Question - Women And Veiling Outside Of Mass (especially Cvs)

[freedomreigns]

FreedomReigns and FreudianSlippers - it seems to me this topic was not started to argue about how women should dress.  If you want to do that, start a new thread, or go bump one that's actually about that.

 

 

I am wondering why I get a special mention when the topic of modesty had most certainly been brought up several times before me?  See below...

 

Another thing that I didnt like - modesty should never be relative to secular society. Anyone following St Padre Pio's guidelines of dress being 8 inches below the knee, two fingers or less below the collarbone, long sleeves etc would stand out in miami or florida where society dresses very immodestly. does that mean the woman shold strip off? No! does it mean she is prideful by remaining modest? NO!!

and yes, the Lord does look to the heart, but that is no reason not to be modest in our clothing, scripture also gives us guidelines for modesty in dress, which it would not do unless our externals mattered too.
 

 

This one below is particularly striking to me.  Apparently if you think people may seek spiritual advice from you, you must be sure not to be "pretty."  And you would have to cry for someone's soul if he noticed you and would have to think it is your fault and you led him to think of sin.  

 

i do kind of agree with you. i didnt used to. i used to think the CV shoudl look like any other laypeson. but then, MY PERSONAL OPINION is that it just didnt seem fitting to spend time co-ordinating outfits or shopping, or even dressing to look attactive. i wished to conceal the shape of my body, and cover my flesh in long loose dresses from wrists to ankles in very modest dress, in earthy colours which did not draw attention. this was partly for ease of dress, but also because naturally people will be seeking your spiritual advice, and you do not want guys checking you out or looking at if you look pretty. it is easier to have a barrier if you are clearly wearing something plain and dull. partly because if a guy did check me out, i would ory for his own soul lest i led him to think of sin, and i would be embarrassed if he was atracted to me since i am maried to God. i would feel like it was my fault. 

 

 

 

 

I completely agree that if you follow modesty standards like from St Padre Pio, you would stand out in our culture because of the immodesty of our culture. I follow St Padre Pio's standards and often I do feel I look different. I don't want to look different. I just think it's harder in our culture to "fit in" than in previous times, because the clothing is more generally immodest. In other times like the 1930s, it was much easier. Pope Pius XII said that we shouldn't totally ignore what people are wearing so that we look ridiculous - but that fashion is not the most important thing and we should have values that go above it that can't be sacrificed. He said also that sensitivity to modesty is actually a good sign in a soul, and that the garment should not be evaluated based on a decadent society (like ours..) but on a virtuous society that praises dignity of dress. So I don't think it's fully cultural, and certain things will never be modest no matter how "used" people are to them. It's regretful that we have to stand out if we want to be modest in our culture, but that's the problem with the culture, not modesty. We can still wear "contemporary" dress but maybe in ways that aren't "fashionable" (like wearing a long skirt with sleeves instead of with a tank top which is more fashionable today). I don't at all look down on women who look different from the culture though - they are trying hard to be modest, which is more difficult today than in previous decades.

 

 

 

 

 

So, I guess I am still not exactly sure why I am in particular getting called out on expressing my opinion about common sense in the way women should think about themselves and their bodies and how to dress.  The original poster is the one who brought up modesty on the first page, so I doubt that my mentioning it 4 pages later is much of a problem in not going with the topic of the thread.

 

Maybe you only noticed my comment because you don't agree with my point of view.  

[freedomreigns]

double post 

 

Edited June 27, 2014 by freedomreigns

[freedomreigns]

Also, Mary's Little Flower, I only quoted you above as an example of the topic of modesty being mentioned well before my input.  I think I may agree with your point of view in part.  (Although you are probably more strict in your standards.)

 

And the same with Oremus1.  I quoted your post to point out that me expressing my opinion was not completely out of the blue.  I was snarky in my tone above about your post that I quoted, and I am sorry about that.  It was wrong of me.

 

 I do, however, disagree with the idea that a lay woman, consecrated or not, needs to dress in dull or shapeless clothing to conceal her shape. There is actually nothing wrong with being a woman and having a womanly shape.  I don't mean that revealing clothing is appropriate, and I do believe that a common sense modesty is important, but I don't think that it is necessary to dress in a way that is unbecoming or hides that female frame.

Edited June 27, 2014 by freedomreigns

[fides' Jack]

I am wondering why I get a special mention when the topic of modesty had most certainly been brought up several times before me?  See below...

 

 

This one below is particularly striking to me.  Apparently if you think people may seek spiritual advice from you, you must be sure not to be "pretty."  And you would have to cry for someone's soul if he noticed you and would have to think it is your fault and you led him to think of sin.  

 

 

 

 

 

So, I guess I am still not exactly sure why I am in particular getting called out on expressing my opinion about common sense in the way women should think about themselves and their bodies and how to dress.  The original poster is the one who brought up modesty on the first page, so I doubt that my mentioning it 4 pages later is much of a problem in not going with the topic of the thread.

 

Maybe you only noticed my comment because you don't agree with my point of view.  

 

Hm...  No, I just didn't read all the posts.  I saw (on that page) posts from the two people I named and responded to those.  Perhaps I shouldn't have named anyone, and just left it open.

 

In all honesty, I don't agree with 95% of people here (especially women - and including those mentioned), when it comes to modesty.  But I didn't want to be the one to start that fight in this thread.  The topic seemed undeserving of that.

[freedomreigns]

Ok, no worries!  

[Ice_nine]

Clothes came after the fall of humanity.

Ergo, God hates clothes. All clothes.

 

QED

[brandelynmarie]

:doh: