.Eefifiémméu? ‘1... km \ 55.: mvm'rgi-w 5'32”?” , 2m .50... 7. ’ ’ ‘ 'é'n'u?" “1' H.5m3‘fiflfi 3% ”3..” ... . Y. . 2.. 3:: . TIP £535 -;. LIBRARIES T'T'TTTT'TT‘TT‘TT TTT TT'TT'T‘TTTT TTTTTTTT TTTTTT TT This is to certify that the thesis entitled AN ANALYSIS OF CATHOLIC VIEWS ON MODESTY IN LAY WOMEN'S DRESS, 1950-1990 presented by MELANIE CLARE BARTLETT has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M.A. . Ciothing & TextiTes degree in Major professor Date flu}, 243", ”75 0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution LIBRARY Michigan State University PLACE N RETURN BOX to remove thie checkout irom your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or More date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE fil—j MSU Ie An Afflnnetive Action/Equal Opportunity lnetituion AN ANALYSIS OF CATHOLIC VIEWS ON MODESTY IN LAY WOMEN'S DRESS, 1950-1990 BY Melanie Clare Bartlett A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Human Environment and Design 1993 ABSTRACT AN ANALYSIS OF CATHOLIC VIEWS ON MODESTY IN LAY WOMEN'S DRESS, 1950-1990 BY Melanie Clare Bartlett This study examined views of Catholics on modesty in lay women's dress in the period 1950-1990. Using content analysis, data were gathered from 253 documents, Catholic and secular, containing Catholic views on modesty in lay women's dress published between 1950 and 1990. Variables were: year the view was published, level within the Catholic Church of the person expressing his or her views, types of dress which considered modest and immodest, and sanctions used to promote modesty and discourage immodesty. Percentages and chi square were used to analyze the data. All levels of the Catholic Church expressed concern about modesty in lay women's dress, with 54% of the views expressed by the clergy. Garments most often viewed as modest were ones which covered the back and chest, whereas garments most often criticized were skirts and pants that exposed the leg above the knee. Views were also expressed on wearing make-up and head—coverings, participation in beauty contests, and dressing for the occasion. Positive sanctions were employed three times more often than negative sanctions. Views denouncing certain garment styles did not always follow fashion trends. Views on lay women were related to views on modesty in lay women's dress. This thesis is dedicated in loving memory of my grandparents, Lynn Henry and Erma May Bartlett, and my great aunt, Augusta Christiansen, who all knew that I could earn my master's degree. iii CHAPTER LIST OF TABLES TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES. I. DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM IntrOduCtion O O O O I O O O O I C O O O 0 Statement of the Problem and Justification Obj eCtives O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Research Questions Definition of Terms. II. Theories Shame. . Disgust. Habit. . Theories III. Religious Values on the Origins of on Modesty. Sexual Modesty . Social Modesty . Theoretical Definition Theoretical Framework. REVIEW OF LITERATURE O Modesty f Modes ty Amount of Religious Participation. Religious Affiliation. Religious Conviction/Commitment. Orthodoxy. Views of the Catholic Church Summary. iv THEORETICAL DISCUSSION AND FRAMEWORK IN DRESS OF MODESTY PAGE .vii viii e e e e U'IWNAA e e \Dkommd 11 12 15 16 16 19 19 20 21 23 IV. METHODOLOGY Selection of Methods . Content Analysis . . . Selection of Period. . Locating Catholic Literature Locating Secular Literature. Data Collection. . . Statistical Analysis of Data Analysis of Existing Research Views on Lay Women . . Fashion Changes. . . . Assumptions. . . . . . Limitations of the Study . V. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS FOR RESEARCH Description of the Literature Sample Publication Dates of the Documents TYpes of Documents . Research Question 1. Research Question 2. Styles of Garments . Other Aspects of Women Research Question 3. Positive Sanctions . Negative Sanctions . Summary. . . . . . . VI. MODESTY IN LAY WOMEN'S DRESS The View of Women by the Catholic Church, 1950-1990 . . S THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN D ress Dressing According to Occasion THE QUESTIONS VIEW OF BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND CATHOLIC LAY Views Before the Second Vatican Council. Views of the Second Vatican Council. Views Since the Second Vatican Council The Relationship Between the View of Wome and Views on Modesty. n -—3 O O I O O O O O I O O O WOMEN COMMENTS ON 24 24 25 25 30 31 33 34 35 35 35 36 —3 38 39 39 42 46 46 56 6O 60 61 64 67 70 71 72 73 76 VII. VIII. CHANGES IN CATHOLIC VIEWS ON MODESTY IN WOMEN'S 1950—1990 DRESS AND CHANGES IN WOMEN'S FASHIONS, General Changes in Women's Fashions, The Early and Mid-19505. . . . . The Late 19505 and Early 19605 . The Mid-to-Late 19605. . . The 19705. . . . . . . . . The 19805. . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . Catholic Views on Modesty in Lay The Relationship Between Changes Changes in Views on Modesty . . SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summary. . . . . . Research Question Research Question Research Question Research Question . Research Question . Conclusions. . . . . Limitations. . . . . . Suggestions for Furth r Stu UiubWN-J eeeeeee eeeeeeee eeee eeee eeee dy e APPENDICES Glossary of Catholic Terms . . 1950-1990 Women's in Fashion and Dress 79 80 83 85 88 89 90 92 O 94 . 96 . 97 .100 .101 .102 .104 .105 .106 .108 List of Key Words Used in Locating References to Views by Catholics on Modesty in Periodical Indexes . . . . . . . . . . . List of Documents from Secular Sources Tables of Raw Data (Tables 8- 12) Supply the Demand for the Supply Modesty List of Documents from Catholic Sources. . Crusade . . . . . . . . . . . Marylike Crusade . . . . . . . REFERENCES 0 O O O O O O O O 0 vi .111 .112 .124 .127 .139 .145 .152 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Publication Dates of the Documents. . . . . .40 2. Frequency of Views Published by Level Within the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church . . . . . . . .44 3. Frequency of Styles of Women's Garments Considered to be Modest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 4. Frequency of Styles of Women's Garments Considered to be Immodest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 5. Frequency of Positive Sanctions Used to Promote Modesty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 6. Frequency of Negative Sanctions Used to Discourage Immodesty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 7. Summary of Changes in Women's Fashions, 1950-1990. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91 8. Number of Views by Level within the Catholic Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 9. Number of Views that Considered Certain Types of Women's Dress Modest . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 10. Number of Views that Considered Certain Types of Women's Dress Immodest . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 11. Positive Sanctions Used to Promote Modesty. . . 135 12. Negative Sanctions Used to Discourage Immodesty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 vii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. Dimensions of Modesty in Dress and Factors Influencing these Dimensions. . . . . . . . .. . 13 2. The Communication of Intentional and Nonintentional Messages in Dress. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3. Types of Documents from Catholic and Secular sourCeSO O C I O O O O O O O I O O I O O 41 4. Views on Modesty by Category of Level . . . . . . 45 5. Views on Modesty by Category of Coverage and De- emphasis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 6. Views on Modesty by Category of Uncoverage and mphaSj-s C C O O O C O O I O O O O I O O O O O 52 7. Views on Modesty by Category of Promoting Modesty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 8. Views on Modesty by Category of Discouraging Immodesty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 viii CHAPTER I. DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM Introduction Contemporary feminists have been raising the issue that major religions, including Christianity, convey a misogynistic attitude, the belief that women are inferior to men. These feminists, who have studied the Bible, church history, and contemporary liturgies and writings, have pointed out many ways in which Christianity appears to discriminate against women. A number of these feminists are Catholic, including Rosemary Ruether, and Mary Daly. They have voiced their opinion on the use of non-inclusive language in translations of the Bible and in liturgies and the Catholic Church's stand on "women's issues": women in the priesthood, birth control, abortion, and so on. Though not a prominent issue for these feminists, the Catholic Church's rules and teachings on women's dress is yet another way the Church has appeared to discriminate against women. Statement of the Problem and Justification The rules and teachings of the Catholic Church for women's dress have received only cursory study by those in the clothing and textiles field (see Waln, 1965; Brook, 1 2 1966). Many of these rules and teachings are concerned with what is considered modest dress for women by the Church. The concept of modesty in dress also needs further study. The Second Vatican Council, which met several times between the years 1962-1965, brought about major changes in the Catholic Church in the past few decades. These changes pose a question pertinent to this study: were there any changes in the promotion of modesty in women's dress in the era of the Second Vatican Council? The Second Vatican Council era starts with the year 1950 to include background information and continues through 1990 to include changes brought about by the Council. Insights into the question posed would benefit religious studies and women's studies, as changes in the Catholic Church's views on modesty in women's dress may be reflective of changes in the views of lay women by the Catholic Church. This study may also be of value for the clothing and textiles profession as a specific example of modesty in dress. This study is focused on lay women only; changes in the dress of women in religious orders after the Council have been studied by several, including Baer and Mosele (1970) and Sister Lucas (1971). Objectives The major objective of this study was to examine, through literature of the period 1950-1990, how Catholics 3 have viewed modesty in women's dress. This major objective had two minor objectives: (1) to explore the relationship between the views of Catholics on modesty in women's dress and changes in women's fashions and (2) to explore the relationship between the view of women by the Catholic Church and the views of Catholics on modesty in women's dress. Research Questions 1. In Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, what levels within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church expressed concern about modesty? The purpose of this question is to identify the sources of written Catholic comment on modesty in lay women's dress and their affiliation with the Catholic Church during 1950-1990. Were those expressing concern only those in positions of ecclesiastical authority within the Catholic Church or were they also the laity? 2. In Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, what was considered modest dress and what was considered immodest dress? The intent of this question is to identify what types and styles of garments, plus the situations in which they were worn, were considered to be modest and immodest by those expressing concern about modesty in lay women's dress during 1950-1990. 4 3. In Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, which sanctions have been used to promote modest behavior and discourage immodest behavior in women's dress? The goal of this question is to identify the sanctions that have been employed to promote modest behavior and discourage immodest behavior in women's dress during the period 1950-1990. These sanctions may have been positive as well as negative. 4. How have lay women been viewed by the Catholic Church in the period 1950-1990, and how does the View of lay women by the Catholic Church relate to the views of Catholics on modesty in lay women's dress? Since the View of women in the Catholic Church may relate to the views of Catholics on modesty in women's dress, this study will examine the View of lay women in the Catholic Church during 1950-1990 in previous research. The relationship between the View of women by the Church and the views of Catholics on modesty in dress will be examined in the literature collection on modesty in lay women's dress. 5. In Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, how have the views on modesty in lay women's dress changed? As the notion of modesty in dress is always changing in our society, this question is aimed at examining the changes in the views on modesty in lay women's dress by 5 Catholics in the period 1950-1990. Since fashion may have an influence on their views on modesty, fashion changes in the corresponding time period will be examined using previous research on fashion. Definition of Terms The Catholic Church: the denomination within Christianity that follows the Roman Rite. Women's dress: clothing and other items added to the female body for utility or adornment. In this study it includes cosmetics, head-coverings, shoes, and stockings. It also refers to the way in which these objects are worn and their relationship to the body, such as tight or loose. In this study it pertains only to the dress of lay women and teen girls in the Catholic Church; it does not include the dress of women religious. Modesty in women's dress: a value that views as desirable women's dress worn in public which does not call undue attention to the wearer, based on the type of dress and the situation in which it is worn. In this study it includes general dress, eveningwear, swimwear, cosmetics, clothing worn in beauty contests, and clothing and head-coverings worn in church. The hierarchy of the Catholic Church: members of the Catholic Church consist of the laity, religious orders for men and women, and a ministerial hierarchy of priests, bishops, and the pope. Those within the ministerial 6 hierarchy have the sacred power to administer the sacraments to members of the laity. Women in the Catholic Church: in this study it refers only to lay women in the Catholic Church, as opposed to including those women in religious orders. Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's ggggg: comments or views of Catholics who expressed concern about modesty in lay women's dress that were published in books and periodical literature, both Catholic and secular, in the period 1950-1990. Sanctions: control mechanisms for promoting modesty and discouraging immodesty in dress. Sanctions for promoting modesty in women's dress are both positive, such as exhortations and programs to promote modesty, and negative, such as warnings and denial of sacraments for those who appear in public immodestly dressed. For readers who are not familiar with Catholic terminology, a glossary is provided in Appendix A. CHAPTER II. THEORETICAL DISCUSSION AND FRAMEWORK OF MODESTY IN DRESS This chapter contains a theoretical discussion of modesty in dress, starting with theories on the origin of modesty and concluding with a theoretical definition of modesty. It also provides a theoretical framework for the study, adapting a model from communication in dress. Theories on the Origins of Modesty Several theories on modesty in dress were found in the array of literature, which was not only from clothing and textiles, but also from psychology, sociology, and anthropology. Most of these theories were proposed by psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Their theories usually focused on the origin of modesty, although some theories were found in the midst of debates over what first motivated humans to adopt clothing. The major theories for the origin of modesty are: shame over nakedness, to prevent disgust, and out of habit. Each theory on the origin of modesty will be discussed briefly. em The account of the fall of humankind found in the Bible has been commonly given as the reason humans wear clothing: "Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized that they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made loincloths for themselves" (Genesis 3:7, New American Bible). Theorists, however, have pointed out many examples of non-Western peoples who wear no clothing and are not ashamed of their nakedness (Thomas, 1899). Although these peoples wear no clothing, they do have some form of dress, such as body paint, earrings, lip plugs, and may become ashamed or embarrassed when this dress is removed or missing (the example of the Suyé tribe is described by Horn & Gurel, 1981, p. 19). Disgust The theory that modesty originated to prevent disgust was proposed by James, a late nineteenth-century psychologist. While James doubted that an impulse for modesty existed, he thought that if it did exist it was because of shyness or a dread of strangers. Since actions of modesty, however, were not the same as actions of shyness, he gave this theory for the origin of modesty: Human nature is sufficiently homogenous for us to be sure that everywhere reserve must inspire some respect, and that persons who suffer every liberty are persons whom others disregard. Not to be like such peoPle, then, would be one of the first resolutions suggested by social self-consciousness to a child of nature just emerging from the unreflective state. And the resolution would probably 9 acquire effective pungency for the first time when the social self-consciousness was sharpened into a real fit of shyness by some person being present whom it was important not to disgust or displease. Public opinion would of course go on to build its positive precepts upon this germ. (1950, pp. 436-437) 3291: Several theorists believe that only after clothing was habitually worn did modesty come into the picture, as not wearing clothing was then viewed as being immodest. Among them were Dunlap (1928), Eichler (1924), and Thomas (1899). Eichler (1924) contends that shame was not a cause of dress, but rather a result of dress. Dunlap (1928) points out that "clothing itself has no modesty or immodesty. It is merely the breaking of the established convention which makes it immodest" (p. 66). Theories on Modesty Regardless of the origin of modesty, researchers agree that modesty in dress is relative and dynamic: it differs by culture, era, gender, age, socio-economic status, religion, activity, time of day, and body part. Most of these researchers View modesty as either a conditioned reflex (Benedict, 1944) or an impulse (Flugel, 1950; Laver, 1969). Flugel (1950), a Freudian psychologist, describes modesty as a negative, inhibitory impulse that: (1) May be directed primarily against social or primarily against sexual forms of display; (2) may be directed primarily against the tendency to display the naked body or primarily against the tendency to display gorgeous or beautiful clothes; 10 (3) may have references, primarily, to tendencies in the self or, primarily, to tendencies in others; (4) may aim, primarily, at the prevention of desire or satisfaction (social or sexual), or, primarily, at the prevention of disgust, shame, or disapproval; (5) may relate to various parts of the body. (p. 54) From this description of modesty two dimensions are apparent: that of sexual modesty, which is what usually comes to mind when we mention modesty, and that of social modesty. Laver, a clothing historian, states that "historically, it is the female who offends modesty by seduction and the male who offends modesty by swagger" (1969, p. 13). Seduction refers to offending sexual modesty; swagger refers to offending social modesty. Both dimensions of modesty, however, can be seen in the dress of either gender. Sexual modesty The sexual dimension of modesty is usually thought of as referring to the desirability of coverage of the genitals or certain body parts to which one's society attaches a sexual connotation. According to Benedict (1944) "given certain turns of fashion, other regions than the genital will be singled out and this emotion directed elsewhere--to the feet, as among Chinese women of past generation, or to the face, as with Mohammedan women" (p. 236). Coverage, however, is only one component of the sexual dimension of modesty, as clothing may cover the body but still call attention to the parts which it covers. Another component of sexual modesty is the concealment 11 of these sexual body parts through the use of dress which is opaque, loose, and does not call attention to the body parts which it covers (see Figure 1). Social modesty There are also two aspects of social modesty: propriety and display. The aspect of propriety is illustrated by the fact that "most peOple have occasionally felt the embarrassment incidental to appearing at some social function in an inappropriate costume, and the embarrassment may be equally great whether one is 'over' or 'under' dressed" (Flugel, 1950, p. 55). Although Flugel does not use the term propriety, his discussion of social modesty, or rather social immodesty, centers on dressing prOperly for the occasion. He states that all situations of social immodesty Bring out exquisitely the sense of shame and guilt that attaches to appearance or behavior which is different from that of our fellows, unless such difference is manifestly [gig] of a kind that arouses their envy, admiration, or approval (or, on rarer occasions, our own approval). (p. 56) Although Laver (1969) quotes Flugel extensively, he does not mention this aspect of social modesty. Rather, he states that "in one of its aspects modesty is a check on the impulse to self—aggrandizement, an inhibition of 'dressing up (p. 8). The display aspect of social modesty Opposes the display of wealth, power, skill, and knowledge through one's dress. 12 The sexual and social dimensions of modesty, diagrammed in Figure 1, are not independent of each other and may function at the same time in a garment. These dimensions also vary in function within a given situation or activity. For example, an elaborate evening gown with a low-cut neckline worn at a formal dance may be considered modest. That same gown worn during the day might be considered immodest because of the cut of the neckline, because it is too formal for a casual daytime situation, or because it calls attention to the wearer through its flamboyancy. Theoretical Definition of Modesty Based on the above discussion, the following theoretical definition of modesty in dress was formulated by the researcher. Modesty in dress: a value ascribed to the wearing of dress which, in relation to the wearer's body, gender, age, culture, social status, and situational context, does not call undue attention to the wearer. It includes both sexual and social modesty in dress. Dress which meets standards associated with this value may be described as modest. Sexual modesty in dress: a value ascribed to the wearing of dress which covers, conceals, and does not call undue attention to body parts to which one's society attaches a sexual connotation. 13 >.o_.no.u biaozu oere>oo mcoflmcoeflo mmwnu mcfiocmsamcH muouomm can mmoum cfl hummcoz mo mcofimcmeflo .ceE inoocoo elllllllllililll \IIIIIIIIIIIIIV ellllllllllllll lllllllllll‘li \\ .o_oom .eaxew / \ canto :_>.oeoox \/ .xe.coo .Ico:a::m one-um .o_oom >oom eu< / .eoceo 23.50 .- ousmfim 14 ’ \ Cultural System ’7 \ Social System (past time) (present time) (future time) I Nonintentional Responded to as \ Messages Nonintentional Messag s TIME TIME Intentional Responded to as Messa es Intentional Messa- es Source (receiver) Meaning Figure 2. The Communication of Intentional and Nonintentional Messages in Dress. (Adapted from Hillestad (1974) and MacKay (1972); used with permission) 15 Social modesty in dress: a value ascribed to the wearing of dress appropriate to the wearer and occasion, considered as ordinary and moderate, which does not call undue attention to the wearer. Theoretical Framework A model adapted from Hillestad (1974) and MacKay (1972) shows that the source or wearer may use forms of dress to convey messages, either intentional or nonintentional (see Figure 2). The receiver or viewer responds to the forms of dress they perceive as sending either intentional or nonintentional messages. This communication occurs in the context of a part of culture and society. In the case of modesty in dress, the forms of dress may convey messages of modesty or immodesty, either intentional or nonintentional. Several aspects of the culture and society may be involved in defining and enforcing aspects of modesty in dress; these aspects may change over time. This study will focus on Catholics as one social system within the realm of the cultural system which functions as the receiver or viewer of women's dress and interprets the observed forms of dress as being modest or immodest during the time period 1950-1990. It is not within the scope of this study to explore the motive of the source or wearer. CHAPTER III. REVIEW OF LITERATURE Much of the research in clothing and textiles on modesty in women's dress links it to religion. Most of these studies were conducted by graduate students in the 19605 and early 19705, using surveys to collect data from various populations of college students. The religious variables examined in these studies will be discussed; samples that included Catholic subjects are highlighted. Religious Values Creekmore (1963) studied specific behaviors in respect to clothing and specific values and needs. She found that some behaviors in respect to clothing related to specific values more often than to others. Her data partially confirmed a hypothesized relationship between the behavior of modesty and religious values. Amount of Religious Participation A significant positive relationship between amount of religious participation and modesty in dress was found by Huber (1962) and Trexler (1968). The subjects in both studies were college students; the former were at Ohio State University and the latter were at Michigan State 16 17 University. Both measured religious participation by attendance at religious services and participation in various religious and church-sponsored activities. Huber measured modesty by responses to 10 statements about dress. Trexler measured modesty by responses to types of body exposure: extreme arm exposure with three degrees of leg and neck exposure in garments for social events and neck coverage with three degrees of leg and arm coverage in garments for religious events. Also observed by Trexler was that The reactions to all the costumes by the entire sample indicated a tendency for greater acceptance if the dress was to be worn by others, rather than themselves. . . . Moderate exposure in dress [for social situations] was generally accepted by the students for themselves. . . . For worship service, costumes with leg cover-up [the knee not totally covered by the skirt] combined with variations in arm exposure were accepted by a majority of the students. Costumes with moderate arm exposure [arm covered to mid-point of upper arm] combined with variations of leg exposure were also accepted by a large portion of the students. Dress with moderate arm exposure and cover-up leg met with more approval for worship. (p. 79-80) Wheeler (1984) found a significant relationship to exist between attitude toward clothing and degree of religiosity, measured by church attendance and regular reading of the Bible. Her subjects were Mennonite women in Ohio and Indiana. Attitudes toward contemporary dress consisted of re5ponses to sets of bipolar adjectives pertaining to photographs of a dress, a sweater, jeans, and a miniskirt. 18 No significant relationship was found between modesty/ conservatism in dress and amount of religious participation in studies conducted by Engelbrecht (1963), Kleinline (1967), and Shivalier (1982). The subjects in Engelbrecht's and Shivalier's studies were female high school students, the former in Ohio and the latter in Georgia. Kleinline's subjects were from three branches of the Mennonite Church (Old Mennonite, Evangelical Mennonite, and General Conference Mennonite) and lived in Virginia, Indiana, and Ohio. Engelbrecht measured modesty by responses to 20 statements about clothing; a few of these statements were similar to the ones used by Huber. Shivalier measured modesty by responses to statements taken from a revision of Creekmore's scale of modesty in dress. Kleinline measured conservativeness in dress by responses to certain types of dress, such as head-coverings and dresses with buttons, worn by her subjects. Engelbrecht and Kleinline measured religious participation by how often the subject went to church and participated in religious activities. A strong negative relationship between modesty in dress and religious participation was found by Williams (1974). Her sample consisted of single female undergraduate students at Oklahoma State University. Modesty in dress was measured by responses to eight statements concerning attitudes towards different types of women's garments; amount of religious participation was measured by responses to questions about religious upbringing, attendance at 19 religious services, participation at church social activities, and diligence in following the doctrine of their church. Religious Affiliation Kleinline (1967) found that, for Mennonite women belonging to three different branches, conservativeness in dress was influenced by church branch, although not always significantly. The analysis of data showed that members of the Old Mennonite branch were the most conservative in their dress. Wheeler (1984), who also studied Mennonite women, found a relationship to exist between attitude toward clothing and liberalness of church doctrine, measured by the branch of the Mennonite Church with which the subject was affiliated (Old Order Amish, Old Mennonite, and General Conference Mennonite). Trimble (1972) and Shivalier (1982) found no significant relationship between religious affiliation and modesty in dress. The Catholic Church was one of the denominations to which the subjects belonged in Trimble's study. Religious Conviction/Commitment Dwyer (1964) studied clothing preferences (i.e., color intensity and chroma, size of fabric pattern, and style of garments to be worn for three different occasions) of female students of various religious backgrounds at the 20 University of Illinois. She found two significant relationships for her Catholic respondents: Only for sports clothing was there a significant relationship between degree of religious commitment and conservatism in the choice of fabric color and design and garment style. The relationship was highly significant for the total group and for the Catholic respondents. . . . There was a significant relationship between family size and conservatism in the selection of clothing to wear to church and a dance for the total group and for the Catholic respondents. (p. 49) Religious commitment was measured by attendance at religious services, religious education, reading and study habits, and public acceptance or rejection of a faith. Shivalier (1982) found that depth of religious conviction was significantly related to modesty in dress; the correlation was positive and on the low side. Orthodoxy A positive relationship between orthodoxy and conservatism—modesty in dress was reported by Christiansen and Kernaleguen (1971) and Trimble (1972). Christiansen and Kernaleguen found significant positive relationships between orthodoxy and total conservatism-modesty and its four components: body exposure, style, length, and fit. Trimble, found this relationship to exist between orthodoxy and total conservatism-modesty and only two components: body exposure and length. The subjects in the first study were single female Mormon college students in Utah; the subjects in the second study were female Christian students at Florida State University. Christiansen and Kernaleguen 21 used Vernon's Church Orthodoxy Scale to measure orthodoxy, whereas Trimble measured orthodoxy by responses to several statements about Christian beliefs and several questions about religious practices of the subjects. In both studies conservatism-modesty was measured by paired line drawings of complete female figures which differed only in one type of garment aspect, i.e. body exposure, style, length, and fit; the subject was to indicate which of the two they would select for themselves. Griesman (1966) found that orthodoxy was highly correlated with behavior in respect to clothing, and that attitude about clothing was highly correlated with behavior with respect to clothing. Her subjects were female students at Andrews University, in Michigan, a school affiliated with the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Orthodoxy was measured by an adaptation of Vernon's Church Orthodoxy Scale. She measured behavior in respect to clothing by responses to four questions, each dealing with certain aspects of clothing. Attitude about clothing was measured by responses to statements adapted from Ellen White's writings about clothing; Mrs. White was a leader in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Views of the Catholic Church Waln (1965) investigated written Jewish-Christian comments about modesty in women's dress primarily found in periodical literature between 1900 and 1964. She 22 concluded that "these comments seemed to indicate that although churches were interested in promoting modest dress of women, the opposing force of fashion had brought about the realization of the futility of their endeavors" (p. 82). She noted that Comments originating from the Catholic Church were more numerous than those from the Jewish and Protestant sectors. The abundance could be due to the numerous Catholic periodicals accessible, but perhaps the weight placed on Catholic comments in this investigation could be an indication of a different position held by the Catholic Church concerning its role in regulating the dress of women. (p. 79) She also stated that "the Catholic Church realized the power of fashion and recommended that a joint effort by all priests and bishops be undertaken to combat the evil of immodest dress" (p. 81). In addition, she noted that comments and campaigns promoting modesty in women's dress were observed as recently as 1962. Brook (1966) studied historical documents that expressed the views of religious leaders concerned with dress in several religions and many denominations. These documents included journals, minutes of meetings, compiled histories, official publications of the church, and studies of religious groups by those outside the group. She also sent questionnaires to a variety of religious leaders in order to analyze their viewpoints on certain aspects of the dress of members. She concluded that, in general, Religion has played a role both in the past and present in attempting to influence dress and adornment. However, emphasis of religious leaders concerning dress and adornment has changed . . . but responses to questionnaire items reflected that there was still 23 concern and an attempt to influence on the part of religious leadership. (p. 91-92) She found that since the thirteenth century, with exceptions in the sixteenth century, popes in the Catholic Church have opposed immodesty and excesses in dress. She concludes that views, which appear to be only papal ones expressed through 1930, "tended to indicate that although there has been a decline in comments on excesses and extravagances, modesty remained of importance" (p. 46). Summary Researchers in the clothing and textiles profession have studied modesty in dress. Significant relationships between modesty in dress and religious variables have been found, although not all the findings agree. These variables include religious values, amount of religious participation, religious affiliation, religious conviction/commitment, and orthodoxy. Very few studies have been conducted relating modesty in dress to the Catholic faith. CHAPTER IV. METHODOLOGY Selection of Methods The major objective of this study was to examine views of Catholics who expressed concern about modesty in lay women's dress contained in literature from 1950 to the present. Two minor objectives were (1) to examine the relationship between Catholic views on modesty and the views of the Church on lay women, and (2) to examine the relationship between Catholic views on modesty and changes in fashion. Due to the historical nature of this study, two unobtrusive research methods were utilized: content analysis and the analysis of existing research. Content Analysis Content analysis was used to analyze literature which contains Catholic views expressing concern about modesty in lay women's dress from 1950 to 1990. As the name implies, content analysis is used to analyze the content of communications. Specifically, "content analysis is a research technique for the objective, systematic, and quantitative description of the manifest content of communication" (Berelson, 1952, p. 18). 24 25 Content analysis was used to collect data to answer research questions 1, 2, and 3. The variables in these questions were (1) levels within the Catholic Church expressing concern about modesty in lay women's dress, (2) types of lay women's dress considered to be immodest and modest, and (3) sanctions used to promote modesty and discourage immodesty in lay women's dress. Selection of Period The literature was taken from the period 1950—1990. There are three reasons for selecting this period. First, this period covers the years before, during, and after the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), which may be viewed as an impetus for change in the Catholic Church. Second, researching this period updates the works of Waln (1965) and Brook (1966), whose research on modesty in dress and religion included some Catholic literature, written, for the most part, prior to the start of the Second Vatican Council. Third, it is a manageable size. The researcher originally wanted to examine Catholic literature on modesty in women's dress in the twentieth century; this ninety-year period would have Yielded too much material for the researcher to collect and analyze. Locating Catholic Literature Catholic written comment is found in literature such as speeches, books, letters, articles, and editorials. 26 Periodical literature and books that contain Catholic views expressing concern about modesty in lay women's dress were found with the aid of appropriate indexes. The indexes used in finding Catholic periodical literature were Catholic Periodical Index (1950-1967) and Catholic Periodical and Literature Index (1968-1990). Catholic Periodical Index and Guide to Catholic Literature merged in 1968 to form Catholic Periodical and Literature Index. Books were found with the aid of Guide to Catholic Literature (1950—1967) and Catholic Periodical and Literature Index (1968-1990). Relevant Catholic document references were found in the indexes by using key words referring to modesty in lay women's dress. The key words used varied within and across indexes. These key words are listed in Appendix B. The document references were then combined into a master list composed of 161 titles. The first attempt at obtaining copies of the documents on the master list was made at the Michigan State University Library. Since the MSU Library had few of the documents to make copies of, the researcher obtained most of the copies through the Interlibrary Loan service at the MSU Library and by visits to Catholic libraries. A listing of periodicals in Michigan libraries was consulted to determine which Catholic libraries had the periodicals which were still needed. The researcher then visited the libraries of Madonna University, Aquinas College, both in Michigan, and University of Notre Dame, a relatively 27 close school in Indiana. The researcher was unable to obtain only 7 of those documents on the master list. Once a copy of the Catholic document was obtained, it was scanned to make certain it contained Catholic views expressing concern about modesty in lay women's dress during 1950-1990. This requirement excluded 29 documents on the master list. Also during this scan, if a complete reference was found to a document that was not on the master list, it was added and searched for at the above mentioned libraries. Additional steps were taken to locate Catholic documents that were not on the master list. The researcher used appropriate headings on the computerized card catalog at MSU library to locate other Catholic literature. She found several Catholic bibliographies, including one on the Second Vatican Council. From the card catalog and these bibliographies, she identified several potential sources of documents at the MSU library. The Pope Speaks, a magazine that prints recent documents of the pope and other major church documents in English, was recognized as a potential source of documents. Every issue contains not only a table of contents for that issue but also a log or guide which gives bibliographic information on some recent papal documents published in other sources. The researcher looked through the table of contents and the logs or guides in all the issues of The Pope Speaks for documents pertaining to 28 modesty in women's dress. The MSU library did not have the first two volumes in their collection; these volumes were found at the Notre Dame library. Also recognized as potential sources of Catholic views were the National Catholic Almanac (1951-1968) and the Catholic Almanac (1969—1991), as they contain news briefs of events that happened the previous year. These news briefs, as well as other information in the almanac, are indexed. The researcher looked in the index of each volume for information pertaining to modesty in women's dress. The MSU Library did not have the volumes of Catholic Almanac for the years 1951-1958 in their collection; these volumes were found at the Notre Dame library. Computerized card catalogs were utilized to search for literature on modesty at each library mentioned above. Before the researcher went to Notre Dame, she made a scan for incomplete references to other documents that contained Catholic views on modesty in women's dress. Names, dates, and publications were recorded on a list. She looked for these references on the computerized card catalog. A few pamphlets and a book were found during this search. While at Notre Dame the researcher also looked at the English weekly edition of the daily Latin Vatican newspaper L' Osservatore Romano. Several incidents involving immodest women's dress at the Vatican had been reported in other documents and the researcher wanted to find more information on these incidents. Copies of the 29 newspaper were examined for the week of the incident, as well as the week before and after the incident; nothing was reported in this edition of the newspaper. Information was requested from diocesan archives on defunct modesty groups that were once headquartered within their diocese. A letter was sent to the archives of the archdiocese of Chicago requesting information on the Supply the Demand for the Supply (SDS) Modesty Crusade, which was once a part of the Chicago Inter—Student Catholic Action. The archives responded that they had no information on SDS. The researcher telephoned the archives in Belleville, Illinois, for information on the Marylike Modesty Crusade, which had been headquartered at St. Cecilia's Church, Bartelso, Illinois. A letter was sent upon the archives' request, but they did not respond nor did they answer her phone calls. A telephone call was then made to St. Cecilia's Church. The person with whom the researcher talked said that the only information they had on the Marylike Crusade was a very short article written in their Centennial book; they were unable to find any more information when they compiled their book. The researcher was referred to a woman who had posed in a dress for the Marylike Crusade, but she was unable to supply the researcher with any more information. All of the issues of the Catholic magazine Divine L232 were obtained through Interlibrary Loan on microfilm. The researcher scanned the table of contents of each issue 30 for articles on modesty plus letters to the editor on modesty. A number of articles and letters to the editor on modesty in lay women's dress were found in this magazine. The researcher made a second scan of her copies of documents for references to other documents on modesty. In several documents a view would be quoted but would not have a bibliographic citation. This was especially true of views expressed by the pope. A second trip was made to the Notre Dame library to look for these quotes and the volumes of The Pope Speaks and National Catholic Almanac that were not in the collection at the MSU library. Two hundred and ten Catholic documents were used in this study; they are listed in Appendix C. It should be noted that the total number of documents existing in the population is not known. Thus, conclusions must be limited to the documents reviewed in this study. Locating Secular Literature During the first screening of the Catholic literature, references were found to secular news articles on Catholic views on modesty in women's dress. This led the researcher to believe that other secular articles on the subject could be found. Several indexes for general periodicals were used in order to find more article references. Bound indexes used were The New York Times Index (1950-1990) and Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature (1950-1990). Database indexes used were Infotrac and Newspaper Index. 31 Indexes to the magazine Time were also consulted. They were found in paper form either behind the December issues or as a supplement and on microfilm at the beginning of the January and July issues. Only the indexes for 1950 through 1962 were used, as they appeared to cease publication in 1963. With the help of the above mentioned indexes and the key words listed in Appendix B, 43 documents were found in secular sources that contained views of Catholics on modesty in women's dress. These documents are listed in Appendix D. Although it is not known whether the documents were written by members of the Catholic Church, they are used in this study as they report events involving modesty in women's dress that either Catholic publications did not report or were not indexed by the Catholic indexing services used in this study. It should be noted, however, that several news stories in The New York Times appeared to be press releases from the Vatican. Data Collection After screening, each document was read in its entirety by the researcher. If the document contained views of Catholics who expressed concern about modesty in lay women's dress, 1950 to 1990, it was given an identification number and included in the sample. Some documents were found to be printed more than once or were condensed forms of other documents. When the researcher was able to obtain 32 the original printing of the document, it was counted as a separate document. Two hundred and fifty-three documents from Catholic and secular sources were used in the sample. The documents were read again and data were collected. This information was: (a) the year the document was printed, (b) the type of document, (0) the year the view was originally expressed, and, if applicable, dates the View was printed again, (d) the level within the Catholic Church of the person expressing his or her views, (e) views about what constituted modest and immodest lay women's dress, and (f) sanctions mentioned to promote modesty and discourage immodesty in lay women's dress. As some of the documents, or the views expressed in them, were printed more than once, rules for dating the documents and views were established. First, if a View or document was printed more than once, both the year of the original and the year of the subsequent printing were recorded. This even applied to views and documents whose original printings either the researcher could not obtain or read because they were written in a foreign language. Second, when the original printing could not be obtained and the year of the original printing was not given in the subsequent printings, the year of the original printing was assumed to be the same as the year of the second printing. Only views which were made in the period 1950-1990 was included in the data. This limitation omitted 33 most references to the 1917 Code of Canon Law, as well as all verses from the Bible. It was noticed that some documents contained several people expressing their views, whereas other documents contained a single person who stated his or her view several times. In these situations, each person's views were gathered as data, but only once per person in each document. The level of those expressing concern who were named were confirmed by consulting two Catholic reference works: The Official Catholic Directory and American Catholic Who's Who. Nearly all the names of males in U.S. religious orders were confirmed in The Official Catholic Directory. Only a few of the names of lay men and lay women were found C in American Catholic Who's Who. The names of Sisters could not be found in either reference source. Neither source listed names of males in religious orders outside the U.S., although The Official Catholic Directory did list all those who were cardinals. Names not listed in these two sources were included in the data, as their numbers were small. Statistical Analysis of Data Data gathered for quantitative analysis of research questions 1 through 3 were: (a) the year the document was printed, (b) the level within the Catholic Church of the person expressing his or her views, (c) views about what constituted modest and immodest women's dress, and (d) sanctions mentioned to promote modesty and discourage 34 immodesty in women's dress. Frequency of categories appearing within the variables of level within the Church, dress regarded as modest and immodest, and sanctions mentioned were tallied. For example, categories in the variable of women's dress considered as immodest included garment attributes such as style, length, fit, and opacity of fabric. The chi square test was utilized to determine the significance of change within the frequency of categories before/during and after the Second Vatican Council. Analysis of Existing Research The analysis of existing research was essential for answering research questions 4 and 5. The View of women by the Catholic Church during 1950-1990 was examined to answer research question 4, the relationship between the view of women by the Catholic Church and Catholic views on modesty in women's dress. Examination of fashion changes during 1950-1990 was needed to answer research question 5, as changes in fashion may have influenced changes in views by Catholics on modesty in women's dress. Analysis of existing research was used for these two research questions for three reasons. First, these research questions were not the main focus of the study. Next, existing research was relatively easy to access. Last, time constraints of the study ruled out using content analysis for the study of fashion changes. 35 Views on Lay Women The works consulted for the views on lay women by the Catholic Church cover not only the period 1950—1990, but also the history of women in the Catholic Church, as much of the present view of women by the Church has to do with how they have been viewed over the centuries. Included in these works are articles, books, and writings of the Church hierarchy. Fashion Changes Research which records general changes in women's fashions that relate to modesty, such as skirt length and width, was sought for the time period 1950—1990. This research included theses and journal articles, as well as general fashion books and magazine articles. Theses were found with the aid of Textiles and Clothing Research Abstracts (1966-1978) and the annual listing of theses in Home Economics Research Journal after 1978. Journal articles were found with the help of The Clothing Index (1970-1979) and The Clothingyand Textile Arts Index (1980-1989). Magazine articles were found with the help of ACAD, a computer search for recent academic articles, at the MSU library. Assumptions It was assumed that the correct dates were given for views which are quoted. Although the researcher tried 36 to find the original printings of these views, in some cases she either was not able to obtain them or was not able to have them translated from a foreign language. When she was not able to find the original printing and no year was given, the original printing was assumed to be in the year of the second printing. It was assumed that the correct levels in the Church were given for those expressing their views. Although the researcher did double-check levels with names listed in the Official Catholic Directogy and American Catholic Who's Who, not all levels were listed in these reference books. Levels may also have changed from time written to time listed in the Directory. Limitations of the Study This study was a partial View of the Catholic Church's teaching on lay women's dress. Modesty in dress in the Catholic Church may be learned through oral tradition and religious education, neither of which were analyzed in this study. This study only used literature, both Catholic and secular, that was cited in indexing systems available to the researcher or in other literature already obtained by the researcher. This made it impossible to know the size of the universe of literature. This study used only documents in English. Documents written in other languages were used only if they could 37 be found already translated in English. An exception to this was a Spanish document that the researcher had translated by two competent Spanish speakers. Although several references were made to documents written in other languages, most of these documents were not located, as either the reference was too vague (such as no date or page number) or the reference did not explicitly state that the document contained views on modesty in lay women's dress. Due to the minor status of research questions 4 and 5, the researcher relied on existing research for the views of the Catholic Church on women, past and present and for the analysis of changes in women's fashions, 1950-1990. CHAPTER V. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS FOR RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1—3 Data for statistical analysis were collected by means of content analysis from 253 Catholic and secular documents containing views of Catholics who expressed concern about modesty in lay women's dress, published between 1950 and 1990. This information was: (a) the year the document was printed, (b) the type of document, (c) the year the view was originally expressed, and, if applicable, dates the View was printed again, (d) the level within the Catholic Church of the person expressing his or her views, (e) views about what constituted modest and immodest lay women's dress, and (f) sanctions used to promote modesty and discourage immodesty in lay women's dress. Description of the Literature Sample The literature sample consisted of 253 documents which contain Catholic views expressing concern about modesty in lay women's dress. Two hundred and ten of these documents were found in Catholic publications and 43 of these documents were found in secular sources. A list of these documents are in Appendices C and D, respectively. 38 39 Publication dates of documents Documents containing views on modesty in lay women's dress were found to be published throughout the forty-year period. Thirty-six of the documents were printed more than once or were versions of the same article. Each appearance of a document was counted separately. The publication dates of the documents are presented in five-year intervals in Table 1. More documents (78 documents or 30.8%) were found printed in the five-year span 1955-1959 than in any of the other time segments. Five documents were found published in the 1985-1990 time segment, the least number of documents found published in all the time segments. About 67% of the documents were printed before the closing of the Second Vatican Council. Types of documents A variety of types of documents were found to contain Catholic comment on modesty in women's dress. The types of documents used in this study found in Catholic and secular sources are presented in Figure 3. Documents found in Catholic sources were classified as feature stories, news stories, editorials, question and answer columns, letters to the editor, papal addresses, pastoral letters, sections of books, and miscellaneous. Editorials included editorials by editors and regular columns by columnists. Letters to the editor columns consisted of the columns, not the number of letters in the columns. Papal addresses 40 mmm mv OHN Honesz Hopes wO.N mm.m mm.m wH.m wv.ma wv.mH wm.om wN.mH m m mH mm vm av mh av MUCMEDUOQ mo HOQEDZ Hmuoa m H o m m m ma OH Hafisomm N 5 ma ma mm mg mm Hm UHHOSUMU ommdlmmma vmmalommfi mbmfllmbmH vbmHIOFOH mmmatmwmfl vwmatomma mmmfilmmmfi vmmHIOmmH ucmEDUOQ MO woudom conmflansm mucosboon mo nonasz mucossooo 0:» mo mouse coflumoflansm .F OHDMB mmousom “wasowm can oHHonumo eoum mucmEsooa wo momhe .m wusmflh sssssssssssss 42 were speeches made by the pope; pastoral letters were letters by cardinals and bishops. Sections of books were from books on Catholic etiquette, modesty, and Canon Law. Miscellaneous consisted of five short pieces entitled "miscellany," three pamphlets, two dress standards, two fictional stories, two plays, a fashion brief and a prayer. Secular documents were also grouped according to these categories. With the exception of news stories and the book on Canon Law, the Catholic documents expressed the opinions of their authors. Almost all secular documents, however, were news stories and did not blatantly express the opinions of their authors. Research Question 1 In Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, what levels within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church have expressed concern about modesty? The number of views expressing concern about modesty in lay women's dress in each level within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church is presented in five-year time intervals in Table 8, Appendix E. In each table in this appendix, numbers in parentheses represent the number of times specific views were found printed again in that time interval, whereas numbers in brackets represent the number of times specific views were found printed again in later time intervals. It should be noted that the number of views is greater than the number of documents used in this 43 study, as some documents contained views from more than one person. Also, some views were counted more than once when a reference was made to an earlier document that could not be obtained or was not in English. A simplified version of the information appears in Table 2. The number of views published in each level of the Church is shown graphically in Figure 4. The category "the Vatican" includes the pope, cardinals, and unspecified levels from within the Vatican. The heading "anonymous clergy" represents unnamed clergy. Other unnamed people whose views were published, such as writers of unsigned editorials, were classified as simply "anonymous" and may include some members of the clergy. The category "modesty crusades" is composed of the Supply the Demand for the Supply (SDS)/Chicago Inter-School Catholic Action (CISCA) Modesty Crusade and the Marylike Crusade, two modesty crusades found to be operating during part of this period. These Crusades are discussed in more detail in Appendices F and G, respectively, and include views of both the laity and clergy. Eight hundred and twenty-eight views on modesty in lay women's dress were published in the documents. Four hundred and fifty-one of these views (54%) were made by the clergy. Table 2 shows the number of views by each level within the Church that were published before/during the Second Vatican Council (1950-1965) and after the Council (1966-1990). In order to run the chi square test, the 44 Table 2. Frequency of Views Published by Level Within the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church Time View Published Before/during After Level Within the Council the Council the Church Category No. (%) No. g(%) The Vatican 86 (14.8) 42 (17.0) ArchbishOps/bishOps 102 (17.6) 30 (12.1) Monsignors/priests 137 (23.6) 46 (18.6) Anonymous clergy 7 ( 1.2) 1 ( 0.4) Sisters 16 ( 2.8) 7 ( 2.8) Brothers 0 ( 0.0) 1 ( 0.4) Lay men/boys 63 (10.9) 70 (28.3) Lay women/girls 45 ( 7.8) 30 (12.1) Modesty crusades* 62 (10.7) 6 ( 2.4) Anonymous 62 (10.7) 15 ( 6.1) Total 580 (100.1) 247 (100.2) *Note: Modesty Crusades are composed of both clergy and laity, men and women. 45 Hm>mq mo hnomwumo an aumwcoz co mzwfl> .v ousmfim own E 8:23.... 2.5; S .3552 .89.. me am >at20 msoE>coc< moonwato >Hwouo§ $9. RNN w>onxcoE >m4 monotq\wtoca_wco§ *- mtocbotm $0 w_.__m\coEo.$ >m._ fior 8228322202 mm m_e«w_w $0 waoE>coc< flow cmozm> och cam Tomm- ES-EO 65 55:5 _o>o._ >3 boo—dos. :o 255 46 categories of "sisters" and "brothers" were combined, as each frequency had to be greater then zero (see Siegel, 1956, p. 110). A significant difference was found in the number of views by the level within the Church hierarchy in these two periods, x’(8, N=828)=62.13, p>.01. With ' more views were the exception of the level "lay men/boys,' published by each level in the Church in the years before/during than after the Council. More views were published by the category "lay men/boys" after the Council because the editor of the magazine Divine Love, a layman, often published his views on modesty in women's dress. Research Question 2 In Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, what was considered modest dress and what was considered immodest dress? Views on styles of garments considered to be modest and immodest by Catholics will be discussed first. Other aspects of women's dress, such as cosmetics, head-coverings, and clothing worn in beauty contests, will be presented next. Finally, dressing according to occasion will be discussed. Styles of Garments Styles considered modest. The number of views expressed on styles of garments considered to be modest are shown in Table 9, Appendix E, in five-year time 47 intervals, and in a simplified version in Table 3. Since many views contained reference to the time and place in which clothing was worn, categories were created for clothing worn for different events. The category "general wear" includes garments which were specified as being modest or immodest if worn to any event or on the street, as well as garments which were not specified by event. The heading "fer work and sports" refers to clothing worn while doing house work and for recreation. The classification " any visit to church" pertains to clothing worn anytime inside a church, as for prayer, viewing the Blessed Sacrament, or attending formal church services; the category "attending formal church services" includes clothing worn only to formal services, namely confession, Holy Communion, and Mass. The heading "in the Vatican/papal audience" applies to clothing worn while touring Vatican buildings or while attending a papal address at the Vatican. To see which aspects of women's garments were thought to be modest during 1950-1990, the types of clothing in Table 9, Appendix E, were combined across time, event, and type of clothing to create categories of body de-emphasis and coverage, listed in Table 3. The category "covered upper arms" includes all styles of garments in which the sleeves covered at least the upper arm. For skirts and for pants, the heading "covered legs to knees" denotes styles of skirts and of pants which covered leg at least to the knee. 48 Table 3. Frequency of Styles of Women's Garments Considered to be Modest Time View Published Before/During After Body De-emphasis/ the Council the Council coverage Category No. (%) No. (%) Sheer fabric made opaque 9 ( 6.7) O ( 0.0) De-emphasized bust 10 ( 7.4) 0 ( 0.0) Covered shoulders 13 ( 9.6) 0 ( 0.0) Covered chest/back 32 (23.7) 0 ( 0.0) Covered upper arms 21 (15.6) 3 (21.4) Covered midriff 12 ( 8.9) O ( 0.0) Covered legs to knees with skirt 14 (10.4) 7 (50.0) Covered legs to knees with pants 24 (17.8) 4 y(28.6) Total 135 (100.1) 14 (100.0) 49 mammnmsoioo can ommuw>oo no >uomoumo Sn humocoz co msofl> .m ousmfim at w u_ newsman-f.— u32> no Eon—=52 as... $9. Elm Lona: votm>oo RFN xomn\bwono uoLm>oo mm l:tu_E noto>oo fiv- CEw \3 no. noto>00 flu 5030:” coco>oo w: 532 uo~_wchEo-mo wo- wbcma \3 no. noto>oo .wo Stonewaomuo cam Tome. Jam—yo: coho—£950 mucoELmG *0 mo_>am :0 mid; 50 A total of 149 views on what was thought to be modest dress was found in the documents, shown graphically by category in Figure 5. Garments which covered the chest and back were most often viewed as being modest (32 views or 22% of the total). Other garments frequently seen as modest were pants which covered the legs at least to the knees (28 views or 19%) and garments with sleeves which covered at least the upper arm (24 views or 16%). The number of views on styles of clothing considered to be modest before/during (1950—1965) and after (1966-1990) the Second Vatican Council are shown in Table 3. Most of the views, 93%, were published before/during the Council. More views were published in all garment categories before/during the Council. The chi square test was not applicable to the data in Table 3, as many cells had an expected frequency of less than 5 (see Siegel, 1956, p. 110). Styles considered immodest. The number of views on styles of garments considered to be immodest are shown in Table 10, Appendix E, in five-Year time intervals, and appear in a simplified version in Table 4. To find which aspects of women's garments were thought to be immodest during 1950-1990, the types of clothing in Table 10, Appendix E, were combined across time, event, and style of garment to create the categories of body emphasis and exposure found in Table 4. Categories of bodices are: "emphasized bust," which includes tight bodices and 51 Table 4. Frequency of Styles of Women's Garments Considered to be Immodest Time View Published Before/During After Body Emphasis/ the Council the Council exposure Category No. (%) No. _(%) Sheer fabric 33 ( 7.6) 20 ( 8.3) Nude-color fabric 10 ( 2.3) 0 ( 0.0) Emphasized bust 45 (10.5) 14 ( 5.8) Exposed chest/back 56 (13.1) 18 ( 7.4) Exposed upper arms 20 ( 4.7) 16 ( 6.6) Exposed upper arms/ chest/back 75 (17.5) 32 (13.2) Exposed midriff 50 (11.7) 15 ( 6.2) Exposed upper torso 2 ( 0.5) 2 ( 0.8) Emphasized hips 7 ( 1.6) 0 ( 0.0) Emphasized hips/thighs 45 (10.5) 25 (10.3) Exposed knees/thighs 86 (20.0) 100 (41.3) Total 429 (100) 242 (99.9) 52 mammnmem can mmmuo>ooca wo auomoumo an >umd©02 do msofl> .m musmfih who a_ qua—3:93."— mlo; .0 b02:5... Ea... *- otnmvouaz mow *0 Swan uofwmcaEm $5 $0- cuEtaE DEBEQEm $- $- QZLuoEwchEm mm , otnmatowcm fin Eta Lona: Dowoaxm omm Toma _. Jumbo—cg ooLoEmcoO «Em—Emmy Lo «23¢ :o 2.55 53 padded/pointed bras, "exposed chest/back," which is composed of low-cut fronts and low-cut backs, "exposed upper arms," which are sleeveless garments, "exposed upper arms/ chest/back," which consists of strapless, narrow-strap, off-the-shoulders, exposed shoulders, halter, tank top, sundress, and bra-dress styles of garments, and "exposed " which stands for topless garments. For skirts upper torso, and pants, the categories are: "emphasized hips," which means tight skirts, "emphasized hips/thighs," which includes all long pants, and "exposed knee/thigh," which consists of short skirts and all types of short pants. The number of views published by categories of body emphasis and exposure is shown graphically in Figure 6. Six hundred and seventy-one views were found to be printed on aspects of women's garments which Catholics considered to be immodest during the forty—year period, Table 4. The styles of garments that were most often criticized were skirts and pants that exposed the leg from the knee upwards (186 views or 28% of the total), followed by garments which exposed the upper arm along with the chest and/or back (107 views or 16%). Also frequently deplored were garments that exposed the chest and/or back (74 views or 11%) and long pants which covered at least the knees (70 views or 10%). The number of views expressed on these styles of garments before/during (1950-1965) and after (1966-1990) the Second Vatican Council are shown in Table 4. About 54 64% of the views were published before/during the Council. Chi square was not computed, as the test was not applicable to the data, since more than 20% of the cells have an expected frequency of less than 5 (Siegel, 1956). In all but two categories, the number of views published before/during the Council was greater than the number of views published after the Council. The number of views considering topless garments immodest were the same in both periods, whereas the number of views considering garments that exposed the upper legs were more numerous after the Council, as the miniskirt was fashionable. Comparing views on modest and immodest styles. Using chi square, a significant difference was found in the number of views published on modest and immodest styles before/during and after the Council, x’(2, N=820)=39.155, p>.01. Sixty-nine percent of the views on modest and immodest garment styles were published before/during the Council. Eighty-two percent of the views published were on what was considered to be immodest dress; this shows that modesty in dress is often defined by its Opposite. The views published in these documents show that Catholics were not always in agreement on what styles of garments were modest and immodest. In the case of longer pants, covering at least the knees, some saw them as modest whereas others saw them as immodest. The number of views published on longer pants seen as immodest, 70, is more than twice the number of views published on longer pants 55 viewed as modest, 28. These numbers, however, do not take into account the situation in which they are worn. Several reasons were given for the views against women wearing pants. Some, such as Wells (1974), thought that women wearing pants was going against Deuteronomy 22:5, "a woman shall not wear an article prOper to a man . . . for anyone who does such things is an abomination to the LORD, your God" (The New American Bible). Others saw pants, especially form-fitting ones, as calling attention to the female body (Oraze, 1977). Still others, while not condemning pants for casual wear, saw them as too casual and informal for wearing to Mass (McDonough, 1951). Catholics were also not unanimous in their views on the lengths of sleeves considered to be modest. Although 36 views were published against women wearing sleeveless garments, several views were published expressing approval of sleeveless garments (see Tables 9 and 10, Appendix E). According to one priest, All too often such [sleeveless] dresses give imprOper exposure around the breasts and shoulders and back. Sleeveless dresses and over-exposure usually go together. A woman just isn't fully dressed if, e.g., she has only a band over the shoulder. A sleeveless blouse may otherwise give respectful coverage, but it still allows for underarm exposure, which is not a pleasant sight, whether on woman or a man. And from certain angles, sleeveless garments allow one to get a glimpse of parts of the body that should not be seen. (Dominic, 1962, p. 63) A lay woman, who takes the opposite view, states "what is immoral about a bare arm I don't know" (Burton, 1955). 56 Other Aspects of Women's Dress A number of views were published on other types of lay women's dress behavior relating to modesty. These were views on: cosmetics and cosmetic surgery, head-coverings worn in church, and beauty contests. Cosmetics. Ten views were published on the use of cosmetics. Nine of these views were made before the Second Vatican Council, one was made after the Council. These views were in general agreement: if make-up was to be worn, it should only be done so to make one's self presentable or non-peculiar; it was not to be worn out of vanity or to entice men. Make-up was not to be applied heavily, especially by teens as their coloring was already beautiful. One priest asked that women refrain from wearing lipstick to Holy Communion, as apparently lipstick smears were left on the common cup (McDonough, 1951); this request may have been related to hygiene, not modesty. Cosmetic surgery. Six views were published on the use of cosmetic or plastic surgery for beauty's sake. All of these views were published in the 19505. A Jesuit priest was reported in Time_magazine as saying that plastic surgery was "good or evil, or neither, according to the purpose for which it is performed. . . . It is not wicked to want to improve one's looks" ("Beauty, right & wrong," 1959, p. 79). This line of thought was echoed by another priest: "If a new shape of nose will better serve the whole man (or more probably woman) either psychologically or 57 socially, and no harm is apprehended, it can be easily justified" ("Plastic surgery," 1959, p. 555). The latter priest quoted two discourses of Pope Pius XII on the subject and it was from these discourses that he formed his opinion. Head-coverings. Twenty-five views were published in the documents on the practice of women wearing hats or head-coverings to church. This practice had its roots in Biblical tradition and also was required by Canon Law. In I Corinthians 11:5-6, St. Paul wrote: Any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled brings shame upon her head, for it is one and the same thing as if she had had her head shaved. For if a woman does not have her head veiled, she may as well have her hair cut off. But if it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should wear a veil. (New American Bible) Canon 1262 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law states that while assisting at sacred rites "women should have their heads covered and should be modestly dressed, especially when they approach the Holy Table" (Bouscaren, Ellis, & Korth, 1963, p. 711). Eighteen of the views on head-coverings were published before the Council. Some of these views were published in answer to questions posed on whether Canon 1262 was still in effect and if it applied to all visits to church. While some thought the canon applied only to Mass, others believed that women should wear a head-covering anytime she enters a church. Several clergy wrote that it would be better for a woman to come to Mass hatless than to not come at all; all clergy that expressed views on 58 head-coverings, however, upheld the Canon. A few, both clergy and laity, said that hats were not being worn by very many women anymore. Two months before the Council commenced, a Sister was mentioned as wondering if "perhaps the coming Vatican Council might be willing to consider a change in the rule that women ought to cover their heads before entering a church" (Breig, 1962, p. 19). In an answer to her question, a lay man wrote that he doubted the matter was important enough to occupy the attention of the Council and thought that the matter would be left up to the bishops to decide individually. This same writer opined that many hats he saw worn to Mass were distracting: women would be less distracting in Mass bare-headed than wearing one of these hats (Breig, 1962). Seven of the views on head-coverings were published after the Council ended. On having to wear a head-covering anytime she entered a church, a lay woman wrote: Particularly in hot weather, we don't find hats any more comfortable than men do. What's that you said, Father? Why can't we always carry head scarves to tie on before we enter a church? You say lots of women wear them and they're becoming? Well, what kind of hat do you wear, Father? One that fits you and feels comfortable? Perhaps a homburg? Well, how would you like to switch to a peaked cap? Lots of men wear them and they're easy to carry. But would you feel at ease in it? Or would you feel as I do when I wear a head scarf—-like a fugitive from a rummage sale? (Hunter, 1967, p. 10) A lay man had his View printed three times. The man, a medical doctor, maintains: In spite of all the news stories to the contrary, the Catholic Church has NOT changed Her practice concerning women covering their hair in church. Since 59 her hair is part of the overall attractive physical image of woman, it is proper that she should cover her head in church so as not to be a distraction to others. (Pro, 1969, p. 7) An excerpt from a 1970 pastoral letter by Bishop Schexnayder printed in Divine Love, wondering why women were not wearing head-coverings, states: "it is not a matter of sin but it is an ancient rule from St. Paul's time--almost 2,000 years ago--and which has not been changed. He says it is a symbol 'done out of respect for the angels' [1 Corinthians 11:10]" (Schexnayder, 1970, p. 10). It should be noted that the Code of Canon Law was revised in 1983 and does not contain a canon equivalent to Canon 1262 of the 1917 Code. Beauty contests. Thirty-three views about beauty contests were printed before/during the Council, mostly from the clergy and lay men. These males were against beauty shows either because these shows put women's physical beauty on public display or because they emphasized outer beauty instead of inner beauty. Two women were also against beauty contests. Several lay women, until reprimanded by someone in the Church, saw no harm in entering the contests. One woman, however, defying orders from her archbishOp and the wishes of her mother, entered the Miss Universe pageant: "I have all the respect in the world for the archbishop and am sure he feels he's doing the right thing. But after all, it's 1959, and it's not going to be indecent or shady, and he should realize that" ("Archbishop y. redhead," 1959, p. 87). The woman later 60 dropped out of the contest, as she felt as though she was being held a prisoner by contest officials ("Sue & the charisma," 1959). Ten views on beauty contests were published after the Council. Nine of these views had also been published before the Council and were by two males, one a priest and the other a lay man. The other View was from a lay woman. All of these Catholics were against beauty shows for the above mentioned reasons. Dressing According to Occasion A number of views were found in these documents that were concerned with lay women dressing for the occasion. This meant that women should reflect the decorum of the occasion through the decorum of their dress. This decorum, respect, and dignity in dress was especially important in church services, where casual dress was thought to be slighting God. Seventeen views on decorous dress were found to be published before/during the Council and 5 views were found published after the Council. Research Question 3 In Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, which sanctions have been used to promote modest behavior and discourage immodest behavior in women's dress? 61 Positive sanctions The number of comments mentioning various positive sanctions are presented in five-year intervals in Table 11, Appendix E, and in a simpler version in Table 5. The various positive sanctions were grouped into categories for further analysis. These categories are: "general actions," which stands for unspecified actions of modesty " which consists of asking retailers groups, "buying habits, and manufacturers of clothing to make and/or sell modest clothing, tagging modest clothing in stores with special modesty tags, refusing to buy immodest clothing, and designing modest clothing for clothing manufacturers, "defined modest dress," which includes drawing up dress standards, and holding fashion shows, "publicized modesty in dress," which consists of holding workshops, offering literature, writing letters to the editors of periodicals, holding talks and discussions, demonstrating or marching, and praising or encouraging modesty groups, and "influenced others," which refers to prayer and to positive examples and influence from children, parents, educators, peers, and priests. A number of these sanctions were put into practice by the Supply the Demand for the Supply Modesty Crusade and the Marylike Modesty Crusade, which are discussed in more detail in Appendices F and G, respectively. A total of 325 views mentioning positive sanctions were published during 1950—1990 in the documents. The 62 Table 5. Positive Sanctions Used to Promote Modesty Time View Published Before/During After Positive Sanction The Council The Council Category No. y(%) No. y(%) General actions 16 ( 7.5) 0 ( 0.0) Buying habits 55 (25.7) 6 ( 5.4) Defined modest dress 40 (18.7) 0 ( 0.0) Publicized modesty in dress 64 (29.9) 70 (63.1) Influenced others 39 (18.2) 35 (31.5) Total 214 (100.0) 111 (100.0) Table 6. Negative Sanctions Used to Discourage Immodesty Time View Published Before/During After Negative Sanction The Council The Council Category No. (%) No. y(%) General action/rules 62 (79.5) 13 (39.4) Denied visiting/schooling 8 (10.3) 11 (33.3) Denied sacraments 8 (10.3) 9 (27.3) Total 78 (100.1) 33 (100.0) 64 number of views in each category is shown in Figure 7 and Table 5. Forty-one percent of these views mentioned positive sanctions which publicized modesty in dress. Two hundred and fourteen views were published before/during the Council (1950-1965) and one hundred and eleven were published after the Council (1966-1990), as shown in Table 5. Using the chi square test, the difference in the numbers of views before/during and after the Council by category was found to be significant, x’(4, N=325)=70.1, p>.01. Negative sanctions The number of views mentioning negative sanctions are presented in five-year intervals in Table 12, Appendix E, and in a simpler version in Table 6. The negative sanctions were grouped into categories for further analysis. These categories are: "general actions/rules" which stands for unspecified or general actions by clergy, modesty groups, and governments, "denied visitation/schooling," which refers to denial of visiting the Vatican as a tourist and attending parochial schools, and "denied sacraments," which consists of denial of entrance to church, as well as denial of communion and confession to those immodestly dressed. A total of 111 views mentioning negative sanctions were found to be published during the forty-year period; they are shown by category in Figure 8 and Table 6. 66 Seventy-eight comments were published before/during the Council and thirty-three were published after the Council, Table 6. Using the chi square test, the difference in the numbers of comments by category before/during and after the Council was found to be significant, x’(2, N=111)= 17.2, p>.01. In two categories, however, more views were found to be made after the Council. These categories were "denied sacraments" and "denied visiting/schooling," with 1 and 3 more views made after the Council, respectively. Not all commentators agreed on the use of negative sanctions, especially the denial of sacraments to those immodestly dressed. A priest thought that as long as bare-headed women were modestly dressed, they should not be refused communion, as "the refusal of Communion is a terrible thing and should never take place publicly except for a most serious and evident reason" (Danagher, 1953, p. 259). In the case of Father Griese, a priest who was removed from Sacred Heart Church in Dayton after twice refusing communion to a man wearing shorts, Monsignor Breslin of St. Charles Borromeo Church, Dayton, commented, "I don't think we should use the sacrament as a weapon to make a point" ("A Catholic taste," 1989, p. 27). Father Griese also, from the pulpit, told a couple wearing shorts to leave his church, as they were not welcome ("A Catholic taste," 1989; "Parishioners protest," 1989). According to a news story printed after Father Griese's removal, 67 Archbishop Pilarczyk had told him to talk privately with those who violated his dress code; Griese was removed because he challenged Pilarczyk's authority publicly and violated a written order ("Ohio priest," 1991). Summary The views of Catholics who expressed concern about modesty in lay women's dress as published in the documents used in this study show that there was a concerted effort made by some in the Church, laity as well as clergy, to promote modest behavior and discourage immodest behavior in lay women's dress. A majority of these efforts were to promote modesty, including positive buying habits, defining modesty in dress, publicizing modesty in dress, and influencing others. Rarely were the sacraments denied to those who dressed immodestly. Two modesty crusades, the Supply the Demand for the Supply Modesty Crusade and the Marylike Crusade, were in operation during the 19505 and 19605. Although a number of views were found in the documents, it is not known how representative of a sample they are of the views held by the Catholic population as a whole. Since the researcher looked only at those views expressing concern with modesty in dress, it is not known how many Catholics thought modesty to be an unimportant issue. It is also not known how representative the periodicals and books from which the documents were taken are of the 68 Catholic press as a whole. No attempt was made to classify periodicals as liberal or conservative in Catholic thought. Differing views were held as to what was considered modest and immodest dress for lay women. This was especially true for longer pants and sleeveless garments. Skirts and pants that exposed the legs above the knees were the garments that received the most condemnation, with only a few views found to disagree. The majority of views were published before/during the Second Vatican Council (1950-1965), even though it is a shorter period than the years after the Council (1966-1990). The number of views published on styles of garments considered modest and immodest were more numerous in the years before/during the Council for all categories, with the exception of skirts and pants that showed the legs above the knees, as the miniskirt was in fashion in the latter part of the 19605. Although it is not known what influence'the Council directly had on views on modesty in lay women's dress, it should be realized that changes were made to update the dress of religious women as a result of the Council (see Baer & Mosele, 1970; Donze, 1973; Lucas, 1971) and this may have had an influence on views on modesty. All levels within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church expressed concern about modesty in lay women's dress, although some levels expressed concern more often than others. The clergy expressed the majority of concern, 69 55% of the views, although this might be due to the ease in which their views were published in the periodicals and books consulted in this study. With the exception of the level "lay men and boys," more views were published by each level before/during the Council. A lay man who was an editor of a Catholic magazine published his Views on modesty several times in the years after the Council. CHAPTER VI. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE VIEW OF LAY WOMEN BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND CATHOLIC COMMENTS ON MODESTY IN LAY WOMEN'S DRESS In this study, research question 4 asks: how have lay women been viewed by the Catholic Church in the period 1950-1990, and how does the view of lay women by the Catholic Church relate to the views of Catholics on modesty in lay women's dress? This question will be answered by analyzing views of the Church found in existing research, such as news articles, books, writings of the Church hierarchy, and by analyzing views of Catholics in the 253 Catholic and secular documents that were content analyzed in this study. The View of Lay Women by the Catholic Churchl 1950-1990 The Catholic Church has primarily viewed lay women as wives and mothers. Although the Church has encouraged women to work in all sectors of society, women are barred from the ministerial hierarchy of the Church, as they cannot be ordained to Holy Orders. However, it should be pointed out that there are a number of Catholics, clergy, Religious, and laity, male and female, who believe that women should be ordained to the priesthood (see Coriden, 1977). 70 71 Views Before the Second Vatican Council Before the Council, many in the Church hierarchy thought that a woman's dignity was to be derived through motherhood. Mary, the mother of Jesus, was held up as an example for women to follow. Bishop Mussio of Steubenville, Ohio, wrote: If in pagan times the woman was mere chattel and treated like an animal, it was because man knew her as nothing more. Christianity raised womanhoood to her rightful place in the society of God's children. The woman now had Mary as her companion, the Lady most pure as her model. (Mussio, 1955, p. 54) In a 1956 address to the Federation of Italian Women, "The dignity of women," Pope Pius XII felt it necessary to defend and explain the Church's doctrine on the dignity of women. He stated that men and women "have an absolute equality in personal and fundamental values, but different functions which are complementary and superbly equivalent, and from them arise the various rights and duties of the one and the other" (p. 370). He added that the primary function of woman is motherhood: Her very physical structure, her spiritual qualities, the richness of her sentiments, combine to make woman a mother, to such an extent that motherhood represents the ordinary way for woman to reach her true perfection (even in the moral order) and, at the same time, to achieve her double destiny--that on earth and that in heaven. (p. 370) This thinking is echoed by Pope John XXIII in a 1960 address to delegates attending the World Congress of the Federation of Young Catholic Women (Foy, 1961) and in a 1961 address to pilgrims (Foy, 1962). In the 1961 address, he noted that "women best employ their natural talents in such fields 72 as teaching and social welfare and in the religious and apostolic spheres, 'thus transforming their occupations into many forms of spiritual motherhood'" (Foy, 1962, p. 80). Women could participate in activities outside the home and church, but, once again, they were to be mothers. Fink (1955), a lay man who wrote an article praising the efforts of women in church and society, stated that "the Church does not object to women entering politics and business, so long as they remember their double objectives of saving their own souls and exerting a maternal influence on man" (p. 53). Views of the Second Vatican Council A number of documents were promulgated by the Second Vatican Council, several of which touch on the role of lay women in the Church. One of these documents was the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, also known as Gaudium et Spes. In section 29 of the Constitution, the Council viewed all types of discrimination, including sexual, as contrary to God's will and lamented that personal rights of humans, including women, were not universally honored. Section 60 states: Women are now employed in almost every area of life. It is appropriate that they should be able to assume their full proper role in accordance with their own nature. Everyone should acknowledge and favor the proper and necessary participation of women in cultural life. (Abbott, 1966, p. 267) 73 The Council was ambiguous on what it believed the nature of women to be. In section 52, on marriage and the family, they wrote that "the children, especially the younger among them, need the care of their mother at home. This domestic role of hers must be safely preserved, though the legitimate social progress of women should not be underrated on that account" (Abbott, 1966, p. 257). Thus the Council believed motherhood to be a role for lay women, although not the only role. In another document, Apostolicam Actuositatem or the Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity, the Council stated that "since in our times women have an ever more active share in the whole life of society, it is very important that they participate more widely also in the various fields of the Church's apostolate" (Abbott, 1966, p. 500). A footnote to this passage in Abbott (1966) mentions that this statement was inserted in the final drafting and that the Council had in mind to highlight the contribution of women in the Church whenever the role of laity was discussed. Views Since the Second Vatican Council Although the Council did not believe motherhood to be the only role for lay women, the Church's view of lay women has been slow to change. Two women comment on this slow change in relation to women's dress. Hunter, a lay woman, made this point: 74 Since Vatican II, the Church has taken giant strides into the twentieth century. But how long must we wait before those "winds of change" erase the ancient, unreasoning prejudice against women still prevalent among various senior members of the clergy? Their grim insistence that we observe archaic norms of dress betrays ignorance of our busy lives in today's modern, mobile society. Worse, by their interpretation of "modesty," they discourage women and girls from entering God's house. (1967, p. 10) Sister MacLeod, a member of the Pontifical Study Commission on Women, told of plans for a liturgical celebration for the International Year of the Woman in St. Peter's Basilica. When it was suggested that women should take part in the ceremony by reading the epistles, "there was worry that they might appear before the Holy Father in short skirts such as the film star Claudia Cardinale had worn [in 1967] for a papal audience" (O'Grady, 1975, p. 4). The documents produced by the Council did not express a change in the Church's stand on women priests, nor have other Church documents produced since the Council. In fact, in 1976 the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith drew up Inter insigniores, which declared that women could not become ordained into the priesthood; this declaration was approved by Pope Paul VI. They reasoned that women should be excluded from the priesthood because Jesus called men to be the Twelve and that the Apostles carried on this tradition. In 1983 the Code of Canon Law was revised, replacing the 1917 Code of Canon Law. According to Coriden, Green, and Heintschel (1985), there was "a genuine effort in the 1983 Code to eradicate many expressions of sexual 75 discrimination found in the former one." They pointed out that women can now serve in tribunals as judges, be authorized to preach, and exercise pastoral care of local churches. The revised Code, however, does not allow women to be ordained. Even as recently as 1988, the Church has insisted on the motherhood role for women. In that year, Pope John Paul II issued an apostolic letter entitled Mulieris dignitatem or "On the Dignity and Vocation of Women." He gave the example of Mary as "woman-mother of God" as a model for everyone to follow: The dignity of every human being and the vocation corresponding to that dignity find their definitive measure in union with God. Mary, the woman of the Bible, is the most complete expression of this dignity and vocation. For no human being, male or female, created in the image and likeness of God, can in any way attain fulfillment apart from this image and likeness. (p. 15) John Paul II, however, also viewed the dignity and vocation of women as equal to but different from that of men: The personal resources of femininity are certainly no less than the resources of masculinity: they are merely different. Hence a woman, as well as a man, must understand her "fulfillment" as a person, her dignity and vocation on the basis of these resources, according to the richness of the femininity which she received on the day of creation and which she inherits as an expression of the "image and likeness of God" that is specifically hers. (p. 22) He listed the two contradicting dimensions of women's vocation, that of mother and virgin, as following the example of Mary. In the light of the Gospel, they acquire their full meaning and value in Mary, who as a virgin became the mother of the Son of God. These two dimensions 76 of the female vocation were united in her in such a way that one did not exclude the other but wonderfully complemented it. (p. 30) The Relationship Between The View of Women and Views on Modesty A relationship was found between the View of lay women by the Church and views on modesty in lay women's dress in the 253 documents that were content analyzed. This relationship is: modest dress does not call attention to a woman's body, thus men will treat her with dignity and respect, which she mainly receives through motherhood. Immodest dress, on the other hand, calls attention to a woman's body, thus men will treat her as a sex object. This relationship was found in the views throughout the forty-year period, in documents by religious and laity, men and women. The following paragraphs are selected quotes from the documents that illustrate this relationship. A priest pointed out that a woman has awesome power, as she is able to cooperate with God in the process of creating a new human life. A woman's dignity is derived from this power. Therefore, a woman who displays her physical beauty before men through immodest dress diminishes "her inner dignity, her closeness to God, the tender and loving and truly beautiful character God has given her" (McGloin, 1951, p. 67). A Sister, reporting on a fashion show dedicated to Mary and modesty at her school, penned: 77 Mary is ever before us as the exemplar of neatness, appropriateness and modernity in this matter of wearing apparel. So long as our young Catholic girls choose their wardrobes with the Mother of Grace and gracefulness beside them they will show forth to a world which lives to dress that only insofar as woman dictates the standards of modesty, dignity and the art of homemaking, will men become God-oriented. (Marie, 1954, p. 537). In "Open Letter to Catholics on Modesty," Auxiliary Bishop Curtis wrote that modesty "sets aside appeal to the flesh or to the physical beauty and asks that its owner be accepted as a person and not just as a body. It says clearly: 'I am a person, not just a thing'" (Oraze, 1961, p. 9). Modest dress thus signifies women as people, not as sex objects. A lay woman, in an article directed to parents on modesty, wrote: There is nothing wrong with a pretty figure. It ig attractive, and any boy with eyes in his head can see this when he walks by. It can arose in him no more than a wholesome wave of admiration: "Hey, nice!" But the same girl wearing clothes that suggest more, in a manner that suggests more, can arouse entirely different feelings in him which, if he is trying to be chaste, precipitate a sudden, unexpected struggle for his imagination and emotions. (Newland, 1965, p. 44) An anonymous man wrote a letter to the editor of Divine Love, asking the editor to speak out against the miniskirt. He wrote "we men are supposed to have, and WANT to have respect for our women. But many of them make it very difficult for us when they shove their nakedness at us on all sides, even in Church" (Oraze, 1968, p. 10). In an article on his desire that women be more modest, Monsignor Berendt wrote: 78 Much of a woman's influence for good or evil is exercised in her manner of dress, for a man, seeing a woman, can have holy and appreciative thoughts of her and other women, or he can have degrading thoughts, and in many cases, brutal desires toward her and other women. . . . Women are not chattel, robots, or slaves to any individuals or institutions. Given the opportunity, they have immeasurable talent and resources to offer humanity, and, in many instances are superior to men in various fields of endeavor. But if they are to take their rightful place in society, both secular and religious, they will make great strides in deserving and acquiring our admiration, respect, and cooperation if they act like ladies striving for the fulfillment of mature womanliness instead of the babyish trait of undressing in public. (1977, p. 15) In a recent article on modesty Reverend Scanlon wrote that Just as it is wrong for a man to use his physical strength to lord it over the woman, so it is wrong for a woman to use the feminine characteristics of her physical body to dominate a man. If the man must restrain his physical power so as not to bully the woman, the woman must restrain (conceal) the feminine characteristics of her physical body so as not to seduce the man. It is hardly a mere coincidence that when women refuse to dress modestly, men will often refuse to restrain their physical power over the woman in the matter of sexuality (rape). (Scanlon, 1988, p. 27) Thus it appears that respect for women was a reason for the promotion of modesty in lay women's dress by religious and laity in the Catholic Church during the period 1950-1990. CHAPTER VII. CHANGES IN CATHOLIC VIEWS ON MODESTY IN LAY WOMEN'S DRESS AND CHANGES IN WOMEN'S FASHIONS, 1950-1990 Research question 5 of this study asks: in Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, how have the views on modesty in lay women's dress changed? This question will be answered in two steps. First, general changes in women's fashions over these forty years will be examined, as changes in fashion may influence changes in what the Catholic Church, as well as general society, considers to be modest. The general changes in fashion examined in this study will be those that have a direct relationship with modesty, such as amount and type of body exposure and degree of fit in garments. Next, the views of modesty in women's dress by Catholics in the 253 documents that were content analyzed will be examined and changes over time will be noted. The relationship between changes in fashion and changes in views on modesty will then be explored. General Changes in Women's Fashions, 1950-1990 Existing research, such as journal and magazine articles, theses, dissertations, and general fashion books, was consulted to find general changes in women's fashions 79 80 that relate to modesty, such as the length of skirts and the tightness of bodices. The categories of fashions that will be discussed are not mutually exclusive. According to Gold (1991), There was a time when there were sharp dividing lines between one clothing market and another--dresses, coats and suits, sportswear, separates, and others. As time passed those dividing lines blurred. Suits looked like two-piece dresses. Coats were sold with dresses in either the coat or the dress department. Women wore beach dresses at home. By 1990, most clothing was classified simply as formal or informal. (p. 5) Thus the fashions described below are grouped into the simplest categories. What is of importance here is not the type of clothing, but rather the overall design. Whatever design is fashionable at the time, it is translated into all categories of clothing, from suits and dresses to swimwear and eveningwear. Also, the design of one category of clothing quite often will influence the design of another. For example, the popularity of pantyhose contributed to the shortening of skirts in the 19605. Table 7 (p. 91) summarizes the changes discussed below in a timeline. The Earlyyand Mid-19505 Daywear. Most clothing during the 19505 was close-fitting. Bodices and blouses emphasized the bust and waist through the use of darts or seams. Sweaters were tight (Tortora & Eubank, 1989). Skirts were either the extremely narrow sheath skirt or were very full, with 81 petticoats worn underneath, emphasizing a small waist. Most skirts were calf length (Lester & Kerr, 1977; Melinkoff, 1984; Tortora & Eubank, 1989). Shirtwaist dresses were popular; these dresses joined a close-fitting, button-front bodice to a full skirt. Also popular was the sheath dress, a close-fitting bodice with a sheath skirt. Summer dresses were designed for staying cool: bodices could be sleeveless and scoop-necked, a halter, or with narrow spaghetti straps (Melinkoff, 1984; Tortora & Eubank, 1989). Suit jackets were also close-fitting, with nipped-in waists. Narrow skirts were more prevalent for wear with suits than were fuller skirts (Tortora & Eubank, 1989). Sportswear. Pants, worn for casual occasions, were close-fitting and ankle-length. They either zipped on the left side or in the back, as "a fly front was much too masculine and would draw attention to our crotches" (Melinkoff, 1984, p. 53). Short shorts, as they were then called, were worn in the first half of the 19505: We couldn't possibly imagine them getting any shorter or skimpier. . . . These waist-hugging shorts (no matter how abbreviated) never revealed the buttocks. . . . Short shorts were always constructed to hug the top Of each leg. No saucy flare to flirt with the disaster of underpants showing. Many had cuffed legs with double-ringed ties at the side to ensure a snug fit. They were as modest as a tight diaper. (Melinkoff, 1984, p. 53) Although the bikini was designed in France in 1947, most swimsuits in the United States during the 19505 were one-piece suits. The two-piece suits were designed like 82 the one-piece suits, with the exception that they showed some midriff. Most suits had boning and shaping panels; some could be worn strapless. Swimsuit bottoms were either skirts or little-boy shorts (Gold, 1991; Melinkoff, 1984; Tortora & Eubank, 1989). According to Melinkoff (1984, p. 61), Midriffs could be exposed, but only above the waist. No hip-huggers, ever. Exposing three inches above the navel was flirtatious but acceptable. Three inches below was whorish. Shorts and bathing suits always hugged the upper thigh. Never, ever did we reveal an inch of hip. The hip and the thigh were two separate entities, one to be revealed, one to be covered. Eveningwear. The bodices of evening dresses in the 19505 "were strapless or had daringly low plunging neck lines, and were usually mounted on a boned underbodice which was sometimes fitted to a customer's shape" (Bond, 1981, p. 144). The skirts were usually ankle-length, although street-length ballerina gowns were popular with young women (Tortora & Eubank, 1989). Underwear. Pointed uplift bras were worn in the 19505. A large bust was admired; smaller women wore padded bras. Special strapless bras were worn with halters and strapless bodices. Girdles were worn to keep waists small and to hold up the seamed stockings with attached garters. When girdles were not worn, such as under pants, the panties worn were briefs, covering waist to upper thigh. Full slips were worn under blouse and skirt outfits and dresses. Petticoats, usually several worn over another, were worn 83 under full skirts in order to achieve the desired silhouette (Melinkoff, 1984; Tortora & Eubank, 1989), The Late 19505 and Early 19605 Daywear. Clothing started to become looser fitting in the late 19505 and continued on into the early 19605 (Melinkoff, 1984). In the late 19505 two waistless styles of dresses, the chemise and the trapeze, were introduced from Paris. The chemise, also known as the sack or bag, was loose at the bust and waist but tight at the hips, sometimes gathered and bowed in the back. The trapeze, also called the A-line, flared out from a fitted bust. Although some women wore these two styles, waistless dresses did not become popular until the mid-19605, in the form Of the shift or skimmer (Lester & Kerr, 1977; Melinkoff, 1984; Murray, 1989; Tortora & Eubank, 1989). The typical suit in the early 19605 was the semi-fitted one that Jackie Kennedy popularized: a waist-length cardigan jacket with the skirt shortened to mid-knee or just below the knee. The two-piece dress, consisting of a sleeveless overblouse and slim skirt, was also popularized by Jackie Kennedy (Gold, 1991; Melinkoff, 1984; Tortora & Eubank, 1989). Sportswear. Loose "Sloppy Joe" sweaters were popular, reflecting both the beatnik look and Italian influence (Bond, 1981; Laver, 1983). Looser, knee-length Bermuda shorts were adopted in the mid-19505 (Gold, 1991; Tortora & Eubank, 1989). Long pants, however, did not follow the: 84 trend for looser fit. They were tighter than they had been in the previous decade. Jeans were "often so tight they could only be zipped closed by lying on the floor" (Bond, 1981, p. 168). Due to advances in knitwear technology in the early 19605, tight stretch stirrup pants were popular (Bond, 1981; Melinkoff, 1984). In the early 19605 the bikini became popular in the United States. It exposed more midriff, hip, and bosom than the two-piece suits of the 19505 did (Gold, 1991; Melinkoff, 1984). Hats and hairstyles. During the 19505, hats were an integral part of a woman's outfit. If a woman was going out of the house, she was not dressed until she put her hat on. In the late 19505 and throughout the 19605 hats were discarded. Reasons for their demise include extreme hairstyles and the younger generation. In the late 19505, hair became fuller on top. It was then shaped into exaggerated heights as the beehive hairdo of the early 19605. This style made hats difficult to wear (Gold, 1991; Probert, 1981). Hairstyles were not the only reason for the demise of the hat. In the 19505, younger women did not feel the need to have a hat coordinated to each and every outfit (Probert, 1981). By the 19605, the "youth revolution" had discarded hats altogether, as they disdained "specific outfits for specific occasions and all the apparatus of genteel fashion which had been built up over one hundred years" (Clark, 1982, p. 60). Although hair has become more natural in style since the late 19605, 85 hats have not regained their popularity. Nowadays they are mainly worn for warmth; few women wear them for style. Clark gives the following reasoning for the hat's lack of popularity: Attempts made by the fashion trade and the press to launch hats for the popular market, such as the veiled 405-style pillbox hats of 1979, have largely failed, since potential customers are caught in a vicious cycle Of waiting for the fashion to establish itself before they try it. The majority of women, who have no wish to be conspicuous, are precluded from both the present-day categories of hat wearing, the hat Of ceremony [such as for royal occasions, religious ceremonies] and the hat of style. (1982, p. 61) The Mid-to-Late 19605 Daywear. Clothing in the mid 19605 became youthful in orientation but continued to be loose-fitting. Dresses, such as the shift or skimmer, had no waistline (Bond, 1981; Gold, 1991; Lester & Kerr, 1977; Melinkoff, 1984; Tortora & Eubank, 1989). Some of these dresses resembled the dresses worn by little girls. Separate skirts were flared or A-line; some had a faced waist that rested on the upper hip, instead of having a waistband at the natural waistline (Laver, 1983; Tortora & Eubank, 1989). Skirts grew shorter, giving way to the miniskirt. Credit for designing the miniskirt goes to Mary Quant and André Courréges (Bond, 1981; Laver, 1983; Melinkoff, 1984; Murray, 1989). Although the miniskirt was introduced in 1964, it was not until 1968 that it was skirt length shown most often in fashion publications (Park, 1985; Thompson, 1977). According to Thompson (1977) and Balkwell and HO (1992), average skirt 86 lengths became the shortest during 1968 and 1969. Weeden (1977) found that the shortest average skirts were being shown in 1966. Skirts in the 19605 were the shortest they had ever been, with some barely covering the underpants (Melinkoff, 1984). In the late 19605 transparent bodices and blouses were introduced in high fashion (Garland, 1970; Laver, 1983). Although some women did wear them, Tortora and Eubank (1989) report that this only happened in urban, cosmopolitan areas. The cardigan or Chanel jacket, collarless and loose, remained popular throughout the 19605. Pants suits were introduced in the late 19605. Variations of the pants worn included knickers, shorts, and culottes. The acceptance of the pants suits in the business setting brought women more comfort and options in dress (Bond, '1981; Gold, 1991; Melinkoff, 1984; Tortora & Eubank, 1989). According to Tortora and Eubank (1989, p. 329), "by the late 60's, pants suits had surpassed skirted suits in popularity." Sportswear. In the mid-19605, hip-hugger pants, with the top of the pants ending below the waistline, became popular; the legs of these pants were wider but the hips fit snugly (Tortora & Eubank, 1989). In 1964 Rudi Gernreich designed the topless bathing suit. It consisted of bottoms that extended to above the navel and a thin neck strap that joined to the bottoms 87 at center front (Gold, 1991). According to Batterberry and Batterberry, "the 'topless' was created more as a preview of the future than as an article for immediate sale, and so it remained, but as a symbol its very existence was more powerful than its apparent lack of sales would suggest" (1977, p. 383). Underwear. Pantyhose was perfected in the mid-to-late 19605. It facilitated the shortening of skirts, as it did away with the stocking tops and garters that would otherwise be seen under a short skirt (Laver, 1983; Lester & Kerr, 1977; Melinkoff, 1984; Tortora & Eubank, 1989). The "no-bra" look of the late 19605 and early 19705 was achieved either by the new natural-looking seamless bra or by not wearing a bra. Girdles declined in popularity, as pantyhose did away with the need for garters (Melinkoff, 1984; Murray, 1989). Panties shrank to bikini panties; matching bra and panty sets were popular (Lester & Kerr, 1977; Melinkoff, 1984). Throughout the 19705 and 19805, most underwear consisted of seamless bras, bikini panties, and pantyhose. Evenipgwear. Many styles of eveningwear were worn in the 19605. Some dresses were long, some were very short, and some were not dresses at all but were evening pants (Bond, 1981; Tortora & Eubank, 1989). These variations continue to be worn to the present day. 88 The 19705 Daywear. Although the calf-length midiskirts were introduced at the end of the 19605, it was not until the early 19705 that they became popular. Even then, some women continued to wear their miniskirts. Other options were the ankle—length maxiskirts that were popular with the young and pants (Bond, 1981; Melinkoff, 1984; Murray, 1989). By the late 19705 most skirts were calf-length (Bond, 1981; Gold, 1991). In a study by Balkwell and Ho (1992) covering the years 1966 through 1986, the average skirt in the United States was the longest in 1978. Sportswear. In the early 19705 pant legs were either skin-tight or very wide. The wide legs either flared from the hips or were tight at the hip and thigh and flared out at the knee (Bond, 1981; Lester & Kerr, 1977; Melinkoff, 1984). Halter tops and waist-length battle jackets were worn with these flared pants (Lester & Kerr, 1977). Hot pants, extremely short, tight-fitting shorts made of opulent fabrics such as velvet and satin, were a short-lived fad of 1971 (Bond, 1981; Lester & Kerr, 1977; Melinkoff, 1984). Separates were important in the mid-tO-late 19705 as the layered look was a practical way to keep warm during the energy crisis (Lester & Kerr, 1977). The Annie Hall look was popular in the late 19705; it consisted of an oversized man's suit and tie worn over cuffed trousers or a long skirt (Gold, 1991; Melinkoff, 1984; Murray, 1989). 89 In the early 19705 the pared-down string bikini became popular. In contrast, loose caftans that covered the body from neck to ankle were worn as a beach cover-ups and as leisure wear (Batterberry & Batterberry, 1977; Gold, 1991). The 19805 Daywear. The miniskirt was revived in the 19805. According to Howell (1990), two of the designers responsible for reviving the miniskirt, Azzedine Alaia and Jean Paul Gaultier, showed the difference between the meaning of the miniskirt of the 19605 and the miniskirt of the 19805: "fashion in the 80's was all about the body of a woman, not the body of a girl" (p. 218). Although the miniskirt was popular, it did not become the prevalent skirt length, but one of several lengths. Options were important in the later 19805, as both loose and tight, long and short garments, were offered to women. Jackets were loose in the mid-to-late 19805, with both notched collar and the collarless Chanel jackets being popular. Suits with shorts that ended at the top of the knee were popular in the late 19805; some of these shorts were so full that they looked like skirts. These shorts were more comfortable to sit in than the miniskirts that were also worn. Sportswear. A variety of pants were worn in the 19805. Tight designer jeans were popular in the early 19805. Baggy jeans were worn in the early-to-mid 19805; they were loose in the hip and thigh, tapering at the ankle. The 90 stirrup pants of the 19605 and the flared pants of the 19705, as well as the perennially popular tight jeans, were worn in the late 19805. In the late 19805 stretch exercise wear made an impact on fashion, as skin-tight spandex leggings and the shorter bicycling shorts were worn on the street as well as for sports (Gold, 1991). Spandex was used in other garments, from body-skimming scooped-neck tops to extremely tight miniskirts. In the 19805 swimsuits became very high cut in the legs, although in the later 19805 skirted suits were also popular (Gold, 1991). In the mid-19805 the suspender suit was popular; it consisted of high-cut bottoms with thin shoulder straps and a narrow tube-top which was worn underneath, looking much like the "topless" with a top underneath. Underwear. The "underwear as outerwear" look was popular in the mid and late 19805. Gaultier designed bras and bustiers with cone-shaped cups, recalling the bras of the 19505. The singer Madonna wore lace Merry Widows and petticoats on stage (Gold, 1991). Women also wore men's sleeveless undershirts and boxer shorts as outerwear. Summar Table 7 summarizes the changes in lay women's fashions during the period 1950-1990. In short, since the mid-19605 there has been an emphasis on exposing more of the body through shorter, skimpier, and sometimes tighter, garments. 91 Table 7. Summary of Changes in Women's Fashions, 1950—1990 Early and Mid-19505 -the silhouette emphasizes the bust, waist, and hips -skirts are calf-length -"short shorts" and midriff tops are worn Late 19505 and Early 19605 -introduction of waistless dresses, the chemise and the trapeze -jackets and sweaters become looser -narrow stretch stirrup pants and tight jeans are worn -some skirts are knee length -the bikini is worn -hats are discarded Mid-19605 -the silhouette is that of a young girl; legs and a skinny body are emphasized -miniskirts are introduced -pantyhose becomes popular, allowing miniskirts to become even shorter -waistless dresses are now popular; the chemise is redesigned as the body-skimming shift -the topless bathing suit and see-through blouses are worn, but by very few women -pants become wide~legged and waistlines ride low on the hips Late 19605 -miniskirts are the prevalent skirt length -pants suits are introduced -the midiskirt is introduced Early 19705 -hot pants are worn -some women wear the longer midi skirts -the string bikini is worn -midriff and halter tops are worn Mid-to-Late 19705 -most skirts are longer -jeans become straight—legged but are tight in the hips Mid-19805 -the miniskirt becomes fashionable again, but longer skirts are also worn -underwear is worn as outerwear Late 19805 -some pants and shorts are skin-tight (leggings and biker shorts) but the wide pants of the late 19605 and early 19705 are also worn 92 Some of these changes, such as the tight stretch pants of the late 19505 and early 19605, were due to changes in technology. Other changes, such as the discarding of the hat, was due to a change in attitudes towards dress. Catholic Views on Modesty in Lay Women's Dress A number of documents contained theoretical discussions and/or theoretical definitions of modesty in dress. Nearly all Of these documents were published before the final meeting of the Second Vatican Council. Two schools of thought on modesty in dress were found in these documents. Although these schools of thought did not appear to change over time, the number of Catholics expressing them in print form decreased after the Council. The first school of thought is that modesty in dress always requires certain standards to be met. This point Of view was taken by a number of Catholics, both laity and clergy, and by two modesty crusades: the Supply the Demand for the Supply (SDS) Modesty Crusade and the Marylike Crusade. A priest asserted that: Modesty is basically an absolute. It is not something wholly relative or variable, not even predominantly so. It is no more an exception to the immutability of the moral law than any other moral issue. Without this absolute basis, nothing can really ever be labeled immodest--not even the most plunging neckline nor strapless gowns nor the shortest shorts nor the skimpiest bikinis--and even complete nudity can be called perfectly modest, as has already been done! (Stepanich, 1964, p. 550-551) The general principle of SDS stated that "Christian modesty demands, under pain of sin, that dress be such as to conceal 93 and in no way emphasize the parts of the body which, if revealed or suggested, are an occasion of sin to normal individuals" (Supply the Demand for the Supply Modesty Crusade, c. 1956, p. 1). The SDS and Marylike Crusade standards for modesty in women's dress are discussed in more detail in Appendices F and G, respectively. NO mention of SDS was found after 1964 and it is not known what happened to the group. Little was heard about the Marylike Crusade after 1969, as that was the year that its founder, Father Kunkel died. The magazine Divine Love, however, reprinted Father Kunkel's article on modesty periodically, from the mid-19505 when the article was written to the mid-19805 when the magazine ceased publication due to the death of its editor. The other school of thought on modesty in dress stresses that modesty is relative, changing according to time, place, and the fashions of the day. This view, held by both clergy and laity, was generally expressed in response to standards Of modesty in dress laid down by the SDS and Marylike Crusades. Father Thomas presented his View in four similar articles he wrote in the mid-19505. He stated: "experience shows that the power of clothing to stimulate venereal pleasure differs according to persons, times and places. Custom plays an interesting role here, since as the moralists say: 'What is customary does not affect us'" (Thomas, 1954, p. 391). He also proclaimed: 94 Catholic women will be innocent of sinful exposure in dress if they follow the prevalent fashion but carefully avoid extremes. . . . since the individual woman who carefully avoids extremes in following the prevalent fashion has reasonable assurance that her dress will not be an occasion of sin to the average male. (Thomas, 1954, p. 392) According to McKenzie (1963), another priest, As a culture becomes accustomed to various fashions, these fashions lose their quality of seductivity. We must consider any given fashion from the aspects of object, intention and circumstances. To dismiss any one Of these three determinants of morality from consideration is to consider the question only partially. (p. 18) The Relationship Between Changes in Fashions and Changes in Views on Modesty The views published denouncing certain garment styles did not always relate to fashion trends (compare Tables 9 and 10, Appendix E, with Table 7). The number of views published decreased dramatically after the mid-19605, although fashions since the mid-19605 have tended to reveal more of the female body through exposure and tight garments. Although the bikini was the focus of a number Of views during the early 19605, it did not appear to receive any condemnation when it shrank to the extremely brief string bikini in the early 19705. The same appears to be true of midriff tops, which were deplored by several when worn in the 19505 but were commented on only once when worn in the 19705, and tight pants, which were deplored when fashionable in the late 19505 and early 19605 but received few comments during the late 19705 and the 19805 when they 95 were also popular. The relationship between views and fashion trends, however, holds true for the miniskirt: although few views on modesty were found to be published during the late 19605 and early 19705, these views pointedly condemn the miniskirt, which reached its shortest length in the late 19605 and was still worn in the early 19705. CHAPTER VIII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summary The major Objective of this study was to examine views of Catholics who expressed concern about modesty in lay women's dress contained in literature from 1950 to the present. The minor objectives were (1) to examine the relationship between Catholic views on modesty and changes in fashion and (2) to examine the relationship between Catholic views on modesty and the views of the Church on lay women. Due to the historical nature of this study, two unobtrusive research methods were utilized: content analysis, for the data collection of research questions 1-3, and the analysis of existing research, for views on women by the Church and changes in women's fashions. Data for statistical analysis were collected by means Of content analysis from documents (210 Catholic and 43 secular) containing views of Catholics who expressed concern about modesty in lay women's dress, published between 1950 and 1990. This information was: (a) the year the document was printed, (b) the type of document, (c) the year the View was originally expressed, and, if applicable, dates the view was printed again, (d) the level within the Catholic Church of the person expressing their views, 96 97 (e) views about what constituted modest and immodest lay women's dress, and (f) sanctions used to promote modesty and discourage immodesty in lay women's dress. Almost 31% of the documents in the sample were printed in the five-year span 1955-1959. About 67% of the documents were printed before the closing of the Second Vatican Council. Research Question 1 In Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, what levels within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church expressed concern about modesty? Eight hundred and twenty-eight views on modesty in lay women's dress were published in the documents, coming from all levels within the Church. Fifty—four percent Of these views were made by the clergy. A significant difference was found in the number of views by the level within the Church hierarchy in two periods, before/during the Second Vatican Council (1950-1965) and after the Council (1966-1990). With the exception of the level "lay men/boys," more views were published by each level in the Church in the years before/during than after the Council. More views were published by the category "lay men/boys" after the Council because the layman editor of the magazine Divine Love often published his views on modesty in women's dress. 98 Research Question 2 In Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, what was considered modest dress and what was considered immodest dress? One hundred and forty-nine views on what was thought to be modest dress were found in the documents. Garments which covered the chest and back were most often viewed as being modest (22% Of the total). Other garments frequently seen as modest were pants which covered the legs at least to the knees (19%) and garments with sleeves which covered at least the upper arm (16%). Most of the views, 93%, were published before/during the Council and more views were published in all garment categories before/during the Council. The chi square test was not run because it was not applicable to the data. Six hundred and seventy-one views were printed on styles of women's garments which were considered to be immodest. The styles of garments that were most often criticized were skirts and pants that exposed the leg from the knee upwards (28% of the total), followed by garments which exposed the upper arm along with the chest and/or back (16%). Also frequently deplored were garments that exposed the chest and/or back (11%) and long pants which covered at least the knees (10%). About 64% of the views were published before/during the Council. Chi square was not computed, as the test was not applicable to the data. In all but two categories, the number of views published 99 before/during the Council was greater than the number of views published after the Council. The number of views considering topless garments immodest were the same in both periods, whereas the number of views considering garments that exposed the upper legs were more numerous after the Council, as the miniskirt was fashionable. Using chi square, a significant difference was found in the number of views published on modest and immodest styles before/during and after the Council. Sixty-nine percent of the views on modest and immodest garment styles were published before/during the Council. Eighty-two percent of the views published were on what was considered to be immodest dress; this shows that modesty in dress is Often defined by its opposite. Differing views were held as to what was considered modest and immodest dress for lay women. This was especially true for longer pants and sleeveless garments. Skirts and pants that exposed the legs above the knees were the garments that received the most condemnation, with only a few views found to disagree. A number of views were published on other types of lay women's dress behavior relating to modesty. If make-up was to be worn, it should only be done so to make one's self presentable, not for vanity or to entice men. Cosmetic or plastic surgery was not seen as immoral if done to better serve the whole person. Although a number of views upheld the practice of women wearing head-coverings, which had 100 its roots in Biblical tradition and was required by 1917 Code of Canon Law, the 1983 Code of Canon Law no longer requires the practice. Many views about beauty contests were from the clergy and lay men, as these males were against them either because they put women's physical beauty on public display or because they emphasized outer beauty instead of inner beauty. Research Question 3 In Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, which sanctions have been used to promote modest behavior and discourage immodest behavior in women's dress? Three hundred and twenty-five views mentioning positive sanctions were published in the documents. Forty-one percent of these views mentioned positive sanctions which publicized modesty in dress. Two hundred and fourteen views on positive sanctions were published before/during the Council and one hundred and eleven were published after the Council. Using the chi square test, the difference in the numbers of views before/during and after the Council by category was found to be significant. A total of 111 views mentioning negative sanctions were found to be published during the forty-year period. Seventy-eight comments were published before/during the Council and thirty-three were published after the Council. Using the chi square test, the difference in the numbers 101 of comments by category before/during and after the Council was found to be significant. In two categories, however, more views were found to be made after the Council. These categories were "denied sacraments" and "denied visiting/schooling," with 1 and 3 more views made after the Council, respectively. Not all commentators agreed on the use Of negative sanctions, especially the denial of sacraments to those immodestly dressed. The views of Catholics who expressed concern about modesty in lay women's dress as published in the documents used in this study show that there was a concerted effort made by some in the Church, laity as well as clergy, to promote modest behavior and discourage immodest behavior in lay women's dress. A majority of these efforts were to promote modesty, including positive buying habits, defining modesty in dress, publicizing modesty in dress, and influencing others. Rarely were the sacraments denied to those who dressed immodestly. Two modesty crusades, the Supply the Demand for the Supply Modesty Crusade and the Marylike Crusade, were in operation during the 19505 and 19608. Research Qpestion 4 How have lay women been viewed by the Catholic Church in the period 1950-1990, and how does the view of lay women by the Catholic Church relate to the views of Catholics on modesty in lay women's dress? 102 Lay women have been viewed by the Catholic Church mainly as wives and mothers. In the writings of recent popes and the Second Vatican Council, women are said to be equals of men, but they are also said to have a different role than men. This role is primarily that of motherhood, either physical or spiritual. Although the Second Vatican Council recognized the need for lay women to be more active, since the time of the Council the Church has on several occasions affirmed its opposition to the ordination of women. It should be pointed out that there are a number Of Catholics, clergy, Religious, and laity, male and female, who believe that women should be ordained to the priesthood. A relationship was found between the View of the Church on lay women and Catholic views on modesty in lay women's dress in the documents that were content analyzed. This relationship was: modest dress does not call attention to a woman's body, thus she will be treated by men with with the dignity and respect she receives through motherhood. Immodest dress, on the other hand, calls attention to a woman's body and men will treat her as a sex Object. Researcthpestion 5 In Catholic written comment about modesty in lay women's dress, how have the views on modesty in lay women's dress changed? 103 Two schools of thought on modesty in dress were found in these documents. Although these schools of thought did not appear to change over time, the number of Catholics expressing them in print form decreased after the Council. The first school Of thought is that modesty always follows certain standards in clothing, whereas the second school of thought is that modesty in dress is relative to the fashions of the day as well as to person and situation. Dress standards were set forth by the Supply the Demand for the Supply (SDS) Modesty Crusade and the Marylike Crusade in the 19505 and early 19605. After the mid-19605, nothing is heard of the SDS standards and little is heard about the Marylike Crusade. The number of views published denouncing certain garment styles were not always related to fashion trends. The number of views published decreased after the mid-19605, yet fashions since the mid-19605 have tended to reveal more of the female body through exposure and tight garments. Many views were expressed against the miniskirt when it was fashionable in the mid-tO-late 19605. Few views were found to be published when the bikini, midriff tops and tight jeans were popular in the 19705, although these garments were condemned in a number of views published in the 19505. 104 Conclusions The Catholic views on modesty in lay women's dress examined in this study are an illustration of the dynamic nature of modesty in dress. Although there appears to have been a concerted effort by clergy and laity of the Catholic Church to promote modesty in lay women's dress in the 19505 and early 19605, mentions of this effort in Catholic and secular literature decreased dramatically in the mid-19605, which corresponds to the ending of the Second Vatican Council. In the late 19605, the 19705 and the 19805 modesty in lay women's dress is rarely mentioned, except in the furor over the miniskirt in the late 19605 and early 19705. These views also illustrate the sexual and social dimensions of modesty in dress. As to the sexual dimension of modesty, those concerned with modesty in lay women's dress most frequently commented that modest dress covered the back and chest, covered the legs at least to the knees and had sleeves that covered at least the upper arm. Immodest dress, on the other hand, exposed the leg from the knee upwards, exposed the upper arm and exposed the chest and/or back. The social dimension of modesty in dress was concerned with women dressing appropriately for the occasion, especially in church where they were to be dressed in their Sunday best to show reverence for God. Views on modesty in lay women's dress did not appear to be related to changes in lay women's fashions. Most 105 of the views found on modesty in lay women's dress were published in the 19505 and early 19605, yet since the mid-19605 there has been a trend to expose more of the body through dress. Some views were expressed, however, when the miniskirt was popular in the late 19605 and early 19705. There are several possible explanations for the lack of published views on modesty during fashion changes. One possible explanation is that Catholic women had established a pattern of modest dress so that the Church felt no need to worry that the women would adopt fashions the Church considered to be immodest. A second possible reason is that the Church had other issues to deal with which it felt to be more important, such as abortion, poverty, nuclear war, and so on. Another possible explanation is that those concerned with modesty no longer published their views in the sources used in this study. Yet another possible reason is that people were used to seeing women in certain dress. Finally, possibly due to the slowly-changing View of lay women by the Church, women ceased to be seen only as mothers but as individuals in their own right. Limitations Several limitations of this study should be noted. First, it is not known how representative the views Of the writers of the documents were of Catholics as a whole. Second, it is not known if lay women followed the 106 exhortations for modesty in the documents examined in this study. Third, although much of the documents were written by Americans, foreign views were also included. This was unavoidable, since the popes and a number of clergy at the Vatican are foreign. Nevertheless, the researcher did not sense that foreign views in general were more strict than American views. Suggestions for Further Study The Catholic views examined in this study were only those which were published. The researcher suggests that current Catholic views on modesty in women's dress be studied by way of a questionnaire on modesty. Only views on modesty in lay women's dress were studied here. A study might be conducted on views of modesty in the dress of women religious, possibly focusing on the change in some of the habits of women religious that took place in the mid-tO-late 19605. This study examined just one of the many denominations or religions that place a high value on modesty in women's dress. Studies could be conducted on views on modesty in Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, as well as on other denominations within Christianity, such as Baptist, Lutheran, and Methodist. A study could also be carried out on the concept of modesty in dress in the general American population. A 107 questionnaire might prove to be a useful method in this study. APPENDICES APPENDIX A APPENDIX A Glossary of Catholic Terms Archbishop: a bishop in charge of an archdiocese. The archbishop has "a certain amount of authority over the bishops of neighboring dioceses" (Daughters of St. Paul, 1984, p. 67). Bishop: a priest who has been consecrated as a bishOp. According to Foy (1991), bishops, in hierarchical union with the pope and their fellow bishops, are the successors of the Apostles as pastors of the Church: they have individual responsibility for the care of the local churches they serve and collegial responsibility for the care of the universal Church. (p. 226) Blessed Sacrament: another name for the Holy Eucharist. It is displayed in the church for prayer, adoration and blessing of the people during the Eucharistic Benediction (Daughters of St. Paul, 1984). Brother: an unordained male member of certain religious orders. Canon Law: "Church law found in the Code of Canon Law" (Daughters of St. Paul, 1984, p. 68). Cardinal: an ordained man chosen by the pope to help and advise him in the central administration of church affairs (Foy, 1991). Confession: a part of the sacrament of penance in which sins committed after baptism are confessed to a priest who has the jurisdiction to absolve sins (Foy, 1989). 108 109 Diocese: the area or territory over which a bishop has jurisdiction. A diocese contains a number of parishes or congregations. Holy Communion: a common term for the Holy Eucharist (Foy, 1989). Holy Eucharist: "the sacrament in which Christ is present and is received under the appearances of bread and wine" (Foy, 1989, p. 225). Holy Orders: "the sacrament by which spiritual power and grace are given to constitute and enable an ordained minister to consecrate the Eucharist, forgive sins, perform other pastoral and ecclesiastical functions, and form the community of the People of God" (Foy, 1989, p. 228). Mggg: the worship service Of the Church. According to Foy (1989), there are two main parts to the Mass: "the Liturgy of the Word, which features the proclamation of the Word of God, and the Eucharistic Liturgy, which focuses on the central act Of sacrifice in the Consecration and on the Eucharistic Banquet in Holy Communion" (p. 212). Monsignor: in the United States, a title "bestowed on members Of clergy for their services to the Church" (Nevins, 1965, p. 384). Pastoral Letter: a letter written by a bishop to the laity in his diocese, the priests in his diocese, or both. The letter to the laity is read at Sunday Masses and usually is also published in the newspaper of the diocese (Nevins, 1965). 110 Pope: the chief teacher and leader of the Catholic Church, selected from the college of cardinals on the death of the previous pope, "he holds the place of Jesus in the Church" (Daughters of St. Paul, 1984, p. 64). The pope is also the Bishop of Rome, the Vicar of Jesus Christ, the successor of St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, the Supreme Pontiff . . . the Patriarch of the West, the Primate of Italy, the Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman Province, the Sovereign of the State of Vatican City, Servant of the Servants of God. (Foy, 1991, p. 143) Priest: "an ordained minister with the power to celebrate Mass, administer the sacraments, preach and teach the word of God, impart blessings, and perform additional pastoral functions, according to the mandate of his ecclesiastical superior" (Foy, 1991, p. 227). Sister: a female member of certain religious orders. Sacraments: "actions of Christ and his Church (itself a kind of sacrament) which signify grace, cause it in the act Of signifying it, and confer it upon persons properly disposed to receive it" (Foy, 1989, p. 222). The seven sacraments are baptism, confirmation, the Holy Eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, holy orders and matrimony. APPENDIX B APPENDIX B List of Key Words Used in Locating References to Views by Catholics on Modesty in Periodical Indexes Apparel Beauty, personal Beauty contests Canon law Church etiquette Clothing and dress Cosmetics Dress Etiquette, ecclesiastical Fashion Head coverings Jewelry Modesty Veils Women APPENDIX C APPENDIX C List of Documents from Catholic Sources Alberse, J. D. (1959, October). Some women are insulting the race. Friar, pp. 18—20. Agius, A. (1983, July). Letter from Greece on immodest fashions in the Church. Christ to the World, pp. 236-237. An American dream? (1965, December). Sign, p. 40. Anderson, F. (1957, July 6). Background for sex crimes. America, p. 377. Bad books, beauty queens. (1950, September 30). Ave Maria, Baltimore girls press modesty campaign. (1957, May). The Catholic Educator, pp. 574-575. Berendt, A. M. (1977, fourth quarter). Your body a jewel. Divine Love, p. 15. Bikini wearers termed "slaves of pagan fashion." (1964, July 9). Catholic Messenger, p. 3. Blaher, D. J. (1961, May). Why did you wear that hat? Friar, pp. 53-55. Blaher, D. J. (1963, May). "Miss Whozis"--but why? Friar, pp. 38-40. Boland, D. M., & Carr, A. M. (1956, September). What is original source of Marylike standards? Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 1106, 1108. Bouscaren, T. L., Ellis, A. C., & Korth, F. N. (1963). Canon Law: A text and commentary. Milwaukee: Bruce. (p. 711) Brady, W. O. (1958, August). What has happened to the Sunday suit? Information, pp. 34-37. Breig, J. (1959, October 10). Let's take a "look" at beauty contests. Ave Maria, p. 19. Breig, J. (1962, August 18). Should women wear (ugh) hats in church? Ave Maria, p. 19. 112 113 Brey, L. S. (1962, September). Operation indencency. Our Lady's Digest, pp. 122-130. Brighton, H. (1954, September). Crusade for modesty. The Catholic Home Journal, pp. 8-9. Brock, T. F. (1961, August 5). The BishOp and the bathing beauties. Ave Maria, pp. 20-21. Buchanan, H. D. (1956, May 30). Those Mother Hubbards! Christian Century, p. 671. Buckley, J. (1960). Purity, modesty, marriage. Notre Dame, IN: Fides. (PP. 65-86) Burton, K. (1955, September). Puritanical dresses. Si n, p. 62. Carr, A. M. (1962, July). Hatless heroines. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, p. 903. The Christian norm: Do we live by it? (1956, August). Voice of St. Jude, p. 5. The Church and bathing beauties. (1959, August 1). Ave Maria, p. 16. Church etiquette. (1963, July). The Liguorian, pp. 57-58. Ciriaci, P. (1954, autumn). Cardinal Ciriaci's letter on modesty in dress. The Pope Speaks, pp. 289-291. Ciriaci, P. (1955, July). Indecency in dress. Catholic Ciriaci, P. (1956, June). Indecency in dress. Family Digest, pp. 1-3. Claudia Cardinale: Miniskirt raises an a-hem. (1967, May 17). National Catholic Reporter, p. 2. Cook, T. (1958, March). Measures and modesty. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 540, 542, 544. Curtis, W. W. (1969, second quarter). An appeal for modesty. Divine Love, p. 15. Danagher, J. J. (1953, December). Women's heads covered in church. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 258-259. Davis, E. K. (1966, October). The mirage that is Miss America. 81 n, pp. 34-36. 114 Day, E. (1963, October). Beauty in bottles: The fatal quest for loveliness. The Liguorian, pp. 23-26. Decent dress in church. (1962, July). The Liguorian, p. 52. DePrez, N. (c. 1955). Teen talk on dress. New York: Catholic Information Society. Doherty, D. (1967, March). A healthy look at the body. Marriage, pp. 6-11. Dominic, M. (1961, November). For teenagers only. Family Digest, p. 68. Dominic, M. (1962, April). For teenagers only. Family Digest, pp. 63-66. Donnelly, J. P. (Ed.). (1967). Prayers and devotions from Pope John XXIII. London: Burns & Oates. (pp. 188-189) Dooley, K. (1960, June 4). A round of applause for the squares in skirts. Ave Maria, p. 30. Dooley, K. (1961, May 27). Welcome, spring--with reservations. Ave Maria, p. 30. Dunne, J. J. (1985, November 3). Scantily clad tourists rankle Lourdes' clergy. Our Sunday Visitor, p. 28. Eberhardt, A. B. (1955, May 7). Teen-agers turn the tide. America, pp. 154-155. Eiten, R. B. (1953, June). Modesty. Action Now, pp. 29-30. Fashions teens approve. (1950, November). Extension, p. 30. Fatima blueprint for modesty. (1960, October-November). Our Lady's Digest, pp. 156-163. Female or feminine. (1963, August 3). America, p. 107. Fenner, K. T. (1962). American Catholic etiquette. Westminster, MD: Newman Press. (pp. 229-230, 346-347) Fink, L. C. (1955, April). "Woman is the glory of man". Family Digest, pp. 52-54. Fitzpatrick, E. A. (1956, October). Chastity, decency, and modesty. Catholic School Journal, p. 246. Flannery, A. (1958, March). On fashions. Doctrine and Life, pp. 30-32. 115 Foy, F. (Ed.). (1953a). The nationwide "SDS" campaign. 1953 National Catholic Almanac (p. 730). Paterson, NJ: St. AnthonyTs Guild. Foy, F. (Ed.). (1953b). A nationwide campaign to promote modesty standards. 1953 National Catholic Almanac (p. 745). Paterson, NJ: St. Anthony's Guild. Foy, F. (Ed.). (1955). Pope Pius XII appealed to the world's bishOps to take action against immodesty. 1955 National Catholic Almanac (p. 744). Paterson, NJ: St. Anthonyrs Guild. Foy, F. (Ed.). (1959). Third order youth promise to fight immodest dress. 1959 national Catholic almanac (p. 77). Paterson, NJ: St. Anthony's Guild. Foy, F. (Ed.). (1960). Beauty contests opposed. 1960 national Catholic almanac (p. 78). Paterson, NJ: St. Anthony's Guild. Foy, F. (Ed.). (1962). Bishop pleads for modesty in dress. 1962 national Catholic almanac (p. 74). Paterson, NJ: St. Anthony's Guild. Foy, F. (Ed.). (1973). Model of modesty. 1973 Catholic almanac (p. 64). Huntington, IN: Our Sunday Visitor. Grady, F. A. (1955, November). Meet Miss Modesty. Queen's Work, pp. 22-23. Gustafson, G. J. (1964, April). Censorship. Priest, pp. 295-299. Hatless women in churches. (1953, July). Clergy Review, pp. 432-433. Hays, E. M. (1981, October). Jack O'lantern. Si n, pp. 34-36. Heberle, D. (1956, October). Queen Mary, teen Mary. Catholic School Journal, pp. 252-254. Holy Father appeals for modesty in dress. (1954, September). Social Justice Review, p. 164. Hunter, S. (1967, February 4). Myopia re: Modesty. Ave Maria, pp. 10-11. Instructions on modesty in dress. (1956, February). American Ecclesiastical Review, pp. 118-119. John Paul II, Pope. (1981). Love and responsibility. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. (PP. 186-193) 116 Juergens, S. B. (1957, May). It's a sin to be a "Baby Doll." Our Lady's Digest, pp. 7-8. Kunkel, B. A. (1954, July). Mary Immaculate in the market place. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 898-900. Kunkel, B. (1955a, March). The Marilyke crusade: The war against immodest fashions. Our Lady's Digest, pp. 359-373. Kunkel, B. (1955b, April). The Purity Crusade of Mary Immaculate. Priest, pp. 281-284. Kunkel, B. A. (1957, July). "Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord." Divine Love, pp. 16-17. Kunkel, B. A. (1967, July). "Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord." Divine Love, pp. 17-18. Kunkel, B. A. (1969, second quarter). "Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord." Divine Love, pp. 5-6. Kunkel, B. A. (1971, third quarter). "Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord." Divine Love, pp. 5-6. Kunkel, B. A. (1972, third—fourth quarters). "Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord." Divine Love, pp. 17-18. Kunkel, B. A. (1977, fourth quarter). "Certain fashions will be introduced that will Offend Our Lord." Divine Love, pp. 5-6. Kunkel, B. A. (1982, second-fourth quarters). "Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord." Divine Love, pp. 8-9. Lawlor, F. X. (1959, June). S.D.S. moderator writes. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 798, 800, 802, 804. Lawrence, M. (1966, April). A woman's beauty. The Liguorian, pp. 17-18. Lemke, S. (1951, October 27). S.D.S. progress. America, p. 112. Live the Mary-like way. (1960, February). Our Lady's Digest, pp. 290-292. 117 Lynch, J. (1958, June). Modesty in dress. Theological Studies, pp. 183-187. Madden, D. M. (1960, November). Europe's fashion priest: Don Michael Peyron. Family Digest, pp. 37-43. Marbach, J. F. (1956, December). How strict is the rule about women having something on their heads in church? Priest, pp. 1044—1045. Marian, J. (1956, April). Watch your smile, Sister. Catholic School Journal, p. 117. Marian, J. (1957, May). Watch your smile, Sister. The Catholic Educator, pp. 597-598. Marie, R. (1954, June). In vogue with Mary. Catholic Educator, pp. 534-537, 540. Marilyn Monroe. (1962, August 18). America, pp. 610-611. Marylike code of attire for church and other sacred places. (1962, September). Our Lady's Digest, pp. 131-132. The Marylike standards for modesty in dress. (1956, December). Our Lady's Digest, pp. 227-228. Mattingly, B. (1963, March). Modesty in dress: A problem of the times. Marriage, pp. 20-28. Mattingly, C. Q. (1967, March). A healthy look at the breast. Marriage, p. 1. McDonough, A. (1950, April). Cosmetics. Sign, p. 46. McDonough, A. (1951, January). Church attire. Sign, p. 37. McDonough, A. (1953, May). Who's normal? Sign, p. 57. McGloin, J. T. (1951, November). Lovely to look at. Extension, pp. 17, 67. McGrath, M. M. (1956, June). Father Gabriel and the beauty contest. Columbia, pp. 3-4, 45. McKenzie, L. (1963, March 23). Modesty crusades. Ave Maria, p. 18. Meyer, A. G. (1967, July). Chastity and modesty. American Ecclesiastical Review, pp. 59-67. Meyer, A. G. (1956). Decency and modesty: A pastoral letter of Albert G. Meyer. Milwaukee, WI: S. N. 118 Miller, D. F. (1962, March). Code for teen-agers on modesty. The Liguorian, pp. 43-45. Miller, E. F. (1956, February). On teen-agers' dress and adornment. The Liguorian, pp. 93-97. Miller, E. F. (1957, January). Code Of Catholic conduct: Hats on and hats off! The Liguorian, p. 29. Miller, E. F. (1964, April). Report from the Orient: America revisted. The Liguorian, pp. 48-51. Modest modishness. (1952, April 19). America, p. 59. Modesty crusade. (1952, June 21). Ave Maria, p. 772. Modesty demanded. (1952, July). Catholic Mind, pp. 438-439. Modesty in Spain: A clarification from Toledo. (1959, August 8). Tablet, p. 670. Modish and modest. (1951, October 6). America, p. 2. Mohan, R. P. (1955, December). Yardstick modesty. American Ecclesiastical Review, pp. 377-380. Mohan, R. P. (1956, June). Guide for action. Today, pp. 20-22. Mooney, P. (1956, October). The style is the Lady. Queen's Work, pp. 14-15. Morality and good taste in apparel. (1955, July 2). America, p. 342. '_——“ Mother Hubbards for everyone. (1956, May 2). Christian Century, p. 541. Mussio, J. K. (1955, July). Wear Mary's robe of modesty! Our Lady's Digest, pp. 54-55. My daughter wishes to enter a newspaper Cover Girl Contest. (1963, December). Sacred Heart Messenger, pp. 46-47. National Conference of Catholic Bishops. (1983). Basic teachings for Catholic religious education. In H. J. Nolan (Ed.). Pastoral letters of the United States Catholic bishopg. (Vol. 3, pp. 341-365). Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference. Newland, M. R. (1955, October). Would saints use lipstick? Torch, pp. 21-24. 119 Newland, M. R. (1965, January). Whistles, flattery and modesty. Sign, pp. 44-45. O'Connell, H. J. (1960, September). What boys think of girls' dress. The Liguorian, pp. 7-12. O'Connell, H. (1965, July). What boys think of girls' dress and vice versa. The Liguorian, pp. 27-31. O'Grady, D. (1975, November 7). MacLeod: Women, short skirts, scare Vatican. National Catholic Reporter, p. 4. Oraze, S. (1959, January). The organized program to corrupt women morally. Divine Love, pp. 13-15. Oraze, S. (1960, April). "What's wrong with modern fashions?" Divine Love, pp. 10-11. Oraze, S. (1961a, July). Immodesty in dress can lead to tragedy. Divine Love, pp. 8-9. Oraze, S. (1961b, July). We get letters. Divine Love, p. 11. Oraze, S. (1962a, July). Immodesty in dress can lead to tragedy. Divine Love, pp. 18-19. Oraze, S. (1962b, July). The organized program to corrupt women morally. Divine Love, pp. 15—16. Oraze, S. (1962c, July). "What's wrong with modern fashions?" Divine Love, pp. 17-18. Oraze, S. (1967a, April). We get letters. Divine Love, p. 10. Oraze, S. (1967b, April). "What's wrong with modern fashions?" Divine Love, pp. 9-10. Oraze, S. (1968a, July). Immodesty in dress can lead to tragedy. Divine Love, pp. 8-9. Oraze, S. (1968b, July). We get letters. Divine Love, p. 11. Oraze, S. (1968c, October). We get letters. Divine Love, p. 10. Oraze, S. (1969a, second quarter). As the women go, so goes the nation. Divine Love, pp. 12-13. Oraze, S. (1969b, second quarter). Do women really want respect? Divine Love, p. 10. 120 Oraze, S. (1969c, second quarter). Immodesty in dress can lead to tragedy. Divine Love, pp. 14-15. Oraze, S. (1969d, second quarter). The "mini" fashions. Divine Love, pp. 2-4. Oraze, S. (1969e, second quarter). Modesty miscellany. Divine Love, p. 6. Oraze, S. (1969f, second quarter). "What's wrong with modern fashions?" Divine Love, pp. 11-12. Oraze, S. (1971a, third quarter). As the women go, so goes the nation. Divine Love, pp. 12-13. Oraze, S. (1971b, third quarter). Do women really want respect? Divine Love, p. 10. Oraze, S. (1971c, third quarter). Immodesty in dress can lead to tragedy. Divine Love, pp. 14-15. Oraze, S. (1971d, third quarter). The "mini" fashions. Divine Love, pp. 2-4. Oraze, S. (1971e, third quarter). Modesty miscellany. Divine Love, p. 6. Oraze, S. (1971f, third quarter). "What's wrong with modern fashions?" Divine Love, pp. 11-12. Oraze, S. (1973, first quarter). We get letters. Divine Love' pp. 3-4, 110 Oraze, S. (1976, first quarter). We get letters. Divine Love, pp. 8-9, 11. Oraze, S. (1977a, fouth quarter). As the women go, so goes the nation. Divine Love, pp. 12-13. Oraze, S. (1977b, fourth quarter). Do women really want respect? Divine Love, p. 10. Oraze, S. (1977c, fourth quarter). Immodesty in dress can lead to tragedy. Divine Love, pp. 14-15. Oraze, S. (1977d, fourth quarter). The "mini" fashions. Divine Love, pp. 2-4. Oraze, S. (1977e, fourth quarter). Modesty miscellany. Divine Love, p. 6. Oraze, S. (1977f, fourth quarter). Modesty miscellany: Modesty for men. Divine Love, p. 13. 121 Oraze, S. (19779, fourth quarter). Modesty miscellany: Slacks and jeans. Divine Love, p. 11. Oraze, S. (1977h, fourth quarter). "What's wrong with modern fashions?" Divine Love, pp. 11-12. Oraze, S. (1979, third quarter). Fighters for decency don't quit. Divine Love, pp. 2-3. Oraze, S. (1982, second-fourth quarters). Immodesty in church. Divine Love, p. 22. Pater Satis Vestitus. Why clothing? (1964, October). Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 14-15. Pater Sine Nomine. (1957, November). Measures and modesty. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 164-172. Pater Sine Nomine. (1959, March). Confused consciences or confused confessors? II. Reply to Father Lynch. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 519-526. Paterne indicazioni del Sommo Pontefice. (1956, April 12). Osservatore Romano, p. 1. Paul, Fr. (1983, July-August). Immodest fashions lead to sin. Christ to the World, pp. 219-222. Paul VI, Pope. (1969). Purity of life. The Pope Speaks, p. 255-256. Pius XII, Pope. (1953, September). Sports and gymnastics. Catholic Mind, pp. 569-576. Pius XII, Pope. (1954, autumn). Ideals for the master tailor. The Pope Speaks, pp. 249-252. Pius, XII, Pope. (1954, July). Children of Mary Immaculate. The Pope Speaks, pp. 269-272. Pius XII, Pope. (1955, March). On tailors and fashions. Catholic Mind, pp. 190-192. Pius XII, Pope. (1957, winter). Moral problems in fashion design. The Pope Speaks, pp. 273-285. Pius XII, Pope. (1958, November-December). Morality and fashion design. Catholic Mind, pp. 539-553. Plastic surgery for beauty's sake. (1959, September). Clergy Review, pp. 553-555. A pledge and a prayer. (1956, October). Catholic School Journal, p. 245. 122 The Pope on fashions. (1957, July 27). America, p. 435. Pro, J. J. (1969, second quarter). The mini modesty mania. Divine Love, p. 7. Pro, J. J. (1971, third quarter). The mini modesty mania. Divine Love, p. 7. Pro, J. J. (1977, fourth quarter). The mini modesty mania. Divine Love, p. 7. Promote the modesty crusade. (1952, July). Review for Religious, pp. 223-224. Reedy, J. (1959, August 15). The editor's desk. Ave Maria, p. 2. Roll, B. (1952, April). The Christian mother's page. Catholic Home Journal, p. 29. Sad but true. (1962, August 4). Ave Maria, p. 16. Scanlon, R. (1988, November). Women's fashions and Christian modesty. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 24-32. Schexnayder, M. (1970, second quarter). Immodesty in dress. Divine Love, p. 10. Shaffer, D. (1973, November). The problems of modesty in fashions. Social Justice Review, pp. 234-237. Shainess, N. (1969, April). The game of fashion. Marriage, pp. 48-51. Sherritt, H. M. (1952, March). Modesty for Mary. Action Now, p. 12. Shorts! (1950, July 8). Ave Maria, pp. 35-36. Smith, J. B. (1969, second quarter). A doctor looks at modesty. Divine Love, p. 4. Smith, J. B. (1971, third quarter). A doctor looks at modesty. Divine Love, p. 4. Smith, J. B. (1977, fourth quarter). A doctor looks at modesty. Divine Love, p. 4. Smith, R. F. (1958, May). Clothes and the woman. Review for Religious, pp. 173-174. Standards of modesty and standards of fashion aren't always the same. (1960, August 4). Catholic Messenger, p. 10. 123 Stepanich, M. F. (1962, June). Marylike church attire. Priest, pp. 542-544. Stepanich, M. F. (1964, June). Relatives and absolutes. Priest, pp. 550-553. Sullivan, K. (1958, April). What ever happened to the Sunday suit? Catholic Digest, pp. 53-58. Sunday dress in church. (1950, January). Catholic School Journal, p. 12. Supply the Demand for the Supply Modesty Crusade. (c. 1956). (6th ed.). What about modesty? Chicago: Chicago Inter-Student Catholic Action. Supply the Demand for the Supply Modesty Crusade. (c. 1957). S.D.S. Modesty Crusade. Chicago: Chicago Inter-Student Catholic Action. Supply the Demand for the Supply Modesty Crusade. (1964, June-July). Who is to blame for immodesty? Our Lady's Di est, p. 65. Tansey, A. (1953, July 4). S.D.S.--modern Davids. Ave Maria, pp. 16-18. Tansey, A. (1958, February). Call letters S.D.S. Information, pp. 15-20. Thomas, J. L. (1954, November). Clothes, culture and modesty. Social Order, pp. 386-394. Thomas, J. L. (1955a, spring). Clothes, culture and modesty. Theology Digest, pp. 119-123. Thomas, J. L. (1955b, September). Modesty: Old problem in modern clothes. Grail, pp. 12-17. Thomas, J. L. (1956, May). Feminine fashions, culture and modesty. Catholic Mind, pp. 267-273. Thompson, P. (1964, June). S.D.S.: modesty crusade. Sacred Heart Messenger, pp. 24-28. Walsh, L. (1964, October-November). What makes women lovely? Our Lady's Digest, pp. 138-142. Wells, J. (1974, July). Annals of perdition, crises in the Church #2: The naked Eve. Critic, pp. 61-62. Where angels fear to tread. (1955, September 10). Ave Maria, p. 4. APPENDIX D APPENDIX D List of Documents from Secular Sources Archbishop bans beauty show. (1952, July 1). The New York Times, p. 21. Archbishop v. redhead. (1959, July 20). Time, p. 87. The bathing-suit issue. (1959, July 27). Time, p. 47. Beauty & the Archbishop. (1952, July 14). Time, p. 58. Beauty contests scored. (1952, July 8). The New York Times, p. 28. Beauty, right & wrong. (1956, September 17). Time, p. 79. Brewster, S. P. (1951, July 8). Spanish forbid scanty swim suits, curb sun bathing in morality drive. The New York Times, pp. 1, 27. Cardinal bans miniskirts. (1968, April 4). The New York Times, p. 47. Cardinal scores style. (1960, July 11). The New York Times, p. 32. A Catholic taste in clothes. (1989, September 18). Newsweek, p. 27. Cortesi, A. (1957, November 9). Pope sees evil in some styles. The New York Times, pp. 1, 25. Fashion & fig leaves. (1957, November 18). Time, p. 70. Girls in summer dresses. (1956, August 13). Time, p. 55. Haidinger, J. D., (1955, July 18). The Marylike look (letter to the editor). Time, p. 4. Hoffman, P. (1957, July 5). Pope blesses fashion workers; urges "modest, healthy" styles. The New York Times, p. 1. Hoffman, P. (1971, April 18). Report of hot pants at papal audience stirs furor. The New York Times, p. 11. Immodesty plot laid to Reds. (1953, August 19). The New York Times, p. 8. 124 125 Italians on holiday abandon the cities. (1971, August 16). The New York Times, p. 4. Krebs, A. (1971, August 5). The task of guarding St. Peter's Basilica from women in miniskirts. The New York Times, p. 28. The Marilyke look. (1955, June 27). Time, pp. 64, 66. Miniskirts vex Vatican publication. (1967, May 11). The New York Times, p. 56. "Modesty" garb being sold here. (1955, June 12). The New York Times, p. 73. Modesty is decreed. (1957, December 9). The New York Times, p. 38. Parishioners protest a ban on bare legs. (1989, September 17). The New York Times, p. 30. Pope criticizes styles. (1954, August 21). The New York Times, p. 20 Prelate warns scantily clad. (1953, August 2). The New York Times, p. 5 Priest who imposed dress code is removed. (1990, January 7). The New York Times, p. 23. Priviledge for Fabiola. (1961, June 10). The New York Times, p. 10. Quest for propriety. (1952, April 7). Life, p. 44. Scanty attire scored. (1952, August 3). The New York Times, p. 31. Smith, P. J. (1986, January 21). Dressing down some fellow Catholics. The Wall Street Journal, p. 28. Southern exposure. (1957, September 9). Time, p. 40. St. Peter's: Vatican cover-up. (1972, August 13). The New York Times, sec. 4, p. 8. Sue and the charisma. (1959, August 3). Time, p. 64. TOO short. (1971, July 28). The New York Times, p. 36. Vatican again seeks seemliness in dress. (1971, August 11). The New York Times, p. 3. 126 Vatican bars miniskirts. (1967, September 15). The New York Times, p. 56. Vatican bars miniskirts. (1969, August 24). The New York Times, p. 84. Vatican displeased with topless suits. (1964, July 7). The New York Times, p. 42. Vatican fashion. (1971, August 1). The New York Times, sec. 4, p. 4. Vatican finds all-covering sloution. (1972, August 9). The New York Times, p. 2. Vatican newspaper for women's slacks. (1954, June 12). The New York Times, p. 19. Venetian Cardinal deplores miniskirt, expects it to stay. (1967, August 11). The New York Times, p. 33. APPENDIX E 1227 Hana-mun..- mfiwu noun.- c..n ohm-ego 38.3 o mmEU mo MODE-E on» one muoxomun CA nudge—E «Hgfi menu was» CH demon mundane 39.9 m £023 5... 8:3 mo 35: 93 one Newman-Gouda 5.." muons-.2 "on-oz AH CH mamfloammo emeaaoo A IN cm N Am cm Am ova Hm Him ems m-moHnoAuwm H m A AA cm A AA L A moosscoca 3 :V B :m z. I: m 8898 mfiag AH cm AH LAN vs As co- aumHo a mom Am OH A AA cm m wanes ewes m 5 AH Ce Am VNH o me E mH Hm HAH cm cusp: seq m In com N Am LIA cm mean cums AHOVH H m e AmHL «H mm Elm so He Lam coH mm L m ems sea A AA Ce A AA cm AH cm Am L m mnmumam A muwnuonm H Am cm AH CH Seumao nuances N v AH cm Av LAH on Am LAo cam Anacom Ammo NH mummaum A AA CH AN cm He Elm cm In boa an L m muocmamcaz Afioc- A AN BAH cm He Lxm cm He Lxm cam Hm E m maocmem H AH CH He Exmacmfl Hm LAN Ce moonmflnauua HA I A an LIA cm .H Am cm Hoflmxm cm mamaacumo m m cBUgofi AH L H A AA cm AH CH mm L m ANALANHOOH HmNLAm cs wand was com-TmmmH emmflnomma memflumsmfl vsmauosma momflnmoma vemfliommfi mmm-TmmmH vmmfluomma Hm>mg eonmflansm amuse 3wfl> mesa sousso oA-ozumo mnu canoes Hm>wq so mzma> no nonssz .m wanes 128 .mHmPHmufi 95.3 .8ng G..- mHoommo 3w?- o 85.... m0 No.5: 93 who muoxooun :H .8ch «ngfi n.5,.» mflfi c..- cemom mundane 38TH o nude: 5 83.3 m0 SEC 05 one memo-35a 5 mg ”8002 H mmnfidaw N >HHOQOHQ uHHEEumaam H H HHHWREH R H H H OH H :m em 3 :H cm 333 no mOOCX Egg Eva H ”Huang: HH LAN CH HH L H ewuw>oo uuHueHz HNL H H :m CH SH H 38.8 on >83 «Ho: @26on H HH CH mm>mon dmo HH OH H mmon>mon H REHESSQENENB 5H3 wmwflg8dw 2.:HCH Hmo .H nasaomhéddfiw H HHCH thfimdsS S :NVH RUE H nfiflfiuaam H :NVH Hem .H Sanwusum ~Q8U :N XOOZ :H:NVH Hmm H TKQSoumfio H HH CH mun maonoHTHmusumz HH L m H HH 2H waHm museum do much : :NVH phase 55 33...... .dmcm HH OH H HH CH dHHm .25358u8fi H85 HMHTCQO ommHammmH vmmHuommH msmHTmsmH vsmHTOsmH mmmHTmomH vomHuoomH mmmHnmmmH vmmHuommH memos do mama nozmHanm umuHm 38H> mass umoooz mmwuo m.cmEoz mo momwa cfiouumo condoncou umsu m3oH> mo Hmafiaz .m manna 129 H u. H vm AH VH AH VH AH Vm Hm BAH Cm HH HAN Cm AH ON AH VH AH CH AH AH AH AH AH OH VH CH CH CH om oouuwxm conflmrmco oouw>oo Room uwuHmc unwed: mmmuum nqu oouo>oo umonu ummzsflsm mm>meHm nuHs mm>OOHm moo coum>oo mnmoHsonm mmmuum 86H: mmdemuum Homo aeHm ozone anm mmmmrmmmmmmm cm>wm cUOCOH on .muuonm monomm you mononm cumceH esHumz oppose nuOCOHIOOGX\MGSEme anumonm paw pomp madam monomw w xuos mom ommalmmmH vmmfilomma mbmalmbma esmHTosmH momHumomH vomHTommH eeanHnsm umuHm zmH> msHe mmmfltmmma vmmHlommH woman no OQNH He.ucooc m mHnme 1130 H H H mumoo mCOH Hence mused pom flung wumoo chH Home: mUHHXchHz uumeHcHz H mw>oon @504 Home anm H OHsnow moon OOSOHosm HmmnmxcoOHum> on» 5H H H moonm ummuum mmConoum H zonHm 30Hmn md>OOHm ooum>oo mHOOHdonm xuoc gmHm mOOH>me cunsgo.dmnupm r-I monocm mused 0838..“ avenge on uHmH> sec ommHlmmmH vmmHlommH abOHImbmH vomHTOHmH momHimomH oosmHHnsm umHHm 38H> mafia vmmHlome mmmHummmH vmmHTommH mmmuo do away 131 .me>uouCH menu umuoH CH mundane sz> o mOEHu mo HOOEDC ecu mum muoxomuo CH madness «HC>COUCH QEHC mHCu CH CHcom mundane 3mH> o COHC3 CH mOEHu «0 Census ecu who momOCCCoqu CH muooasz "ouoz H H m 328 pox H H 8 :v EH 2. :m cm Hm cm Buosm Noam H H cm R H S cm H :H cm 8: m .8an H2 H m R :H 5 H :m cm 823 z. 3:8 ”Ema. H CH 8 L H H 3:8 H2 H H m 8:? EH 8.3355 H CH 892 889. 8.me H H OH v H CH tan 886 H 8..me 38 H :H on H H CH and... £35 H 8838. H H :H cm H z. 3 CH buds. and H H CH 36388 H Hm H H H moo xCdu \mmmnolmsn\mmouocsm H H H 3. cm H CH defies 8 L H H cm H :m cm 8: m m8Hw>8Hm H mdegfimumfinumo H H H H CH .83 .5818 H 3.. L H H :m cm H :v 6 Am Cm ucoum pg H OH H H H H H 8n 8350386883 H 8 L H H... :m E R :v E 8: m Hughes 235 R :H cm 2. L H 333 BBHBTmEz H 8 H m S :m cm 2.. :m x. H: e 833.53 madam Hmm3 HCHOCOO 83-82 $2.83 83.33 33.22 82.83 83.83 82:82 $2.82 888 no more 88:95 832 33> 8H5 umOCOEEH mmouo m.Cmeoz mo momma CHmuuou ooumonCOO menu mon> mo HonEsz .o- OHCCB 132 R :H cm £63 85 H 88H ”.8185 H H H CH muoHdoe H v 2. :m OH HH 6 8 cm 83on \Houmfiooflo? 88m m 8 CH 38338 H L H used “.8158 H OH 8.83.98 Ha g H H m 8 CH owned: 88 H :V 8 5H :23 K mfldflum 8 :H on Romeo 38.82 H 8 OH 838 H L m m 38388 ofiuomo H ".8352... 8898 H H H CH .83 5?on H F. L m H H CH pooh 50:33 H cm 33$ 588 82:83 $3.82 RmHTmSH EoHToSH momHumomH vomHuoomH 82.32 33.82 mood mo om? COCNHHQHE umuHm 3OH> OEHB Ho. UCOUV or OHQCB 1133 H H8563; m H 2. :m cm H H CH 81.8% H? H C. :H CH 3:8 are? H H CH 3:3 HH< H ”Edwin: m S : H OH fines. oumm T... :H CH page Shh-oz m H uouHmm m moo Home 3 :N vm mmmHgmon H .83 .5?qu H S :m CH Hood ”.8133 C. :m cm 888 one? H 2. :m cm 8.63 umogm 8.98 B uHmH> HS- omermmmH emmHuommH msmHTmSH 3.2.2.3 momHumomH $2183 $2182 $2182 88a do men. BCmHHnHE umHHm 30H> OCHHB 134 HmovH ANOVN ANOVH AHOVN H H H AN vm AH Vm H magma pom uuflmeCHz mmme>mon aconw_eavL§uH wOHUon umonm mocwHusm Hammm\cmoHum> map cH mCHnuoHo mugomm Hmm3num®n\nmm35fl3m H muuozm uuonm Hv H m H muuocm HH< 35.0 £53. H magma HH4 uuflmeCHz mmwcx w>onm uuflxm uuflxm uuonm H «uHucHe mumm uwuHmm Q09 xcmu\mmmucc=m H mmew>mon H muwanoamamnuawgo xomn uaniuH H ucoum #501304 on>Hmm souscu Hmauom ommHlmmmH vmmHlommH mbmHlmhmH vbmHIOFmH mmmHumomH nocmHHnsm umuHm 3mH> mafia vomHlommH mmmHlmmmH vmmHlommH mmmho mo mmNB 135 ommHImmmH vmmHIOmmH mhmHImbmH .mHgkuaH 9:3 kumH CH mug—w 33> m 85.3 NC .395: mfi mum muwxomun 5 mg: «HmPkuHHH 95» must 5 Emma mumwmmm 3w? m £033 5 8E3 mo 35c wfi mum 8855.30 5 $352 ”302 AH Vm H Av vv AH VH 53.2.9 momHummmH cofiHHnE umuHm 33> 85. ¢mmHiome huwmnoz muoeoum ou 0mm: mcoHuocmm m>HuHmom masonm >ummuos @womusoocw\@mmHmum @wnoums\uoumuumcoewo H HonHuo may on muwuuwH meoyz AH vm AH VN musumquHH nouomgo H mocmxuoz @me mmmuw :HJNumwnoe @wNHOHHnsm Av VHO HomgfiH VNH v 93330 H885 8638 3288 ummoonfi >3 8 @838 mwmmmnv nuance @038. 3833: 3 9233 page: umfi 8x2 33m: 9.23m HH H H AH Vm HmHH H HH HANHVm Hm HAv Vm madouo >umwnos mo mCOHuom Hmuacww mcoauom Hmumcww COHuocmm m>HuHmom Av Vm Hm BAH VN mmmHImmmH vmmHIOmmH . :. wHQMB 136 H AH VH AH HH HH HAH HN AH HH Hm H N Hm H H Hm H H “H Hm AH Hm AH Hm Hb H N Hr HAH vb HH H N H HH HAm Hm Hm HAH Hm Am Hm Hm H N Hm HAN Hv Hm HHv Hv wummuoe womdaflanfifi 8 mummflm H695 mumwm fiuREQHEJHEQS muopmosum Ho wocwsHmcH nmmya mucmumm fluREQHBJHUQS Bag 805ng amuoHng mconmsumHU kififiHHQH H&NE mHGfiO EUEDHHCH mzonm COHSmmw UHmm mcnmccmum mmmuc 05 swan mmmuo “wanes uoCHHmo oomHlmmmH vmmHlommH mbmHlmbmH vbmHIObmH mmelmmmH vwanHnsm umuwm 3wH> QEHB vmmHloomH mmmHammmH vmmHlommH :oHpocmm m>HuHmom A©.ucoov PP wHQMB 137 .mHmPHmuCH mEHu HmuMH CH in. 3mH> m. 55 mo BBC m5 mum 39695 CH mHmQECC «HmEmuCH 9:3 35 CH CHmom mama 335 m. CUHC3 CH 8E3 mo 595C 93 9.8 $855th CH 989.52 "302 HH H H H was 3 on m3mH HuboH @095 H H C935 93 5H3 COHuUCHHnCoo CH EfiHuzsocfiaafi H H 383:5 $5.3m COHuom 9H3 RHmafifimnaflo Ho HHm VH HumovoaaH_um:Hmmm COHvom mxmu QHmfizflbHNRS HHoHH H H H mesu umumom H HHHm 2.:mvo HmHHvHH mfiummham mmfla 0§\§§ 39.6 as in H HHHm Hmvv Hmvm maafififingflflmo QHR 25 >umeOEEH mmmusoomHo ou ammo mCoHuOCmm w>Hummmz .NP mHnma 138 AHOHH AHOHH AH HH AH H m HH HHv HH AH Hm COHmmwMCoo flaw COHCQECQU uchwQ H HHJHHECUO coHCwo mucmemuumm uwHCwQ HH 3 98H B HUHBESBHS wfi B 8558 828 CUMCCU m>moH 8 HVHBRVHBB 3 8§5 328 696 3 an.» H89 5 uCQEHHOHCw uoHCwQ maHH8fim\coflSHmH> @028 ommHImmmH vmelommH mbmHlmboH EmHuoEH $3-33 8:238 umuE 23> 85. wmmHlommH mmOHlmmmH $2.83 8388 gflmdmz Hw.u:ooH NH mHnme APPENDIX F APPENDIX F Supply the Demand for the Supply Modesty Crusade History One of the Catholic modesty crusades operating during this period was the Supply the Demand for the Supply (SDS) Modesty Crusade. As the name implies, the crusade incorporated the idea of supply and demand. SDS was started by a group of girls at Seton High School in Cincinnati on February 4, 1947, after they read an article in Queen's HQEE magazine about supply and demand. The article asked "that if Roman Catholic priests could, by demanding it, get a certain type of collar, why couldn't Catholic high school girls demand and get more modest clothing" (Stiglmaier, Pepple, & Keller, 1950, p. 8). The purpose of SDS was "to secure more decency in fashion, literature, and entertainment, in order that modesty and purity may be protected" (Stiglmaier, et al., 1950, p. 8). Word about SDS quickly spread and soon there were chapters in other Catholic schools in Cincinnati and Cleveland. An article in The Catholic Universe Bulletin told of Cleveland girls being "mocked, laughed at, 'brushed off' and flatly insulted when they asked downtown department and women's stores for modest evening gowns" ("Girls seeking modest gowns," 1948, p. 1). The story created a stir and help came quickly from the clergy and retailers (Bowen, 139 140 1949). After being successful in Ohio, the crusade then Spread to schools throughout the country. By October 1951, SDS movements had begun in New Orleans, St. Louis, and Chicago ("Modish and modest," 1951). By April 1952, SDS also could be found in Washington and Rochester, New York ("Modesty demanded," 1952). In June 1952, the Chicago Inter-Student Catholic Action (CISCA) started a nationwide modesty campaign (Foy, 1953). About that time, CISCA joined forces with SDS, as SDS had its national headquarters in its offices. Some SDS chapters started when girls, not finding modest formals for their proms, decided to take their problems up with retailers and manufacturers of evening gowns. This was the case for SDS chapters in Rochester, New York, and Baltimore ("Baltimore girls," 1957; "Modesty demanded," 1952; "Quest," 1952; Tansey, 1958). Although SDS had its beginnings in demanding modest evening dresses for the prom, as it grew in numbers it focused on all types of clothing and drew up a list of clothing standards. The goals of these standards were "to provide a definite guide to fashion experts and store proprietors as well as to guarantee unity among the crusaders throughout the nation" ("Supply the Demand," c. 1956). There is a discrepancy in the date in which the standards were first drafted. In a letter to the editor in 1959, the national moderator for SDS stated that they were drawn up in December 1957 (Lawlor, 1959), whereas 141 SDS literature gave the date as December 1951 ("Supply the Demand," c. 1956). Apparently 1957 is a printing mistake, and should be 1951, as Brighton listed the SDS standards in his 1954 article. The researcher was able to find three lists of the SDS standards, which are presented below. They are found in articles by Brighton (1954) and Thompson (1964) and in the pamphlet "What about modesty?" (c. 1956, sixth edition). Brighton (1954) appears to have used this pamphlet, or a version of it, when he listed the standards in his article, as his list is quite similar. The standards in Thompson (1964) are a summary of a slightly longer list of standards which the researcher was not able to locate. The SDS standards were not strict rules imposed by adults. Rather, SDS crusaders voluntarily pledged to follow these standards, which were drawn up after the Chicago SDS "studied the current styles, consulted with various groups and individuals, interviewed the Cleveland crusaders, held meetings, and finally got down to the difficult business of drawing up what we felt would be an acceptable set" of standards (Lawlor, 1959, p. 802). Before the SDS standards were published, they were approved by "competent Church Authorities" ("Supply the Demand," c. 1956). The standards were submitted for approval by the Archbishop of Chicago, the late Cardinal Stritch, and then to moral theologians. Later, approval was requested of the 0.8. bishops ("Supply the Demand," 142 c. 1957; Lawlor, 1959). According to Lawlor (1959), forty archbishops and bishops gave approval, either personally or through their secretary, and none expressed disapproval. A good number of these approvals appear to be quoted in the pamphlet by the SDS ("Supply the Demand," c. 1957). Although most articles that mentioned SDS praised the standards, as they gave the teens direction in specific areas of dress, not all articles praised them. Thomas (1954) criticized SDS because, among other things, he thought that "for the most part . . . the types of clothing which the standards condemn cannot be shown to be ' an occasion of sin to normal individuals' in our society" (p. 394). Lynch (1958), while agreeing that some types of clothing are immodest, stated that "any attempt to define with further exactitude the criteria of modest dress is, in the considered opinion of many, unnecessary and perhaps inimical to the effectiveness of such a crusade" (p. 187). Lynch did not name SDS as one of these crusades, nor did McKenzie (1963), who pointed out deficiencies in what he termed "tape measure morality" (p. 18). 143 Dress Standards The following is a summary of nine dress standards found in an article by Brighton (1954) and the SDS pamphlet "What about modesty?" (c. 1956). Styles considered objectionable are: --All bared-midriff styles, regardless of the occasion (one-piece bathing suits should be worn at the beach) --All strapless, halter and off-the-shoulder styles including swimsuits and formals (these garments should have either reasonably broad straps over the shoulders or cap sleeves) --Transparent fabrics such as sheer nylon, organdy, net, batiste, lace and similar fabrics when worn alone (these fabrics may be worn, but only over slips or camisoles) --Front necklines that show where cleavage begins and back necklines that are lower than a horizontal line drawn between each armpit (a lower backline in a swimsuit is okay if there is nothing suggestive or extreme about it) --Knits that cling too tightly or emphasize the bustline --Padded, pointed and uplift styles of bras --Skirts that are too short or tight (skirts should be long enough to cover the knees when seated) --Short shorts and rolled-up longer shorts (Bermuda shorts should be worn in public) --Tight pants and jeans 144 These standards were also included in an article by Thompson (1964) on the SDS. She mentioned that the SDS standards were published in the "What about modesty?" pamphlet. The Thompson article included a tenth standard not found in the two previously mentioned articles. It reads: "when attending Mass, going to Confession, or other religious and formal occasions, the girl who has dignity and modesty remembers that the sacredness and importance of the occasion demands the proper dress. No shorts or slacks to visit Him!" (p. 28). APPENDIX G APPENDIX G Marylike Crusade History The Marylike Crusade (alternate spellings are Marilyke and Marylyke) grew out of the Purity Crusade for Mary Immaculate (PCMI), which was founded on December 8, 1944 at St. Cecilia's Church in Bartelso, Illinois. The ultimate goal of PCMI was "the universal recognition of our Mother " whereas the specific Most Pure as 'Queen of the Universe', goal of the Marylike Crusade was "to lead Catholic women and girls to accept and abide by the motto, 'Whatever Our ' to recognize Mary as 'Queen of Blessed Mother Approves, Modest Fashions'" (Kunkel, 1954, p. 899). In order to promote a clear-cut definition of what they thought constituted modest women's dress, the Marylike Crusade came up with the idea of dress tags. These tags bore Marylike dress standards, presented below, which were "in essence those set up by the late George Cardinal Mundelein of Chicago, who took this action after special instructions had been issued by the Sacred Congregation of the Council on Jan. [gig] 12, 1930," and were attached to dresses meeting these standards (Kunkel, 1954, p. 899). The tags, which were ready in May 1953, first appeared as a trial run on wedding dresses in September 1953 and were deemed successful. The Marylike Crusade started publicly on October 7, 1953, when it asked more than 8,000 145 146 Catholic schools to enlist in the Marylike Crusade. This meant not only looking for the tag when shopping, but also asking retailers and manufacturers to use the tag on dresses that met the standards (Kunkel, 1954). By June 1955 the tag had been applied to almost 75,000 dresses, at both factories and stores ("'Modesty' garb being sold here," 1955). According to Kunkel (1955), several archbishops and bishops expressed their approval of the Marylike Crusade. POpe Pius XII is reported to have praised the Crusade on July 14, 1954 and May 11, 1956 (Stepanich, 1962). However, several Catholics expressed their disapproval of the tags. In her column for The Sign magazine, Katherine Burton, as well as the half-dozen peOple who wrote letters to her, thought the tag idea went "A Little Too Far" (Burton, 1955, p. 62). After Time magazine carried a slightly sarcastic story about the dress tags, a Catholic wrote a letter to the editor of Time stating that "a mother and daughter who believe in modesty do not have to read a tag on a dress to tell if it is modest" (Haidinger, 1955, p. 4). Others who disapproved of the Crusade's tactics include Mohan (1955) and Lynch (1958). Although the Crusade thought the tag program was successful, it was halted in September 1955 for three reasons. First, some tags had been applied to dresses that did not meet the standards. Second, some stores claimed that the tags were censorship. Last, dresses that 147 were tagged did not always sell, creating a financial loss for the retailer (Kunkel, 1957). The Marylike Crusade did not quit promoting its dress standards when it dismantled its tag program. It printed them from time to time in Catholic magazines. A debate, however, arose over the origins of the standards. As mentioned above, the Crusade said the standards were taken from those set up by Cardinal Mundelein, who took action after the Sacred Congregation of the Council issued instructions on modesty, January 12, 1930. The researcher was not able to find the standards that Cardinal Mundelein had set for modesty in dress. She was able to obtain English translations of the January 12, 1930 instructions by the Sacred Congregation of the Council, but the translations did not give any dress standards (Woywod, 1930; Bouscaren, 1947). In 1956 and after, the Marylike Crusade standards was prefaced with a quote, attributed to Cardinal Sbarretti, prefect of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, on January 12, 1930, which stated: A dress cannot be called decent which is cut deeper than two fingers' breadth under the pit of the throat, which does not cover the arms at least to the elbows; and scarcely reaches a bit beyond the knees. Furthermore, dresses of transparent materials are improper . . . [gig] ("Marylike standards," 1956, p. 227). The January 12, 1930 instructions by the Sacred Congregation of the Council gave reference to a letter written on August 23, 1928 by the Sacred Congregation of Religious (Woywod, 148 1930). Pater Sine Nomine (1957) also pointed this out, stating that the quote in question was in the August 23, 1928 letter written by the Sacred Congregation of Religious to nuns running girls' schools in Rome. However, Lynch (1958) related that neither this quote, nor any specifics on what constitutes modest dress, was in this letter. Both Carr (1956) and Pater Sine Nomine (1959) stated that the quote in question was written by the Cardinal Vicar of Rome, who was Cardinal Pompili at that time, in a letter to superiors of girls' schools in Rome, on September 24, 1928. Although these instructions on clothing were written by a cardinal, in a pastoral letter dated July 22, 1944, BishOp Douville of Quebec was said to have considered them directives from POpe Pius XI (Carr, 1956; Pater Sine Nomine, 1959). In fact, the Crusade article "Fatima blueprint for modesty" (1960) attributed this quote to Pope Pius XI, although at the bottom of the same page it once again erroneously attributed the quote to Cardinal Sbarretti. It should be noted that the Crusade did not quote Cardinal Pompili's instructions in its entirety. The last part of the instructions, which came after the ellipsis in the above quote, reads "as also flesh-colored stockings, which suggest the legs being bare" (Woywod, 1929, p. 171). Although these standards were derived from Cardinal Pompili, they also were reported to be established by mothers and daughters ("Where angels fear," 1955). 149 In 1962, the Marylike Crusade started a campaign for modest dress in church. The focus of this campaign was a code of attire for church and other sacred places, found below. The Crusade also offered posters for churches and other sacred places with the following wording: Out of respect to Our Lord and the edification of our neighbor we beg women and girls to appear in Church modestly dressed. Slacks, shorts, sleeveless and low cut dresses do not meet the norm of Christian modesty. Your cooperation is evidence of your love for Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament and respect for the House of God. (Stepanich, 1962). Hunter (1967) condemned the code, as it discouraged women from even entering the church for a brief visit. She related her own experience of being discouraged from entering a church: she was wearing a sleeveless dress and was about to enter a church to give thanks for a safe journey when she saw the code posted on the church door. She left the church building quite upset (Hunter, 1967). Although Reverend Kunkel, the founder of the Marylike Crusade, died in 1969, his voice was still heard. The magazine Divine Love published one of his articles on the Marylike Crusade periodically until 1982 (Kunkel, 1982). In the same issue of Divine Love, there is a short article describing a poster offered by J.M.J. Madonna Tours of Anaheim, California, for churches and sacred places. The poster sounds very similar to the Crusade poster described above. It includes a picture of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the wording: 150 Out of respect for our Lord, And for the edification of our neighbors, we beg men and women, boys and girls, to appear in church modestly and respectfully dressed. Shorts, tanktops, low cut, backless and mini dresses, halters, bare midriffs, tight fitting clothes, etc. Do [gig] not meet the norm of Christian modesty and or [gig] respect. Your cooperation is evidence of your love for our Lord, in the Blessed Sacrament, and for His Holy Mother. Thank you. (Oraze, 1982, p. 22). This poster appears to be the same one used by Reverend Griese, the pastor of Sacred Heart Church in Dayton, Ohio, who was removed from his post in 1990 after he denied communion twice to a man dressed in shorts ("A Catholic taste," 1989; "Priest who imposed," 1990). Dress Standards The following quote is an early version of the standards from Kunkel (1955, p. 370). 1--"Marylike" is modest without compromise, "like Mary," Christ's Mother. 2--"Marylike" dresses provide full coverage for the bodice, chest, shoulders, back, and arms, as indicated in No. 5; with no cutouts in front or back lower than two inches below the neck line. 3--"Marylike" dresses do not admit the use of transparent or flesh colored materials where full coverage is required. 4--"Marylike" dresses do, however, permit a free use of laces, nets, etc., for ornamentation and trimming. 5--"Marylike" dresses have sleeves extending at least one half way between the shoulder and elbow; but three-quarters length in gowns for brides and their attendants, and in church and school uniforms. (Gauntlets are tolerated for wedding ceremonies, but only if attached to the sleeves, which are of quarter length.) 6--"Marylike" dresses do not unduly reveal the figure of the wearer. 7--"Marylike" dresses have skirts extending below the knees. 151 8--"Marylike" dresses provide for full coverage, even after jacket, cape, or stole are removed. A later version of the dress standards is worded slightly differently than the above standard. It deletes the requirement for three-quarter length sleeves for brides, church and school, and adds an explanatory note to the quarter-length standard for sleeves. This note reads: "because present styles have become so pagan that dresses with sleeves are a rarity, quarter-length sleeves temporarily are tolerated with ecclesiastical approval, until Christian women and girls can be educated to accept fully the POpe's decision on modesty" (Kunkel, 1957, p. 17). Some of the other standards are reworded but their effect is as before. REFERENCES REFERENCES Abbott, W. M. (1966). The documents of Vatican II. New York: Herder & Herder. Archbishop v. redhead. (1959, July 20). Time, p. 87. Baer, D. J., & Mosele, V. F. (1970). Political and religious beliefs of Catholics and attitudes toward lay dress of Sisters. The Journal of Psychology, 13, 77-83. Balkwell, C., & Ho, S. (1992). A quantitative analysis of dress dimensions: Comparison of models for Taiwan and the United States from 1966 to 1986. Clothing and Textile Research Journal, 12(4), 47-53. Baltimore girls press modesty campaign. (1957, May). The Catholic Educator, pp. 574—575. Batterberry, M., & Batterberry, A. (1977). Mirror, mirror: A social history of fashion. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Beauty, right & wrong. (1956, September 17). Time, p. 79. Benedict, R. (1944). Dress. In E. R. A. Seligman (Ed.), Encyglopedia of the social sciences (reprint) (pp. 235-237). New York: Macmillan. Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press. Berendt, A. M. (1977, fourth quarter). Your body a jewel. Divine Love, p. 15. Bond, D. (1981). The Guinness guide to 20th century fashion. Enfield, Middlesex, England: Guinness. Bouscaren, T. L. (1947). The Canon Law digest (6th printing). Milwaukee, Bruce Publishing. Bouscaren, T. L., Ellis, A. C., & Korth, F. N. (1963). Canon Law: A text and commentagy. Milwaukee: Bruce. Bowen, D. (1949, March). The cold shoulder for the bare shoulder. Catholic School Editor, pp. 2-4, 13. 152 153 Breig, J. (1962, August 18). Should women wear (ugh) hats in church? Ave Maria, p. 19. Brighton, H. (1954, September). Crusade for modesty. The Catholic Home Journal, pp. 8-9. Brook, M. P. (1966). An analygis of the viewpoints of selected religious leaders concerning dress and adornment of lay personnel. Unpublished master's thesis, San Jose State College, San Jose, CA. Burton, K. (1955, September). Puritanical dresses. Sign, p. 62. Carr, A. M. (1956, September). Editor's reply. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 106—108. A Catholic taste in clothes. (1989, September 18). Newsweek, p. 27. Christiansen, K. S., & Kernaleguen, A. (1971). Orthodoxy and conservatism-modesty in clothing selection. Journal of Home Economics, §i(4), 251-255. Clark, F. (1982). Hats. London: E. T. Batsford. Coriden, J. A. (Ed). (1977). Sexism and church law: Equal rights and Affirmative Action. New York: Paulist Press. Coriden, J. A., Green, T. J., & Heintschel, D. E. (Eds.). (1985). The code of Canon Law: A text and commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press. Creekmore, A. M. (1963). Clothing behaviors and their relation to general values and their striving for basic needs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park. Danagher, J. J. (1953, December). Women's heads covered in church. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 258-259. Daughters of St. Paul. (1984). Basic catechism (5th rev. ed.). Boston: Daughters of St. Paul. Dominic, M. (1962, April). For teenagers only. Family Dunlap, K. (1928). The development and function of clothing. Journal of General Psychology, 1, 64-78. Dwyer, K. M. (1964). Religious commitment as a factor in conservatism in dress. Unpublished master's thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus. 154 Eichler, L. (1924). The customs of mankind. Garden City, NY: Garden City Publishing. Engelbrecht, W. M. (1963). Modesty in relation to women's dress. Unpublished master's thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus. Fatima blueprint for modesty. (1960, October-November). Our Lady's Digest, pp. 156-163. Fink, L. C. (1955, April). "Woman is the glory of man". FamilyADigest, pp. 52-54. Flugel, J. C. (1950). The psychology of clothes (3rd impression). London: Hogarth Press. Foy, F. (Ed.). (1953). A nationwide campaign to promote modesty standards. 1953 national Catholic almanac (p. 745). Paterson, NJ: St. Anthony's Guild. Foy, F. (Ed.). (1961). Address to young women. 1961 national Catholic almanac (PP. 176-178). Paterson, NJ: St. Anthony's Guild Foy, F. (Ed.). (1962). Rights of men and women are equal but functions are different. 1962 national Catholic almanac (p. 80). Paterson, NJ: St. Anthony's Guild. Foy, F. (Ed.). (1989). 1989 Catholic almanac. Huntington, IN: Our Sunday Visitor. Foy, F. (Ed.). (1991). 1991 Catholic almanac. Huntington, IN: Our Sunday Visitor. Garland, M. (1970). The changigg form of fashion. New York: Praeger. Girls seeking modest gowns tell of "insults" in downtown stores. (1948, December 17). The Catholic Universe Bulletin, pp. 1, 16. Gold, A. (1991). 90 years of fashion. New York: Fairchild. Griesman, K. S. (1966). Clothing behavior related to attitudes toward certain clothing standards, clothing interest, orthodoxyygand conformity. Unpublished master's thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis. Haidinger, J. D. (1955, July 18). The Marylike look. Time, p. 4. 155 Hillestad, R. C. (1974). A schematic approach to a theoretical analysis of dress as nonverbal communication. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus. University Microfilms No. 75-3097. Horn, M. J., & Gurel, L. M. (1981). The second skin: An interdisciplinary study of clothing (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Howell, G. (1990, January). The 80's. Vogue, pp. 214-220. Huber, J. A. (1962). A comparison of men's and women's attitudes towards modesty in women's dress and some background factors relating to those attitudes. Unpublished master's thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus. Hunter, S. (1967, February 4). Myopia re: Modesty. Ave Maria, pp. 10-11. James, W. (1950). The principles of psychology. (Vol. 2). (Reprint). Dover. John Paul II, Pope. (1988). On the dignity and vocation of women. The Pope Speaks, 33(1), 10-47. Kleinline, J. K. (1967). The relationship of Mennonite Church branch, age, and church attendance and participation to attitudes towards conservativeness of dress. Unpublished master's thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus. Kunkel, B. A. (1954, July). Mary Immaculate in the market place. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 898-900. Kunkel, B. A. (1955, March). The Marilyke crusade: The war against immodest fashions. Our Lady's Digest, pp. 359-373. Kunkel, B. A. (1957, July). "Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord." Divine Love, pp. 16-17. Kunkel, B. A. (1982, second-fourth quarters). "Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord." Divine Love, pp. 8-9. Laver, J. (1969). Modesty in dress: an inquiry into the fundamentals of fashion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Laver, J. (1983). Costume and fashion: A concise history. (2nd ed.) New York: Oxford. 156 Lawlor, F. X. (1959, June). S.D.S. moderator writes. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 798, 800, 802, 804. Lester, K. M., & Kerr, R. N. (1977). Historic costume: A résumé of style and fashion from remote times to the nineteen-seventies (7th ed.). Peoria, IL: Chas. A. Bennett. Lucas, K. (1971). Religious habit: Past and present. Unpublished master's thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins. Lynch, J. (1958, June). Modesty in dress. Theological Studies, pp. 183-187. MacKay, D. M. (1972). Formal analysis of communicative processes. In R. A. Hinde (Ed.). Nonverbal communication. New York: Cambridge Press. Marie, R. (1954, June). In vogue with Mary. Catholic Educator, pp. 534—537, 540. The Marylike standards for modesty in dress. (1956, December). Our Lady's Digest, pp. 227-228. McDonough, A. (1951, January). Church attire. Sign, p. 37. McGloin, J. T. (1951, November). Lovely to look at. Extension, pp. 17, 67. McKenzie, L. (1963, March 23). Modesty crusades. Ave Maria, p. 18. Melinkoff, E. (1984). What we wore: An offbeat social historyyof women's clothingyy1950 to 1980. New York: William Morrow. Modesty demanded. (1952, July). Catholic Mind, pp. 438-439. Modish and modest. (1951, October 6). America, p. 2. "Modesty" garb being sold here. (1955, June 12). The New York Times, p. 73. Mohan, R. P. (1955, December). Yardstick modesty. American Ecclesiastical Review, pp. 377-380. Murray, M. P. (1989). Changing styles in fashion: Whoy what, why. New York: Fairchild. Mussio, J. K. (1955, July). Wear Mary's robe of modesty! Our Lady's Digest, pp. 54-55. 157 Nevins, A. J. (Ed.) (1965). The Maryknoll Catholic dictionagy. New York: Grosset & Dunlap. Newland, M. R. (1965, January). Whistles, flattery and modesty. Sign, pp. 44-45. The new American Bible with the revised New Testament. (1986). Iowa Falls, IA: World Bible. The official Catholic directory. New Providence, NJ: P. J. Kenedy. O'Grady, D. (1975, November 7). MacLeod: Women, short skirts, scare Vatican. National Catholic Reporter, p. 4. Ohio priest won't fight ouster over strict dress code. (1991, January 6). Atlanta Journal, sec. A, p. 4. Oraze, S. (1961, summer). Immodesty in dress can lead to tragedy. Divine Love, pp. 8-9. Oraze, S. (1968, October). We get letters. Divine Love, p. 10. Oraze, S. (1977, fourth quarter). Modesty miscellany: Slacks and jeans. Divine Love, p. 11. Oraze, S. (1982, second-fourth quarters). Immodesty in church. Divine Love, p. 22. Parishioners protest a ban on bare legs. (1989, September 17). The New York Times, p. 30. Park, S. (1985). Trends of fashion cycles from 1960 to 1984. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Pater Sine Nomine. (1957, November). Measures and modesty. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 164-172. Pater Sine Nomine. (1959, March). Confused consciences or confused confessors? II. Reply to Father Lynch. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 519-526. Pius, XII, Pope. (1956). The dignity of woman. The Pope Speaks, 3, 367-375. Plastic surgery for beauty's sake. (1959, September). Clergy Review, pp. 553-555. 158 Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. (1977). Declaration on the question of the admission of women to the ministerial priesthood. In J. A. Coriden. (Ed). Sexism and church law: Egual rights and affirmative action (pp 173-187). Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press. Priest who imposed dress code is removed. (1990, January 7). The New York Times, p. 23. Pro, J. J. (1969, second quarter). The mini modesty mania. Divine Love, p. 7. Probert, C. (1981). Hats in Vogue since 1910. Thames & Hudson. Quest for propriety. (1952, April 7). Life, p. 44. Scanlon, R. (1988, November). Women's fashions and Christian modesty. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 24-32. Schexnayder, M. (1970, second quarter). Immodesty in dress. Divine Love, p. 10. Shivalier, M. L. (1982). Clothing attitudes, religious variables, and racial affiliation of adolescent females. Unpublished master's thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus. Siegel, S. (1956). Nonparametric statistics for the behavorial sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill. Stepanich, M. F. (1962, June). Marylike church attire. Priest, pp. 542-544. Stepanich, M. F. (1964, June). Relatives and absolutes. Priest, pp. 550-553. Stiglmaier, H., Pepple, S., & Keller, K. (1950, January). S.D.S. sparks a war on immodesty. Catholic Home Journal, pp. 8-9, 22. Sue and the charisma. (1959, August 3). Time, p. 64. Supply the Demand for the Supply Modesty Crusade. (c. 1956). (6th ed.). What about modesty? Chicago: Chicago Inter-Student Catholic Action. Supply the Demand for the Supply Modesty Crusade. (c. 1957). S.D.S. ModestyyCrusade. Chicago: Chicago Inter—Student Catholic Action. Tansey, A. (1958, February). Call letters S.D.S. Information, pp. 15-20. 159 Thomas, J. L. (1954, November). Clothes, culture and modesty. Social Order, pp. 386-394. Thomas, W. I. (1899). The psychology of modesty and clothing. The American Journal of Sociology, 5, 246-262. Thompson, N. L. (1977). An analysis of the fashion process of the mini-length garment as shown in fashion publications. Unpublished master's thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing. Thompson, P. (1964, June). S.D.S.: modesty crusade. Sacred Heart Messenger, pp. 24-28. Tortora, P., & Eubank, K. (1989). A survey of historic costume. New York: Fairchild. Trexler, N. G. (1968). Religious participation and reactions of college women to body exposure. Unpublished master's thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing. Trimble, G. M. (1972). Clothing conservatism-modesty related to Christian-orthodoxy and other general factors of single, Christian, college women. Unpublished master's thesis, Florida State University, Tallahassee. Waln, B. A. (1965). An investigation of written church comments concerning modesty as observed in women's dress in the United States from 1900—1964. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Weeden, P. (1977). Study patterned on Kroeber's investigation of style. Dress, 3, 9-19. Wells, J. (1974, July). Annals of perdition, crises in the Church #2: The naked Eve. Critic, pp. 61-62. Wheeler, A. R. (1984). Levels of acceptable fashion for Mennonite women in Ohio and Indiana. Unpublished master's thesis, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH. Where angels fear to tread. (1955, September 10). Ave Maria, p. 4. Williams, G. S. (1974). An investigation into the relationships of church participation on modesty in dress of single undergraduate college women. Unpublished master's thesis, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater. Woywod, S. (1929, November). Immodest women's dress. Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 171-173. 160 Woywod, S. (1930, September). What is considered indecent dress of women by the supreme authority of the Church? Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pp. 1328-1329. "I1111111111!1111111111“s