United pentecostal woman arent allowed to cut hair

[revelations]

cbs42.com/news/local/19162619.html

McNeily said the other student took out some scissors and snipped off 8 inches of her daughter’s hair. “Until two weeks ago she could sit on her hair. You can see all the different lengths where she just took the scissors and went right across,” said Sherry McNeily.
…]

Mrs. McNeily said any parent would be outraged if this happened to their child, but because her family is United Pentecostal it is an especially big deal. “One of our basic, fundamental doctrines is that a woman’s hair should be uncut. We get that out of Corinthians where it talks about how a woman’s hair is her glory and she has power on her head with her uncut hair,” said Sherry McNeily.

Fundamental doctrine? Thoughts?

 

[Sabda]

Ya, that’s true. They can not cut their hair short or even what would be called medium length. It must be long. The women can not wear jewerly, make-up and are not allowed to wear pants. They don’t drink or gamble either.

 

[GemmaRose]

They probably have to keep their heads covered and their mouth shut too. :whacky:

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

It is a strong doctrine, particularly in the southern US. You can tell the Holiness and Full Pentecostals (as opposed to just Pentecostals) by their skirts, blouses,dresses, and the ton of hair and lack of jewelry and cosmetics. They do not wear amish “covers” but some (each church is autonomous) wear headscarves, etc. The women don’t talk if there is oneof their men there to talk for them.

Can the school monitor the bathrooms more? Probably. Is this a case of two kids and a pair of scissors, and not really a school out to “get” somebody? Probably.

 

[WalkingByFaith]

Hi everyone.
I heard about the story from my daughter and did a search to find more information, that’s how I happened across this thread. Your comments intrigued me enough to register in order to post a comment of my own:
I happen to be one of those United Pentecostal ladies who made a personal covenant not to cut my hair over 25 years ago at the very young age of 22. Contrary to what some may think, this wasn’t done in order to join or even in order to remain a member of the United Pentecostal Church International organization, but rather from personal conviction in prayer and in reading the scriptures. I’m not sure where anyone got the idea that the ladies of the UPCI dont talk until the man speaks first - sounds a little silly to me and I have never known this to be true. But then, I’ve heard a lot of things rumored about Catholics and have not found them to be true either. If ladies weren’t allowed to speak before the man - why would women evangelists and preachers be ‘allowed’ in the UPCI? Oh well, human nature does seem to discount that which seems odd or out of place with the even more bizzare - maybe just to more easily discredit them? Or maybe that way they won’t have to feel convicted about not getting to know their neighbor?..yet if I don’t get to know my neighbor, how can I truly love them?
As an added side note: while my hair is considered “long”, it’s definitely not long enough to sit on, and of course, even if it was, I still wouldn’t cut it. It was also good to read in that news article that at least the family is “hoping to avoid a lawsuit”. At first glance it seems I would’ve turned the other cheek instead of raising such a ruckus, but then the only ones who know for certain what exactly happened were those who were present at the time, and the Lord. Keep growing in Christ!

 

[mercygate]

Hi everyone.
I heard about the story from my daughter and did a search to find more information, that’s how I happened across this thread. Your comments intrigued me enough to register in order to post a comment of my own:
I happen to be one of those United Pentecostal ladies who made a personal covenant not to cut my hair over 25 years ago at the very young age of 22. Contrary to what some may think, this wasn’t done in order to join or even in order to remain a member of the United Pentecostal Church International organization, but rather from personal conviction in prayer and in reading the scriptures. I’m not sure where anyone got the idea that the ladies of the UPCI dont talk until the man speaks first - sounds a little silly to me and I have never known this to be true. But then, I’ve heard a lot of things rumored about Catholics and have not found them to be true either. If ladies weren’t allowed to speak before the man - why would women evangelists and preachers be ‘allowed’ in the UPCI? Oh well, human nature does seem to discount that which seems odd or out of place with the even more bizzare - maybe just to more easily discredit them? Or maybe that way they won’t have to feel convicted about not getting to know their neighbor?..yet if I don’t get to know my neighbor, how can I truly love them?
As an added side note: while my hair is considered “long”, it’s definitely not long enough to sit on, and of course, even if it was, I still wouldn’t cut it. It was also good to read in that news article that at least the family is “hoping to avoid a lawsuit”. At first glance it seems I would’ve turned the other cheek instead of raising such a ruckus, but then the only ones who know for certain what exactly happened were those who were present at the time, and the Lord. Keep growing in Christ!

I really appreciate your taking the trouble to come here and explain this to us. BOY! Do we EVER know what it is to have people believing things about us that are not true.

Is the no-haircutting rule in response to Paul’s observation that a woman’s hair is her glory?

A Catholic view of a thing like not cutting one’s hair, would likely see it as a discipline rather than as a mandate. One would undertake this discipline out of devotion but we would not see it as an issue of salvation. (I’m sure you do not see it that way either.)

Yet, I think, should a Catholic decide to let her hair grow for devotional reasons, if someone chopped it up, we would likely trim it even because we would see “not cutting one’s hair” as a principle.

P.S. When I had long hair as a young woman, I DEFINITELY could sit on it!

P.P.S. You would not take the prohibition of hair cutting to the extent of not allowing a woman to have her head shaved if she required brain surgery – would you?

 

[ralphinal]

I used ot work near a little hot dog joint. The people that owned it were either Holiness or UPC, I never asked and we never discussed religion, only food. ANyway, both the husband and wife worked there. Really nice people. She would talk the paint off of the walls to anyone. She kept her long hair up in a bun and covered, but that was the food service industry.

Their youngest daughter worked there sometimes when her college schedule allowed it. She was not typical: pants and short hair. It did not seem to matter, so I think that like all issues of faith, it was left to the individual conscience. I always figured that she did not want to be a target of some well-meaning leftist atheist who wanted to show the true salvation of abandoning Christ.

 

[Sabda]

I used ot work near a little hot dog joint. The people that owned it were either Holiness or UPC, I never asked and we never discussed religion, only food. ANyway, both the husband and wife worked there. Really nice people. She would talk the paint off of the walls to anyone. She kept her long hair up in a bun and covered, but that was the food service industry.

Their youngest daughter worked there sometimes when her college schedule allowed it. She was not typical: pants and short hair. It did not seem to matter, so I think that like all issues of faith, it was left to the individual conscience. I always figured that she did not want to be a target of some well-meaning leftist atheist who wanted to show the true salvation of abandoning Christ.

From my own personal experience the above bold is enough to cause me to have doubts about her being a practicing Pentecostal. DH has a lot of family in this group, we also had a number of them in our playgroup and of the women who are practicing I have never seen one in pants or with short hair. Our own dil is one whom I would consider to be very liberal for a practicing Pentecostal and even she still has long hair and does not wear pants. Are you sure she was practicing? Based on my experience, for those who are practicing there is pressure to comply. Not necessarily a bad thing but it is there.

 

[mercygate]

From my own personal experience the above bold is enough to cause me to have doubts about her being a practicing Pentecostal. DH has a lot of family in this group, we also had a number of them in our playgroup and of the women who are practicing I have never seen one in pants or with short hair. Our own dil is one whom I would consider to be very liberal for a practicing Pentecostal and even she still has long hair and does not wear pants. Are you sure she was practicing? Based on my experience, for those who are practicing there is pressure to comply. Not necessarily a bad thing but it is there.

Maybe she was like a lot of our own children: pushin’ the boundaries. Testing her parents. Drivin’ 'em nuts.

 

[Sabda]

Maybe she was like a lot of our own children: pushin’ the boundaries. Testing her parents. Drivin’ 'em nuts.

Like I said I consider my dil to be liberal. She most certainly pushes a number of boundaries in her faith. But one she does not push is the one on hair and pants. I know two ladies who are non-practicing and BOTH ladies wear pants and have short hair. One is my own aunt and another is my mom’s neighbor. All the other ladies I know who are practicing all have long hair and wear dresses.

 

[ralphinal]

From my own personal experience the above bold is enough to cause me to have doubts about her being a practicing Pentecostal. DH has a lot of family in this group, we also had a number of them in our playgroup and of the women who are practicing I have never seen one in pants or with short hair. Our own dil is one whom I would consider to be very liberal for a practicing Pentecostal and even she still has long hair and does not wear pants. Are you sure she was practicing? Based on my experience, for those who are practicing there is pressure to comply. Not necessarily a bad thing but it is there.

No, I do not know if she was practicing. I do know that she still lived at home, and I was assuming that she did. That was an assumption.

Would a Pentecostal woman wear pants to the gym? Would she go to a co-ed gym? WOuld she swim in a pool with men in it?

 

[Sabda]

No, I do not know if she was practicing. I do know that she still lived at home, and I was assuming that she did. That was an assumption.

Would a Pentecostal woman wear pants to the gym? Would she go to a co-ed gym? Would she swim in a pool with men in it?

No, they would not wear pants to a gym. None of the ones I know even go to a gym. As far as swimming, my fil, who is non-practicing, have said that the women would just go into the lake with their dresses on. No swimsuits for them. One thing you can guarantee is that you will never catch a devout Holiness Pentecostal woman dressing in any sort of an immodest way and a swimsuit and pants are seen as immodest.

Here is the United Pentecostal Church International website which will help you understand what their standards are.

 

[dessert]

I think the men want their women to have long hair because it makes them feel more like they are men. And the women feel more feminine
It is a bother to have too long hair and can get tangled into something. But of course the men(husband ) likes to see it come down in the evening. There are other religions that believe in this, such as the Mennonites and the Amish. I have my hair long sometimes and short other times and curl it or leave it straight. I resent it when other women tell me how to have my hair. There are many that have their hair shorter than men or their husbands. If I don’t see a woman friend for awhile their hair is shorter and shorter and they say oh it feels so good to get just a quarter inch off they don’t even have that left that is why I will not go real short. I need it at least about 4-6 inches long.

 

[WalkingByFaith]

Hello everyone

I’m afraid my following responses to everyon’e’s posts are couched more questions than actual replies.

Thank you mercygate for the kind welcome. The ‘no haircutting’ is in response to Pauls observation that a woman’s hair is her glory and all that Paul wrote concerning the matter to the Corinthian church. Our church’s doctirnal beliefs are totally founded in one’s relationship with and devotion to God. Without love, doesn’t all we do in this life amount to vanity?
Devotion can be defined as not only profound dedication to worship and service, but also a solemn committment of your life to a cherished purpose. If such: a life comitment made to a cherished purpose - why would the circumstances of life change anything? Even when applied to such a simple thing as uncut hair?
A woman’s hair is given to her by God as a covering, even so you may not view uncut hair as anything in itself, but shouldn’t the love, dedication and obedience behind such a simple act at least be seen as the treasure it is meant to be?
It seems to me, the teenager ralphinal refers to probably does not see uncut hair as a treasure. She would also probably agree with dessert that its a bother.
Even in practical matters I think the opposite… with long hair I have more options. I could wear it in a different style every day of the week if I wanted too and it doesnt take but a minute to leave it long, tuck it under, or throw it all the way up to keep it out of my way when I’m busy. When its cut - you can’t really do anything different with it. Yeah - that’s definitely a feminine thing. But I think so long as it doesn’t become a pride thing - that’s ok.

I tend to doubt that all men like to see women long hair - let alone see it “come down in the evening”… Men, what do you think?

As to the modesty issue…I hope all would agree that swimsuits are a bit immodest and no pool I know of would let anyone in the water with anything but a swimsuit on - which frankly does not make any sence to me… hence the lake is about the only place we go. Besides - it is more fun.
I recently moved - at my ‘old’ church, about half the women that went there belonged to Curves.
As to not wearing pants… The scriptures forbid the man to put on anything that partains to the woman and the woman is forbidden to put on anything that partains to the man. Out of the last 1000 or so years - only in about the last hundred have women thought pants were not men’s apparel. Yes, in Old Testament days men wore robes but if you look up jewish customs, they were still easily distinguishable from a distance. Today, even if you’re up close, it’s hard to tell which is which sometimes and until it’s common for men to wear skirts and dresses - it does generally keep us easily distinguishable even from a distance. At least us ladies have it easy - the men have a little harder time with that one.
Discipline can be defined both as training that develops or improves a skill and as a state of bringing to order and obedience. Am I correct in thinking discipline is viewed here more in the concept of training than obedience? For if it is looked on as a matter of obedience, is not doing the opposite of what God asks of us looked upon as rebellion? And is not rebellion against God, sin?
The bible talks about line upon line precept upon precept here a little there a little. Are all people who do not share your personal conviction ‘going to hell’? God deals with each person individually. In love He guides and chastises each of us according to our own weaknesses. Reveals Himself to us through our own life’s experiences and does not demand of us anything more than we can bear. Perhaps an example would work better — To the person such as I, who has been personally scarred by alcohol abuse even the thought of being in the presence of someone having a glass of wine can be unbearable. To another, it’s a temptation that when rationalized away can be the stumblingblock that leads to a wasted life. And yet to another it is purely harmless in moderation - all 3 are correct in their thinking. Is it wrong to err on the side of not wanting to cause pain nor cause another to stumble? Neither do I look down on anyone for their innocence. In many ways - innocence itself is a wonderful treasure, once gone, it can never be recaptured.

This thing is turning into novel… sry for rambling on so much!

 

[mercygate]

Hello everyone

I’m afraid my following responses to everyon’e’s posts are couched more questions than actual replies.

Thank you mercygate for the kind welcome. The ‘no haircutting’ is in response to Pauls observation that a woman’s hair is her glory and all that Paul wrote concerning the matter to the Corinthian church. Our church’s doctirnal beliefs are totally founded in one’s relationship with and devotion to God. Without love, doesn’t all we do in this life amount to vanity?
Devotion can be defined as not only profound dedication to worship and service, but also a solemn committment of your life to a cherished purpose. If such: a life comitment made to a cherished purpose - why would the circumstances of life change anything? Even when applied to such a simple thing as uncut hair?
A woman’s hair is given to her by God as a covering, even so you may not view uncut hair as anything in itself, but shouldn’t the love, dedication and obedience behind such a simple act at least be seen as the treasure it is meant to be?
It seems to me, the teenager ralphinal refers to probably does not see uncut hair as a treasure. She would also probably agree with dessert that its a bother.
Even in practical matters I think the opposite… with long hair I have more options. I could wear it in a different style every day of the week if I wanted too and it doesnt take but a minute to leave it long, tuck it under, or throw it all the way up to keep it out of my way when I’m busy. When its cut - you can’t really do anything different with it. Yeah - that’s definitely a feminine thing. But I think so long as it doesn’t become a pride thing - that’s ok.

I tend to doubt that all men like to see women long hair - let alone see it “come down in the evening”… Men, what do you think?

As to the modesty issue…I hope all would agree that swimsuits are a bit immodest and no pool I know of would let anyone in the water with anything but a swimsuit on - which frankly does not make any sence to me… hence the lake is about the only place we go. Besides - it is more fun.
I recently moved - at my ‘old’ church, about half the women that went there belonged to Curves.
As to not wearing pants… The scriptures forbid the man to put on anything that partains to the woman and the woman is forbidden to put on anything that partains to the man. Out of the last 1000 or so years - only in about the last hundred have women thought pants were not men’s apparel. Yes, in Old Testament days men wore robes but if you look up jewish customs, they were still easily distinguishable from a distance. Today, even if you’re up close, it’s hard to tell which is which sometimes and until it’s common for men to wear skirts and dresses - it does generally keep us easily distinguishable even from a distance. At least us ladies have it easy - the men have a little harder time with that one.
Discipline can be defined both as training that develops or improves a skill and as a state of bringing to order and obedience. Am I correct in thinking discipline is viewed here more in the concept of training than obedience? For if it is looked on as a matter of obedience, is not doing the opposite of what God asks of us looked upon as rebellion? And is not rebellion against God, sin?
The bible talks about line upon line precept upon precept here a little there a little. Are all people who do not share your personal conviction ‘going to hell’? God deals with each person individually. In love He guides and chastises each of us according to our own weaknesses. Reveals Himself to us through our own life’s experiences and does not demand of us anything more than we can bear. Perhaps an example would work better — To the person such as I, who has been personally scarred by alcohol abuse even the thought of being in the presence of someone having a glass of wine can be unbearable. To another, it’s a temptation that when rationalized away can be the stumblingblock that leads to a wasted life. And yet to another it is purely harmless in moderation - all 3 are correct in their thinking. Is it wrong to err on the side of not wanting to cause pain nor cause another to stumble? Neither do I look down on anyone for their innocence. In many ways - innocence itself is a wonderful treasure, once gone, it can never be recaptured.

This thing is turning into novel… sry for rambling on so much!

This reflects in some ways a very “catholic” way of thinking. I just realized that over here we have a nuanced/technical way of defining discipline. We use that word to distinguish things that may (or may not) be quite important but that may be changed according to needs and circumstances but that are not core to doctrine. For example, the celibacy of the priesthood is a “discipline.” It imitates Our Lord’s own life. It follows Paul’s counsel. But we know that in New Testament times and in the early Church, there were BOTH married and celibate priests. Our own Eastern Catholic Churches allow married men to be ordained. But something touching doctrine cannot be changed.

And you are right: without love, everything is ashes.

 

[Zooey]

Hi everyone.
I heard about the story from my daughter and did a search to find more information, that’s how I happened across this thread. Your comments intrigued me enough to register in order to post a comment of my own:
I happen to be one of those United Pentecostal ladies who made a personal covenant not to cut my hair over 25 years ago at the very young age of 22. Contrary to what some may think, this wasn’t done in order to join or even in order to remain a member of the United Pentecostal Church International organization, but rather from personal conviction in prayer and in reading the scriptures. I’m not sure where anyone got the idea that the ladies of the UPCI dont talk until the man speaks first - sounds a little silly to me and I have never known this to be true. But then, I’ve heard a lot of things rumored about Catholics and have not found them to be true either. If ladies weren’t allowed to speak before the man - why would women evangelists and preachers be ‘allowed’ in the UPCI? Oh well, human nature does seem to discount that which seems odd or out of place with the even more bizzare - maybe just to more easily discredit them? Or maybe that way they won’t have to feel convicted about not getting to know their neighbor?..yet if I don’t get to know my neighbor, how can I truly love them?
As an added side note: while my hair is considered “long”, it’s definitely not long enough to sit on, and of course, even if it was, I still wouldn’t cut it. It was also good to read in that news article that at least the family is “hoping to avoid a lawsuit”. At first glance it seems I would’ve turned the other cheek instead of raising such a ruckus, but then the only ones who know for certain what exactly happened were those who were present at the time, and the Lord. Keep growing in Christ!

Thank you so much for sharing with us! I tthink that we all agree that it is so much more helpful to hear from you, as opposed to hearing what somebody said that somebody heard.
God bless you & yours.

 

[GemmaRose]

I’m all for modesty in dressing. It always amuses/amazes me when you see a woman in a dress so incredibly short that I think I have bras made with more material!

However, it always astounds me that it seems in many if not most faiths, the burden is always upon the woman. Men can walk around shirtless, or with jeans cut so tight that no imagination is needed, or they can wear speedos at the beach, yet a woman, even on the hottest summer day, is not supposed to wear shorts or sleeveless tops.

Doesn’t anyone see a bit of discrimination here?

A Moslem will say it is to “protect the woman” (I’ve heard more than one say it - I live in a very Arabic neighborhood). Does this mean that all men are wild beasts and the only way to tame them is to burden the woman?

Again, I’m not saying that women should wear thong bikinis - I think they’re disgusting. But there are many bathing suits that provide decent coverage. And as for going to the gym, Curves gym is for women only.

I think, for the most part, people should be responsible for their own sins. If a man wants to think lustfully of me, he’s going to think that way whether I’m wearing a potato sack or something revealing. It’s not my fault, it’s his. I will continue to dress decently, but if it’s 98 degress and 100 percent humidity, I am not going to have sleeves past my elbows! (And in the winter, when it’s 20 degrees with a windchill of -3, these legs are going to be covered with pants!)

 

[Salonika]

United Pentecostals are not the only Christian group which prohibit women from cutting their hair, or who still debate whether it is okay for women to at least trim their hair or state that women should have hair long enough to put up.

The first group that came to mind when I read the post on this topic about non hair cutting was the “Church with No Name” also known as “The Cooneyites or “Two by Two’s” who started in the United Kingdom in the late 19th century. Link to them on religioustolerance.org/chr_2x2.htm

The Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints is another group against women cutting their hair at all. The reason given in articles for them having this prohibition is because women “will use it to wash Christ’s feet at the second coming.”

The Apostolic Christian Church states “Women are to wear their hair long (ideally long enough to put the hair up, i.e., shoulder-length hair would be considered too short) and to have their hair up”. Link is apostolicchristianchurch.org/

From googling seems that some there is a range on opinion in Amish and Menonite groups with se believing that women should not cut their hair at all to having hair of a “reasonable” length.

Also there seems to be differences about whether women should wear their long hair up or not. The Conneyites do not allow it while The Fundamentalist Church of Later Day Saints allows it but prescribes how it should be worn.

Trousers and pants for women are also usually prohibited.

 

[ralphinal]

Thanks to everyone who has joined this discussion.

As far as the onus being on the woman, I had a priest explain it like this: it is to protect the men from themselves. Too many men all through the ages have lacked self-control over their own sexual desires. If women did not limit them, they would really be in trouble. Please referance the last 40 years in the world.

 

[GemmaRose]

Thanks to everyone who has joined this discussion.

As far as the onus being on the woman, I had a priest explain it like this: it is to protect the men from themselves. Too many men all through the ages have lacked self-control over their own sexual desires. If women did not limit them, they would really be in trouble. Please referance the last 40 years in the world.

And it’s high time men do learn to control themselves… without burdening women! Men have to control their own testosterone.