Veiling challenge

  • Thread starter Thread starter phoage
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Never said it did.
See, this is the problem. So many are putting words in my mouth.

I don’t really care if you choose to cover or not. I am just very aware that for some women, it is a practice that brings up very negative feelings and memories. And I choose not to discount their feelings, just as I choose not to discount the feeling of women who choose to cover.

However, the topic of this thread is whether or not the priest has a right to ask his liturgical ministers not to cover. The answer is, YES, he does. The women in question can choose to obey his wishes and continue in her ministry or she can not. The ball is completely in her court.
 
This sounds like Southern Baptist doctrine to me. I know several Southern Baptists who have told me the same thing.

I was taught that headcovering showed respect to the Blessed Sacrament and is not a show of a woman’s subjection to her husband. Otherwise single women should be forbidden to wear headcovering.

The Church does not teach that women who do not veil are causing offense to God.

I am all for women who wear headcovering as a personal devotion but I draw the line at judging women who do not wear headcovering as being offensive to God.
 
I guess we all know different people because I am very well aware of older women who veiled then and still do now. Plus many older women do not wear them today, not because of terrible experiences but because they followed what the feminists told them to do. They do not even realize what happened.
 
Last edited:
I thought it was because holy things are covered. It is a symbol of holiness, sanctity, devotion to God. I went for years without them and considered myself a valid Christian all the while, but I never had any problem with women who veiled; in fact I always really liked it and was just afraid to do it. It’s hard to start it, but then you get used to it. I do it now. I agree this woman should certainly talk to the pastor to see where he is coming from; this could be a total miscommunication; he might just say ok. I put this to micromanaging (or anti traditionalism). The priest is trying to do too much on a small scale for bad reasons. Let people be people; have mercy.
 
Last edited:
Why do you keep trying to discount what I am saying?

This is my problem! I DON’T CARE IF A WOMEN WANTS TO WEAR A HEAD COVERING!
My problem is that if other women don’t agree they are somehow “less than” or that her prior experiences and memories don’t count.
 
Last edited:
How do you know the priest’s intentions behind the rule?

Are we so beholden to veiling that we call into question a priest’s decision?

If he required the opposite and demand that all female choir members veil will his intentions be called into question?
 
leocor said:
Veiling is not just a personal choice, a fashion taste, or a church tradition; to some women, a veil represents a moral duty. A duty to veil one self in the sanctuary of God where the angels of God are present. It is not just for modesty’s sake, but for out of respect for both the heavenly order and our natural order on earth. It represents the order ordained by God himself, that woman is subject to her husband, and with a veil on her head, this sign of authority over her, signals to the angels to not overstep their bounds, as at one time they did before, for her husband is the head of her, and none else. For some women, to not veil, is to cause offense to God, to his heavenly and earthly order, and to her own position in relation to her husband.
Click to expand...
The woman doesn’t have an obligation to be obedient to her pastor in this but I think you missed my point. If it were someone she did owe obedience to, if she were a religious sister, her personal convictions would not matter, even if Jesus personally told her to wear a veil, if her superior said she was not to do so then she is not to wear it.

Others have made it clear, if she is convicted that wearing a head covering (and veiling isn’t a thing unless one is religious) then she has a choice to make.

As someone who has worn her mother’s mantilla in prayer I am so turned off by the defense of wearing a veil and question my own intentions when I see this approach to head covering. I think t’s an affectation for many. Veiling is turning into the vegan/gluten-free of Catholicism.
 
I’m sorry if I am misunderstanding what you are saying. I don’t think nor do I know anyone else who thinks that those who do not cover are less of a woman or Christian or bad experiences do not count. I just meant that yes there could have been a mistreatment of a devotion but it doesn’t mean the devotion itself is bad.
 
I agree we don’t know his intentions, which is why I stated in my post that the OP’s wife should clarify that with the pastor. Also I don’t have experience serving in choirs as a lot of other posters, and I said that earlier too, maybe there are standard dress requirements but I am skeptical of that especially with respect to veils in the RCC. I can see basic dress requirements. My opinion is that the priest should allow women to veil or not veil, in visible service in the Church or in the pews. Especially given the tension in the Church between traditionalism and progressivism. It would just be a generous tolerant gesture that would carry political impact. I error on the side of being pro-veil. Women covered their heads in all Churches, Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant until Vatican II, the 1960s. Not veiling is thoroughly modern, Western. I would never force a woman to wear a veil OR not. I think making a big deal of wearing a veil or not is intolerant either way.
 
I never said it was “bad”, why do you think I did?

This is my problem- you keep putting words in my mouth.

I don’t care if you want to cover your head or not. I ask you give me and all others the same choice.
 
MagdalenaRita said:
because they followed what the feminists told them to do.
Click to expand...
Oh, please. Women commonly wore hats or some kind of head gear in the past and it had nothing to do with the Church. Then we stopped wearing hats. Men used to wear hats too you don’t see that much either, no matter how dressed up they are. Both men and women are more likely dressed down and it’s sporting gear or a beanie.
 
Again, I’m sorry. I do not mean to put words in your mouth. I did not say you said it was bad, I was just more or less trying to say do not think the practice is bad just because women had bad experiences.

Also I never said you, nor anyone else, did not have a choice not to cover your heads. It is not required as we know. It is a personal devotion.

I am very sorry if we are misunderstanding each other. I think I will stop now because I just seem to keep digging a hole for myself, that I do not mean to dig.

God bless
 
Last edited:
Wow, I missed the comment you were responding to until you responded to it…
Veils remind angels not to overstep their bounds?

Holy moly…

I’m just going to slowly back out of this thread now.
 
Yes, you are correct, women did wear hats. I love hats but I was there when we veiled and I distinctly remember wearing veils. We all did and I remember when and why we quit.
 
Last edited:
I’m talking about a time before we were born. Women wore the same hat or bonnet out and about and to church.
 
I’m not sure what time period you mean but yes women throughout history did wear hats out and about and at in church also. I agree.
 
MagdalenaRita said:
Plus many older women do not wear them today, not because of terrible experiences but because they followed what the feminists told them to do.
Click to expand...
Really? I’m sorry but I don’t think so. Dress overall has become more casual over the years. The real reason is that women, like men, enjoy being freed from stuffy dress codes.

I remember when my employer, a large industrial company, abrogated the rule that all male managers had to wear a necktie. I hated them with a passion, and was overjoyed and stopped wearing them immediately. It wasn’t because I was told to stop by men’s rights groups or whatever. I find a necktie a totally useless article of apparel that happens to also be uncomfortable, and when I had to go into the manufacturing area, downright dangerous. I never wear them now, at church or anywhere else.

I’m not too fond of hats either, unless it’s cold outside.

Ya know feminists are responsible for all the ills of the world.

Side note, I was born in the '50s and grew up in the Church in the '60s. Veils or rather mantillas, were never popular here in French Canada, but hats were. So while head covering may have been a requirement, “veils” are cultural.
Bruised_Reed said:
The woman doesn’t have an obligation to be obedient to her pastor in this but I think you missed my point.
Click to expand...
The pastor has every right to expect a dress code from choristers, lectors, EMHCs, and altar servers. If the code poses a problem, then one simply declines to serve in one of those capacities. It really is that simple. When we imposed a dress code on our schola, we had a couple of members leave. It was too bad to lose them but such is life. New choristers joined who were only too happy to conform in order to have the rare experience of singing Gregorian chant,
 
Last edited:
But they didn’t wear veils unless they wore veils other times. Because veils were a fashion choice at different times and they might have been lace if the woman was had money but poor women didn’t. And sometimes it was a practical thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top