A new Catholic (married) woman with a question about headcovering?

[whatischarity]

Wonderful post, dixieagle! Thanks for adding to the discussion with such thoughtful responses. While I really appreciated the post by excubitor that you were responding to here, and thought he made some good points, I think you have made some really insightful observations and clearly have given this matter quite a lot of thought. Listening to you is very valuable for me, a new Catholic.

Your original post has created quite a discussion. I would just ask this qestion. Would you want to be remembered as the woman devoted to wearing a veil in church or as the woman who was known for her charity toward others? I believe the central mesage of the New Testament was that the rule-based formalism of the Old Testament was but a step to the spirit based message of Jesus which completely superseded it. At one point you were considering wearing a veil in church out of respect for Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament and now I am reading posts that women need to wear a veil in order to be respectful toward their husbands and to demonstrate that they accept him as thier head. The veil is becoming an issue instead of the message. I would compare it to circumcision. The early church had to determine if Christians needed to carry on the Jewish tradition of circumcision and St Paul successfully demonstrated that it was only circumcision of the heart that was required. My personal opinion only is that Catholics. since they are human, can have a tendency to give emphasis and importance to a thing such that it becomes an end in itself instead a means to an end. thats all.

 

[floresco]

Your original post has created quite a discussion. I would just ask this qestion. Would you want to be remembered as the woman devoted to wearing a veil in church or as the woman who was known for her charity toward others? .

Is there any reason she couldn’t be remembered as both? Why is this being framed as an either/or? One good thing about head-covering no longer being a rule is that the women who do so, usually find it personally meaningful. When I read a post from a woman who covers her head, it tends to be admirable and inspiring. These women almost invariably have good attitudes and good reasons.

The posts I see arguing with these women are often accusing and judgmental. Some people like to identify the practice of head-covering with being legalistic or self-righteous. But I almost never see that in the way that women who do it write about it.

 

[Miserys_Fence]

This is from the perspective of a 36-year-married wife and mother who gladly followed her husband to a place far from home for his work, is a longtime, active pro-lifer, was a stay-at-home mom while our girls were growing up, believes the ordination of women can never happen…

First, every successful marriage must ideally be 100/100.

I disagree that your stated positions are in line with Pope John Paul II. “However, the awareness that in marriage there is mutual “subjection of the spouses out of reverence for Christ”, and not just that of the wife to the husband, must gradually establish itself in hearts, consciences, behaviour and customs.” It is quite clear from His Holiness’ own words that he believes change must come, and that the old way of regarding a wife as someone who is not a full partner in marriage must end. This is in utter opposition to your previous references to “ruling” your wife.

This hearkens (and I use a word of Old English etymology purposefully) back to the days when smart girls pretended to be dumb in order to attract boys. It was ridiculous then, and it is absurd now.

Competent women should know better than to marry men who are immature.

So, in order to be “soft” and “feminine” a woman must keep her mouth shut and her opinions to herself?

What positions of service do you mean? I have seen some bossy DREs, but also plenty of humble, hard-working women, without whom little would get done in the way of church cleaning, parish fundraisers, etc.

To what generation do you refer? Actually, more and more young women are rejecting “choice”; look at the latest polls on the subject. Truth is winning with regard to abortion, and those who support “choice” are running scared.

As people have moved away from God-centered lives, much evil has entered the world.

One doesn’t have to be a “feminist” to think that the day of required head coverings has passed; literally all of the very good, Mass-going, pro-life, Catholic wives and mothers I know - along with their husbands - are of this opinion, as is the 1983 Code of Canon Law, and the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as referenced in Inter Insigniores. Hats, veils, chapel veils…wear them if you feel called to do so, by all means, but don’t assign them a “normative value” they no longer possess.

Excellent post, Dixieagle!

When, oh when will the control freaks learn that there is a HUGE spiritual difference between doing something of your own free will out of love and respect for God, and being forced to do it?

Miz

 

[lizaanne]

When, oh when will the control freaks learn that there is a HUGE spiritual difference between doing something of your own free will out of love and respect for God, and being forced to do it?

Miz

Here is a post from my headcovering group here in CAF: Want to as opposed to must… It does make a massive difference - something I think is horribly lost on most people who don’t “get it”.

Here is the main forum: Veiled in Grace

Please do join the group!!! We could use some new discussion!

~Liza

 

[PatriceA]

Is there any reason she couldn’t be remembered as both? Why is this being framed as an either/or? One good thing about head-covering no longer being a rule is that the women who do so, usually find it personally meaningful. When I read a post from a woman who covers her head, it tends to be admirable and inspiring. These women almost invariably have good attitudes and good reasons.

The posts I see arguing with these women are often accusing and judgmental. Some people like to identify the practice of head-covering with being legalistic or self-righteous. But I almost never see that in the way that women who do it write about it.

I second this!

 

[dixieagle]

Wonderful post, dixieagle! Thanks for adding to the discussion with such thoughtful responses. While I really appreciated the post by excubitor that you were responding to here, and thought he made some good points, I think you have made some really insightful observations and clearly have given this matter quite a lot of thought. Listening to you is very valuable for me, a new Catholic.

Thank you so much, mommamaree (we may share the same first name, if I understand your name correctly…)

I actually hesitated quite a while before posting, and really labored over that. I am a very non-confrontational person, and often tend to discount my own opinions, not wanting to offend anyone, or wondering if my post will be intelligent enough. I just got really offended by the very broad brush with which the previous poster was painting. I’m about as conservative a Catholic wife and mom as you will find, and that just got my “Irish” up!!!

I am from the kleenex and bobby pin days, and had several little white, round “chapel veils” though we usually wore hats of some sort. I in no way want to offend the very devout women who choose to cover their heads (the “veil” part still baffles me, as it was only elderly Italian ladies in my pre-Vatican II parish who wore those - everyone else wore hats of some sort). It’s only when someone starts insisting that we’re all on our way to he** in a handbasket and it is connected to not veiling or covering that I get a little worked up.

You sure have started a lively conversation - which is a very good thing.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Is there any reason she couldn’t be remembered as both? Why is this being framed as an either/or? One good thing about head-covering no longer being a rule is that the women who do so, usually find it personally meaningful. When I read a post from a woman who covers her head, it tends to be admirable and inspiring. These women almost invariably have good attitudes and good reasons.

The posts I see arguing with these women are often accusing and judgmental. Some people like to identify the practice of head-covering with being legalistic or self-righteous. But I almost never see that in the way that women who do it write about it.

Because, as the kleenex and beanie brigade know, that’s what it turned into. It’s an outmoded style. Do we still wear tunics, like Mary did? I think it draws unnecessary attention. Quite frankly, I don’t understand why a piece of fabric on a head represent devotion and prayer. Do you cover your head when you say your morning and night prayers? Do you cover your head when you say grace? Jesus said
Mathew 6:5-8:

5"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 6But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. 8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

BTW, I agree with much of the other posts stating the watering down of the faith and the traditional relationship between husband and wife. Unfortunately, I was one of those who though I had chosen a husband wisely. He completely changed as the children came along, and I couldn’t have them grow up in an abusive home.

 

[Julianna]

My, look how much the feminists have gotten a hold on the church and turned traditional values upside down. OK. You think I might be seriously misinformed do you? Then here is something from Augustine.
“Nor can it be doubted, that it is more consonant with the order of nature that men should bear rule over women, than women over men. It is with this principle in view that the apostle says, ‘The head of the woman is the man;’ and, ‘Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands.’ So also the Apostle Peter writes: ‘Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord.’” Augustine, On Marriage and Concupiscence, Bk 1, Ch 10 (A.D. 419-420).
Here is a whole stack of scriptures and citations from early church fathers which prove my point. scripturecatholic.com/husband_headship.html from John Salza. Do I really care what feminists think or even what people who are infected by feminism think? Of course not. Sadly however it is difficult, very difficult to exercise my God-given authority in the home, when all of society tells me that I am very seriously informed and even my brothers and sisters in the church offer me no support.

Now do I think that my God-given duty as head of the family to command and rule my wife
means that i can order her about like a tin pot dictator and turn her into an abused slave. No of course not, because that would conflict with other instructions to love my wife.
Now do any of us think that Christ the LORD has authority to command and rule us? If you do then you must also think that husbands have the authority to command rule over his wife, because Jesus said 1 Cor. 11:3 – “But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.”

Therefore as Christian men we must rule our wives with love and care, even as Christ who is our head rules us with love and care.

"I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is: I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat.

Wow, the good 'ol days of A.D. 419-420

**Perhaps it is the tone in your posts or using words like, rule, command and obey. I was married in the Church in 1981…“obey”, “command” and “rule” were not part of the vows. **

If your wife goes along with it, who am I to say it doesn’t work for you.

If a woman wants to wear a head covering, have at it. If she doesn’t…the Church does not have a problem with it. And wearing a veil doesn’t make a woman any more pious or holy any more than being in a garage makes you a car.

 

[floresco]

**Perhaps it is the tone in your posts or using words like, rule, command and obey. I was married in the Church in 1981…“obey”, “command” and “rule” were not part of the vows. **

Words like “obey” “command” and “rule” to describe the marriage relationship were in the Bible and Church writings for hundreds of years. They only stopped being widely used in the last few decades. Perhaps we shouldn’t dismiss them out of hand. Maybe there is some wisdom there for us to consider.

 

[Julianna]

I have a favorite verse that sums up my commitment to my husband and his to me in the sacrament of marriage.

Song of Solomon 2:16

It will be 29 yrs next month.

I don’t obey him, nor does he obey me…he doesn’t rule or command me and I don’t rule or command him. There is no wisdom in a parent/child relationship or master/slave relationship in a marriage. Marriage is not 50/50…sometimes it’s 70/30 or 40/60…it is how the couple in the marriage work through those times “together”. We talk, we discuss, there is no decision so great that we cannot work through it together.

 

[floresco]

I don’t obey him, nor does he obey me…he doesn’t rule or command me and I don’t rule or command him. There is no wisdom in a parent/child relationship or master/slave relationship in a marriage. Marriage is not 50/50…sometimes it’s 70/30 or 40/60…it is how the couple in the marriage work through those times “together”. We talk, we discuss, there is no decision so great that we cannot work through it together.

It sounds to me like you are saying that you consider yourself wiser than the Bible and hundreds of years of Church teaching. You believe you can just ignore them and come up with your own way of doing things. Well, there is no point in me saying anything to you. If you won’t even listen to the Bible, you are not going to listen to me.

 

[PatriceA]

I have a favorite verse that sums up my commitment to my husband and his to me in the sacrament of marriage.

Song of Solomon 2:16

It will be 29 yrs next month.

I don’t obey him, nor does he obey me…he doesn’t rule or command me and I don’t rule or command him. There is no wisdom in a parent/child relationship or master/slave relationship in a marriage. Marriage is not 50/50…sometimes it’s 70/30 or 40/60…it is how the couple in the marriage work through those times “together”. We talk, we discuss, there is no decision so great that we cannot work through it together.

My marriage is similar. I have my strengths and weaknesses and he has his. We recognize those in each other and work together for the better of our marriage.

But I can’t understand how this thread has deginerated to this. Why are so many of the women in this thread so upset that another woman is considering veiling? If it doesn’t appeal to you, then ignore it. If someone feels they are being called to veil, that’s their faith journey. We should be supporting each other, not tearing each other apart over a fellow Catholic wanting to do something as simple as covering their head.

 

[Julianna]

It sounds to me like you are saying that you consider yourself wiser than the Bible and hundreds of years of Church teaching. You believe you can just ignore them and come up with your own way of doing things. Well, there is no point in me saying anything to you. If you won’t even listen to the Bible, you are not going to listen to me.

I have a Baptist grandmother (now passed away)…I do know the Bible.

So I guess Song of Solomon 2:16 is not part of the Bible…

The two shall become one. Where have I heard that before? If he “rules” over me, then, we are two.

If a woman wants to wear a veil to Mass, great…if she doesn’t…great. It is not required that she wear one. That is fact.

To say, that a woman is more holy and pious if she wears a veil to Mass, is ridiculas. It is a “preference”. If a woman “feels” better wearing a veil, she shouldn’t give two hoots what others “think”. If a woman doesn’t “feel” like wearing a veil and it is not a requirement, then she shouldn’t give two hoots what others “think”.

When I start thinking about what “others” think of me…I know I’m in trouble. When other people are responsible for paying my bills, feeding or clothing me,…it may make me more subservient and mindful of what I wear or say.

 

[Miserys_Fence]

It sounds to me like you are saying that you consider yourself wiser than the Bible and hundreds of years of Church teaching.

“Hundreds of years of Church teaching” conceived and given by MEN. You’d better believe I take it with many, many grains of salt.

Miz

 

[Julianna]

“Hundreds of years of Church teaching” conceived and given by MEN. You’d better believe I take it with many, many grains of salt.

Miz

oh boy are “you” in trouble now. I suggest you get a “head covering” made of iron…and “duck”

 

[mommamaree]

oh boy are “you” in trouble now. I suggest you get a “head covering” made of iron…and “duck”

 

[Miserys_Fence]

oh boy are “you” in trouble now. I suggest you get a “head covering” made of iron…and “duck”

I’m not worried. I was a weightlifter and football player back in the day. I’m older now, but still pretty quick with a cane!

But seriously, the point I was trying to make–which I’m sure will be wasted on some people anyway–is that women have been second-class citizens and “property” for most of those hundreds of years. Rules made by men, for women whom they considered inferior beings, are pretty questionable at best (and utterly bogus in my opinion).

I own a vacuum cleaner (not that I use it, but that’s another story ). But it is my property to do with as I please. I can make rules saying my vacuum cleaner has to wear a scarf over its handle, or even wear a little dress, or that is has to be stored facing northwest whenever it’s not in use (i.e., all the time ).

I am certainly authorized to make these rules and make sure they are followed. But that doesn’t make the rules any less R-I-D-I-C-U-L-O-U-S.

Miz

 

[floresco]

I wonder if women who have a disrespectful and hostile attitude toward men are capable of having healthy relationships with them.

 

[floresco]

But seriously, the point I was trying to make–which I’m sure will be wasted on some people anyway–is that women have been second-class citizens and “property” for most of those hundreds of years. Rules made by men, for women whom they considered inferior beings, are pretty questionable at best (and utterly bogus in my opinion).

As Catholics we believe that God speaks through the Bible and through the Church. Treating these as “rules made by men” leaves out their divine dimension. But even thinking in human terms, your reasoning here is troubling.

How would you like it if I dismissed what you said automatically because you are a woman? This is what you are doing to men. You are assuming than anything that men say about women is wrong based on a distorted view of history.

Historically, men’s view of women was rooted in protecting them. Men considered it their duty to give their lives for the women in their care. The vast majority of the survivors of the Titanic were women because men believed in “women and children first”. This is not how people treat property. Would you give your life for your vacuum cleaner (even if you used it)?

Men went to war, to sea, to the mines. They constantly faced toil and danger and their main reason was to provide for and protect the women for whom they were responsible. Is this treating women as second-class citizens? So we have been told. I for one do not believe it. It looks like love to me.

 

[Miserys_Fence]

As Catholics we believe that God speaks through the Bible and through the Church. Treating these as “rules made by men” leaves out their divine dimension.

You are a far more trusting soul than I. But apparently, even you don’t believe the Church is always Divinely inspired. Otherwise, you’d have accepted that the Church says headcovering is no longer required as Divine inspiration.

How would you like it if I dismissed what you said automatically because you are a woman?

If I viewed men as inferior beings, and was trying to push a set of rules on them that were written only from a female perspective–I certainly hope you would dismiss it.

Please don’t misunderstand and think that I ignore everything a man says just because he has a Y chromosome. There are plenty of men (and women) who are truly Divinely inspired. Their words and actions are compatible with the Love and caring God wants us to feel. And even those who aren’t speaking/acting directly out of Divine inspiration–there are plenty of wonderful, sensible, kind, intelligent men out there. I was lucky to be married to one until he passed 9 years ago, and engaged to one until he also passed last summer. So no, I don’t dismiss men just because they are men. But when they try to control me–and every man in my life has tried, to some extent–they tend to try to puff themselves up with half-truths and wishful thinking and hoping that I can’t sniff out the BS. But I always do.

The vast majority of the survivors of the Titanic were women because men believed in “women and children first”.

This was only 100 years ago, fairly recent history. This doesn’t relate to the hundreds of years the Church has been handing out rules.

Men went to war, to sea, to the mines. They constantly faced toil and danger and their main reason was to provide for and protect the women for whom they were responsible. Is this treating women as second-class citizens? So we have been told. I for one do not believe it. It looks like love to me.

“Responsible for” isn’t love; I’m “responsible for” keeping my lawn mowed. It doesn’t come close to describing what my husband and I (or my fiance and I) felt for each other. If it comes from a sense of duty, it isn’t love.

And that’s rather the whole point of my posts. A woman who covers because her husband or father makes her, or her church demands it, is covering out of duty (and fear) and not love. You think God can’t tell the difference?

Miz