D
Daniel_Marsh
Guest
Has an verifible source for this claim been given yet?
with link please.
with link please.
- Status
O
otjm
Guest
If he is SSPX, he has been specifically excommunicated.
That, in the average Catholic’s handbook guide to holy and orthodox bishops, says he ain’t. So let’s not get sidetracked. The issue is whether or not there is a moral issue with women wearing pants.
In Moral Theology, the Church has not spoken authoritavely on the matter. Individuals who are members of the Church have, from time to time, voiced their personal opinions on the matter. The fact that they may be ordained does not automatically convey to them expertise on all matters moral; such issues as style of dress is one glaringly obvious area. For evey priest who wants to hold forth that pants are immoral on women, I suspect I can find somewhere between 100 and 1000 who feel the opposite, or who have no opinion.
And while morality in general is not a matter of numbers, there comes a point where the odd, stray opinion is just that - odd, and stray. Style to the largest extent is in the eyes of the beholder; and style comes and goes with rapidity. In and of itself, style is neither particularly moral or immoral; the morality of it is often not obvious as it is contextually and culturally conditioned. Tht is, in one context or culture, a certain style in a certain circumstance may be morally acceptible and in another, not acceptible. It is not something intrinsic to the style. and those who insist otherwise are simply wrong.
Attempting to convince them of their wrongness, however, is a waste of time as their attitude is one of “don’t confuse me with the facts, as I already have my mind made up”.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
Keep that in mind when considering:
Pope Stephen VI, who exhumed the body of an earlier pope, Formosus, and put him on trial for false misdeeds, and then (after he was found guilty) had his “blessing fingers” cut off and then had his body thrown into the river.
Alexander VI, who used bribes in order to be elected pope, who fathered at least 9 illegitimate Children. Encouraged the selling of indulgences (and I’m referring to the actual “selling”) to finance his son’s military expences.
We’re to follow their examples? The Popes are infallible regarding Faith and Morals, and to contradict this definition is to incur an anathema (as decreed at Vatican Council I).
B
bobzills
Guest
Scripture doesn’t say a lot of things, such as misuse of computers. But it can easily be figured out that pants are men’s apparel. This is easy to see by going to a country where you don’t know the language, but you have to go to the bathroom. Someone directs a lady to an area which has two doors. One of the doors has a figure wearing pants, the other door has a figure wearing a skirt. Now which door will the lady always choose? And why will she always choose that door of the figure with the skirt? It is because pants are men’s apparel.
H
hilde_the_dog
Guest
Then again how many times has she appeared wearing a skirt or dress as such?
L
latinmasslover
Guest
The main man behind the Novus Ordo Missae was excommunicated as well. Therefore the Novus Ordo is totally wrong, right?
The Church hasn’t spoken on the matter? What would you say if the Pope declared that pants being worn by women is morally wrong?
So what if Bishop Williamson is SSPX? They’re in schism? It was an unjust excommunication which will be lifted soon anyway. And then what?
You would have us change the laws of modesty based on what the world says?
St. Bridget of Sweden:
…the devil will be let loose for a period to tempt men. When all will seem lost, God Himself will suddenly bring all evil to an end. The sign of when these events will occur will be when priests will have discarded their holy habits and dress themselves in lay clothes and when women will dress like men and men like women.
E
estesbob
Guest
How do you determine this? As far as signs go up I’ve been in restaurants were the signs are in Spanish. Does that mean it’s immoral to designate restrooms in a language other than English?
E
estesbob
Guest
I just cannot shake the feeling that this whole thread is nothing more than a big joke on those of us replying to those who say women should not wear pants. It is one of those things that is so ludicrous that one cannot really believe that people would be concerned about such an insignificant issue.
I mean when people start telling you that one can determine the propriety of clothing to be worn by looking at restroom signs you know we have entered the twilight some
I mean when people start telling you that one can determine the propriety of clothing to be worn by looking at restroom signs you know we have entered the twilight some
F
First_of_9
Guest
Oh really
Roman Garb
Women would wear several layers of garments. The bottom layer was a tunica. Over that, married women wore a stola and a palla. Several web sites suggest that a sleeved tunic could be worn under a tunica or peplos on unmarried (or less than high class) women. Men wore a tunica and a toga. (NO PANTS on men or women)
Irish
The léine (pronounced /lay’-nuh/) in early Ireland in early depictions (between 5th and 12th century CE) is a long shirt-like garment made of linen, not too widely cut, reaching to slightly above the ankles and decorated around the neck, wrists, and lower hem with embroidery. McClintock says it resembles a djelabbeh (Arabic garment). It might have sleeves or be sleeveless. The léine can be drawn up through the belt to knee-level (which causes it to bunch in such a way that carvings of men wearing their léinte this way are sometimes mistaken for wearing a kilt). [H.F. McClintock, Old Irish Dress, p. 2] The léine may sometimes have opened in the front to the waist (see below), but most pictures show a neckline and don’t indicate such an opening. The léine’s neckline can be round, square, or v-shaped. Sometimes a léine is described by the term culpatach, meaning hooded; this could have meant that it had a collar (culpait) large enough to be used as a hood. [McClintock, Old Irish Dress, p. 13] (NO PANTS on men or women)
Vietnam
Áo bà ba, (or Vietnamese silk pajamas) - is one of several traditional Vietnamese costumes. It continues to be widely used today.
The Áo bà ba simply consists of a pair of silk pants and a long sleeved, buttoned-down silk shirt. The shirt will be somewhat long and split at the sides of the waist, forming two flaps. In the front of the shirt at the very bottom are typically two pockets.
Its simplicity and versatility has contributed to its popularity, as it’s used by an overwhelming amount of the population, whether in rural or urban areas. It can be worn while laboring or lounging.
Modern versions allow countless different designs, colors, embroidery and such which have allowed the costume’s transition into Vietnamese fashion as well.
All of this makes it easy to explain the costume’s natural presence in almost every aspect of Vietnamese life. [Wikipedia] (PANTS on men and women)
Africa
See below.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
Modesty is no joke to a Christian. But then again, it is to some. Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t you also support women flashing their more than half naked bodies in “approved” bra and panities (bikinis)?
S
Sure
Guest
What about skorts? They’re like a cross breed of pants and skirts combined!!! How do we judge them???
E
estesbob
Guest
Depends on the woman. It would be immoral for Roise O’Donnell to wear a bikini but would be more than proper for Nicole Kidman to do so. I do wonder though if she had a bikini on how she would know what restroom to go in?
L
Liberanosamalo
Guest
That from a guy in a dress? Not that I’m not a firm fan of priests who wear cassocks, because I think that’s wonderful. But it’s also a testimony to the changing fashions.
I see Paris Hilton wears skirts and dresses all the time. My own daughters went to school today wearing jeans. I can guess who God finds more pleasing right off the top of my head. My daughters were dressed much more modestly than Paris. A woman covered with a floor length dress can exude much more “come hither sex appeal” and incite way more lust than a mom wearing jeans and a sweatshirt.
Every self defense course I have attended says pants can save a woman’s life. Rapists will look for the woman who can’t run fast. It’s easier to book out of a danger spot in jeans than a skirt.
This is all nonsense. Christ said that immorality and impurity doesn’t come from outside of us. It comes from inside of us.
And I really distrust men who want to shoehorn women into skirts. Not that I don’t usually wear them myself. But I have a sister who is a nurse. My xh, the premier mysogynist of all time, said “Nursing went downhill when they stopped wearing skirts and a hat and wearing white.” He had an idea of the usual Porn Nurse figure. I know what nurses go through. I told him I hoped when he had a heart attack, his nurse in heels and a skirt couldn’t straddle him on a cart and do furious CPR being rushed down the hall to the ER by the techs because her skirt was in the way. Idiot! Nursing wasn’t degraded because the job became more complicated and the dress code changed accordingly!
Many women work jobs that require pants. For modesty, (you can look up a skirt, you know), and ease of movement. Let me tell you, there are many men out there who will treat a woman with no respect, no matter what she wears!
H
homewardangel
Guest
I can not believe all of this time and effort being spent on whether or not women should wear pants!!! Wow! I seriously doubt Mary says “no pants on women”, she has better priorities than that!
Anyone who thinks that because a lady wears pants will confuse the genders has absolutely NO IDEA what homosexual people are dealing with…when people have the sexual issues its not because their mother wore pants! Wow - if only life were that simple
Wow!
Anyone who thinks that because a lady wears pants will confuse the genders has absolutely NO IDEA what homosexual people are dealing with…when people have the sexual issues its not because their mother wore pants! Wow - if only life were that simple
Wow!
O
otjm
Guest
No, it can’t. At various times and places, pants have been an item worn by women; other times and places, worn by men. It is both culturally and time conditioned. What is worn below the waist by either sex is very much related to the culture of the area.
And you appear to not have traveled very much; in many areas, the “bathroom” is a slit in the floor, and both men and women squat over that and do their business. The “bathrooms” are uni-sex.
Your point is not made.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
Well, anyone serious about modesty now knows not to consider your opinion, that you’re just a “typical guy” as the phrase go. Thank you for the clarification.
B
bobzills
Guest
Of course not.
The point is that if a woman asks for directions to a restroom and she sees two doors, one of which has a figure with pants and the other has a figure with a skirt, which one will she always choose?
It is obvious what door she will always choose, because it is obvious that pants are men’s apparel.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
Again, it’s the mentality behind the pants. The mentality, more specifically, the anti-woman “feminist” mentality, more so than the actual wearing of the pants.
O
otjm
Guest
Since he isn’t going to do that, it is irrelevant to the issue at hand. The Church ahs been around 2000 years without issuing specifics as to style of dress. It will be around for a long time to come without the same.
You seem to have almost no understanding of moral law at all. The “world” as you say, has a tremendous difference, based on cultural norms, as to what is sexually provocative and what is not; just compare, for example, the cultural norms of say, an Eskimo with a native tribe in central Africa. So, as a matter of fact, the Church does not change the laws of modesty; what it does is say that modesty is in part a cultural issue (a point you seem unwilling or unable to recognize). It is not the clothes or lack thereof which defines modesty; it is in part cultural conditioning as to what is acceptible and what is not. One who went to central Africa and reacted to bare breasts as if the women were being sexually suggestive would be treated as someone who had very strange ideas b out sexual attraction, and one who had a major problem with lust. The problem would not be theirs, but rather the viewer’s who reacted inappropriately.
A
aurora77
Guest
This is hilarious. I never thought I’d have someone call me “a piece of meat” because I wear jeans.
The website given is great, too. I really feel bad now; the children we hope to have are going to be gay b/c I’ve done minor household repairs and wear pants. I wish someone had warned me!
The website given is great, too. I really feel bad now; the children we hope to have are going to be gay b/c I’ve done minor household repairs and wear pants. I wish someone had warned me!
- Status