Women wearing pants

[Vera L.]

S Prazdnikom Vozneseniem!

Forgive me for asking such a basic question, but I hope that someone can guide me in the right direction here.
From what I understand, Orthodox women are not supposed to wear pants. Is this correct? If so, why? And where could I find more information about it?
I do wear pants and wonder if, strictly speaking, I shouldn't.
If someone could give me some guidance on this it would be greatly appreciated!

In Christ,
Vera

[Kris]

S Prazdnikom Vozneseniem!

Forgive me for asking such a basic question, but I hope that someone can guide me in the right direction here.
From what I understand, Orthodox women are not supposed to wear pants. Is this correct? If so, why? And where could I find more information about it?
I do wear pants and wonder if, strictly speaking, I shouldn't.
If someone could give me some guidance on this it would be greatly appreciated!

In Christ,
Vera

I do not believe there is a strict rule forbidding women to wear trousers. However, Scripture does make it very clear that a woman should not wear men's clothing and vice versa. Secondly, women should dress modestly.

So I think the question of whether or not women can wear trousers depend on the social context (in Yemen, for example, only women wear trousers) and whether or not it constitutes modest dress.

[Bob Kovacs]

So what your saying is that you where the pants in the house. He He!!

[Herman Blaydoe]

I'd have to say it is more a cultural thing than a spiritual one. In fact, there are stories of women saints who disguised themselves as men and lived in men's monasteries and were only found out after their deaths, so I'm not sure how big a deal can be made of the issue. What to do if a man from Scotland shows up for Liturgy in formal Highland attire (kilt)? Pant suits can be much more modest than some dresses or skirts. I think the the key is, as Kris says, modesty. And remembering the idea is to keep the attention on God, not on you!

[Vera L.]

Pant suits can be much more modest than some dresses or skirts. I think the the key is, as Kris says, modesty. And remembering the idea is to keep the attention on God, not on you!

This is a great point! I guess the goal is to not think about what you are wearing at all... whether it be pants or a skirt. After all getting hung up on something like is vanity, right?
Recently I watched a talk by Mother Nina (Krygina) from Ekatirenburg. She made the same good points about fashion. She said it designed specifically (from even just a purely psychological point of view) to draw attention to an individual. And as you say Herman, that is not where our attention should be.
Thanks for the help everyone!!!
God Bless

[Anna Brenneis]

Dear Vera,

Habitual modesty aside, it has been my understanding that more traditional Orthodox parishes ask that people observe a dress code when inside the church building that befits the high dignity of God's house. In our parish, women are asked to wear dresses or skirts that are at least knee length and men are asked not to wear shorts. Men do not wear hats, of course, and many women wear hats or scarves, though the covering of women's heads is not enforced. We keep wrap skirts and head coverings available for women to borrow when they visit our church. In general, we try to be polite and accommodating when enforcing our dress code, and people are usually understanding and happy to comply.

I've actually never heard that Orthodox women should never wear pants at all. If that is the case, I am a major violator.

[Father Serafim]

In our parish we have a dress code. Women wear skirts and cover their heads. Why? Because pants/trousers/shorts can be a distraction. Covering the head is a sign of obedience not only to the Church (the Theotokos is our example) but to the Orthodox family too. Unmarried women are not required to cover their heads, but most do in order to blend in.

When we stand in Church we should be invisible so that we do not distract others from worship. This includes the men who should not wear loud t-shirts or extravagant attire. It also includes the priest who should move quietly and prayerfully. This is our goal.

Sometimes I have to remind people that this is the Church and not the beach. We don't throw people out because they dress inappropriately, but I tell them after the service how we dress and why. BTW if someone complains about the difficulty of moving about in a dress (it has happened), I simply point at my cassock, which I wear all the time. You learn to move in your attire. Sister Elizabeth of St John the Baptist in Essex, told me how she learnt to move in period dress when she was an actress in Germany. After a while you can even run in long, bulky skirts - but I digress.

[Nina]

Unmarried women are not required to cover their heads

Dear Father Serafim,

Your blessings!

Could you please explain why unmarried women are not required to cover their heads?



BTW if someone complains about the difficulty of moving about in a dress (it has happened),Even if I feel that now "I am a major violator" like Anna expresses it above, because I do wear pants here in US for various reasons (snow, cold etc), living previously in a Mediterranean climate I have to admit that dresses and skirts were daily, my means of clothing (although I owned one pair of jeans).

Therefore I have to say that it is not difficult at all for a female to move about in a dress and skirt (!) actually it is very feminine to dress like that and personally I love the feeling of it. My mom told me that since I was a toddler I rejected all pants (maybe I have an innate preference for feminine dress). However now I find myself westernized in my clothing manner because of the climate in my area, but if I have a skirt and a pair of pants as a choice, the skirt/dress always wins.

[Elena]

Isn't the point simply not to draw attention to oneself?

That may vary depending on the traditions of each local church and the guidence of the father there. In some places wearing trousers is very noticable, in others it goes completely unoticed, it all depends on your surroundings.

We simply seek not to distract anyone else, this is true of both men and women. It entirely depends where one is whether this requires a more or less 'western' style of clothing.

[Tim Grass]

I'm pretty sure women who wear pants in Church can't be saved....

--tim

[Nina]

I'm pretty sure women who wear pants in Church can't be saved....

--tim

Giggles... ok now... I have to move back to the Mediterranean climate to be saved. This is so funny! :)

[Father Serafim]

Dear Nina,

The custom (no longer a rule) is that a married women submits i.e covers her head in obedience to family life. Unmarried women are not in obedience to any man or family. The priest's head is also covered as a sign of submission to his lofty office. Of course one can always argue about dress but the fact that nuns are so covered should tell us something about modesty which it seems has become relative in today's post-Christian society.

[Nina]

Dear Nina,

The custom (no longer a rule) is that a married women submits i.e covers her head in obedience to family life. Unmarried women are not in obedience to any man or family. The priest's head is also covered as a sign of submission to his lofty office. Of course one can always argue about dress but the fact that nuns are so covered should tell us something about modesty which it seems has become relative in today's post-Christian society.

Ooo, I see. Thank you so much dear Father Serafim for your time and explanation!

Your Blessings.

[Archbishop Lazar]

The concept is one of modesty. Modest women's pants are preferrable to immodest skirts or dresses. One problem that arises in many parishes is that women who do wear pants often wear such tight pants or skimpy ones that it demonstrates a self-centred disregard for other people. One of the young men who comes to the monastery occasionally, told me that he had visited a local Orthodox parish, and that he might as well have been in a discoteque because of the immodesty of the trousers that young women were allowed to wear in church. This is the problem: the Fall was a fall into egoism and self-centredness. The parish is supposed to be a place where this venom of Eden can be healed. If we encourage young women to dress in an immodest, or even (as in some cases) shameless fashion, then we are encouraging the venom, not the antidote. The same must be said of the way men dress, except that men are less likely than young women to dress in a clearly immodest or shameless fashion. When a priest declines to give a skimpily clad person Communion, it is not so precisely the clothing that is the impediment but the cold indifference to others, the self-centredness, that is the impediment. Church is not the place to dress in a manner seductive to the men, interfering with their prayers and their efforts to prepare for Communion. Pants are not the issue, modesty and care for others is the issue.

[Tessa Miljanic]

I gave up pants about a year ago, my m.i.l. said in her day no women wore pants. It wasn't hard when we moved from Florida to snowy Colorado either-I just wear leggings or long-johns underneath if it's REALLY snowing. As for covering my head-always at prayer, for about the last three years now. It was hard to get used to, pride I guess. Now I feel naked without my scarf! I would like to wear one all the time, but unfortunately this is not Serbia and people are all Islamophobic now, so my Spiritual Father and I agree not to freak people out by wearing it all the time. If any of you ladies are looking for some good length scarves, that cover even long hair really well, or skirts that are perfect for prostrations I recommend Tzinus.com. It's an Orthodox Jewish geared website, but I have not yet been disappointed by there products.

In Christ,
Tessa

[Trudy]

Of course one can always argue about dress but the fact that nuns are so covered should tell us something about modesty which it seems has become relative in today's post-Christian society.


Amen! Amen! Amen!

This is a wonderful thread. I enjoy wearing dresses and skirts but only if they are mid-calf or to the floor. I will not wear anything shorter than that. I also don't wear them in the garden. But I do wear them to church whenever I am there, even in winter. That's what long johns are for! It's amazing what a pair of knee socks will cover! Toasty warm underneath and appropriate outer dress for worship.

athanasia

[Nina]

That's what long johns are for!
athanasia

Dear Athanasia,

Really? I thought those (lj) are exclusively for men and not uni. (at least in my culture)! Even if it is not the case, I can never imagine wearing those (I guess that's how I am programmed :) ).

Although for church, feminine leg covering garments are great in cold weather and can be sufficiently warm given that one does not have to walk to church for a long time during our freezing Northeastern winters :) ; however what I was referring to was the use of pants in other settings, while exercising in winter for example, or various occasions. But in any case I very much prefer to wear dresses and skirts if I can.

[Vera L.]

The custom (no longer a rule) is that a married women submits i.e covers her head in obedience to family life. Unmarried women are not in obedience to any man or family.

I am a little confused with this.
The Mother of God is always depicted with her head covered and she was not "married". As weren't many women saints and they are often depicted (unless children) with their heads covered. Do we not cover our heads in "obedience" to God? (Not just to family?)
I am not married and I cover my head because I feel that standing in Church with my head uncovered is inappropriate. And i guess I am trying to be humble.
Do you say Father Seraphim "no longer a rule" because it once was and now it isn't? If it has ceased to be a rule. why?
I'm sorry if i am repeating anything that was covered in other threads (i'm sure this topic has been discussed at length somewhere else!)

About the pants:
In answering my own question in a way, I also thought about when I was travelling and I came across a Church, but unfortunately was in pants, I still went into the Church. It's better to pray and seek God, than be hung up on what you wear or any other outward rules.

Thanks for such interesting thoughts!


I also don't wear them in the garden.
Dresses are THE BEST when gardening! =)

[Vera L.]

I tried to edit my last comment but the computer wouldn't let me!


Pants are not the issue, modesty and care for others is the issue.

Thankyou Archbishop Lazar for this important message! It is unfair to distract others from prayer. And if anything you dress in does distract others - you probably shouldn't be wearing it! This can probably be said for dress in the Church and outside, on the streets?

I am so glad that I can refer to this website for discussion of Orthodox topics! Thanks everyone!

In Christ,
Vera

[Trudy]

Really? I thought those (lj) are exclusively for men and not uni. (at least in my culture)! Even if it is not the case, I can never imagine wearing those (I guess that's how I am programmed :) )

Nina,

For a long time I was also programmed, "I'm NOT wearing them! They're atrocious." Then warmth and sensibility won out over vanity for me. Constantly shivering through northeastern winters was not my idea of fun, so I just started wearing them. It is not unusual for me to wear 3 layers of clothes through the winter months. Now they have very fashionable ones with little designs on them and stuff, but it doesn't much matter to me!

I won't stop shivering until it is a sound and steady 80 degrees F outside!

'Warmly' yours in Christ,
Trudy

[Nina]

Nina,

For a long time I was also programmed, "I'm NOT wearing them! They're atrocious." Then warmth and sensibility won out over vanity for me. Constantly shivering through northeastern winters was not my idea of fun, so I just started wearing them. It is not unusual for me to wear 3 layers of clothes through the winter months. Now they have very fashionable ones with little designs on them and stuff, but it doesn't much matter to me!

Dearest Athanasia,

Giggles... Yes you know me. I am so vain. And honestly, I feel so unworthy to post in this thread after reading how much progressed all you ladies are here.


I won't stop shivering until it is a sound and steady 80 degrees F outside!
:) No, this does not happen with me. But I am used only to mild winters.

[Father David Moser]

I am a little confused with this.
The Mother of God is always depicted with her head covered and she was not "married". As weren't many women saints and they are often depicted (unless children) with their heads covered. Do we not cover our heads in "obedience" to God? (Not just to family?)

The distinction of covering your head when married/unmarried is, in my experience an old emigration (as opposed to the "new emigration") Russian thing. My Archbishop (Kyrill of SF) holds the opinion that although the practice is "widespread" and is considered even by many clergy to be "traditional", it is more traditional and more appropriate that every woman should cover her head while in Church in obedience to Christ. If she is not "in submission" to a husband, then as a single woman is still in her father's house and under his authority or at least under the authority of the Church. However, let me also mention that he does not aggressively "enforce" this rule since to do so would require so much effort as to exclude any other activity such as prayer and would create strife and division in the flock. He leaves the practice to the conscience of his flock which is shaped by their spiritual fathers (his clergy). Such an approach produces a slower, more organic change than a rigid external enforcement of a rule.

Fr David Moser

[Fr Seraphim (Black)]

Constantly shivering through northeastern winters was not my idea of fun, so I just started wearing them. It is not unusual for me to wear 3 layers of clothes through the winter months. Now they have very fashionable ones with little designs on them and stuff, but it doesn't much matter to me!

I won't stop shivering until it is a sound and steady 80 degrees F outside!

'Warmly' yours in Christ,
Trudy


Ah, 80 degrees F outside; now let me take out my calculator as here in Canada we do our very best not to follow the Yanks to the south. Whew! That is 27 degrees Celsius - let us say an even 30 degrees.

Today I am dripping from the heat at 10:35 am and it is only 19 degrees Celsius. For those south of the border, that would be 66 degrees F.

Here our winters are on average between minus 35 degrees Celsius and upwards of minus 50 degrees Celsius, which is seriously dangerous. One night I was out and the wind was howling and my knees started to crack as if I were on thin ice. Later I learned it had been minus 52 degrees Celsius. Now that is not even on my calculator. Minus 30 degrees Celsius is minus 22 degrees F. And since you guys count ice at 32 degrees F. that is a l-o-n-g way down the scale.

No one in England could believe my winter tales of Canada. But it is a fact. At Fr. Sophrony's monastery it was somehow worse. It just hovered at 1 degree Celsius. And the dampness, kyrie eleison, and with the North Sea only a few kilometres walk and then Holland was a short swim...

But I digress. I simply like others added layer upon layer of monastic robes. I was so thin in those days, that it was not uncommon in the winter to have three prodrasniks on, plus my regular pants, long johns, tee shirt, woolen shirt, woolen sweater underneath the three prodrasniks.

In the Church, which is a beautiful one, and the only Church we had then, other than the Chapel of St. John the Baptist, dedicated to All Saints. The foundations are from the 900's. There is even a Crusader effigy inside.

But my, my, my, was it ever cold in the prothesis. Water was running down the inside walls. I had on all the above, plus two ryassas, one a regular cloth, and the other heavy duty wool. Even then, I prayed intensely. The cold, running water and dampness inspires deep prayer!

Outside of Church I wore my trusty Canadian toque (a French word, but here the French of Quebec, speak Quebecois [actually an old form of French]) and it is a woven woolen head covering, which you can pull well over the ears, and even cover your nose. The winters here are only for the chosen few.

But I digress.

[Archbishop Lazar]

There also seems to be a question about wearing a headcovering in Church. It seems one can interpret Scripture just any old way at will, but Apostle Paul expresses the idea rather strongly. If a person wants to take it as a form of denigration they might, but if a woman has sufficient confidence and awareness, she will not take it as such. Someone mentioned "islamophobia." One might admire these aspects of Islam: the believe deeply enough to keep their fasts, for women to cover their heads at least at prayer and to maintain their own calendar rather than adopting the civil calendar. I notice that the women at the St. Nicholas Parish in Langley, B.C. have no difficulty with covering their heads at prayer. One Presbytera told me that the reason is, `women are not denigrated in that parish.' Of course, the entire congregation sings the services together and women read also during the divine services. They are a type of the Church, which is the body of Christ, and as Scripture tells us, men are a type of Christ. The body is never denigrated by the head; women are not denigrated in the Body of Christ. It does take a little humility both to cover the head and to dress modestly, but following the Tradition and Scripture really is an essential aspect of Orthodox Christianity. So much of the reticence to express the rolls given us by Scripture arises from the steady erosion of secularism entering into the Church, as it did in Protestantism rather rapidly during the centuries after the Reformation deconstructed Christianity in the West.

[Father Serafim]

Forgive me if I seem to labour this issue about dress. In my opinion and that of my bishop and many other bishops that I have served with - pants are never appropiate in Church. The need to wear them is probably based on fashion and probably due to comfort. The Mother of God was obedient to her husband Joseph and she is the first monastic too. She often appears as an abbess and never without her veil. When I was in Siberia (in summer!), Mother Elizabeth told me that the custom of virgins wearing head covering was a Moslem influence and not Christian. She told me that early icons did not show young virgins with covered heads. I have never researched this. It is our custom to cover the head and I personally don't make an issue of it. My Matushka has never worn trousers and neither have my daughters. Its how we dress in our community and in the monasteries we visit from time to time.

[Nina]

Forgive me if I seem to labour this issue about dress. In my opinion and that of my bishop and many other bishops that I have served with - pants are never appropiate in Church. The need to wear them is probably based on fashion and probably due to comfort. The Mother of God was obedient to her husband Joseph and she is the first monastic too. She often appears as an abbess and never without her veil. When I was in Siberia (in summer!), Mother Elizabeth told me that the custom of virgins wearing head covering was a Moslem influence and not Christian. She told me that early icons did not show young virgins with covered heads. I have never researched this. It is our custom to cover the head and I personally don't make an issue of it. My Matushka has never worn trousers and neither have my daughters. Its how we dress in our community and in the monasteries we visit from time to time.

No, dear Father Serafim, you are not laboring the issue. We have to ask your forgiveness because we are the ones asking questions and taking your precious time with our curiosity. :)

What you say here is also very interesting. Thank you!

Actually with the information, of the head covering for virgins being a non-Christian tradition, you reminded me of a saying: "Do not act spoiled like a Christian girl!" that I have read before. In the past in some diverse communities in other parts of the world this was an expression. Christian girls were considered "spoiled" because of a more liberal upbringing in comparison.

P.S When I read your original post about head coverings and was posting my question for you, my non-Orthodox Christian fiancé, was near by and asked why I looked so surprised. I told him about your post and he answered: "Of course unmarried girls can not cover their heads! How are guys supposed to see and pick them for marriage, if they do?!" I found his comment very humorous.

Your Blessings.

[Father David Moser]

She often appears as an abbess and never without her veil.

Actually the miraculous Akhtyrsk icon of the Mother of God shows her without a veil of any kind. It is certainly a unique depiction of the Virgin Mary, however, it is an accepted and wonderworking icon in the Russian Church.

Fr David Moser

[Paul Cowan]

Dear Fr. David,,

http://www.icon.lt/04.html

I had never seen the Theotokos without a head covering until now. Though a wonderworking icon, it does look odd for her not to wear it.

Paul

[Olga]

Actually the miraculous Akhtyrsk icon of the Mother of God shows her without a veil of any kind. It is certainly a unique depiction of the Virgin Mary, however, it is an accepted and wonderworking icon in the Russian Church.
Fr David

The Aktirskaya icon of the Mother of God certainly shows her with her head uncovered. There are a small number of other depictions of the Mother of God where her head is similarly uncovered, or where some of her hair is visible. All of these date from the 17thC or later, and are of unmistakeably western influence, both in the head covering of the Virgin, and, in many cases, in other aspects of their content.

For instance, in many such depictions, the Mother of God is shown alone, with her arms crossed above her chest, or reading a book, etc. These motifs were never present in icons prior to this time. A look at western devotional art of this period will show many similar images. I must make the point that Orthodoxy has never rejected anything from the west simply because it has come from the west, only those things which do not conform with Orthodox doctrine, dogma and practice.

In addition, regarding these images showing her alone, without the presence of Christ, this is generally considered a deviation from accepted and longstanding canonical iconographic practice. The Virgin should always be shown with her Son in “portrait” icons (as distinct from icons of feasts, or of other historical events such as Bogolyubskaya, or her appearance to St Sergius of Radonezh), as it is through her obedience to the will of God in giving birth to Him, and her nurturing of Him, that the Church regards her in such an exalted light, as greater in honour than any saint or angelic power. Even in the latter icons, there is invariably a motif at the top of the icon of Christ (as an adult, or as Emmanuel), or, in the case of the appearance to St Sergius, the Holy Trinity.

I acknowledge that depictions such as Akhtirskaya or Diveyevo have been venerated by pious Orthodox for centuries, and some are credited with miraculous works. However, the vast bulk of icons of the Virgin are with her head covered, and in the presence of her Son and God. Deviations from this are of comparatively recent origin. This surely speaks for itself. The more an icon's content deviates from Orthodox doctrine and dogma, the more it should be regarded with caution. (One only needs to consider the theological minefield generated by the recent profusion of "icons" depicting St Joseph the Betrothed holding the young Christ, but that's ANOTHER story ….)

[Angie]

Gooday!

I used to wear pants many years ago, but was told it was not allowed in our Orthodox Faith. So now I wear skirts, and only wear tracksuit pants when I go for a walk. Reading about how cold some of your winters are is amazing! We don't get too much cold here in Australia, and now we are a few weeks away from winter, and it's been kind of warm.

As for the head scarf we have to wear it when we pray and in church. There are hundreds of Angels in Church(St Nepon), so we need to cover our heads with a scarf. St Paul also mentions that a woman must cover her head.

Mother Mary is a great example of humbleness, and so seeing her wear a scarf is something I would like to imitate.

In Christ
Angela+++

[Anthony]

On the question of Muslim influence, it is worth bearing in mind that there may have been a strong influence first in the other direction. At risk of some oversimplification, most of the Middle East was Orthodox before it became Muslim.

[Father David Moser]

The Aktirskaya icon of the Mother of God certainly shows her with her head uncovered. There are a small number of other depictions of the Mother of God where her head is similarly uncovered, or where some of her hair is visible. All of these date from the 17thC or later, and are of unmistakeably western influence, both in the head covering of the Virgin, and, in many cases, in other aspects of their content. ... I acknowledge that depictions such as Akhtirskaya or Diveyevo have been venerated by pious Orthodox for centuries, and some are credited with miraculous works. However, the vast bulk of icons of the Virgin are with her head covered, and in the presence of her Son and God. Deviations from this are of comparatively recent origin....

By referencing that icon (a copy of which I happen to have in my parish and having had the privilege of venerating the original in Australia) I did not mean to imply that the practice of women covering their heads was irrelevant or that this iconographic illustration should trump everything before or since. I simply pointed out that such an icon did exist. My purpose for doing so was in response to Fr Serafim's universal assertion that the Mother of God "often appears as an abbess and never without her veil." I find that if we do not acknowledge such exceptions to universal pronouncements up front, they will later cause difficulty. This icon is not always well known, however, it is venerated as a wonderworking icon. I had asked numerous iconographers about it - why it was that the Virgin was shown without a covering and no one seems to know an exact reason. When asked by my parishioners about it, I point to the fact that this icon is of the Mother of God grieving at the Cross of her Son and that the absence of her veil is an expression of her profound grief (so great that she neglected even her own appearance).

So I do not advocate that women should leave off wearing some kind of head covering in Church, however, it must be acknowledged that neither will a woman go to hell if she doesn't wear one. As the Apostle says, all things are lawful, but not all things are profitable.

Fr David Moser

[Elena]

Is it not strange that the question of modesty generaly revolves around trousers and headscarves today? I remember as a child the aspect of imodest behaviour that was most strongly disapproved of was makeup. I remember visitors to church being handed handkerchiefs to remove their makeup or having it removed for them! Also I recall jewelrey being removed at the church door.

I don't really remember trousers coming into it. Simply that all clothes should be plain and sort of blend in, whatever they were. Sadly I also remember the unecessary bad feelings that later occured between different groups over their typical dress (e.g. some women wearing short skirts and makeup and men wearing hair gel). We were so stupid and complacent to grasp on outward differences as being important.

[Nina]

I remember as a child the aspect of imodest behaviour that was most strongly disapproved of was makeup. I remember visitors to church being handed handkerchiefs to remove their makeup or having it removed for them! Also I recall jewelrey being removed at the church door.


Wow! Why should they remove things at the door? Doesn't this prompt someone subconsciously to lead a double life (at Church and outside it)? I wear a ring everywhere let say and if I come to realize and consider it excess I should not use it, ever. However until eyes are opened by the mercy of God we should accept people like they are and welcome them to Church.

It's like the wonderful stories of the ladies here, who shared that after starting to wear a scarf they would feel naked without it even when alone at home. We should strive that what we do at Church, should become a nature for us: that's the goal in all aspects.

However not all of us are that strong, and we should not loose a wonderful soul from church because she wears makeup, or other things (you never know what happens in her life really and how humble she might be). I prefer that openness and honesty, over fake piety (or hypocrisy) against which Christ spoke so openly and often (pharisees etc). Women of ill repute were some of the first to follow Christ and stand by His Cross along with His Mother.

The Church is a Spiritual Hospital and when the ill come in the hospital the physician does not say: "Please leave the illnesses at the door!" We are there to identify and combat the many illnesses. Otherwise we would be in Paradise.

P.S Anthony, you make such a good point. And maybe the whole influence for head-covering is Jewish.

[John Charmley]

Dear Nina,

Of course, in English English, the outer garment is called trousers - pants are something quite different - which is why, when I first came across this thread's title I was a little startled - and much relieved when I remembered this difference between our common language!

Modesty is all, and to some extent, as with language, culturally conditioned. I can recall from my Anglican days ladies coming to Church with their hair properly covered - but by hats which drew considerable attention; even back then I could see there was something not right here!

In Christ,

John

[Herman Blaydoe]

Just a thought that struck me reading this thread:

When we approach Christ, we certainly should "come as we are", but we shouldn't necessarily expect to stay that way...?

And I agree with Nina we need to be careful about setting up false dichotomies between the spiritual and the physical. If we leave our brokenness at the door as we come in, might we not forget to take our healing with us as we leave?

OK, I'll shut up now.

[Nina]

Dear Nina,

Of course, in English English, the outer garment is called trousers - pants are something quite different - which is why, when I first came across this thread's title I was a little startled - and much relieved when I remembered this difference between our common language!

Modesty is all, and to some extent, as with language, culturally conditioned. I can recall from my Anglican days ladies coming to Church with their hair properly covered - but by hats which drew considerable attention; even back then I could see there was something not right here!

In Christ,

John

Giggles... Oh but it is fine, we all know the differences of the words and their connotation. For me is natural to call them pants, because I live here in USA. Actually, when I read the word 'trousers' I visualize the ones Charley Chaplin used to wear :) I do not know why...

You are right about culture as a determinant factor for behavior. I have heard the not removing hats while in the presence of someone in some cultures shows disrespect. From which probably originated the gesture (hat tipping custom) of a gentleman, when passing by a lady - as a sign of politeness and respect.

[Trudy]

We were so stupid and complacent to grasp on outward differences as being important.

Elena,

You make a very good point. While the dialogue is revolving around headscarves, trousers, make-up or whatever, they are the peripheral issue. What is the main point? It is what is our 'interior' soul wearing? Is it modesty, humility, love for God, love for neighbors?

I recall the axiom quoted often to my children as they sat mesmorized in front of the TV, "garbage in - garbage out.' What you fill your mind and heart with, will eventually come out of your mouth (and your actions). I would say, fill yourself with good things and good things will be produced and come out.

As Fr. Sophrony instructed Fr. Seraphim, "Read only that which inspires you to prayer." So it is with everything. Dress in a manner that inspires you to prayer. Speak in a manner which inspires you to prayer. Watch only that which inspires you to prayer.

In Christ,
Athanasia (Trudy)

[Angie]

Elena,

You make a very good point. While the dialogue is revolving around headscarves, trousers, make-up or whatever, they are the peripheral issue. What is the main point? It is what is our 'interior' soul wearing? Is it modesty, humility, love for God, love for neighbors?

I recall the axiom quoted often to my children as they sat mesmorized in front of the TV, "garbage in - garbage out.' What you fill your mind and heart with, will eventually come out of your mouth (and your actions). I would say, fill yourself with good things and good things will be produced and come out.

As Fr. Sophrony instructed Fr. Seraphim, "Read only that which inspires you to prayer." So it is with everything. Dress in a manner that inspires you to prayer. Speak in a manner which inspires you to prayer. Watch only that which inspires you to prayer.

In Christ,
Athanasia (Trudy)

Dear Athanasia,

This is a lovely quote. Could you tell me a little about Fr Sophrony? Maybe a website?

Also makeup, music etc leads to vanity. Especially in these days we live in a world that is all about looking good and feeling good about looking good. (I hope this makes sense!). We tend to forget about our brothers and sisters who are need, because we tend to be too buzy checking ourselves out in the mirror.

In Christ
Angela+++

[Anthony]

Dear Nina,


And maybe the whole influence for head-covering is Jewish.

Right, I had forgotten that orthodox Jewish women are expected to keep their heads covered (I think).

[Mary]

Also makeup, music etc leads to vanity. Especially in these days we live in a world that is all about looking good and feeling good about looking good. (I hope this makes sense!). We tend to forget about our brothers and sisters who are need, because we tend to be too buzy checking ourselves out in the mirror.

In Christ
Angela+++

I'm afraid I can't blame makeup, music, etc. Vanity courses through my blood. I wear no make up, I dress very simply and I wear a headcovering all day long. But I can't avoid stopping to look at myself everytime there's a mirror around! =)

Mary

[Paul Cowan]

I visited the St. Paraskeva convent in Washington Texas a couple of years ago and all the mirrors had butcher paper covering them up. It was for the purpose to help the sisters not participate in vanity.

I wondered why they left the mirrors up at all and it is just now occuring to me to remind them of vanity and to be on the watch for it?

We have 2 bathrooms in our house. Each has a 4ft X 5ft mirror and one has an additional 3ft X 4 ft mirror. Perhaps I should also buy some butcher paper.

Paul

[Fr Seraphim (Black)]

But I can't avoid stopping to look at myself everytime there's a mirror around! =)

Mary

Interesting point on mirrors, whereas St. Ephrem the Syrian, addressing Christ writes:

"Let our prayer be a mirror, Lord, placed before Your face, then Your fair beauty will be transplanted on its luminous surface." [The Syriac Fathers on Prayer and the Spiritual Life, introduced and translated by Sebastian Brock, Cistercian Publications Inc. Kalamazoo, Michigan, pg. xxx]

I never saw a mirror on the Holy Mountain, referencing Paul's statement on the conditions at St. Paraskeva Convent.


Dear Angela,

Two excellent sites on Father Sophrony and Saint Silouan are these:

www.sophrony.narod.ru/indexe.html

www.silouan.narod.ru/indexe.html

Photo of Fr. Sophrony taken by Fr. Raphael (Noica) 1982
Photo of St. Silouan, Mount Athos, taken by David Balfour
Photo of Fr. Raphael (Noica) Bucarhest, Romania, 2002

[Angie]

Father Seraphim Black,

I have discovered your a priest. Great!

Thankyou very much for this information.

Father, if I can ask you something, how does one conquer vanity? It is hard. I don't wear make up, don't dance, wear a headscarf, wear skirts, but whilst I'm in church I see no one else wearing a scarf, except a few older women. I am married to a wonderful orthodox husband and we are trying to follow the narrow path.

People wear make-up in church, (women of course!) short skirts, sleeveless tops and seeing this I get distracted and ponder why? I belong to a Greek Orthodox Church. Even though I don't mean to, I think I might have some vanity because I think to myself that I do it the proper way. Is this wrong? It's hard not to look, but I know I must be puffing myself up this way?

Many thanks

In Christ
Angela+++

[Robert Hegwood]

Trowsers?...oh you mean britches.

But more seriously, this is one of those things (as I have said before) that doesn't make entire sense to me. Being modest I understand, being well covered I understand, not drawing attention to yourself I understand....but not the women shouldn't wear trowsers/pants/britches to church? It seems to me that if they are immodest by nature (regardeless of the cut) for women they are immodest for men as well...which is at least part of why I was taught monastic dress is as it is...to soften the natural form/movement "signals" of the human body that can tempt some too easily to lust. Some say it is a men's dress women's dress thing and women shouldn't wear men's clothing...but in Apostolic times there was little difficulty telling men's robes from women's robes. Can't it be the same for legged garments? And if it can't why can't we just all adopt a more covered form of dress...like maybe the long shirt/trowers sets that are worn in places like India?...or cassocks/habits?

[Mary]

Father Seraphim Black,

I have discovered your a priest. Great!

Thankyou very much for this information.

Father, if I can ask you something, how does one conquer vanity? It is hard. I don't wear make up, don't dance, wear a headscarf, wear skirts, but whilst I'm in church I see no one else wearing a scarf, except a few older women. I am married to a wonderful orthodox husband and we are trying to follow the narrow path.

People wear make-up in church, (women of course!) short skirts, sleeveless tops and seeing this I get distracted and ponder why? I belong to a Greek Orthodox Church. Even though I don't mean to, I think I might have some vanity because I think to myself that I do it the proper way. Is this wrong? It's hard not to look, but I know I must be puffing myself up this way?

Many thanks

In Christ
Angela+++

Dear Angela,

I know you're question is for Fr Serahim, but I hope you don't mind if I share what I've observed. Not that it's of any significance, compared to Fr Seraphim's wisdom, it's just that I haven't learned how to keep myself from talking so much.

Early on, I understood the wisdom in not comparing myself to others, because it could either fill me with pride or despair. The way I avoid looking at other women is by looking only at their faces when I speak to them and either the icons or the floor when we're in church. (Interesting thought - women distract other women as much as men by what they wear!)

But as I got better at ignoring others, a new problem arose. I started to feel really good about my ability to not judge other women. By patting myself on the back I only added to my pride - which is the exact thing that I was trying to avoid, by not thinking myself better than other women. So now, I find that it's dangerous for me to even compare myself to my past!

It's like taking credit for my own progress, when I know full well that I can't even take a breath to keep myself alive, without God's help. Well - that's my observation of me. Can't look at others, can't even look at myself. Have to keep looking straight ahead, so I don't forget how far I still have to go.

If you truly do find yourself thinking you're more properly dressed, remember St Mary of Egypt and how she was dressed. I wouldn't dare go to church dressed as she was... =)

In Christ,
Mary.

[Angie]

Mary

Thanks Mary for sharing that. At least I know I'm not the only one thinking of this. Sometimes I used to look straight at an Icon, but that's kind of hard to do.

Good point about St Mary of Egypt. She is one of my favourites!


Robert

In those days it was different. Though these days you cant distinguish men from women. In other words men have long hair, earings and woman have short hair and dress like men with trousers. In the days your talking about the women looked like women with long hair etc and the men were men.


A Sinner
Angela+++

[Vera L.]

The body is never denigrated by the head; women are not denigrated in the Body of Christ.
This has always been something that I wanted to know about. In our "anti-Christian" Western world (I live in Australia) there is often the comment made that women are denigrated in the Church. I always knew this had to be wrong. I know that some of Christ's most dedicated friends were women. They were after all the first to come to him after his death. But it was a beautiful point that you made and helps me to understand this more. Thankyou!

Thank you Father David about pointing out the Aktirskaya icon of the Mother of God (in Cabramatta). How could i forget about this beautiful icon?


My Matushka has never worn trousers and neither have my daughters. Its how we dress in our community and in the monasteries we visit from time to time.
Thankyou for this message Father Seraphim! Do you mean that your family never wears trousers in church? of all the time?
I am also sorry to labour the point, but now that some people have messaged that they do not wear pants/trousers at all, I am starting to get the impression there is nothing written about this (otherwise there wouldn't be so many differing opinions?) As well as starting to get a little confused...
If you could give me some guidance, and let me know if there is anywhere I could fine our Holy Fathers writing on this topic.
Thanking you, in Christ
Vera

PS

For me is natural to call them pants, because I live here in USA. Actually, when I read the word 'trousers' I visualize the ones Charley Chaplin used to wear :) I do not know why...

hehe. me too! and in Australia we say "pants" not "trousers" (i didnt think it would cause such confusion! hehe) thats like i could never get used to Americans saying "sidewalk"... we say "footpath"

[Paul Cowan]

hehe. me too! and in Australia we say "pants" not "trousers" (i didnt think it would cause such confusion! hehe) thats like i could never get used to Americans saying "sidewalk"... we say "footpath"


Sounds like a modern day Babylon. In USA a footpath would be a dirt path one would walk in a park or in the woods. Interesting since Sunday's homily at church was about Babylon.

I wonder what other words we use here in Monachos land that get everyone confused and all worked up.

Paul

[Father Serafim]

In answer to Vera. I don't think there is any specific patristic reference to dress, except in the case of modesty. The pants issue is a modern dress code problem. In earlier times men and women were for the most part distinguishable. My Mother always wore a skirt/dress and never left the house without a hat. Our family wear dresses all the time. My eldest daughter rode and did dressage in a skirt etc. Now as a nun she works on construction in the monastery, climbing scaffolds in her riasa. What you do is between your priest and your conscience.

[Elena]

Wow! Why should they remove things at the door? Doesn't this prompt someone subconsciously to lead a double life (at Church and outside it)?

Dear Nina,

I think people removed their jewellry because it was a public demonstration of wealth, which is undesirable in church . The same reason that people preferred to walk to church (if it was possible) rather than driving. I don't think it lead to a double life - it was rather an acknowledgement that we have a particular duty to be unobtrusive when worshiping with others. We don't think it strange when women put headcoverings on just before entering church, or men remove theirs. I wouldn't go to the beach in the same sort of clothes I go to church in, or vica versa.

I'm not suggesting that people do the same thing today, simply that I find it interesting how the keynotes of this type of discussion change over time. For example headcoverings used to be less of an issue because women always wore hats or scarves when outside their home, and it simply wouldn't have occured to a woman to go into a church or any place of worship with her head uncovered. I think part of the resistance to headscarves, and the image problem they have, is that in general people think it's oldfashioned or backward. Men and women's manners seem to have merged today, and any distinction between the two is becoming quite unusual. People forget that not so long ago, even when visiting someone elses home or eating lunch in a restaurant, women kept their hats on. Nowdays this is considered odd to say the least. The current custom isn't a greater freedom, one set of general social rules have simply replaced another.

At the end of the day as Orthodox we know that any set of rules only has the value we give it. The details of rules change, the spirt behind them stays the same. We can all think of types of trousers that are completely modest attire and skirts that are not. There is no set of rules that can make us modest, no type of outfit which will insure we are not vain or distracted by anothers apperance.

[Vera L.]

Thank you Father Seraphim!
That's probably where I should have started!
By your blessings,
Vera

[Nina]

Dear Nina,
I'm not suggesting that people do the same thing today, simply that I find it interesting how the keynotes of this type of discussion change over time.

Oh, no dear Elena, I did not take your message like you suggested something. I was just responding to what you remembered from childhood. :) I liked that particular message of yours very much. The attitude you described reminded me of something.

I guess I feel a bit sensitive to that attitude (of telling people at the door, or inside the church about rules - unless it is a monastery), because I have seen some similar behavior at present times with disappointing outcome. For instance, I invited some Muslim friends to come with me at church (different times) and immediately after entering church, some ladies started criticizing: "You can't chew gum in here! You can't keep hands in your pocket!" etc. I do not blame the ladies because they did not know that the people visiting were guests from a different religion and maybe just looking, or inquiring more about Orthodoxy. However imagine my friends' embarrassment and humiliation. They had never been in a church before. If we apply this "welcoming" practice, we never know who we might deter from returning to our Church. I think love comes before rules in this case, especially for strangers, whom we should welcome with opened arms in our Church (think of philoxenia (hospitality), which is such an emphasized subject since the times of Abraham). I might be wrong, however this is what experience has taught me.

[Archbishop Lazar]

Hospitality should preclude anyone stopping someone at the door and telling them about rules and regulations. The general concept of modesty really is something that may be absorbed by seeing other practising it. If a person becomes a member of a parish and attends regularly, then someone might, in a non-aggresive manner, mention the "ethos of the parish" with regard to modesty, but hospitality must trump all that for a visitor or new-comer. Only after a person feels completely welcome and accepted, and has been coming to the parish for some time, could one approach them about modesty of dress, and really that is the job of the priest in confession. In my opinion, it should begin with a suggestion, not a command or rule. After all, dressing modestly is an act of love for others and concern for the well being and sensitivities of our neighbours, not simply a code or rule.

[Father David Moser]

Archbishop Lazar' comments reminded me of the comments of a matushka that I know. She relates that in her parish, the women expect her to be the one to "enforce" the dress code, so when a visitor comes in inappropriately attired, they send matushka over to tell the newcomer how to dress. Matushka does go over and quietly talks to the newcomer, welcoming her to the parish and being generally friendly, not saying a word about dress codes - because she believes that women are usually pretty smart and observant and once they look around and see what the "norm" for dressing is, the next time they will come closer to the mark.

I do disagree, however, with the Archbishop that it is primarily the priest's job to inform people about the dress code. As a parish priest, I am probably the least effective person to say anything about dress. It is much better if a "peer" - a friendly parishioner - quietly mentions something in the course of friendly conversation. I have a few folks who are really good at this and so if I do notice something that needs to be addressed - I'll take one of my "friendly parishioners" aside and point it out. Next week, its all fixed with no fuss and no hurt feelings.

As for saying something in confession, it is my experience that for some newcomers, they come to confession and communion once or twice a year at nativity and pascha and so the "frequency" of opportunity just isn't there. This is what they were taught and how they were raised and it is their piety. After years under my pastoral care, that may change (I've seen it happen) but its not going to change right away.

Fr David Moser

[Tessa Miljanic]

I agree with Fr. David about sometimes the Priest not being the most effective person to enforce things. Sometimes it can backfire and people label him as a fanatic.

Thankfully in Orthodoxy, though, most traditional parishes have the maternal order of babas/yiayias who enforce all the rules, from enforcing dresscode, to keeping unruly kids quiet during the Gospel reading, even if it means a jerk of the arm or light spanking at times. My children have been the victim of the latter discipline more than once, thankfully. Sometimes your kids just listen to other people better than you. LOL.

In Christ
Tessa

[Mary Ward]

Before I converted to Orthodoxy, I had few dresses or skirts because pants are so comfortable it was my habit at work and casual occasions. I have acquired several skirts now that I wear to church because some ladies drew my attention to it, but many parishioners do wear pants. I have noticed (it's difficult not to) women and even young teanagers who wear skirts or dresses which serve to draw eyes to their chest area or to their figures. Some would have to wear something quite voluminous to hide their youthful shape, so maybe it can't be helped (although the chest area can be). There are pants and pants suits that are attractive and yet quite modest, and the same goes for dresses/skirts. I agree with the bishop who posted earlier: the important thing is modesty. However, going to a monastery one has to observe thier rules, and likewise to a church that has the same rules. Providing wrap skirts for those guests not prepared is a charitable act, and ensures that the sensibilities of the host community is not offended. It's better to go to church than not to.

[Xenia Rose]

While I typically wear a skirt to church, I became very uncomfortable this last Lent after our choir was moved to a new location were people might be behind me wearing skirts during the prostrations and wore pants. Some of the younger ladies started to wear knit capri-pants under skirts for the same reason. Therefore, I do feel that sometimes pants are more modest then some skirts.

I also agree with the statement that it is better to attend church then not to attend. I would not like to see someone feeling rejected for wearing pants and feel their presence was unwanted.

[Kusanagi]

I visited the St. Paraskeva convent in Washington Texas a couple of years ago and all the mirrors had butcher paper covering them up. It was for the purpose to help the sisters not participate in vanity.

I wondered why they left the mirrors up at all and it is just now occuring to me to remind them of vanity and to be on the watch for it?

We have 2 bathrooms in our house. Each has a 4ft X 5ft mirror and one has an additional 3ft X 4 ft mirror. Perhaps I should also buy some butcher paper.

Paul

Because there is a temptation of wanting to rip the tape of and looking at themselves.
To struggle against this they receive a crown for it.

[Florianos]

God bless!!

I think it is a sin not to attend church but it is a much greater sin to attend improper!

Because not attending church harms yourself but to attend improper harms the whole parish!!

I know that in the canons of the apsotels many things are said about hair style, hair cover, how to dress and how to behave in church, for example that women have to stand on the left side -man on the right!!
No women should be dressed like man and no man should be dressed like woman!! Even the old testament speaks about this!!
I also read in homilies of St. John Chrysostomos some things about dressing and behavier in church!!
From the outside looking of someone we can look inside!!

In CHRIST

[Father David Moser]

I think it is a sin not to attend church but it is a much greater sin to attend improper!
...
From the outside looking of someone we can look inside!!

But a greater sin than either of the above is judging others. Beware lest "looking from the outside to see the inside" lead you into judging the state of the inner man by the outward appearance.

Fr David Moser

[Richard Long]

Greetings,

Respect and modesty, yes, however, is not what is in the heart most important ? This is where the emphasis should be ?

JMJ,

Richard

[Florianos]

God bless!!

I dont want to judge!!But it is a fact that we can not seperate the body from the soul!! We are psychosomatic beings so when the soul is away from God so is the body, and also is the body away form God so is the soul!!

The Fathers often speak about our twofold nature!! Everything wich is done physically has also a spiritual effect!!!

Today often people wants to seperate the body from the soul but this is impossible!
When we pray ,we should pray with the body and the soul and not only with one !!
We can not sit relaxed and pray : Come let us worship and fall down( I thínk this would be nonsens=)!!

St. John of Damaskos says: Not venerating or to venerate improper an icon is a greater sin than adultery!!

So I think we have to be very carefull how we are dressed and behave in the Temple of God and everywhere!!

Richard when we are modest and godfearing in the heart(SOUL) we also are in body!!

God made himself Flesh so that the whole
man is saved not only the soul!!so please do not divid the two natures!!

In CHRIST

[Florianos]

God bless !!
St: John Chrysostomos writes:


Do you wish to adorn your face? Do so not with pearls, but with modesty, and dignity. So your countenance will be more full of grace (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06689a.htm) in the eyes of your husband. For the other kind of adorning is wont to plunge him into a suspicion of jealousy, and into enmity, quarrelsomeness and strife, for nothing is more annoying than a face which is suspected. But the ornament of compassion and modesty casts out all evil (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05649a.htm) suspicion, and will draw your partner to you more strongly than any bond. For natural beauty does not impart such comeliness to the face as does the disposition of him who beholds it, and nothing is so wont to produce that disposition as modesty and dignity; so that if any woman (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15687b.htm) be comely, and her husband be ill affected towards her, she appears to him the most worthless of all women (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15687b.htm); and if she do not happen to be fair of face, but her husband be well affected towards her, she appears more comely than all. For sentence is given not according to the nature (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10715a.htm) of what is beheld, but according to the disposition of the beholders. Adorn your face then with modesty, dignity, pity, lovingkindness, charity, affection for your husband, forbearance, meekness, endurance of ill. These are the tints of virtue (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15472a.htm). By means of these you will attract angels (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01476d.htm) not human beings to be your lovers. By means of these you have God to commend you, and when God receives you, he will certainly win over your husband for you. For if the wisdom of a man illuminates his countenance, Ecclesiastes 8:1 (http://www.newadvent.org/bible/ecc008.htm#1) much more does the virtue (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15472a.htm) of a woman (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15687b.htm) illuminate her face; and if you consider this to be a great ornament, tell me what will be the advantage of the pearls in that day? But why is it necessary to speak of that day, since it is possible to show all this from what happens now. When, then, they who thought fit to revile the emperor were dragged to the judgment hall, and were in danger of extreme measures being taken, then the mothers, and the wives, laying aside their necklaces, and their golden ornaments, and pearls, and all adornment, and golden raiment, wearing a simple and mean dress, and besprinkled with ashes, prostrated themselves before the doors of the judgment hall and thus won over the judges; and if in the case of these earthly courts of justice (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08571c.htm), the golden ornaments, and the pearls, and the variegated dress would have been a snare and a betrayal, but forbearance, and meekness, and ashes, and tears, and mean garments persuaded the judge, much more would this take place in the case of that impartial and dread tribunal. For what reason will you be able to state, what defense, when the Master lays these pearls to your charge, and brings the poor who have perished with hunger into the midst? On this account Paul (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11567b.htm) said, "not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly raiment." 1 Timothy 2:9 (http://www.newadvent.org/bible/1ti002.htm#9) For therein would be a snare. And if we were to enjoy them continually, yet we shall lay them aside with death. But arising out of virtue (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15472a.htm) there is all security, and no vicissitude and changeableness, but here it makes us more secure, and also accompanies us there. Do you wish to possess pearls, and never to lay aside this wealth (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15571a.htm)? Take off all ornament and place it in the hands of Christ through the poor. He will keep all your wealth (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15571a.htm) for you, when He shall raise up your body with much radiancy. Then He shall invest you with better wealth (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15571a.htm) and greater ornament, since this present is mean and absurd. Consider then whom you wish to please, and for whose sake you put on this ornament, not in order that the ropemaker and the coppersmith and the huckster may admire. Then are you not ashamed, nor do you blush when you show yourself to them? doing all on their account whom you do not consider worthy of accosting.

How then will you laugh this fancy to scorn? If you will remember that word, which you sent forth when thou were initiated, I renounce you, Satan (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04764a.htm), and your pomp, and your service. For the frenzy about pearls is a pomp of Satan (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04764a.htm). For you received gold not in order that you might bind it on to your body, but in order that you might release and nourish the poor. Say therefore constantly, I renounce you, Satan (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04764a.htm). Nothing is more safe than this word if we shall prove it by our deeds.

God bless!!

Some Quotations from the Apostolic Constitutions:


You, therefore, who are Christian women, do not imitate such as these. But thou who designest to be faithful to thine own husband, take care to please him alone. And when thou art in the streets, cover thy head; for by such a covering thou wilt avoid being viewed of idle persons. Do not paint thy face, which is God's workmanship; for there is no part of thee which wants ornament, inasmuch as all things which God has made are very good. But the lascivious additional adorning of what is already good is an affront to the bounty of the Creator. Look downward when thou walkest abroad, veiling thyself as becomes women.

You have learned what great commendations a prudent and loving wife receives from the Lord God. If thou desirest to be one of the faithful, and to please the Lord, O wife, do not superadd ornaments to thy beauty, in order to please other men; neither affect to wear fine broidering, garments, or shoes, to entice those who are allured by such things. For although thou dost not these wicked things with design of sinning thyself, but only for the sake of ornament and beauty, yet wilt thou not so escape future punishment, as having compelled another to look so hard at thee as to lust after thee, and as not having taken care both to avoid sin thyself, and the affording scandal to others.

You wives, therefore, demonstrate your piety by your modesty and meekness to all without the Church, whether they be women or men, in order to their conversion and improvement in the faith. And since we have warned you, and instructed you briefly, whom we do esteem our sisters, daughters, and members, as being wise yourselves, persevere all your lives in an unblameable course of life. Seek to know such kind of learning whereby you may arrive at the kingdom of our Lord, and please Him, and so rest for ever and ever. Amen.

[Nina]

Did you know there is a law in Paris against women wearing pants? (http://lifestyle.msn.com/your-look/simply-chic-blog-post.aspx?post=8b40912a-827a-4120-8b21-fa3ff8a42cbe%3FGT1%3D32002):D

[Vasiliki D.]

But a greater sin than either of the above is judging others. Beware lest "looking from the outside to see the inside" lead you into judging the state of the inner man by the outward appearance.

Fr David Moser

I guess that means that now I have a nose ring ... I am full of holes inside? Its true I tell you ...

[Effie Ganatsios]

Did Saint Chrysostomo wear trousers? No, he didn't.

Also in Jesus' time men wore skirts, as did women.

As long as what you wear is modest and clean, I don't see where the problem is.

Women wear trousers because they are practical and modest (or they should be modest). Isn't this better than what we see everywhere, especially on TV, women wearing short skirts, crossing their legs, and providing interested spectators with views they have no business seeing, as the women have no business showing.

There is a religiousTV channel here - nothing like the evangelistic TV channels that I have seen from the US, of course. I enjoy watching it because everything that is shown is a celebration of the Orthodox religion. It is broadcast from St. Lydia Church in Serres, North Greece. There is a large variety of programmes and, something that I really like, a lot of the programmes include many children and young people.

The only thing that I am not enthusiastic about on this channel is the women's choir of St. Lydia. These women are dressed in what seems to be discarded clothing from the Soviet Union era. God's works are beautiful and we do not need to make them ugly. Even their chanting is not very harmonious. The Christian women that take part in other programmes on this channel are dressed modestly but attractively. The young women are also dressed very conservatively but again, in a manner that is pleasant. Why go out of your way to appear unattractive by wearing clothes that would probably have been laughed at in the time of our Lord. I can't understand why a certain way of dressing makes us more Christian than others.

Something that I do like is that most of the attractive women seen on this TV channel have long hair that is attractively dressed either in a chignon or some such style.

Effie

[Nina]

Did Saint Chrysostomo wear trousers? No, he didn't.
Effie

Of course he did! How do you know he did not wear pants?



Also in Jesus' time men wore skirts, as did women.

Those things were not called skirts. There is a huge difference between the male and female clothing. They were covered yes, but it was not called a skirt in their language. If you read the Old Testament you will see the rules God gave the priests who entered the Holy of Holies. They could not be uncovered so my understanding is that they wore something like the equivalent of pants and were covered with robes.

[Brian Patrick Mitchell]

Did Saint Chrysostomo wear trousers? No, he didn't.

Also in Jesus' time men wore skirts, as did women.

The ancients, male and female, wore robes and tunics of various lengths and styles, not skirts in the sense of a wrap that hangs from the waist or hips. Robes fit loosely; tunics, more snugly. They often wore robes over tunics and various cloaks or wraps over both. Women did not leave the house without their wraps, which they used to cover both their figures and their heads. Trousers were often worn by men beneath their tunics in the late Roman Empire, especially in cooler weather, so Chrysostom might have worn them. Tight-fitting trousers or hoses were standard wear beneath one's tunic in the Byzantine era.


Why go out of your way to appear unattractive by wearing clothes that would probably have been laughed at in the time of our Lord. I can't understand why a certain way of dressing makes us more Christian than others.

I can think of three rules the Fathers applied to matters of dress: modesty, propriety, and sexual distinction. Modesty meant both not too revealing and not too showy. Propriety meant that which was appropriate to your station. St. Augustine of Hippo wrote a very sensible letter to a married woman chastizing her for acting and dressing like a nun and thereby causing her husband to stumble. He advises her to dress like a wife, to please and honor her husband. So yes, Effie, no reason to dress ugly. As for sexual distinction, the Fathers often cited Deuteronomy 22:5:


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.

The problem is that what pertaineth unto the man and the woman changeth over time and varieth from culture to culture. Trousers were once strictly manly because they revealed too much of the woman's figure (and because women's work did not require the extra freedom of movement that trousers allow). Even men covered their trousers with coats whenever they could. Nowadays trousers or pants are not strictly manly, but it's still a good idea for both men and women to cover them with coats, especially in church. This is true whether one has an attractive figure or an unattractive one. (I myself have taken to always wearing a sport coat in public, intead of a waist-length jacket, for modesty's sake. The waist-length jacket was invented for cavalrymen and later adopted by other men like bus drivers who must sit in public.)

All cultures that respect the distinction of gender express that respect in differences of dress. The ancients could easily tell a woman's tunic from a man's based on the cut, color, and fabric. We can do the same today with most clothes. Women's business suits don't look like men's business suits, and when a woman does wear a suit that looks like a man's, we know something's wrong.

[Donna Rail]

Is it permissible, if the weather requires it, for a woman (who is wearing a skirt as part of her church outfit) to also wear something like leg-warmers? These look like knit sleeves and go over the leg from knee to ankle. They can be worn over nylon hose. We have a short winter where I live, but I was just wondering, in case I ever needed to keep them on in church. :)

[Nina]

Is it permissible, if the weather requires it, for a woman (who is wearing a skirt as part of her church outfit) to also wear something like leg-warmers? These look like knit sleeves and go over the leg from knee to ankle. They can be worn over nylon hose. We have a short winter where I live, but I was just wondering, in case I ever needed to keep them on in church. :)

Of course it is permissible. :) Also you can wear pants (not in a traditional monastery though) if it is cold, or hot. It is preferable we wear skirts, but Orthodoxy is not a heartless Church. :)

[Donna Rail]

Of course it is permissible. :) Also you can wear pants (not in a traditional monastery though) if it is cold, or hot. It is preferable we wear skirts, but Orthodoxy is not a heartless Church. :)


Thank you very much. :)

[Effie Ganatsios]

Of course he did! How do you know he did not wear pants?




Those things were not called skirts. There is a huge difference between the male and female clothing. They were covered yes, but it was not called a skirt in their language. If you read the Old Testament you will see the rules God gave the priests who entered the Holy of Holies. They could not be uncovered so my understanding is that they wore something like the equivalent of pants and were covered with robes.

Nina, pants or trousers or whatever you want to call them were not worn by men. The word skirts is not correct of course but I wanted to emphasize that what we call skirts today is roughly what they wore. Not a skirt from the waist down but a garment that was more like a long dress.

"In the early stages of the Byzantine Empire the traditional Roman toga was popular. By Justinian's time this had been replaced by the tunica, or long chiton, for both sexes, over which the upper classes wore other garments, like a dalmatica (dalmatic), a heavier and shorter type of tunica, again worn by both sexes, but mainly by men. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_dress

Trousers were worn by the so-called barbarians, including Muslim women.

Your sister in Christ
Effie

[Effie Ganatsios]

The ancients, male and female, wore robes and tunics of various lengths and styles, not skirts in the sense of a wrap that hangs from the waist or hips. Robes fit loosely; tunics, more snugly. They often wore robes over tunics and various cloaks or wraps over both. Women did not leave the house without their wraps, which they used to cover both their figures and their heads. Trousers were often worn by men beneath their tunics in the late Roman Empire, especially in cooler weather, so Chrysostom might have worn them. Tight-fitting trousers or hoses were standard wear beneath one's tunic in the Byzantine era.



I can think of three rules the Fathers applied to matters of dress: modesty, propriety, and sexual distinction. Modesty meant both not too revealing and not too showy. Propriety meant that which was appropriate to your station. St. Augustine of Hippo wrote a very sensible letter to a married woman chastizing her for acting and dressing like a nun and thereby causing her husband to stumble. He advises her to dress like a wife, to please and honor her husband. So yes, Effie, no reason to dress ugly. As for sexual distinction, the Fathers often cited Deuteronomy 22:5:



The problem is that what pertaineth unto the man and the woman changeth over time and varieth from culture to culture. Trousers were once strictly manly because they revealed too much of the woman's figure (and because women's work did not require the extra freedom of movement that trousers allow). Even men covered their trousers with coats whenever they could. Nowadays trousers or pants are not strictly manly, but it's still a good idea for both men and women to cover them with coats, especially in church. This is true whether one has an attractive figure or an unattractive one. (I myself have taken to always wearing a sport coat in public, intead of a waist-length jacket, for modesty's sake. The waist-length jacket was invented for cavalrymen and later adopted by other men like bus drivers who must sit in public.)

All cultures that respect the distinction of gender express that respect in differences of dress. The ancients could easily tell a woman's tunic from a man's based on the cut, color, and fabric. We can do the same today with most clothes. Women's business suits don't look like men's business suits, and when a woman does wear a suit that looks like a man's, we know something's wrong.

Thank you Fr. Dcn Mitchell. A very good post.

I also found this at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_dress

"Leggings and hose were often worn, but are not prominent in depictions of the wealthy; they were associated with barbarians, whether European or Persian. "

[Brian Patrick Mitchell]

"In the early stages of the Byzantine Empire the traditional Roman toga was popular."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_dress

Trousers were worn by the so-called barbarians, including Muslim women.


Thank you for the compliment, Effie. On reflection, I think you're right about Chrysostom. It's not likely that he wore trousers.

I would challenge the wikipedia article on the wearing of togas and trousers, though. Roman history is a favorite subject of mine, and years ago I did a lot research on late Roman dress for a Constantinian novel I was writing (finished but not published). What I remember is that the toga was daily wear in the days of the Roman Republic, but its use waned gradually during the Empire, and it came to be reserved only for formal, official events, like tuxedos today or tophats and tails in the early 20th century. It still showed up in official art but got fewer and fewer mentions in contemporary literature.

Conversely, trousers gradually grew in popularity, losing their barbarian look. Roman soldiers were already wearing britches in the time of Trajan (98-117). This is from another wiki article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trousers), on trousers:


Two types of trousers eventually saw widespread use in Rome; the Feminalia, which fit snugly and usually fell to knee of mid-calf length, and the Braccae, a loose fitting trouser which was closed at the ankles. Both garments were adopted originally from the dress of the Celts of Europe, although later familiarity with the Persian Near East, and the Teutons increased acceptance. Feminalia and Braccae both began use as military garments, spreading to civilian dress later and were eventually made in a variety of materials including leather, wool, cotton and silk.

By Constantine's time, the empire was largely ruled by military men from barbarian backgrounds. From what I recall, trousers were then common in the military and in the civil service, which in those days wore uniforms like the military. So it's possible but not likely that a clergyman later that same century wore them — not likely because the clergyman's long robes made trousers unnecessary.

[Nina]

Trousers of various design were worn throughout the Middles Ages in Europe, especially by males. Loose fitting trousers were worn in Byzantium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantium) under long tunics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunics), .[17] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trousers#cite_note-16)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trousers

[Effie Ganatsios]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trousers


Nina mou, St. Chrysostomos lived from 349–407.


"The Middle Ages was a period of European history from the 5th century to the 15th century. The period followed the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476."

"Trousers of various design were worn throughout the Middles Ages in Europe, especially by males. Loose fitting trousers were worn in Byzantium under long tunics,"



Effie

[Brian Patrick Mitchell]

So maybe he did, and maybe he didn't. I really can't say. But can we agree that trousers were often worn by many men in Chrysostom's day? That could settle the issue kindly.

[Nina]

So maybe he did, and maybe he didn't. I really can't say. But can we agree that trousers were often worn by many men in Chrysostom's day

Yes, and I do not see how relevant this is to this thread - and it is spelled very clearly in that link that men wore trousers in Byzantium - plus St. Chrysostom did not come from Roman background who were wearing tunics and I do not know what (I did not date a Roman of those times to know lol :P), but from Antioch.

And still I can not think of St. Chrysostom just wearing robes without some kind of undergarment (call them trousers, breeches, shorts if you will) and going in the Holy Altar, due to respect for the sacred. He was a very strict man first with himself, and I am sure that that early in Christianity they were influenced by the Old Testament garment/undergarment - wise for a priest and other church hierarchy clothing:


(http://bible.cc/exodus/28-40.htm)40 (http://bible.cc/exodus/28-40.htm) And for Aaron's sons thou shalt make vests; and thou shalt make for them girdles; and high caps shalt thou make for them, for glory and for ornament. 41 (http://bible.cc/exodus/28-41.htm) And thou shalt clothe with them Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him; and shalt anoint them, and consecrate them, and hallow them, that they may serve me as priests. 42 (http://bible.cc/exodus/28-42.htm) And thou shalt make them linen trousers to cover the flesh of nakedness; from the loins even to the hips shall they reach. 43 (http://bible.cc/exodus/28-43.htm) And they shall be upon Aaron and his sons when they enter into the tent of meeting, or when they come near to the altar to serve in the sanctuary; that they may not bear iniquity and die an everlasting statute for him and his seed after him.

http://darbybible.com/exodus/28.htm

And although people in general wore robes, tunics etc. there was definitely a difference between a man's and a woman's clothing for our tradition as it is indicated in the OT:

Deut 22:5



5 “A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God.

People might explain this also for a different meaning (about transvestites) however there is also a literal meaning to this verse.