Catholic Priest: Women Must Cover Their Shoulders at Mass to Protect Male Purity

[trotsky]

https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2019/06/04/catholic-priest-women-must-cover-their-shoulders-at-mass-to-protect-male-purity/

Another day, another Catholic leader saying something idiotic on Twitter, then doubling down on it.

This time, it’s Father Kevin M. Cusick, a former Lieutenant Commander in the US Navy chaplain corps, telling women to cover up their bodies to avoid offending the delicate sensibilities of men.

...The lesson is clear: Catholic women should just wear a burqa, or maybe full body armor, when attending Mass. Do it for Jesus.

Or perhaps women should just walk out of the Catholic Church for good. That way priests would never have to look at their naked shoulders at all.

Bullshit victim blaming from the largest Christian church in the world. Men are responsible for their own damn behavior. Why does the RCC think otherwise?

[50 Shades Of Blue]

1. What about little boys?

[Vogon_Glory]

2. NO TIGHT-FITTING TROUSERS, EVER!!!

Particularly for altar-boys!

[MontanaMama]

3. +1

As a former catholic, I say, fuck these people.

[trotsky]

4. Here was an appropriate response:

Link to tweet

[3Hotdogs]

5. Or better yet, stay home. Save your collection money for something better.

[edhopper]

6. Well he has a point

nothing sexier than a bare shoulder.

[MineralMan]

7. Well, now, sales of mantillas should skyrocket there.

[zipplewrath]

8. Standard RCC Theology

There is a standard bit of theology in the RCC that says the temper is as sinful as the tempted. Much of the story of the embodiment of evil (the devil, Lucifer, fallen angels, etc.) is as a tempter, not as an actual "doer of evil". The theology can get tortured though because one quickly goes from the concept of the intentional temper (basically a con man so to speak) to this kind of thought that one can be a "temper" by merely existing. In law there is the concept of entrapment which is roughly the same thing, tempting someone to do something they might otherwise not do. We draw a distinction between that and people who see an opportunity to do something wrong and act upon it. If I carelessly or forgetfully leave my keys in my car, that's not entrapment.

But on more than one occasion, the church has acted to say that leaving your keys was a sinful act. This is what they are doing here. Bare shoulders, in the past it might have been bare ankles, or tight clothes is seen as a sin because of how OTHER people will behave.

I love it when these "dress code" arguments start. There is nothing harder to define than a dress code. And it is virtually impossible to justify "style" based codes. Safety gear is one thing. But after that, it gets really difficult to justify anything on any other basis than "I don't like it".

[Major Nikon]

9. Why can't they just pluck their eyes out?

Wouldn't that be the biblical answer?

[Cartoonist]

10. The alternative is awkward for all involved

This is a threat. This is also the first time I've heard rape described as awkward.

[virgogal]

11. Covered shoulders,covered heads,

that's how some religions are.