Women and head coverings

  • Thread starter Thread starter kellie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
As the Protestants say “I don’t see it”
Just kidding…

I see this mans opinion on it not being necessary but I do not see a statement that states that it is not necessary, which should be the case shouldn’t it?
A pro-veil person could then argue the following
catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/head-covering1.htm
I do not see a statement that says it is required from the Vatican either.
So the pro-veils have as much clout as the non-veils and vice versa as it has come down to opinion.

So what it comes down to is interpretation and bias, unless we see something specific.

I still then am stuck on 1 Cor 11 and what is the correct interpretation?

Is there anything specific on this…
God Bless
Scylla
 
I am not a woman so I don’t really care too much as a man what concerns me is my own personal fidelity first.
What does it matter if I say all the right or wrong stuff to everyone else but still go to Hell because I am just bugging others while being a hypocrite.
I know that hypocrites can speak truth, but people listen more to people who have their house in order.

So I try and do everything possible for utmost respect for God, my wife is considering wearing a veil.

I am more of the mind of, what is the most we can do for God, not what is permitted, so I can do the least.

In Christ
Scylla
 
scylla said:
As the Protestants say “I don’t see it”
Just kidding…

I see this mans opinion on it not being necessary but I do not see a statement that states that it is not necessary, which should be the case shouldn’t it?
A pro-veil person could then argue the following
catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/head-covering1.htm
I do not see a statement that says it is required from the Vatican either.
So the pro-veils have as much clout as the non-veils and vice versa as it has come down to opinion.

So what it comes down to is interpretation and bias, unless we see something specific.

I still then am stuck on 1 Cor 11 and what is the correct interpretation?

Is there anything specific on this…
God Bless
Scylla
Click to expand...
But, see, the Church doesn’t require it and the Church is the one who authoritatively interprets scripture AND who has the authority to both bind and loose (and if the Holy See thinks it’s a matter of discipline, they certainly can loosen it). Try it. Trek on over to Rome with your wife and see if they let her in for Mass (they will) uncovered (bring me back a medal of St. Josephine Bakita if you can, I can’t find one anywhere).

Again, I think women in veils are beautiful (actually, as a man, I find it rather humbling, I can’t explain why). What I object to is the insistence of sites like the Fisheaters one that women must.
 
scylla said:
I am not a woman so I don’t really care too much as a man what concerns me is my own personal fidelity first.
What does it matter if I say all the right or wrong stuff to everyone else but still go to Hell because I am just bugging others while being a hypocrite.
I know that hypocrites can speak truth, but people listen more to people who have their house in order.

So I try and do everything possible for utmost respect for God, my wife is considering wearing a veil.

I am more of the mind of, what is the most we can do for God, not what is permitted, so I can do the least.

In Christ
Scylla
Click to expand...
And that’s an excellent frame of mind, if I may say so, Scylla.
 
If yur really interested in this Issue, here is an 18-page Commentary on the COR verses. If you read thru vs 16 there is a lot to be said for it being Divine origin and not just a musing custom of the day. In addition, why hold this practice for 1980 yrs without question??
In any case it is quite a lovely thing to see a woman veiled, be it in church or at her wedding, or in mourning:
Here’s another long commentary.
As well as this from
The Latin Mass Society
http://www.latin-mass-society.org/images/hertford08_med.jpeg
CatholicPlanet has this one which is good also

In any case, I would add that if one believes it is still pleasing to Our Lord at the Sacrifice of His Mass to be veiled, then do it. If one believes that it is displeasing after 1983 then don’t do it. However, I still don’t think it is completely neutral in His eyes. There are other verses in the OT that show God’s interest in dress.

We should do such things out of respect & love of God, not just because the church says so anyway.
What merit is there to do only what is required?
BTW:
I read scylla’s post after I posted this…kinda similar. Keep up the good work.

Actually, I get my wife a few veils as gifts several times/year. Some I have had custom made, which really pleases her…They are in various colors to compliment her favorite dresses & coats.

Then there’s that sig:
To destroy a Religion, you must first sever its traditions
 
JKirkLVNV said:
But, see, the Church doesn’t require it and the Church is the one who authoritatively interprets scripture AND who has the authority to both bind and loose (and if the Holy See thinks it’s a matter of discipline, they certainly can loosen it). Try it. Trek on over to Rome with your wife and see if they let her in for Mass (they will) uncovered (bring me back a medal of St. Josephine Bakita if you can, I can’t find one anywhere).

Again, I think women in veils are beautiful (actually, as a man, I find it rather humbling, I can’t explain why). What I object to is the insistence of sites like the Fisheaters one that women must.
Click to expand...
I agree that they can loose it.

Practice that is allowed at the Vatican doesn’t necessarily determine teaching. Popes have done some horrible stuff and allowed things to happen that they shouldn’t have.
What I am looking for is official teaching.
Maybe I am being too strict but I am looking for official statements not just what is allowed, maybe overlooked.
The Pope may overlook something done wrong and do this as a prudent measure as he is a pretty smart man. This doesn’t make for official teaching.

If I ever make it to the Vatican I will be sure to PM you.*

I don’t trust sites like Fisheaters either, just as much as I don’t trust LA Religious Congress, but I am going. That doesn’t mean that everything is wrong but I agree we should be cautious.

God Bless
Scylla

*(Unless the statute of limitations have passed on personal promises like this (lets say 3 years)and I forget, then all promises are null and void.)
 
scylla said:
I agree that they can loose it.

Practice that is allowed at the Vatican doesn’t necessarily determine teaching. Popes have done some horrible stuff and allowed things to happen that they shouldn’t have.
What I am looking for is official teaching.
Maybe I am being too strict but I am looking for official statements not just what is allowed, maybe overlooked.
The Pope may overlook something done wrong and do this as a prudent measure as he is a pretty smart man. This doesn’t make for official teaching.

If I ever make it to the Vatican I will be sure to PM you.*

I don’t trust sites like Fisheaters either, just as much as I don’t trust LA Religious Congress, but I am going. That doesn’t mean that everything is wrong but I agree we should be cautious.

God Bless
Scylla

*(Unless the statute of limitations have passed on personal promises like this (lets say 3 years)and I forget, then all promises are null and void.)
Click to expand...
I feel the same way about the LA Conf.

It might help to remember that even the Church’s disciplines are protected infallibly (negatively, as it were) in that whatever she allows liturgically cannot lead the faithful into impiety. If the Church allows women to go unveiled, it won’t lead anyone into impiety. We have to be careful not to fall into the error of Sola Scriptura. The Bible means what the Church says it means.
 
TNT said:
%between%

We should do such things out of respect & love of God, not just because the church says so anyway.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It isn’t a matter of what you or I or the women we know and love decide, it’s the matter of attempting to force it on others where the Church does not. That seems to be the question.
 
JKirkLVNV said:
Agreed. It isn’t a matter of what you or I or the women we know and love decide, it’s the matter of attempting to force it on others where the Church does not. That seems to be the question.
Click to expand...
I think I read all the posts. I can’t find a forced submission proposal in any of them.
What seems to be the question as I read them is whether the church changed its practice in any overt way. It didn’t. It was changed by dead silence in the New CofCL.
It then became optional as one chooses as so many other tradtional practices. Even in the OLD Canon Law it was not a demand but a “should” as I remember.
In my case, when in doubt, follow St. Paul. It can’t hurt. After all, he speaks from inspiration of the Holy Spirit Himself. In that case it’s the HS that desires headcovering.
 
TNT said:
I think I read all the posts. I can’t find a forced submission proposal in any of them.
What seems to be the question as I read them is whether the church changed its practice in any overt way. It didn’t. It was changed by dead silence in the New CofCL.
It then became optional as one chooses as so many other tradtional practices. Even in the OLD Canon Law it was not a demand but a “should” as I remember.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but what’s a “should” when it’s in canon law? I would interpret that as I “definitely should” (in this case, if I were a woman). And I cannot find any evidence that the law was NOT abbrogated properly (by John Paul II in 1983).

And no, I don’t see in any of these posts the idea of a “forced submission.” There are many, however, in these forums (and the Fisheaters lady) that WOULD force it if they could. Only the Church has the right to do that. She doesn’t. If she did, I’d be among the first to defend her right to do so.
 
TNT:

In your first post, where is that picture from? Lovely church.
 
Your question is wonderful. if i would not attract attention to myself, i have several mantilla’s i would love to wear in the presence of the Lord. It is a sign of honor and respect.

the Second Vatican Council is known as the 'MEETING THAT OPENED THE WINDOWS OF THE CHURCH, BUT FAILED TO PUT UP SCREENS TO KEEP THE BUGS OUT…"

I’ve always love that. Two things come to mind:
  1. there are NO pictures and no mention of Jesus wearing the jaimacah of Jewish men.
  2. One positive —OUT OF THE MANY PROBLEMS CREATED BY VATICAN II, is that there was a re-focus from external acts, seen by all and used to identify an indiv. as a Catholic, was altered to make the Catholic mind more important than externals.
Personally, among the things that need to be restored in the Universal Roman Catholic Church should be the teaching of Latin as our primary method of communicating in religion/Mass/ Sacraments, and the covering of women’s head in church.

The origin of this practice was to discourage sexual distraction in Church, and additionally to veil ourselves in humility before God. THE CHURCH SHOULD RETURN TO LATIN MASS, AND TEACH LATIN IN PARISHES, AND WOMEN SHOULD BE WEARING HEAD COVERINGS.

it would surprise you to know who i am and how i view the post
Vat. II decisions. We needed to open up the Church to the Holy Ghost, but not to all the hiiding spirits infecting our worship. love, maureen
 
on a different note, but same topic… has anyone ever actually tried wearing a headcovering before? they’re not very comfortable - in fact, I tried it, and I spent so much time realizing that I couldn’t turn my head because it pulled my hair and tugging at the thing because it gave me a rash all around my scalp, that I didn’t really pay as much attention as I could’ve.

it’s just not practicle, that’s all.
 
scylla said:
A pro-veil person could then argue the following
catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/head-covering1.htm
I do not see a statement that says it is required from the Vatican either.
Click to expand...
I started reading that stuff (and I don’t understand it all, because I’m still new to all this stuff and am struggling enough with just the bible and the catechism…) and then got distracted by something else… catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/mulieris–dignitatem1.htm
(sorry, I don’t know how to make it a link… hope you don’t mind copy-pasting?)

in particular, it quotes that “Let women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted them to speak but to be subject, as also the law saith. But if they would learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is a shame for a woman to speak in the church.”

I think it’s the same writer…

anyways, what I’m trying to say is… while I wouldn’t mind wearing a veil (except for how uncomfortable it is), I would not like to be silent in church; first, I’m in the choir, second… I like to pray along with others, and when there is no celebration going on, I ask questions like “what is that” and “what is this” that I wouldn’t remember long enough to take home with me… and finally… the husbands could not be expected to always know the answers…

so do the supporters of forced veils also support forced silence for women in church and prayer, or go hand in hand with supporters of forced silence? because if so… I don’t know if I could agree to that…

if the Church demanded it, then, maybe… in fact, at this point in my conversion experience probably(as I only just decided I might rather trust the Church’s conscience over my own, and that maybe the Church is a better pillar on which to stand than the bible alone)…

but I doubt I could ever force my heart to truly agree to such a thing, and my experience of this slowly growing faith would be much weaker than it is now… and I doubt there’d be a lot of new converts, either, because I certainly would’ve been scared off at first, and so would anyone else, to be honest…

there’s enough rules that seem to be unspoken and understood by all Catholics that it’s scary enough, as a non-Catholic… I’m always afraid I’m going to make a mistake and do something wrong, or offend somebody…

I know I’m not saying this very clearly, but it struck me when I was reading that… and on the mutual submission thing, as well… marriage only works with two partners compromising, IMO… and it’s rules like that which would encourage me to never marry at all, because I doubt I would trust anyone (other than Christ) to “rule” me like that…

Saoirse
 
Saoirse said:
on a different note, but same topic… has anyone ever actually tried wearing a headcovering before? they’re not very comfortable - in fact, I tried it, and I spent so much time realizing that I couldn’t turn my head because it pulled my hair and tugging at the thing because it gave me a rash all around my scalp, that I didn’t really pay as much attention as I could’ve.

it’s just not practicle, that’s all.
Click to expand...
It was strange wearing the veil at my wedding many years ago too.
But at the same time I did feel as if I was doing something very holy, which I was, but it sure was a relief when my husband was able to lift it up off my face.
However, I think I could get used to it, except no one wears them at my parish, and I am not one to stick out like a sore thumb either.
 
Saoirse said:
I
in particular, it quotes that “Let women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted them to speak but to be subject, as also the law saith. But if they would learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is a shame for a woman to speak in the church.”

I think it’s the same writer…
Click to expand...
It is Paul, the same writer.

Nice women-as opposed to prostitues and slaves- were not allowed much freedom in Greek society. They couldn’t leave the house without their hubbies permission. So, when the women got together in groups they were often talkative and had no idea how to conduct themselves during meetings. From what I have been told, they would shout out questions of the speaker during the meeting. This would make them very disorderly. Paul is speaking to these specific church and asking these women to keep quiet because it was a problem. He is not suggesting that women not ever speak up during church. Actually, no one today speaks during the priest homily because it would be rude.🙂
 
dumspirospero said:
.just because over 90% of them don’t, ?
Click to expand...
In my diocese that number is 100% and in my short 40 years here on earth I had never even heard of or seen a woman wearing a chapel veil until 4-5 years ago when I attended the baptism of my God son at Boys Town chapel in the omaha area.

I would like my wife to wear one but it is up to her. Not me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top