Trousers / pants and female dress in church

[Robert Hegwood]

This is an itch I'm not sure how to scratch. I know Orthodox tradition has a lot to say about modesty and humility, but frankly I do not understand why some segments of Orthodox society...even those of other conservative Christian communions have against pants for women? If the issue is modesty then while women should be in dresses men should be in kassoks. Isn't that part of the reason for monastic garb being as it is for men and women...to blur the human form a little and diminish visual tempations for others? If the issue is not wearing clothes that specifically pertain to another gender when all one needs is distinctly male and female versions of pants...which I think exist...I have not the slightest desire to be seen in anything resembling my mother's pants suits....or kulots. In Christ's time there were men's and womens robes/ways of wearing them and there was no issue really beyond ostentatious dress. So if a pair of pants are clearly a woman's garment and are not ostentatious or otherwise immodest how are they objectionable?

I just don't understand the reasoning here. I suppose it could be said pants have always been a male garment...but that is not necessarily true since there are traditional pants worn by women in several Asian countries. So I don't get it. Still I respect the tradtionalist mindset here (at least I think I do) but I just don't understand what it is based upon in this particular instance.

[Trudy]

Hi Seraphim,

Since I can only speak to my own situation, the reasons I wear skirts are:

1) Respect for God. I figure I am worshipping the One True God in His Holy Church. Since I stand before Him, a sinner, the least I can do is look decent since I am unworthy to be there in the first place. If I were to meet the Queen of England, I'd be wearing a dress. Why not God? :o)

2) Respect for myself. I figure, when I do a full prostration and my derriere is sticking up in the air, the least I can do is make sure it doesn't look more obscene than it does.

3) Respect for others. I figure no one should be looking at my derriere, so I do my best to cover it up in church.

4) I like wearing long skirts.

5) It's a "tool in the tool box" as Fr. David Moser explained it once. It helps me work out my salvation.

Fairly untheological, but there ya go. One thing I'm not is very theological. Hope this helps. I understand the scratch.

In Christ,
Trudy (Athanasia)

[Anthony]

As an aside, is there any problem with men wearing kilts in church?

[Robert Hegwood]

Dear Athanasia,

So it seems your reasons center on respect and modesty which is fine, but what of men here. Where it might be argued that pants are proper attire for a man to see the queen, with regard to modesty does anyone care to be staring at a man's backside in church either? So would it be better then if women should wear skirts that men wear cassoks.

As for kilts they probably aren't long enough, and show too much leg.

[Anthony]

As for kilts they probably aren't long enough, and show too much leg.

Nonetheless they are the accepted formal dress of a particular culture, and often worn to occasions like marriages as a mark of respect. That is the kind of situation I had in mind.

I don't know what the correct answer to my question is - just asking.

[Herman Blaydoe]

Actually, a kilt is quite the modest dress, except in a very strong wind. It consists of at least 4 yards or up to 8 yards of fairly heavy wool material which really does not move around all that much. A prostration in a proper kilt is probably more concealing than a prostration in poorly fitted trousers might be. And by the time you add the high socks, about all you are going to see in a properly fitted kilt is the lower part of the knee, avert your eyes ladies! Right.

Beyond that, I certainly find a woman in a well-tailored pant suit much less distracting than a wispy short dress any time. Any reason why women should NOT be as covered up as the menfolk in Church? Nicer to look at granted, but we are not in Church to be looked at.

[Ken McRae]

Nonetheless they are the accepted formal dress of a particular culture, and often worn to occasions like marriages as a mark of respect. That is the kind of situation I had in mind.

I don't know what the correct answer to my question is - just asking.

I'm not so sure, though, that cultural considerations should trump the moral ones. For instance, it is well known, (and there are plenty of photos to prove it,) that the last Pope presided at several Masses, performed in countries like New Guinea, for example, where topless women dressed in grass skirts and grossly painted faces, gave the Gospel Reading(s), of all things, and all in the name of "cultural respect". It caused great scandal, to say the least (which was fairly typical, however, of his overall dismal pontifficate). It is a shame to even speak of it, imo, so please forgive me.

[Trudy]

but what of men here. Where it might be argued that pants are proper attire for a man to see the queen, with regard to modesty does anyone care to be staring at a man's backside in church either? So would it be better then if women should wear skirts that men wear cassoks.

Seraphim,

Since I've done no research on the subject, except by being a woman for nearly (gulp) half a century, these are just my feeble thoughts as regards men and women.

Women are not as visual a creature as men. Thus I would assume, in general, you'll not find a woman falling into temptation/sin as regards a man's physique as you would the reverse.

So to answer your question, no I can't imagine many would be caring to stare at a man's backside in church. And when I am bending to do a full prostration, I am taking care not to land on my nose, thus I'm not paying much attention to the rest going on around me. I assume that to be the case for most others.

As for what it's worth, for myself, I'm a "shoulder/neck" woman. Thus a cassock would make no difference to me. I try very hard to keep my eyes focused on the altar and my mind in the prayers to the best of my ability.

The long and short of it is, the last statement. Wouldn't you agree?

Humbly yours in Christ, Trudy (Athanasia)

[Anthony]

I'm not so sure, though, that cultural considerations should trump the moral ones.

I am completely with you on that one! However in everyday life highland dress does not seem to give rise to moral objections, while the traditional New Guinea costume you describe might well raise an eyebrow or two. So I am wondering simply whether kilts pass the more stringent dress code of an Orthodox service.

[Father David Moser]

So I am wondering simply whether kilts pass the more stringent dress code of an Orthodox service.

Everyhing in contxt! In Scotland, or in a Scottish community where the kilt is a part of the normal culture - it is not out of place. But take the kilt out of the culture and all you have left is a skirt on a guy. The same with the traditional dress of New Guinea - within the culture of the tribe where it is normal, it is acceptable - but take it out of the culture and all you have left is a painted naked lady.

Context is everything here - The Church does not exist outside of culture, but rather within culture. Nor does any culture survive unaffected when touched by the Church. Pagan scottish culture is different from Christian Scottish culture (even though the kilt and tartan survive - blue painted faces don't much make an appearance anymore) so just because something was a part of a pagan culture, doesn't mean it survives when the culture becomes Christian. Everything in context both to time and place...

Fr David Moser

[Robert Hegwood]

Well, maybe if kilts and the socks (still a bit form-fitting) were black or dun colorred.

Given what Fr. David says with regard the the Church and culture, then where are we in the intersection of Church and our culture with regard to dress in Church?

I can't find an objection to pants for women that seems reasonable on the basis solely of gender appropriate clothing.

The bulk of the comments so far come down more to the side of modesty/decency. So if this is the case then maybe the question should be why don't we reqire men to wear cassoks in Church, or at least some kind of long overgarment (choir robes anyone)? If they are good enough for clergy and monastics why should there be some corresponding (if not quite so severe) dress to be expected for all.

As I recall even the ancient pagan Romans felt the trousers of the celts to be just too immodest for men...it practically like being naked with stripable tatoos (plaid of course). And pants as we know them arose as a way of making the most economical use of a difficult to obtain resource (cloth).

Anyway, I just trying to understand what the objections to modest women's pants are among more traditionally minded Orthodox...what they are based upon.

[Jennifer]

Anyway, I just trying to understand what the objections to modest women's pants are among more traditionally minded Orthodox...what they are based upon.

Dear Seraphim,

I think you have hit the nail on the head here. Among traditionally minded Orthodox, I think the objections to women wearing trousers to church are based on tradition and custom. Because women used to always wear skirts and headcoverings to church a few decades ago, many people are accustomed to women always dressing this way in church and believe that it is the appropriate way for women to dress. A major factor that led to the change in women's dress was the women's movement, and, to a strict traditionalist, it may not seem right that feminism and the women's movement are having an effect on practices at church.

In my opinion, a good epistle to use to understand how to act in this situation is I Corinthians 10:23-11:1,16. St. Paul writes here about the disagreement between Greeks and Jews about whether it is right or wrong to eat certain foods. He instructs them that even though one person's liberty can not be judged by another person's conscience, we should follow the conscience of others for their sake. He concludes that all that we do should glorify God and should not give offense to others. We should imitate Christ by not seeking our own profit, but the profit of others. I would also add that whatever we do, we should do so without judging those who do differently because "we have no custom of contentiousness". (I Cor. 11:16)

Therefore, when it comes to women's dress, I think that women should follow the conscience of their parish or thier bishop. If other people in the parish would be offended by a woman wearing trousers to church, then she should not do so. If they would not be offended, then fine, any modest clothing would be appropriate.

I do not think that the differences regarding trousers or dresses for women is based solely on modesty. I think that it would be unnecessary to impose a rule on lay men to always wear cassocks in church, especially if it were imposed simply in an attempt to make the requirements of men and women equal.

Regarding people looking at each other's bums, I think it is important for us to remember that all of our sins, whether they be lust or some other, originate from our own minds and what we allow ourselves to think, rather than originating from the attire of others. If a person wants to lust after someone else, they are capable of doing so regardless of what the person is wearing.

Jennifer

[Bratislav]

I have been reticent to post my thoughts untill now because I have been said to come off as a "hardliner" on this topic. I will try to write moderately.

"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 an abomination unto the Eternal thy God". This is a commandment from the Almighty Himself as found in Dueteronomy 22:5.

But of course, as Fr David (Moser) has pointed out, "that which pertaineth to a man vs. the garments of a woman" is different from culture to culture. The main issue, I agree, is not the particular article of clothing (as long as it is modest) but rather that there be a distinction made in clothing between the man and woman. This in most cultures is not a problem, but in the modern west it is, where a young man and his girlfriend can walk down the street both wearing blue jeans, a t-shirt and a baseball cap.

The solution seems simple and reasonable to me: Let the women don a skirt or dress as this is still acceptable in western culture at large or, if she is not willing to do that, let her have her head covered as she wears pants. I also understand the idea put forth that men should also perhaps wear some sort of "cassock" and would be all for the idea if pants had not been the accepted clothing article for men's lower halves for four centuries (as compared to a couple decades for women). If Orthodox men all started wearing "togas" of sorts I believe it would do nothing but cause ridicule and alienation for the Church.

This principle of differentiation between the sexes also comes into play in other areas such as head scarves(as I mentioned), facial hair, etc.

I could be off base though, and am open to correction.

In Christ,
Bratislav

[Scott Pierson]

had not been the accepted clothing article for men's lower halves for four centuries (as compared to a couple decades for women)

Thats a good point. I think its also important to point out that the change to women wearing pants was very contraversial at the time and was often connected to radical feminism and womens "liberation".

[Alec Lowly]

The entire issue is indeed a vexed one.

I have seen women in church dressed "traditionally" who were (how do I put this?) more "distracting" to male worshippers than were women in slacks because the skirts are more revealing of the female form than slacks are.

Let me be clear that I am not talking here about immodest dress.

Are there any other fellows out there who understand the point I'm trying to make?

[Chrissi]

This is Irene of NSW, member since Jan 2004, posting under my daughter's name because my account isn't working at the moment.

I have been thinking about the issue of dress after reading the posts in this thread a couple of days ago. We attend Church at a monastery where all parishioners male and female are asked to and do dress very modestly. We (the females) mostly wear long skirts, sleeved shirts and scarves. The men (and boys over a certain age (7ish?)) always wear long pants and sleeved shirts even in the heat of our Australian summers. My daughter and I discussed this and this is what we think:

(1) Visiting people who wear clothes that are not to the standard that our Priest asks of us make us feel uncomfortable. *Realising that we may be falling under the sin of judging others we try to keep our eyes to the front of the Church or even closed and concentrate even harder on the service. *

(2) Visiting other Churches and seeing people dressed less modestly and seeing women wearing heavy make up and lip stick also makes us feel uncomfortable. *see point 1*

(3) There was an occasion recently where we were at another Orthodox Church and suddenly came to the realisation that a parishioner wearing pants and with short hair was actually a female and not a male. (This we noticed at the end of the service). This also made us feel uncomfortable. *see point 1*

(4) A cassock may be "dress"-like but there is no way in the world that it looks like a a woman's dress or skirt.

(5) Putting on the long skirts and the scarves makes us instantly feel more humble and reminded of our duty in the Church. Conversely when we put on jeans we feel a little more "tomboyish" "tough". When I dress in the manner I feel expected to for working in the world, makeup, high heels, modern hair cut etc.... I feel worldly, I don't feel humble, I feel like a different person.

The above are just our thoughts on the subject.

In Christ
Irene and Christina

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

(5) Putting on the long skirts and the scarves makes us instantly feel more humble and reminded of our duty in the Church. Conversely when we put on jeans we feel a little more "masculine" "tough" and when I dress in the manner I feel expected to for working in the world, makeup, high heels, modern hair cut etc.... I feel worldly, I don't feel humble, I feel like a different person.

The above are just our thoughts on the subject.

In Christ
Irene and Christina


Welcome back Irene!

It's this last point that's so important I think but which we look at so rarely. Of course we're taught to concentrate on the inner person. This is so natural as it's a result of our efforts to have a spiritual life. Whether we're talking about prayer or fasting or standing at the services we're rightly encouraged to strive towards the inner.

And yet surely the relationship of outer to inner is also a part of our tradition. From the earliest times the Church developed a particular kind of dress for both laity and clergy. And from experience we also know that how we dress affects us spiritually. When the priest puts on his ryassa or vestments to serve he feels different. When laity dress in a special, modest way for the church they often comment on how they feel different and are able to be more prayerful. So it is that women who also dress modestly in church also notice something similar.

Why this is so is a bit of a mystery. Apart from the effort of preparing oneself for being in a holy place, which special dress involves; and apart from the modesty which such dress also involves, there seems to be some sort of little understood connection between how we cover ourselves and our inner/spiritual state. Since this is so universally practiced, even by our modern society which borders on the iconoclastic, (we all proclaim our identity by how we dress- and isn't this perhaps why some have such a hard time adjusting to chruch dress? We resist giving up this identity.) doesn't this dress in church correspond to something deep within us & to our very make-up as human beings?

After all whether no matter how we dress in church we're really trying to achieve a certain state through our dress or perhaps to make a statement.

If so it would be well worth it to understand a little better what this connection is between dress and what we try to be.

Also it's surely significant that the Church from ancient times took this reality of what we are into account in its way of life.

In Christ- Fr Raphael






[/COLOR][/QUOTE]