Modesty Vs. Morality

[pinstripes]

in a conversation between myself and a girl i've met at school who's from europe, we've noticed that some people have a warped sense of what it is to be modest or rather, what it is to be modest and why it is important.

from what i gather, her norm for modesty isn't even close to what most people would consider modest at my school. many girls wear dresses to their ankle, shirts to their wrists and neck, etc. she looks at these girls like they aren't happy with their bodies and act like they are covering up bad things. i find it interesting because to her, the body is beautiful no matter what, due to her cultural upbringing. a nude beach is not any big deal because no one taught her to think of one as sinful. here though, nude beaches are associated with immorality, and lust, among other things.

i attend a conservative [url="http://www.udallas.edu"]Catholic School[/url] where modesty is portraied almost as if our bodies aren't ment to be seen by anyone other than ourselves, God, and our spouse if we ever have one. I'm pretty sure that the girl i was speaking with said that modesty where she's from is more along the lines of your behavior with your body (i.e. if you go to a topless beach to lay out in the sun or swim, its different than going there because you can be naked and see other people naked).

do you think that our culture (united states/north america) has a distorted image of the human body and ways of being modest, or do other cultures have a better attitude when it comes to this?

[CreepyCrawler]

i think we have a distorted view of the body but not because we want to cover them up! i heard of a study done awhile ago on teenage girls in the u.s. and muslim girls in a country (can't remember which) where women's magazines were banned. the muslim girls, even though they would be considered by americans as repressed and taught that bodies were shameful, had better body image and loved their bodies more than the americans. i think that says something.
i don't think bodies are bad. like i say to people who wonder about my reluctance to bare it all: "i'm comfortable with my body but i'm not comfortable with other people being comfortable with my body!"

[popestpiusx]

The Catholic view of modesty is not so much that our bodies are bad, which is ridiculous considering that God created them and the second person of the Holy Trinity "took one on" and became like us in all things but sin. Rather, our bodies are sacred and are to be treated accordingly. Certain areas of the body are to be covered. This is not because we think they are evil but because they are in some sense the most sacred and are only to be exposed within the sacred bonds of marriage in which we no longer exist for ourselves but have given ourselves entirely to our spouse. This covering of the sacred can be seen in other areas of the Church (and history in general). Consider the curtain that covered the entrance to the Holy of Holies in the Jewish temple, and the veil that covers the door of the Tabernacle in a properly decorated Church. Proper modesty is not so much covering what is evil, but rather, is like a veil covering the most sacred things. Moreover, we don't use sacred things for everyday use. You would not take a chalice used at Mass and try to use it at the dinner table as well. Nor would a priest wear his vestments down to the local bar for a stiff drink after Mass. Sacred things are reserved for sacred use. In covering our bodies properly we are reserving them for their proper use. We are shielding them from the vulgar for the sacred.

Edited April 19, 2004 by popestpiusx

[CreepyCrawler]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Apr 19 2004, 03:50 PM'] Proper modesty is covering what is evil, but rather is like a veil covering the most sacred things. [/quote]
I think you mean what is NOT evil, right?

Good points btw

[popestpiusx]

You are correct, creepy. Thank You!!

[Sojourner]

I read or heard something on this recently which, if I remember correctly, was along the lines that in this country, the extremes we have experienced ranging from prudery to promiscuity are two sides of the same coin, neither of which represent a true respect for and appreciation of the body.

Modesty should stem from a proper respect for the body, which PSPX articulates well, not from a sense that the body is shameful in and of itself.

[cmotherofpirl]

We are Temples of the Holy Spirit, not display cases.

When groupies show up for my son's band, I have been known to offer them one of my ( read very big) T shirts before they can come in. Some are offended, some go home. They do get the point.

[God Conquers]

I think we have gone too far as a society in reaction to victorian (protestant) sexual repression. We need to find a happy medium between getting all hot and bothered by an ankle, and thinking a woman is sinful for showing one, and the "letting it all hang loose" attitude of today.

I think the "Euro" view you have expressed pinstripes, is not completely good. We need to realize the sacredness, as PSPX so wonderfully put it, of the human body. We need to know why 1) we need to be modest in both behavior AND dress and 2) How to properly react to a level of immodesty we are uncomfortable with.

We must realize that the human body is a wonderful thing, to be admired (as in art) and celebrated, but not ALL of it, to EVERYONE. We need to respect the sacredness of our future marriages, as well as the purity of those around us, without being prudish or condescending towards those who are not.

[CatholicCrusader]

The Church has stated that women must cover at least to the elbow. The shirt cannot be any deeper than two fingers breadth from the pit of the throat. Dresses should not merely fall "scarcely below the knee" (in all positions)--St. Pio would not even hear confession from a woman unless her dress was at least 8 inches below the knee while standing. Of course, no transparent material can be worn. I posted this on another thread that I assume is now in the back alley. I need to check, though. I have the exact quote there. Also, the website that I got a lot of this information from ([url="http://www.olrl.org"]Our Lady of the Rosary Library[/url]) has been down for a few days. If it comes back up, I will copy the links here. God bless.

[CreepyCrawler]

[quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Apr 19 2004, 05:54 PM'] The Church has stated that women must cover at least to the elbow. The shirt cannot be any deeper than two fingers breadth from the pit of the throat. Dresses should not merely fall "scarcely below the knee" (in all positions)--St. Pio would not even hear confession from a woman unless her dress was at least 8 inches below the knee while standing. Of course, no transparent material can be worn. I posted this on another thread that I assume is now in the back alley. I need to check, though. I have the exact quote there. Also, the website that I got a lot of this information from ([url="http://www.olrl.org"]Our Lady of the Rosary Library[/url]) has been down for a few days. If it comes back up, I will copy the links here. God bless. [/quote]
many women at my church, even the eucharistic ministers wear sleeveless dresses. if this were a rule, why doesn't anyone know about it? i'm just wondering, not b/c i'm offended, but b/c i just had never heard it before.

[crusader1234]

I liked the comment about the point of how you are dressing or why you are nude. I think that modesty is more a matter of what you are THINKING, or the reasons why you dress the way you do than what you are actually wearing. For example, if a girl wears a bikini becuase she thinks she looks good in it, thats one thing. if a girl wears a bikni because she wnats to make OTHER people think she looks good in it, i think thats immodesty. Besides, in 100 years our bodies will be rotting 6 feet under so start looking at the spiritual side of modesty rather than looking at the clothes we wear.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Apr 19 2004, 06:54 PM']The Church has stated that women must cover at least to the elbow. The shirt cannot be any deeper than two fingers breadth from the pit of the throat. Dresses should not merely fall "scarcely below the knee" (in all positions)--St. Pio would not even hear confession from a woman unless her dress was at least 8 inches below the knee while standing. Of course, no transparent material can be worn. I posted this on another thread that I assume is now in the back alley. I need to check, though. I have the exact quote there. Also, the website that I got a lot of this information from ([url="http://www.olrl.org"]Our Lady of the Rosary Library[/url]) has been down for a few days. If it comes back up, I will copy the links here. God bless.[/quote]
I believe [url="http://www.catholicmodesty.com"]Catholic Modesty[/url] has the information to which you were referring.

[Dave]

[quote name='CreepyCrawler' date='Apr 19 2004, 06:59 PM'] many women at my church, even the eucharistic ministers wear sleeveless dresses. if this were a rule, why doesn't anyone know about it? i'm just wondering, not b/c i'm offended, but b/c i just had never heard it before. [/quote]
Pope Pius (can't remember which Pope Pius it was) said that. But I doubt he meant to teach it as doctrine but was rather stating his opinions on the subject.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Dave' date='Apr 19 2004, 07:15 PM'] Pope Pius (can't remember which Pope Pius it was) said that. But I doubt he meant to teach it as doctrine but was rather stating his opinions on the subject. [/quote]
That would be my take on it this, as well as St. Pio's requirements for hearing confession. They do not, from a quick perusal, appear to be doctrine, but rather personal opinion.

[willguy]

Appropriate modesty is not defined by oneself but by the ones around you. For example, if wearing a certain article of clothing will cause lust, then it is immodest. On the contrary, there are places where nudity is fine and not meant to be erotic (nude beaches for example). In that case, it is not immodest. Adam and Eve were nude in the garden before they knew shame and lust.

[Livin_the_MASS]

Our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit. We do not own ourselves. To be naked causes lust.

It doesn't matter if you are at a place that allows it.

Jesus was pure, that is not following His example of purity!

Dressing for Holy Mass well I will say it is not a beach party and modesty is most appropriate. At the Shrine of the Most Blessed Sacrament in Alabama they had dress rules! I say Amen to that.

God Bless
Jason

[popestpiusx]

I think if we explicate the proper reasons why modesty is necessary, then the "how to be modest" question is easier to answer. It is not simply a matter of whether this or that is a doctrine. Pius XI and St. Pio both said what they did because of the very nature of mankind. We shouldn't be asking "how short can my skirt be" (not that I would have the occasion to ask this, and if I do I expect someone to put me out of my misery) but rather, what is the most pleasing to God, what is more likely to assist me and my fellow man in living a life of virtue, and at the lowest level, will I be an occasion of sin to other people? We striving for virtue, not seeing how close to the line we can come. Aquinas taught that morality I based on reason informed by human nature. When considering the issue of modesty, be reasonable. Think about human nature. If a girl is wearing a bikini (in public) she is being immodest, no matter what her intention. She may as well be walking around in public in a bra and panties. Is not that providing an occasion of sin for any normal male she happens to encounter? Of course. Modesty is not about the person’s intentions but in objective standards reasonably derived from human nature.

Edited April 20, 2004 by popestpiusx

[CatholicCrusader]

[quote]I liked the comment about the point of how you are dressing or why you are nude. I think that modesty is more a matter of what you are THINKING, or the reasons why you dress the way you do than what you are actually wearing. For example, if a girl wears a bikini becuase she thinks she looks good in it, thats one thing. if a girl wears a bikni because she wnats to make OTHER people think she looks good in it, i think thats immodesty[/quote]

That is very faulty logic. If anything, modesty depends much more on those around the person than on the person herself. To wear a bikini is a mortal sin, period. As I said on another recent modesty thread, if this is not grave immodesty, what is, nudity??

[quote]Appropriate modesty is not defined by oneself but by the ones around you. For example, if wearing a certain article of clothing will cause lust, then it is immodest. On the contrary, there are places where nudity is fine and not meant to be erotic (nude beaches for example). In that case, it is not immodest. Adam and Eve were nude in the garden before they knew shame and lust. [/quote]

This, too, is faulty logic...Adam and Eve were not scandalized by the other's nudity BEFORE they commited sin. Then what did they do? They covered themselves. It is clear that this original sin is what called for modesty because this new inclination to sin could not be contained while nude. No Catholic can actually support nude beaches...that is just absurd. I can only wonder what Pope Pius XI would say about that (or any Pope for that matter).


[quote]Pope Pius (can't remember which Pope Pius it was) said that. But I doubt he meant to teach it as doctrine but was rather stating his opinions on the subject. [/quote]

Yet nowadays every "conservative" takes anything the Pope says as absolutely infallible, no questions asked. For example, he is personally against the death penalty, so all the neo-cons are, too. If we all acted this way in areas where the Pope's opinion actually MAKES SENSE...then we would all be MUCH better off.

However, I would hardly call this the "Pope's opinion." The Magesterium clearly stated declaritavely that a dress CANNOT BE CALLED MODEST if it violates the rules I have already mentioned. That doesn't seem like it is very much of an opinion. St. Pio, yes, had his personal rule. However, the Magesterium clearly defined what is and what is not modest. These guidelines MUST be followed.

Further, these rules did not say that "if you wear something blatantly against these rules (such as a bikini), as long as you think it's OK, then it is." That is the epitome of relativism.

I don't see how someone can say that nude beaches, bikinis, ect. are OK. If they are OK sometimes then they should be permitted all the time. It makes not sense to say that something that is absolutely vulgar and immodest when worn outside of its "secular purpose" (e.g., a bikini in a church) is OK when worn outside of church (at a pool, for example). That is to say that those who go to church must not be the same people when they are outside of church because they are scandalized in one situation and not the other.

This would not only be absurd in church but also walking along the street or anywhere in the real world outside of a pool, beach, etc. How is it that you can "turn off" whether you are scandalized or not? If this were the case you would never be scandalized because you could always just "turn it off." This theory is absurd.

God bless.

Edited April 20, 2004 by CatholicCrusader

[pinstripes]

oops.. double post...

my next post is what i wanted to say

Edited April 20, 2004 by pinstripes

[Iacobus]

I am not offended by females wearing what they so do choose becuase it rarly affects me anymore. However, there are many out there at are affected by it so I would stress common sense. And don't dress to show off.