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

[Julianna]

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.

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.

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.

“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

Wow! That one was out of the park! :tiphat:

 

[floresco]

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.

I accept that it is not required. I believe, however, that it is a good and beautiful custom.

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.

Men and women both try to control each other. Human beings want to get their own way. I hope you are as good at sniffing out your own attempts to control others.

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.

The Titanic is one example. It is representative of men’s ability for self-sacrifice and heroism in the protection of women.

“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

Love very well may be expressed as duty. Parents don’t feel like getting up in the night to care for a crying baby. They aren’t full of mushy feelings. They are exhausted and would rather stay in bed. But they do it because it is their duty.

Many saints have spoken of the importance of obedience and duty and their primacy over feelings. It is a constant theme that there is more merit in doing something out of obedience that one does not wish to do than in doing what one wishes to do. In denying one’s will, one dies to self and grows closer to Christ. It is just as possible to do one’s duty out of love as out of fear.

Of course, there is something wrong when women are coerced to cover their heads, but simply having the rule does not demean women in any way. The same canon in the 1917 Code that had the rule for women, had a rule for men too. Men were not allowed to have their heads covered in church.

 

[qui_est_ce]

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”.

This is my point. How is a piece of cloth an object of piety? I still want to know if wearers of the veil wear them other than at mass, since they feel it helps them in their prayer life.

Maybe muslim women feel the same about the burqa.

 

[Julianna]

This is my point. How is a piece of cloth an object of piety? I still want to know if wearers of the veil wear them other than at mass, since they feel it helps them in their prayer life.

Maybe muslim women feel the same about the burqa.

I doubt many women in the US would wear a veil outside of mass.

As for muslim women, they don’t have a choice…it is “required”. It is more for modesty purposes. You have to remember, the women are under strict “control” by the men in all aspects of their lives. To some it’s religion…to others it’s slavery. As long as the women go along with it.

I know muslim women who don’t wear a head covering at all…and some that just wear the hijab???.. I would not consider them less devout by any means.

 

[mommamaree]

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”.

:clapping::clapping::clapping:

Happily, I married such a man, who would do anything for his family, and who behaves like a gentlemen, even though men in the U.S. tend to get confused about whether chivalry is even acceptable anymore. We need to remember all the good men, who lay down their lives for their loved ones.
As an example of how men can truly understand the needs of the women under their care, I would like to mention that the best OB care that I have received, despite having had many different OBs due to moving around a lot, was a male OB. He had a wife and lots of children himself, and he treated me with an incredible amount of respect and consideration. He was wonderful and I thanked God for him.

 

[mommamaree]

Love very well may be expressed as duty. Parents don’t feel like getting up in the night to care for a crying baby. They aren’t full of mushy feelings. They are exhausted and would rather stay in bed. But they do it because it is their duty.

Many saints have spoken of the importance of obedience and duty and their primacy over feelings. It is a constant theme that there is more merit in doing something out of obedience that one does not wish to do than in doing what one wishes to do. In denying one’s will, one dies to self and grows closer to Christ. It is just as possible to do one’s duty out of love as out of fear.

:clapping::clapping::clapping:

And again I applaud your responses! Love demands things of us. We have a duty to our loved ones. We even had a duty to relatives we don’t particularly care for. We have obligations to our Church, and to our God. Does this make our love any less? No, in fact, faithfully fulfilling one’s duties can lead to an increase in love. How could it be any other way? What is love worth if it asks nothing of us?

 

[mommamaree]

This is my point. How is a piece of cloth an object of piety? I still want to know if wearers of the veil wear them other than at mass, since they feel it helps them in their prayer life.

Maybe they do wear a veil for prayers at home. (My mother, who is not Catholic, wears a pashmina scarf during her prayers at home, but not in her Baptist church.) Or maybe they reserve that for Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament or for Mass, when Christ is physically present to us in the Eucharist? That certainly adds a certain power to the present moment, you know? Realizing that Jesus is there physically in a way that we cannot fully understand…so perhaps women who headcover reserve the spiritual discipline for those times?

 

[mommamaree]

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.

As the OP, I must admit this discussion has taken many turns that I didn’t anticipate. But overall, I have found it to my benefit to hear from a variety of perspectives. In the end, I will still do what I feel God is leading me to do, whether that is to veil or not. And I intend to consult my priest first, before undertaking any spiritual discipline. Especially as a new Catholic, I don’t want to bite off more than I can chew, you know what I mean?

 

[qui_est_ce]

I doubt many women in the US would wear a veil outside of mass.

So, the veil is somehow an aid to holiness and prayer, but only when worn in church. In private, it loses it’s effects.

 

[Julianna]

So, the veil is somehow an aid to holiness and prayer, but only when worn in church. In private, it loses it’s effects.

ok…let’s keep it simple. It’s about style…the average American 20 something woman would not wear a veil to go clubbing…the average American 30 something woman wouldn’t wear a veil to work…as a admin assistant…a nurse…a construction worker…truck driver or CEO of a company…or to WallyWorld.

 

[PatriceA]

So, the veil is somehow an aid to holiness and prayer, but only when worn in church. In private, it loses it’s effects.

Its not an “aid” , its about showing respect to the Eucharist. Why would I wear the veil outside of mass? The Eucharist isn’t at Starbucks or Target, its in the Church. Hence the veil in the Church.

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

One of the reasons for the “angst” I have is that growing up, we were required to cover our heads in church. If you forgot your “beanie” you had to wear a kleenex with a bobbie pin. Now that’s superficial.

Styles come and go.

My priest mentioned today in a class before Mass that one of the reasons he thinks that “felt banner Catholicism” took hold was as a reaction to the formalism that had taken hold by the 1950s. People, including priests, knew what they were supposed to do, but they didn’t love it, they didn’t know why they did it. From veils to the entire Mass, the necessary boundaries in our conduct with God began to be seen as barriers to a relationship with God.

Sure, if you just see the veil as something the Church made women do without knowing why, then of course it would seem superficial. But if women veiled for more than 1900 years around the world, then there is probably something to the practice, not simply a “superficial” tradition.

There are a number of veiling traditions with different aspects. I’m on a Facebook group for women who wear Christian headcoverings (as opposed to Muslim, etc.) ~ a good mix of both Protestant (various denominations) and Catholic. I only veil at Church and during my prayers at home so it’s exclusively about my relationship with God. But I do admire women who choose to veil all the time for modesty reasons (or nuns who do it as a constant sign of prayer, bridal status and mortification).

I was going to quote from Tertullian here but removed it. In brief his “On the Veiling of Women” is after he became a Montanist but is still accurate.

Obviously it is better for a woman to dress modestly all the time than to wear a veil to Mass on Sunday and then dress like a hooker on Monday but veiling encourages a general humility and modesty and submission throughout the week.

When I was growing up, women NEVER wore pants to church or school, whether Catholic or public.

I wouldn’t wear pants to Church, very few women or girls at my Church do. Probably the only times I have worn pants to Church was when I was working and I caught daily Mass on my way home.

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

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.

It’s no longer in Canon Law, correct. Of course, there’s nothing against it in the 1983 CIC and you can’t abrogate the Bible…

To say, that a woman is more holy and pious if she wears a veil to Mass, is ridiculas.

If someone does something for God, yes, it does make them more holy and pious. If someone does something to be seen as more holy and pious, it makes them less (cf. Mt 6:1-6). Veiling promotes interior virtues of modesty, humility and obedience.

Most women at my church wear a lace veil (a few hats and scarves), so I don’t have to worry too much about wanting it to be seen as being more pious, at least there, because it’s the norm. I suppose for women who attend churches where veiling is rare, this might be more of a problem. It doesn’t mean that veiling is not the right thing to do but women might have to be more on guard to ensure the reason for the practice is obedience to God. The pharisee should indeed give alms, he just shouldn’t be blowing his trumpet to announce his good deed (Mt 6:2). He should be wearing his phylacteries and fringes on his garment, but he shouldn’t be enlarging them to make a show, a farce, of piety. (Mt 23:5).

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”.

So, “if it feels good, do it”?

I’m worried about the emphasis on “feelings” here.

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.

Although that works with regards to morally neutral or good acts, I think there is a better saying that is more apropos and less individualistic:

“What is popular is not always right; what is right is not always popular.”

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

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.

So by “men” are you including God in that? Men wrote the Bible but God inspired them. So when we talk about the Bible, we don’t talk about it as though it is men making “ridiculous” rules for women but rather that God instituted these things for a reason which is for His greater glory. You could look to the Garden of Eden and think that God’s command was simply a ridiculous and arbitrary rule for the subjugation of women or you can view things from a Christian perspective.

God made these rules for a reason. Men show their respect to God by uncovering their heads, women show their respect to God by covering them. Men and women are different and this is good. God, through St. Paul, says that men should uncover their head and that women should cover theirs:
1Cor 11:4-5 (also see 3-15):

Every man praying or prophesying with his head covered, disgraceth his head. But every woman praying or prophesying with her head not covered, disgraceth her head

The real question is then, what is your contention with God?

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

“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.

You have it completely backwards. Love (caritas) is an act of the will, not an emotion (Summa, II, II, 24, 1).

My mom used to have (I assume still does, I don’t remember) a quote in the laundry room (a place of much resigned suffering ^_^):

Love is not a feeling to be felt, but an action to be learned.

Or, as my priest said today, love doesn’t always feel good. A mother who is up all night with a screaming baby doesn’t feel good, she is not elated for doing so, but she loves her child because she wills it. Sometimes our families (and friends) can be very trying but we don’t just dissolve the bond because of feelings, we stick with it, because we’re family and that is an act of the will. Likewise, obedience to God doesn’t always feel good, but we stick with it because we know that it is the right thing to do because this is how we glorify God. It’s not the consolations, the “spiritual cookies”, that matter but rather our sufferings united with the Cross and offered up to God.

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?

Then cover for the right reasons. The proximate authority is the family or canon law or the force of long-standing (2,000 year) custom, but the ultimate authority is God, who wrote it in Scripture. The proximate end might be to please your husband or father (or sister, mother, friend, priest, etc) but the ultimate end is to please God.

The law commands (“makes”, “demands”) that I not kill my boyfriend. This is the proximate authority, but God also declared to Moses that I should not kill and God is the ultimate authority. If murder was removed from secular law tomorrow, would it be okay to kill him? No, because the ultimate authority of God still stands. If the State were to decree, for whatever reason, that I kill him (unjustly), would it be okay to do so? No, for the same reason.

If the proximate authority declares that I not drive over 55 mph on a certain road, to do so without a proportionate good (e.g. fire truck, police car, ambulance) would be wrong. Even though God did not write down in the Bible somewhere, “Thou shalt not travel more than five and fifty miles in one hour along the highway numbered two and ninety,” God still established the proximate authority over us and thus we must obey them (unless it is obviously sinful, of course). We owe our obedience not only to divine law but also to ecclesiastical law and the proper exercise of authority within the family, government and workplace. Obedience is a virtue – the highest of the moral virtues (Summa, II, II, 104, 3).

So in your proposed situation, where a woman feels that she is being made to wear a veil and has no love for God in that, it is not a virtuous act. But what she needs to do, rather than rebel against the veil and burn her bra on the steps of the capitol building, is learn to love the veil. Boundaries are a good thing, we need to know why they are there. If I hike next to a waterfall and there is a fence which says “Warning: stay on this side of the fence” and I get upset because the sign and fence is “demanding” that I do something and climb over it, there is a fair chance that I might fall to my death. Boundaries exist for a reason. We must learn to love them because they are how we treat God with proper respect.

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

ok…let’s keep it simple. It’s about style…the average American 20 something woman would not wear a veil to go clubbing…the average American 30 something woman wouldn’t wear a veil to work…as a admin assistant…a nurse…a construction worker…truck driver or CEO of a company…or to WallyWorld.

Wearing a veil at Church and during prayers is a different thing than wearing it when you’re grocery shopping. I would look rather ridiculous wearing a lace veil to the grocery store! Wearing a veil during prayer, especially in the Eucharistic Presence of Our Lord at Church (Mass, Benediction, etc.), is primarily a sign of submission to Christ and union with Him as His Bride. Wearing headcoverings outside of prayer times is primarily a sign of modesty. Nuns’ habits show a unity throughout their lives in both those aspects.

I see Muslim women wearing hijab all the time at my store and they don’t look ridiculous. Of course, if I adopted the same style of scarf, people would think I was Muslim. I think the most subtle would be a simple kerchief, which would very much blend in so you don’t look like a Muslim or a Quaker/Amish. I have thought about it but I can’t wear a head covering at work. I have worn a kerchief but not regularly and not specifically for religious purposes, it’s fun and cute.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Its not an “aid” , its about showing respect to the Eucharist. Why would I wear the veil outside of mass? The Eucharist isn’t at Starbucks or Target, its in the Church. Hence the veil in the Church.

I was responding to posts like this one:

Wearing a veil is an outward manifestation of obedience. Obedience to God, who is the same yesterday, today and forever and is indicative of our God ordained place on earth. Wearing the veil in church stopped at almost the identical time of the rebellion of women in society as a whole in this country. What does that tell us? It tells us that we are daughters of Eve biologically and therefore prone to rebellion in our nature. Even if women were to look at it from a merely selfish aspect, once you put your veil on it’s like “this is my time with God” and it signals the same to your family. It is a help in concentrating on the sacredness of the Mass. Ladies, it’s a help, not a hindrance!

That’s putting a lot on a piece of cloth. And if that piece of cloth means all that to you, you should wear it constantly, especially in secular public. It’s a statement.

Me, I wear a crucifix and have a Catholic bumper sticker. I don’t wear a veil ever. Even at Adoration or daily mass. My time with God is not restricted to mass or holy hour. He is a part of all I am in my daily life.

I am not a feminist. I am not a Cafeteria Catholic. I accept the Church Hook Line and Sinker (HLS club).

 

[crazzeto]

I was responding to posts like this one:

That’s putting a lot on a piece of cloth. And if that piece of cloth means all that to you, you should wear it constantly, especially in secular public. It’s a statement.

Me, I wear a crucifix and have a Catholic bumper sticker. I don’t wear a veil ever. Even at Adoration or daily mass. My time with God is not restricted to mass or holy hour. He is a part of all I am in my daily life.

I am not a feminist. I am not a Cafeteria Catholic. I accept the Church Hook Line and Sinker (HLS club).

I can see how a woman might take that posting you’re citing as being rather hostile, but I think you should take a second to reflect on what the cited poster was saying, and what the poster you are directly responding to said. They’re saying the same thing believe it or not, they’re saying that it is an appropriate act of respect to wear the veil in church because it is a different situtation than going to Starbucks or target (for instance).

It is appropriate because it is (in fact) the constant teaching of the Church, it is even found in Sacrade Scripture. Not wearing it is now considered allowable because of the vast, quick and considerable changes our culture has gone through in particular since the 60’s, so rapid it is little wonder the Church had such difficulty seeing it coming, adapting and creating appropriate catechisis to deal with the changing situation.

That’s what the poster you cited was (rather uncharitably) getting at. Truely, God hasn’t changed even though we wish to believe he has.

Of course, I’m a guy so what do I know

 

[lizaanne]

I was responding to posts like this one:

That’s putting a lot on a piece of cloth. And if that piece of cloth means all that to you, you should wear it constantly, especially in secular public. It’s a statement.

Me, I wear a crucifix and have a Catholic bumper sticker. I don’t wear a veil ever. Even at Adoration or daily mass. My time with God is not restricted to mass or holy hour. He is a part of all I am in my daily life.

I am not a feminist. I am not a Cafeteria Catholic. I accept the Church Hook Line and Sinker (HLS club).

If you “accept the Church Hook Line and Sinker” then you realize that Christ is NOT present to us in the same way everywhere. You say “He is a part of all I am in my daily life” - yet Christ is not present Body Blood Soul Divinity when you are in Target or the grocery store. It is the act of being in the presence of CHRIST that moves us to cover our heads. That is a big difference for those of us who do practice this very personal devotion.

It is not the “piece of cloth”. It is the act of humbling myself, an act of obedience. It’s not a “statement” at all.

~Liza

 

[mommamaree]

If you “accept the Church Hook Line and Sinker” then you realize that Christ is NOT present to us in the same way everywhere. You say “He is a part of all I am in my daily life” - yet Christ is not present Body Blood Soul Divinity when you are in Target or the grocery store. It is the act of being in the presence of CHRIST that moves us to cover our heads. That is a big difference for those of us who do practice this very personal devotion.

It is not the “piece of cloth”. It is the act of humbling myself, an act of obedience. It’s not a “statement” at all.

~Liza

I knew I could count on you, Liza, to be able to quickly clear up the confusion here. Your answer is exactly what I anticipated from a women who actually covers in Mass and during adoration. (as I speculated in my post above) Your reasoning here is the reason why I have considered adopting this spiritual discipline, however, my main concern at this point is that I might not be spiritually mature enough to adopt this discipline without it leading me into false piety. I am still (as a new Catholic) very distracted by people sneaking out after Communion, or hopping out of church before the Priest process out during the final hymn, or even when nobody else bows or strikes their breast during the appropriate times. I realize how quickly and easily I get distracted by others lack of participation, and so I fear that choosing to headcover for myself would become an issue of false piety. Does that make sense? I pray for genuine humility, and I hope someday I will feel led one way or another with regards to veiling. Although, one consideration that has occurred to me is that a mantilla pulled close to the sides of my face might help me have a sensory reminder of my humility and will help me be obedient to God.
On a side note, I recently rewatched Angels and Demons, and noticed that the female lead (practically the only female in the film) wore a beautiful mantilla in her visit with the new Pope. I thought to myself, ‘here a veil is adding to her beauty, and yet somehow she appears humble and thankful to have been able to act in the service of the Church’. It was an interesting juxtaposition of beauty and humility, silence and action. I realize it was simply a character in a film, but it was still interesting to me nonetheless.