No, really, do I? It's not a rhetorical question, so if anyone stumbles on this and has an opinion, I'd like to know.
The 'skirt' issue isn't one that I've really felt strongly one way or the other about. I like skirts. They're feminine, they're pretty, they're practical. I will only wear skirts to Mass, I've never set foot inside a church in pants. Why? I was raised understanding that skirts/dresses were the only appropriate clothing for church. But why?
I found another great blog, Country Mom. One of her latest posts was A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words. So, of course, I was reading through her back posts on 'Biblical Womanhood' and 'Modesty'. And it made me start thinking about it again.
5 A woman shall not be clothed with man's apparel, neither shall a man use woman's apparel: for he that doeth these things is abominable before God. - Deuteronomy 22:5 (Douay-Rheims)
I buy my pants in the Women's section of the store. They are, therefore, 'women's apparel'. Problem solved! Only, not so much, maybe. Historically, traditionally, pants are mens clothing. Women wore dresses/skirts. Aside from that, skirts are, inherently, more modest than pants on women. And I'm thinking of proper skirts, not skin tight, mini, see through - skirts. When I think of a skirt, I'm picturing something that goes to my ankles, at least. I think pants, even loose ones like I wear, might draw a little too much attention to a womans...'assets'. Which is not something that anyone but her husband should be thinking about.
9 In like manner women also in decent apparel: adorning themselves with modesty and sobriety, not with plaited hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly attire, 10 But as it becometh women professing godliness, with good works. - 1 Timothy 2:9 - 10 (Douay-Rheims)
So I'm trying to figure this out. Do I have to wear skirts? Is that the next step here? I'm apparently doing this backwards, because, reading, most women start out with the skirts and then add headcovering. I'm running around covering in pants.