Dressing Down For Church Has Gone Too Far, CNN Article

[F. J.]

Suits next to sandals . . .

At my church, it runs the gamut. You’ll see some of the older gentlemen dressed in sharp suits while the younger folks are in button-downs, jeans, and flip-flops. Some of the high school and college-aged girls wear what my dad calls ‘eternity dresses,’ as in, “When they sit down you can see all the way from here to eternity.”

There’s this one fella that wears his cheap cloth trilbies in the sanctuary. I can’t really say he’s irreverent though, as he takes it off during the prayer.

Personally, as I only have one suit at the moment (two if you count my dinner suit), I usually wear an odd jacket, odd waistcoat, odd trousers, double-cuffed shirt (usually) or white button-down, four-in-hand or bow tie, grey fedora, black shoes. I also keep my handkerchief points-up in my breast pocket. This is also how I dress most days anyway. On Easter, I wore black lounge (I haven’t acquired full morning dress yet and it would have been a touch over-the-top).


The thing that gets me is when people say, “Oh, you’re supposed to come as you are. Y’know, Jesus’ll take you however you are,” and “You don’t get cleaned-up to come to Jesus, you come to Jesus to get cleaned-up.” While that is true, the people spouting it probably haven’t read their Bibles as well as they thought.

What did Isaiah say when he saw the LORD?
“ ¶ Then said I, Wo is me ! for I am undone;
because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell
in the midst of a people of unclean lips : for
mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of
hosts.”

—Isaiah VI. 5.​

Also remember
“That at the name of Jesus every knee
should bow, of things in heaven, and things in
earth, and things under the earth ;
And that every tongue should confess that
Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the
Father.”

—Philippians II. 10-11.​

 

[LizzieMaine]

Of course, the point I get from those scriptures is that no matter who you are, and no matter how you're dressed, you're still unclean flesh unworthy to stand before the Lord. Don't matter how nice your hankie is, you're still as dirty a sinner as the crummiest bum in the gutter.

Dressing nice isn't the issue. It's when dressing nice makes you self-righteous that's the problem.

 

[F. J.]

Of course, the point I get from those scriptures is that no matter who you are, and no matter how you're dressed, you're still unclean flesh unworthy to stand before the Lord. [...]

I’m sorry, I guess I didn’t convey it very well. That was my point. I wasn’t trying to come across as self-righteous, I was really just rambling. I dress the way I do because I like it, not because I think I’m any better than anyone else; I know I’m not. As long as we’re both there to worship, it doesn’t really matter how we’re dressed.

 

[jamespowers]

http://www.crosswalk.com/blogs/dr-ray-pritchard/how-to-dress-for-church-11582002.html

 

[ChiTownScion]

And then there is the option of dressing however you see fit, and doing something you view as more constructive, beneficial, and enjoyable with your scare free time on a Sunday morning than spending it inside of a church.

Perhaps it's rooted in part in my Catholic upbringing and the admonition that not attending every Sunday unless one was at death's door was a "mortal sin," or perhaps it was decades of putting up with happy clappy Evangelical "praise and worship" services, but the amount of spiritual edification obtained in a church service hardly seems worth the time invested.

If it's about learning or instruction, I'd prefer attending a lecture on a theological subject by a qualified academic. If it's about serving God and fellow man, I'd rather volunteer at a hospital, soup kitchen, legal clinic, or even mow the grass/ clear the snow for a neighbor who needs it.

A growing number of Americans are describing themselves as religiously unaffiliated, and quite frankly, I can find that very easy to appreciate. Apparently, we now have an omnipotent Supreme Being Who not only "needs" our attention every Sunday morning and is taking attendance, but is a fashion critic as well. Evidently, God made man in His image and likeness... and there is now a determined effort by at least a few in His fan club to return the favor.

 

[jamespowers]

And then there is the option of dressing however you see fit, and doing something you view as more constructive, beneficial, and enjoyable with your scare free time on a Sunday morning than spending it inside of a church.

Perhaps it's rooted in part in my Catholic upbringing and the admonition that not attending every Sunday unless one was at death's door was a "mortal sin," or perhaps it was decades of putting up with happy clappy Evangelical "praise and worship" services, but the amount of spiritual edification obtained in a church service hardly seems worth the time invested.

If it's about learning or instruction, I'd prefer attending a lecture on a theological subject by a qualified academic. If it's about serving God and fellow man, I'd rather volunteer at a hospital, soup kitchen, legal clinic, or even mow the grass/ clear the snow for a neighbor who needs it.

A growing number of Americans are describing themselves as religiously unaffiliated, and quite frankly, I can find that very easy to appreciate. Apparently, we now have an omnipotent Supreme Being Who not only "needs" our attention every Sunday morning and is taking attendance, but is a fashion critic as well. Evidently, God made man in His image and likeness... and there is now a determined effort by at least a few in His fan club to return the favor.

You weren't listening in church or at the lecture. Not attending church is a venial sin and NOT a mortal sin. You cannot equate killing someone with not attending church. :rofl: You do not end up in Hell for not attending church. It is a forgivable sin and doesn't result in a separation from God.

 

[ChiTownScion]

You weren't listening in church or at the lecture. Not attending church is a venial sin and NOT a mortal sin. You cannot equate killing someone with not attending church.

That it is deemed sin at all is an arbitrary declaration.

 

[jamespowers]

That it is deemed sin at all is an arbitrary declaration.

It has never been arbitrary. It was decided by a conference of Cardinals long ago. There was discussion etc.

 

[ChiTownScion]

You weren't listening in church or at the lecture. Not attending church is a venial sin and NOT a mortal sin.

The Catholic Church deems it " a grave sin." That hardly seems "venial."



Catechism of the Catholic Church

Part Three, Section Two, Chapter One, Article Three

“The Sunday obligation

Ҥ2180 The precept of the Church specifies the law of the Lord more precisely: On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound to participate in the Mass. The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day.

“§2181 The Sunday Eucharist is the foundation and confirmation of all Christian practice. For this reason the faithful are obliged to participate in the Eucharist on days of obligation, unless excused for a serious reason (for example, illness, the care of infants) or dispensed by their own pastor. Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a grave sin.”

Evidently I am not the one who wasn't "listening in church or at the lecture."

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[vitanola]

Well, a sin may well be grave and yet not deprive a would of divine grace. A "Venial Sin" is by definition one which does not deprive the soul of divine grace.

The catechism on my shelf is a bit out of date, but it explains the difference between Mortal and Venial sin thus:

"Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God's law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him." (C.C.C. # 1855)

"Mortal sin, by attacking the vital principle within us - that is, charity - necessitates a new initiative of God's mercy and a conversion of heart which is normally accomplished within the setting of the Sacrament of Confession." (C.C.C. # 1856)

"Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the private of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance of God's forgiveness, it causes exclusion to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God." (C.C.C. # 1861)

"To choose deliberately - that is, both knowing it and willing it - something gravely contrary to the divine law and to the ultimate end of man is to commit a mortal sin. This destroys in us the charity without which eternal beatitude is impossible. Unrepented, it brings eternal death." (C.C.C. # 1874)




"Venial sin allows charity to subsist (i. e. exist), even though it offends and wounds it." (C.C.C. # 1855)

"Venial sin constitutes a moral disorder that is reparable by charity, which it allows to subsist in us." (C.C.C. # 1875)

"One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law,or when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter, but without full knowledge or without complete consent." (C.C.C. #. 1862)

"Venial sin weakens charity; it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul's progress in the exercise of the virtues and the practice of the moral good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However venial sin does not set us in direct opposition to the will and friendship of God; it does not break the covenant with God. With God's grace it is humanly reparable. 'Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.'" (C.C.C. # 1863)

Now, I believe that the applicable line is; "One commits sin, when in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by moral law."

Which does pretty well sound like skipping Mass.

Of course I am writing as a Protestant who has merely read a bit of Catholic theology, and as we all know, "a little knowledge..."

 

[LizzieMaine]

This discussion prompted me to dig out my Methodist Book of Discipline (1916 edition), which has only one sentence in the entire volume about how one should dress for church:

"Let all our people be exhorted to conform to the spirit of the apostolic precept, not to adorn themselves with 'gold, or pearls, or costly array.'" -- Membership, Chapter III -- Special Advices, paragraph 66, page 59.

As far as attendance goes, there is no rule or penalty for non-attendance, either earthly or spiritual, at all. Worship is considered a voluntary action, not a compulsory behavior.

 

[jamespowers]

Well, a sin may well be grave and yet not deprive a would of divine grace. A "Venial Sin" is by definition one which does not deprive the soul of divine grace.

The catechism on my shelf is a bit out of date, but it explains the difference between Mortal and Venial sin thus:

"Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God's law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him." (C.C.C. # 1855)

"Mortal sin, by attacking the vital principle within us - that is, charity - necessitates a new initiative of God's mercy and a conversion of heart which is normally accomplished within the setting of the Sacrament of Confession." (C.C.C. # 1856)

"Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the private of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance of God's forgiveness, it causes exclusion to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God." (C.C.C. # 1861)

"To choose deliberately - that is, both knowing it and willing it - something gravely contrary to the divine law and to the ultimate end of man is to commit a mortal sin. This destroys in us the charity without which eternal beatitude is impossible. Unrepented, it brings eternal death." (C.C.C. # 1874)




"Venial sin allows charity to subsist (i. e. exist), even though it offends and wounds it." (C.C.C. # 1855)

"Venial sin constitutes a moral disorder that is reparable by charity, which it allows to subsist in us." (C.C.C. # 1875)

"One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law,or when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter, but without full knowledge or without complete consent." (C.C.C. #. 1862)

"Venial sin weakens charity; it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul's progress in the exercise of the virtues and the practice of the moral good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However venial sin does not set us in direct opposition to the will and friendship of God; it does not break the covenant with God. With God's grace it is humanly reparable. 'Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.'" (C.C.C. # 1863)

Now, I believe that the applicable line is; "One commits sin, when in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by moral law."

Which does pretty well sound like skipping Mass.

Of course I am writing as a Protestant who has merely read a bit of Catholic theology, and as we all know, "a little knowledge..."

Not bad. You nailed it. No response necessary. :clap:

 

[2jakes]

This discussion prompted me to dig out my Methodist Book of Discipline (1916 edition), which has only one sentence in the entire volume about how one should dress for church:

"Let all our people be exhorted to conform to the spirit of the apostolic precept, not to adorn themselves with 'gold, or pearls, or costly array.'" -- Membership, Chapter III -- Special Advices, paragraph 66, page 59.

As far as attendance goes, there is no rule or penalty for non-attendance, either earthly or spiritual, at all. Worship is considered a voluntary action, not a compulsory behavior.

My mother was a Methodist & my father was raised as a Catholic.
I grew up with double view of religion.
One of my grandmothers had religious statues
splattered all over the place with smelly candles.
The other had none, not even family photos.
She treated me like a "king".
But I was never a spoil-brat!
Not sure what this has to do with the topic,
but LM sparked a memory mode !

 

[swanson_eyes]

This discussion prompted me to dig out my Methodist Book of Discipline (1916 edition), which has only one sentence in the entire volume about how one should dress for church:

"Let all our people be exhorted to conform to the spirit of the apostolic precept, not to adorn themselves with 'gold, or pearls, or costly array.'" -- Membership, Chapter III -- Special Advices, paragraph 66, page 59.

As far as attendance goes, there is no rule or penalty for non-attendance, either earthly or spiritual, at all. Worship is considered a voluntary action, not a compulsory behavior.

True, but there are so many examples of how the first century church lived as family, meeting together constantly. And not being part of a fellowship makes it hard to live out all the "one another" scriptures, of which there are many. There are reasons I miss a service here and there (mostly medical), but my heart is that you do your best to be at family meetings.

 

[vitanola]

Not bad. You nailed it. No response necessary. :clap:

Now, this question interested me sufficiently that I posed it to the priest who officiated at the wedding at which I canted this morning. He explained that IN HIS UNDERSTANDING most Catholics have been rather poorly catechized about this point over the last forty or so years. He remembers priests attempting to frighten parishioners to Mass by calling missing mass a Mortal sin, a practice which was proscribed by the American church in the late 1970's. That said, a Grave sin is a Venial sin which may tend if frequently repeated utterly separate the soul from God, and so the Venial sin of skipping Mass may become the Mortal sin of Apostasy, if repeated over a long enough period.

 

[sheeplady]

Now, this question interested me sufficiently that I posed it to the priest who officiated at the wedding at which I canted this morning. He explained that IN HIS UNDERSTANDING most Catholics have been rather poorly catechized about this point over the last forty or so years. He remembers priests attempting to frighten parishioners to Mass by calling missing mass a Mortal sin, a practice which was proscribed by the American church in the late 1970's. That said, a Grave sin is a Venial sin which may tend if frequently repeated utterly separate the soul from God, and so the Venial sin of skipping Mass may become the Mortal sin of Apostasy, if repeated over a long enough period.

I had been following this conversation closely because of family history. My mother (whom was raised a Catholic) left the church after being told missing mass was a mortal sin by her priest around that time period (1970s). I was starting to think that maybe her priest was just off his rocker, but apparently this was a practice by some priests?

 

[fashion frank]

Was at Mass yesterday and my priest called all fathers to the altar to receive a blessing and a fathers day prayer card and there I am wearing a suit and the guy next to me was wearing a faded t shirt ,cargo shorts and deck shoes .

Years back you would not dare to go to church like that .
We had an old school priest Father Valour (god rest his soul) he was an awesome priest and he once commented how he was in Haiti and how the people were very poor but on Sunday they wore the best clothes that they had to church , and man you should have seen the look on some peoples faces when he said that !

All the Best ,Fashion Frank

 

[Big J]

Was at Mass yesterday and my priest called all fathers to the altar to receive a blessing and a fathers day prayer card and there I am wearing a suit and the guy next to me was wearing a faded t shirt ,cargo shorts and deck shoes .

Years back you would not dare to go to church like that .
We had an old school priest Father Valour (god rest his soul) he was an awesome priest and he once commented how he was in Haiti and how the people were very poor but on Sunday they wore the best clothes that they had to church , and man you should have seen the look on some peoples faces when he said that !

All the Best ,Fashion Frank

I absolutely understand your point of view. These days I think 'Maybe you're a bum, but maybe you're the one guy in 100 who works sixty hours a week for minimum wage and saves everything for his kids college fund (or something)'. There must be some of them out there.

 

[swanson_eyes]

It was good of you to try to give hime the benefit of the doubt. I do have a friend who is a single mom in school and working 2 jobs, one of which is often an overnight shift into Sunday. When we have morning service, she comes in what she was wearing overnight rather than being late. She does home health care and given what she deals with in taking care of her clients, really casual clothes are in order.

 

[Big Man]

I was pleasantly surprised this past Sunday to see six men dressed in coat and tie for Sunday services. And on top of that, all but one of them was younger than me. Maybe the folks in my church are checking out the Fedora Lounge. [huh]