First time wearing my mantilla

  • Thread starter Thread starter maryelizabeth2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No one questions that women veiled their heads. The question has become,“Is it an immutable requirement or not?” Who can answer that? The Church. What has the Church said? That it’s a matter of mutable discipline and custom. So either the Church is right or the Church is wrong.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
No one questions that women veiled their heads. The question has become,“Is it an immutable requirement or not?” Who can answer that? The Church. What has the Church said? That it’s a matter of mutable discipline and custom. So either the Church is right or the Church is wrong.
Click to expand...
Did the “church” admit to inappropriate translation
of Pro Multis for 25years?
Of course they did, at least as much as a liberal will admit to any shade of error.
So, the idea that “church” is always correct is not even an issue.
I mean, any “church” that would be so bold as to misquote their Messiah at the Consecration leaves a lot of doubt in my mind about who’s really behind that “church”.
Personally, as a Rabid Trad, I couldn’t care less if a woman wears a head covering. The Mass that I attend, it’s simply a given, and no woman would come in without one. Even a Church-of-Christ friend I took once, agreed she should wear a veil at the Mass.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
No one questions that women veiled their heads. The question has become,“Is it an immutable requirement or not?” Who can answer that? The Church. What has the Church said? That it’s a matter of mutable discipline and custom. So either the Church is right or the Church is wrong.
Click to expand...
Am I mistaken, or did you post that there should be questions about the sq. in. top covering?
 
TNT said:
Did the “church” admit to inappropriate translation
of Pro Multis for 25years?
Of course they did, at least as much as a liberal will admit to any shade of error.
So, the idea that “church” is always correct is not even an issue.
Personally, as a Rabid Trad, I couldn’t care less if a woman wears a head covering. The Mass that I attend, it’s simply a given, and no woman would come in without one. Even a Church-of-Christ friend I took once, agreed she should wear a veil at the Mass.
Click to expand...
They didn’t admit an “error”, did they? They clearly stated that the Masses celebrated with “for all” were valid. I think they simply wanted the clearest translation.

And there’s a difference in import, don’t you think, TNT?
 
JKirkLVNV said:
They didn’t admit an “error”, did they? They clearly stated that the Masses celebrated with “for all” were valid. I think they simply wanted the clearest translation.

And there’s a difference in import, don’t you think, TNT?
Click to expand...
JKirk, you are over seven thousand posts!!! :eek: What do you find to talk about??😛
 
JKirkLVNV said:
They didn’t admit an “error”, did they? They clearly stated that the Masses celebrated with “for all” were valid. I think they simply wanted the clearest translation.

And there’s a difference in import, don’t you think, TNT?
Click to expand...
I think they simply wanted the clearest translation.
Click to expand...
So, up to that point they wanted what? A foggy translation?
Like I said:
I mean, any “church” that would be so bold as to misquote their Messiah at the Consecration leaves a lot of doubt in my mind about who’s really behind that “church”.
 
paramedicgirl said:
That’s why those little chapel caps seem kinda silly. It’s like a doily on top of your head. Doesn’t seem appropriate as a head covering to me, though I know some women like them.
Click to expand...
Compare the Jewish head coverings; these should be indicative for the tradition draws forth from them. Men covered their heads, even in the Synagogue, with a 5" diameter yarmulka as a minimum; an eqvalent of the keffiya (I forget the Hebrew for that article of head-cover) was acceptable as well amongst the temple-jews.

Modern orthodox jews still wear the yarmulke as the default head-cover for men. Women tend to wear a hat of at least the same size, or a prayer shawl.

I suspect that the yarmulke covers the minimum to count… and the church says that it doesn’t matter anymore in the Roman Church.
 
PatienceAndLove said:
I think I am actually going to move from the mantilla to a chapel cap, at least for attending the NO here in town. I still get looks with the mantilla, even 6 months later.
Click to expand...
I have been a Catholic three years this past Easter Vigil. I started out always wearing a veil and received dirty looks from women and inaudible comments as they passed by me after Mass. A Deacon’s wife who teaches RCIA with her husband at this particular parish told me in a meeting that wearing a head covering is a grievous sin because it causes other people to take their minds off the Mass and to look and admire (if the veil is lovely) at my head covering. I was admonised for wearing one by both the deacon and his wife. I was told to take it off even during Adoration and only wear it in private prayer. I wrote a lengthy letter to the Monsignor of this parish about all the things being said to me by this Deacon and his wife during this meeting - hereitcal things regarding Holy Church - and nothing was done about them. Not to get off track, but I left this parish and now go to another. I no longer wear a mantilla/veil - but a kerchief, which is basically a disguise and is accepted by the women in today’s society. It’s a shame that I have fallen prey to the pangs of humiliation when I receive dirty looks from women - and also the fact that I spent hundreds of dollars on veils and lace head caps and feel I can no longer wear. I wore lovely handmade head caps, made by a Jewish woman on eBay - and they were quite beautiful; These head caps were so different and beautiful, that I received even more dirty looks and uncalled for sounds from passing women. All my veils are now gently put away and I hope to sell all of them one day at a flea market or church bizarre.

I also wear very wide headbands that I buy at Claires at the mall, but they do not cover the head entirely as is proper for Mass.
 
Unitas said:
Oh I’ve heard it slung many times before, just never accompanied with any sort of proof to back it up. It’s just one of those insults that is meant to be taken on the person’s say-so alone.

So when you made the accusation, I called you out on it. And seeing as you’ve provided no support for your accusation it still stands as a baseless insult to be taken on your say-so.
Click to expand...
Unitas…there is no slinging of an insult here. The expression applies in this case and the expression probably came about from situations just like this.

This fisheaters group and others like them IS trying to appear more catholic than the pope. The hierarchy of the Church, the pope and the magisterium, have made it clear that the wearing of a headcovering for women is no longer required…

What fisheaters is essentially saying is that they know better than the magisterium. (hence, they know better how to be a good catholic than the pope himself, through their own personal interpretation of scripture).

Since this group refuses to tell the truth of who they are or even give their real names, they could well be members of some schismatic group not in union with the Church.

They are just as rebellious in their own way as the liberal dissenters.
 
TNT said:
So, up to that point they wanted what? A foggy translation?
Like I said:
I mean, any “church” that would be so bold as to misquote their Messiah at the Consecration leaves a lot of doubt in my mind about who’s really behind that “church”.
Click to expand...
TNT you are implying that the Holy Spirit is not guiding the Church? Then who do you think is “behind it”. Do you realize what you are saying??

The Church HAS THE RIGHT to determine the validity no matter what words are used…you do not.
 
I love to see the ladies wearing veils, as a man I wouldn’t dare wear a hat in the Church, so what if you get funny looks, Christ was spat upon, funny looks are insignificant after that.

I’d swap funny looks for spittle any-day.
 
TNT said:
Listen…
I’m a Sede, so the “church” of mutation has no authority…See?
Click to expand...
TNT …I’m sorry, when I last posted, I didn’t realize that you had left the Church and become a sedervacantist. I missed this post. Now I understand why you posted that protestant link above, truthinheart, on wearing a headcovering. I will pray for you too…but I do have one question if you don’t mind.

Who is your “authority”.?
 
JKirkLVNV said:
And again, I think women covering their heads is a lovely, reverent custom. Philotea, you’re making this a persoal thing, without necessity. I’m sorry you’ve taken it that way and I’m sorry if I’ve offended you, but I think it’s wrong to say that the Church has dispensed with an essential. Women who do not veil should not be made to feel they’re wrong, because the Church doesn’t require it. Women who do veil should not be made to feel as though they are wrong to do so,either.
Click to expand...
I have NEVER said that women should feel they’re wrong for not veiling! Maybe that’s what the problem has been all along. You, and others, have read more into the inquiry of us who don’t understand the lack of explanation/communication on this issue from Rome. You, and others, have put your own personal interpretation on ----- silence. All I am asking for is understanding of the issue.

This conversation has caused the very worst in me to come out on more than one occasion. I am very sorry and I beg forgiveness of those to whom I have been less than charitable and those who I have encouraged to behave likewise. I have a bad tendency to feel very passionately about some things and even at my somewhat advanced age, I don’t know how to curb my tongue.

As much as I enjoy this forum very much, I think I must stay away for a few days. God bless you all.
 
EWTN-FAN said:
I have been a Catholic three years this past Easter Vigil. I started out always wearing a veil and received dirty looks from women and inaudible comments as they passed by me after Mass. A Deacon’s wife who teaches RCIA with her husband at this particular parish told me in a meeting that wearing a head covering is a grievous sin because it causes other people to take their minds off the Mass and to look and admire (if the veil is lovely) at my head covering. I was admonished for wearing one by both the deacon and his wife. I was told to take it off even during Adoration and only wear it in private prayer. I wrote a lengthy letter to the Monsignor of this parish about all the things being said to me by this Deacon and his wife during this meeting - heretical things regarding Holy Church - and nothing was done about them. Not to get off track, but I left this parish and now go to another. I no longer wear a mantilla/veil - but a kerchief, which is basically a disguise and is accepted by the women in today’s society. It’s a shame that I have fallen prey to the pangs of humiliation when I receive dirty looks from women - and also the fact that I spent hundreds of dollars on veils and lace head caps and feel I can no longer wear. I wore lovely handmade head caps, made by a Jewish woman on eBay - and they were quite beautiful; These head caps were so different and beautiful, that I received even more dirty looks and uncalled for sounds from passing women. All my veils are now gently put away and I hope to sell all of them one day at a flea market or church bizarre.

I also wear very wide headbands that I buy at Claires at the mall, but they do not cover the head entirely as is proper for Mass.
Click to expand...
As many women will tell you not to veil or cover man others will see your faithfulness and might also do so. Don’t see them. Wear them. When something bothers society so much it must be touching them inside. The call to cover made even those that now do so uncomfortable at first. Just remember that it is God that is calling you to do so.👍
 
TNT said:

Nice try, but let’s keep it relevant. Head covering is Scriptural. Separate seating is nowhere found in Scripture, except perhaps under the OT Law, which Christ abrogated… It requires a REINTERPRETATION of the NT Scriptures to remove the head covering.
Because this “separate seating” provision is not mandated by any Scripture, nor by 2000 years of tradition…an exception might be in a few Eastern antiquities… Again, the argument presented may seem clever, but in fact, it is irrelevant because the wearing of the veil is on a completely different Inspired-by-the-Holy Spirit level than separating men and women during Mass.​

But overall, the same theme is behind it all; no more kneeling, no more communion on the tongue, no more tabernacles at front n center, willy nilly eucharistic “prayer” preferences, no reverential head covering, pro multis morphs to pro omnibus, …conformity to modern man…who of course is always morphing, so, by definition, there is no stability at all (aka tradition), and why there is no actual practice of a standard NO Mass either. They can be as different as night n day from one diocese to another.​

Once again the Sig tells all:
To destroy a Religion, you must first sever its traditions.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t seem clever, it seems intellectually honest.

Here are the facts and my argument:
  1. The 1917 Code specified head coverings. The 1917 code also specified sitting separately.
  2. You claim head covering is scriptural, sitting separately is not. Okay, for the sake of this argument, I’ll grant you that.
  3. Somewhere before 1983 people stopped wearing headcoverings and stopped sitting separately. Both acts would be violations of canon law.
However, it seems that you excuse one because it is not scriptural and do not excuse the other because it is. Does that mean that we are free to disobey canon law if the canon is not directly tied to revelation?
 
KathleenElsie
As many women will tell you not to veil or cover man others will see your faithfulness and might also do so. Don’t see them. Wear them. When something bothers society so much it must be touching them inside. The call to cover made even those that now do so uncomfortable at first. Just remember that it is God that is calling you to do so.
Click to expand...
Well, I cannot argue with someone who says that “God” is calling them to do something. But please remember that God’s Church is not calling women to do this. It is not a requirement nor does it make one more holy, pious or devoted, even if it makes you “feel” more holy, pious or devoted.
 
Philothea53 said:
I have NEVER said that women should feel they’re wrong for not veiling! Maybe that’s what the problem has been all along. You, and others, have read more into the inquiry of us who don’t understand the lack of explanation/communication on this issue from Rome. You, and others, have put your own personal interpretation on ----- silence. All I am asking for is understanding of the issue.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think it’s time to clarify the terms here… My understanding is that there have been some people who stated that the wearing of veils IS MANDATORY. And that’s what’s been the main focus of the discussion, not whether women should or should not veil.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top