• A blessed Nativity / Theophany season to all! For users new and old: the forum rules were streamlined when we transitioned to the new software. Please ensure that you are familiar with them. Continued use of the forum means that you (a) know the rules, and (b) pledge that you'll abide by them. For more information, check out the OrthodoxChristianity.Net Rules section. (There are only 2 threads there - Rules, and Administrative Structure.)

Converts wearing headcoverings= legalists?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Deep Roots

Elder
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
377
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
38
Location
Baltimore
Maria said:
Many men have expressed that they are tempted when women do not wear headcoverings
really?  maybe in some countries, but uh, not where I live. 

In fact, I bet that some folks actually fetishize headcoverings. How many here probably think a woman is "more beautiful" with a headcovering?  I think a fixation on the heacovering becomes quite unhealthy.

As I said at the beginning: wear it, don't wear it, according to one's conscience and culture.
 

Clemente

Elder
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
466
Reaction score
0
Points
0
For what it is worth, in my Russian Orthodox Church in Spain, about, oh, 100% of the women over the age 8 cover their hair.

I love it because (1) I think it is Scriptural and (2) I find it less distracting, given that we are all standing.

I've never heard any woman in the parish complain and there are a number of professional women. I sizeable number seem to wear Burberry...very fashionable.  ;)
 

Punch

Taxiarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
5,799
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
59
Location
Omaha, Nebraska
It is not out of legalism, but out of disobedience.  The Priest will not kick them out of Church for not having a head covering.  He will, however, refuse to hear their confession or commune them.  So, they obey just long enough to get what they want.  I wonder if they think that sacraments taken this way are really of any benefit to them.

Dominika said:
Maria said:
In fact, my husband wishes that all women would wear a headcovering and dress modestly. I have heard many Orthodox Christian men, both young and old, express agreement with my husband and the epistles of St. Paul. Many men have expressed that they are tempted when women do not wear headcoverings and do not dress modestly.
I've heard some such opinions from men too. But I think, that it's THEIR problem (mostly). I dress modestly, but generally not head covering. So, if a man is tempted by me, it's his problem. Of course if a woman puts on, especially in church, a miniskirt, it's her fault and sin the first place.

But regarding the question, now I think that if some women wear headcoverings only for the sacraments (confession, Eucharist) and for the rest service not, it is a legalistic beahaviour. Because they think they're, let's say, "worthy" (probably not proper word) to receive a sacrament only if they cover their's heads, althoguh for the rest of service/Liturgy and prayers they do not it.
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
Headcovering: Legalism or Obedience to God

Several women in my prior parish were given a blessing to wear a headcovering only when receiving the sacraments, so that we would not upset the majority of females who were blatant feminists. The priest was hoping that our example would help the parish change. But alas, it further divided the OCA parish as the loud and strident feminists would rather tear our parish apart than see a women veiled.

Yes, there were a couple of other women who were given permission to wear their headcoverings during the entire Divine Liturgy, but these women were single and were contemplating entering the monastic life. So as not to cause confusion, the priest consistently advised married women to wear the head covering only at the time the sacrament was administered to them, but single women discerning the monastic life could wear it at any time, even in the parish hall. We all wore the head covering in a spirit of obedience. Later, most of us left that sick parish, especially after the Bishop issued a letter rebuking that parish.

So, wearing the headcovering was not done in a spirit of legalism, but rather it was worn in humility and obedience. In fact, I had to have the blessing of my (former) priest and my husband in order to wear it, which is strange since St. Paul admonished women to wear the veil. Was my priest above St. Paul? Of course not, but he was between a sharp rock (the strident women) and a hard place (his dying parish).

Punch said:
It is not out of legalism, but out of disobedience.  The Priest will not kick them out of Church for not having a head covering.  He will, however, refuse to hear their confession or commune them.  So, they obey just long enough to get what they want.  I wonder if they think that sacraments taken this way are really of any benefit to them.


Dominika said:
I think that if some women wear headcoverings only for the sacraments (confession, Eucharist) and for the rest service not, it is a legalistic beahaviour. Because they think they're, let's say, "worthy" (probably not proper word) to receive a sacrament only if they cover their's heads, althoguh for the rest of service/Liturgy and prayers they do not it.
p.s.: During this time we had several inquirers and catechumens. The women catechumens chose to and were granted a blessing to wear the headcovering.
 

Kerdy

Taxiarches
Joined
Jan 23, 2011
Messages
5,813
Reaction score
0
Points
0
PeterTheAleut said:
Kerdy said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Kerdy said:
PeterTheAleut said:
What this thread IS about is this: Is it proper for us to judge female converts for wearing head coverings or for not wearing head coverings? Please let us work together to bring this thread back to its intended topic. Thank you.
No, we should not.
Should not do what? Judge female converts for wearing/not wearing head coverings, or work to bring this thread back to its intended topic?
???
There was only one question, right?
Your response could be seen as answer to a question or as response to a request. It's not at all clear to me which one you're referring to.
The question.
 

Santagranddad

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Apr 17, 2012
Messages
1,198
Reaction score
0
Points
0
When this question was raised in Greece I heard again and again women saying it cost x to have my hair done and I am not covering it for anyone. Others appeared to think it was old fashioned and unnecessary.

That many also appeared to think low tops and short skirts were appropriate saddened me.

Is it what the Church teaches or do we all do or own thing and then call it Orthodoxy? Surely following Christ is not a case of following the mores and fashions of the times?
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
Santagranddad said:
When this question was raised in Greece I heard again and again women saying it cost x to have my hair done and I am not covering it for anyone. Others appeared to think it was old fashioned and unnecessary.

That many also appeared to think low tops and short skirts were appropriate saddened me.

Is it what the Church teaches or do we all do or own thing and then call it Orthodoxy? Surely following Christ is not a case of following the mores and fashions of the times?
Exactly.

And to claim that inquirers and catechumens are being legalistic and proud when they dare to wear head coverings is absolutely insane.

Those who issue these judgments are failing to heed Christ's command not to judge lest we ourselves be judged.

Actually those who claim that catechumens are being legalistic are the strident feminists and wimps who are Orthodox in name only. Sorry for judging the feminists and wimps, but I am saddened by this turn of events. It should not be happening in the Orthodox Church.

Lord have mercy and save us for we perish.
 

Seth84

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
1,077
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
36
It is sad that people judge women who cover.  It saddens me even more though to think that a priest of the Church would judge women unworthy to receive Holy Communion simply because they didn't cover their hair. 
 

Achronos

Toumarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
13,265
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
House Of Balloons
Ionnis said:
It is sad that people judge women who cover.  It saddens me even more though to think that a priest of the Church would judge women unworthy to receive Holy Communion simply because they didn't cover their hair.   
Is it because they think they don't have enough reverence for the Eucharist?
 

Seth84

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
1,077
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
36
Achronos said:
Ionnis said:
It is sad that people judge women who cover.  It saddens me even more though to think that a priest of the Church would judge women unworthy to receive Holy Communion simply because they didn't cover their hair.   
Is it because they think they don't have enough reverence for the Eucharist?
I wouldn't know.  I was referring to Maria's earlier post where she was glorifying God after hearing that Punch's priest refused Holy Communion to women without head coverings. 
 

Santagranddad

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Apr 17, 2012
Messages
1,198
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Is the priest judging or simply guarding the chalice, as is his sacred duty? All of us approaching the chalice have a duty to prepare beforehand, male and female. And Orthodoxy is not a pick n' mix Pathway nor is public worship a fashion parade.

How is it some feel their autonomy must not be challenged, to follow Christ is a different path and has different values than that of the world, even from the beginning this has been so, surely?
 

SolEX01

Toumarches
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
13,832
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Central Maryland
Website
www.goarch.org
Punch said:
It is not out of legalism, but out of disobedience.
Do any of us (including Priests and Hierarchs) examine his/her own disobedience?

Punch said:
The Priest will not kick them out of Church for not having a head covering.  He will, however, refuse to hear their confession or commune them.  So, they obey just long enough to get what they want.  I wonder if they think that sacraments taken this way are really of any benefit to them.
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
 

Santagranddad

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Apr 17, 2012
Messages
1,198
Reaction score
0
Points
0
SolEX01 said:
Punch said:
It is not out of legalism, but out of disobedience.
Do any of us (including Priests and Hierarchs) examine his/her own disobedience?

Punch said:
The Priest will not kick them out of Church for not having a head covering.  He will, however, refuse to hear their confession or commune them.  So, they obey just long enough to get what they want.  I wonder if they think that sacraments taken this way are really of any benefit to them.
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Have you confused 'needs' with 'wants'? Or have I misunderstood you? If we are to put off the old man or woman then the easiest or most comfortable route seems an unlikely Path to Salvation.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Portland, Oregon
Kerdy said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Kerdy said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Kerdy said:
PeterTheAleut said:
What this thread IS about is this: Is it proper for us to judge female converts for wearing head coverings or for not wearing head coverings? Please let us work together to bring this thread back to its intended topic. Thank you.
No, we should not.
Should not do what? Judge female converts for wearing/not wearing head coverings, or work to bring this thread back to its intended topic?
???
There was only one question, right?
Your response could be seen as answer to a question or as response to a request. It's not at all clear to me which one you're referring to.
The question.
Thank you. Now that wasn't so hard, was it? ;)
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Portland, Oregon
Maria said:
Santagranddad said:
When this question was raised in Greece I heard again and again women saying it cost x to have my hair done and I am not covering it for anyone. Others appeared to think it was old fashioned and unnecessary.

That many also appeared to think low tops and short skirts were appropriate saddened me.

Is it what the Church teaches or do we all do or own thing and then call it Orthodoxy? Surely following Christ is not a case of following the mores and fashions of the times?
Exactly.

And to claim that inquirers and catechumens are being legalistic and proud when they dare to wear head coverings is absolutely insane.

Those who issue these judgments are failing to heed Christ's command not to judge lest we ourselves be judged.

Actually those who claim that catechumens are being legalistic are the strident feminists and wimps who are Orthodox in name only. Sorry for judging the feminists and wimps, but I am saddened by this turn of events. It should not be happening in the Orthodox Church.

Lord have mercy and save us for we perish.
Don't you think that kind of comment extremely hypocritical? You remind us of Christ's command that we not judge, specifically as this governs how we relate to inquirers and catechumens who decide to wear head coverings, yet in the same post you judge as "Orthodox in name only" those who claim that these catechumens are being legalistic. If you're going to cite Christ's command that we not judge, Maria, then you had better practice what you preach.
 

SolEX01

Toumarches
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
13,832
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Central Maryland
Website
www.goarch.org
Santagranddad said:
SolEX01 said:
Punch said:
It is not out of legalism, but out of disobedience.
Do any of us (including Priests and Hierarchs) examine his/her own disobedience?

Punch said:
The Priest will not kick them out of Church for not having a head covering.  He will, however, refuse to hear their confession or commune them.  So, they obey just long enough to get what they want.  I wonder if they think that sacraments taken this way are really of any benefit to them.
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Have you confused 'needs' with 'wants'? Or have I misunderstood you? If we are to put off the old man or woman then the easiest or most comfortable route seems an unlikely Path to Salvation.
When is the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee?

O Lord, I wore my headcovering and get to partake from your Body and Blood while that other woman didn't wear her headcovering and was turned away by our Priest....

EDIT: made corrections
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
Santagranddad said:
When this question was raised in Greece I heard again and again women saying it cost x to have my hair done and I am not covering it for anyone. Others appeared to think it was old fashioned and unnecessary.

That many also appeared to think low tops and short skirts were appropriate saddened me.

Is it what the Church teaches or do we all do or own thing and then call it Orthodoxy? Surely following Christ is not a case of following the mores and fashions of the times?
Exactly.

And to claim that inquirers and catechumens are being legalistic and proud when they dare to wear head coverings is absolutely insane.

Those who issue these judgments are failing to heed Christ's command not to judge lest we ourselves be judged.

Actually those who claim that catechumens are being legalistic are the strident feminists and wimps who are Orthodox in name only. Sorry for judging the feminists and wimps, but I am saddened by this turn of events. It should not be happening in the Orthodox Church.

Lord have mercy and save us for we perish.
Don't you think that kind of comment extremely hypocritical? You remind us of Christ's command that we not judge, specifically as this governs how we relate to inquirers and catechumens who decide to wear head coverings, yet in the same post you judge as "Orthodox in name only" those who claim that these catechumens are being legalistic. If you're going to cite Christ's command that we not judge, Maria, then you had better practice what you preach.
PtA, I admit that I am a sinner in that post. I could have edited that part out, but then I would have been truly hypocritical.

Hopefully, those who are so quick to condemn catechumens for wearing headcoverings will see their own hypocritical spirit.

We are all hypocrites in need of Christ's mercy.

 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
SolEX01 said:
Santagranddad said:
SolEX01 said:
Punch said:
It is not out of legalism, but out of disobedience.
Do any of us (including Priests and Hierarchs) examine his/her own disobedience?

Punch said:
The Priest will not kick them out of Church for not having a head covering.  He will, however, refuse to hear their confession or commune them.  So, they obey just long enough to get what they want.  I wonder if they think that sacraments taken this way are really of any benefit to them.
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Have you confused 'needs' with 'wants'? Or have I misunderstood you? If we are to put off the old man or woman then the easiest or most comfortable route seems an unlikely Path to Salvation.
When is the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee?

O Lord, I wore my headcovering and get to partake from your Body and Blood while that other woman didn't wear her headcovering and was turned away by our Priest....

EDIT: made corrections
How often does this happen, if at all?

Frankly, this scenario is all hypothetical. For which truly Orthodox Christian lady would haughtily approach the Chalice with her head uncovered if the church has posted that she should cover herself?

And which catechumen would dare to approach the Chalice before being baptized or chrismated into Holy Orthodoxy? None that I know. So, why was this side topic brought up?
 

SolEX01

Toumarches
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
13,832
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Central Maryland
Website
www.goarch.org
Maria said:
SolEX01 said:
Santagranddad said:
SolEX01 said:
Punch said:
It is not out of legalism, but out of disobedience.
Do any of us (including Priests and Hierarchs) examine his/her own disobedience?

Punch said:
The Priest will not kick them out of Church for not having a head covering.  He will, however, refuse to hear their confession or commune them.  So, they obey just long enough to get what they want.  I wonder if they think that sacraments taken this way are really of any benefit to them.
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Have you confused 'needs' with 'wants'? Or have I misunderstood you? If we are to put off the old man or woman then the easiest or most comfortable route seems an unlikely Path to Salvation.
When is the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee?

O Lord, I wore my headcovering and get to partake from your Body and Blood while that other woman didn't wear her headcovering and was turned away by our Priest....

EDIT: made corrections
How often does this happen, if at all?

Frankly, this scenario is all hypothetical. For which truly Orthodox Christian lady would haughtily approach the Chalice with her head uncovered if the church has posted that she should cover herself?
That is legalism.  Wasn't that the lesson on the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee?

Maria said:
And which catechumen would dare to approach the Chalice before being baptized or chrismated into Holy Orthodoxy? None that I know. So, why was this side topic brought up?
I was responding to how Punch's Priest handles uncovered women.  Still pertains to covered vs. uncovered cathecumens (I wear a headcovering; I'm better than that woman who doesn't wear a headcovering).
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
SolEX01 said:
Maria said:
SolEX01 said:
Santagranddad said:
SolEX01 said:
Punch said:
It is not out of legalism, but out of disobedience.
Do any of us (including Priests and Hierarchs) examine his/her own disobedience?

Punch said:
The Priest will not kick them out of Church for not having a head covering.  He will, however, refuse to hear their confession or commune them.  So, they obey just long enough to get what they want.  I wonder if they think that sacraments taken this way are really of any benefit to them.
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Have you confused 'needs' with 'wants'? Or have I misunderstood you? If we are to put off the old man or woman then the easiest or most comfortable route seems an unlikely Path to Salvation.
When is the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee?

O Lord, I wore my headcovering and get to partake from your Body and Blood while that other woman didn't wear her headcovering and was turned away by our Priest....

EDIT: made corrections
How often does this happen, if at all?

Frankly, this scenario is all hypothetical. For which truly Orthodox Christian lady would haughtily approach the Chalice with her head uncovered if the church has posted that she should cover herself?
That is legalism.  Wasn't that the lesson on the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee?

Maria said:
And which catechumen would dare to approach the Chalice before being baptized or chrismated into Holy Orthodoxy? None that I know. So, why was this side topic brought up?
I was responding to how Punch's Priest handles uncovered women.  Still pertains to covered vs. uncovered cathecumens (I wear a headcovering; I'm better than that woman who doesn't wear a headcovering).
See, now you are revealing your thoughts ...
(I wear a headcovering; I'm better than that woman who doesn't wear a headcovering).
This was not a kind statement, but a rudely judgmental statement.

I do not consider myself better than those women who do not cover themselves. Only Christ can read our hearts and know our thoughts. I try my best not to judge them, but it is very difficult when they have gossiped loudly about me during the Priest's sermon so that I could hear the gossip rather than Father. They were taunting me. And yes, I do pray that they will be saved. Lord have mercy.

And because of this, I have left the OCA as being in their company was not unto my salvation.

Now hear the following which was told to me by catechumens who wear headcovering. These catechmens are not legalistic by any means:

Many women who wear headcoverings do so much like horses wear blinders. It helps them to focus and to control their eyes. They wear it with humility and obedience, and most importantly, it helps them to pray.

So, now we are back on topic as these simple catechumens and converts do not wear the headcovering because they are legalistic, but because they love Christ God and the Orthodox Church and want to obey what was written in the Epistles and has always been taught in the Orthodox Church from the beginning -- that unchanging Faith that was given to us by Christ through the Apostles for all peoples and all times.

Sometimes, it is hot, and then the headcovering is very uncomfortable. I sweat and my hair gets wrecked, but I reflect on Christ and his sufferings. My sufferings are so little compared with what He went through for all of us. The ridicule I have received is so mild with what Christ had to suffer.

Those who follow Christ accept His Cross, and that includes ridicule from those who do not want to adhere to the teachings and traditions of the Holy Orthodox Church.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
49
Location
Portland, Oregon
Maria said:
PeterTheAleut said:
Maria said:
Santagranddad said:
When this question was raised in Greece I heard again and again women saying it cost x to have my hair done and I am not covering it for anyone. Others appeared to think it was old fashioned and unnecessary.

That many also appeared to think low tops and short skirts were appropriate saddened me.

Is it what the Church teaches or do we all do or own thing and then call it Orthodoxy? Surely following Christ is not a case of following the mores and fashions of the times?
Exactly.

And to claim that inquirers and catechumens are being legalistic and proud when they dare to wear head coverings is absolutely insane.

Those who issue these judgments are failing to heed Christ's command not to judge lest we ourselves be judged.

Actually those who claim that catechumens are being legalistic are the strident feminists and wimps who are Orthodox in name only. Sorry for judging the feminists and wimps, but I am saddened by this turn of events. It should not be happening in the Orthodox Church.

Lord have mercy and save us for we perish.
Don't you think that kind of comment extremely hypocritical? You remind us of Christ's command that we not judge, specifically as this governs how we relate to inquirers and catechumens who decide to wear head coverings, yet in the same post you judge as "Orthodox in name only" those who claim that these catechumens are being legalistic. If you're going to cite Christ's command that we not judge, Maria, then you had better practice what you preach.
PtA, I admit that I am a sinner in that post. I could have edited that part out, but then I would have been truly hypocritical.

Hopefully, those who are so quick to condemn catechumens for wearing headcoverings will see their own hypocritical spirit.

We are all hypocrites in need of Christ's mercy.
I posted my reply HERE, since what I had to say is not appropriate for the Convert Issues board.
 

SolEX01

Toumarches
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
13,832
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Central Maryland
Website
www.goarch.org
Maria said:
SolEX01 said:
Maria said:
SolEX01 said:
Santagranddad said:
SolEX01 said:
Punch said:
It is not out of legalism, but out of disobedience.
Do any of us (including Priests and Hierarchs) examine his/her own disobedience?

Punch said:
The Priest will not kick them out of Church for not having a head covering.  He will, however, refuse to hear their confession or commune them.  So, they obey just long enough to get what they want.  I wonder if they think that sacraments taken this way are really of any benefit to them.
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Have you confused 'needs' with 'wants'? Or have I misunderstood you? If we are to put off the old man or woman then the easiest or most comfortable route seems an unlikely Path to Salvation.
When is the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee?

O Lord, I wore my headcovering and get to partake from your Body and Blood while that other woman didn't wear her headcovering and was turned away by our Priest....

EDIT: made corrections
How often does this happen, if at all?

Frankly, this scenario is all hypothetical. For which truly Orthodox Christian lady would haughtily approach the Chalice with her head uncovered if the church has posted that she should cover herself?
That is legalism.  Wasn't that the lesson on the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee?

Maria said:
And which catechumen would dare to approach the Chalice before being baptized or chrismated into Holy Orthodoxy? None that I know. So, why was this side topic brought up?
I was responding to how Punch's Priest handles uncovered women.  Still pertains to covered vs. uncovered cathecumens (I wear a headcovering; I'm better than that woman who doesn't wear a headcovering).
See, now you are revealing your thoughts ...
I was applying the parable of the Publican and the Pharisee to a convert or cathechumen who wears a headcovering and receives preferential treatment for doing so.

Maria said:
(I wear a headcovering; I'm better than that woman who doesn't wear a headcovering).
This was not a kind statement, but a rudely judgmental statement.
How was that statement judgmental?

Maria said:
I do not consider myself better than those women who do not cover themselves. Only Christ can read our hearts and know our thoughts. I try my best not to judge them, but it is very difficult when they have gossiped loudly about me during the Priest's sermon so that I could hear the gossip rather than Father. They were taunting me. And yes, I do pray that they will be saved. Lord have mercy.
Are the OCA Churches in CA that bad or was your former church an isolated example?

Maria said:
And because of this, I have left the OCA as being in their company was not unto my salvation.
Without visiting any other Orthodox Church (at least the ones in Communion with each other).

Maria said:
Now hear the following which was told to me by catechumens who wear headcovering. These catechmens are not legalistic by any means:

Many women who wear headcoverings do so much like horses wear blinders. It helps them to focus and to control their eyes. They wear it with humility and obedience, and most importantly, it helps them to pray.

So, now we are back on topic as these simple catechumens and converts do not wear the headcovering because they are legalistic, but because they love Christ God and the Orthodox Church and want to obey what was written in the Epistles and has always been taught in the Orthodox Church from the beginning -- that unchanging Faith that was given to us by Christ through the Apostles for all peoples and all times.

Sometimes, it is hot, and then the headcovering is very uncomfortable. I sweat and my hair gets wrecked, but I reflect on Christ and his sufferings. My sufferings are so little compared with what He went through for all of us. The ridicule I have received is so mild with what Christ had to suffer.

Those who follow Christ accept His Cross, and that includes ridicule from those who do not want to adhere to the teachings and traditions of the Holy Orthodox Church.
The Pharisee followed the Law of Moses.  That didn't get him very far.  Lord Jesus Christ, son of God, have mercy on me a sinner.
 

Deep Roots

Elder
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
377
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
38
Location
Baltimore
Maria said:
Hopefully, those who are so quick to condemn catechumens for wearing headcoverings or not wearing them will see their own hypocritical spirit.
fixed.  and now is an accurate statement.

By the way, I find it fascinating that it seems that only in Orthodoxy can statements seem so humble on the surface while betraying a profound sense of pride.  It's like a game of limbo -- whoever gets lower wins the game.

Look -- we already covered this re: the op:  The answer is "no," not necessarily.  Be concerned with your own salvation and let others be moved to wear the headcoverings or not wear them, and judge none of them.  But you are not allowed to play the martyr for wearing the headcovering while simultaneously doing the martyring of those who don't.  Just chill out.
 

Punch

Taxiarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
5,799
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
59
Location
Omaha, Nebraska
SolEX01 said:
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Yes, the last thing that MOST people want to hear is the truth.  That is why the liberal churches are so full.  The road to hell is wide.  You don't have to be that exact with your steering when the road is a mile wide.

If a woman approaches confession or communion with here head uncovered, she is given a scarf.  So, I guess you would say that if she refuses it, we should commune her anyway?  As to your above statement, you must not deal with many converts.  In the Churches that I have attended, the converts are the most likely to follow the rules.
 

yeshuaisiam

Protokentarchos
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
4,695
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Maria said:
SolEX01 said:
Santagranddad said:
SolEX01 said:
Punch said:
It is not out of legalism, but out of disobedience.
Do any of us (including Priests and Hierarchs) examine his/her own disobedience?

Punch said:
The Priest will not kick them out of Church for not having a head covering.  He will, however, refuse to hear their confession or commune them.  So, they obey just long enough to get what they want.  I wonder if they think that sacraments taken this way are really of any benefit to them.
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Have you confused 'needs' with 'wants'? Or have I misunderstood you? If we are to put off the old man or woman then the easiest or most comfortable route seems an unlikely Path to Salvation.
When is the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee?

O Lord, I wore my headcovering and get to partake from your Body and Blood while that other woman didn't wear her headcovering and was turned away by our Priest....

EDIT: made corrections
How often does this happen, if at all?

Frankly, this scenario is all hypothetical. For which truly Orthodox Christian lady would haughtily approach the Chalice with her head uncovered if the church has posted that she should cover herself?

And which catechumen would dare to approach the Chalice before being baptized or chrismated into Holy Orthodoxy? None that I know. So, why was this side topic brought up?
I don't think I can be critical of the faith on this section of the forum, but all I can say is that I agree with what Maria has said, and many Eastern Orthodox Christians think as she does on this topic.  

Consider the implication of the icon in Maria's Avatar - the Theotokos, the MOTHER of God,  has her head covered in the presence of God as a babe or small child.
 

mike

Protostrator
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
24,873
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
30
Location
Białystok / Warsaw
yeshuaisiam said:
Consider the implication of the icon in Maria's Avatar - the Theotokos, the MOTHER of God,  has her head covered in the presence of God as a babe or small child.
I thought you despise icons and view them "unbiblical".
 

Punch

Taxiarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
5,799
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
59
Location
Omaha, Nebraska
yeshuaisiam said:
I don't think I can be critical of the faith on this section of the forum, but all I can say is that I agree with what Maria has said, and many Eastern Orthodox Christians think as she does on this topic.  

Consider the implication of the icon in Maria's Avatar - the Theotokos, the MOTHER of God,  has her head covered in the presence of God as a babe or small child.
Amen.  I, too, think that Maria has been right on with her posts, and pretty much in keeping with what I have been taught in the Russian and Serbian Churches.
 

Santagranddad

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Apr 17, 2012
Messages
1,198
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Why is the supposition that young people and others need to feed the easy path so readily pushed. Among those I see taking up following a faith not a few chose anything but the easy path. When reading the Faith section online of London's The Times yesterday a lengthy article focused on the surprising number of women converting to Islam.

True we should avoid judging others, sometimes easier said than done, but challenging or pointing something out is not judging (and that when men need to adjust their dress). And assuming a fanciful and sinful pride in presuming we are better than others has no basis in the Faith handed down to us.

An example in my experience: A very accomplished Archimandrite who often corrects the reader or choir was stopped by a woman over some small error in the service. She was immediately lauded and he asked why she, and she alone had done such a thing before going on to say that all believers had a duty to correct any error he might make in serving immediately the error was made.

Why if a senior priest is open to anyone challenging him should he make a mistake in serving, cannot those who are not appropriately dressed when standing before their maker in church be challenged and accept it humbly?
 

Asteriktos

Strategos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
39,505
Reaction score
267
Points
83
Age
41
A monk must be extremely cautious of carnal and animal zeal, which outwardly appears pious but in reality is foolish and harmful to the soul. Worldly people and many living the monastic life, though ignorance and inexperience, often praise such zeal without understanding that it springs from conceit and pride. They extol this zeal as zeal for the faith, for piety, for the Church, for God. It consists in a more or less harsh condemnation and criticism of one's neighbors in their moral faults, and in faults against good order in church and in the performance of the church services. Deceived by a wrong conception of zeal, these imprudent zealots think that by yielding themselves to it they are imitating the holy fathers and holy martyrs, forgetting that they--the zealots--are not saints, but sinners.

If the saints accused or convicted those who were living in sin or irreligion, they did so at the command of God, as their duty, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, not at the instigation of their passions and demons. Whoever decides  of his own self-will to convict his brother or make some reprimand, clearly betrays and proves that he considers himself more prudent and virtuous than the person he blames, and that he is acting at the instigation of passion and deception and diabolic thoughts. We need to remember the Savior's injunction: 'Why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but not notice the log in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, "Let me take the speck out of your eye," when there is a log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.' (Matt. 7:3-5)

What is a log in this connection? It is the earthly wisdom or carnal outlook, hard as a log, which deprives the heart and mind of all capacity for true vision, so that one is quite unable to judge either one's own inner state or the state of one's neighbor. such a person judges himself and others as he imagines himself to be, and as his neighbors appear to him outwardly, by his carnal mind (Rom. 8:6), mistakenly. And so the Word of God is extremely just in calling him a hypocrite.

A Christian, after being healed by the Word of God and the Spirit of God, gains a true view of his spiritual state and of that of his neighbors. the carnal mind, by striking his neighbor with a log, always upsets and confuses him, often ruins him, never does any good and cannot bring any benefit, and has not the least effect on sin. On the other hand, the spiritual mind acts exclusively on the soul-sickiness of one's neighbor, compassionates, heals and saves him...

If you want to be a true, zealous son of the Orthodox Church, you can do so by the fulfilment of the commandments of the Gospel in regard to your neighbor. Do not dare to convict him. Do not dare to teach him. do not dare to condemn or reproach him. To correct your neighbor in this way is not an act of faith, but of foolish zeal, self-opinion and pride. Poemen the Great was asked, 'What is faith?' The great man replied that faith consists in remaining in humility and showing mercy; that is to say, in humbling onseself before one's neighbors and forgiven them all discourtesies and offenses, all their sins. As foolish zealots make out that faith is the prime cause of their zeal, let them know that truth faith, and consequently also true zeal, must express themselves in humility regarding our neighbors and in mercy towards them. Let us leave the work of judging and convicting people to those persons on whose shoulders it is laid the duty of judging and ruling brethren.

- St. Ignatius Brianchaninov, The Arena: An Offering to Contemporary Monasticism, (Printshop of St. Job of Pochaev, 1997), pp. 140-142
 

SolEX01

Toumarches
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
13,832
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Central Maryland
Website
www.goarch.org
Punch said:
SolEX01 said:
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Yes, the last thing that MOST people want to hear is the truth.  That is why the liberal churches are so full.  The road to hell is wide.  You don't have to be that exact with your steering when the road is a mile wide.
Everybody falls off the road when the road is one inch wide.

Punch said:
If a woman approaches confession or communion with here head uncovered, she is given a scarf.  So, I guess you would say that if she refuses it, we should commune her anyway?
Yes, if she is an Orthodox Christian not subject to any penances, etc.

Punch said:
As to your above statement, you must not deal with many converts.  In the Churches that I have attended, the converts are the most likely to follow the rules.
We deal with converts.  In 2011, I attended a 8 week Introduction to Orthodoxy seminar taught by a convert to Orthodoxy from the Episcopalian faith.  She taught the basic tenets of Orthodoxy.  She didn't discuss headcoverings.
 

yeshuaisiam

Protokentarchos
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
4,695
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Michał Kalina said:
yeshuaisiam said:
Consider the implication of the icon in Maria's Avatar - the Theotokos, the MOTHER of God,  has her head covered in the presence of God as a babe or small child.
I thought you despise icons and view them "unbiblical".
Michal,  

In Maria's statement, she was talking of an EO woman going to partake of the Eucharist uncovered being wrong.  These EO women would venerate an icon (similar) to the one in her avatar showing the Theotokos who covers herself before God.  I have yet to see the any Eastern Orthodox icon that depicts the Theotokos uncovered.
 
However, yes, you are correct about my personal differences with that practice of the church.
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
Punch said:
SolEX01 said:
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Yes, the last thing that MOST people want to hear is the truth.  That is why the liberal churches are so full.  The road to hell is wide.  You don't have to be that exact with your steering when the road is a mile wide.

If a woman approaches confession or communion with here head uncovered, she is given a scarf.  So, I guess you would say that if she refuses it, we should commune her anyway?  As to your above statement, you must not deal with many converts.  In the Churches that I have attended, the converts are the most likely to follow the rules.
Good point.

If a church has a basket in the narthex with scarves in it AND a posting at the door with guidelines that women should wear modest clothing including skirts and headcoverings, then she should obey. If she chooses NOT to wear a headcovering, then she is displaying not only her disobedience but also her pride.
Remember it was Eve who showed her pride and disobedience to God by obeying the Devil.
 

yeshuaisiam

Protokentarchos
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
4,695
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Santagranddad said:
Why is the supposition that young people and others need to feed the easy path so readily pushed. Among those I see taking up following a faith not a few chose anything but the easy path. When reading the Faith section online of London's The Times yesterday a lengthy article focused on the surprising number of women converting to Islam.

True we should avoid judging others, sometimes easier said than done, but challenging or pointing something out is not judging (and that when men need to adjust their dress). And assuming a fanciful and sinful pride in presuming we are better than others has no basis in the Faith handed down to us.

An example in my experience: A very accomplished Archimandrite who often corrects the reader or choir was stopped by a woman over some small error in the service. She was immediately lauded and he asked why she, and she alone had done such a thing before going on to say that all believers had a duty to correct any error he might make in serving immediately the error was made.

Why if a senior priest is open to anyone challenging him should he make a mistake in serving, cannot those who are not appropriately dressed when standing before their maker in church be challenged and accept it humbly?
I have experienced in the EO faith that there is a time and place for everything.  If a woman is dressed somewhat immodestly, a priest (or better yet his wife) may be able to give her a paper on dress code.   There is no reason to "challenge her" by calling her out and embarrassing her.  If she's OBVIOUSLY dressed very immodest (like major cleavage) she can be quietly be given another woman's sweater, jacket, etc.  

Now if she comes dressed like Lady Gaga in a meat suit during lent, I think that's a little bit different.  Call her out.

If a parishoner sees a small/slight error during a service, or issue, nudge it later on.  No reason to call it out.

I've seen priests even correct themselves after divine liturgy on an error they made during the service and corrected themselves.  It was during a litnay and it was a visiting priest who commemorated his GOA bishop instead of the jurisdictional bishop in an OCA church.  After the cross veneration at the end of the service, he made an announcement and said "I have a correction to make, out of habit I commemorated my bishop, and I want to commemorate your bishop XYZ right now".   Most of the church sang "Lord have Mercy".  Then a couple people said "we commemorate yours too".

When we people are brothers and sisters in Christ, we should be able to nudge each other rather than beat people down and get them to humbly accept corrections... Unless of course they wear a meat suit.... Especially thinly sliced lamb cutlets already seasoned with rosemary.

 

yeshuaisiam

Protokentarchos
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
4,695
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Maria said:
Punch said:
SolEX01 said:
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Yes, the last thing that MOST people want to hear is the truth.  That is why the liberal churches are so full.  The road to hell is wide.  You don't have to be that exact with your steering when the road is a mile wide.

If a woman approaches confession or communion with here head uncovered, she is given a scarf.  So, I guess you would say that if she refuses it, we should commune her anyway?  As to your above statement, you must not deal with many converts.  In the Churches that I have attended, the converts are the most likely to follow the rules.
Good point.

If a church has a basket in the narthex with scarves in it AND a posting at the door with guidelines that women should wear modest clothing including skirts and headcoverings, then she should obey. If she chooses NOT to wear a headcovering, then she is displaying not only her disobedience but also her pride.
Remember it was Eve who showed her pride and disobedience to God by obeying the Devil.
Your example is very interesting... Because what did Adam and Eve do once their sin was before them?  They covered themselves up...
Okay, not theological...  Just fun.
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
I was applying the parable of the Publican and the Pharisee to a convert or cathechumen who wears a headcovering and receives preferential treatment for doing so.
This statement of yours is way off topic, and you know it. I will not respond to the rest of your off topic feminist rant.

Back on Topic:

In my experience, converts wearing headcoverings would be rashly judged to be proud and legalistic. This goes against Christ's command not to judge.

If a convert were to wear a headcovering in many of the jurisdictions of World Orthodoxy (especially outside the ROCOR), they would most likely suffer taunts, gossip, and ridicule from other women who hold a feminist agenda. These converts WOULD NOT receive any preferential treatment, but would be shunned by the feminists.
 

SolEX01

Toumarches
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
13,832
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Central Maryland
Website
www.goarch.org
Maria said:
I was applying the parable of the Publican and the Pharisee to a convert or cathechumen who wears a headcovering and receives preferential treatment for doing so.
This statement of yours is way off topic, and you know it. I will not respond to the rest of your off topic feminist rant.
What off topic feminist rant?  ???

Maria said:
Back on Topic:

In my experience, converts wearing headcoverings would be rashly judged to be proud and legalistic. This goes against Christ's command not to judge.

If a convert were to wear a headcovering in many of the jurisdictions of World Orthodoxy (especially outside the ROCOR), they would most likely suffer taunts, gossip, and ridicule from other women who hold a feminist agenda. These converts WOULD NOT receive any preferential treatment, but would be shunned by the feminists.
That's your experience; you don't speak for all female converts to Orthodoxy.
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
yeshuaisiam said:
Maria said:
Punch said:
SolEX01 said:
The last thing a convert (or most people) needs to hear is akriveia (exactness).  The liberal options are so tempting....
Yes, the last thing that MOST people want to hear is the truth.  That is why the liberal churches are so full.  The road to hell is wide.  You don't have to be that exact with your steering when the road is a mile wide.

If a woman approaches confession or communion with here head uncovered, she is given a scarf.  So, I guess you would say that if she refuses it, we should commune her anyway?  As to your above statement, you must not deal with many converts.  In the Churches that I have attended, the converts are the most likely to follow the rules.
Good point.

If a church has a basket in the narthex with scarves in it AND a posting at the door with guidelines that women should wear modest clothing including skirts and headcoverings, then she should obey. If she chooses NOT to wear a headcovering, then she is displaying not only her disobedience but also her pride.
Remember it was Eve who showed her pride and disobedience to God by obeying the Devil.
Your example is very interesting... Because what did Adam and Eve do once their sin was before them?  They covered themselves up...
Okay, not theological...  Just fun.
Yes, they covered up with leaves, and cotton and linen are also from plants.
If Adam and Eve had not committed that first sin, then perhaps, PtA would be glad to be a nudist.
However, we are so tempted in this fallen world that it is best for us to cover.

Since Eve fell first, it is fitting that women cover their heads.

Okay, back on topic.

Converts who wear headcoverings are learning obedience and are trying to undo Eve's disobedience. Since they are imitating the New Eve, the Most Holy Theotokos, who wore the veil even though she was without sin, how can these converts be judged to be legalistic?

Frankly, I think that this is only a slur (a slur that I hear a lot from feminists) to discourage women from wearing headcoverings. These feminists would destroy our church. They are the unscrupulous ones.
 

Maria

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 8, 2003
Messages
14,023
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
Website
www.euphrosynoscafe.com
SolEX01 said:
Maria said:
I was applying the parable of the Publican and the Pharisee to a convert or cathechumen who wears a headcovering and receives preferential treatment for doing so.
This statement of yours is way off topic, and you know it. I will not respond to the rest of your off topic feminist rant.
What off topic feminist rant?   ???

Maria said:
Back on Topic:

In my experience, converts wearing headcoverings would be rashly judged to be proud and legalistic. This goes against Christ's command not to judge.

If a convert were to wear a headcovering in many of the jurisdictions of World Orthodoxy (especially outside the ROCOR), they would most likely suffer taunts, gossip, and ridicule from other women who hold a feminist agenda. These converts WOULD NOT receive any preferential treatment, but would be shunned by the feminists.
That's your experience; you don't speak for all female converts to Orthodoxy.
Are you a convert who wears a headcovering? If not, please be honest and excuse yourself from this thread.

I am a convert and I do wear a headcovering out of obedience.

When I first converted, my priest granted me grace and told me to wear the headcovering only at Communion time. Now I wear it during the entire Divine Liturgy with his blessing and that of my husband. During summer, I would rather not wear it as it is too hot (120 degrees sometimes), but I wear it in obedience disregarding my own discomfort to set a good example, per my priest.
 

SolEX01

Toumarches
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
13,832
Reaction score
16
Points
38
Location
Central Maryland
Website
www.goarch.org
Maria said:
Converts who wear headcoverings are learning obedience
Obedience to what?

Maria said:
and trying to undo Eve's disobedience.
That's already been undone.

Maria said:
Since they are imitating the New Eve, the Most Holy Theotokos, who wore the veil even though she was without sin, how can these converts be judged to be legalistic?
So a convert has to become the Most Holy Theotokos - like the boast of the Pharisee.

Maria said:
Frankly, I think that this is only a slur (a slur that I hear a lot from feminists) to discourage women from wearing headcoverings. These feminists would destroy our church. They are the unscrupulous ones.
In your jurisdiction, feminism doesn't exist?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top