Veiling challenge

  • Thread starter Thread starter phoage
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I missed the part where we determined it was ‘morally neutral.’ Last I heard, we did not know and the wife was going to talk to the pastor. And I don’t think it is off topic to examine the question of anti-tradtionalism. A larger point, but not off topic. And back to your point, I do support dress codes; I think veils should be mandatory. 😆😋 (just joking) Have you seen some of these threads about how repressive it is to ask women to wear modest dresses to Church? It is ironic, that is all. This demand for conformity and obedience.
 
Once again, getting back to the original post in the thread…

The OP might have his wife inquire about wearing a chapel cap such as in this picture. They are readily available in black, white, and beige. A beige or black one (depending on her hair color) would still cover the head but might be better received by the pastor.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.

2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

4 Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.

8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s.

9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.

10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way.

14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.

16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:

17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

18 For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men.

19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.

20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.

21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.

23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
 
BTW if one is to veil for Church at least do it properly.All hair is meant to be hidden.
They were were commonly worn when the old code of law was in force. And we didn’t think of ourselves as “veiling” back then. We just saw ourselves as obediently submitting to an ancient law about covering the head which a chapel cap obviously does.

As to whether or not the pastor would except such a veil, I don’t know. But since they are less conspicuous than longer veils, he just might.
 
Last edited:
This is misinformation. Veils (head covering anyway) have been part of the Christian Church since the beginning. At least get your facts right.
 
Last edited:
Christian head covering and hair covering was unanimously practiced by the women of the Early Church. This was attested by multiple writers throughout the first centuries of Christianity. The early Christian writer Tertullian (150–220) explains that in his day, the Corinthian church was still practicing head covering. This is only 150 years after the Apostle Paul wrote 1 Corinthians. He said, “So, too, did the Corinthians themselves understand [Paul]. In fact, at this day the Corinthians do veil their virgins. What the apostles taught, their disciples approve.”[10] Clement of Alexandria (150–215), an early theologian, wrote, “Woman and man are to go to church decently attired…for this is the wish of the Word, since it is becoming for her to pray veiled.”[11] Another theologian, Hippolytus of Rome (170–236) while giving instructions for church gatherings said “…let all the women have their heads covered with an opaque cloth…”[12] “Early church history bears witness that in Rome, Antioch, and Africa the custom [of wearing the head covering] became the norm [for the Church].”[13]

Later, in the 4th century, the church leader John Chrysostom (347–407) stated, “…the business of whether to cover one’s head was legislated by nature (see 1 Cor 11:14–15). When I say “nature,” I mean “God.” For he is the one who created nature. Take note, therefore, what great harm comes from overturning these boundaries! And don’t tell me that this is a small sin.”[14] Jerome (347–420) noted that the hair cap and the pray veil is worn by Christian women in Egypt and Syria: “do not go about with heads uncovered in defiance of the apostle’s command, for they wear a close-fitting cap and a veil.”[15] Augustine of Hippo (354–430) writes about the hair covering, “It is not becoming, even in married women, to uncover their hair, since the apostle commands women to keep their heads covered.”[16] Early Christian art also confirms that women wore headcoverings during this time period.[17]
Middle Ages and Early Modern Era

Until at least the 18th century, the wearing of a hair covering, both in the public and while attending church, was regarded as customary for Christian women in Mediterranean, European, Middle Eastern, and African cultures.[18] Women who did not wear hair coverings were interpreted to be “a prostitute or adultreress”.[18][19] In Europe, law stipulated that married women who uncovered their head in public was evidence of her infidelity.[20]

Christian head covering - Wikipedia
 
why the authorities gave up enforcing this ancient Eastern secular custom only being given ineffectual lip service in the West.
This is inaccurate. Early Christianity was influenced by Jewish tradition and developed these same customs within the Church as evidenced by the New Testament and the early Church Fathers. The custom of head covering was unanimous throughout Christianity into modern times, including the West up to about 1965, and that includes Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox.
 
I am happy if they are just peaceful, panties and pants optional.😮:hugs:😊
 
I mean, I knew you Europeans were liberated but that seems excessive…
 
Yeah—ads for chapel veils aren’t exactly authoritative history.

Women wore veils when veils were what all women wore publicly. But it was about head covering—not “veiling.” That concept applies to women religious.

Women should feel free to cover their heads…or not. With a mantilla…or not. But the term ‘veiling’ gives the actual object on her head a spiritual significance it never had. One covered one’s head, often with a Kleenex. The type of covering was irrelevant.
 
Women should feel free to cover their heads…or not. With a mantilla…or not.
Agree with this.

Plus women should not be made to feel contempt or disrespect because they don’t cover and also women should not be made to feel contempt or disprespect if they choose to cover their heads, whether they are wearing a hat, a scarf, a headband, mantilla or a lace veil. Only God can read the individuals heart and reasoning.
 
Last edited:
Wow. I can’t believe I just read 295 replies on the veiling issue (again).

Every pastor is going to have his pet peeves. Some parishioner behaviors are going to annoy him and he will eventually try to shift the congregation away from those practices. We like the pastor doing this when we agree but not when we are the object of his displeasure. One of your pastor’s peeves seems to be mantilla wearing.

How your wife responds is entirely her choice. As long as she is humble, charitable and kind in her decision making all is good. She shouldn’t feel any particular needs to obey the priest in this matter as he does not appear to be worried about her spiritual growth here, only having everyone conform to his own preferences.
She isn’t going to change him so she can only decide what is most important for her.
 
Its ironic to me that the issue is over a head covering whose spiritual significance is female willingness to submit to “male” authority (be it God, father or husband) … this submission to her priest is exactly what the OP’s wife seems to be having problems with.
From reading through this thread, I do not come away with the impression that younger women who wish to wear one see the veil as signifying submission to male authority. No doubt some do. But I’m not sure they see submission as the primary symbolism.
 
Last edited:
From reading through this thread, I do not come away with the impression that younger women who wish to wear one see the veil as signifying submission to male authority. No doubt some do. But I’m not sure they see submission as the primary symbolism.
I have NO desire to cover my hair and never will, and I do not consider males to have more authority than I. Equals, yes. God has authority over me, but God is not a male except in the person of Jesus Christ.

(And I am not a feminist, nor do I support female priests.)
 
Last edited:
He also spoke to the 2 women EMHC’s who veil saying the same thing.
I did just catch this in the original post, which I did not notice before, so now I see the situation as more than just wanting the choir all to be uniform.
 
After reading the rest of this thread, I suppose I need clarification. Is it improper to refer to a mantilla as a veil or simply improper to refer to the practice as veiling? I don’t say veiling, but I do call it a veil. I don’t want to be giving it some greater significance than it is due.

Other thoughts:
  1. I’d be more self conscious in a hat.
  2. To the people who think the women in mantillas are vain or drawing attention to themselves… if you saw a raggedy lookin mom with kids yanking it off her head, is that still your assessment or do you tend to judge attractive or fashionable people more?
  3. Regarding when the subject briefly became panties, that’s what I’m often afraid people will think they are when there’s just some lacey stuff bunched up in my car or hanging out of the diaper bag. Maybe I should switch to scarves.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top