The Dress Code for the Vatican - Should it be Universal?

[L_piperatus]

But your definition of modesty is not reasonable.

My definition of modesty is exactly the same as that of the Pope in Vatican, the bishops and priests in Rome, Venice, Italy, Knock/Ireland, Lourdes/France, Vodnjan/Croatia, Fr. Dominic Mary on EWTN, the priests at the Shrine of the Most Blessed Sacrament in Hanceville/Alabama, the bishop of Leon/Mexico, the bishops and priests who imposed a dress code in the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, and the administrators of the Buddhist shrine of Angkor Vat in Cambodia.

I wish you all the best, Maryjk. :tiphat:

There’s no point arguing - we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[maryjk]

My definition of modesty is exactly the same as that of the Pope in Vatican, the bishops and priests in Rome, Venice, Italy, Knock/Ireland, Lourdes/France, Vodnjan/Croatia, Fr. Dominic Mary on EWTN, the priests at the Shrine of the Most Blessed Sacrament in Hanceville/Alabama, the bishop of Leon/Mexico, the bishops and priests who imposed a dress code in the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, and the administrators of the Buddhist shrine of Angkor Vat in Cambodia.

I wish you all the best, Maryjk. :tiphat:

There’s no point arguing - we will just have to agree to disagree.

(I think I have been told to go fly a kite. )

Your definition of modesty is what you think it should be. When I look at the pictures shown, I see what is allowed in the Vatican. I don’t see the Vatican saying only what is pictured is modest. If that is what they meant, why did they include cell phones in the list? How are cell phones immodest?

The same with any posting at a local parish. That is what is allowed AT THAT PARISH. It says nothing about what is allowed at my parish. And it doesn’t say anything about what is or isn’t modest, only what the fashion police will patrol.

It comes down to, if you can’t handle seeing my knees, that is your problem, not mine.

 

[grasscutter]

I have two points:

1. If a priest has to suffer through the heat wearing all of the vestments, it’s not too much to ask of the laity to have shoulders and knees covered.
2. Equating shorts, skirts above the knee, tank tops, etc. worn to Mass with endangering our children’s immortal souls the same way small pox would endanger their bodies is an alarming lack of perspective.

 

[Debora123]

You are right, Do Good Then Go. This isn’t about modesty. This is about a personal problem.

I caught on to that quite a while ago…

 

[Debora123]

---

Seems to be – you have personal “issues”-- and using the “modesty bandwagon” – to cover up your personal problems and pass the buck. It may be better for you to seek out some type of professional clinical help.

Agreed.

 

[CroCatholic]

(I think I have been told to go fly a kite. )

Your definition of modesty is what you think it should be. When I look at the pictures shown, I see what is allowed in the Vatican. I don’t see the Vatican saying only what is pictured is modest. If that is what they meant, why did they include cell phones in the list? How are cell phones immodest?

The same with any posting at a local parish. That is what is allowed AT THAT PARISH. It says nothing about what is allowed at my parish. And it doesn’t say anything about what is or isn’t modest, only what the fashion police will patrol.

It comes down to, if you can’t handle seeing my knees, that is your problem, not mine.

Exactly why there need to be a UNIVERSAL SET OF GUIDELINES…People interpret modesty differently…

 

[Portrait]

Here’s another similar dress code - this one from a church in Malaysia - quote from the website of Divine Mercy Roman Catholic Church in the city of Sungai Ara - cdm.my/proper-attire-inside-the-church/ :

Proper Attire Inside the Church

1. September, 2011

***The Eucharist is the source and summit of the Christian life.

(LG no 11)***

1. Our dignity as baptized children of God.

“For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.”

[Gal 3:27]

1. The sacredness of the Church as the House of God and the Eucharistic celebration urge all participants to dress and manifest the importance of what they are doing.

“The mystery of the Eucharist has found historical expression not only in the demand for an interior disposition of devotion, but also in outward forms meant to evoke and emphasize the grandeur of the event being celebrated.”

[Ecclesia de Eucharistia, no. 49]

http://www.cdm.my/images/proper.jpg

http://www.cdm.my/images/improper.jpg

So, again, the Malaysians are men enough (women enough) to deal with the heat, and still dress modestly. And again, humble enough not to get offended by the instructions they received, requiring them to dress modestly.

But we in America fear offending the parishioners?

Something is very, very, very wrong with America, if this is truly the case. We can’t possibly keep God’s blessings and stay a great nation with this kind of unruly, disobedient, arrogant attitude. Our own lack of humility, our lack of obedience, our egotism will lead to our own downfall, if we continue like this.

Dear L piperatus,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

Splendid (name removed by moderator)ut, if I may say. Hear, hear especially to your last paragraph, dear friend. The same would also be very applicable to the UK, where immodest attire at Holy Mass is frequently and everywhere all too common nowadays, especially among the female youth. Alas, dear friend, the clergy appear reluctant to denounce this deplorable disrespect and disobedience. The urgent need of the hour is for plain speaking catechesis and homilies that admonish men and women to reverence God’s sanctuary by the wearing of seemly vesture.

God bless and thankyou for those excellent contributions on dress codes, dear friend.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[catholictiger]

while I think it is a good thing to dress like this and dressing less than this is inappropriate at times in mass. I don’t want to turn away someone from the Church and Christ in the eucharist because he decided to where a little to short of a short during the summer. As a priest I would never turn someone away for not dressing the way you should, but I would bring it up to them if it became a problem, or just simply address it in a homily saying, dressing appropriately is important, only if it became a problem in the parish

 

[thewanderer]

While it’s true that different men have different ideas of what constitutes ‘modest’ dress for church, my own idea is the very same idea espoused by the Vatican, by the churches of Rome, Venice, and Italy, and by dozens (probably thousands) of Catholic bishops and priests located in Italy, the USA, Mexico, France, Ireland, Croatia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Australia, and so on. Even the Buddhist shrine of Angkor Vat in Cambodia requests visitors to do the same thing - to cover their shoulders and knees. In another thread, I posted the specific norms of a modest dress code, as requested by bishops and priests from various places across the globe, and that’s what they requested. They want parishioners to cover their shoulders, to wear shirts with sleeves, to stop wearing shorts, and to wear skirts and dresses that come down to cover the knees. In addition, they regard showing cleavage, bare backs, and exposed midriffs, as immodest.

As others have pointed out these are not necessarily guidelines for modesty, simply for appropriate dress for Church where some line is being drawn for the sake of having such a line. This is hardly proof of what is considered modest or appropriate at other times. I mean, just because the Vatican guidelines for entering the vatican state no shoulders must show doesn’t mean I will refuse to wear a bathing suit to the beach that doesn’t cover my shoulders, different things are appropriate at different times and places. It is often easier to draw the line at having ones shoulders covered if a hard and fast line is really to be drawn than to say, no straps wider than such and such a length and no side cleavage, and the top of the dress/shirt in front and back must be no more than so many inches from the nape of the neck/collarbone. That hardly necessitates that wearing something that does not cover the shoulder is necessarily immodest. It is instead saying this is the guideline for appropriate dress within the Vatican. That is all it says. If the Vatican wanted to say more than that, if they wanted to apply it as a universal standard of dress for all at all times they could very easily do so. Instead we have JPII himself speaking out about how what is modest changes from culture to culture, while still maintaining the importance of modesty.

 

[EasterJoy]

Having found myself in an outdoor cafe during a “nude in” (the locals were protesting proposed changes in local laws that allowed public nudity by consuming their lattes sans any clothing whatsoever), I realize that some standard of modesty is a necessity. If your parish wouldn’t allow the staging of a “nude in”, then your parish has at least an informal a modesty code.

There is a line, then. The only questions, then, are
a) where the line ought be drawn
b) how the existence of the line ought to be communicated, and
c) how the situation ought to be handled when someone chooses to cross the line.

Telling yourself that it is somehow “more Christian” if your parish has abandoned even mentioning the concept of modesty or that you would feel “less Christian” if you had one because you would not dream of having a standard of modesty that could be applied in an objective sense is a bit disingenuous.

You do have a standard. It might be low to the point of being shocking, but you have one.

 

[catholictiger]

Having found myself in an outdoor cafe during a “nude in” (the locals were protesting proposed changes in local laws that allowed public nudity by consuming their lattes sans any clothing whatsoever), I realize that some standard of modesty is a necessity. If your parish wouldn’t allow the staging of a “nude in”, then your parish has at least an informal a modesty code.

There is a line, then. The only questions, then, are
a) where the line ought be drawn
b) how the existence of the line ought to be communicated, and
c) how the situation ought to be handled when someone chooses to cross the line.

Telling yourself that it is somehow “more Christian” if your parish has abandoned even mentioning the concept of modesty or that you would feel “less Christian” if you had one because you would not dream of having a standard of modesty that could be applied in an objective sense is a bit disingenuous.

You do have a standard. It might be low to the point of being shocking, but you have one.

what you wear doesn’t make you more or less christian, while I think people should dress nicely in the presence of Christ, I don’t want to turn anyone away (in reason) because they aren’t dressed as they should. BTW the arch diocese of San Antonio has a pants rules in church (i’m pretty sure) I don’t know enough about the rule to really make a comment on it.

 

[EasterJoy]

what you wear doesn’t make you more or less christian, while I think people should dress nicely in the presence of Christ, I don’t want to turn anyone away (in reason) because they aren’t dressed as they should. BTW the arch diocese of San Antonio has a pants rules in church (i’m pretty sure) I don’t know enough about the rule to really make a comment on it.

Again, I think of rules for modesty like rules for grammar. You can have both the rule that “this is how you ought to dress” and also the rule that “unless a most serious line is crossed, you don’t correct those you don’t have the office to correct.”

Having a communicated rule of modesty means that the pastor has made it clear what he expects. Just as with every other moral or administrative boundary that he defines, it doesn’t mean he has to make his ushers into bouncers, let alone the rank and file of the parish. In fact, while he is articulating the rules of modesty, he can also articulate his rules about what kind of mutual correction is and is not to be considered appropriately fraternal and charitable.

 

[pnewton]

But if he is correct, we are in deep trouble. In that case, we have become totally arrogant crybabies with no sense of humility, no sense of obedience, and no sense of duty. In that case, we aren’t any better than the stale water that God will spit out of his mouth.

1. If a priest has to suffer through the heat wearing all of the vestments, it’s not too much to ask of the laity to have shoulders and knees covered.

I will answer the second question, though both of these underlie the problem with a dress code. Is it too much to ask? No, but it is too much to require. Not every one has the commitment to Christ that the priest has. Not all who come to Church are in the same stage of maturity on their spiritual journey. The problem with the whole warm water spewing application is that it applied to a church, not a person, and it was Christ who said that enough was enough, not Church ushers. We are admonished not to judge others in matters that Christ alone is judge. We should never try and usurp the role of determining when God’s mercy has reached an end, especially over something as ridiculous as dress.

Everyone who comes to Mass dressed immodestly needs to be treated as an injured person entering the hospital, though we ourselves are patients. We must never thing that because we have a higher sense of modesty or holiness that we are in any position judge others. Compared to the holiness that God demands, we really are no more than a little further along than that girl that shows her shoulders or knees, or wears a tee shirt with an inappropriate remark. Rather let us embrace in love all those who enter our doors. Let use work on the interior and the exterior will naturally follow.

 

[catholictiger]

Again, I think of rules for modesty like rules for grammar. You can have both the rule that “this is how you ought to dress” and also the rule that “unless a most serious line is crossed, you don’t correct those you don’t have the office to correct.”

Having a communicated rule of modesty means that the pastor has made it clear what he expects. Just as with every other moral or administrative boundary that he defines, it doesn’t mean he has to make his ushers into bouncers, let alone the rank and file of the parish. In fact, while he is articulating the rules of modesty, he can also articulate his rules about what kind of mutual correction is and is not to be considered appropriately fraternal and charitable.

but you need to be careful about making it to big of a deal. If you start to bring it up in every mass or you actually make it a rule you are going to far, IMO. I would at most mention it in a homily saying that how you dress to mass is important because it is the weeding of our lord and the Church. Don’t dress like your going to a football game, but dress to the best of your ability. Hopefully this will convince people that dressing well to mass is important, and instead of doing it because Father said so they do it because they want to be more reverent at mass. Don’t make a small issue a big issue. Also don’t ever say you HAVE to do something, rather show the importance of why it is so important to live this way, not to do these things and so on and so forth. I think people may not like you as a pastor when you start to demand things from them. Your job as pastor is to save souls, not make people look like the most amazing catholics, or look like the great enforcer of Catholic Teachings.

 

[Portrait]

what you wear doesn’t make you more or less christian, while I think people should dress nicely in the presence of Christ, I don’t want to turn anyone away (in reason) because they aren’t dressed as they should. BTW the arch diocese of San Antonio has a pants rules in church (i’m pretty sure) I don’t know enough about the rule to really make a comment on it.

Dear catholictiger,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

Whilst I agree, dear friend, that how one is attired does not make one any less a Christian, it surely does make one less obedient, respectful and considerate. After all, the virtue of modesty is the virtue which protects chastity by inclining us to guard our senses, so as not to be the occasion of temptation to others. This necessarily entails being considerate in our dress and behaviour. Therefore, dear friend, I see nothing scrupulous or austere in our parishes insisting upon a dress code, especially in these times of moral laxity when even professing Catholics have adopted the debased fashions of the godless world.

We must, dear friend, strive to bring men up to our good standards, not descend to their indecent level as regards clothing choices. It is all a part of providing a vibrant Christian counter-culture that is unafraid to swim against the stream and bravely resists “…the allurements of fashion and pressures of prevailing ideologies” (CCC, para. 2523). Catholics are called to raise a standard and to dare to be different, amidst the moral and cultural deterioration in their midst. There is nothing harsh or uncharitable about this, it is merely practicing authentic Catholicism and refusing to be conformed to the godless world (Rom. 12: 2). In any event, St. Paul enjoins that women, who he singles out for special mention, “should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel” (I Tim. 2: 9), which would especially apply within His sanctuary, of all palces Moreover, this admonition cannot be dismissed as some culturally bound requirement restricted to his own times, for the implication is that dressing immodestly is most unbeffiting of women who profess religion (v. 10). This would always be applicable, be it in the first or twenty-first century.

The Vatican’s admittance requirements do provide us with a jolly good yardstick as to what constitutes immodest attire in our contemporary world. Moreover, our parish churches are no different from the Vatican, for God is present within them just as much as He is within the Vatican and thus if provocative and revealing clothing trespass the boundaries of propriety at that holy place, then it must necessarily do so in other sacred buildings. Indecent clothing, dear friend, is indecent clothing, be it at the Vatican or a local parish church and as such should not be permitted in such a holy place. God’s sanctuary must be reverenced by everyone.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[catholictiger]

Dear catholictiger,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

Whilst I agree, dear friend, that how one is attired does not make one any less a Christian, it surely does make one less obedient, respectful and considerate.

I don’t disagree

After all, the virtue of modesty is the virtue which protects chastity by inclining us to guard our senses, so as not to be the occasion of temptation to others. This necessarily entails being considerate in our dress and behaviour.

I don’t disagree

Therefore, dear friend, I see nothing scrupulous or austere in our parishes insisting upon a dress code, especially in these times of moral laxity when even professing Catholics have adopted the debased fashions of the godless world.

my only issue about enforcing a dress code at a parish, that has an issue with immodest dress, is your going to loose parishioners and you may even loose faithful Catholics, over a small issue like dress. I don’t think the issue should be ignored no. But enforcing a dress code goes a little to far in a parish church

We must, dear friend, strive to bring men up to our good standards, not descend to their indecent level as regards clothing choices.

I don’t disagree

It is all a part of providing a vibrant Christian counter-culture that is unafraid to swim against the stream and bravely resists “…the allurements of fashion and pressures of prevailing ideologies” (CCC, para. 2523). Catholics are called to raise a standard and to dare to be different, amidst the moral and cultural deterioration in their midst.

I don’t disagree

There is nothing harsh or uncharitable about this, it is merely practicing authentic Catholicism and refusing to be conformed to the godless world (Rom. 12: 2).

I don’t disagree either but the issue at stake for me is my flock that I have been put in charge (well will be put in charge) I want to build a good relationship with my flock, and I want to avoid things that will hurt my relationship. enforcing a dress code will hurt my relationship. Bringing it up in a homily and dealing with people one on one won’t hurt it as much maybe even help it. What is the point of a dress code if it sends a large portion of your flock away and your pews are more empty, but those people are dressed as they should.

btw if someone dressed inappropriately I would as a priest address it, just not a dress code.

In any event, St. Paul enjoins that women, who he singles out for special mention, “should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel” (I Tim. 2: 9), which would especially apply within His sanctuary, of all palces Moreover, this admonition cannot be dismissed as some culturally bound requirement restricted to his own times, for the implication is that dressing immodestly is most unbeffiting of women who profess religion (v. 10). This would always be applicable, be it in the first or twenty-first century.

don’t disagree

The Vatican’s admittance requirements do provide us with a jolly good yardstick as to what constitutes immodest attire in our contemporary world. Moreover, our parish churches are no different from the Vatican, for God is present within them just as much as He is within the Vatican and thus if provocative and revealing clothing trespass the boundaries of propriety at that holy place, then it must necessarily do so in other sacred buildings.

our parishes are different than the vatican, not in the way you mention but the people who go to those parishes. That is why you can’t have the same rules the vatican have and expect the same reaction. In a small country parish, especially where I live if you do something they dislike they will just go to the church 10 minuets down the road where that priest didn’t do that thing.

Indecent clothing, dear friend, is indecent clothing, be it at the Vatican or a local parish church and as such should not be permitted in such a holy place. God’s sanctuary must be reverenced by everyone.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

yes of course but how you address that is where we disagree.

 

[CesarAugustus]

What about a modesty rule according to the culture where the Parish is? that adresses the problem of “ethnocentrism”.

Good catechesis about modesty would be useful too.

Blessings!

 

[benjammin]

I voted no, but only because it seems a little strict. Living in Nebraska in the summer, I think its kind of hard. While I agree with the short shorts, skirts and shorter dresses can be okay if they aren’t too short. I also think shorts are okay if you wear a nice shirt with them. I do identify with people though who want more modesty in church dress, but the sleeveless thing is a little far. I think tank tops aren’t good for church but if it’s just a sleeveless top i don’t see a problem

 

[Joe_5859]

Does anyone else wonder why the Vatican hasn’t mandated St. Peter’s dress code universally? If it was such a great idea, don’t we think it might have been included in Canon Law?

Generally speaking, our culture seems to value modesty less and less. So I understand the desire to counteract that trend. That’s not necessarily a bad impulse to have. But I think we should reflect on the fact that the Church has not seen fit to establish a universal dress code. I’ve never even heard of a diocese implementing a diocesan-wide dress code. Could it be perhaps that there is a good reason not to do these things? Or do we need to start a letter writing campaign?

 

[CroCatholic]

"our parishes are different than the vatican, not in the way you mention but the people who go to those parishes. That is why you can’t have the same rules the vatican have and expect the same reaction. In a small country parish, especially where I live if you do something they dislike they will just go to the church 10 minuets down the road where that priest didn’t do that thing. "

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the Vatican the head of our Church??? Doesn’t it set the example that ALL Catholics should be following? Isn’t the Mass said at the Vatican the same Mass said around the world??? The Mass said in Kalamazoo is still the Mass. It deserves the same amount of respect as any Vatican Mass would receive. You are IN THE PRESENCE OF CHRIST, put on some darn clothes!