Attn. Christians of Various Traditions: Women & Head Covering ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ComeHome2Rome
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
vames said:
The whole point of this thread is the necessity of covering women’s heads ALL THE TIME, 24/7, not only in church.
Click to expand...
The point of this thread is to find out 1. When & 2. The Reason Why each Christian Faith Traditions changed from the practice of full-time head covering as Christian tradition shows was the original practice for all Christian Women & also the when & reason why those Christian Faith Traditions that no long practice head covering during their Church services/prayer.

From what I’ve read here, Catholics stopped wearing head coverings full-time at some point between St. Thomas Aquinas & St. Gemma, but not sure exactly when or why. And that Catholics stopped covering in Church after the most recent code of canon law was issued in the 1980s.
 
Then we should also include the EO at this point in understanding as it relate’s to 1+2 above. 😉

Is it mandatory for every women and daughter to cover their head in all the Eastern Orthodox church’s? Which ones specifically? I’ve read a few threads here and I’m not seeing this overall consistency. Why did they change, and when specifically?

When you google “Mandatory Head covering in Orthodox church” You see the wide range of Orthodox thinking on this and by members of the Orthodox denominations.

The fact its a wonderful tradition as we see with individual testimony, this doesn’t resolve the overall issue. As there’s no mention at any Ecumenical Council.
 
Btw heres some response’s…All Orthodox random.

"In the Russian Orthodox Churches: Yes (and only dresses - no skin showing from the neck down & no make up)

In the Serbian Orthodox Churches: No (but women/girls should be in dresses rather than pants, make up is fine)

In the Greek Orthodox Churches: No (pants are just fine - although usually the women wear suits - jackets/blouses with either pants or skirts, but not always - make up is fine)"

“Technically, yes, head coverings are mandatory. However, for the sake of economy, they are often (too often) dispensed with.”

“No one in my Antiochian parish wears head coverings”

“Nor in my Orthodox church, either. Unfortunately, due to the misunderstanding and misquoting of St. Paul’s teachings in his letter to the Corinthians, some still do.”

Names are omitted to protect the innocent.
 
Ah yes, it was at a Russian Orthodox Church in St Petersburg that I spotted a “No Dogs or Women in Pants” sign. I suppose Chekov’s “Dama” would have to leave the “sobochka” outside.
 
I’m of the thinking that women’s head covering can only have meaning and value when a woman has the right to choose freely and then makes this choice. Thoughts?
 
GaryTaylor said:
Then we should also include the EO at this point in understanding as it relate’s to 1+2 above.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.
GaryTaylor said:
Is it mandatory for every women and daughter to cover their head in all the Eastern Orthodox church’s?
Click to expand...
According to the particular Church’s pastor? No. According to Scripture and Tradition? I would say yes. 😉
GaryTaylor said:
Which ones specifically?
Click to expand...
Mostly Russian (MP), Serbian and ROCOR.
GaryTaylor said:
Why did they change, and when specifically?
Click to expand...
That’s a great question. You tend to see most women cover their heads in most Orthodox Churches in the old country…but not America (except the Slavic Churches). Why is this? Is it the American culture? Is there a link to the feminist movement? It is interesting to note that the feminist movement gained full steam in the 60’s. This movement brought us the demonic organizations known as NOW…NARAL…and Planned Parenthood. It was around this time that head coverings began to be shed. Is there a connection?

Here is a side bar question for you Gary. The majority of Orthodox monasteries (even in America) continue to require that women cover their heads. Does the same hold true for Catholic monasteries?
 
GaryTaylor said:
I’m of the thinking that women’s head covering can only have meaning and value when a woman has the right to choose freely and then makes this choice. Thoughts?
Click to expand...
They have meaning according to the writings of St Paul and the Holy Church Fathers.
 
Mickey said:
Is there a connection?
Click to expand...
As a former Catholic, I will add that in Marian Apparitions, Mary has expressed her disdain for how immodest the fashion had become for women…in the early 1917!!!..Our Lady of Fatima…when full-time head coverings on women were still the norm.
 
JHow said:
Ah yes, it was at a Russian Orthodox Church in St Petersburg that I spotted a “No Dogs or Women in Pants” sign.
Click to expand...
That makes no sense in light that there’s no Biblical, no Church Fathers, no Icons or Saint practice that shows a tradition of women in dresses & men in pants. Robes used to be universal for everyone.
 
GaryTaylor said:
Then we should also include the EO at this point in understanding as it relate’s to 1+2 above. 😉

Is it mandatory for every women and daughter to cover their head in all the Eastern Orthodox church’s? Which ones specifically? I’ve read a few threads here and I’m not seeing this overall consistency. Why did they change, and when specifically?
Click to expand...
From I’ve found so far, a vast majority of Orthodox women in the U.S. do Not cover. While, in other countries it is still common.

When?..when they or their immigrant ancestors came to the U.S., they threw off their head coverings (many also had their names shortened) to fit into American society.

In Greece, women seem to have thrown off their head coverings outside of Church along with Islamic rule when they defeated the Turks and became independent- during the 400 yrs of Islamic rule, they seemed to have forgotten the original Christian roots of head covering.

Because I’ve Not been able to find a Christian reason, only a secular one, did I make the OP to see if there was Ever a Christian reason or if it was only rebellion which began the domino effect of uncovered women’s hair in society & in Churches. If it is found to be the former, then I, a woman, can breathe a sign of relief, if the latter, then I, in good conscious must being wearing a head covering full-time because I do Not want to rebel against God.
 
Mickey said:
They have meaning according to the writings of St Paul and the Holy Church Fathers.
Click to expand...
Sure they do and all the Biblical commentaries confirm. I’m convinced the US is the problematic area. The Catholic Sisters are inclined to promote especially in light of the past 20-years with those who were inclined to wear secular clothing. These are some which do, I believe in light of the increase in vocations its a sound practice which the majority of the Sisters advocate for, and to further impact the world by bringing God to the secular world.

As to the US and Western Europe, slow progression from the Bonnets of the 19th century to the liberation movement which was again transgressed with Abortion 73, also no God in secular schools 61. Now we have a major problem with dysfunctional families due to much of the above thinking. This also impacts the way in thinking from Catholic/Orthodox and mainline Protestant congregations to below mainline and often below the Incarnation break in basic Christianity. Many of the Jesuits have been right all along, we need to get back to the finished missionary work in the US and for 20-years its been known. Its going to take a joint effort. The more we can relieve the Catholic/Orthodox situation the quicker we can all get back to this. With Latin America this becomes even more imperative with North American influx. Certainly we can’t have the usual occur in becoming Americanized. We need the opposite to occur in correct formation.

Abbey of Regina Laudis, Bethlehem, CT
All Saints Sisters of the Poor, Catsonville, MD
Benedictine Nuns, Virginia Dale, CO
Benedictine Nuns, Abiquiu, NM
Benedictine Nuns, Greensburg, PA
Benedictine Nuns, Westfield, VT
Benedictine Nuns, Ashford, CT
Benedictine Nuns of Mary, Queen of the Apostles, Kansas City, MO
Benedictine Nuns, Oxfordshire, UK
Benedictine Nuns, Le Barroux, France
Canonesses Regular of the Mother of God, Lagrasse, France
Capuchin Sisters of Nazareth, Williamsport, PA
Carmelite Nuns of the Ancient Observance, Allentown, PA
Carmelite Nuns of the Ancient Observance, Wahpeton, ND
Carmelite Sisters of the Divine Heart of Jesus
Children of Mary
Cistercian Nuns
Congregation of The Sisters of Our Lady of Mercy
The Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious
Daughters of Mary, Mother of Israel’s Hope, Tulsa, OK
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Ada Parnell, MI
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Alexandria, SD
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Brooklyn, NY
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Buffalo, NY
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Dallas, TX
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Denmark, WI
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Des Plaines, IL
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Erie, PA
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Flemington, NJ
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Georgetown, CA
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Iron Mountain, MI
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Lake Elmo, MN
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Littleton, CO
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Terre Haute, IN
Discalced Carmelite Nuns (Carmel of the Holy Trinity Convent), Spokane, WA
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Traverse City, MI
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Valparaiso, NE
Discalced Carmelite Nuns, Seremban, Malaysia
Discalced Carmelites of the Byzantine Catholic Church, Sugarloaf, PA
Dominican Nuns, Marbury, AL
Dominican Nuns, Bronx, NY
Dominican Nuns, Buffalo, NY
Dominican Nuns, Lockport, LA
Dominican Nuns, Summit, NJ
Dominican Sisters, Hawthorne, NY
Dominican Sisters, Ann Arbor MI
Dominican Sisters, Nashville, TN
Dominican Sisters, Post Falls, ID
Little Sisters of St. Francis
Little Sisters of the Good Shepherd, France
Little Sisters of the Poor
Franciscan Minims of the Perpetual Help of Mary
Franciscan Sisters of Christian Charity
Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate
Franciscan Sisters of the Renewal
Franciscan Sisters of Penance of the Sorrowful Mother
Handmaids of the Precious Blood
Holy Spirit Adoration Sisters, Philadelphia, PA
Holy Spirit Adoration Sisters, St. Louis, MO
Little Sisters of the Good Shepherd
Marian Sisters of the Diocese of Lincoln•Missionaries of Charity
Norbertine Canonesses, Tehachapi, CA
Passionist Nuns, St. Louis, MO
Passionist Nuns, Whitesville, KY
Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration, Black Canyon City, AZ
Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration, Cleveland, OH
Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration, Hanceville, AL
Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration, Portsmouth, OH
Poor Clare Colettines, Barhamsville, VA
Poor Clare Colettines, Belleville, IL
Poor Clare Colettines, Cleveland, OH
Poor Clare Colettines, Los Altos Hills, CA
Poor Clare Colettines, Minooka, IL
Poor Clare Colettines, Palos Park, IL
Poor Clare Colettines, Rockford, IL
Religious Sisters of Mercy, Alma, MI
Reparatrix Society of Our Lady of the Cloister (Cloisterites)
School Sisters of Christ the King
Sister Servants of the Eternal Word
Sisters Adorers of the Precious Blood, Watertown, NY
Sisters Adorers of the Royal Heart of Jesus Christ, Italy
Sisters of Carmel
Sisters of Life
Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Church, Spokane, WA
Sisters of the Passion and Cross (Traditional Franciscan Contemplatives), New Middletown, OH
Sisters of Perpetual Adoration, Sioux Falls, SD
Sisters of Reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus
Sisters of St. Francis of the Martyr St. George
Sisters of St. Francis of Perpetual Adoration
Sisters of St. Rita
Sisters of the Holy Spirit, Garfield Heights, OH
Sisters of the Most Holy Trinity, Euclid, OH
Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary
Society of St. Pius X (SSPX)
St. Joseph’s Association of OCD Nuns
Victim Nuns of the Sacred Heart of Jesus
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
From I’ve found so far, a vast majority of Orthodox women in the U.S. do Not cover. While, in other countries it is still common.

When?..when they or their immigrant ancestors came to the U.S., they threw off their head coverings (many also had their names shortened) to fit into American society.

In Greece, women seem to have thrown off their head coverings outside of Church along with Islamic rule when they defeated the Turks and became independent- during the 400 yrs of Islamic rule, they seemed to have forgotten the original Christian roots of head covering.

Because I’ve Not been able to find a Christian reason, only a secular one, did I make the OP to see if there was Ever a Christian reason or if it was only rebellion which began the domino effect of uncovered women’s hair in society & in Churches. If it is found to be the former, then I, a woman, can breathe a sign of relief, if the latter, then I, in good conscious must being wearing a head covering full-time because I do Not want to rebel against God.
Click to expand...
No your thinking is absolutely right by large, its the secular thinking which impacted the Christian thinking instead of visa-versa. And I would imagine as Christian countries became secular this slowly advanced. Let face it we are statistically Christian in the US. Orthodox Christian thinking though is where the secular thinking assaults with “I don’t have to do all that”. We have a gravitation toward the wrong paradigms. The power of example has to increase and teaching. Spiritually Abortion is a factor, just as the sack of Constantinople has been seen in time with its East/West effect. You can’t transgress in this Kingdom without a very long ripple effect in time. As we still feel the effects of Constantinople, so too we are dead in the middle of the US transgression. We live in a spiritual reality too often overlooked.

Be interesting to see what more women in the CC EO and OO have to say. Truly they are role models for each other. Just as you are for those who you come in contact with. and without even speaking.
 
Mickey said:
Canon 1262 that required head covering for Catholic women was located in the Code of Canon Law 1917. There was no previous requirement in Canon Law for women to covering their heads in the presence of the Eucharist but had been practiced as a form of tradition and Catholic culture. Code of Canon Law 1917 was “abrogated” in Book 1 of Code of Canon Law 1983 (theCode that came about upon the closing of the Second Vatican Council). Therefore, Canon 1262 was taken out of effect in 1983, but the Church’s stance has remained ambiguous on current practices of head covering.
Click to expand...
Dear Mickey,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Hope all is well.

The Code of Canon Law 1983 did indeed officially abrogate all of the 1917 Code, dear friend, including the requirement for women to be covered at Holy Mass. However, it is fallacious to say, as many modern Catholics are wont to do, that covering is now entirely optional and can be discarded as an obligation.

The tide of radical feminism was, as you know, overwhelming in Western culture, especially in the English speaking world, and sadly many Catholic women uncritically accepted the warped ideology of feminism during the 1960’s. It is highly probable that the Vatican did find a potential problem with the old 1917 Code of Canon Law, requiring women to be covered, as it could be used to bolster the case for the erroneous feminist argument. It is quite possible that for this reason the Vatican decided to drop the covering requirement from the 1983 Code. Under the old 1917 Code, women could theoretically be coerced under penalty to wear a covering against their will. The problem with this was twofold: First, this canon could be employed as a plank to strenghthen the false feminist argument against the covering of women. Second, the canon actually defeated the authentic Catholic reason for women being covered in the first place, which is why too much should not be made of the requirement being repealed by the 1983 Code of Canon Law.

As you mention in another of your posts, dear brother, the primary reason for women being covered is a biblical one. It is something that all pious Catholic women are supposed to do in obedience to the teaching of Sacred Scripture. The fact that the Catholic Church has decided to no longer enforce this timeless custom through the Canon Law, simply means that the Church does not wish to be our nanny. Covering their heads in divine worship is a custom for women to do voluntarily in obedience to Scriptural teaching and not because they are compelled to do so under pain of sin. The idea is that women are to read for themselves what the biblical directives are and then be convinced as to what is written. Moreover, for head covering to be an authentic token of humility and holiness, it must be done freely without coercion; women are supposed then to be covered in church, but it is never to be forced.

Fashions may come and go, dear brother, but the biblical case for women being covered remains the same and is to be found in the First Epistle of the Corinthians (11: 2-16). The tradition for covering comes from Christ, by way of the Holy Spirit, through St. Paul, for the apostle states later in the same Epistle, “If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant” (I Cor. 14: 37,38). Thus it is important to observe that biblical covering has nothing whatsoever to do with fashions/habits that are subject to change through the vicissitudes of time, like ordinary head-wear, which has been worn for all manner of reasons, some purely practical.

Canon Law may then be presently silent upon this issue, but Sacred Scripture is not and it is not forbidden to a Catholic to repair to it for guidance. Moreover, Holy Mother Church has not, as far as I am aware, issued any official magisterial teaching stating that the biblical teaching is no longer perpetually valid or morally binding, being supposedly culturally conditioned. This, of course, is a very popular approach to the bible by liberal exegetes, who are always desirous to negate the teaching of Scripture because it is at variance with their progressive opinions. They resort to this sort of thing to nulify the ‘unpalatable’ teaching of God’s word relating to the role of men and women, as well as homosexual aberrant acts of depravity.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax
 
Portrait said:
Fashions may come and go, dear brother, but the biblical case for women being covered remains the same and is to be found in the First Epistle of the Corinthians (11: 2-16). The tradition for covering comes from Christ, by way of the Holy Spirit, through St. Paul, for the apostle states later in the same Epistle, “If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant” (I Cor. 14: 37,38). Thus it is important to observe that biblical covering has nothing whatsoever to do with fashions/habits that are subject to change through the vicissitudes of time, like ordinary head-wear, which has been worn for all manner of reasons, some purely practical.
Click to expand...
Thank you for this post my dear friend. You are spot on as usual.

It seems very apparent to me that women should read the Holy Scripture and writings of the Holy Fathers and come to the conclusion that head covering is a good and holy practice as set forth by the Scripture and Tradition. Sadly, I know women who would prefer to cover their heads, but they do not cover because they are embarrassed due to no other women in the Church who are covering. It grieves me. But as you said…women cannot be forced to observe this practice.
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
That makes no sense in light that there’s no Biblical, no Church Fathers, no Icons or Saint practice that shows a tradition of women in dresses & men in pants. Robes used to be universal for everyone.
Click to expand...
I saw the sign in 1993 at holy Trinity Church at the Alexander Nevsky monestery.

In the same year when I went to the Pskov cave monestery, we were asked for the men not to wear shorts and the women to wear skirts and head covering before entering the grounds of the monestery.

Needless to say, no one in our group wore robes.
 
JHow said:
In the same year when I went to the Pskov cave monestery, we were asked for the men not to wear shorts and the women to wear skirts and head covering before entering the grounds of the monestery.
Click to expand...
Yes. At most traditional monasteries, men must wear long sleeve shirts (preferably collared) and long pants. Women must wear a head covering and skirt below the knee (not form fitting). Many monasteries have extra head coverings and skirt wraps at the entrance for those who are caught off guard.
 
Portrait, thanks for the informative post. I knew that the old canon of 1917 was abrogated by the one in 1983, but you gave good information.

I think it is up to the woman, and parishioners should not assume she is trying to stand out or think herself holier than thou.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top