CS Lewis on modesty and societal propriety

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Sabby

People also don't realize that C.S. Lewis married late in life, used to have lively discussions with notables such as Tolkien at the local meeting house (pub) and (according to one professional I know) smoked cigars.

None of which takes away from the statement of chastity vs modesty.

I cannot see smoking being a sin, but it is stupid and destructive of the body. Before they knew it was destructive to the body they were not as responsible as we are today.

We discussed this here: http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=8780

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I cannot see smoking being a sin, but it is stupid and destructive of the body. Before they knew it was destructive to the body they were not as responsible as we are today.

We discussed this here: http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=8780

I read testimony of demon named cigeratte cast out of people.

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by Sabby

I see Lewis' point and completely agree with it. I'm getting cynical.

I thought that might be the case.

[Truthseeker]

I recently spoke to friend of mine who questioned within himself the wearing of shorts by a brother leading midweek service prayer. While I wouldn't like it either, I asked how would he feel if sista wore skirt right below knees which he responded he wouldn't have problem with it. Some things are cultural standards.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I cannot see smoking being a sin, but it is stupid and destructive of the body. Before they knew it was destructive to the body they were not as responsible as we are today.

We discussed this here: http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=8780

Very good point, mfb. The dangers of smoking weren't always so well understood as they are now.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

"The Christian rule of chastity must not be confused with the social rule of “modesty” (in one sense of that word: i.e. propriety, or decency). The social rule of propriety lays down how much of the human body should be displayed and what subjects can be referred to, and in what words, according to the customs of a given social circle.

Thus, while the rule of chastity is the same for all Christians at all times, the rule of propriety changes. A girl in the Pacific islands wearing hardly any clothes and a Victorian lady completely covered in clothes might both be equally “modest,” proper, and decent, according to the standards of their own societies; and both, for all we can tell by their dress, might be equally chaste (or equally unchaste)."

- Mere Christianity

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

There is some great food for thought in this article:

http://ptm.org/09PT/Winter/modesty.pdf


One quote, which I think is very thought provoking -

"While immodest apparel focuses attention on women as sexual objects, obsessive teaching on dress codes creates the same focus. Preachers and other spiritual leaders reinforce the destructive message that women and girls are so distracting sexually that they must be covered up beyond cultural sensibilities."

More -

"Inadvertently, the focus on female modesty and guilt labels men as victims of their own sexual impulses."


"For many, church-generated propriety and modesty standards are less about listening to God, and more about following the culture within a sub-group or denomination."

(can the church say amen??)

Excellent quotes--especially the last bits. It brings to mind a conversation my husband had with a friend; the friend brought up split skirts and made a passing comment (not an exact quote), "Why would a woman WANT to wear a split skirt, unless she wants someone to look at her legs?"

This particular man, I've observed giving women the creepy "up and down" on more than one occasion. He's accomplished two things with his mindset:

1. He's established in his thinking that if a woman looks attractive or even sexy, that this is because she wants men to ogle her, and

2. Since this is the case, he's then excused himself to ogle her, or as your quote put it, to be a victim of his own sexual impulses.

Also, I've heard this sort of attitude from ministers across the pulpit. They attack women for wearing certain types of clothing and the emphasis is that she is doing so because she is lascivious or "lustful." Often, the clothing they are complaining about is relatively modest, except within their very conservative culture. To complicate matters, BECAUSE it creates that paradigm in the minds of men and women, it's very likely that a very conservative woman who puts on forbidden items of clothing is doing exactly what *they* think she is. She probably IS rebelling or she may be trying to look sexy for someone other than her husband. Unfortunately, this puts your average Christian woman at a disadvantage, since she may wear the same clothing without the same motives but be perceived exactly the same.

An example of this would be in churches where it is taught that only harlots wear red. A couple of things can happen as a result: any woman who has sat under that teaching and starts putting on red dresses may be properly perceived as doing so for the wrong reasons; any woman who wears red innocently will be judged exactly the same as the women who wear red out of rebellion to the church's teachings.

It's a complicated mess, IMO. Most of it stems from treating the teachings of men as if they're the teachings of God.

[*AQuietPlace*]

Do you think the hard-nosed teaching that women need to cover up pretty much everything so that men don't lust has done a disservice to a lot of young men raised in that environment? Do you think it has made them hyper-sensitive to any exposure of the female form?

I think that it can be unhealthy when this issue is talked about and stressed so much in churches. Unhealthy for both men and women.

[Truthseeker]

I still don't want my wife showing the goods.

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

I still don't want my wife showing the goods.

I don't know many godly women who want to show the goods.

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Excellent quotes--especially the last bits. It brings to mind a conversation my husband had with a friend; the friend brought up split skirts and made a passing comment (not an exact quote), "Why would a woman WANT to wear a split skirt, unless she wants someone to look at her legs?"

This particular man, I've observed giving women the creepy "up and down" on more than one occasion. He's accomplished two things with his mindset:

1. He's established in his thinking that if a woman looks attractive or even sexy, that this is because she wants men to ogle her, and

2. Since this is the case, he's then excused himself to ogle her, or as your quote put it, to be a victim of his own sexual impulses.

Also, I've heard this sort of attitude from ministers across the pulpit. They attack women for wearing certain types of clothing and the emphasis is that she is doing so because she is lascivious or "lustful." Often, the clothing they are complaining about is relatively modest, except within their very conservative culture. To complicate matters, BECAUSE it creates that paradigm in the minds of men and women, it's very likely that a very conservative woman who puts on forbidden items of clothing is doing exactly what *they* think she is. She probably IS rebelling or she may be trying to look sexy for someone other than her husband. Unfortunately, this puts your average Christian woman at a disadvantage, since she may wear the same clothing without the same motives but be perceived exactly the same.

An example of this would be in churches where it is taught that only harlots wear red. A couple of things can happen as a result: any woman who has sat under that teaching and starts putting on red dresses may be properly perceived as doing so for the wrong reasons; any woman who wears red innocently will be judged exactly the same as the women who wear red out of rebellion to the church's teachings.

It's a complicated mess, IMO. Most of it stems from treating the teachings of men as if they're the teachings of God.

my wife has some skirts with splits, usually at the back calf area, I know she has no desire to flaunt her legs even though she has some nice ones.

Women should dress with godliness in mind pleasing God and husband alone. If women start being "men" conscious about this it can pull them in some many directions because the carnal mind of men have so many various fetishes, desires, turn ons etc........

I like what Watchmen Nee taught new ladies, he taught them to lay out an outfit and pray over it before putting on. this way it becomes between her and the Lord not Joe fetish down the street.