FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Men's Dress Worn By Women - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Archives (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Theology and Philosophy (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: Men's Dress Worn By Women (/showthread.php?tid=25362)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26


Men's Dress Worn By Women - StevusMagnus - 02-06-2009

HK,

Bottom line is that you have no idea the circumstances of the Church in the video, if it is an area with frequent visitors and tourists, and make no allowance for this fact. Then you assume that SSPX Chapels in Europe must not care about veils or pants from the evidence of one video of one Chapel.

Then you make similarly rash assertions based on a false premise: that the more "robustly" and "intimately" you sing means the more "aware" one is of the Mass. There are Life-Teeners who sing very "robustly" and "intimately" are they "aware" of the Mass? In reality whether one sings or not has no correlation to their "keen sense of liturgy". Also, you seemingly read the faces of Chapel goers by studying their "blank or confused expressions". Completely subjective and speculative assertions. Furthermore, are you sure you were "aware" and had a "keen sense of liturgy" as you scanned the congregation to see who was singing, look for "blank and confused expressions" and if people were praying private devotions?

And based on this nonsense, you then make the claim that many US SSPX Chapelgoers are unaware of the Mass, and furthermore that they are, instead,  are "glad to hear the priest rail against this or that from the pulpit". I suppose you can read their minds as well?

Please keep your rash judgment and speculative assertions to yourself. At worst they are calumny and at best detraction.



Men's Dress Worn By Women - Cantus - 02-06-2009

Telemaque Wrote:
Cantus Wrote:For those who would not, is it not the wearers final judgment that is their own responsibility?

No, it isn't the wearers final judgement if the priest says they should not wear them at mass.

Quote:In the light of abortion, the excommunication, the vicious media attacks on the church, is the question of women wearing pants so important to you that you cannot let it go or do you think it so much more important than the issues I just mentioned?  Priorities people, please!!!!

Feminism is a major reason for abortion. The people attacking the SSPX are bringing up Williamson's views on pants because they believe such a thing will hurt its reputation. Well, the SSPX has good reasons for its views so those views should be defended. If it's so unimportant to you why have you been participating in this thread?


So then you place the same level of sin on wearing pants, even though they are modest and feminine as you would on a woman getting an abortion?  I believe I'm done here.   I cannot logically argue against such seriously insane statements.  Best of luck to you.



Men's Dress Worn By Women - Telemaque - 02-06-2009

Cantus Wrote:
Telemaque Wrote:
Cantus Wrote:For those who would not, is it not the wearers final judgment that is their own responsibility?

No, it isn't the wearers final judgement if the priest says they should not wear them at mass.

Quote:In the light of abortion, the excommunication, the vicious media attacks on the church, is the question of women wearing pants so important to you that you cannot let it go or do you think it so much more important than the issues I just mentioned?  Priorities people, please!!!!

Feminism is a major reason for abortion. The people attacking the SSPX are bringing up Williamson's views on pants because they edit: are feminists, society has feminist attitudes and they believe such a thing will hurt its reputation. Well, the SSPX has good reasons for its views so those views should be defended. If it's so unimportant to you why have you been participating in this thread?


So then you place the same level of sin on wearing pants, even though they are modest and feminine as you would on a woman getting an abortion?  I believe I'm done here.   I cannot logically argue against such seriously insane statements.  Best of luck to you.

So saying Feminism has to do with abortion is a seriously insane statement? Notice, I didn't put wearing pants and abortion on the same level, to suggest I did is insane.

Here's what I'm saying. When women seek to reject their natural role they see abortion as a means of helping to achieve that evil end. Now women wishing to wear pants and not dresses and demanding it as a "right" as a similar motivation, to avoid the natural role. No one is drawing any equivalence between them. It's a similar motivation.

If I commit a heinous crime to gain money or if I don't give a reasonable amount of money to Church the motivation is the same, avarice.

So you said, who cares about pants and its relation to a woman's role, when there's abortion?

That would be analogous to saying: "who cares about people not giving money out of avarice, when people are being robbed, defrauded or killed for money."

And my analogous response would be:

"Avarice has to do with people being robbed, people defrauded, murders committed for money. Those criticizing churchgoers who refuse to give and telling them they are inspired by avarice have good reasons for making those criticisms. If you have a problem with discussing refusal to tithe and avarice why are you making posts on this thread?"

I'm sorry you misinterpreted what I'm saying. I admit what I said was clumsy, but I assure you many of the liberals who think Williamson's views on pants are outrageous are pro-abortion. Their attitudes regarding the two topics are connected. Rebellion against the traditional role of women is the motivation.

Now not many Churchgoers who refuse to tithe think it's acceptable to rob, defraud, or kill for money. But if they did think that way it would be because they are conquered by avarice.





Men's Dress Worn By Women - The_Harlequin_King - 02-06-2009

StevusMagnus Wrote:Bottom line is that you have no idea the circumstances of the Church in the video, if it is an area with frequent visitors and tourists, and make no allowance for this fact. Then you assume that SSPX Chapels in Europe must not care about the issue from the evidence of one video of one Chapel.

When some of those ladies in question are in the music program, it's evident that they're not tourists or visitors. Ladies who not only attend, but actively work with men in various positions of authority in that church. And if this church is not just one chapel, but is the heart of the SSPX in France (a country where an estimated half of all SSPX'ers worldwide reside), then it's very reasonable to figure that the pants issue isn't taken as seriously there. And look at the statement I was replying to:

Telemaque Wrote:Not in SSPX chapels. We don't have to follow all the fashions of the world. Within living memory standards were different. They were different for a good reason, they were changed for bad reasons. I know the difference between the standards of dress of women in SSPX chapels and those in Novus Ordo.

If one of the most significant (if not the most significant) SSPX establishments isn't strictly upholding a no-pants rule, then this statement above isn't true.

StevusMagnus Wrote:Then you make similarly rash assertions based on a false premise: that the more "robustly" and "intimately" you sing means the more "aware" one is of the Mass. There are Life-Teeners who sing very "robustly" and "intimately" are they "aware" of the Mass? In reality whether one sings or not has no correlation to their "keen sense of liturgy". Also, you seemingly read the faces of Chapel goers by studying their "blank or confused expressions". Completely subjective and speculative assertions. Furthermore, are you sure you were "aware" and had a "keen sense of liturgy" as you scanned the congregation to see who was singing, look for "blank and confused expressions" and if people were praying private devotions?

Quite sure. You're free to disagree, though.

StevusMagnus Wrote:And based on this nonsense, you then make the claim that many US SSPX Chapelgoers are unaware of the Mass, and furthermore that they are, instead,  are "glad to hear the priest rail against this or that from the pulpit". I suppose you can read their minds as well?

Most American SSPX'ers I've read on forums and the blogosphere were attracted to the SSPX for their moral and doctrinal stances more than for liturgical reasons. European SSPX'ers on the same sites, though, more often emphasize liturgical principles.

What I said about all that is ultimately just a series of personal observations. If you don't like them, that's fine. But since they're not against the forum rules, I'll say what I please about it, just as you'll say what you please about FSSP'ers being sellouts, etc. without just "keeping them to yourself".



Men's Dress Worn By Women - Telemaque - 02-06-2009

Quote:If one of the most significant (if not the most significant) SSPX establishments isn't strictly upholding a no-pants rule, then this statement above isn't

It's true where I go to church. So it is true regarding the attitudes of the SSPX in this city.







Men's Dress Worn By Women - The_Harlequin_King - 02-06-2009

Telemaque Wrote:
Quote:If one of the most significant (if not the most significant) SSPX establishments isn't strictly upholding a no-pants rule, then this statement above isn't

It's true where I go to church. So it is true regarding the attitudes of the SSPX in this city.

And that's fine. A little clarification helps everything. I'm just pointing out that the issue is not uniform throughout the whole Society.



Men's Dress Worn By Women - StevusMagnus - 02-06-2009

Telemaque Wrote:
Quote:If one of the most significant (if not the most significant) SSPX establishments isn't strictly upholding a no-pants rule, then this statement above isn't

It's true where I go to church. So it is true regarding the attitudes of the SSPX in this city.

My city as well Telemaque. Of course, HK knows better as he has seen one video clip on the internet and reads minds, hearts, and faces at Mass.

Which begs the question why he was at an SSPX Chapel anyway, and not at his "indult" or FSSP if the Society members are so clueles?



Men's Dress Worn By Women - StevusMagnus - 02-06-2009

The_Harlequin_King Wrote:
Telemaque Wrote:
Quote:If one of the most significant (if not the most significant) SSPX establishments isn't strictly upholding a no-pants rule, then this statement above isn't

It's true where I go to church. So it is true regarding the attitudes of the SSPX in this city.

And that's fine. A little clarification helps everything. I'm just pointing out that the issue is not uniform throughout the whole Society.

Except that's not what you did. Instead you made several rash judgments of many people based on speculation and false assumptions.




Men's Dress Worn By Women - The_Harlequin_King - 02-06-2009

StevusMagnus Wrote:My city as well Telemaque. Of course, HK knows better as he has seen one video clip on the internet and reads minds, hearts, and faces at Mass.

Which begs the question why he was at an SSPX Chapel anyway, and not at his "indult" or FSSP if the Society members are so clueles?

You have a clannish mentality.

I'm a pan-traditionalist. I support all the traditional orders, including the SSPX.

Quote:Except that's not what you did. Instead you made several rash judgments of many people based on speculation and false assumptions.

If you wish to believe that, I'm not going to stop you any further. I'm not going to make a poll this time.



Men's Dress Worn By Women - StevusMagnus - 02-06-2009

The_Harlequin_King Wrote:I support all the traditional orders, including the SSPX.

You have a funny way of showing it.