I don't feel like wearing head covering. I don't like making obvious statements

[maggieodae]

When you attend a TLM and do not cover IMHO a woman is making a very loud statement.

Yep! Like me…she hates hats.

 

[maggieodae]

Not an equivalency issue, but I believe everyone is expected to genuflect on two knees. This is, I believe, also Scripturally-based.

everyone can’t always genuflect…some of us are disabled you know. Does that make us irreverent?

 

[MariaG]

I feel like wearing a hat to church would be a fashion statement, not a doctrinal statement, not a challenge or dare to others, and not a proclamation of my own spiritual perfection.

The original context of scripture and the covering of the head was because the women of the time would decorate thier hair as a fashion statement. If you felt that wearing a hat would be a fashion statement, that would certainly violate the intention of wearing a head covering.

If however, you wished to cover your head, consider a simple plain scarf so as to avoid feeling “fashionable”.

God bless,
Maria

 

[mciver]

Hi
I think head covering is a beautiful and feminine thing for a women to do - it allows you to be totally for God its reclaiming oneself for God in the beauty and sacredness of the Mass and becoming at one with Christ - the New Testament is quite radical, look at it from a different perspective its about freedom really - i personally think mantillas or however its spelled look ridiculous, like old granny net curtains - but i think a plain simple head scarf which originates from the eastern tradition is very lovely. Think of Mary the blessed Mother she would have covered her hair when she prayed and went to synagogue - also i think it is a way for a women to reclaim their feminity.

 

[Listener]

I feel that wearing head covering would be a negative statement on my part: Okay I concede …I will show that am trying to be humble like all you mantilla wearing ladies at the TLM and I will wear this darned thing to show you how much I am trying.

There is no way I could wear the thing and not have all sorts of little distracting thoughts in my mind.

I want to love God and follow His Church. He has not said I have to wear a mantilla through His Church’s teachings so I don’t have to. Just as you don’t have to Pray the Sorrows of Mary devotion that I really like and benefit from.

Go ahead shoot me now!!! I am ready.

I certainly wouldn’t want to shoot you for anything. My mantilla is still sitting in my bottom drawer where it has been since around 1963 or 1964. I go to a regular Mass every Sunday, which happens to be in English. I don’t even know where all of these people are finding all of these Latin Masses they seem to be going to. If I did find a Latin Mass and decided to go, I would feel no obligation whatsoever to wear anything on my head. Been there, done that! Just because something is old, it doesn’t make it better.

 

[jmcrae]

Yep! Like me…she hates hats.

I don’t like them either - they make my scalp itch, and they mess up my hair - and unless it 20 below or colder outside, or unless I need a sunshade, I don’t wear any sort of a hat, at any time.

So far, nobody has ever asked me to wear a hat at the TLM. (I have a friend who wears a ball cap to the TLM - I think they see the two of us sitting together, and they just decide to leave us alone. )

 

[Hellisreal]

I imagine this is how the women in the 60’s felt when they were burning bras thinking all the while how free they were from the constraints that society was dominating them with.
But are they laughing now that they are saggy?

Just a thought.

I cant find a Latin Mass near me. I am at a flip flops and jeans kinda place.
I see threads like this and wonder where all these Latin Masses are going on.

 

[lizaanne]

I see threads like this and wonder where all these Latin Masses are going on.

Visit the websites for some parishes near you - you may find one you never knew was there. Doesn’t mean it’s right around the block from you, some people will drive a considerable distance to attend a Mass they feel is appropriately reverent.

~Liza

 

[scylla]

everyone can’t always genuflect…some of us are disabled you know. Does that make us irreverent?

Of course not, just like a lady forgetting her head covering is not doing anything wrong.

There is nothing wrong with mistakes, ignorance or doing what is acceptable by the Church.

I can certainly skip weekday Mass it is not required that I go. I can certainly not wear my Sunday best, if it is not available.

On the other hand…
What should we do if we want to be Saints…
Why do people go to weekly Mass?
Let’s look at how things can be done wrong…
Now to obstinantly not genuflect as a rejection of the presence of Christ in the tabernacle, that would be evil.
To not put God first is to put human desire first, and it is extremely difficult to constantly do this, but we must.
To set desires above obedience is evil and wrong, to put Jesus first, to treat God as God is the model of Christianity we should all emulate.

Irreverance these days is almost inexcusable as most of us know Jesus is present, it is just that we are so puffed up with pride that we do stupid things like seek ways to entertain ourselves at Mass. This is expressed in dancing around, jokes during the homily, clapping and plenty of other stuff that seek attention rather than focusing on God.

In Christ
Scylla

 

[Hellisreal]

Visit the websites for some parishes near you - you may find one you never knew was there. Doesn’t mean it’s right around the block from you, some people will drive a considerable distance to attend a Mass they feel is appropriately reverent.

~Liza

I can’t do that. My husband is a nominal barely hanging in there Catholic. I cant tip him over the edge now by stirring the pot and furthering his obstinance. If I told him we were going on a hike to Mass, he would tell me he will simply not go

He likes the fact that we can walk to Mass its so close. If it were even one more block away, I think he would stop going all TOGETHER.

 

[maggieodae]

I don’t like them either - they make my scalp itch, and they mess up my hair - and unless it 20 below or colder outside, or unless I need a sunshade, I don’t wear any sort of a hat, at any time.

So far, nobody has ever asked me to wear a hat at the TLM. (I have a friend who wears a ball cap to the TLM - I think they see the two of us sitting together, and they just decide to leave us alone. )

Well, a ball cap beats a Kleenex any day. We used to do that during the 50’s and early 60’s, and thought nothing of it. Now, I think that was totally dumb of us. We should have had enough sense to be prepared with a proper head covering, but as with all young people we were rather clueless.

On the other hand, maybe it was a statement of protest,to all the older woman who prided themselves on who had the biggest hat that blocked the whole pews view of Mass.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Headcoverings by Devorah for Religious Purposes - Modesty or Hair Loss

I have found many casual and fancy coverings here. For those that don’t want to stand out the little black or color co-oridinated cap is a start. Maybe you will start a fashion trend.

http://www.headcoverings-by-devorah.com/BlackCottonCrochetSimpleKippah.jpg

Special occasions or fancy dress. I love these.

http://www.headcoverings-by-devorah.com/WhiteBuchariStyleKippah.jpg

 

[threebells17]

Do not fret- you just are not ready yet. When the time is right you will know. I didn’t wear one right off and then I felt that I should, and then I did, and even though I felt uncomfortable at first, my desire to wear it out of reverence and respect for our Lord, made any uncomfortable feeling a small sacrifice. I wear it always now! I would be uncomfortable not to wear one. Also, I noticed other women beginning to wear them at NO Masses now. A move towards God- not society or fashion. (ps- I originally started to wear one to NO Mass and then after attending TLM, which I go to whenever possible, the TLM just convicted me of my desire to wear it. Our Lord appreciates our attempts to please Him- He knows our heart. Do not worry.

 

[Fidelia]

I don’t really see what’s modest about putting something else pretty on your head to begin with.

And why shoud women wear an outward symbol of reverence when men don’t? Like I said in my other post, the TLM I went to, the me were dressed quite casually compared to the women. Come on, the women have to dress up AND wear a veil (really only about half were) and the men don’t even have to dress up??

ETA- I don’t see anything wrong with some women wanting to wear something. That’s very nice. What bothers me is when people go around saying women should have to.

 

[Jaypeeto3]

No one has mentioned the Scriptures that deal with this issue.
Unfortunately, I’m at work and don’t have my Bible here with me,
but Saint Paul in one of his inspired Letters said that women should wear a headcovering in church because of the presence of the Angels.

 

[MariaG]

I don’t really see what’s modest about putting something else pretty on your head to begin with.

Although I would never judge a person’s heart (nor believe you are) and truly believe women cover their heads for truly devotional reasons, I personally would never wear any beautiful and ornate head coverings since I believe they are really doing the opposite of what Paul was saying when he said women should cover their heads and is not, in fact, modest.

He said this because the women would decorate thier hair richly. Covering one’s head was a way to be modest and not draw attention to oneself.

A simple head covering would be more appropriate in my view. Men DO find women’s hair sexually attractive. We would be removing temptation from others by covering it. But I know some of those beautiful mantillas and lace head coverings would be considered VERY sexy by my DH and that would completely defeat one of the purposes of covering one’s head.

It would not defeat the purpose of the individual’s interior devotion, but Paul’s words were about a person’s interior dispostion as well as their exterior. Ornate hair is a sexual distraction. Ornate head coverings would be also, in my opinion.

 

[puzzleannie]

The original context of scripture and the covering of the head was because the women of the time would decorate thier hair as a fashion statement. If you felt that wearing a hat would be a fashion statement, that would certainly violate the intention of wearing a head covering.

If however, you wished to cover your head, consider a simple plain scarf so as to avoid feeling “fashionable”.

God bless,
Maria

I have no problem at all with feeling fashionable. Since I am not someone vowed to a lifestyle that restricts clothing, I am only bound by the discipline of the Church with regard to proper garb for Mass. When the Church restores the rule regarding headcovering I will comply. Until then I will wear, or not wear, a hat as becomes by outfit or the occasion. I am not commenting on anyone else’s “intention for wearing a headcovering.”

 

[Fidelia]

Although I would never judge a person’s heart (nor believe you are) and truly believe women cover their heads for truly devotional reasons, I personally would never wear any beautiful and ornate head coverings since I believe they are really doing the opposite of what Paul was saying when he said women should cover their heads and is not, in fact, modest.

He said this because the women would decorate thier hair richly. Covering one’s head was a way to be modest and not draw attention to oneself.

A simple head covering would be more appropriate in my view. Men DO find women’s hair sexually attractive. We would be removing temptation from others by covering it. But I know some of those beautiful mantillas and lace head coverings would be considered VERY sexy by my DH and that would completely defeat one of the purposes of covering one’s head.

It would not defeat the purpose of the individual’s interior devotion, but Paul’s words were about a person’s interior dispostion as well as their exterior. Ornate hair is a sexual distraction. Ornate head coverings would be also, in my opinion.

Yea, that is the type of thing i was getting at. Along the same lines, I don’t get how Jews see wigs as modest either.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Possibly this has already been expressed, but it bears repeating.

I remember the 60s (and after) quite well. While I do not say that there was any intentional misunderstanding or misinformation on any given subject, the fact remains there was, and is, misunderstanding and misinformation on so very much of Catholic teaching and practice, then and now.

I remember, along with the obligatory protofeminist argument of ‘sexist’ language, the ‘veil question’ (and it is also important to note that veils ‘stopped’ being worn as early as 1970, while the Code of Canon Law still had the practice mandated, well before the 1983 ‘omission’).

How often did I hear that veiling was sexist because it required the woman to ‘cover herself’ as though she was second class, dirty, a temptress.

However, on reading documents both from ‘before’ Vatican 2 and also including (to their credit) many writers of the period through today, the focus, the practice, and the reason for wearing a veil had nothing to do with sexism, second class citizenship, male dominance and oppression. . .

but rather reflected the woman’s hair as her glory, and (like the veiling of the Ark of the Covenant), the practice was felt to reflect the innate sacredness and sanctity of that which was being covered.

Rather than a woman being ‘oppressed’ by her veil, she was being elevated. She was being acknowledged as worthy and sacred, and she covered herself for acknowledgement of this, as well as to show her understanding of the fitness of the proper setting for her ‘glory’.

Just because people choose to make (wrong) interpretations regarding ‘sexist’ veiling does not mean the interpretations were true. And just because there may have been individuals, or eras, where people did make those interpretations and because of them acted poorly does not make the reality of veiling wrong.

We do not blame the teaching of the Church that abortion is wrong as the reason that so many abort, because of whatever ‘interpretaton’ is put on the Church’s reason for teaching such (usually of course it is derided as being anti-woman, anti-choice, impossible to adhere to, failing to take ‘other factors’ into account, interpreted by MEN and thus biased, etc.)

So why would we suddenly decide that a teaching which is still in force (or at the very least a reasonable option) should be thrown out because of the same type of reasoning that we (quite rightly) would not accept as reasons to abrogate or change any OTHER Church teaching?

 

[BlyssfulDreamer]

I cant find a Latin Mass near me. I am at a flip flops and jeans kinda place.
I see threads like this and wonder where all these Latin Masses are going on.

At the Diocese of Lincoln