The way people dress to Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter francisca
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
OurLadyPerpHelp said:
St. Thomas More, may I ask you a couple questions?

Are you in the seminary?

Do you consider yourself a Traditional Catholic such as this forum would describe it.
Click to expand...
Seminary? No. I am. however enrolled in a MA Theology program at a small Catholic (not just in name, i might add) university.

I have a hard time placing myself in a category. I am loyal to the Magisterium. I usually attend the Ordinary Form of the Liturgy, but I attend the Extraordinary Form about once a month. I am staunchly pro-life. I go to confession at least once a month. I have a weekly Holy hour in front of the Blessed Sacrament. I sympathize with the concerns of the SSPX, but feel they have gone about things in the wrong way. Am I traditional? I really don’t know. I don’t concern myself with it. I do know that I try my best to be loyal to Holy Mother Church. Some of my fronds at the university (who are active in the Charismatic Renewal) describe me as a “traddy,” but there are posters on CAF who have all but called me a modernist heretic.
 
StTommyMore said:
Seminary? No. I am. however enrolled in a MA Theology program at a small Catholic (not just in name, i might add) university.

I have a hard time placing myself in a category. I am loyal to the Magisterium. I usually attend the Ordinary Form of the Liturgy, but I attend the Extraordinary Form about once a month. I am staunchly pro-life. I go to confession at least once a month. I have a weekly Holy hour in front of the Blessed Sacrament. I sympathize with the concerns of the SSPX, but feel they have gone about things in the wrong way. Am I traditional? I really don’t know. I don’t concern myself with it. I do know that I try my best to be loyal to Holy Mother Church. Some of my fronds at the university (who are active in the Charismatic Renewal) describe me as a “traddy,” but there are posters on CAF who have all but called me a modernist heretic.
Click to expand...
Most of what you have written could describe me.
 
StTommyMore said:
No offense, but that read like the dress code of the Fundamentalist Bible college I attended for a year. We need to get away from legalistic “rules,” and look at the spirit of what true modesty is.
Click to expand...
The ‘rules’ precisely reveal the spirit of true modesty when you appreciate their raison d’etre. They are quite timeless and appropriate to today.
 
francisca said:
I know some of you think that certain dresses are not appropriate for mass. Recently some local churches in city where I live begin to make official rules about dress code for attending mass.

I think that such step is very unwise, because attending mass is more important than how to dress for the mass.

Supposedly I have used up all my “polite” clothes during work days, I haven’t got any chance to do my laundry yet, should I come to mass with my “inappropriate” clothes, or should I just stay home?

This is just one example where “Traditionalist mind” could override what’s important with what’s not.
Click to expand...
I won’t comment on the wisdom of requireing a dress code, as I have no connection to the parishes in question and because frankly this question is well outside my vocation (lay, married).

That said, I certainly beleive there is something to be said for dressing as if you’re about to have a personal audience with the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Basically, would you wear a tee full of holes when your about to meet the president of the USA? Well then why would you wear one when your about to meet someone so much greater?
 
Shin said:
The ‘rules’ precisely reveal the spirit of true modesty when you appreciate their raison d’etre. They are quite timeless and appropriate to today.
Click to expand...
We will have to agree to disagree. There is nothing inherntly immodest about women in pants.
 
Collen Hammond’s book ‘Dressing with Dignity’ goes into the history of the problems with pants in regards to women. Cardinal Siri dealt with it too, amongst others. These are not out of date documents… and men and women have different requirements for modesty in dress.

The natural law and the problem of concupiscence are two keys towards understanding this.

The exterior rules, when understood in spirit, are both timeless and reveal the secrets behind the virtue of modesty and what they allow and do not allow. There’re enough quotations from the saints, from all over history, to reveal what these standards are regardless of culture… besides the other sources from which the understanding can spring.

In regards to preventing lust, which is only one aspect of modesty… there is also the humility, the concealment for that sake… For women, the dress must cover sufficiently to prevent the automatic concupiscence awakening in the general populous of men who do not desire it to awaken, and the innocent. For women who are older, etc. who are less beautiful, they still should maintain the standard so as to provide good example and not provide scandal.

This results in garments that are not tight about the body in inappropriate places, and do not draw the eye thence too. The motivation is holy, and to imply otherwise insults the saints.

And I will note we are called all the more to be modest at mass. 🙂
 
Shin said:
Collen Hammond’s book ‘Dressing with Dignity’ goes into the history of the problems with pants in regards to women. Cardinal Siri dealt with it too, amongst others. These are not out of date documents… and men and women have different requirements for modesty in dress.

The natural law and the problem of concupiscence are two keys towards understanding this.

The exterior rules, when understood in spirit, are both timeless and reveal the secrets behind the virtue of modesty and what they allow and do not allow. There’re enough quotations from the saints, from all over history, to reveal what these standards are regardless of culture… besides the other sources from which the understanding can spring.

In regards to preventing lust, which is only one aspect of modesty… there is also the humility, the concealment for that sake… For women, the dress must cover sufficiently to prevent the automatic concupiscence awakening in the general populous of men who do not desire it to awaken, and the innocent. For women who are older, etc. who are less beautiful, they still should maintain the standard so as to provide good example and not provide scandal.

This results in garments that are not tight about the body in inappropriate places, and do not draw the eye thence too. The motivation is holy, and to imply otherwise insults the saints.

And I will note we are called all the more to be modest at mass. 🙂
Click to expand...
Noe of this makes any sense. Modesty is not an eternal, unchanging standard. It varies from culture to culture. Your view promotes an ethnocentricity that holds up Europe as the standard by which other cultures must be judged.
 
I don’t understand some rule stating women can’t wear pants. Don’t traditional priests wear cassocks? What about the Irish and Scottish men who wear kilts?
 
StTommyMore said:
Noe of this makes any sense. Modesty is not an eternal, unchanging standard. It varies from culture to culture. Your view promotes an ethnocentricity that holds up Europe as the standard by which other cultures must be judged.
Click to expand...
Pope Pius XII amongst others has contradicted you.
 
OurLadyPerpHelp said:
I don’t understand some rule stating women can’t wear pants. Don’t traditional priests wear cassocks? What about the Irish and Scottish men who wear kilts?
Click to expand...
Try Colleen Hammond’s book, ‘Dressing with Dignity’. It goes into detail.
 
Shin said:
Then I suggest you pray and seek to understand the mindset.
Click to expand...
There is nothing not to understand. The rule is ludicrous. I happen to know very holy women who wear pants. Outward appearance isn’t everything. Remember the key is interior conversion, not whether a woman wears a skirt or pants
 
francisca said:
I know some of you think that certain dresses are not appropriate for mass. Recently some local churches in city where I live begin to make official rules about dress code for attending mass.

I think that such step is very unwise, because attending mass is more important than how to dress for the mass.

Supposedly I have used up all my “polite” clothes during work days, I haven’t got any chance to do my laundry yet, should I come to mass with my “inappropriate” clothes, or should I just stay home?

This is just one example where “Traditionalist mind” could override what’s important with what’s not.
Click to expand...
The rules the church is making is probably just minor, like excessive display of skin, etc. miniskirts, hot pants, very low cut dresses (cleavage), etc. I mean, why would you want to wear impolite clothes to mass anyway. Throw on a pair of jeans and a sweatshirt, no one would argue with that, right; these days, in the dress-down for mass culture we live in now days. What kinds of rules are these churches specifying in your area?

my :twocents::blessyou::shamrock2:
 
Remember the key is interior conversion, not whether a woman wears a skirt or pants
Click to expand...
You have just dismissed the exterior side of modesty, which is unacceptable to Catholic teaching.

I will respond more later as needed, I have to go, I again note the ‘Modesty and Purity Resources’ below and the very many many quotes that someone open and praying and humble can learn a great deal about the virtue of modesty from.

The scriptures say the saved are few.
I will. Thank you for such a charitable response. It’s refreshing.
Click to expand...
The peace of Christ be with you.
 
Shin said:
You have just dismissed the exterior side of modesty, which is unacceptable to Catholic teaching.

I will respond more later as needed, I have to go, I again note the ‘Modesty and Purity Resources’ below and the very many many quotes that someone open and praying and humble can learn a great deal about the virtue of modesty from.

The scriptures say the saved are few.

The peace of Christ be with you.
Click to expand...
Not dismissed, placed in proper perspective. Simply having the Law did not work for Israel, because it is easy to go through the motions (in this case dressing to a certain standard) with no interior conversion. What I am talking about is “circumcision of the heart.” If the priority is placed on interior conversion, outward sign will follow in its due course.
 
Did many women wear pants to Mass prior to the Second Vatican Council? If not, then I’d say Shin is promoting the traditional Catholic perspective on this subject. Would you call chapel veils a paranoid mindset showing a fear of women? I may or may not agree with Shin’s position but it seems to reflect the traditional perspective to me. As I suspect most women did not wear pants to Mass prior to the Second Vatican Council, your assessment would apply to the great Church prior to 1960. Is that fair?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top