Women wearing veils

[Lorarose]

<Most Catholics do not go to confession (about 95% actually).

Mot Catholics do not know that Friday is still a day of abstinence, we are to abstain from eating meat, or some equal substitute every Friday.

Most Catholics (70%) do not believe in the Real Presence of Jesus’ Body and Blood in the Eucharist.

We should be careful about any general statements…the state of the faith today is not what it was just 30 years ago.>

I am well aware of this.
Of course, the Church DOES tell all catholics that they should be doing these things. The Church is clear on these matters.
The Church does not instruct all catholic women that they MUST wear veils.​

<Perhaps, just perhaps, some Catholics feel that if they show an example of reverance to our Lord, maybe that might move other people to follow…in your case it creates the opposite impression, yet perhaps for others the sight of people receiving on the tongue, or wearing veils might give them reason to think about their own reverance.>

That is fine for them. And I have my own ways I like to show reverence and devotion to God. Our Church provides many opportunities for its member to do this.
However - just because I might prefer a certain act of devotion doesn’t mean I should tell other catholics that they MUST do the same.​

<You are not doing anything wrong, yet you are being fairly harsh on Catholics who wear veils and receive on the tongue.
The Bishops recently approved gestures (bowing, etc.) during Mass. That was done to incrementally bring back some reverance for our Lord into the Mass. I personally suspect that was just the beginning. The Church moves slow.>

I’m not trying to be harsh on those who wear veils. Wear them if they want.
Yet - I often see it is these same folks who would disobey requests from the church to follow other guidelines - such as bowing and receiving while standing.
I think there are many ultra traditionalists out there who are exremely harsh on catholics who don’t practice catholicism the way it was done 40 years ago.l
I still see these folks arguing that it is “abhorrent” for women to be reading scripture from the altar - despite the fact that Rome lifted the ban.

So…it doesn’t surprise me that a guy who still insists on believing that the universe revolves around the earth would want to make me feel like a “less than” catholic because I don’t wear a veil.
I’m simply not buying it.

 

[Lorarose]

I think it is human nature to fall into legalism…and there are many people of all denoms that fall into being to legalistic. However, with that said, if a Catholic is well informed of a given Church rule, and chooses to ignore the rule–then are at the very least being prideful.

Well said - and the Church does not have a rule that women MUST wear veils.

God knows what is it my heart while I’m at mass.
A veil isn’t going to change that.

 

[TPJCatholic]

Lararose,

As I said in my message, you are not doing anything wrong by not wearing a veil to Mass. The Church has not given definitve word on this issue so you are free to do as you please.

I wonder though, since many things do go in cylces, it is not out of the realm of possibility that things like veils, and altar rails, etc…might actually come back. If the Church did mandate veils for women, how would you react?

God is our judge and I will certainly not dare to judge your heart. Please have the same attitude towards those who practice their faith in ways that you do not (i.e., kneeling, wearing veils, etc.).

BTW, I personally have no issue with women saying the readings at Mass. I confess that I am personally a bit conflicted with the notion of female altar servers, considering the altar server role was traditionally used a means to encourage vocations, and since only men can be ordained it seems to me that only males should serve at the altar. However, despite my personal internal conflict with that issue, I still obey and follow the guidelines set down by the Magisterium of Lord’s Church. The Church has stated that females can serve at the altar–case closed (at least for now).

 

[Racer_X]

exile:

It does seem to me strange that Catholics - and other churches - are so concerned about the minutiae of ritual.

A line has to be drawn somewhere. Two lines really. One to separate what always must be observed from what is optional. And one to separate the optional from the forbidden. The fact that we have such lines drawn is what makes the Church catholic (universal)–in fact not just in theory.

My problem with it has more to do with the reasons that it was dropped.

I wonder - are the congregation actually directing their thoughts during Mass to God or to what their fellow communicants think

I do worry about what my fellows are thinking. Many times I wonder if they even believe that God is real.

Does God actually care what exact ritual is followed if those who participate do so in the right spirit?

I don’t know. But I have two considerations for you to ponder.

(1) Frankly, I don’t think what you suggest is God’s style. Would it have mattered if the Hebrew slaves in Egypt didn’t follow the instructions with the blood of the Passover lamb if they were only in the right “spirit”? God is omnicient after all. He knows who have the right “spirit” and who do not, right?

(2) Right now most women aren’t even thinking about this issue and so it is no reflection on their spirit. But suppose there were a congregation in which half the women covered their heads and half did not. Then a woman getting ready for Mass would have to decide to perform this devotion or not to. So then in what “spirit” of worship does a person decide to refrain from a common devotion?

It is a moot point now, yes, but was not moot in the 1960s. In what spirit of worship did those women then abandon it?

Nowadays the same question can be applied to bare thighs instead of bare heads.

 

[Totus_Tuus]

It is all a matter of giving glory to God. Isn’t that the reason we’re here? Yes, of course it is. If you go to the Tridentine Mass you’ll see the vast majority of the women wearing very modest, long dresses with high nicklines, covered shoulders and heads, the guys wearing suits and ties, and all of them receiving the Blessed Sacrament on their tongues from the hand of a priest while kneeling. If you go to the novus ordo you’ll often see totally different styles of celebrations of the Mass ranging from devout celebration by reverent priests focusing on God rather than themselves who omit nothing and change no word, all the way down to wild and idiotic circuses complete with a clown for a priest who acts as a performer and stand-up comic with the sole purpose of drawing attention to himself, who’ll give you communion in the hand and not worry about a particle falling to the floor since, after all, it is only bread, right?..And liturgical dancers, guitars and bongo drums and all the rest of it…The whole point is to give glory to God with all due respect and reverence, and not only for one tortured hour per week. I have my preference, obviously, though I in no way discount the novus ordo as a valid form of the Mass when celebrated properly (i.e. without prayers of the ordinary being left out seemingly ‘just because…’ as I’ve seen many times). The beautiful thing about the traditional Mass, as I have observed to be the case far more than the novus ordo, is that there seems to be an ever increasing desire to love and serve the Lord from most of the parishioners who place a great joy and reverence on being able to receive holy communion, but who also realise that Mass is only one part of the daily liturgy, rather than the social event the novus ordo Mass seems to be very often. My main point about certain practices and disciplines, including kneeling for communion and wearing a veil etc. that seem obscure to many Catholics today is that we read in Genesis ch. 4 about the two sacrifices, one given by Cain, and one by Abel. One was more acceptable to say the least. If our purpose for being here is to give glory to God, wouldn’t you want to give of yourself everything that you have and are for His greater glory, or would you rather make it to mass halfway through the gospel in sweats and a t-shirt?

 

[SusanG]

I’ll toss my veil into the fray on this one (pun intended)

Women covered their heads because St. Paul said we needed to cover our heads while praying or prophesying. And men should have their heads bare. The reason for a woman to cover her head was due to the fact that a woman’s hair was ‘her glory’. It defined her in some way and set her apart from man. In this part of the reference Paul is referring to a cover as something that goes on top of the head, literally a covering as we understand it.

Later in the passage he refers to a woman’s hair as a covering, different word in the greek, meaning more like a mantle or surrounding item.

That defines the difference between head covering and hair as a cover. Why did women stop? Vanity of sorts…hats fell out of vogue blah, blah…I didn’t like wearing a covering in church because I was not prophesying and the prayers were made by some deacon or elder etc. (raised protestant) and so I wasn’t in fact praying so much as listening…

Bottom line? It is a very tertiary matter, salvation is not dependant on the observance and it was deemed to be culturally irrelevant long ago. In fact, as a point of interest there are still several prot. denoms that practice this.

That’s all I got to say 'bout that.

Blessings,

Susan

 

[Lorarose]

I wonder though, since many things do go in cylces, it is not out of the realm of possibility that things like veils, and altar rails, etc…might actually come back. If the Church did mandate veils for women, how would you react?

I understand that things change - that is why I get so frustrated when people fight it so much.
If Rome issued such a proclamation - I would honor it. But I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for this one.​

God is our judge and I will certainly not dare to judge your heart. Please have the same attitude towards those who practice their faith in ways that you do not (i.e., kneeling, wearing veils, etc.).

Certainly!
BTW I also kneel while I worship.
When I’m carrying my toddler I receive on my tongue. When I’m not, I receive in the hand because I personally feel I am less likely to drop our Lord’s Body this way.
I know others feel differently and their choice to do otherwise is also acceptable.
My problem here is not that I really care what other people are doing or not doing.
I tend to have a problem with those who attempt to interpret Church teaching to their own personal inclination.
It is wrong to claim that the Church has rule requiring women to wear veils - plain and simple.
I understand that they CAN wear them - I’m just not one of them!​

BTW, I personally have no issue with women saying the readings at Mass. I confess that I am personally a bit conflicted with the notion of female altar servers, considering the altar server role was traditionally used a means to encourage vocations, and since only men can be ordained it seems to me that only males should serve at the altar. However, despite my personal internal conflict with that issue, I still obey and follow the guidelines set down by the Magisterium of Lord’s Church. The Church has stated that females can serve at the altar–case closed (at least for now).

Well - the Church has allowed it - so I don’t have a problem with it.
I know there are many folks who, after the scandal, might not be too inclined to allow their boys to be altar servers.
Somebody has to do it.
I see many of our local churches using adults (male and female) to do this - because no children are signing up.

 

[Lorarose]

My main point about certain practices and disciplines, including kneeling for communion and wearing a veil etc. that seem obscure to many Catholics today is that we read in Genesis ch. 4 about the two sacrifices, one given by Cain, and one by Abel. One was more acceptable to say the least. If our purpose for being here is to give glory to God, wouldn’t you want to give of yourself everything that you have and are for His greater glory, or would you rather make it to mass halfway through the gospel in sweats and a t-shirt?

Forgive me if I’ve misunderstood.
Are you questioning the Church’s authority to decide what constitutes an “acceptable” sacrifice?
And if the Church has gotten this wrong - who is the one to decide?

 

[littleitaly]

Lorarose:

I have a problem with this issue.

I’ve seen people who wear the veils, and refuse to take communion unless they are kneeling - and receive on the tongue (despite the new guidelines)

It just seems to me behavior that is screaming
“LOOK AT ME EVERYONE! SEE HOW HOLY I AM?”

You really should not take the issue so personal. It has been a custom for many years. Lets say for instants, 2000 years ago. In the book 1 Corinthians, St Paul writes of this issue, but you will notice in chptr 11 verse 16 he suggest to remove the custom of covering ones head. He realizes that his argument may not be generally accepted, and so appeals to the authority of custom in the Church. Kind of makes me think of the events that took place with the issue of divorce when the Pharisees tested Jesus about the ruling Moses gave the people because of their hardnes of their hearts, but as Jesus said “But it was not so from the beginning.” (Matthew Chptr 19 verses 3 thru 9) God Bless. Peace to all

 

[Grolsch]

littleitaly:

You really should not take the issue so personal. It has been a custom for many years. Lets say for instants, 2000 years ago. In the book 1 Corinthians, St Paul writes of this issue, but you will notice in chptr 11 verse 16 he suggest to remove the custom of covering ones head. He realizes that his argument may not be generally accepted, and so appeals to the authority of custom in the Church. Kind of makes me think of the events that took place with the issue of divorce when the Pharisees tested Jesus about the ruling Moses gave the people because of their hardnes of their hearts, but as Jesus said “But it was not so from the beginning.” (Matthew Chptr 19 verses 3 thru 9) God Bless. Peace to all

Right on. Paul leaves it up to the custom of the Church and veils were a custom of Rome as a show of humility. Just as a man wearing a hat in Church was seen as ostentatious, so too was a woman’s uncovered head. Both were seen as possibly being prideful or boastful and thats why Paul was so concerned. So it was just to show humility before God.

Woman praying with veiled head from 3rd century catacomb in Rome:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/first/art/orans.jpg

 

[Lorarose]

I’m not disputing this was a custom in the past - that much is obvious.
If I seem a little touchy it may be due to a few close encounters with RadTrads who insist that the Church has not changed.
The Church has changed - and this custom is no longer the rule.
That’s it …really.

 

[TPJCatholic]

Lorarose,

I don’t see anyone on this thread telling you to wear a veil…did I miss it?

Everyone on this thread appears to agree that veils are not required, but they can be worn if a woman chooses to do so…you even agree that if the Church ever changed the rule, you would honor it…I guess I don’t see a problem.

 

[Lorarose]

I don’t see anyone on this thread telling you to wear a veil…did I miss it?

Thank you for asking.
It seems when I first read this thread (or what I thought was this thread) someone had posted Bob Sungenis’s arguments asserting this rule was still required.
Now I’m not sure if I got the threads confused or if some posts got deleted.?

Everyone on this thread appears to agree that veils are not required, but they can be worn if a woman chooses to do so…you even agree that if the Church ever changed the rule, you would honor it…I guess I don’t see a problem.

Agreed!

 

[TPJCatholic]

Lorarose,

Thanks for the reply.