You are going with the standards of the culture here. What the culture considers “edgy”, inappropriate, or over the top is what you disapprove. Why would these be the standards of Christ?
Yes, I’ve been over this many times. You can read my past posts where I go into a lot of detail and use a lot of examples. As I’m tired of repeating myself, this is the brief version of my answers to your question:
Because the body is not evil or dirty. Nakedness is not evil or dirty. The human mind, however, IS (or can be).
So when it comes to showing skin, it all depends on the context (ex: time, place, reason, function). Wearing shorts on a hot day, is not sexual, and isn’t viewed that way, therefore there is nothing wrong with it because there is nothing wrong with our bodies/nakedness. Wearing a bikini to the beach, is not sexual, and isn’t viewed that way, therefore there is nothing wrong with it because there is nothing wrong with our bodies/nakedness.
Same exact reason why we don’t think it’s scandalous when women in tribal Africa walk around completely topless.
So, this imaginary “standard of Christ” you all speak of. I’ve asked this a million times but no one ever tells me. WHAT is it?? Can you please tell me?
The reason why no one ever answers me is because there is no set standard.
The catechism states that modesty varies depending on cultural norms, yet some of you here insist on some sort of imaginary standard that doesn’t exist.
Why would Our Lady have said He would be “offended very much” by fashions that would only be disapproved a short time by a segement of the culture, then quickly get seen as normative as standards continually get flouted?
Can you please show me this quote? From what I remember, this is all it was: “certain fashions will offend our lord very much.” If there is more to it than that, please quote it for me.
But first, I have a question for you. Do you think it is immodest to expose one’s ankles? Because at one point in time, showing an ankle was disapproved at first and was a source of arousal for men. …But it was later seen as normative, and now a days men don’t get turned on by seeing an ankle.
If your answer is YES, then I guess you and I are never going to see eye to eye anyway. If you answer is NO, I urge you to think about that for a little bit, and think about how it relates to what you said above.
Is it only social disapproval that concerns you?
???
NO. Please refer back to my earlier posts… I’ve talked about this soooo much already. It’s just exhausting.
Here I go, explaining this for the millionth time:
Our religion, the Catholic religion, has no universal standard of modesty.
For example. There is no Church doctrine or anything of the sort that says the following:
“Here are the guidelines for modesty of dress. Showing a knee is immodest. Showing collar bones is immodest. Showing anything in between is immodest. Sleeves must come down to the elbows. Clothes must not be tight. Etc etc…”
Are we on the same page here? Can we both agree that there is nothing of the sort in our religion? Good. Now, the catechism states that “modesty varies from culture to culture.”
This makes sense, because like I said, the human body/nakedness in itself is not vulgar or indecent.
What makes it indecent is what runs through our minds.
So, several dozen years ago, showing an ankle was immodest. It was immodest because it was not the cultural norm. Ankles were never exposed, so because they were never exposed, men used to get extremely aroused at the sight of them.
Therefore, at that time and place, walking around with calf high skirts would have been very immodest.
At the other side of the spectrum we’ve got indigenous African tribes in the deserts. The women in those tribes walk around completely topless. Is this immodest? No. Why not? Because it is a cultural norm, and since the body/nakedness in itself is not vulgar or indecent, then there is no problem. There is no problem because the men in those tribes are used to seeing women walk around like that. It is not a sexual, vulgar, immodest thing. It is a cultural norm.
From everything I’ve just pointed out above, we can see that when it comes to MODESTY OF DRESS, it is all dependent on cultural norms, and not on some sort of universal Catholic standard of modesty that DOES NOT exist.
If a generally-accepted fashion is also provocative, isn’t that more important than whether some old lady finds it unsuitable?
If it is a standard way of dress in this culture, it is not provocative. It is a cultural norm, like the topless tribal women.
Some fashions are always going to provoke, no matter how “social standards” change.
Like what for example? Is this a fact you got from somewhere? Does the Church teach this?
Wouldn’t that be what concerned Jesus, who spoke of lust in the heart as sinful?
Lust from the heart IS sinful. What does this have to do with me wearing standard swimming attire when I go swimming?
