[Dixiecat]

still think you're left with two realistic options when it comes to membership in an organization (as opposed to dealing with legally protected rights and freedoms): Either 1) try to work constructively, from the inside, for change, or 2) decide to no longer associate yourself with the organization.

David, I would tend to agree with you for the most part except, 1) the young man in question is not a member, he attends because his parents do. He hasn't 'chosen' anything at all and 2) he is a minor child of a member with all the limitations that entails; he can't unjoin something he isn't a member of and he shouldn't be subjected to a 'chat' without permission from his parents.

I'm not here to say anything other than it's sad when anyone, ANYONE can't have an open and just mind. OP, I hope it all gets worked out in the end and that you will be able to use this as a learning opportunity for all involved.

[MacColl]

I am a roman catholic. Being of Irish and Highland Scots ancestry I do wear my kilt to mass. I have never gotten a negative reaction. 100% positive reactions from women and men. My vietnamese priest told me that at his previous parish in New Jersey he saw many kilts. I don't understand the negativity.

[Java]

OK, I'm an old biker, who is now in seminary school. I would say if he won't listen to reason, tell him this old one on the way out the door. (It would apply to kilties as well as bikers).
An old biker decided to go to church one Sunday. He had heard good things about one particular church, so Sunday morning he put on his best jeans, and boots, his newest vest, and a clean t-shirt and went to church. On the way out, he stoped to thank the pastor, and the pastor told him that maybe he had better pray about what is appropriate to wear, before next Sunday. The same thing happened the following 3 Sundays. On the fifth Sunday, after the service, the biker again stopped to thank the pastor on the way out, and the pastor much less politely than before told him, "I told you to ask God what is appropriate to wear here before you came back!" And the biker answered, "Well, pastor, I did ask God what I should wear here, and God told me that he had no idea, because He hd never been here."

Have Fun,
Java

[Riverkilt]

Visions of what the posts would have been like had there been an Internet back when women were first wearing pants suits to church....

[Richard]

I haven't read all the post, but has this got any thing to do with this
Deuterogamy 22:5 - neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God

I wear my kilt to church (Mass) ever week and no one has passed a bad comment, in fact we had a new priest and he came over and wanted to know what tartan it was, I said it was Anderson, he said I should bow down to you, I was confused, but it turned out that during the reformation in England many of the Anderson clan died for there faith they were staunch
Catholics I had no idea that happened

[davidlpope]

Originally Posted by Dixiecat

David, I would tend to agree with you for the most part except, 1) the young man in question is not a member, he attends because his parents do. He hasn't 'chosen' anything at all and 2) he is a minor child of a member with all the limitations that entails; he can't unjoin something he isn't a member of and he shouldn't be subjected to a 'chat' without permission from his parents.

Very good points.

[MacBean]

Here is a link to a web site that discusses Mormon views on modest dress. Personally, I have no difficulty with the discussion on the page, from the point of view of their church. After reading it, I came away with a feeling that they were careful to guide the reader in a positive and helpful way as to what is modest.

http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/daily/modesty.htm

If the bishop had asked your son whether he thought that his kilt might be drawing more attention to him than might be modest, letting him come to his own conclusion, then I can't see the objection.

Therefore, I conclude that the offensive action was that the bishop saught to impose his view and take away the boy's autonomy; a serious, but not uncommon error in any place of sacred endeavor. The kilt may indeed be immodest in that it is unusual or new, but probably not immodest in and of itself. In time, the congregation would no longer be distracted by the newness. Newness in itself does not strike me as immodest.

On the flip side, it might have been best to consult with the bishop first.

[wildrover]

Originally Posted by Richard

I haven't read all the post, but has this got any thing to do with this
Deuterogamy 22:5 - neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God

Probably does. Maybe the guy didn't have that exact quote in mind...but I suspect he had the feeling of it.

I'm pretty confident making that guess, since that misconception is the only source of static I ever get when kilted.

It's also our business to put that misconception to rest in a manner appropriate to the situation.

MB, that was an interesting link, with a lot of good suggestions and guidelines worth keeping in mind even for those of us who choose to remain unfettered. They sure do worry about sex a lot, tho ...just tell 'em, "don't drink and park, accidents cause people!" I don't think modesty is what the OP's son was up against, however...that seems to be more the worry at high school proms, than churches, where the focus seems to be all about not getting down, vs the secular focus on a party that is gonna go off like a prom dress . The link did explain something I saw here a while back though, where a guy wanted to kilt up to go to church, and stated that his decision to wear his hose like knee socks and his kilt at skirt length was based on a requirement for modesty. At the time, I didn't post, but I did disagree...I think you've got the right of it, that it might be new and interesting, but a kilt in and of itself is not inherently immodest.

Only people are immodest...or not.

I can't put it better than Z's quotes or Travis's & Dixiecat's thoughts on the matter...

-Sean

[Mike_Oettle]

Coming into this discussion a tad late, I must say that I agree with those posters who say that the bishop’s action in lecturing the young lad about the kilt without his father’s say-so was wrong.
But it seems unlikely that he will be persuaded (although perhaps a more senior member of his church might convince him).
I would suggest to Grizz, though, that he might be happier at another church.

Kenneth mentioned wearing a kilt to church (as a minister), and Hector seems to have the right idea with his two kilts (one of them Clergy).
Another poster (sorry, I have lost track of who it was) said that his choir robes didn’t fit properly over his kilt.
This is surprising to me – probably the robes are too tight!
Since I am an Anglican, it is normal for me to see clergy (and a few others) robed up, and it would make no difference to me whether they were wearing trousers or not underneath.
(Strangely, most of the female clergy I know wear pants!)
I grew up in a Congregational church where the minister refused to wear a dog collar and instead would preach in his academicals.
The master’s gown doesn’t cover the whole of the legs, but it is below the knee, and can just as easily be worn with a kilt as with trousers.
Regards,
Mike

[Frank McGrath]

Originally Posted by grizzbass

My 12 year old son wore his kilt to our church sunday (Mormon) and was told by the bishop (a congregational leader) he couldn't participate if he wore his kilt. His older cousin was told by his bishop a few weeks ago when he wore his kilt in idaho that he wasn't welcome at church if he wore it again.
Has anyone else of another faith (or I guess the same) gotten such negative responces when they wear a kilt to church. Just wondering.

Find an Episcopalian Church. They will love it.

Plus, I did not see any signs in my church stating a dress code. (BTW, I'm Lutheran)