On Headcoverings and Modesty of Women in Church

[Methodius]

Surely we should not let American culture guide our modesty, morals and beliefs? Should we not be set apart from pop culture and society in how we behave, present ourselves, and believe? What if it became American culture neutral for men to wear skirts? I do not understand how can it be good, feminine, and modest now when it was deemed wrong less than 100 years ago? We are supposed to be different and look different and dress different too. "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God." - Deuteronomy 22:5

P.S. I do not mean this as a condemnation to any woman that has ever worn pants.

[Justin Kissel]

Methodius

I must admit that I find your opinion on this matter distressing. You seem to have no sensitivity for the fact that cultural things such as clothes have always changed with the times. Using scripture to support your position is especially distressing (as though scriptures advocated one cultural outlook on clothing and from that point forward nothing could change). But maybe you are wearing leather sandles (with ropes tied around your ankles to keep them on), tunics, etc.? Tell me, do you gird your loins the old-fashioned way as well? What is considered proper dress changes. Different situations require different dress codes.

And so... what? if my forefathers wore kilts that makes them immoral!?

You may not mean what you are saying as a particular condemnation of someone, but it is certainly offensive to those who wish to live somewhere other than the past. I wouldn't want to live in the past, to be quite frank; I live in the now and am much happier here than I would have been then. I can understand 90 year old people from "the old country" wishing that "kids today" would dress differently; I can't understand young American-borns having the same mindset.

Btw, I once did see a guy walking around with a tunic on, sandals, etc. It looked like he had stepped right out of the pages of the Bible. Maybe you think we should all dress like that? Oh wait, then you'd have to bring up that passage again that says we can't look like girls (since in our culture such clothing is normally associated with the feminine!) Quite a little box you've built.

[rebecca]

I agree that skirts do add class and femininity. And many women (especially young ones) wear very tight, unflattering trousers.

I suppose once something becomes accepted in a society, it ceases to draw attention to itself, so there's less harm in the 2003 woman wearing trousers, than there is for the 1903 woman.

[rebecca]

And I realize that a practice ceasing to draw attention to itself and becoming the social norm is often a bad thing. But not as much with main-stream fashion trends as with other things (such as living arrangements).

[ania]

Back in the day that the scriptures were writen, the only people who wore trousers or pants were either the Goths or the Gauls, don't remember which exactly. The were considered barbarians. So the scriptures never said anything specifically against pants. They wrote against women impersinating men (which actually some female saints had done), and vice versa. So, if the woman has no intention of looking like a man when she pulls on a pair of pants, it becomes a non-issue, especially if the pants were specifically designed for a woman. (I have bought men's jeans & snowboarding pants before, but that's because I find the cut fits better & their cheeper, but I've never tried to look like a guy).
If you want to get into modesty, that's a completely different issue then women wearing men's clothing. A woman can look very modest in a pair of pants. Take for instance the muslim women who live in my building. They wear the full head covering (some going even so far as to cover all but their eyes), long sleaved shirts, and 1/2 of them wear jeans. Can't get more modest then that, trust me, unless you go the full burka. Anyway, this rant was going somewhere... just can't recall, lots of work today. But I stand by my original idea... Lets everyone wear togas... (I wonder how long some of us (esp the guys) would last at the office if they showed up in a long flowing sheet).
ania

ToGa ToGa ToGa ToGa ToGa ToGa ToGa ToGa...

[Methodius]

Paradosis, I simply disagree and mean no offense whatsoever.

You may not mean what you are saying as a particular condemnation of someone, but it is certainly offensive to those who wish to live somewhere other than the past. I wouldn't want to live in the past, to be quite frank; I live in the now and am much happier here than I would have been then. I can understand 90 year old people from "the old country" wishing that "kids today" would dress differently; I can't understand young American-borns having the same mindset.

So you would not want to live somewhere on a farm raising your own food, going without modern American music, cable television, electricity and modern conveniences? And anyone who does not like today's conveniences, if born and raised in the USA, should they just get with the times because its just not understandable?

Isn't that what the Antiochian priests are doing in having pews, wearing Roman Catholic collars and Protestant suits and keeping clean shaven? Allowing their womenfolk to wear jeans or shorts to church and be uncovered? So should we apologize them for getting mad about their getting with the times and being hip to American culture?

Are you telling me that as a young American-born, that you have no problem with what you see kids today wearing?

We should have a get-together, I am thinking maybe a TOGA PARTY AT ANIA'S HOUSE!

[尼古拉前执事]

Maybe this is a good time to go to the Fathers on the subject.

The only link I know of is this one:
http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-04/anf ... 279_349605