Modesty Vs. Morality

[pinstripes]

[quote]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.[/quote]

that's exactly what i was driving at...

that we might have confused prudity with modesty.


[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]

i dunno... i don't think adam and eve can aply here because they had no sin on them when they were naked....

wheather or not an attractive guy or girl covers all their skin, they can still cause others to lust just as much. their actions and intentions are still what make an impression on others. if a 'hot' girl is wearing jeans and a sweatshirt and acting like a total [url="http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/floozie"]floozie[/url], you're gunna think of her as one. if a girl wearing a 'bikini in public' is feeding orphans, you're not going to think of her as someone who is all about her body.

mary magdaline probably dressed like a floozie for the times, yet, Jesus saw past that to her intentions of following Him.


so, is the greater sin on the person who causes other to lust, or others for viewing the person as an object and not seeing the image of Christ within?

[crusader1234]

... oi haha i retract my comments. i thought about it and i changed my mind. on a sidenote, biknis are acceptable, on the beach that is. Isnt jp2 quoted as saying something along the lines of bathing suits are appropriate while simming? something like that. I think that for church we should go out of our way to be overly modest, becuase it is a place of God and we shouldnt be trying to attract the opposite sex while trying to focus on God. I think that outside of Church and Swimming, modesty is a tricky thing. I think that if your dressing for the bedroom it shows. Being a guy, I dont worry about myself too much. Can guys dress immodestly? Jeans and a t-shirt? Jeans and a hoody? Oh well.

[Paladin D]

Everyone should wear either stormtrooper, scout trooper, snow trooper, or sandtrooper armor. That way, our entire bodies will be covered. Not to mention the armor is white, so the sun will bounce off of us.

[crusader1234]

Kind of like a space aged burqa?

[CreepyCrawler]

i've always wondered, why do so many catholic girls' schools require knee-length skirts (they can be rolled up higher, too) when those can be quite immodest (think of how the 'catholic school girl' outfit is now sexified, esp. by britney spears)? wouldn't it be better to just have the girls wear ugly pants?

[crusader1234]

i dont think the point of catholic schoolgirls is to be ugly and repulsive to boys. girls at the local catholic school get detentions for rolling their skirts.

[God Conquers]

Catholic Crusader.. you think wearing a bikini is a MORTAL SIN!?

Can you back that up? Somehow I can't imagine every women who has died in a bikini being sent to hell for what she was wearing at the time.

[Dave]

[quote name='God Conquers' date='Apr 19 2004, 11:00 PM'] Catholic Crusader.. you think wearing a bikini is a MORTAL SIN!?

Can you back that up? Somehow I can't imagine every women who has died in a bikini being sent to hell for what she was wearing at the time. [/quote]
He apparently thinks that women who wear bikinis automatically do it to make guys lust after them. But that's very judgmental. Granted, it may not always be wise to wear bikinis, but it would only be a mortal sin if a girl knew it would make the guys lust after her.

[pinstripes]

thats interesting... the proper atire to Mass business...

is it better for a guy to wear a suit and tie to Mass as opposed to his everyday clothes?

me for instance...
i own one suit. it's the "nicest" thing i own, but should i wear it every week to Mass, or should i wear my normal pants (usually nice jeans or chords) and a t-shirt or sometimes a button-down shirt to Mass because that's who i am every other day of the week?

to me, i feel like it's just like the people who go to Mass and think they're holier than they are by going to church and being a jerk for the rest of the week. wearing a suit and tie doesn't change who i am the other days of the week. if i dress modest and don't advertize anything vilgar or inapropreate on my shirts, then is that alright to go to Mass in?

to me, it shouldn't matter. CreepyCrawler's point about Catholic school girls wearing dirty old pants kind of makes sense, like how some religious orders chose to wear the least quality/fashonable things they can find because it shows their humility. if i wore my everyday mundain clothes, would that be a more accurate representation of who i am before God?

also, i don't like to spend a lot of money on clothes when there are others who need the $60 more than i need $60+ jeans when i can get good ones for cheeper, so why is it looked down upon for wearing jeans for Mass instead of $60+ dress pants (guys)? to me, that's just petty and judgmental, yet, it's still not accepted to wear jeans in Mass, no matter how clean they may be...

(sorry i just kind of went on and on. lol)

[Dave]

[quote name='pinstripes' date='Apr 20 2004, 01:41 AM'] thats interesting... the proper atire to Mass business...

is it better for a guy to wear a suit and tie to Mass as opposed to his everyday clothes?

me for instance...
i own one suit. it's the "nicest" thing i own, but should i wear it every week to Mass, or should i wear my normal pants (usually nice jeans or chords) and a t-shirt or sometimes a button-down shirt to Mass because that's who i am every other day of the week?

to me, i feel like it's just like the people who go to Mass and think they're holier than they are by going to church and being a jerk for the rest of the week. wearing a suit and tie doesn't change who i am the other days of the week. if i dress modest and don't advertize anything vilgar or inapropreate on my shirts, then is that alright to go to Mass in?

to me, it shouldn't matter. CreepyCrawler's point about Catholic school girls wearing dirty old pants kind of makes sense, like how some religious orders chose to wear the least quality/fashonable things they can find because it shows their humility. if i wore my everyday mundain clothes, would that be a more accurate representation of who i am before God?

also, i don't like to spend a lot of money on clothes when there are others who need the $60 more than i need $60+ jeans when i can get good ones for cheeper, so why is it looked down upon for wearing jeans for Mass instead of $60+ dress pants (guys)? to me, that's just petty and judgmental, yet, it's still not accepted to wear jeans in Mass, no matter how clean they may be...

(sorry i just kind of went on and on. lol) [/quote]
That's something to think about right there!

[Ellenita]

I was always taught when I was young that we had to wear 'Sunday best' for church so it was a bit of a shock recently when my friend, who is catholic but who has only just started going to Mass again after many years, turned up wearing trainers on her feet - it seemed disrespectful to me to not be wearing 'proper' shoes.....but then I realised how silly I was being because actually the most important thing is that she goes to Mass!

It's what's in your heart that counts isn't it?




















I still can't wear trainers myself though...... :ph34r:

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='Dave' date='Apr 19 2004, 11:17 PM'] He apparently thinks that women who wear bikinis automatically do it to make guys lust after them. But that's very judgmental. Granted, it may not always be wise to wear bikinis, but it would only be a mortal sin if a girl knew it would make the guys lust after her. [/quote]
You are confusing the issue. It is wrong to wear a bikini in public, pure and simple. If the woman doesn't know that, she may not be culpable but that does not mean the act itself is ok. She is simply ignorant (and therefore does not possess the full consent of the will necessary to commit a mortal sin) of the gravity of the situation.

If it is ok to wear a bikini in public, then it's ok for a girl to wear nothing but bra and panties in public. There is no difference.

It is not being judgmental to condemn a certain act as being mortally sinful. We do this for any number of sins (fornication, contraception, abortion) even though it is entirely possible that a person could engage in one of those acts without being culpable of mortal sin. Crusader did not judge any individual person, but rather the act itself. This is a perfectly legitmate thing to do.

[Dave]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Apr 20 2004, 07:23 AM'] You are confusing the issue. It is wrong to wear a bikini in public, pure and simple. If the woman doesn't know that, she may not be culpable but that does not mean the act itself is ok. She is simply ignorant (and therefore does not possess the full consent of the will necessary to commit a mortal sin) of the gravity of the situation.

[/quote]
Then tell me where the Church teaches it's wrong to wear bikinis. Where does it come out and say, "Wearing bikinis is a sin!"?

[quote]It is not being judgmental to condemn a certain act as being mortally sinful.  We do this for any number of sins (fornication, contraception, abortion) even though it is entirely possible that a person could engage in one of those acts without being culpable of mortal sin.  Crusader did not judge any individual person, but rather the act itself.  This is a perfectly legitmate thing to do.[/quote]

You're not telling me anything I don't already know. However, the Church does NOT have a teaching on wearing bikinis. Simple as that. So it's judgmental to say that those who wear them are guilty of sin.

And as for a girl wearing a bikini in public, it depends on the place. Walking down the street, no. At the beach, yes. Besides, everybody at the beach is dressed like that, so I'd say there's a good chance guys there would be desensitized to what women wear, as they're used to it. However, guys walking down the street would surely NOT be desensitized to a girl wearing a bikini, as that's just not something you normally see.

[popestpiusx]

Did you think about that before you wrote it, Dave? Give it a second look and see if you can't pick out five or six glaring holes in your argument. I'll respond later.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='pinstripes' date='Apr 19 2004, 05:31 PM'] 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? [/quote]
Our nakedness should be covered.

Our nakedness should only be viewed by our spouse. Not even by those of the same sex.

What makes something right or wrong (good or bad) is God, not society.

The God has taught, as we see in Scripture the above.

Society is not modest.

The body is beautiful, but it should not be viewed by everyone. We all know what a body looks like.

Exposing ourselves makes us an occassion to sin, who wants to be a stumbling block for someone? I don't.


God Bless,
ironmonk

[marielapin]

First of all, let me say the only time in my life I have worn a bikini was when I was about 5 years old and my mom dressed me in one (I guess now its considered a two piece suit b/c bikinis are much smaller). Bikinis are highly uncomfortable, I really don't know why people wear them. I really disliked the one my mom made for me.

BUT, I don't think its fair to say that wearing one is always a mortal sin. For a sin to be mortal, there must be three things met 1-grave matter 2-knowledge of that grave matter 3-full consent to go ahead with the sin.

There are plenty of girls out there that do not know what wearing such things does to others, and this is very true whether you believe me or not. My mom confided in me once that she did not know that the fashions of the time made men lust until they started taking her clothes off on a date. So after she came to this revelation, she started taking more care in the clothes she wore. She did not purposefully wear these clothes which are considered against modisty. Did she commit a mortal sin beforehand? Not according to what is the three conditions are for it to be a mortal sin. Would it have been if she did it afterward? Probably yes. Was it a mortal sin when I was dressed in a "bikini" at age 5? Give me a break!

As a side note, I have been very pleased to see the number of more modest bathing suits on the market now....because even a one piece, depending on how it is cut, can be more alluring and can show more than a bikini.

[Lil Red]

not to be a pest here, but i'm confused.

For example. When we say that in Lifeteen Masses there are all these abuses going on, and we say that it's not a matter of what the GIRM includes, but what it doesn't say (hand holding, altar gather, etc.) to include. Does that make sense?

Yet, on this modesty issue (which I don't know if I agree with or not), we say, "Show us where it says that. Show us where the Church teaches that. Show us what Pope said it."

I'm confused.

[pinstripes]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='Apr 20 2004, 09:47 AM'] Our nakedness should be covered.

Our nakedness should only be viewed by our spouse. Not even by those of the same sex.

What makes something right or wrong (good or bad) is God, not society.

The God has taught, as we see in Scripture the above.

Society is not modest.

The body is beautiful, but it should not be viewed by everyone. We all know what a body looks like.

Exposing ourselves makes us an occassion to sin, who wants to be a stumbling block for someone? I don't.


God Bless,
ironmonk [/quote]
should you wear a baithing suit when showering in the gym w/ others of the same sex?

it really never was so until recent times, go ask a grandparent.




for that matter...
the idea of a 'baithing suit' is entirely a new concept in the span of human existance.

i speculate that if Jesus and the apostles ever took a dip in the jordan river on a hot day in the desert, they weren't all hung up about their lack of proper baithing atire, or jump in tunic-and-all.

Edited April 20, 2004 by pinstripes

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='marielapin' date='Apr 20 2004, 11:09 AM'] BUT, I don't think its fair to say that wearing one is always a mortal sin. For a sin to be mortal, there must be three things met 1-grave matter 2-knowledge of that grave matter 3-full consent to go ahead with the sin.

[/quote]
This point has already been clarified above. Ignorance may remove culpability but it does not change the fact that the act itself is objectively still a mortal sin. Now, the case of the five year old is entirely different as five year olds have not yet reached the age of reason and are never (or rarely) culpable for anything they do.

[marielapin]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Apr 20 2004, 11:17 AM'] This point has already been clarified above.  Ignorance may remove culpability but it does not change the fact that the act itself is objectively still a mortal sin.  Now, the case of the five year old is entirely different as five year olds have not yet reached the age of reason and are never (or rarely) culpable for anything they do. [/quote]
If you are going to say wearing bikinis are an objectively mortal sin, don't forget to leave out:

all high cut and low cut one piece suits
all halter tops
all tight blue jeans
all short shorts
all low cut shirts
anything see through
short skirts
running shorts
sports bras
speedos
etc


Lets just be fair about this.

And even though I agree with you that people should not be wearing such clothes, I am still yet to find something that states that the act of wearing these clothes in and of themselves is objectively mortal.

I have read plenty of examination of consciences that state that dressing in this way intentionally is objectively mortal.

[EDIT] I have also seen the phrase "flagrant immorality in dress" as well, but have never seen what is considered such. I am just trying to get a good hold on what is considered "flagrant". It could be anything depending on your outlook. For instance, I have seen many one pieces that could be considered "flagrant" because they are more revealing and look more like lingerie than just a plain bikini. But not all bikinis I have seen I would consider "flagrant", because some are more modest in the parts they cover (i.e. the boy shorts, the longer tanks, etc) than most bathing suits.