 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5079 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 22nd, 2007 06:57 pm |
|
ROME, MAY 22, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.
Q: A friend of mine told me that according to the Scriptures a woman should cover her head in the presence of Our Lord (holy Eucharist/during Mass). In our churches this is not practiced. Can you please write and tell me as to how and when the practice of women covering their heads came to an end, or is it that we are doing something which is not proper? -- J.M., Doha, Qatar
A: The Scripture text referred to is probably 1 Corinthians 11:4-16:
"Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered brings shame upon his head. But any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled brings shame upon her head, for it is one and the same thing as if she had had her head shaved. For if a woman does not have her head veiled, she may as well have her hair cut off. But if it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should wear a veil. A man, on the other hand, should not cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; nor was man created for woman, but woman for man; for this reason a woman should have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels. Woman is not independent of man or man of woman in the Lord. For just as woman came from man, so man is born of woman; but all things are from God.
"Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head unveiled? Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears his hair long it is a disgrace to him, whereas if a woman has long hair it is her glory, because long hair has been given (her) for a covering? But if anyone is inclined to be argumentative, we do not have such a custom, nor do the churches of God."
A full treatment of this text is beyond the scope of this column. But we may say that this passage contains some elements that have perennial theological value and others which reflect transitory social mores which apply only to the specific time and place of the Corinthians.
For example, during the course of history there were times when it was common for men, and even clerics, to wear their hair long; and none felt that St. Paul's words considering the practice a disgrace applied to them.
Likewise, liturgical norms tell bishops to keep their skullcaps on during some of the prayers during Mass, and they may use the mitre while preaching, without falling under St. Paul's injunction that this practice brings shame upon his head. The norms, however, do ask him to remove his head covering for the Eucharistic Prayer and when the Blessed Sacrament is exposed.
Apart from bishops, and some canons, custom still dictates that all other men should uncover their heads in church except for outdoor Masses.
During St. Paul's time it was considered modest for a woman to cover her head, and he was underscoring this point for their presence in the liturgical assembly.
This custom was considered normative and was enshrined in Canon 1262.2 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law alongside the recommendation that men and women be separated in Church and that men go bareheaded. This canon was dropped from the new Code of Canon Law promulgated in 1983, but the practice had already begun to fall into disuse from about the beginning of the 1970s. Even though no longer legally binding, the custom is still widely practiced in some countries, especially in Asia. It has been generally abandoned in most Western countries even though women, unlike men, may still wear hats and veils to Mass if they choose.
Sociological factors might also have been involved. The greater emphasis on the equality of man and woman tended to downplay elements that stressed their differences.
Likewise, for the first time in centuries, not donning a hat outdoors, especially for men, ceased being considered as bad manners, whereas up to a few years beforehand it was deemed unseemly to go around hatless.
This general dropping of head covering by both sexes may also have influenced the disappearance of the religious custom.
The above article is reposted with permission from Zenit.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Credo Catholic
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | Greenville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 1268 |
| First Name: | Marsha | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 12:51 am |
|
| Thanks for the info Rick. This is very interesting to me. Since the subject has come up recently, I have been taking more notice of it during Sunday and weekday mass. Only 2 or 3 women cover their heads, some with veils, one with a beret. Although it looks lovely and quaint, I'd be happier if they would have their daughters cover their knees and necklines!
|
|
|
Credo Catholic
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | Greenville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 1268 |
| First Name: | Marsha | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 28th, 2007 11:36 am |
|
CajunRick wrote: the practice had already begun to fall into disuse from about the beginning of the 1970s. Even though no longer legally binding, the custom is still widely practiced in some countries, especially in Asia. It has been generally abandoned in most Western countries even though women, unlike men, may still wear hats and veils to Mass if they choose.
Sociological factors might also have been involved. The greater emphasis on the equality of man and woman tended to downplay elements that stressed their differences.
Likewise, for the first time in centuries, not donning a hat outdoors, especially for men, ceased being considered as bad manners, whereas up to a few years beforehand it was deemed unseemly to go around hatless.
This general dropping of head covering by both sexes may also have influenced the disappearance of the religious custom.
I'd like to hear from some of the women who used to wear a veil or head covering regularly, when they ceased using it and how they came about that decision. Was it like when women in the Baptist church began wearing trousers, one of two women bravely wore them during bitter cold weather, and very very gradually more women began to wear them until it became the norm. A few of the fundamental churches around here still do not allow women to wear pants at any time. I know of someone who only wears long pants occasionally, always with panty-hose so her legs are completely covered. She would never wear them to church. She is sometimes frowned upon by other women from her church when she wears them to pick up her children from school, etc. Was there a time when going without head covering was thought of in this way? My real concern as a new catholic is, have we dropped an important element of our status in the church as women without realizing it? I'm already sort of an odd-ball in my protestant family circle for promoting chastity and the church's position on contraception! I might as well go all the way and clap a veil on my head as far as they're concerned. Back to the original question: do any of you out there have personal experience with the demise of the custom? Was it hard for you to get used to not wearing it?
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1790 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 28th, 2007 04:19 pm |
|
Marsha, regarding when the custom of head covering for women was dropped, one can almost name the day and the hour. One Sunday about 1968 it was announced that the Vatican had dropped the requirement, and that headcoverings for women at Mass would be optional from then on. The next Sunday, almost all women stopped wearing them. It didn’t take long for the remainder to feel the pressure, and within a matter of weeks nobody wore them.
I recall my mother, a near life-long Methodist (she dropped out at age 75 for reasons I don’t need to discuss here), being quite relieved that during the decade of the sixties the fashion and peer pressure to wear a hat or veil to church evaporated. Being a dyed in the wool liberal, she personally never saw the point of it.
Do I think that head coverings for women are something essential for Catholics? Partially. I believe that modesty is essential, not only for women but also for men. It is, after all, still listed as a virtue. Also, I believe that we need to see that a relationship can be adduced between the headcovering and the traditional Jewish prayer shawl. This shawl has its place in promoting a concept of God as so much greater than man that he must identify himself with humility. Again, as a sacramental, the shawl is similar to the Muslim prayer rug or the Catholic rosary: an object to revere and through which a person can come closer to God. So there is much to be said for these little traditional tokens.
David
|
|
|
Credo Catholic
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | Greenville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 1268 |
| First Name: | Marsha | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 28th, 2007 05:20 pm |
|
| Enough said to convince me. I will start with a small veil!
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5079 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 6th, 2007 12:30 am |
|
ROME, JUNE 05, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.
Follow-up: Head Coverings for Women
Several readers asked for further clarifications after our article on women wearing head coverings (May 22).
One reader said he was told that the new Code of Canon Law did not repeal the former obligation to wear hats and veils, but simply did not mention it.
Although some canonists might accept this hypothesis, it is not the most probable interpretation as it is unlikely that the legislator would have left the faithful in doubt as to the existence of an obligation. By no longer mentioning the custom, the legislator removed it from the realm of obligation while leaving intact the possibility of its remaining as a custom in some places or contexts.
A reader from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, mentioned a particular case: "We have a small group of traditionalist parishioners who come for Mass with their heads (especially women) veiled. Most parts of the Mass they are seen kneeling when everyone else is standing. During Communion they would receive kneeling and will only receive Communion if distributed by a priest and not by lay ministers or religious. There are instances where they refused to come out for Communion because the priest who celebrated the Mass would only give Communion to communicants who are standing. This resulted in them moving from church to church, searching for priests who would give them Communion kneeling. What is the Church's norm on this?"
Other readers mentioned similar cases of women being actively discouraged by priests from wearing hats and veils because they "cause distraction."
The principal reason why St. Paul mandated women to cover their heads was to foment modesty during the liturgy, especially because in the cultural context of the time a woman who did not cover her head conveyed a message of impropriety.
Since modesty is the primary reason, a woman is free to cover her head for the sake of modesty, or simply out of respect for long-standing custom.
While modesty would also advise against using elaborate hats and veils that tend to draw attention to oneself, there is no authority in canon law or in common-sense social mores that would allow a blanket prohibition or discouragement of all head coverings. Priests should be flexible enough to accommodate the various spiritual sensibilities of their flock, except in the case of clear incompatibility with the nature of the sacred rite.
A similar point could be made regarding the so-called Malayan traditionalists. These faithful should be encouraged to participate in the common gestures of the celebration which express unity of prayer and purpose.
Although the priest should try to educate them as to Church norms and genuine piety, it is usually pastorally advisable to be patient and avoid creating unnecessary divisions regarding points that are not always clearly defined in liturgical law.
At the same time, the Holy See has made it clear that even when the bishops' conference has established the practice of receiving Communion standing as a general norm, the faithful who wish to, may kneel down to receive the Host. It has also emphasized in very clear terms that under no circumstances may the faithful be refused Communion simply because they kneel.
Such members of the faithful, however, should also be careful lest their practice cause any disturbance to the flow of the Communion lines and if necessary they should, for example, wait until the end to receive kneeling.
As one version of the classic spiritual adage says, "In important things unity, in less important things liberty, in all things charity."
The above article is reposted with permission from Zenit.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Serina
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jun 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 28 |
| First Name: | Serina | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Cradle Catholic, Lapsed, Now Hopelessly Devoted |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 6th, 2007 01:42 am |
|
Modesty and Head Coverings is my favorite subject!!
I am reading a book called "Immodesty: Satan's Virtue" by Rita Davidson from Little Flowers Family Apostolates http://www.lffa-ollmpc.com and this is what she has to say..."And only now, because of some misinformation women have put their mantillas away. Head coverings are part of the history of our Faith and worship! They are part of the tradition of the Church and deserve to be pulled out of those dusty drawers and put back on! Now, many people today may think that this is all old news and is simply not followed any longer. But, Our Lord never changes. And there is a reason for you confusion. The old Canon Law #855 & 1262, No. 2 stated 'Let those who are going to receive Holy Communion be decently dressed. Women whose heads are not covered and who are improperly dressed are to be excluded from the Sacrament, as Canon Law directs'. When the Canon Law was revised in 1983, only the changes were listed and so since Canon Law 1262.2 about womens headcovering was not changed, this means it is still a valid law of the Church! Since women wearing headcoverings has existed ever since the beginning of the Church it was simply taken for granted that it would continue. But, on June 21, 1969, during Vatican II a reporter asked Msgr. Annibale Bugnini, then secretary of the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship, whether women must still wear headcoverings, he replied that they were discussing other issues and it was not on the agenda. A statement about Msgr. Bugnini, released by United Press International stated, 'A Vatican official says there has been no change, as reported; in the Roman Catholic rule that women cover their heads in church.' The Rev. Anibale Bugnini, secretary of the New Congregation for Divine Worship, said the reports stemmed from a misunderstanding of a statement he made a news conference in May. 'The rule has not been changed,' he said. 'It is a matter of general discipline. It began as a custom in the time of St. Paul and was later incorporated into canon law.' Somehow this first statement in May, led the reporters to believe that it was no longer necessary and the press announced just that to the world the very next day! When this error was finally corrected in June, it was too late, and many papers didn't carry the correction and so women have been left all these years with mistaken impression that it is okay to go to Mass with our heads uncovered! What massive misinformation! "
And as far as modesty goes...A BIG WOW, WE NEED A LOT OF HELP LORD!! For the past few months God has led me to wear dresses/skirts only, to dress modestly (no sleeveless tops), no adornments such as jewelry except for wedding ring. I am doing this as a reparation for the sins committed from impurity and immodesty. I am not saying I am against a woman wearing pants, by all means that is your choice; and believe me this was a hard habit for me to break as well. But, once I started doing this, you would not believe the overwhelming feeling of love and utmost respect for Our Lord that came over me. I encourage every woman to pray about this, and to at least try it for a week. God Bless.
____________________
Our Lady of Fatima said, "Certain fashions will be introduced which will offend Our Divine Lord very much. Those who serve God ought not to follow these fashions."
|
|
|
Credo Catholic
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | Greenville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 1268 |
| First Name: | Marsha | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 6th, 2007 02:51 am |
|
| Serina, thanks for the info. I have been trying to get the nerve to wear a caplet to daily mass but have discovered I'm a big chicken. I know I couldn't start with Sunday mass! I may ask around to see if any weekday regulars would be interested in trying it. They may run me out of town!
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5079 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 6th, 2007 10:12 am |
|
Serina wrote: When the Canon Law was revised in 1983, only the changes were listed and so since Canon Law 1262.2 about womens headcovering was not changed, this means it is still a valid law of the Church!
Fr. McNamara (quoted above) disagrees:
One reader said he was told that the new Code of Canon Law did not repeal the former obligation to wear hats and veils, but simply did not mention it.
Although some canonists might accept this hypothesis, it is not the most probable interpretation as it is unlikely that the legislator would have left the faithful in doubt as to the existence of an obligation. By no longer mentioning the custom, the legislator removed it from the realm of obligation while leaving intact the possibility of its remaining as a custom in some places or contexts.
I am not suggesting that those women who choose to cover their heads shouldn't do so, nor that there is not value in it. However, according to Fr. McNamara (the most authoritative source I have found to this time), the obligation was removed with the revision of Canon Law.
I don't believe a universal obligation would go without comment from the Vatican for so long. If John Paul II and Benedict XVI considered the obligation for women to have their heads covered still in effect, we would have seen documentation from the Vatican insisting that the law still applied. Neither pope has been shy about telling the faithful how to behave at mass.
Having said that, let me also say that I think there is tremendous value in the custom, but like Friday abstinence from meat throughout the year, I think the greatest value is when it is done willingly and not through a sense of obligation, and I am thrilled to see such questions again being brought up. I think it's part of an overall trend of voluntary holiness that is part of the new stability of the Church following the chaos of the decades after Vatican II. The Holy Spirit has allowed us to play around for a little while, and now it's time to truly understand how we are supposed to practice our faith.
But that's just my personal opinion.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
japhy
Member
| Joined: | Thu Apr 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Princeton, New Jersey USA |
| Posts: | 180 |
| First Name: | Jeff (you can call me "japhy" | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic (Latin Rite) |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 6th, 2007 11:00 am |
|
CajunRick wrote: ROME, JUNE 05, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.
Follow-up: Head Coverings for Women
...
At the same time, the Holy See has made it clear that even when the bishops' conference has established the practice of receiving Communion standing as a general norm, the faithful who wish to, may kneel down to receive the Host. It has also emphasized in very clear terms that under no circumstances may the faithful be refused Communion simply because they kneel.
In case anyone is interested, Adoremus has one of the letters (from July 2002) addressing kneeling during reception of Communion. Here are some excerpts, emphasis mine:The Congregation [for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments] in fact is concerned at the number of similar complaints that it has received in recent months from various places, and considers any refusal of Holy Communion to a member of the faithful on the basis of his or her kneeling posture to be a grave violation of one of the most basic rights of the Christian faithful, namely that of being assisted by their Pastors by means of the Sacraments (Codex Iuris Canonici, canon 213). In view of the law that "sacred ministers may not deny the sacraments to those who opportunely ask for them, are properly disposed and are not prohibited by law from receiving them" (canon 843 ¶ 1), there should be no such refusal to any Catholic who presents himself for Holy Communion at Mass, except in cases presenting a danger of grave scandal to other believers arising out of the person's unrepented public sin or obstinate heresy or schism, publicly professed or declared. Even where the Congregation has approved of legislation denoting standing as the posture for Holy Communion, in accordance with the adaptations permitted to the Conferences of Bishops by the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani n. 160, paragraph 2, it has done so with the stipulation that communicants who choose to kneel are not to be denied Holy Communion on these grounds.
In fact, as His Eminence, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger has recently emphasized, the practice of kneeling for Holy Communion has in its favor a centuries-old tradition, and it is a particularly expressive sign of adoration, completely appropriate in light of the true, real and substantial presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ under the consecrated species.
____________________
[Mary said,] "Do whatever he tells you." - John 2:5
|
|
|
Darlene
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 868 |
| First Name: | Darlene | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Christian, trusting His love and forgiveness |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 10th, 2007 02:16 pm |
|
CajunRick wrote: Having said that, let me also say that I think there is tremendous value in the custom, but like Friday abstinence from meat throughout the year, I think the greatest value is when it is done willingly and not through a sense of obligation, and I am thrilled to see such questions again being brought up. I think it's part of an overall trend of voluntary holiness that is part of the new stability of the Church following the chaos of the decades after Vatican II. The Holy Spirit has allowed us to play around for a little while, and now it's time to truly understand how we are supposed to practice our faith.
But that's just my personal opinion.
Rick,
Thanks for your comments here (the ones I have in bold/underlined). You answered my question that I had on another thread regarding abstinence from meat on Fridays. I wanted to know if this absitnence on Friday was a practice that was required or whether Catholics can choose to practice this traditon. I think that voluntary holiness is what God honors above all else.
Darlene
____________________
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. II Corinthians 13:14
|
|
|
Credo Catholic
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | Greenville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 1268 |
| First Name: | Marsha | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 12th, 2007 01:32 am |
|
| Concerning the reason for women wearing veils or headcoverings, I bought a little booklet written by two Christendom College coeds making their case for the value of women covering their heads in church: "The Chapel Veil: Symbol of the Spouse of Christ" by Elizabeth Black and Emily Griswold. One reason was the comparison of Mary being the tabernacle of the baby Jesus, and that being likened to the Ark of the Covenant which was veiled. Also there was a comparison of the tabernacle containing the Holy Eucharist (which apparently used to always be veiled) and the vocation of women as the tabernacle of life that God creates in their bodies, making their bodies holy, because they are touched by God. "The veil is a symbol of the relationship of the woman's soul to Christ." Okay, I have a small caplet now and I am choosing the right moment to become a rebel!
|
|
|
beachmoss
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 13th, 2006 |
| Location: | Simpsonville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 270 |
| First Name: | Beth | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Catholic (raised Baptist) |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 12th, 2007 08:50 pm |
|
Marsha,
Where did you find that booklet? It sounds like something I would like to read!
Don't call yourself a rebel! Think of the uncovered ladies as the rebels! You are welcome to come sit with me at the 11:00 at SEAS if you don't want to go it alone! I can't believe there aren't ladies at St. Mary's that wear head coverings. Of course you can always go to POP's Tridentine Mass--every woman covers her head at it.
Beth
|
|
|
Credo Catholic
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | Greenville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 1268 |
| First Name: | Marsha | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 12th, 2007 09:39 pm |
|
| I would love to come to mass with you. St. Mary's has almost no one wearing a veil. I got the booklet at St. Anthony's bookstore, and the caplet. I have heard the Latin mass at POP is beautiful. I went one Sunday, sat in the parking lot till I realized no one was coming. I later found out it's only once a month!
|
|
|
beachmoss
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 13th, 2006 |
| Location: | Simpsonville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 270 |
| First Name: | Beth | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Catholic (raised Baptist) |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 13th, 2007 11:15 pm |
|
Marsha,
I'll look for the booklet sometime soon. Please join me at mass any Sunday. I'll be travelling this summer so pm me when you think you may want to come and I'll let you know if I'm home.
Beth
|
|
|
Ali
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 6th, 2007 |
| Location: | Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 660 |
| First Name: | Ali | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | JW, finally fully Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 15th, 2007 09:38 am |
|
Credo Catholic wrote: Concerning the reason for women wearing veils or headcoverings, I bought a little booklet written by two Christendom College coeds making their case for the value of women covering their heads in church: "The Chapel Veil: Symbol of the Spouse of Christ" by Elizabeth Black and Emily Griswold. One reason was the comparison of Mary being the tabernacle of the baby Jesus, and that being likened to the Ark of the Covenant which was veiled. Also there was a comparison of the tabernacle containing the Holy Eucharist (which apparently used to always be veiled) and the vocation of women as the tabernacle of life that God creates in their bodies, making their bodies holy, because they are touched by God. "The veil is a symbol of the relationship of the woman's soul to Christ." Okay, I have a small caplet now and I am choosing the right moment to become a rebel!
I got goosebumps reading this! You veil people are starting to pull a bit to strong! I wonder what my dh would think? LOL I hate to say it, but I don't have the guts to wear one all by myself. I think I'll talk to a couple older ladies about this and see what they say.
Thanks for the threads on this subject, it really makes me think about what is right versus what I'm comfortable with. And those two don't always mesh.
Ali
|
|
|
beachmoss
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 13th, 2006 |
| Location: | Simpsonville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 270 |
| First Name: | Beth | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Catholic (raised Baptist) |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 16th, 2007 10:46 pm |
|
I bought the booklet today. It was very well written. It contained much information in a few pages. The ladies did a great job of expressing why we wear the veil. I wish all women would read this!
Ali, you are correct in saying that what is right is not always what we're comfortable with. Jesus never said the road would be easy. And I have to stop and think--it certainly wasn't comfortable hanging on a cross three hours! But I don't think of veiling as being uncomfortable. It means that you are comfortable in your femininity.
In response to Serina's post--the book you mentioned sounds a lot like one I read, Dressing with Dignity by Colleen Hammond. She almost convinced me to wear dresses all the time, but I really have a hard time giving up my shorts. I love wearing dresses, but it is really difficult for me to do it full time.
On that note I will say that dresses do make a difference. Last Sunday was set up day for Cub Scout Day Camp. I went there straight from Church without changing clothes. I forgot that setting up my room meant hauling in tables and chairs from all over the church we were using. I never touched a table or chair! I believe that had I been in my Scout uniform or shorts and a T-shirt I would have been carrying them myself!
Beth
|
|
|
Current time is 06:11 am | |
|
|
|
|
|
