R
ReaderT
Guest
We (Orthodox) still do that - about 300 million of us in Europe and Asia, and also America:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
We (Orthodox) still do that too.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
History behind christian religious fasting and head coverings? Are they still necessary to that same degree? And why they 'went out of style'?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
L
Lasse
Guest
As has already been mentioned, Orthodox Christians still fast from meat, eggs and dairy on Wednesdays and Fridays and it is still common for women to cover their heads when praying. In the Byzantine East, the fasting practices are interrelated with our hymnogeaphy (the Octoechos). It is also common to abstain from meat, sex, alcohol etc. before receiving Holy Communion. We do it to discover that we are free, not entirely under control of our passions; it reminds us of Eden and the state of life where there was no death.
I thought Catholics still abstained from meat on Fridays? Is not this interrelated with your liturgical and devotional practices, such as the mysteries of the rosary?
I thought Catholics still abstained from meat on Fridays? Is not this interrelated with your liturgical and devotional practices, such as the mysteries of the rosary?
S
stpurl
Guest
Abstinence from meat on Fridays is still the Norm in the Latin Church. However, a number of countries have requested an indult from the practice except on Lenten Fridays. In the US this occurred during the tumult of the 1960s with its own societal uproar, and was according to some the result of many lay people requesting an opportunity to either do a more meaningful penance/ give vegetarians something to give up/ and was supposedly necessary because of the again supposedly high degree of piety and the assimilation of Catholics into ‘WASP” society.
So you can take it with a grain of salt, and again depending on the sources that document the period, it was a combination of wishful thinking that the lay in America were so incredibly pious, were about to ‘integrate’ into Protestant society and not be ‘ghettoized’ any more with ‘oldfashioned’ and ‘punitive practices’ and were apparently raring to show the Protestants through social activism how Christlike Catholics were, how modern and free as opposed to medieval and tied to the Pope, etc.
And as might be expected, given the ambiguity of the terms and the lack of cohesion as the hierarchy themselves were wanting to ‘break free’, the net result was that the Catholic lay were simply told they ‘only had to abstain in Lent’. . .NOT that they were expected to keep ON the normal fasting on the other Fridays OR were supposed to find something else penitential.
And by the 1970s most Catholics were firmly convinced that there was no need for any Friday penance at all, that Lent Fridays were simply ‘suggestions’ and that since meat was allowed any other time, it was all no real big deal. Just something that Grandma or Aunt Piety did because they’d been brainwashed in their youth. . .
So you can take it with a grain of salt, and again depending on the sources that document the period, it was a combination of wishful thinking that the lay in America were so incredibly pious, were about to ‘integrate’ into Protestant society and not be ‘ghettoized’ any more with ‘oldfashioned’ and ‘punitive practices’ and were apparently raring to show the Protestants through social activism how Christlike Catholics were, how modern and free as opposed to medieval and tied to the Pope, etc.
And as might be expected, given the ambiguity of the terms and the lack of cohesion as the hierarchy themselves were wanting to ‘break free’, the net result was that the Catholic lay were simply told they ‘only had to abstain in Lent’. . .NOT that they were expected to keep ON the normal fasting on the other Fridays OR were supposed to find something else penitential.
And by the 1970s most Catholics were firmly convinced that there was no need for any Friday penance at all, that Lent Fridays were simply ‘suggestions’ and that since meat was allowed any other time, it was all no real big deal. Just something that Grandma or Aunt Piety did because they’d been brainwashed in their youth. . .
M
MNathaniel
Guest
The religious reasons seem (to me) the only reasons worth talking about here, in light of the OP’s question.Are you talking about covering head only in church or the rest of the time when women were outside of their homes?
…As far as religious reasons, there are several schools of thought on that one.
A
anendlesswaltz
Guest
Thank you so much! That explains a lot. Thanks for helping me understand!
M
MNathaniel
Guest
As it happens, I happen to disagree with your interpretation of the historical reasons for daily female head covering as reducible to ‘hygiene’, and I can see an ongoing good religious rationale for daily wear (related to why female Christians have worn daily hair-coverings when hygiene wasn’t the reason, and why nuns wear hair-coverings every day all day, not just ‘in church’).
I just also happen to accept the Church’s authority to declare that we’re not all bound to do this (either daily or in a church), so I’m not interested in getting into an internet argument over it.
I reckon the question may keep popping up though, because the culture/hygiene reductionist argument will continue to be unsatisfying for many people who sense (correctly, in my estimation) that there’s actually more to it.
I just also happen to accept the Church’s authority to declare that we’re not all bound to do this (either daily or in a church), so I’m not interested in getting into an internet argument over it.
I reckon the question may keep popping up though, because the culture/hygiene reductionist argument will continue to be unsatisfying for many people who sense (correctly, in my estimation) that there’s actually more to it.
Last edited:
M
MNathaniel
Guest
I’m not a historian so I can’t bring you research. All I can say is that the research others produce to suggest there’s no true religious value to veiling has so far — going on years now — been unpersuasive to me. I’m open to persuasion. On this topic, hasn’t yet happened.
Honestly, I think 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 speaks for itself.
In conjunction with 1 Thessalonians 5, it makes perfect sense to me that many women choose to wear hair coverings at all times, since they’re intending to be praying at all times.
If that’s not the same reason consecrated women (nuns and sisters) give for the fact that the overwhelming majority of them veil daily outside of church, I’m honestly mystefied as to what that reason would be. If it’s arbitrary, they might as well throw their veils in a fire because by reductionist culture/hygiene theories, they’re just perpetuating outdated and irrelevant cultural/hygiene norms and their clothing becomes mere antiquated costumery at that point. Nuns do have access to the same shampoo and running water the rest of us do, and they’re not unusually prone to lice.
Side note, the religious orders that burned their veils (metaphorically speaking) have not caught on. Many of them have become sad examples of laxity or rebellion against Church teaching in other ways and are aging out because no young women of the next generation will join them. Women seeking religious life overwhelmingly answer on surveys that they’re only interested in habited orders. I disbelieve that this is because women who desire to dedicate their whole lives to God through consecrated, celibate religious life are just frivolous fashionistas. There’s meaning to everything we do, including what we choose to wear.
Personally I’d prefer to veil all the time, for religious reasons, if it wouldn’t make me stand out. I respect women who do. The primary reason I don’t is that back when I did (and did it quietly, not even talking to people about it; and I didn’t wear a chapel veil or anything religiously obvious, just a Jewish style scarf), I got such vicious and prolonged pushback over it that I finally stopped, but not because it left my conscience.
When I became Catholic I submitted my will to the Church. The Church has clearly permitted unveiling, so I won’t speak against it. I avoid veiling myself because my interpretation of what Catholics have told me is that veiling when others aren’t becomes a ‘Look At Me’ act of pride or rebellion, and I don’t want to be a stumbling block to anyone weak of faith, if they interpret my actions as actively rebellious or prideful.
Nonetheless, when I secretly wear a veil inside my own house in prayer, it’s so calming and focusing on how I am God’s, and how my glory is not my own. I wish I could veil outside of my house but unfortunately am too intimidated by the hostility of others at this point. But because of my own internal feelings, I can well recognize the reality that many veiling Christian women throughout time and place have shared them, and have veiled with these reasons in mind. Not just ‘culture’ and ‘hygiene’.
Honestly, I think 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 speaks for itself.
In conjunction with 1 Thessalonians 5, it makes perfect sense to me that many women choose to wear hair coverings at all times, since they’re intending to be praying at all times.
If that’s not the same reason consecrated women (nuns and sisters) give for the fact that the overwhelming majority of them veil daily outside of church, I’m honestly mystefied as to what that reason would be. If it’s arbitrary, they might as well throw their veils in a fire because by reductionist culture/hygiene theories, they’re just perpetuating outdated and irrelevant cultural/hygiene norms and their clothing becomes mere antiquated costumery at that point. Nuns do have access to the same shampoo and running water the rest of us do, and they’re not unusually prone to lice.
Side note, the religious orders that burned their veils (metaphorically speaking) have not caught on. Many of them have become sad examples of laxity or rebellion against Church teaching in other ways and are aging out because no young women of the next generation will join them. Women seeking religious life overwhelmingly answer on surveys that they’re only interested in habited orders. I disbelieve that this is because women who desire to dedicate their whole lives to God through consecrated, celibate religious life are just frivolous fashionistas. There’s meaning to everything we do, including what we choose to wear.
Personally I’d prefer to veil all the time, for religious reasons, if it wouldn’t make me stand out. I respect women who do. The primary reason I don’t is that back when I did (and did it quietly, not even talking to people about it; and I didn’t wear a chapel veil or anything religiously obvious, just a Jewish style scarf), I got such vicious and prolonged pushback over it that I finally stopped, but not because it left my conscience.
When I became Catholic I submitted my will to the Church. The Church has clearly permitted unveiling, so I won’t speak against it. I avoid veiling myself because my interpretation of what Catholics have told me is that veiling when others aren’t becomes a ‘Look At Me’ act of pride or rebellion, and I don’t want to be a stumbling block to anyone weak of faith, if they interpret my actions as actively rebellious or prideful.
Nonetheless, when I secretly wear a veil inside my own house in prayer, it’s so calming and focusing on how I am God’s, and how my glory is not my own. I wish I could veil outside of my house but unfortunately am too intimidated by the hostility of others at this point. But because of my own internal feelings, I can well recognize the reality that many veiling Christian women throughout time and place have shared them, and have veiled with these reasons in mind. Not just ‘culture’ and ‘hygiene’.
Last edited:
M
Margaret_Ann
Guest
In the Byzantine Tradition - Catholic and non-Catholic - every Wednesday and Friday (with 4-5 exceptions) are fast days. We started the Dormition Fast last Saturday (Aug. 1-14) and it’s stricter than the Great Fast even though it’s the shortest fast of the year (this year it’s less than 2 weeks because Aug 1 was on Saturday).they used to fast or observe dietary restrictions every wednesday and friday and such and not just during lent or some other mandatory observance time.
Btw, in the West, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday were fast days. We generally don’t fast on Saturday (Great Saturday being the exception).
M
Margaret_Ann
Guest
I felt the same way when I began wearing a veil. I used to wear a chapel cap on my head. My late mother didn’t like it (and I can’t post what she said lest I get flagged).I wish I could veil outside of my house but unfortunately am too intimidated by the hostility of others at this point.
M
Margaret_Ann
Guest
I’m Ukrainian Greek Catholic and we always had Friday abstinence growing up. My late mother would make us peanut butter and jelly sandwiches every Friday.
I have Russian Orthodox cousins in their 60s & 70s who still keep all 4 fasts of the year as well as the traditional fast from midnight before receiving Communion. Their example helped me rediscover the traditional fasting practice in our Byzantine Tradition.
I have Russian Orthodox cousins in their 60s & 70s who still keep all 4 fasts of the year as well as the traditional fast from midnight before receiving Communion. Their example helped me rediscover the traditional fasting practice in our Byzantine Tradition.
V
vsedriver
Guest
I don’t think that is what people are saying at all. I think people are saying it goes hand in hand. It is a fact that women wore hair coverings for hygienic reasons. I can attest to personal experience when participating in living history. If you went outside of your home you wanted your head covered.All I can say is that the research others produce to suggest there’s no true religious value to veiling has so far — going on years now — been unpersuasive to me
That doesn’t mean there can’t be a religious attachment to women covering their heads. After all, men covered their heads for as long as women did and Jewish men still cover their heads when at worship.
Paul is not commenting on a simple means to be pius, since the vast majority of women would be wearing head coverings anyway. He is addressing a particular behavior that is associated with not wearing a head covering. I think the explanation in the link I posted made perfect sense. Treating the Mass as a dinner party is indeed bad behavior and exhorting women to behave as they would in a public place rather than in a personal space makes perfect sense to me.
Nun’s habits evolved from everyday wear. It only became different when fashions changed and the nuns didn’t. That doesn’t mean that religious orders haven’t attached religious reasons for what and why they wear it.
Nurses also dressed in ‘habits’. But their clothing continued to move with the times.
I think it is fine if a woman wants to veil. I don’t pass judgment on their motives. A spiritual aid is a spiritual aid.
A
anendlesswaltz
Guest
I don’t remember the bible verse but i remember reading something about veiling onesself in Paul’s writings, and for a time i really wanted to wear a head covering even if just in private prayer. As a sign of my submission to God’s will whatever it may be (i had a lot of conflicting questions at the time) and because in that verse it spoke of angels watching and God’s order of creation so i thought its probably important to God that i do this, so i better at least do it in private prayer. No more, though, because i know my mom would flip cause she thinks it demeans women.Nonetheless, when I secretly wear a veil inside my own house in prayer, it’s so calming and focusing on how I am God’s, and how my glory is not my own. I wish I could veil outside of my house but unfortunately am too intimidated by the hostility of others at this point. But because of my own internal feelings, I can well recognize the reality that many veiling Christian women throughout time and place have shared them, and have veiled with these reasons in mind. Not just ‘culture’ and ‘hygiene’.
I bought a headdscarf from a family owned christian company but its still sitting in its packaging. I’m afraid to be walked in on with it on, praying, and having to defend myself and what mom (and everyone else) will probably think of as an antiquated, outdated, oppressive part of scripture.
Last edited:
A
anendlesswaltz
Guest
Oh so abstinence is what its called! I’m sure someone’s mentioned it before here in this thread, but i’ve just now gotten around to reading the new replies. Thank you so much! I’m glad you had your cousins’ examples. I’ve been asking about things like this since i joined this site because i’d like to rediscover the roots of the religion i grew up with. I grew up protestant but it just feels so much like a religion that gets left to church on sundays and bible study time, at best, the way i was brought up with it. I very much feel like God is calling me to a much deeper, more all-consuming, relationship with him. This sort of thing was the first thing i found.I’m Ukrainian Greek Catholic and we always had Friday abstinence growing up. My late mother would make us peanut butter and jelly sandwiches every Friday.
I have Russian Orthodox cousins in their 60s & 70s who still keep all 4 fasts of the year as well as the traditional fast from midnight before receiving Communion. Their example helped me rediscover the traditional fasting practice in our Byzantine Tradition.
M
MNathaniel
Guest
There are two reasons I’m disinclined to discuss this further in this forum.
- I personally find anti-veiling rhetoric discouraging to my heart.
- There is a minor present who believes her mother would be distressed if she veiled, and I do not want to accidentally persuade a minor to engage in any activity contrary to her parent’s wishes.
Last edited:
A
anendlesswaltz
Guest
Uhm actually i’m not a minor. I just happen to be over 18 and still living with my parents. Which does mean i feel like I should respect their wishes, i guess? Moreso, i just think she’s too close minded and confrontational so its not worth the fight just cause i want to try it out. She thinks she’s always right, always has.There is a minor present who believes her mother would be distressed if she veiled, and I do not want to accidentally persuade a minor to engage in any activity contrary to her parent’s wishes.
I do agree though, i loved hearing from the orthodox and byzantine members of this forum!
Last edited:
V
vsedriver
Guest
but there was no anti-veiling rhetoric in this thread. There was a discussion on what St. Paul was teaching. To understand his teaching you must understand the times in which he was living. And an explanation as to why the Church no longer makes it a requirement.I personally find anti-veiling rhetoric discouraging to my heart.
But no one at anytime on this thread said veiling was bad or shouldn’t be done. It’s a personal choice.
D
DarkLight
Guest
If you do want to try it out at home, I might recommend using an ordinary headwrap and not specifically a religious headscarf. I’ve worn something like this before:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Because it’s a bit more ordinary it doesn’t really read as a religious head covering to most people.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Because it’s a bit more ordinary it doesn’t really read as a religious head covering to most people.
T
tuffsmurf
Guest
If hygiene was the main reason for women covering their hair, men would have done it all the same.
According to Roman norms at least, a man was expected to keep his hair short. That’s less hassle and potential trouble than long (sometimes vey long) hair.
Some of it does make sense to me. I have very thin longish hair. On windy days, all of it goes into hiding, or I end up with an inextricable mass of tangles (and often, bits of dried leaves or insects) on the head. My husband has short hair and he doesn’t have that problem.
Some of it does make sense to me. I have very thin longish hair. On windy days, all of it goes into hiding, or I end up with an inextricable mass of tangles (and often, bits of dried leaves or insects) on the head. My husband has short hair and he doesn’t have that problem.
M
MNathaniel
Guest
Okay, since @anendlesswaltz says she’s not a minor (sorry sister! I misinterpreted your comment).
And even though responding might still be a bad idea for personal reasons since I find this whole topic so irritating and don’t see the value in debating this with strangers on the internet…
Since two people saw fit to respond to me by denying engaging in anti-veiling rhetoric, here goes:
Dismissing religious reasons for religious head covering and promoting a reductionist narrative in which head covering is ‘really’ about hygiene/culture, and only accidentally caught up in religion, is anti-veiling rhetoric as far as I’m concerned. I can tell because it hurts my heart and discourages me from veiling.
It discourages the hearts of those who otherwise feel called to veil for religious reasons, to be talked down to that sure, if we want to do something arbitrary and consider it privately significant we can, but we sure better understand that it’s arbitrary and there’s no actual religious value or significance to it. We’re just silly-billies who don’t understand that all Christians prior to the 1960’s (when everything took a cultural turn for the better, right?) were ignorant for their traditional practice of hair covering, and when women in the 1960s organically stopped wearing hair coverings (again, nothing suspicious about that at all! Certainly impossible that women taking off the traditional symbol of humility before God and in deference to the idea of a natural order, had any spiritual relationship with other trends in the 1960s that had to do with rejections of humility and the idea of a natural order (e.g. promiscuity and contraception, abortion, divorce, female priest push, generally aggressive and prideful behaviour passed off as ‘liberated’, etc). Total coincidence that this stuff all happened at the same time, couldn’t be a problematic spirit common to all of it. Really, it’s Christians after the 1960s that have actually increased in virtue and reverence and love for God, and taking off their veils was somehow… an expression of that? Or at least is totally unrelated and not worth noticing. Yeah, sure, that one. (Except the millions of Orthodox and Eastern Rite Catholics. They haven’t figured out yet that they’re just clinging to an outdated cultural/hygiene practice and mistaking their 2,000 year Scripture-rooted tradition of veiling for being religiously worthwhile.)
Yes, the Catholic Church tolerated the 1960s lay-led change in custom by avoiding re-issuing Canon 1262 in the 1983 edition of the Code of Canon Law, thereby abrogating the obligation for women to veil in Church. But the mere fact of the Church capitulating to a 1960s practice does nothing to suggest that this practice is better than what Christians practiced for the majority of the existence of Christianity. And if something isn’t ‘better’, I don’t see why we should do it. Again, I’m not suggesting women who see no reason to should now put on a veil – I’m just saying I think there’s a lot more religious significance to both veiling, and the historical event of 1960s un-veiling, than is being acknowledged in this conversation so far.
And even though responding might still be a bad idea for personal reasons since I find this whole topic so irritating and don’t see the value in debating this with strangers on the internet…
Since two people saw fit to respond to me by denying engaging in anti-veiling rhetoric, here goes:
Dismissing religious reasons for religious head covering and promoting a reductionist narrative in which head covering is ‘really’ about hygiene/culture, and only accidentally caught up in religion, is anti-veiling rhetoric as far as I’m concerned. I can tell because it hurts my heart and discourages me from veiling.
It discourages the hearts of those who otherwise feel called to veil for religious reasons, to be talked down to that sure, if we want to do something arbitrary and consider it privately significant we can, but we sure better understand that it’s arbitrary and there’s no actual religious value or significance to it. We’re just silly-billies who don’t understand that all Christians prior to the 1960’s (when everything took a cultural turn for the better, right?) were ignorant for their traditional practice of hair covering, and when women in the 1960s organically stopped wearing hair coverings (again, nothing suspicious about that at all! Certainly impossible that women taking off the traditional symbol of humility before God and in deference to the idea of a natural order, had any spiritual relationship with other trends in the 1960s that had to do with rejections of humility and the idea of a natural order (e.g. promiscuity and contraception, abortion, divorce, female priest push, generally aggressive and prideful behaviour passed off as ‘liberated’, etc). Total coincidence that this stuff all happened at the same time, couldn’t be a problematic spirit common to all of it. Really, it’s Christians after the 1960s that have actually increased in virtue and reverence and love for God, and taking off their veils was somehow… an expression of that? Or at least is totally unrelated and not worth noticing. Yeah, sure, that one. (Except the millions of Orthodox and Eastern Rite Catholics. They haven’t figured out yet that they’re just clinging to an outdated cultural/hygiene practice and mistaking their 2,000 year Scripture-rooted tradition of veiling for being religiously worthwhile.)
Yes, the Catholic Church tolerated the 1960s lay-led change in custom by avoiding re-issuing Canon 1262 in the 1983 edition of the Code of Canon Law, thereby abrogating the obligation for women to veil in Church. But the mere fact of the Church capitulating to a 1960s practice does nothing to suggest that this practice is better than what Christians practiced for the majority of the existence of Christianity. And if something isn’t ‘better’, I don’t see why we should do it. Again, I’m not suggesting women who see no reason to should now put on a veil – I’m just saying I think there’s a lot more religious significance to both veiling, and the historical event of 1960s un-veiling, than is being acknowledged in this conversation so far.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.