Modesty: Does It Include Bare Shoulders In Church?

[homeschoolmom]

But that does not specify "elbow length" sleeves. I would look at that picture and think "oh, no sleeveless shirts." (since that's the picture that shows what is forbidden)... ie short sleeved t-shirts would be fine... and I'm sure that's what I wore when I was there many years ago.

[N/A Gone]

Do the women have shorts on? Or is that like a work-out jumper?

Also, that doesnt include formal wear. Just as a wedding dress.

Apparently the punishment is a cutting off of the hands cause the first group has no hands. hehe

I love pictures

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1379747' date='Sep 6 2007, 04:19 PM']Apparently the punishment is a cutting off of the hands cause the first group has no hands. hehe[/quote]
Argument aside... You have to admit, that was pretty funny.

[homeschoolmom]

It would seem, from the picture, that everyone should tottle in barefoot...

[adt6247]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1379746' date='Sep 6 2007, 05:18 PM']But that does not specify "elbow length" sleeves. I would look at that picture and think "oh, no sleeveless shirts." (since that's the picture that shows what is forbidden)... ie short sleeved t-shirts would be fine... and I'm sure that's what I wore when I was there many years ago.[/quote]
I concede that this is a possible interpretation.

It must be hard to design signs that have to be understandable by people of hundreds of different languages and cultures.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1379759' date='Sep 6 2007, 03:23 PM']It would seem, from the picture, that everyone should tottle in barefoot...[/quote]
Well, that is standard OT protocol for walking on holy ground ...

[kafka]

I've seen a few interesting points made here but nothing deep or convincing enough to refute that article I posted so:

Ok well lets ask ourselves these question:

Why in Hebraic and Christian societes, from time immemorial, have woman always worn dresses, even when trousers were introduced and it became the norm for men to wear them?

Why all of a sudden after centuries of wearing dresses did woman begin to wear pants? What influenced this change?

When men first began to wear pants why didnt woman at the same time begin to wear pants?

[kafka]

[quote name='Revprodeji' post='1379557' date='Sep 6 2007, 12:33 PM']Pants are only for men? I know that was in the article. But are you defending it? That is ludacris.[/quote]

A few hundred years ago the idea of a woman wearing pants would have been ludacris.

[Lil Red]

okay, i talked to my priest (and friend) who used to give tours of the Vatican and the basilicas. he said that a general guideline of modest dress is required. Shoulders have to be covered, no sleeveless shirts are allowed (men or women). No shorts are allowed, and skirt length should be by the knees. He wasn't sure about capris, but said that they probably were acceptable. Also wasn't sure about sandals, but also thought those would be acceptable.

He said there is no guideline as to elbow length shirts. He just said shirts cannot be sleeveless.

[kafka]

[quote name='adt6247' post='1379576' date='Sep 6 2007, 12:44 PM']And the whole pants vs. skirts thing is an inherently cultural argument. If a woman were trying to dress no different than a man, that would be disordered. Same if a man were trying to dress like a woman.[/quote]

Yet God created society and culture, therefore they are not beyond the order He has established, the laws He made, etc. They are meant to acknowledge Him and reflect Him, and not be seperate from Him.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='adt6247' post='1379803' date='Sep 6 2007, 04:45 PM']I concede that this is a possible interpretation.

It must be hard to design signs that have to be understandable by people of hundreds of different languages and cultures.[/quote]
Simple... if you want to specify that the sleeves must come to the elbow, then you make your little figures with bent arms and sleeves coming all the way to them. Since they did not, I assume that only the shoulders (and not the elbows) need be covered.

[kafka]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1379832' date='Sep 6 2007, 05:11 PM']okay, i talked to my priest (and friend) who used to give tours of the Vatican and the basilicas. he said that a general guideline of modest dress is required. Shoulders have to be covered, no sleeveless shirts are allowed (men or women). No shorts are allowed, and skirt length should be by the knees. He wasn't sure about capris, but said that they probably were acceptable. Also wasn't sure about sandals, but also thought those would be acceptable.

He said there is no guideline as to elbow length shirts. He just said shirts cannot be sleeveless.[/quote]

you are right. I have to point this out to my friend. What he expressed is actually now optional, but used to be the norm before Pope Pius VI

[Lil Red]

also, i must say that my priest (and friend) said that he was always taught by their canon lawyer teacher: Don't be stricter than the Church. and before you malign my priest, he is an orthodox Catholic. faithful to the Church. he does what is written (like the liturgy, etc.). he does not have a 'liberal' agenda. so think twice if you are going to malign his good name.

[kafka]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1379860' date='Sep 6 2007, 05:54 PM']also, i must say that my priest (and friend) said that he was always taught by their canon lawyer teacher: Don't be stricter than the Church. and before you malign my priest, he is an orthodox Catholic. faithful to the Church. he does what is written (like the liturgy, etc.). he does not have a 'liberal' agenda. so think twice if you are going to malign his good name.[/quote]

Are you talking to me? Why on earth would I do that?

[N/A Gone]

[quote name='kafka' post='1379830' date='Sep 6 2007, 05:09 PM']A few hundred years ago the idea of a woman wearing pants would have been ludacris.[/quote]


As pointed out earlier, depends on the culture. There are many fashion situations from a couple hundred years ago that we would find ludacris now.