Veiling challenge

  • Thread starter Thread starter phoage
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, I had the same suggestion. An alternative headcovering is probably the best choice and a good compromise.
 
If you go in the hairstuff section of most big department stores they have them there, usually near the hairbrushes. Mine mostly came from walmart or target or something.
 
I have to say that if I normally covered, and was asked not to when in choir, I would feel an almost overwhelming desire to dye my hair purple. Or blue.
 
Last edited:
I am a lector and an EMHC. A couple years ago, I did have purple highlights put in my hair. Very purple. Was not a problem at all. In fact, my Pastor and my Bishop said I was about the only person they knew who could actually pull off purple hair!😀
For me, any thing is better than mousey brown & gray.
 
LOL!!! Oh gosh. Probably bright pink is more appropriate if you’re female. 😉 😛
 
It’s not rebelling. LOL. It is a voluntary position. She can choose to negotiate and see if there are alternatives or she can choose to leave the position because she is uncomfortable with the dress code. 🙂
 
Hey, if she wanted to wear a hijab I would still be on her side. A woman’s right to choose man!
 
Lillypilly:
I remember taking my mother into town .

There were some ladies wearing the hajib .

My mum asked me if they were nuns .
 
Amen! It’s not a moral question at all. God doesn’t care whether we wear one or not. Period.
 
How do you think those of us who have liturgically received the veil as Brides of Christ feel about women who claim the same status by putting on some kind of lacy thing?
 
Exactly. The tradition was an opaque cloth that covered the hair and neck and sometimes face. It’s very easy to “spiritualize” (justification by quoting something that sounds pious) wearing lacy frothy things and much harder to find opaque cloth appealing, attractive, or anything else. Most of the women who think they are “called by God” to “veil” would quickly lose their “call” if they went to the traditional opaque cloth.
“somecanadian said:
The veils are stunning and make the women look so much more beautiful. I honestly can’t help but stare.

Then I wonder: THIS is a sign of humility? Something that enhances beauty and makes it stand out even more?
Click to expand...
 
“leocor said:
While I agree that one should not do things (wear in this case) to make one stand out, as if it were for pride, I do not see any problem in doing so to show or reflect the sanctity of where one stands. Both the Old Testament and New Testament respected the sacredness and holiness that the House of God had, in furniture (the adorned curtains, among others), priestly garbs (with beautiful embroidery, the breast plates having pearls and gems), absolute respect expected (silence when necessary, etc.), the holy vessels which were made of gold and silver, and many other things which were made to make known the beauty and holiness (sacredness) of God in the Sanctuary. Even then, the veil or head covering, is not something of such extravagance. Nor is it a sign meant to stand out for one’s personal pride, but a sign to show respect for God’s natural order of things.
Click to expand...
. This is a modernist justification for wearing mantillas. It has nothing to do with the traditional Church’s practice. See if you can find ANYWHERE, in ANY Church writing from the 100’s to 1950’s a justification on the lines that somehow a headcovering donates a sacred person (other than Moses covering the glory of God). This is a modernist ploy to make mantillas appealing.
 
“The veil is a visual sermon, … a public proclamation before the Lord that He IS the Lord and that we love Him and that we are ready to obey him. It’s a totally counter-cultural statement proclaiming obedience in the midst of a culture that is totally permeated with this attitude of ‘I will not serve.’”

Forgive me if I have not quoted properly. I am not very good at using this form of communication. This part of your post really stood out to me. The fact that a veil is a “counter-cultural statement proclaiming obedience” seems so ironic on this thread. If that is truly the case, wouldn’t it stand to reason that removing her veil out of obedience would be a no brainer? Would it not mean more to live out that sign of obedience than to just make a visual show of it? Instead of the veil being used as a show of humility (as I have often heard it represents), it seems to often actually be a statement of pride.
 
Full disclosure: I am the OP.

I am very tempted to reply; harshly or not, to several of the posts.

Many were clearifications, others were useful information. My wife and I have read all of them, at this point over 400. We were seeking information and opinions.

I will try to keep this civil and Christian.

My wife has decided that she must obey the priest, she cannot disregard her call to be covered in the Lords presense and she will not abandon her music ministry. We will now go to two Masses every week. One we go to and assist at the Mass and receive the Eucharist and she is veiled. The other she goes to as chior director, unveiled but with her hair up in a bun. She does not recieve Eucharist at this Mass. She has decided to be obediant and offer it up as a mortification to the Lord in reparation for sins against the Blessed Sacrament and for holy priests. She will not recive communion except when her hair is humbly veiled.

The Pastor had a meeting Last week with the EMHC and told them no veils, no bright nail polish or lipstick, nothing that detracts from the Eucharist.

My wife remembered a passage from the Diary of St Faustina where she was given one instruction by Jesus and another by her spiritual director. Jesus told her to obey the priest. This is what my wife has decided to do.

Just to settle any confusion, she has lace veils, crocheted veils and a translucent veil. All are fairly full coverage, not doilies or coasters.

Patrick
AMDG
 
I would say they are misunderstanding why women are choosing to cover their heads in the presence of God, because it is not a claiming of the same status.

Peace to you and may God bless.
 
First, I am not the one that said that, I was quoting someont else. Also, I agree she should obey or not be the choir director. To not obey, wear the veil, while directing the choir, yes would be a sign of disobedience and pride.

In the quote, it is encouraging women to obey God and many times obeying God may seem like a prideful thing to those who do not understand. That is how it has been throughout history. The culture does not understand why Christians have done or do the things they do.

I wear about four Catholic medals. I wear them on the outside of my clothing everyday. Everyone can see them. People many, many times stare at them, but I wear them in plain site because of certain medical issues, some probably look at me and say look how prideful she is being, holier than thou, wearing those Catholic medals where everyone can see them, we keep ours tucked away, but they don’t understand and that is the problem.

It is our very lack of understanding.
 
Last edited:
I know that you did not write that and it was quoted from another source. I am not very good at using this type of communication and could not figure out how to properly show that. I apologize for appearing to misquote you or attribute something to you that was not yours.

The point I was trying to make was that our pride can at times win out and we need to carefully examine our reasons for doing the things we do. We need to remember that the call for obedience surpasses our desires. I do not see pride in a person that uses outward signs or symbols, but there are times when those outwards signs and symbols CAN become a source of pride. Pride is what gets in the way of obedience and leads to rebellion. Pride leads to vanity. Pride leads to anger, hurt, hate, and nearly all sins and vices. It is easy to slip from humility to pride, just as it is to slip from joy to despair, love to hate, and cheerfulness to anger.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top