Well, my understanding was that the point of submission to one’s husband is to acknowledge one’s submission to God, so two for one, no? And it seems that if we were supposed to worry about what other people thought instead of following the tugging of God on our hearts, we’d be in quite a mess, no?
By the way, I asked if dh was concerned about others seeing him as a “chauvenist” (by assuming he was “making” me veil), but he said no, that the people at our church know him and our family enough to know that isn’t true. He is concerned that it’s “trying too hard”, coming across as “holier than thou”. But when I asked him what he thought of the few other women he’s seen cover, he admitted that while his knee jerk reaction is as he said, once he observes the family, he sees that it’s not that at all
I’m not rushing into this, I just want to be able to mark the sacredness of the space when in the presence of Our Lord. DH agrees with me that there’s too much mundane/secular attitude in the sanctuary. People hang around after mass and carry on conversations, for starters. Dress in general can get abysmall at times. Some people try to say hello when going up for Communion, instead of focusing on what they’re doing. I’m not trying to judge any of these individually, but taken together, it feels no different from any other gathering of people, some of whom happen to know each other
To me, seeing a mantilla (or even any fabric covering - with hats, I always wonder if it’s “on purpose” or not )
is a welcome reminder that there is something special about where we are, what is going on. The mantilla comes right off as soon as the woman leaves the church. It’s all about Our Eucharistic Lord, from where I’m standing. But other people see it differently and project their assumptions onto why they think women cover.
As a priest, I think a real problem arises when people invest in something a meaning and a significance beyond what is right and what is proper
My mother, gone to God for many decades, was very grateful when the convention of both covering her head and wearing a dress was abolished toward the end of her life. It had already been so in secular life for years and her wardrobe reflected that. From her perspective, it was a change long overdue in the Church…and I agree
It was a social convention that had become passe in society and, eventually, the parish as well. A proper lady did not need to be clad in a dress, as opposed to a pantsuit, and also with hat and gloves and handbag
There was no profound spiritual meaning for women in the 50s and 60s when they covered their head…some times with simply a tissue attached by a hair pin. They certainly did NOT think of it as veiling. A woman who “took the veil” became a Nun or a Sister
The concept that “God asked me to do X” moreover is a very slippery slope that I find has crept into popular conversation at a level that is disturbing
One can certainly, legitimately, have a sense of being called to the Secular Franciscan Order or the Dominican Laity or to a parish ministry or to service to the poor
To be called by God to wear a certain type of clothing in a given instance is quite another matter to assert
I remember a case of a lady who submitted, for spiritual direction, a desire for her wardrobe to move toward exclusive use of the colors black and white. She was a member of the Dominican third order secular. Her wardrobe would carefully avoid the appearance of being in any way a type of habit but simply adopting the Dominican color scheme
Whether this was part of her vocation as a tertiary or her personal preference was really moot and did not need discernment in the end. It was of benefit to her at a personal level, it was not harmful, it did not feed a misconception of hers or anyone else of what it is to be a tertiary, and it did not cause others to assume she was a Religious – which would be the case had she adopted some sort of modified Religious habit. Her dresses and blouses and pants and skirts were simply ensembles in white and black. It was so very discreet that I am sure what she did was lost on many people
You hit the nail on the head when, in looking at the women wearing hats, you wondered if it was deliberate or simply their taste in fashion. The same would be true for a man who comes to Mass wearing a tie and jacket or even a suit. If it is an action he has chosen to honour the Lord and to lend a decorum to the
Domus Dei it should be a disposition that is interior to him…hidden and not for being noted by others
As a priest, there are special occasions where I wear a special cassock…other times I go into the church in my standard house cassock – and other times when I have on a clerical shirt and still others, if I am doing something more manual where, given the work I am doing, a simple pullover shirt that I can easily put into the washing machine
There is nothing more honouring to the Lord by my being in the church in the cassock than in the pullover shirt…in fact not being in the cassock can be more utilitarian if I am doing something where the cassock is too cumbersome
In fact, there have been times when I have gone to the sacristy to take off the cassock before changing the tabernacle veil so I am not climbing a step stool in an ankle length garment that could occasion my catching my foot and falling
In sum, I have known tertiaries who like to wear their larger ceremonial scapular when they pray at home. I have known people who find wearing a prayer shawl helpful to the devotions they do at home…but, again, asserting that God wants them to wear the scapular or prayer shawl when they do certain activities is quite different from saying the person chooses to do it because they find it of benefit – and that distinction is the key to where controversy can and often does begin
Good job.