Posted on 04/11/2004 9:02:32 AM PDT by Willie Green
Although famed musical composer Irving Berlin thought them lovely enough to write a sonnet, nowadays few women are donning Easter bonnets.
In fact, you're more apt to see wrinkled khakis and rumpled polo shirts than pressed suits and pastel pumps at church on Sunday.
While Easter Sunday has traditionally been the day to show off your new spring finery, America has become a nation that dresses down, and not just on "casual Fridays" in the office.
(Excerpt) Read more at pittsburghlive.com ...
Me neither. It's a very serious spiritual question, and you refused to answer it. You impose an arbitrary dress code (that some people, for physical reasons you can't understand, find intolerable), and you pharisaically judge those who are not in compliance, as not being true worshippers, not really caring about God.
To add grievous insult to injury, you compare me to Clinton... who always dressed "well" for church and conspicuously failed to heed its teachings.
Why?
That is the ONLY statement I am making when I dress comfortably for church.
So uh, if your an atheist, what do you mean exactly when you say "God bless our soldiers"?
MSNBC: US Helicopters destroy 5 house in Fallujah
Posted by woofie to mikegi On News/Activism 04/05/2004 9:14:47 AM PDT #2 of 61
"God bless our soldiers"
Define "define" according to Holy Scripture. Define "according" according to Holy Scripture. Define "Holy Scripture" according to Holy Scripture. Do you think that 'Sola Scriptura' means that all true aesthetic values must be derived from Scripture?
2. Dressing up for church in order to impress other people with one’s looks is vain and wrong. So is dressing up to flaunt one’s wealth. But abuse does not nullify proper use. Just because there are wrong reasons to X does not mean that there are no right reasons to X.
3. For those who have no understanding of aesthetics and what is objectively communicated by the way one dresses when coming to God's presence, “Go to God in whatever suits you” is not good advice. It is much worse than telling a blind man to pick out his wedding outfit by simply choosing whatever feels best to him.
4. Since God wants us to be reverent and respectful in His presence, and since the way one dresses (and acts) when coming to God’s presence is either reverent and respectful or not, God does care how we are dressed when coming into His presence.
5. Just because Saddam dressed nicely does not mean that God does not care how we dress when coming into His presence; that’s a non sequitur. The way we dress (and act) when coming into God’s presence reflects something about our heart, even if only the recognition that God deserves to be approached in dress and manner that are reverent and respectful.
6. Anyone who thinks that coming to God’s presence in tank tops, tube tops, shorts, rags, pajamas, jeans, sneakers, halter tops, bikinis, thongs, etc. etc. is respectful and reverent needs to study aesthetics. People who come to God’s presence dressed irreverently are saying something with their manner of dress (i.e. God is not worthy of respect and reverence), even if they are thinking something else in their minds. Right intentions do not right actions make. It is not enough to have good intentions.
7. Just because health of the soul is more important than health of the body, it does not follow that how one dresses in God’s presence is unimportant. Not only does the soul affect the body, but the body affects the soul. This is why we kneel in prayer; it is not mere tradition. Kneeling actually helps prepare our souls for prayer. Likewise, coming to God’s presence dressed irreverently tends to put the soul in a less reverent state. The idea that our bodies (and their actions and their manner of cover and adornment) are irrelevant to the condition and activity of our souls is a kind of Platonically rooted Gnosticism, which the church has long recognized as heretical.
8. Trying to impress God is not the reason to dress respectfully and reverently in His presence. God, being omniscient, cannot be impressed by the way we dress, or by anything that we do. But God can be respected and revered by the way we dress.
No offense, but this is a load of bunk.
That is a very good question. Others on this thread have given very good answers. Here is my attempt.
The early Chuch never viewed non-Christian cultures as totally devoid of religious significance, only that their religious understanding was incomplete. If those cultures possessed symbols that expressed ideas similar to Christianity, they were viewed as prefigurations to the ultimate meaning to be found in Christianity. It provided a link from the old religion to the new one.
The original Christians, all of whom were Jewish, found it very natural to interpret their own scriptures pointing forward to what they experienced in the founding of the church. St. Paul would use a similar technique when he went outside the synagogue of a foreign city to preach to Greeks. He used imagery in Greek culture to illustrate and illuminate his message.
Eggs and rabbits were symbols of fertility--new life. The church simply blessed them to bring out what they thought were their ultimate and true meaning--new life that was eternal, the Resurrection.
As for Easter bonnets, I can only offer a possible explanation. Not so long ago, women always wore hats when they went out of the house. Women also wore something on their heads when they went to church--a scarf, a prayer veil, a hat. Easter was a joyous holiday, so celebrate with a new hat.
Today, women seldom wear hats when they go out of the house or in church. I don't think people understand any more the fascination woman used to have for hats.
I hope this helps as an explanation. Sorry if it's a bit wordy, but I didn't know how to say it in fewer words.
So did I. The weather was nice. Why was everyone looking at me funny?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.