I venture no opinion as to what the wilier sex should wear to Mass. I just thought that people might like to have something else to discuss other than politics. I will now skitter away and I promise to stay with comparatively more noncontroversial topics in the future, like the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Top one doesn’t look bad, has a basic level of formality and applies it to both sexes. It even specifically mentions jeans and t-shirts on both sides being fine.
Yes, I have noticed how many of the lectures see nothing wrong with DudeBro lifter gear, but a pre-teen girl in stretch fabric pants is an affront to the lord. /eyeroll
Not even clicking on the not wearing pants thing. Solid no. Not bothered by others who can manage it, fine for them, I care no more than I care if they wear heels and will only notice in a similar situation. (Basically “Oh, wow, Neko– did you see that?” levels of impressive.)
Clarification, I will very much notice a utilikilt and have to remind myself that I would look very stupid in one, no matter how cool they are; my father is one of a handful of Scotsmen whose knees should never be seen, and I inherited them.
I always used to wear a dress, then skirt/blouse because they fight better) to Church (Protestant or Catholic). I eventually got in the habit of wearing a chapel cap.
.
This past year I switched over to dress pants/sweater, or a tunic dress with leggings or some such. And almost always a hat or beret. An elderly gentleman (my “second dad”) at our parish said I was one of the best dressed there.
.
One elderly lady always used to wear a suit, but finally seems to have switched over to pants full time. The woman (approaching 80 ys old) I consider the most devote at our parish always wears pants–I don’t think I have every seen her in any kind of dress or skirt. The jolly lady I consider my “second mom” wears pants on some days or a skirt on others. She’s very grandmotherly. Fits the sterotype exactly.
.
A younger woman (by our parish’s standards–the vast majority are well into their 70’s and early 80’s) has joined and seems to wear mostly suits.
.
As I have gotten older, I have begun to wonder about wearing skirts and dresses. They just don’t seem to work right. Very frustrating. Younger folks seem to get away with wearing a garbage bag and look okay. As I start the beginning of “elderly-hood” I worry about being “frumpy” or “immodest.”
.
Did Jeff Foxworthy did a video on Old Folk Fashion tips?
Don activates timer on explosives, leaves building.
Lawyers…
🙂
Discussions about atomic bombs are safer? Actual atomic bombs are safer.
For men, coats, ties, and dress shoes unless you’ve just come from work. The chap who used to blog under the handle “Secret Agent Man” had a dictum: work clothes are St. Joseph’s Clothes. I very seldom see construction workers or industrial workers who are on their way to work or on their way home or on break, however.
For women, the dictum in re work clothes also applies. Otherwise, frock and dress shoes. If someone can see your cleavage, you’re doing it wrong. If someone can see your shoulders, you’re doing it wrong. If someone can see your knees, you’re cutting it close. As for dress shoes, don’t show up in CFM pumps. (Yes, there’s a lectrix at one parish I attend who does that). If you’re carrying enough precious metal to cause a panic on the Eurodollar market, you’re also doing it wrong. Mantillas recommended.
Youngsters not yet confirmed should have Sunday clothes unless affordability is an issue.
https://www.google.com/search?q=john+roberts+children&client=firefox-b-1-d&sxsrf=ALeKk02Zxi-fqa2a8bzzE0H58cHjY-La0w:1605282995502&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjWsdeV8f_sAhVizlkKHTW1ASIQ_AUoAnoECAoQBA&biw=1185&bih=647#imgrc=4GPlldv6w4AcjM
If you have a beard, keep it properly trimmed. Men’s hair should be tidy and unobtrusive – have the barber put the clippers on setting number 2 if you cannot think of anything better. The hair of men and women should be its natural color. Women should remind their hairdresser that hair is not sculpture. Hair is hair.
snort Hair is hair, and that’s exactly why these discussions are so high-flash-point.
Just as I would not go to Mass without having bathed unless there was dire reason, and I would not wear clothing that had not been washed since I last wore it, I would not follow the fashion norms of the pre-1950s, especially not as filtered through those who have no idea how much went into those “natural” and not “sculptured” hair.
I would not follow the fashion norms of the pre-1950s, especially not as filtered through those who have no idea how much went into those “natural” and not “sculptured” hair.
Go to the barber now and again, keep it washed, use a comb and brush, and keep some hairbands or barettes around. Works in our house.
A younger woman (by our parish’s standards–the vast majority are well into their 70’s and early 80’s) has joined and seems to wear mostly suits.
Hillary should have destroyed the constituency for that quite thoroughly.
Haven’t been to a barber in at least six years– which is possible because I am not using the same hair-care products that my grandmother grew up using. I wash my hair every day, just as I can wash my clothes every day. Neither of which were an option in the time of suits and dresses, colored or sculpted hair is scandalous.
Womens hair back then was sculptured, and it took a lot of work to look like it wasn’t– curlers, relaxers, tints, lotions…. Colors or shapes that went beyond fashion-norms were a form of conspicuous consumption.
Now?
Even my husband’s shampoo is designed to do little harm to the hair; even those folks who do their hair with a body-soap bar aren’t doing the kind of damage that long hair took in the 40s. The ladies who have to get old school hair care are generally of highly African ancestry, and the sculptured look is the less expensive way to avoid having boy-short hair.
(Which I learned by asking. Hair down and loose or in a pony tail, like I usually do, would take too much expensive care to be in their reach.)
Womens hair back then was sculptured,
My mother’s hair in 1944 was not sculptured. She got the idea in her head, sometime around 1958, that it should be. She spent money at the hairdresser every week and what she got in return is what women usually get from hairdressers: money spent to make your hair look worse than it would if you did nothing. She didn’t need curlers; her hair curled naturally.
Modesty is often talked about as an exclusively female virtue. It’s not surprising that women take offense at this since the odds that the females in any event are much better dressed than the males are high. I don’t have to police what my wife and daughters wear. They’re far better at that than I ever would be but my son? Well, he’d look awful most of the time if he didn’t have folks telling him to change. Heck, I suspect I would too since the women in my life are the ones who kindly point out my fashion disasters BEFORE I go out.
With regards to church attire, it seems to me that the focus shouldn’t be on women and girls while boys and men wear low-rise jeans… And really shouldn’t considering most of them have a case rather than a six-pack. It isn’t often the girls who show up with stained shorts, holes in their jeans, and unkempt. That’s the men, from about 13 to 70.
To be sure, there have to be some external standards for weddings and funerals and such. These are, in a sense, orchestrated affairs and the folks who put them together deserve respect that can be externally enforced but I rather think God is unconcerned with the matter.
Wearing sweat pants to a wedding? Awful. Wearing them to church? I’m just glad you’re here.
Blessed with naturally curling hair, lucky her– and it was still less of a bother to go to the hair stylist.
Women “got it into their head” that it was a good idea because all that bother was easier, for a better result, than doing it at home.
A lot of it mirrors folks who say women shouldn’t wear makeup– but when you get into figuring out what their basis is, they mean they don’t want to notice that women are wearing makeup.
One gentleman figured this out on his own, because he spent a good 30 years sure that his mother wore no makeup and was startled when she had some to loan to his wife. She’d been wearing it his entire life, he simply didn’t know what she looked like without it.
So now he says, “I don’t like seeing makeup on women.” Which is rather the point of makeup, to not be seen.
With regards to church attire, it seems to me that the focus shouldn’t be on women and girls while boys and men wear low-rise jeans…
Embrace the power of ”and’.
I’m not sure I’ve seen young men who fit that description. What hits you is the older men in ball caps and windbreakers.
Women “got it into their head” that it was a good idea because all that bother was easier, for a better result, than doing it at home.
No, that was what she preferred to do. It wasn’t ‘easier’ than just washing and brushing and having Mr. Marcella cut it twice a year.
A lot of it mirrors folks who say women shouldn’t wear makeup– but when you get into figuring out what their basis is, they mean they don’t want to notice that women are wearing makeup.
No, I haven’t wanted any of the women I kept company with to wear makeup and if they did, I’d see it on the bureau, the commode, and around the sink. Which I don’t.
“…but I rather think God is unconcerned with the matter. Wearing sweat pants to a wedding? Awful. Wearing them to church? I’m just glad you’re here.”
So you think wearing sweat pants to Mass is fine? Coming in personal contact with the Lord of Hosts and King of Kings wearing sweat pants? Would you dress that way to appear in Court or meet a Governor or President?
Matthew 22:11 –
11 But when the king came in to meet the guests he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment.
12 He said to him, ‘My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?’ But he was reduced to silence.
13 Then the king said to his attendants, ‘Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.’
Seems he does care how we dress and isn’t grateful just for OUR presence.
It was my understanding that people wore some of their best clothes not because of any vanity but because of the importance of the occasion and going to Church WAS important.
It was my understanding that people wore some of their best clothes not because of any vanity but because of the importance of the occasion and going to Church WAS important.
I grew up in the world of suburban Anglicanism. The first time I can recall seeing someone in casual clothes at an ordinary church service was around about 1987.
Certainly, we should make ourselves presentable to God, not just for church but in our regular lives but I don’t think saddling others with our choices is helpful. I’d rather someone come to church looking like a hoyden than feel unwelcome to come as they are.
Jesus is God but He was born in a manger and sat in boats as men hauled fish aboard and dropped them squirming at His feet.
It wasn’t ‘easier’ than just washing and brushing and having Mr. Marcella cut it twice a year.
Phrases that make it very clear someone really doesn’t grasp what goes into “just” washing and brushing, even with modern resources, kind of like the eternal “why does it always take a woman so long to get ready” laments.
All work is easy when someone else is doing it.
JFK-
the “garments” in that story are recognized as being the same garments that are made white by being washed in the blood of the lamb; in context, the parable at most would argue for the “poor people clothes are OK if you’ve got your soul in the right shape” interpretation.
The speed with which it goes from being modest and not drawing attention away from Himself and to one’s self and over to “everyone should dress and groom in my preferred style in this and all things” is part of why this is a nuclear topic.
David-
one of the better priests we had (our parish was where they sent folks who’d pissed off the Bishop or were new) did a sermon that included explaining how common it was to work essentially naked, and how uncommon bathing in a manner we’d recognize was.
Certainly, we should make ourselves presentable to God, not just for church but in our regular lives but I don’t think saddling others with our choices is helpful.
‘Helpful’ to what end? I’m afraid standards are set and adhered to communally. That’s why they’re standards.
Phrases that make it very clear someone really doesn’t grasp what goes into “just” washing and brushing,
You’re absolutely egregious.
As usual, your arguments are absent.
I suppose next you’ll explain to me what it is like to be pregnant, or to have a monthly cycle, based on your vast personal experience and in-depth discussions on the topic.
I really DON’T think it helpful to saving souls to enforce external standards on those not under our authority. It is different for parents because we have ongoing relationships which create context for our standards. “Son, I need you to change your shirt because that one is stained. Wearing it to church makes it look like you don’t care and may be a distraction to people who are trying to focus on the Lord.” We don’t have that for the stranger. Making him feel unwelcome may lose a soul we were meant to partner with God to save.
Besides, people tend to rise to the standards that become regular around them. If we worry about us and ours, others may do the same and so on.. All without our disapproving looks and all with a welcoming church that leaves no one feeling like they don’t belong, like they have to look a certain way to be welcome.
Of greater concern to me is that so few people refrain from the Eucharist. I would like to see our priests speak more openly about the State of Grace so that folks can more comfortably refrain from going up for communion.
I think that more recognition that nearly all of us will have times when we aren’t in a good place to receive the eucharist and that we shouldn’t be embarrassed by doing the right thing or look down on others for doing so.
Most of the time I wear a broad brimmed hat or a beret or tam o’ shanter to Mass. For me it’s a sign of respect for God in the tabernacle. More and more I see girls and women with veils. My hair is long so most times it’s in French twist or a peruke (? think powered wig’s low pony tail and that’s a peruke) tied with a ribbon or flower. I think I am too old to wear it down. Why hats? I was used to wearing a cover in the Navy. At ceremonies and changes of command women wore hats, guess it’s a fading tradition unless it’s outside or on a ship’s deck. My husband buys me nice brimmed hats, wool felt and straw, so I please him by wearing them and I am fair so I want to prevent skin cancer on my face. To church I wear skirts, sweater or long sleeved Ts, occasionally dresses,or suits on a big feast day and wool slacks with a blazer or shawl.. Funerals are always a black suit and a hat; I figure it’s a sign of respect. Daily Mass wear is usually jeans or even, I hate to admit it, a track suit or sweats – it depends if the heat is on and what’s going on at the farm. Having worn a uniform, I always tried to look feminine off duty and that’s a continuing trend. I have gained some COVID weight so for now my wardrobe is limited. When my husband lectors at 0730 Mass he wears a coat and tie. Non lecturing he will wear khakis, collared shirt and maybe a blazer. When we came back from our 40th anniversary trip to Bermuda he wore to Mass men’s business attire from there – Bermuda shorts, matching knee socks, dress shirt and tie with blazer. He looked handsome though he received ribbings from his pals. His retort was, “Are you making fun of my heritage’s traditional dress?”
In a former parish we’d see a young man at Mass who always wore shorts, a skivvy white T and bare feet in the dead of winter and go up to communion. He was with other young people and I figured he was an eccentric. Also have seen some young women with tight, low cut tops and mini skirts and a middle aged woman with a terrific figure in a cat suit. For church they were immodest and I bet every man in attendance was distracted.
FOXFIER, for my mother’s funeral I hadn’t packed properly so I found a full skirted black voile dress of my mother’s and a wide brimmed black straw hat of hers plus her pearls and a pin my dad brought her from post war Japan.. The outfit was from the 60s and I remember she was very proud of finding them on sale at the nicest dress shop in her town. So I looked retro, so what. My mom battled her weight all her adult life and I thought she would be pleased looking down and seeing that her daughter could fit in her slim period clothes.
CAM, that was beautiful and I really appreciate the careful consideration of the matter. Well done.
David Spaulding
USS Ainsworth (FF-1090)
Unlike my usual won’t, I currently wear my best jeans to church, rather than a skirt. Then again, I am not usually forced to attend church in a parking lot .
CAM-
that sounds like an awesome tribute to your mother.
If you ever have someone giving you trouble about the hats, SuburbanBanshee has an entire tag-section on hats. Also other fashion and tradition posts, including a lovely if fierce article on Mother Cabrini for today.
(USS Essex, LHD-2– although I liked VX-31 in Death Valley more; buncha sailors, here!)
I generally try to dress in a way that shows appropriate regard for those whom I encounter, especially when that encounter includes the Real Presence of the King of Kings. So I wear a coat and tie to Mass. I fully understand that others don’t see it that way, and while I don’t understand them I avoid judging them. Much more pressing things to worry about.
I generally try to dress in a way that shows appropriate regard for those whom I encounter, especially when that encounter includes the Real Presence of the King of Kings. So I wear a coat and tie to Mass.
Me too Mike. My black suits are so associated with me that acquaintances have expressed surprise when they see me in casual garb at home, one saying that she had always assumed that I mowed my lawn wearing a suit!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought it was “racerbacks.” Razorbacks are those unfortunate souls attending the University of Arkansas.
Foxfier, I do realize the passage is in regard to the state of our souls and baptism. My repeating it is only to point out that I think the prevailing attitude “out there” among most Christians is that God WILL accept me however I present myself to him, unrepentant sins and all, which I don’t think is true. It has ALWAYS been God’s call to us to repent and walk with Him and advance in holiness.
While I don’t “condemn” people for wearing what is easily identified as inappropriate clothing, such as CAM recounted, I simply don’t understand it at all, and I won’t approve of it. My opinion, whatever that is worth, is that while striving spiritually to be closer God, changing our ways to follow the Lord, that our progress should be / could be visible to others. If I were to start wearing tee shirts and shorts to Mass, infrequent shaving, bathing or getting a hair cuts, people would be concerned for me because my decline would be evident.
For me, a late middle aged man, I want to dress like a “grown-up” and give those whom I encounter their own due respect, whether at Church, at work, on a video call, picking up pizza. Why is wearing sweat pants to a wedding awful? It’s because it’s not respectful to the couple, the occasion and the rest of the attendees. Why limit that respect of people to weddings? Mass? Work? I decided a few years ago to no longer do so.
It really is surprising the kinds of reactions you get from people when you show up at the supermarket, picking up pizza, etc. wearing a nice shirt, a tie and a jacket and nice shoes. They complement you and think you’re a doctor, a lawyer, an architect. No, I tell them, I’m just an normal guy. Are you going somewhere? No, I’m just coming here. I think people appreciate my taking the effort to dress nicely FOR them. I hope I can be an example for someone that they can be better than they are.
So that’s it. I know it seems rather silly but it’s my little attempt to stop a societal decline of decency and standards.
Let the broadsides against me begin….
Let the broadsides against me begin….
Bah.
You’re doing something, yourself, to improve things for others.
Which is exactly the opposite of demanding that others do a thing for your desires.
I’m glad it works– frequently, our son wears pressed pants, button-up shirts and an adorable little professor’s jacket, with a bow tie. He is happy, and it makes people happy. Two of our daughters love frilly dresses, and look good in them, and it makes people happy. (…even if they frequently wear socks with cartoon characters, they still coordinate.)
When it works, it’s great.
That’s a world away from sending someone to hell for not wearing nice enough outfits to Mass, which is what your original post suggested.
Of greater concern to me is that so few people refrain from the Eucharist. I would like to see our priests speak more openly about the State of Grace so that folks can more comfortably refrain from going up for communion.
They don’t care. If they did care, Cdl. Arinze’s instructions in 2004 would have been respected. I’ve never been in a novus ordinary parish that paid them any mind. I was told explicitly in 2004 that Bp. Moynihan’s policy was to ignore those instructions and have ‘Extraordinary ministers’ whenever whenever. I gather the priest in Greene, NY did discontinue the practice of routinized use of extraordinary ministers, so you if you attend either the parish, mission, or oratory in his current portfolio of assignments, you can attend a service without them.
You’d also see priests encouraging people to use the confessional. I’ve known two priests outside the Latin mass subculture who did. One went off the grid in 2004 and hasn’t had any public ministry in the last 16 years. The other died in 2008.
This guy
https://www.hamilton.edu/news/story/father-john-croghan-retires
used the confessional in his church to store folding chairs (before he had the confessional removed entirely). He set up a pseudo confessional in a side room with what looked like a washboard appended to a kneeler.
I really DON’T think it helpful to saving souls to enforce external standards on those not under our authority.
What’s your complaint, ‘external standards’ or ‘not under our authority’?
As usual, your arguments are absent.
I have had just about enough of you. First you’re correcting my observations about my mother, then you’re telling me I know nothing of ordinary hygiene, and now you’re playing these games. I’d rather have no further interactions with you in any venue.
Play nice folks. Argue ideas and not personalities. We are, or should be, friends here.
Foxfier, Don sends them to hell for not wearing “nice enough” outfits to Mass? No, he’s warning that those who are nonchalant about their attire might send themselves there. Recall the parable of the man without a proper wedding garment at the wedding feast. We’re talking about the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, where Our Lord comes down to us on the altar. We’re also not talking of someone just coming to Mass for the first time, but someone who should know what Mass is, and can afford a decent outfit. By the way – that meme still sets the bar way too low. How we dress reflects our character, what we value, etc.
Art Deco, by “I really DON’T think it helpful to saving souls to enforce external standards on those not under our authority,” I mean to acknowledge parental responsibility for their household and the danger of seeking to dictate to others what they should do.
We, as parents, have a duty to help our kids understand the rules. Some are quite serious and others barely so and it is our job to point them out, explain them, and insist on the more important of them. However, there is something deeply offensive about my treating you like one of my kids. Who am I to tell you that “men where hats in public” or that they don’t in a restaurant? Were you my child, I’d tell you what the rule is and hope that I’d done a good enough job of parenting that it wouldn’t chaffe too much but you aren’t.
When we tell people how they should dress in church, we place on them the standard we set for ourselves. We dont’ have that right or duty and it may actually BE harmful.
I volunteer with an unemployed / underemployed ministry and one of the more important things we do is set folks up with interview and work clothes. Most of us have been managers and we know that getting the job is only partially about qualifications; A nice outfit that improves confidence can make all the difference.
There are two lessons here: 1) When we tell people how to dress we assume they can meet our standard or will humble themselves to ask for help in meeting that standard. As like as not, they’ll just not encounter God in our churches. 2) Our job, as Christians, is to meet people where they are, not to insist that they meet us where we are on our path to Heaven.
I applaud dressing up for church and modesty generally. When we do so, we encourage others without demanding anything at all. Where we go wrong is when we shame others into making a choice to either abandon the faith or adopt our customs.
We aren’t in the right when we do that.
“Of greater concern to me is that so few people refrain from the Eucharist.” I hope they never do away with the pre-Communion fast. In my life time the fast went from Midnight on to 3 hours and now down to 1 hour before reception. If someone is not in the State of Grace, i.e., has committed a mortal sin, they should not receive. “I forgot and had breakfast”, is a good excuse for a teen when he/she has had a big Saturday night. In grade school the nuns told us when we had committed venial sins to say the Act of Contrition before receiving. I still say that.
Churchgoers should be more attentive to what’s happening on the altar as opposed to observing who stays seated in the pew.
FOXFIER and DAVID SPAULDING, thanks for the compliment. Both of you had interesting duty. Don’t you find that the sea stories get better and better with age? Go Navy! That is if the Army and Navy teams are well enough to play.
Thank you for the Suburban Banshee link. I booked marked it. Enjoyed seeing the sea of Sister of Charities bonnets at Bishop Fulton Sheen’s Mass.
Interesting points being made.
I agree that setting an example is important however we must be aware that the one who knows hearts, intentions and circumstances is mercy itself. He, who cleansed the ten lepers, was saddened that only one returned to give Him thanks.
Thanksgiving.
Eurchrist.
If the pinnacle of our Mass is receiving Jesus, then the interior of our being and it’s condition, it’s disposition, far outweighs the exterior coverings.
I’m not saying sloppy attire is kosher.
I’m saying rend your hearts…not your garments.
When we become the front pew parishioner who is fine tuned and sharply dressed..I hope he/she isn’t praying; “Thanks God that I’m not like the one’s who come to you in Jean’s and a tee shirt.”
For the one in the last pew could be praying; “Dear God forgive me. I’m a terrible sinner and don’t deserve your great mercy. Forgive me too for my clothes are clean but they are not befitting to be in your presence.”
I have befriended a man who has suffered greatly from the addiction of alcohol. Through the grace of God he has returned to the Sacraments.
He is being fitted to wear a white robe.
We, all of us, are being fitted with a white robe. Some will have to wait for alterations in Purgatory. Others will have that robe placed upon them at the moment of their death.
May we be worthy.
I’m OK with the rules posted, with the exception of the ban on anything sleeveless. The issue of modesty/decency is separate from the issue of whether one should always “dress up” for Mass. I posted at TAC on this issue some years ago: https://the-american-catholic.com/2010/09/17/the-third-rail-of-the-catholic-blogosphere/
Thoughts:
1. Dress as well or better than if you were to meet a human being of importance, because your meeting Jesus, God and Man. If you don’t own good clothes, it’s understood.
2. We all have a wounded human nature. Men and Women are different. Men are more apt to be tempted by lust; Women by gossip. Dress accordingly.
3. Argh. Why is this controversial?
“Dress as well or better than if you were to meet a human being of importance”
I would agree with that except for one thing. For most middle or working class people, meeting “a human being of importance” is a once in a lifetime event at best, not something they do on a regular basis; therefore they would not practically be expected to own or spend money on the kind of clothing they would wear to meet someone like a pope, president, king or queen. If someone wants to do it, fine, but I dunno that I would hold this up as an absolute standard for people without considerable disposable income. Are they supposed to dress EVERY WEEK as if they were going to the White House or St. Peters? (Of course, this is why you added “if you don’t own good clothes, it’s understood.”) Personally I wear to Mass what I would wear to work — clothing suitable for greeting the public and local/state officials.