Top 10 reasons women should dress modestly

[severus68]

The way a lot of these ppl talk you’d think that they thought the body had some sort of evil to it or something. There’s nothing evil or wrong about the body itself, or nakedness itself. It is the human MIND that there is something wrong with.

Therefore, if you live in a culture where women go to the beach in a bikini and no one thinks anything of it, then there is nothing wrong with going to the beach in a bikini. Likewise, if you live in a culture where women walk around topless and no one thinks anything of it, then there is nothing wrong with walking around topless.

JPII removed all the fig leaves for a reason, but apparently some Catholics (though in the vast majority) just haven’t really gotten the message.

There is a saying that nothing in the world is good or bad but thinking makes it so. Some sin and evil in everthing. On this thread, there are some who are so fixated on modest clothing and women’s thighs, breasts etc that I wonder. Perhaps they should not be looking at what people wear and focus on seeing their souls as well as their own.

 

[JaneGrey]

Well this has been yet another long discussion on the CA forums. I’m very tired of arguing points with relativist who do want to take any side, and who simply seek to call anyone who actually has a standard, “judgmental.” The same happened regarding NFP, gun control, and many other controversial issues.

You may look towards the future where Catholic priest may someday celebrate Mass in a speedo (when the culture approves), but I will look towards Catholic saints as examples of modesty and true virtue.

At least I know the kind of arguments people are making against priests and religious wearing habits. Who would have thought modesty would be a factor? Crazy how modern culture turns your head around.

You accuse people of being relativists ( a word that is thrown about way too much on CAF IMO) yet you are not being entirely consistent here.

Why would our standards lead to priests celebrating Mass in speedos? Seriously? No one here has advocated going to Mass in our bathing suits.

Sorry, maybe its just me but I fail to see how you’ve come to your conclusions.

 

[severus68]

There is a saying that nothing in the world is good or bad but thinking makes it so. Some sin and evil in everthing. On this thread, there are some who are so fixated on modest clothing and women’s thighs, breasts etc that I wonder. Perhaps they should not be looking at what people wear and focus on seeing their souls as well as their own.

Sorry “Some see evil in everything”.

 

[Art321]

I just truly don’t see the huge amount of controvery the topic of modesty can truly bring. I am honesty so sad that there are catholics who advocate for immodest clothing such as the miniskirt or short shorts.

Whether one accepts this or not, these types of clothes offend God so much. I believe that has been proven by some of you here.

Listen I am not here to attack anyone. Please know that. But also know that just because modesty differs from one culture to another, doesn’t mean that certains types of clothes are appropriate. When I look at girls who dress immodestly by such revealing clothes, the things that come across is that many guys won’t treat them like ladies but rather as sexual objects.

I know that I will not convince you Debora123, Walking Home, or Lost Wanderer. I just needed to post this video called The Naked Truth about Modesty.

Here is the link to anyone who wishes to listen to it.

youtube.com/watch?v=sWKipaNH83E

It is about an hour long but worth to see. All I can offer is my prayers for you three.

God bless.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Whether one accepts this or not, these types of clothes offend God so much. I believe that has been proven by some of you here.

Yet none of you ever read 1 Samuel 16:7, which presents a God that does not care for appearances.

All the Party of Modesty has ever done here is blindly hail Portrait’s hollow speech about how it is taken of context even though it doesn’t explain what exactly is out of context about interpreting it as simply God telling the prophet to not look to appearances to assess the worth of a person.

Honestly, rather presumptuous of people to assume that God is as shallow as they are.

 

[severus68]

I just truly don’t see the huge amount of controvery the topic of modesty can truly bring. I am honesty so sad that there are catholics who advocate for immodest clothing such as the miniskirt or short shorts.

Whether one accepts this or not, these types of clothes offend God so much. I believe that has been proven by some of you here.

Listen I am not here to attack anyone. Please know that. But also know that just because modesty differs from one culture to another, doesn’t mean that certains types of clothes are appropriate. When I look at girls who dress immodestly by such revealing clothes, the things that come across is that many guys won’t treat them like ladies but rather as sexual objects.

I know that I will not convince you Debora123, Walking Home, or Lost Wanderer. I just needed to post this video called The Naked Truth about Modesty.

Here is the link to anyone who wishes to listen to it.

youtube.com/watch?v=sWKipaNH83E

It is about an hour long but worth to see. All I can offer is my prayers for you three.

God bless.

With respect, clothes do not offend God, our bodies do not offend God.

Perhaps you should not look and keep looking at those girls. Control yourself and see the beauty in people (outside and inside). By seeing women in such a manner you are not being a gentlemen. I dislike the use of the terms lady and gentleman in this context BTW.

 

[Art321]

Yet none of you ever read 1 Samuel 16:7, which presents a God that does not care for appearances.

All the Party of Modesty has ever done here is blindly hail Portrait’s hollow speech about how it is taken of context even though it doesn’t explain what exactly is out of context about interpreting it as simply God telling the prophet to not look to appearances to assess the worth of a person.

Honestly, rather presumptuous of people to assume that God is as shallow as they are.

I have read that quote so much since you used it for reference in this thread. I do agree that God judges all human beings with their hearts. I do not deny this. Please know that. But I also know that our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit and as such, we are to respect it with true dignity, something that can NOT be done with immodest clothes.

 

[Edward_H]

I just truly don’t see the huge amount of controvery the topic of modesty can truly bring. I am honesty so sad that there are catholics who advocate for immodest clothing such as the miniskirt or short shorts.

Whether one accepts this or not, these types of clothes offend God so much. I believe that has been proven by some of you here.

Listen I am not here to attack anyone. Please know that. But also know that just because modesty differs from one culture to another, doesn’t mean that certains types of clothes are appropriate. When I look at girls who dress immodestly by such revealing clothes, the things that come across is that many guys won’t treat them like ladies but rather as sexual objects.

I know that I will not convince you Debora123, Walking Home, or Lost Wanderer. I just needed to post this video called The Naked Truth about Modesty.

Here is the link to anyone who wishes to listen to it.

youtube.com/watch?v=sWKipaNH83E

It is about an hour long but worth to see. All I can offer is my prayers for you three.

God bless.

In the end, it’s up to each adult to answer a profound question each hour of the day: Am I serving God with my actions and my choices? My words, my thoughts, my intentions, choices, my desires.

Am I loving God with all my heart, mind, soul and strength - am I a loving my neighbor, seeking their greatest (and eternal) good.

Serviam, or non-Serviam.

I met a stunningly beautiful woman after Mass this weekend, a friend of my wife’s, whom I had not yet met. She is a numerary member of Opus Dei (unmarried). She’s brilliant (a university professor, articulate, etc), joyful, and modestly but simply and elegantly dressed.

She ‘attracts’ people, and many women…but not sexually; she does this because she is so joyful and serene and transparent in her intentions and mannerisms.

There are no ‘folds’ in her intentions. God’s intentions are hers. She’s not playing games, she’s not desiring to be sought after sexually, she’s not vain, and she’s not “letting her personality out” (in the cheap sense). She is letting God out. God’s beauty is attracting people to Him, not to her in a sense.

She has a beauty that is almost ‘anonymous’; it’s like God’s beauty is shining through her.

This is modesty and beauty and simplicity and serenity.

And this is her response to the natural beauty that God gave her.

God gave us freedom, and we can’t try to take it away from anyone. It’s up to them how they use it.

 

[Mark_David]

Forgive me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think Portrait is referring to race. It’s about cultural standards according to the Christian life - and some simply don’t match up to that. This includes much of the contemporary Western World. But to imply that all cultures are of equal value smells of relativism. And God isn’t a relativist. Also, criticizing Blessed John Paul II over a matter isn’t somehow inexcusable - he would have been the first to tell you that; he was very tolerant of criticism.

 

[Art321]

With respect, clothes do not offend God, our bodies do not offend God.

Perhaps you should not look and keep looking at those girls. Control yourself and see the beauty in people (outside and inside). By seeing women in such a manner you are not being a gentlemen. I dislike the use of the terms lady and gentleman in this context BTW.

Since our bodies are created and are beautiful in the sight of God, of course they do not offend Him. Although it must be said wearing such clothes is not right in the sense that all that we do must be done to bring us closer to God, so how will wearing these clothes do anything but bring lustful thoughts to men?

We must do everything with love, leading us to the greatest prize of all which is Heaven.

 

[Art321]

In the end, it’s up to each adult to answer a profound question each hour of the day: Am I serving God with my actions and my choices? My words, my thoughts, my intentions, choices, my desires.

Am I loving God with all my heart, mind, soul and strength - am I a loving my neighbor, seeking their greatest (and eternal) good.

Serviam, or non-Serviam.

I met a stunningly beautiful woman after Mass this weekend, a friend of my wife’s, whom I had not yet met. She is a numerary member of Opus Dei (unmarried). She’s brilliant (a university professor, articulate, etc), joyful, and modestly but simply and elegantly dressed.

She ‘attracts’ people, and many women…but not sexually; she does this because she is so joyful and serene and transparent in her intentions and mannerisms.

There are no ‘folds’ in her intentions. God’s intentions are hers. She’s not playing games, she’s not desiring to be sought after sexually, she’s not vain, and she’s not “letting her personality out” (in the cheap sense). She is letting God out. God’s beauty is attracting people to Him, not to her in a sense.

She has a beauty that is almost ‘anonymous’; it’s like God’s beauty is shining through her.

This is modesty and beauty and simplicity and serenity.

And this is her response to the natural beauty that God gave her.

God gave us freedom, and we can’t try to take it away from anyone. It’s up to them how they use it.

Beautiful post Edward, I must say. We must all try to be as this beautiful daughter of God. As Jesus said we must be perfect as our father in heaven is perfect.

And I know I’m not perfect for I have fallen and I admit that. But I try to work to get better and by posting here, I am trying to help those who don’t seem to truly understand modesty. In the end, I hope I don’t come off as judgemental because I do not mean to be so.

 

[Tomcmaj]

How is dressing sexily (showing 3/4+ of ones legs, showing midriff, showing cleavage, showing all shoulders and most back) an act of charity?

That’s practically a definition of charity.

 

[Mark_David]

Dressing “sexily” (ie: revealingly) demonstrates an intention to be an object of desire and to attract others sexually; otherwise it’s just plain ignorance and should be corrected. Some of these posts are an apology for titillation and loose cultural “values”, not modesty.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

I have read that quote so much since you used it for reference in this thread. I do agree that God judges all human beings with their hearts. I do not deny this. Please know that. But I also know that our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit and as such, we are to respect it with true dignity, something that can NOT be done with immodest clothes.

Sorry but even standards for temple/church/cathedral architecture change over time. Any container, no matter how sacred the content, is still just a container in the end. It is not an end of anything higher. Once before, I was amused by a net joke I saw in defense of modesty using the Temple of the Holy Spirit argument. (“Does a temple wear a thong?”) However, meditating upon it, I realized that such logic can also be used to formulate hurtful additions such as “they don’t wear dorky glasses and dweeb-wear either”.

That tells me a lot of about putting a golden value on physical appearances in the manner the Party of Modesty and the Party of Sex do. Yet another simple proof that they’re both opposite ends of the same branch that is human shallowness.

Although it must be said wearing such clothes is not right in the sense that all that we do must be done to bring us closer to God, so how will wearing these clothes do anything but bring lustful thoughts to men?

Clothes do not incite anything. Proven fact. It is people who allow their senses to intoxicate their reasoning and make them think they’re out of control. Once again, the Party of Modesty sings its motto: “Looks first. Inside, never.”

Dressing “sexily” (ie: revealingly) demonstrates an intention to be an object of desire and to attract others sexually; otherwise it’s just plain ignorance and should be corrected.

Again, assuming based on appearances. I’ve demonstrated numerous times how such logic can easily presume something just as dubious:

“Dressing ‘stealthily’ (ie: covering the face) demonstrates an intention to be unseen and to stalk others; otherwise it’s just plain weirdness and should be corrected.”

Some of these posts are an apology for titillation and loose cultural “values”, not modesty.

Really now? All I’ve read are words in defense of human dignity in the face of superficial shallowness.

 

[Mark_David]

Again, assuming based on appearances. I’ve demonstrated numerous times how such logic can easily presume something just as dubious:

“Dressing ‘stealthily’ (ie: covering the face) demonstrates an intention to be unseen and to stalk others; otherwise it’s just plain weirdness and should be corrected.”

Show me where this is ever expressed by God through Scripture or the Church. Quite frankly, I’m not concerned with bare-bones logic but theology. I can give you 1 Timothy 2:9 - In like manner women also in decent apparel: adorning themselves with modesty and sobriety, not with plaited hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly attire. Sounds like you’re arguing against the word of God to me.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Show me where this is ever expressed by God through Scripture or the Church. Quite frankly, I’m not concerned with bare-bones logic but theology. I can give you 1 Timothy 2:9 - In like manner women also in decent apparel: adorning themselves with modesty and sobriety, not with plaited hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly attire. Sounds like you’re arguing against the word of God to me.

You want the Word of God? I’ve quoted and referred to 1 Samuel 16:7 many times over on this thread.

But the LORD said to Samuel: “Do not judge from his appearance or from his lofty stature, because I have rejected him. Not as man sees does God see, because man sees the appearance but the LORD looks into the heart.”

That is what I am arguing for. That is what I live by. When I see a person, I do not care for what they look like as much as I care for who they are. Nobody from the Party of Modesty has even come close to denying that this is how God sees people, much less prove that this is not what the verse says.

It’s as clear as day: "Not as man sees does God see, because man sees the appearance but the Lord looks into the heart."

 

[Tomcmaj]

Show me where this is ever expressed by God through Scripture or the Church. Quite frankly, I’m not concerned with bare-bones logic but theology. I can give you 1 Timothy 2:9 - In like manner women also in decent apparel: adorning themselves with modesty and sobriety, not with plaited hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly attire. Sounds like you’re arguing against the word of God to me.

All I can recall at the moment is that Paul wanted women to wear hats in church.

 

[severus68]

Forgive me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think Portrait is referring to race. It’s about cultural standards according to the Christian life - and some simply don’t match up to that. This includes much of the contemporary Western World. But to imply that all cultures are of equal value smells of relativism. And God isn’t a relativist. Also, criticizing Blessed John Paul II over a matter isn’t somehow inexcusable - he would have been the first to tell you that; he was very tolerant of criticism.

You are forgiven.

He referred to savages and heathens and says this was the term used by people in the Church before Vatican II and in response to some communities (non Western) where women go bare breasted.
On the JPII, I took exception to him saying JPII was making accomodations going against years of the Church’s position. While many were not happy with JPII turning back the clock for the Church, it would have been hard not to love him as a loving, forgiving person.

 

[TrueLight]

You want the Word of God? I’ve quoted and referred to 1 Samuel 16:7 many times over on this thread.

But the LORD said to Samuel: “Do not judge from his appearance or from his lofty stature, because I have rejected him. Not as man sees does God see, because man sees the appearance but the LORD looks into the heart.”

That is what I am arguing for. That is what I live by. When I see a person, I do not care for what they look like as much as I care for who they are. Nobody from the Party of Modesty has even come close to denying that this is how God sees people, much less prove that this is not what the verse says.

It’s as clear as day: "Not as man sees does God see, because man sees the appearance but the Lord looks into the heart."

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m not arguing that people who dress immodestly are evil people or loose women.

Obviously God knows the heart and we aren’t to judge people based on how they’re dressed.

Having said that, my major concern is that we should be a witness to the world.

If we “talk like Sailors” (no offense to the Sailors on this board), then we are not being good witnesses to the gospel since the bible says

Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.

If we dress in a way that is worldly (and yes I know that is subject to definition), then we are not being good witnesses.

The Party of Modesty shouldn’t even think of declaring itself guiltless of being shallow when this is always their first argument.
The word “vary” in of itself is enough to destabilize whatever absolutist standard the Party of Modesty holds dear regarding the form of modesty.

How about you stop being so derisive and referring to people as “the Party of Modesty”?

 

[severus68]

Dressing “sexily” (ie: revealingly) demonstrates an intention to be an object of desire and to attract others sexually; otherwise it’s just plain ignorance and should be corrected. Some of these posts are an apology for titillation and loose cultural “values”, not modesty.

You have no idea why a woman would dress the way she does. You insult women who do not dress the way you think they should by saying they are wanting to be sexually provocative or they are just plain ignorant.

Are you saying that those of us who disagree with your views are loose/have loose values?