Catholic headcovering?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chantelle1989g
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
3 cont’d. And falsely assert that there is a “solemn consecration of veils”. Here’s what the false assertion says:
Blockquote
Click to expand...
The Roman Pontifical contains the imposing ceremonial of the consecration of the veils.

"Receive the sacred veil, that thou mayst be known to have despised the world, and to be truly, humbly, and with all thy heart subject to Christ as His bride; and may He defend thee from all evil, and bring thee to life eternal” (Pontificale Romanum; de Benedictione) /

/> Blockquote

What is the problem with that? The Roman Pontifical DOES NOT have an imposing ceremony of the consecration of VEILS. It is a ceremony previously known as Veiling of Virgins or, the elevation of a woman to being Bride of Christ. The citation (Pontificale Romanum; de Benedictione) is misleading because it makes it appear as if this so-called blessing of “veils” is so important that it is in the Bishop’s own Liturgical book (Roman Pontifical) instead of the Roman Missal or Roman book of Blessings. But the actual citation should have been: Pontificale Romanum, De Benedictione et Consecratione Virginum. By leaving out the Virginum, the author made it appear as if this was a veil blessing ceremony and that somehow a laywoman is sacred in the same way that the sacred virgin being veiled as a sign of her espousals with Christ is sacred. To the contrary, the current Rite is explicit when it says that this ritual constitutes the virgin “a sacred person”… You don’t get this sacredness by putting on a mantilla. You get this by becoming a bride of Christ as a virgin, given the grace through the ministry of the bishop and entering the Ordo Virginum… It is very misleading to pretend that this is a ceremony of veils… Again, there is nothing in the Church Fathers that talks about laywomen being “sacred brides of Christ” and that’s why they need to cover their heads! It is a modern distortion of many things and an eager desire of women to theologize something they want to wear.
  1. Tertullian, and other Patristic writers are very explicit that it was not sufficient for lace material (not that there was real lace back in those days) to cover the head. They agreed it must be opaque cloth that had to cover all hair. Some also contended that it must cover the shoulders and even face. Consequently, women who want to be truly traditional should heed those instructions and wear not mantillas but cloth hijabs or the like.
“And let all the women have their heads covered with an opaque cloth, not with a veil of thin linen, for this is not a true covering.” Hippolytus (A.D. 200) Apostolic Tradition
 
Last edited:
For similar reasons that we do not have the mass in Aramaic, or kiss a paddle board during the sign of peace, we do not exactly follow the head covering rules of the early centuries. Though it is not custom to go out with one’s head covered, it is still acceptable to cover one’s head in church.

I know Tradition in Action is not the best website, but they do bring some interesting information to the table. They quote St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologiae,
"In this case [of the veil], however, they may be excused [for not wearing it] from sin, if they do not do it from a certain vanity, but because of some contrary custom. Such a custom, however, is not praiseworthy.”
Click to expand...
http://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/d009rpVeil_5_Goodman.htm

So, one is excused of sin if it is not custom to veil. But such a custom is not considered praiseworthy, most likely because it is a sign that whenever society rids themselves of the veil would also mean they have rid themselves of modesty because it was considered modest to wear a veil (or headcovering, or whatever, you get my drift).

Upon reading some more, I also discovered this interesting piece. Read it if you like. http://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/d011rpVeil_7_Goodman.htm
 
Last edited:
stupidisasstupiddoes said:
It’s not the hair that’s arousing per se. Most haircuts are designed to draw attention to the most attractive parts of the face (e.g. big ears can be concealed, maybe a long forehead is covered). So overall the haircut compliments the face to make it more attractive. Or put another way, the face appears more plain when the hair is not visible.
Click to expand...
True, but that’s not what long hair meant in those days.

Long hair was a sign of health & youth for a young lady. Since it was expected that young, unmarried women were virgins, long hair and youth became synonymous with virginity and purity.

All the way until the 19th century (in Europe and the Middle East) when a women was convicted of being a prostitute, her hair was cut off as part of the punishment. Short hair on a woman was a sign that she was not a virgin and that she was impure (aka a prostitute)

This was done is MANY pre-Chrisitian cultures.

The head covering (besides the practical notion of keeping the hair physically clean) was also symbolic of longer hair and a symbol of purity.

So when a woman didn’t cover her hair in public, it OBJECTIVELY meant that she wasn’t concerned with keeping her hair clean, hence she was not concerned with purity… because to have unclean hair or short hair was symbolic of not being pure.

Also, SOME older women (esp if they were married or nuns) cut their hair shorter so they could better manage. So for them, the head covering because even more important so people would not think they were prostitutes, etc.

It was purely a cultural thing that grew up in societies all over Europe and the Middle East, most likely have a root in hair cleanliness.

God bless
 
Just keep it short then, life is too short worry about minor things like hair.
 
In my parish I have seen women wearing hats. Usually they have been old enough that they may have a bald spot. Some of the young women occasionally wear hats. I have only seen one young woman wear a mantilla.
 
That’s wonderful. How long have you been doing this, and which type of
headcovering do you prefer to wear?
 
Last edited:
I’m half tempted on getting another veil, an infinity scarf one that’ll completely cover my hair and can be worn around the neck… Does anyone have an opinion on those?
 
Do they happen to provide any sort of insulation? Or should I get an actual scarf for that?
 
I have been doing it for 2 years since I got back to my faith I was baptized into.
At home I wear a long scarf that I wrap around my head like in the first photo I showed. In the Church I either use my own head covering I use in winter or during summer I use a scarf that I wear in my purse. I wrap it around it around my neck so it doesn’t fall down.
 
No, of course it hasn’t been outlawed. As long as who practice it do not think it is more pious or reverent than not covering one’s head, it’s fine. It is simply a personal choice – Don Ruggero did a really good post on this a while ago about making sure we don’t conflate personal pious practice with a call from God.
 
One family, one woman, and I veil at my parish. I do it out of reverence for God. And there is a common theme with veiling things. In the Temple in Jerusalem, there was a veil separating the most sacred part of the church. In Catholic parishes, the Tabernacle is veiled. Women veil because they are sacred; a woman is a vessel that contains the miracle of a new life. That is my reasoning behind it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top