Skip to main content

Virtues - Modesty

+
JMJ

This post by Rorate is perfectly timed as I'm putting together a series of posts on the virtues.

This post focuses on a virtue lacking in the 'West': Modesty in dress.

Source: Rorate-Caeli Women's Fashions

P^3


Women's Fashions


"Looking back at the summer season now over, we need to acknowledge, unfortunately, that nothing has improved with regard to women’s fashions, which have become increasingly more indecent. Nudism, these days, has even crossed the thresholds of our churches!

"There is a topic which has become taboo: women’s fashions. Who talks about it? Is it all acceptable? And if something isn’t acceptable, who should illuminate, rebuke and correct? Nudism, alas, has become increasingly more brazen and intrusive, fomented by [TV] shows, newspapers and billboard advertising […] We are now witnessing the globalization of immodesty, since the idea that a woman is not a woman if she isn’t provocative has taken root in [the minds] of the masses. It first began with the shortening of sleeves and then - sleeves disappeared altogether.

"More and more of the upper part of the body became exposed. Simultaneously there was the appearance of the mini-skirt which has become progressively more  mini! So why not bare the midriff and the navel as well? And then extremely tight shorts and ‘short shorts’. Today this audacity knows no limits, not even in holy places - in our churches and sanctuaries […]. And what is there to say when in some churches women dressed unbecomingly go up to the lectern or are extraordinary ministers of Communion? Perhaps these observations will make some smile, since now – they say – “times have changed and these things don’t shock us anymore!” This assertion is as false as it is stupid. So the concupiscence of the eyes and the flesh doesn’t exist anymore, does it? And what is written in the letters of the Apostles about women’s dress doesn’t count anymore either? The reality is this: sins of impurity are not considered sin anymore. And all this has not happened by chance.

"There has been an all out strategy of diabolical malice aimed at de-Christianizing the masses; this has occurred not with guns and prisons, but by demolishing Christian principles. […] Against this ‘steam-roller’ which seems to have no obstacles, a strong, authoritative voice must be heard! Our Lady of Fatima, through little Jacinta, preannounced the advent of indecent fashions - the cause of the loss of many souls. May the Most Pure Virgin, through Her powerful intercession, obtain a return to a pure and chaste life, at least among Christian women."

[Source: Cordialiter blog, July 14, 2015. Translation: Contributor Francesca Romana.]

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Communiqué on the Meeting between Cardinal Ladaria and Fr. Pagliarani

+ JMJ I suspect that the 'resistance' will be freaking out about this ... but as with the Archbishop, when Rome calls ... they go ... even if just to let them know (again) why they do what they do. Concerning the alleged 'sell-out' I have this to say: I should update the meme ... with 2017, 18 etc. The 'resistors' should stop and think a little: We are in the 18th year of the latest sell-out frenzy. So we're still waiting. Try and reconcile the 'resistance' positions with the Catholic Faith. If it doesn't objectively sync up - admit that you're wrong and take appropriate action. I have also attached some commentary from CFN. P^3 Courtesy of FSSPX.news Courtesy of Catholic Family News Communiqué on the Meeting between Cardinal Ladaria and Fr. Pagliarani November 24, 2018 By Eucharistic Crusade The Palace of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith i...

"Father, Should I Attend That Mass?" Advice on Attending Non-SSPX Latin Masses

 + JMJ I see that the 'resistors' are in a tizzy because Fr. Robinson used them as an example instead of the sedevacantists. What is interesting is that you can apply the exact same reasons against going to a sede mass as that of the 'resistors'. Namely: On the other extreme are those situations where an SSPX priest knows that a certain non-SSPX traditionalist venue is a grave danger to the faith . Frankly, most, if not all, of the Resistance Masses would fall into this category. In many cases, the behavior of these priests has been and continues to be scandalous, by their (A) spirit, their (B) preaching, and their indiscriminate conferral of the (C) priesthood and (D) episcopacy. To attend a Mass with such ongoing scandals poses a serious danger to the souls of the faithful. Yep, looking at A,B,C and D the shoe fits. On this basis the "resistors" = "sedevacantists". P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org   A companion article to a recent "Questions with ...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin - July 6, 1988

There has been some discussion (read lots) about the term 'Conciliar Church'. I have posted this letter written by the Superior General and District Superiors of the SSPX after the 1988 Consecrations. Of particular interest is that the 'Conciliar Church' being referred to as a system. My paraphrase would be that the SSPX regards the 'conciliar Church' as an error within the Church. Source Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o...