Author Topic: Headcoverings Revisited  (Read 54616 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #90 on: May 27, 2009, 12:24:53 PM »
So, back to the question of the thread:  Why has our practice changed?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Dan-Romania

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 938
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #91 on: May 27, 2009, 12:31:40 PM »
secularism
This user no longer posts here.

Offline LizaSymonenko

  • Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,658
    • St.Mary the Protectress Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #92 on: May 27, 2009, 12:38:03 PM »

My mother covers her head in church, as do a number of women.  However, the majority do not, especially those in my age group.
I have nothing against covering my head - out of respect to God, not some man, however, to do so would only get tongues wagging.

Maybe it's just my parish, however, people tend to be negatively judgmental.  They wouldn't commend a person for their adherence to the laws, but, would mock them for thinking they are "so pious".  Does that make sense?

The whole thing would not help to unite the members of the church, but, to cause further rifts.

Women who are "new" to the parish and cover their heads are viewed differently than those who grew up "American" along with the other girls, and now act like a pious immigrant. 

In other words, I would draw undue attention to myself by doing so.  I would feel extremely uncomfortable feeling those knife jabs in my back.

I have covered up at the monasteries I have visited and felt good about it.

However, sometimes, when in Rome....

I don't believe God will judge me negatively for coming to church without headgear, if I remain modest, humble and pray earnestly. 

I know that I will be judged on how I live my life, how I treat people, how I care for those entrusted to me.

Headcovering was not listed in the 10 Commandments of the OT, nor is it one of the new two Great Commandments of God:  (these were identified by our Lord, Jesus Christ, as the Great Commandments)
1.   You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
2.   You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

These are the rules on which I focus.  These are the rules given by God Himself.  In my mind, these are most important.

__________________________

 ;)
...as to the original OP - WHY does the church no longer enforce women covering their heads?  Maybe because they realize that covering one's head does not, alone, make a woman a good Christian.  Maybe, the church is focusing more on morals and values, not headcoverings. 

Since it IS still required in some areas, leads me to believe that where it is required is a location of majority Orthodox population.  People of like mind and same Faith.

In the U.S. we are a "mix".  Not only do we live among peoples of various colors and faiths, we have mixed marriages.  Because we live in such close proximity to "other" faiths it is almost impossible not to have marriages of different faiths.  People are no longer among only Orthodox.  At work I am the only Orthodox Christian.  School was the same.  Therefore, many people who wished to get married, did so with non-Orthodox partners.

Maybe this has led to the rules becoming a bit lax.  If an Orthodox man brings his non-Orthodox wife to church, and asks her to cover her head, she will just feel uncomfortable and  unwelcome.

Instead, let us focus on making her welcome, teaching her the ways.  Her head being uncovered is the least of things that would make her Orthodox, and the least important aspect of Orthodoxy as a whole.

In the scope of things, it's really NOT that important!

All male priesthood, non-gay priests, fasting, Communion, Confession, etc.  Now THESE are aspects of Orthodoxy that truly need to be defended!

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #93 on: May 27, 2009, 12:46:18 PM »
I think that it's that because women's hair covered with headscarfs very often have nothing in common with modesty.

When I see some pictures of (mainly Russian) with full makeup, kilograms of golden jewellery and very expensive silk scarfs I think that headscarfs should be banned in some parishes.

When some of my friends go to a Church in trousers instead of a skirt/dress and without a headscarf they became victims of elderly women, who don't hesitate to complain aloud during the DL about them and try to show them the door. THAT should be killed off!
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline LizaSymonenko

  • Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,658
    • St.Mary the Protectress Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #94 on: May 27, 2009, 12:50:32 PM »

I'm with you Mike!

"Judge not..."

You have point, headcoverings used to be a mark of modesty.  Not so much anymore.

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria

Offline Michael L

  • Priest Michael
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 239
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #95 on: May 27, 2009, 12:54:29 PM »

All male priesthood, non-gay priests, fasting, Communion, Confession, etc.  Now THESE are aspects of Orthodoxy that truly need to be defended!

According to you logic, these aspects of Orthodoxy would not be that important either since they are:

not listed in the 10 Commandments of the OT, nor is it one of the new two Great Commandments of God:  (these were identified by our Lord, Jesus Christ, as the Great Commandments)
1.   You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
2.   You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

These are the rules on which I focus.  These are the rules given by God Himself.  In my mind, these are most important.

Offline Tamara

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,208
  • +Pray for Orthodox Unity+
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #96 on: May 27, 2009, 01:06:08 PM »
Women covered their heads in and outside of church for cultural reasons through the centuries. Perhaps it began changing when women started uncovering their heads outside of church. The discarding of headcoverings aren't the only things which have changed. Individualism in how we dress has overridden past cultural conformism for both males and females.

Many priests and bishops have not been consumed with worry over this change otherwise they would be making it the message of their sermons or encyclicals. They would be counseling women to cover. But as I said earlier, no priest or bishop, who have been my spiritual fathers, have ever even mentioned the headcovering. Some women in my parish cover and some don't, but this difference has not caused any divisions in our parish because we look beyond the external.

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #97 on: May 27, 2009, 01:37:20 PM »
Why has our practice changed?

I do not think it was changed.  I think it has been gradually ignored.  I remember seeing virtually all Latin Catholic women covering their heads in Church when I was a young boy--before the Novus Ordo had caught on.  Many will tell you that it was partially due to the radical feminist movement of the 1960's.  Is this true? I do not know. Did the Orthodox follow suit? I do not know. In my thinking, if it is good for the monastery, it is good for the parish.

I believe priests should reintroduce the practice gently and charitably.

But of course this is my opinion.  ;D

Offline Cudgel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #98 on: May 27, 2009, 01:42:27 PM »
So, back to the question of the thread:  Why has our practice changed?

My tentative answer is here: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,21479.msg324724.html#msg324724

...as to the original OP - WHY does the church no longer enforce women covering their heads?  Maybe because they realize that covering one's head does not, alone, make a woman a good Christian. 

Nobody past or present has suggested something quite that absurd. Sinner Servant above already said everything else I had planned on saying more concisely than I probably would have.

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #99 on: May 27, 2009, 01:45:58 PM »
So, back to the question of the thread:  Why has our practice changed?

My tentative answer is here: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,21479.msg324724.html#msg324724
I was just trying to keep the discussion on topic, but thanks for your help. ;)
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Cudgel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #100 on: May 27, 2009, 01:52:45 PM »
So, back to the question of the thread:  Why has our practice changed?

My tentative answer is here: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,21479.msg324724.html#msg324724
I was just trying to keep the discussion on topic, but thanks for your help. ;)

Well, I found my answer partially convincing but I hope it's attacked mercilessly before I hang my hat on it. However, some still dispute whether a change occurred because there are no official documents saying so. I mean we never formally abolished the pro-slavery or anti-intermarriage canons ratified by Ecumenical Councils, but we certainly act as if they are dead even though they and the principles they embody contradict our present ways of thinking and acting.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2009, 01:54:59 PM by Cudgel »

Offline zoarthegleaner

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 398
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #101 on: May 27, 2009, 02:40:36 PM »
People are passionate about their Hair, male and female. 

Courteous is my name,
and I have always aimed to live up to it.
Grace is also my name,
but when things go wrong
its Courteous whom I blame;
but its Grace who sees me through it.

Offline LizaSymonenko

  • Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,658
    • St.Mary the Protectress Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #102 on: May 27, 2009, 02:43:44 PM »


...so, if a woman wore a wig....therefore, her head would officially be covered...and yet others wouldn't realize it....does that count?

 ;)

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria

Offline zoarthegleaner

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 398
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #103 on: May 27, 2009, 03:00:29 PM »
...so, if a woman wore a wig....therefore, her head would officially be covered...and yet others wouldn't realize it....does that count?"

Nyet,  for the covering of the head is also to cover the hair.  Hair has a theological significance which is simply incomprehensible to worldly mindedness which only understands hair as a means of physical attraction.  But clearly (IMO) the Apostle establishes in His letter to the Corinthians that Hair has a theological significance and not just a cultural one.  The Mosaic instructions about hair were not about cultural relativity to the people around them, but cultural relativity to the Lord who was their Paschal resurrection out of the bondage of Egypt and so with us, if we keep the traditions which the Apostle Himself said he taught in all Churches.

Courteous is my name,
and I have always aimed to live up to it.
Grace is also my name,
but when things go wrong
its Courteous whom I blame;
but its Grace who sees me through it.

Offline Rosehip

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,755
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #104 on: May 27, 2009, 03:10:31 PM »
Not only hair, but HEADS, mind you! I was just reading one of those early churchman-was it Tertullian, by chance? He felt certain the face should be covered too (IIRC).
+ Our dear sister Martha (Rosehip) passed away on Dec 20, 2010.  May her memory be eternal! +

Offline Mickey

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,309
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #105 on: May 27, 2009, 03:10:52 PM »

Nyet,  for the covering of the head is also to cover the hair.  Hair has a theological significance which is simply incomprehensible to worldly mindedness which only understands hair as a means of physical attraction.  But clearly (IMO) the Apostle establishes in His letter to the Corinthians that Hair has a theological significance and not just a cultural one.  The Mosaic instructions about hair were not about cultural relativity to the people around them, but cultural relativity to the Lord who was their Paschal resurrection out of the bondage of Egypt and so with us, if we keep the traditions which the Apostle Himself said he taught in all Churches.

Yes. And another reason that my wife covers is due to the presence of the angels at the Liturgy.  :angel:

Offline Dan-Romania

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 938
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #106 on: May 28, 2009, 07:58:29 AM »


...so, if a woman wore a wig....therefore, her head would officially be covered...and yet others wouldn't realize it....does that count?

 ;)



what is with this scenario , no it doesn`t count , and for a woman who shaved her head is a disgrace ; the head must be covered with veil . Even is she is bald. As the apostle said : A custom like this woman uncovering their heads we DON`T HAVE IN THE CHURCHES OF GOD . Judge yourselfs , also he added . Christ is the head of the head of the woman , therefore the head of the woman while prophesying and praying in the Church must be covered. Like the Sacraments of the Church , they all have a part of the "material in them" as John Chrysostom said : If you would have been only spiritual , you would not need the water for baptize , but since you are also human(earthly , material) you needed. Everything has to do with the energies created by God trough wich we can commune with His Personna. As long as we are earthly and between heaven and hell , we need sacramental , and use of the `material` , as long as we are between good , and evil . If we would have been only spiritual beings , incorrupted we would not be in the need of communing with God trough , material things , if we would get into a point that we are all spiritual , and God to be all in all . Of course because of God big mercy , there are exceptions , to everything and everycase . It is more important to have the right attitude and spiritual feeling , than to have the veil (material) on your face . But is innapropriate as Paul said .
This user no longer posts here.

Offline LizaSymonenko

  • Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,658
    • St.Mary the Protectress Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #107 on: May 28, 2009, 09:15:11 AM »

...I was trying to be funny about the wig.

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria

Offline Douglas

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 608
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #108 on: May 28, 2009, 10:09:44 AM »
I can pretty much guarantee two (perhaps three) things:

- nothing is going to change in terms of women covering their heads. The times and our culture dictate that women will not return to these middle-eastern customs. These admonitions were more to do with the times and culture in which the apostle found himself than anything else and as such it no longer applies. Women who still feel this is an important act of piety and femininity will continue to wear something and those who do not (a soon to be majority) will not.

- we will soon grow weary with this topic and move on to something else (i.e. women's periods and holy communion) but inevitably return to it in a year's time when someone (probably a young man) reopens it.

- the theological foundations for the apostle's injunction will satisfy some and will not satisfy others (nothing new here).

Christ is ascended! From earth, to heaven!
Douglas no longer posts on the forum.

Offline LizaSymonenko

  • Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,658
    • St.Mary the Protectress Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #109 on: May 28, 2009, 10:12:54 AM »


Glory be to God!

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria

Offline Douglas

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 608
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #110 on: May 28, 2009, 10:13:54 AM »
Now and always... and unto ages of ages! Amen!
Douglas no longer posts on the forum.

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #111 on: May 28, 2009, 12:04:13 PM »
- we will soon grow weary with this topic and move on to something else (i.e. women's periods and holy communion) but inevitably return to it in a year's time when someone (probably a young man) reopens it.
Why does it have to be a young man?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Cudgel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #112 on: May 28, 2009, 12:14:54 PM »
nothing is going to change in terms of ________________. The times and our culture dictate that _____________________________. These admonitions were more to do with the times and culture in which the apostle found himself than anything else and as such it no longer applies.

What else are you willing to fill in the blank with? Consistency demands cultural contextualization of the whole apostolic deposit where applicable.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 12:15:33 PM by Cudgel »

Offline Douglas

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 608
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #113 on: May 28, 2009, 12:20:11 PM »
- we will soon grow weary with this topic and move on to something else (i.e. women's periods and holy communion) but inevitably return to it in a year's time when someone (probably a young man) reopens it.
Why does it have to be a young man?

I doesn't have to be... but it always is. I can't figure out why but in the twelve years I've been on Orthodox forums online...it's ALWAYS been young, male converts that have raised this issue. Very odd but ... ???
Douglas no longer posts on the forum.

Offline AlexanderOfBergamo

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 706
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #114 on: May 28, 2009, 12:20:54 PM »
Why has our practice changed?

I do not think it was changed.  I think it has been gradually ignored.  I remember seeing virtually all Latin Catholic women covering their heads in Church when I was a young boy--before the Novus Ordo had caught on.  Many will tell you that it was partially due to the radical feminist movement of the 1960's.  Is this true? I do not know. Did the Orthodox follow suit? I do not know. In my thinking, if it is good for the monastery, it is good for the parish.

I believe priests should reintroduce the practice gently and charitably.

But of course this is my opinion.  ;D

I support your opinion... I attend a Russian Orthodox Church, where women still wear headcoverings, independently of the age.
Sincerely I find it nice... it shows a greater respect for God... But how can we impose headcoverings when some girls of our time find it difficult even to wear decent dresses both inside and outside of the church?

In Christ,    Alex
"Also in the Catholic Church itself we take great care that we hold that which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and properly Catholic" (St. Vincent of Lérins, "The Commonitory")

Offline Douglas

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 608
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #115 on: May 28, 2009, 12:21:54 PM »
nothing is going to change in terms of ________________. The times and our culture dictate that _____________________________. These admonitions were more to do with the times and culture in which the apostle found himself than anything else and as such it no longer applies.

What else are you willing to fill in the blank with? Consistency demands cultural contextualization of the whole apostolic deposit where applicable.

I don't need to fill in any blanks. This is not an academic game for me, Cudgel. My wife is involved in the question so I've a personal stake in the issue.
Douglas no longer posts on the forum.

Offline Cudgel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #116 on: May 28, 2009, 12:25:51 PM »
I don't need to fill in any blanks. This is not an academic game for me, Cudgel. My wife is involved in the question so I've a personal stake in the issue.

You do not know my situation or who I know.  Your foolish presumption neither appreciated nor relevant to the topic at hand.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 12:26:10 PM by Cudgel »

Offline Douglas

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 608
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #117 on: May 28, 2009, 12:26:14 PM »
Why has our practice changed?

I do not think it was changed.  I think it has been gradually ignored.  I remember seeing virtually all Latin Catholic women covering their heads in Church when I was a young boy--before the Novus Ordo had caught on.  Many will tell you that it was partially due to the radical feminist movement of the 1960's.  Is this true? I do not know. Did the Orthodox follow suit? I do not know. In my thinking, if it is good for the monastery, it is good for the parish.

I believe priests should reintroduce the practice gently and charitably.

But of course this is my opinion.  ;D

I support your opinion... I attend a Russian Orthodox Church, where women still wear headcoverings, independently of the age.
Sincerely I find it nice... it shows a greater respect for God... But how can we impose headcoverings when some girls of our time find it difficult even to wear decent dresses both inside and outside of the church?

In Christ,    Alex

You can't impose anything... period. It's not a question of how can you impose something. That sort of thinking, I can assure you, will lead to greater disunity and a greater exodus from the Church. And there is no way of measuring a woman's piety and respect by the fact that she wears or does not wear a headcovering. As I mentioned in an earlier post, some of the biggest gossips in the Church have been women whose heads were covered. Gossip is a damaging sin... one which rips a church asunder. Headcoverings may appear to you to demonstrate a woman's piety but that is not an accurate measure. It simply means that it corresponds with your preconceived ideas of piety.
Douglas no longer posts on the forum.

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #118 on: May 28, 2009, 12:28:22 PM »
- we will soon grow weary with this topic and move on to something else (i.e. women's periods and holy communion) but inevitably return to it in a year's time when someone (probably a young man) reopens it.
Why does it have to be a young man?

I doesn't have to be... but it always is. I can't figure out why but in the twelve years I've been on Orthodox forums online...it's ALWAYS been young, male converts that have raised this issue. Very odd but ... ???
What's wrong with that?  As much as we might think it "beating the dead horse", the issue of head coverings is an important issue to many Orthodox, men and women alike, and we will have others join us in the future--we hope--who will be unaware of the discussions we've had now and in the past.  Why do you appear so willing to readily dismiss honest inquiry?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Douglas

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 608
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #119 on: May 28, 2009, 12:29:29 PM »
I don't need to fill in any blanks. This is not an academic game for me, Cudgel. My wife is involved in the question so I've a personal stake in the issue.

You do not know my situation or who I know.  Your foolish presumption neither appreciated nor relevant to the topic at hand.

It's true... I do NOT know you nor your situation. NOR do you know me. I call upon the moderator to caution this person from making such remarks as to whether my posts demonstrate FOOLISH presumptions. YOU, Sir, are not the focus of my previous posts. I simply indicated that it's been my experience that young, male converts have always raised this issue in the forums of which I've been a member. That is NOT a presumption but a FACT. You've no right to speak so disparagingly to me.
Douglas no longer posts on the forum.

Offline Douglas

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 608
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #120 on: May 28, 2009, 12:30:18 PM »
- we will soon grow weary with this topic and move on to something else (i.e. women's periods and holy communion) but inevitably return to it in a year's time when someone (probably a young man) reopens it.
Why does it have to be a young man?

I doesn't have to be... but it always is. I can't figure out why but in the twelve years I've been on Orthodox forums online...it's ALWAYS been young, male converts that have raised this issue. Very odd but ... ???

There's nothing wrong with it. I did not suggest or state such. I simply pointed out a fact. End of story.
What's wrong with that?  As much as we might think it "beating the dead horse", the issue of head coverings is an important issue to many Orthodox, men and women alike, and we will have others join us in the future--we hope--who will be unaware of the discussions we've had now and in the past.  Why do you appear so willing to readily dismiss honest inquiry?
Douglas no longer posts on the forum.

Offline Cudgel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #121 on: May 28, 2009, 12:38:35 PM »
I don't need to fill in any blanks. This is not an academic game for me, Cudgel. My wife is involved in the question so I've a personal stake in the issue.

You do not know my situation or who I know.  Your foolish presumption neither appreciated nor relevant to the topic at hand.

It's true... I do NOT know you nor your situation. NOR do you know me. I call upon the moderator to caution this person from making such remarks as to whether my posts demonstrate FOOLISH presumptions. YOU, Sir, are not the focus of my previous posts. I simply indicated that it's been my experience that young, male converts have always raised this issue in the forums of which I've been a member. That is NOT a presumption but a FACT. You've no right to speak so disparagingly to me.

To claim that I am engaged in a mere academic game and have no personal stake in the issue without knowing my situation is a foolish presumption. If that's not what you were saying in response to my question, then what I said is inapplicable and an unfortunate accident for which I apologize.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 12:39:18 PM by Cudgel »

Offline Keble

  • All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,621
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #122 on: May 28, 2009, 02:31:31 PM »
You do not know my situation or who I know.  Your foolish presumption neither appreciated nor relevant to the topic at hand.
I think actually that you volunteered for this one. Douglas's original remark wasn't specifically directed at you, but you seem to have assumed that it was. And frankly I'm inclined to believe that you are a male convert from a Protestant church. It's hard to imagine that a born Antiochian would be so wound up over these sorts of issues, whereas your very first post was to start a topic about a sexuality topic; and women who go off on this particular subject tend to write from a very different angle. Finally, to be blunt: those of us with sufficient children are much less inclined to bloviate about these particular topics.

Offline Cudgel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #123 on: May 28, 2009, 04:28:22 PM »
Keble,

This forum is an ad hominem minefield and the rustling of leaves is enough to set off many ear-wringing explosions. Maybe I'm a promiscuous bisexual Nigerian email scam artist on house arrest posing as an Orthodox Christian so I can bring about the experience to my liberal Episcopal friends.  I just do not see the incentive to post off-topic remarks and personal judgments, why not start a new thread or post in another that appeals to you?  Why are you telling me what you're inclined to believe about my background?  What am I supposed to do with that information?  If you don't like the thread, it's a beautiful day outside.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 04:36:36 PM by Cudgel »

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #124 on: May 28, 2009, 04:46:31 PM »
You do not know my situation or who I know.  Your foolish presumption neither appreciated nor relevant to the topic at hand.
I think actually that you volunteered for this one. Douglas's original remark wasn't specifically directed at you, but you seem to have assumed that it was. And frankly I'm inclined to believe that you are a male convert from a Protestant church. It's hard to imagine that a born Antiochian would be so wound up over these sorts of issues, whereas your very first post was to start a topic about a sexuality topic; and women who go off on this particular subject tend to write from a very different angle. Finally, to be blunt: those of us with sufficient children are much less inclined to bloviate about these particular topics.

Now there's a word I've never seen/heard used before.  I'll have to remember to make this the word of the day at the next Toastmasters meeting for which I'm the grammarian.


blo⋅vi⋅ate
  /ˈbloʊviˌeɪt/ [bloh-vee-eyt]
–verb (used without object), ‑at⋅ed, ‑at⋅ing.
to speak pompously.

"bloviate." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 May. 2009.
< Dictionary.com http://dictionary.classic.reference.com/browse/bloviate >.


That said, back to our regularly scheduled programming...
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 04:47:21 PM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Tamara

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,208
  • +Pray for Orthodox Unity+
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #125 on: May 28, 2009, 07:38:57 PM »
- we will soon grow weary with this topic and move on to something else (i.e. women's periods and holy communion) but inevitably return to it in a year's time when someone (probably a young man) reopens it.
Why does it have to be a young man?

I doesn't have to be... but it always is. I can't figure out why but in the twelve years I've been on Orthodox forums online...it's ALWAYS been young, male converts that have raised this issue. Very odd but ... ???

I have found the same to be true in regard to young, male converts. I would imagine this topic is important to them because of their youthful zealousness for their new found faith. Their zealousness can be a good and healthy thing when tempered properly and given good direction by a spiritual father in order to produce much fruit. As a young woman, I had many male Orthodox friends who were cut from this same cloth. Now, some of them are priests and two of them are monks. They have kept me in their prayers all these years and I always remember them when I offer the prosphora. So we continue to hold each other up through our prayers of love for one another.

Offline Ebor

  • Vanyar
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,492
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #126 on: May 28, 2009, 07:43:13 PM »


...so, if a woman wore a wig....therefore, her head would officially be covered...and yet others wouldn't realize it....does that count?

 ;)



Actually, for Orthodox Jewish women the "Sheitel/sheitl" is a wig that covers the real hair.  Married or formerly married women are to cover their hair and that is one way.  Here is a link that looks at the question of why from a site that sells sheitls in many styles.  There was some controversy that I read about some years ago that some rabbis said that such wigs were not permitted since it could be mistakenly thought that the woman was showing her real hair.
http://www.sheitel.com/news/212


"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.

Offline Ebor

  • Vanyar
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,492
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #127 on: May 28, 2009, 07:46:31 PM »
  Hair has a theological significance which is simply incomprehensible to worldly mindedness which only understands hair as a means of physical attraction. 

Could you please explain what you think the theological significance of hair is?

Quote
The Mosaic instructions about hair were not about cultural relativity to the people around them, but cultural relativity to the Lord who was their Paschal resurrection out of the bondage of Egypt and so with us, if we keep the traditions which the Apostle Himself said he taught in all Churches.

What Mosaic instructions about hair are you thinking of here, please?

Ebor
"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.

Offline Ebor

  • Vanyar
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,492
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #128 on: May 28, 2009, 07:48:19 PM »
Yes. And another reason that my wife covers is due to the presence of the angels at the Liturgy.  :angel:

Could you please explain your thoughts on why angels would need to have a human woman's hair covered?  Thank you in advance.

Ebor
"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.

Offline Ebor

  • Vanyar
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,492
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #129 on: May 28, 2009, 07:51:23 PM »
To claim that I am engaged in a mere academic game and have no personal stake in the issue without knowing my situation is a foolish presumption.

May one ask if you do have a personal stake in this particular question and, if so, what it might be?  If you prefer not to answer, I apologize and withdraw the question.


Quote
from one of your posts two days ago:
This thread's somewhat interesting. Try reading it and share your thoughts.

Why would you assume that I had not read the thread before I made my first posting in it? 


With respect,

Ebor
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 07:53:45 PM by Ebor »
"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.

Offline Cudgel

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #130 on: May 28, 2009, 08:22:13 PM »
May one ask if you do have a personal stake in this particular question and, if so, what it might be?  If you prefer not to answer, I apologize and withdraw the question.

1. Many in my previous tradition, including close female blood relatives, take this commandment literally.
2. I have regularly attended Orthodox parishes where women were heavily encouraged to cover and ones where the reverse is true, and have witnessed debates on this matter.
3. I'm doing a personal study of controversial elements of St. Paul's epistles and attempting to see how the Church has applied them historically.  I started my OC forum career with the Sex/marriage thread because it's covered in 1 Corinthians 7; headcoverings are covered in 1 Corinthians 11. 

I hope this explains more clearly why the condescending remarks from other older persons on this forum, looking down on me because I'm young and depicting me as another confused intellectual jerk-off are completely baseless, unnecessary and unChristian.


Quote
Why would you assume that I had not read the thread before I made my first posting in it?

Sorry if I was rude; I've just been subjected to a continuous series of unnecessary personal judgments and got frustrated.  I'd much rather be called a complete fool and that claim backed up with clear argumentation then someone offer their opinion on how I'm trying to "destroy the Church" and say nothing relevant to the topic at hand.. Given the innumerable options on this forum, it seems like alot of work just to monkeywrench a conversation and put someone else down.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 08:23:45 PM by Cudgel »

Offline Heorhij

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,574
    • Mississippi University for Women
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #131 on: May 28, 2009, 09:24:43 PM »
May one ask if you do have a personal stake in this particular question and, if so, what it might be?  If you prefer not to answer, I apologize and withdraw the question.

Well, my wife happens to be an infant-baptized ("cradle") Orthodox who very sincerely and enthusiastically believes that the demand to cover women's hair is an example of the ultimate cruelty and stupidity of the male oppressor chauvinists. But on a perhaps deeper level, my personal interest to this issue is that I have observed the adherence to the custom of covering women's hair in Ukraine where it sits very well together with a rather blatant immodesty in other things - like I said, young girls come to church pierced and tattoed all over, wearing their very tightly fitting jeans so low that everyone can observe their pierced belly buttons and tattoed butt cracks, but feeling very well because they have "obeyed the commandment" and covered their hair with an etherially-thin, almost invisible band of some sort of polyester. So, like I wrote earlier in this thread, I begin to think that maybe it is GOOD that in the present-day USA in such jurisdictions as my GOA, women believe that it is more appropriate to come to church in a normal modest attire and their heads un-covered, rather than the other way around...
« Last Edit: May 28, 2009, 09:26:20 PM by Heorhij »
Love never fails.

Offline Rosehip

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,755
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #132 on: May 28, 2009, 09:45:23 PM »
But George, maybe part of the problem is that the Church through Christ  isn't changing the people's hearts? Maybe modesty is subject which should be taught a little more.

And when I was in Ukraine, I saw many women in the churches who were quite modestly dressed, with headscarves like the young girls in the Zagorsk video I recently posted. There were those types too.

+ Our dear sister Martha (Rosehip) passed away on Dec 20, 2010.  May her memory be eternal! +

Offline Riddikulus

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,788
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #133 on: May 28, 2009, 10:32:12 PM »
Wasn't it traditional for men to wear a tallit (prayer shawl) covering their heads in the early church? I'm sure I remember reading/hearing that it would have been the practice of all Jews (including Christ) to cover their heads before approaching the Torah; a tradition that carried over into the Church. If I am correct, why did the Church change that early tradition?
I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)

Offline Rosehip

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,755
Re: Headcoverings Revisited
« Reply #134 on: May 28, 2009, 10:38:26 PM »
I would love to know the answer to that question too! It seems both Jewish men and women covered their heads. Why did Paul come along and say it was a shame for men to cover their heads but for women it was still proper to do so??? I've always wondered about this.
+ Our dear sister Martha (Rosehip) passed away on Dec 20, 2010.  May her memory be eternal! +