J
JLSacred
Guest
You guys are really beyond belief. 
- Status
G
Godfollower
Guest
In the U.S., it is not considered disrespectful for a woman to enter a building without covering her hair. This includes church. It is, however, considered disrespectful for a man to wear a hat indoors. This includes church.
Therefore, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with a woman attending Mass with her hair showing. A man wearing a hat, however, falls into the same category as someone showing up in improper attire. He is being disrespectful, whether or not the priest interrupts Mass to call him on it. A woman without a hat, however, is not being disrespectful (all other things being equal, that is).
And I see nothing in Catholic tradition that allows a man to order his wife to wear particular clothing in church. It’s an equal partnership, not a dictatorship.
Therefore, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with a woman attending Mass with her hair showing. A man wearing a hat, however, falls into the same category as someone showing up in improper attire. He is being disrespectful, whether or not the priest interrupts Mass to call him on it. A woman without a hat, however, is not being disrespectful (all other things being equal, that is).
And I see nothing in Catholic tradition that allows a man to order his wife to wear particular clothing in church. It’s an equal partnership, not a dictatorship.
J
jrabs
Guest
So there are positive and neg laws of the church?Let’s be slightly more clear than your perfection: uncovered women are not defying any positive law of the Church. They are however, defying many centuries of liturgical tradition, with roots dating back, if the Bible is a trustworthy source
Ugh. Unbelievable.
Like I said, have at it friend. You feel compelled to wear a hat at mass when in the States, go ahead. You’ll probably be met with some disapproving glances. It’s simply not acceptable.
Not my thing - plus NOT a way to gracefully lead a wife’s spiritual life by the OP’s style of demanding.
J
jrabs
Guest
Ahhh, the voice of reason. Thanks
I
ICXCNIKA
Guest
Why is it disrespectful to God?But please don’t wear a hat to mass. It’s disrespectful to God.
I
ICXCNIKA
Guest
I posted that I was trying to convince my wife. I don’t know how that got interpreted as “demanding.”
O
OutinChgoburbs
Guest
Indeed. Men who tend to “invoke” their authority tend to sleep on the couch. Women in this country are not chattel, and they are not children. Better to suggest, and treat her with the adult respect due her to make her own decisions, or compromise and make a decision.
S
sarita
Guest
Actually, in the first letter of St. Paul to the Corinthians, where he tells women they must cover their heads if they prophesy or pray he also says it is disgraceful for men to pray or prophesy with their heads covered.
1 Cor 11
1 Cor 11
J
JLSacred
Guest
[/SIGN]
J
JLSacred
Guest
Our Church always studies scripture within the frame of reference of cultural context. This was the etiquette of the time and place where these events took place.
S
scylla
Guest
It is very interesting to me that people have taken styles of the day and they use that to justify their actions at Mass.
If it was the style for women to go topless would it be allowed in Church. Remember the concept is, style dictates action, so if it isn’t disrespectful culturally that makes it ok?
I would not argue against this with this principle in mind, current style does not direct Church discipline, obedience directs Church discipline. Church discipline is decided upon by the Church for the good of the people, but abused as people many times seek the minimum they can do for God.
If you would like to object to headcoverings, then use honest reasons such as…
I do not like headcoverings and would prefer to go without.
Since it is not explicitely required I prefer to go without.
or
I have feminist sensibilities and feel that an admission of a difference between the sexes insults women and they should do whatever they desire.
or
We should seek the will of God and do that over our own selfish desires.
In Christ
Scylla
If it was the style for women to go topless would it be allowed in Church. Remember the concept is, style dictates action, so if it isn’t disrespectful culturally that makes it ok?
I would not argue against this with this principle in mind, current style does not direct Church discipline, obedience directs Church discipline. Church discipline is decided upon by the Church for the good of the people, but abused as people many times seek the minimum they can do for God.
If you would like to object to headcoverings, then use honest reasons such as…
I do not like headcoverings and would prefer to go without.
Since it is not explicitely required I prefer to go without.
or
I have feminist sensibilities and feel that an admission of a difference between the sexes insults women and they should do whatever they desire.
or
I just like to argue and never want to admit that I could be wrong so I will try and find every reason to object.
My point is, the style of the age is a lousy reason as it is anti-christian to believe that we conform truth to desire.We should seek the will of God and do that over our own selfish desires.
In Christ
Scylla
I
ICXCNIKA
Guest
My wife and I try to convince each other all the time. For instance, during elections we go through our sample ballots and have great, heated discussions on the issues. Sometimes she convinces me and sometimes I convince her. Neither one of us are invoking our authority, browbeating the other or demanding.
Another example: My wife accepts the apparitions at Medjugorje and I do not. We often discuss the reasons for believing and for not believing. I am not trying to browbeat her into submission because I have authority over her.
As a husband I do have an authority over my family and a responsiblity to help lead them to salvation. I don’t use my authority as a dictator, but as a loving husband and father.
Invoking my authority does not mean making demands on my wife which are oppresive to her.
Trying to convince my wife to cover her head in Church (St. Paul thinks it’s a good idea) is not the same as lording it over her like some kind of dictator.
T
Tom317
Guest
The husband is supposed to be the leader of the domstic Church, so the husband does have a say in the matter.
T
Tom317
Guest
From a civil point of view the husband and wife are equal, from a spiritual POV the husband is the leader of the domstic Church.
J
JLSacred
Guest
I cannot believe anyone is comparing not wearing a headcovering to being topless! 
Really!
There is NOTHING immodest about a woman not covering her head!
To the OP: the tone of your first posts did sound a little bit ‘male chauvinistic’ but on reading your latest ones, you sound okay. I’m glad to hear you do have a healthy give and take with your wife after all.
Really! There is NOTHING immodest about a woman not covering her head!
To the OP: the tone of your first posts did sound a little bit ‘male chauvinistic’ but on reading your latest ones, you sound okay. I’m glad to hear you do have a healthy give and take with your wife after all.
T
Tom317
Guest
Women ignoring Biblical mandates to cover their head is not disrepectful to God, but a man wearing a hat is?Personally, I would like to wear a head covering for our Lord. I wish everyone would. However, I’ve only seen maybe less than five women wear head coverings in all the masses I’ve attended in different parishes. Besides wearing it for Jesus, it is also supposed to be for modesty or humility. Therein lies the problem: it’s so rare now days that it would attract much attention. Some misinformed might even think it is an act of defiance or holier-than-thou. And I think that’s very sad, because it is after all, something that is humble and for our Lord. I think it would be absolutely wonderful, if in the near future, females would wear mantillas to mass. I hope it wouldn’t be done as a temporary “trend”, however. The connotation with the mantilla is that it is pre-vatican II, meant only for Latin masses, and not just ‘optional/not required’ but somehow unnecessary and not encouraged (although not discouraged either). Perhaps laity could use a little refresher on the mantilla, and a little encouragement too. Though it’s optional and not mandatory, it would be wonderful to learn from priests, bishops, etc why it is good to wear a mantilla and how it’s still okay. I wouldn’t be surprised if there are many people who don’t even know what a mantilla is, or even that we have the option to wear one, or the reasons for wearing one. I think it’ll just take a little more information to female laity about head coverings and encouragement that it’s okay to wear them… it would be a great help. God bless you for encouraging your wife, and may more husbands (including my husband!) encourage their wives all the same.
But please don’t wear a hat to mass. It’s disrespectful to God.
T
Tom317
Guest
Frankly, before women start wearing veils to Mass, they might want to start by wearing more modest clothes to Mass (not all, but many). A woman veiling her head does nothing if she has first veiled her heart.
S
scylla
Guest
Ummm… Please read my post again.I cannot believe anyone is comparing not wearing a headcovering to being topless!
There is NOTHING immodest about a woman not covering her head!
.
(unless I missed something I never said anything about a woman being immodest by not covering her head)
I was not comparing the two directly, I was comparing the discussion replies which equate style as effecting behavior in Church and respect for God.
Does current secular style define what Catholic discipline is.
No, unless you have a man centered religion.
We seek to do the will of God, not man.
So, please again, before you post, read my post again. I am talking about religious principles, not modesty.
In Christ,
Scylla
J
jebojora
Guest
What if the “domestic church leader” doesn’t want his wife to wear a veil and she thinks she should?
My sister is in this situation. She’s feeling convicted that she should have her head covered in church but her husband doesn’t want her to. He feels that it makes her stand out and has a certain stigma of being an ultra-conservative.
We are converts to Catholicism. It was never even mentioned when we were coming into the church.
But St. Paul says a woman’s hair is her covering. Why then do we need an additional covering?
My sister is in this situation. She’s feeling convicted that she should have her head covered in church but her husband doesn’t want her to. He feels that it makes her stand out and has a certain stigma of being an ultra-conservative.
We are converts to Catholicism. It was never even mentioned when we were coming into the church.
But St. Paul says a woman’s hair is her covering. Why then do we need an additional covering?
G
Godfollower
Guest
Actually, I seem to recall something about John Paul II attending a Mass in which some of the women were topless – not as a sexual thing, but because in that society (I can’t remember where, sorry; I believe it was an equatorial country) toplessness was the norm. The point? Modesty depends on the circumstances.
Cf. Catechism ¶ 2524 (“The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another”).
In the early centuries of the Church, various bishops issued apparently contradictory edicts about women having long or short hair (e.g., one bishop said in one century that women were not to appear in church with long hair, while a different bishop in another century said that women were not to appear in church with short hair). This was not based on the inherent sinfulness of long or short hair; it was based on the fact that in one society long hair was the symbol then used by prostitutes; while in the other society short hair served that purpose. All that’s actually required by the Church is appropriate attire for Mass, and what’s actually appropriate will vary by time and location (for example, I wear a lot “better” clothing when serving as an EMHC at Easter Mass at my parish than I do when stopping in to attend Mass with the hospital chaplain while visiting a sick relative).
There is nothing inherently wrong with a woman appearing in Mass with her hair showing. There have been societies in which a woman showing her hair was considered immodest (e.g., certain Islamic countries even today), but that isn’t true in the U.S. today.
It used to be that everyone always wore their best clothing to Mass. I no longer do so, because my best clothing is a tuxedo, which would be inappropriate. The question is: which clothes are appropriate for this Mass in this society at this particular time in this day and age?
In short, clothing is inspired by modesty (Catechism ¶ 2522). In modern U.S. society, a woman’s showing her hair is not immodest. So my question isn’t “How can women justify not covering their heads?” It’s “Where do men get off complaining when they don’t?”
- Status