Why no veil?

[lizaanne]

No.

Probably not.

So much for obedience.

That’s ok - it was the response I expected.

~Liza

 

[MaryTeresa2]

I cover my head because it was spoken to me very clearly in my heart to do so, because it’s spoken in Scripture, because it is a sign of respect, humility before God. You won’t be going in front of the Pope or to Mass (no I guess they can’t wrangle every woman out in the Square and request a headcovering when Mass is celebrated in such open crowds of people) in St. Peter’s and not have your head covered. You will not have audiance with the Pope unless in a dress either. He is Christ’s representative. Since there are those who do not wish to cover and it is not demanded, then so they will go. I do so not by damand but by desire, mine and that spoken to me by the Holy Spirit when I say, Thy Will, not mine. Many go to Mass in very inappropriate clothing when coming before God, I chose not to. No demands, no rules, just respect. There are many things we do in and out of church that are done for respect, they are not all written in law. Many things went by the way-side in the period of time when headcoverings fell out of ‘fashion’ or ‘common practice’. We are reaping the fruits of those things now, sadly. Covering my head and doing many other things in a spirit of reverance are my way of walking the narrow road, not the wide open path. Maybe we aren’t going to answer to every little thing in life because it’s a rule, maybe somethings are just done for the betterment in some small way. It is not dogma nor did they demand the return of headcoverings when the dicipline fell away… so to each her own. But think of the glory that could be if we did take Sacred Scripture to heart and wore our heads covered! You never know the fruit unless you taste it. Imagine how special going to Mass would feel if one ‘dressed up’ for Jesus, not just show up in what you had on (unless absolute necessity, He accepts all… and don’t go on about being poor… in the 3rd world countries they deck themselves out to go to Mass and walk 5 miles to do so…) It’s all relevant. How lovely we ladies could be, in immitation of Our Blessed Mother. IMHO. Peace to all however you chose to dress, Jesus still loves you. I just want to tell Him I care enough to go out of my way. By doing so when others do not…or not doing when others do…good and bad practices fall into each catagory. Are we not to be set apart from the world?

 

[ElizabethPH]

I remember the lacy veils coming into popularity in the 60’s, along with the pill box hat. But before that it was anything from beret’s to hat’s to scarves folded in a triangle and tied under your chin to little fancy hankies kept in place with a bobby pin. And if you still want to cover your head it could be any number of ways and not just with a lace mantilla or a hat for that matter.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

So much for obedience.

That’s ok - it was the response I expected.

~Liza

I won’t say that I absolutely expected it, but I think it points out the latter point (not addressed yet by the ladies) in my probably-too-lengthy post –

Some women are so stubbornly set on the false idea that ‘freedom’ means’ freedom to choose whatever I want, even if it is evil (not that I am saying refusing to cover is evil, so please don’t post as if I did), that they absolutely positively cannot be obedient to any authority.

Not their priest, not their bishop, not their Pope. “Mere men! Historically riddled with error! Not the boss of me!”

And not even God.

I am sad to say that I think that if Jesus Himself came down to some (not all, and not even any specific poster here) and said, “Veiling is a sign of women’s holiness. I said it in the Scripture, I said it in Tradition. For a brief period of confusion some falsely spoke against it with lying words that it was ‘oppressive’ --but it is not. It is a sign of the highest respect and love of women and for women and I ask it of you”. . .

I think that He would be ‘told off’ that a really loving God would not ask His people to do what they felt ‘uncomfortable’ doing, so sorry Jesus, they will not cover and really they are rather disappointed with His attitude. . .

 

[Rence]

So much for obedience.

That’s ok - it was the response I expected.

~Liza

But see you should have expected it because God is not the one saying that women must have their head covered at Mass, a few here on CAF are, and Juliana and I (and anyone else) do not have to obey them.

 

[Rence]

Some women are so stubbornly set on the false idea that ‘freedom’ means’ freedom to choose whatever I want, even if it is evil (not that I am saying refusing to cover is evil, so please don’t post as if I did), that they absolutely positively cannot be obedient to any authority.

But that’s the point: it’s not evil to refuse to cover one’s head at Mass, you hit the nail on the head. That’s what makes it a mute point to claim that women who don’t wear veils are being disobedient to God. For every claim that women who don’t wear veils are disobedient to God, another claim can be made that women who do wear veils are looking for a pat on the back for their obvious piety, humilty, obedience and holiness. And that isn’t true either. It is what it is: It’s really a matter of preference. Some women are called to wear them, some aren’t. Just like some women are called to be married, and some are called to a life of being single.

 

[lizaanne]

But see you should have expected it because God is not the one saying that women must have their head covered at Mass, a few here on CAF are, and Juliana and I (and anyone else) do not have to obey them.

That was not my question and you know it. My question was if the CHURCH said you had to cover your head - and you said “probably not”. That speaks volumes about how you feel about the authority of the Bride of Christ in your life.

~Liza

 

[Rence]

That was not my question and you know it. My question was if the CHURCH said you had to cover your head - and you said “probably not”. That speaks volumes about how you feel about the authority of the Bride of Christ in your life.

~Liza

It’s a mute point (because that’s not the reality of it) but I’ll go ahead and humor you: I probably would not.

And it’s not a reflection on how I feel about the authority of the Church, it’s a reflection of how I feel about some who interpret the teachings of the Church. How I feel about the authority of the Church is better left to another thread

 

[lizaanne]

It’s a mute point

The expression is moot point, by the way.

How I feel about the authority of the Church is better left to another thread

It sounds like more of a topic best discussed with your priest actually.

~Liza

 

[Miserys_Fence]

But see you should have expected it because God is not the one saying that women must have their head covered at Mass, a few here on CAF are, and Juliana and I (and anyone else) do not have to obey them.

God does not call every woman to cover her head, just as He does not call every woman to be a nun, or a wife, or a doctor, or a lawyer. God does not call every man down the same path either.

Miz

 

[Rence]

The expression is moot point, by the way.

Oops, my spelling-bad. Sorry!

It sounds like more of a topic best discussed with your priest actually.

~Liza

And who knows, maybe I have discussed it with him

 

[Rence]

God does not call every woman to cover her head, just as He does not call every woman to be a nun, or a wife, or a doctor, or a lawyer. God does not call every man down the same path either.

Miz

The problem is that what the Church actually teaches, is not always represented by everyone as it really is. There are always going to be those who leave things out, and then there will always be people who add things in. And that makes it difficult for people who don’t have a good priest to talk to. It’s not just about veils vs non-veils. I see it all the time on other threads as well. You can look at NFP and “grave reasons” to use it, and you can count on the fact twenty people will bicker about what is “grave” and will either omit, add to, or read between the lines of what is actually there in black and white. The same thing goes for how one takes communion: we are allowed to take communion in the hand or in the mouth. But we can count on some to criticize those who take on the tongue and you can count just as well on someone to criticize those who take in the hand. We can go to any valid Mass we choose. But we can always count on someone who says that masses in other than Latin should all be outlawed.

The fact is, some people really feel they should wear a veil or some kind of head covering to Mass, and that’s fine with me. But others don’t want anything to do with a headcovering, and that’s fine with me too. People should follow their conscience. It doesn’t have to be a drama every time someone disagrees. We’re not talking about wearing a strapless dress, or shorts, to Mass. We’re talking about a head covering. It’s far from sinful not to cover one’s head when going to Mass.

 

[MaryTeresa2]

We have pretty well covered the point that the Church doesn’t demand it as doctrine. It had been a long discipline or tradition of the Church however. The confusion perhaps comes because when the 60’s sort of women’s rights things came about and fashion radically changed and church attendance was not what it was prior… as many things no longer were… it fell by the wayside… with family values, socially accepted behaviors… lots of things went lax from former times. And… the Church has not come out and said, ‘wait a minute there ladies, get that cover on…’ maybe the Church too has to pick it’s battles… but I feel many of us are speaking from a USA point of view… it’s still very traditional to wear a head covering in many other countries… where many other things are still more traditional as well. Customs in the US are very different from many places, usually to the more liberal side. Often this has proved to be to our detriment, not our benefit. Sadly.
BUT Scripture doesn’t change! Scripture still says women are to wear head coverings!
1Cor 11: 2-16. Why do we take so seriously some Scripture and not other? Just asking…

 

[Rence]

We have pretty well covered the point that the Church doesn’t demand it as doctrine. It had been a long discipline or tradition of the Church however. The confusion perhaps comes because when the 60’s sort of women’s rights things came about and fashion radically changed and church attendance was not what it was prior… as many things no longer were… it fell by the wayside… with family values, socially accepted behaviors… lots of things went lax from former times. And… the Church has not come out and said, ‘wait a minute there ladies, get that cover on…’ maybe the Church too has to pick it’s battles… but I feel many of us are speaking from a USA point of view… it’s still very traditional to wear a head covering in many other countries… where many other things are still more traditional as well. Customs in the US are very different from many places, usually to the more liberal side. Often this has proved to be to our detriment, not our benefit. Sadly.
BUT Scripture doesn’t change! Scripture still says women are to wear head coverings!
1Cor 11: 2-16. Why do we take so seriously some Scripture and not other? Just asking…

I don’t know but I do know that the OT was adamant as handed down by God Himself that newborn boys should be circumsized on the 8th day, and we don’t follow that either…oh I know, that was changed. Well, so was this.

And scripture says we turn the other cheek, and we don’t do that either. Good Catholics can and do defend themselves when they have to as well as anyone else.

and scripture says that when someone steals from you, you should give them more, but what do we do? we call the police. We certainly don’t give them the car keys when a thief nabs our purse: “here ya go, take the care too. Wait, here take my coat too.”

Cultures evolve over time. If we didn’t, our society would never grow or change, we’d still be wearing long dresses, sandals, and cover everything except our face. And that’s fine if some of you want to do that. But that’s not what I am called to do. The Church doesn’t demand it, so I don’t get why some mere people demand it of others? Isn’t it enough that they are called to do so themselves? no one is stopping them from their calling.

 

[Julianna]

But see you should have expected it because God is not the one saying that women must have their head covered at Mass, a few here on CAF are, and Juliana and I (and anyone else) do not have to obey them.

Surely you jest Rence…of course we are wrong…we “dare” to think for ourselves while at the same time “respect” those who choose to wear a veil, a Queen Elizabeth hat, or a table scarf. Makes no difference to me.

I realize scripture has been sited as a requirement…isn’t that sola scripture…more in line with what Baptists practice…shouldn’t they be wearing head coverings? No, I guess not, for the same reason we no longer sacrifice animals.

 

[MaryTeresa2]

At one time not covering one’s head at Mass was as shocking as strapless dresses and shorts. Everyone covered so everyone was comfortable with it, no one thought differently. When it became a ‘freedom for women’ sort of issue, greatly because of the wording in 1 Cor 11 regarding women and men… and other scriptures about wives/husbands… and the women’s lib thing was raging… 1960’s…suddenly the headcovering came into play! Because it was something that could be gotten around and was allowed to be gotten around, whoosh, there it went in the name of ‘liberation’. I’m old enough to remember the day! Just this week at Mass I saw spaghetti straps on dresses, low cut tops, shorts on men and women, loads of folks in flip flop rubber sandals, jeans so low the girl’s butts were showing, gum chewing… the list goes on. It’s been gotten around… no one steps up and enforces a ‘set apart for Church’ type of behavior. Will we one day think what’s the big deal if my butt shows at Mass? It’s not like I don’t hear what you are saying. I attended for many years with no cover. I followed the crowd. I eventually fell away too just like many others did. I let too many things go. When I returned to the Church, I wanted to make it mean something. Not be some holier than thou type, or stand out, or anything else. But in the quiet of prayer the ideas came to me (furthest thing from my mind) to begin to treat it as Sacred, Holy… more than I had before, in a deeper way. Dressing the part just came with it, with the increased respect, the deeper conversion. That’s just how it was for me. I can not speak for how anyone else feels, nor do I condem anyone who dresses differently than I do. But I still can’t get around the Scriptures and I still love the feeling of reverence for the Presence of Jesus, expressed by my bowed, covered head at Adoration and Mass. Just how it is for me.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

But that’s the point: it’s not evil to refuse to cover one’s head at Mass, you hit the nail on the head. That’s what makes it a mute point to claim that women who don’t wear veils are being disobedient to God. For every claim that women who don’t wear veils are disobedient to God, another claim can be made that women who do wear veils are looking for a pat on the back for their obvious piety, humilty, obedience and holiness. And that isn’t true either. It is what it is: It’s really a matter of preference. Some women are called to wear them, some aren’t. Just like some women are called to be married, and some are called to a life of being single.

Moot point (sounds similar, very easy to make the error).

See, I’m not saying (and I don’t think Liza was saying) that not covering was evil.

But. . .it appears to me (and please help me understand if I’m wrong) it appears to me that you somehow feel that what your priest or bishop, or even the Pope, ‘say’ is not ‘equivalent’ to what "JESUS says’. IOW, it appears to me that you are saying that, particularly in regard to the idea of covering the head for women, that you **will never accept that any ‘man’ in the Church is speaking for Jesus on the issue, IF what they said was something you did not want to do or did not agree with. IOW, you ‘accept’ now that the Church says “you need not cover”. . .but if the Church determined that you SHOULD, you would NOT accept that. **

Because what I saw, in respond to Liz’s post, was that Liz had postulated that if the Church made the definitive teaching (guided by the Holy Spirit, as we believe has always been the case lo these 2000 years, correct, when it comes to issues of faith and morals, yes?). . .that you would not cover because you would not accept that what ‘men said’ was what Jesus said.

Can you explain to me if I have made an erroneous assumption on your behalf here?

 

[JadeStarr]

Surely you jest Rence…of course we are wrong…we “dare” to think for ourselves while at the same time “respect” those who choose to wear a veil, a Queen Elizabeth hat, or a table scarf. Makes no difference to me.

I realize scripture has been sited as a requirement…isn’t that sola scripture…more in line with what Baptists practice…shouldn’t they be wearing head coverings? No, I guess not, for the same reason we no longer sacrifice animals.

Actually, it does seem that certain women do consider themselves holier than than the women who don’t. And doesn’t Peter speak against painted faces, so do the veil wearing women refrain from cosmetics?
I wear a veil when I attend Mass but that doesn’t mean that I think that makes me better than anyone else, and I can’t believe that some women are saying that they’re looked at funny because they DO wear a veil, how on Earth, if you had your mind on the Mass could you even NOTICE whether or not someone else approves your apparel?
I have been to Baptist services and the women don’t allows wear a hat or a veil there either.
I don’t think it’s wise to wear a veil for the WRONG reasons. If I were judging others that would be WRONG. If I’m doing it so that I can feel closer to God then it’s the Right reason.

 

[MaryTeresa2]

I may get off the point here but in regards to the OT and why we don’t do those things anymore is because of the NT… the old laws were fulfilled. The other Scriptures you mentioned were words of Jesus, obviously NT. We can say that cultures evolve and now we surely don’t hand over the car keys, etc. But what if we did? What if each act of violence and evil were answered as Jesus taught us? What if someone didn’t react to war by waging war in return? When St. Philip was speaking Italy centuries ago, trying to quell violence between two factions… a fellow stepped up and whacked him. Philip turned the other cheek. The guy dropped to his knees and begged forgiveness and was instantly converted. He became St. Peregrine who later was cured of cancer by Jesus leaning down from the Cross he was praying beneath. What if? What if we really followed Jesus to the letter? And NO, I’m not going on sola scripture. Scripture + Tradition = The Church. Paul is laying down the foundations of the Church by word, preaching and tradition in 1 Cor. What if each and every person really followed the teachings of Jesus? What if it had not become ‘normal’ to steal a car and have to ring the police, etc… how do we evolve to accept things like abortion as ‘normal’ and a person’s right? And there is plenty of Scripture to say one is justified in protecting oneself… yet, what did Jesus do? What if? I realize fully the issue of headcoverings is not on par with violence. I have not here or anywhere else said anyone had to obey, that’s a matter of your choice of what Scripture to follow or not. Just like all the other choices one can make. I merely asked some questions. Because evolution takes place doesn’t always mean it goes in the right direction. Peace be with you.

 

[Rence]

Moot point (sounds similar, very easy to make the error).

See, I’m not saying (and I don’t think Liza was saying) that not covering was evil.

But. . .it appears to me (and please help me understand if I’m wrong) it appears to me that you somehow feel that what your priest or bishop, or even the Pope, ‘say’ is not ‘equivalent’ to what "JESUS says’. IOW, it appears to me that you are saying that, particularly in regard to the idea of covering the head for women, that you **will never accept that any ‘man’ in the Church is speaking for Jesus on the issue, IF what they said was something you did not want to do or did not agree with. IOW, you ‘accept’ now that the Church says “you need not cover”. . .but if the Church determined that you SHOULD, you would NOT accept that. **

Because what I saw, in respond to Liz’s post, was that Liz had postulated that if the Church made the definitive teaching (guided by the Holy Spirit, as we believe has always been the case lo these 2000 years, correct, when it comes to issues of faith and morals, yes?). . .that you would not cover because you would not accept that what ‘men said’ was what Jesus said.

Can you explain to me if I have made an erroneous assumption on your behalf here?

Woah, yeah…I think you’re way over-reaching here. I don’t wear a veil because I don’t think it is required of me. It’s really as simple as that, I promise. Having a few ladies who wear the veil on an online forum claiming that it’s a requirement of the priest, bishop, pope or Church or Jesus doesn’t make it so. It just means that a few women who wear veils in Church value the tradition of wearing veils more than I do. It’s as simple as that, and unnecesssary to make it more than that.

I think it’s unappropriate to set up crazy senarios to prove another person’s fidelity to the Church. While you might agree to do whatever the Church mandates, up to and including jumping off a bridge, I’m inclined to believe that you would not, but I would be willing to bet some posters would say online that they would. Not saying that to be mean or disrespectful, truly I’m not What I’m trying to say is: In other words, it’s out of line for someone to create a senario to judge another person’s faith in the Church, especially when that senario is over the top.

Why else would someone ask me if I would obey the Church if it asked me to do something it’s not asking me to do? Why not stick to the real expectations of the Church, aren’t there enough?

I answered Liz’ post as honestly as I could because I believe it is a non-issue. The point is, the Church is not going to all of a sudden require us to wear veils to Church. So if one is going to impose the hypothetical to me, I’ll give an appropriate hypothetical answer as my conscience dictates. The fact is, I’ll deal with it when (and if) the time comes. IF IF if the Church were to mandate that veils are required to Mass, I’ll probably just go attend a Mass where I am welcome without one. And you know as well as I do that I’ll find one. Because the mandate would not be reasonable, which is why it’s not a mandate. If the Church demanded you shave your head under your veil, will you do so? because no, I wouldn’t, sorry. But it’s a crazy question, isn’t it? The Church isn’t about to require we shave our heads under the veil. But like your hypothetical veil mandate, it’s a crazy question to me. Both senarios are equally crazy to me.