The veil/head cover in monotheistic religions

[riverman]

You're the one who has failed in presenting evidence that Christian women should cover themselves in this manner.
The evidence you have presented demonstrated (possibly) that the veil could have been used historically (culturally)...we already knew that
And...that (possibly) some Christian priests or otherwise have advocated it's use. Which, by the way, is in question because you continually present writings, verses, out of context and within no clear subject.
Even if, we give you the benefit of the doubt, these two facts (if they are) simply do not fulfill the requirements of presenting verses that clearly command women to dress in this garb. So many arguments concerning religious subjects are of this manner, namely convoluded interpretatons, verses always out of context, that it becomes very easy to spot false religious ideas and false, poor interpretations.

[Mary]

You're the one who has failed in presenting evidence that Christian women should cover themselves in this manner.
The evidence you have presented demonstrated (possibly) that the veil could have been used historically (culturally)...we already knew that
And...that (possibly) some Christian priests or otherwise have advocated it's use. Which, by the way, is in question because you continually present writings, verses, out of context and within no clear subject.
Even if, we give you the benefit of the doubt, these two facts (if they are) simply do not fulfill the requirements of presenting verses that clearly command women to dress in this garb. So many arguments concerning religious subjects are of this manner, namely convoluded interpretatons, verses always out of context, that it becomes very easy to spot false religious ideas and false, poor interpretations.

Why do you do this to yourself?

1) Here are some of the applicable Bible passages:

31Now Susanna was exceeding delicate, and beautiful to behold.

32But those wicked men commanded that her face should be uncovered, (for she was covered,) that so at least they might be satisfied with her beauty.

33Therefore her friends and all her acquaintance wept.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...13&version=DRA

65And said to the servant: Who is that man who cometh towards us along the field? And he said to her: That man is my master. But she quickly took her cloak, and covered herself.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...65&version=DRA

6For if a woman be not covered, let her be shorn. But if it be a shame to a woman to be shorn or made bald, let her cover her head.

7The man indeed ought not to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man.

8For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man.

9For the man was not created for the woman, but the woman for the man.

10Therefore ought the woman to have a power over her head, because of the angels.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...11&version=DRA

2) Here are the commentaries by the Church Fathers:

John Chrysostom:

Ver. 6. “But if a woman is not veiled, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be veiled.”

Thus, in the beginning he simply requires that the head be not bare: but as he proceeds he intimates both the continuance of the rule, saying, “for it is one and the same thing as if she were shaven,” and the keeping of it with all care and diligence. For he said not merely covered, but “covered over137,” meaning that she be carefully wrapped up on every side.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf112.iv.xxvii.html

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/sho...&postcount=270

Tertullian:

So perilous a face, then, ought to be shaded, which has cast stumbling-stones even so far as heaven:

But even if she has been recognized by any other, she is wise to have blocked up the pathway against temptations. For who will have the audacity to intrude with his eyes upon a shrouded face? A face without feeling? A face, so to say, morose? Any evil cogitation whatsoever will be broken by the very severity. She who conceals her virginity, by that fact denies even her womanhood.

But we admonish you, too, women of the second (degree of) modesty, who have fallen into wedlock, not to outgrow so far the discipline of the veil, not even in a moment of an hour, as, because you cannot refuse it, to take some other means to nullify it, by going neither covered nor bare. For some, with their turbans and woollen bands, do not veil their head, but bind it up; protected, indeed, in front, but, where the head properly lies, bare. Others are to a certain extent covered over the region of the brain with linen coifs of small dimensions— I suppose for fear of pressing the head— and not reaching quite to the ears. If they are so weak in their hearing as not to be able to hear through a covering, I pity them. Let them know that the whole head constitutes "the woman." Its limits and boundaries reach as far as the place where the robe begins. The region of the veil is co-extensive with the space covered by the hair when unbound; in order that the necks too may be encircled. For it is they which must be subjected, for the sake of which "power" ought to be "had on the head:" the veil is their yoke. Arabia's heathen females will be your judges, who cover not only the head, but the face also, so entirely, that they are content, with one eye free, to enjoy rather half the light than to prostitute the entire face. A female would rather see than be seen.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0403.htm

Clement of Alexandria:

nor is it becoming for any part of a woman to be exposed. Though you may with great propriety use the language addressed to him who said, "Your arm is beautiful; yes, but it is not for the public gaze. Your thighs are beautiful; but, was the reply, for my husband alone. And your face is comely. Yes; but only for him who has married me." But I do not wish chaste women to afford cause for such praises to those who, by praises, hunt after grounds of censure; and not only because it is prohibited to expose the ankle, but because it has also been enjoined that the head should be veiled and the face covered; for it is a wicked thing for beauty to be a snare to men.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02092.htm

Let the woman observe this, further. Let her be entirely covered, unless she happen to be at home. For that style of dress is grave, and protects from being gazed at. And she will never fall, who puts before her eyes modesty, and her shawl; nor will she invite another to fall into sin by uncovering her face. For this is the wish of the Word, since it is becoming for her to pray veiled.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02093.htm

Nikodemus the Hagiorite:

"We read in the Sacred Scripture that, when they left the house, the women of old times were covering not only their head, but also their face.

And until today the women of the Ottomans walk with their cheeks wrapped. Let these be heard by the women of the Christians and let them feel shame!

For this let them force themselves, for the love of God, to straighten this indecency from now on and, when they leave the house, be wrapped on the head with honor and decency, as is becoming Christian women. And if not, they will be condemned on the day of Judgment by the women of the Israelites(the Jews) and of the Pagans!"

[riverman]

And yet none of this are actual verses from the Bible commanding women to be covered in this manner. It is a tradition that is desert/some muslim orientated, whether you or frankly anyone thinks otherwise.
It is your choice to wear the niqab, it's not required by Christianity and it never has been.

[Mary]

If you are challenged when it comes to reading comprehension, I will now explain the concept in pictures:

1) The principle of subjection

Symbols many and diverse have been given both to man and woman; to him of rule, to her of subjection: and among them this also, that she should be covered, while he hath his head bare. If now these be symbols you see that both err when they disturb the proper order, and transgress the disposition of God, and their own proper limits, both the man falling into the woman’s inferiority, and the woman rising up against the man by her outward habiliments.

Ver. 7. “For a man indeed ought not to have his head veiled, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God.”

This is again another cause. “Not only,” so he speaks, “because he hath Christ to be His Head ought he not to cover the head, but because also he rules over the woman.” For the ruler when he comes before the king ought to have the symbol of his rule. As therefore no ruler without military girdle and cloak, would venture to appear before him that hath the diadem: so neither do thou without the symbols of thy rule, (one of which is the not being covered,) pray before God, lest thou insult both thyself and Him that hath honored thee.

And the same thing likewise one may say regarding the woman. For to her also is it a reproach, the not having the symbols of her subjection. “But the woman is the glory of the man.” Therefore the rule of the man is natural.

[5.] Then, having affirmed his point, he states again other reasons and causes also, leading thee to the first creation, and saying thus:

Ver. 8. “For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man.”

But if to be of any one, is a glory to him of whom one is, much more the being an image of him.

Ver. 9. “For neither was the man created for the woman, but the woman for the man.”

This is again a second superiority, nay, rather also a third, and a fourth, the first being, that Christ is the head of us, and we of the woman; a second, that we are the glory of God, but the woman of us; a third, that we are not of the woman, but she of us; a fourth, that we are not for her, but she for us.

Ver. 10. “For this cause ought the woman to have a sign of authority on her head.”

“For this cause:” what cause, tell me? “For all these which have been mentioned,” saith he; or rather not for these only, but also “because of the angels.” “For although thou despise thine husband,” saith he, “yet reverence the angels.”

It follows that being covered is a mark of subjection and authority. For it induces her to look down and be ashamed and preserve entire her proper virtue. For the virtue and honor of the governed is to abide in his obedience.

Again: the man is not compelled to do this; for he is the image of his Lord: but the woman is; and that reasonably. Consider then the excess of the transgression when being honored with so high a prerogative, thou puttest thyself to shame, seizing the woman’s dress. And thou doest the same as if having received a diadem, thou shouldest cast the diadem from thy head, and instead of it take a slave’s garment.

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/sho...&postcount=321

* The man was created in the image and glory of God. Therefore the man is "perfect" as he is.

* The woman was created inferior to the man. And the woman was created for the man. Therefore the woman is in subjection to the man.

* The veil symbolizes that the woman is inferior and in subjection. It is a marker of rank.

2) How do we know this means a Christian woman has to cover her face?

Because if the woman only covers her head, the difference in rank disappears:





You cannot see that the woman is in subjection to the man here.

But if the woman covers her face:



Here you can clearly see that the woman is below the man in rank.

(Sorry for using a Muslim picture, but it was the best example I found)

[riverman]

Mary, seriously, I'm through arguing with you. We can agree to disagree. You know that I have never opposed your right to wear what you want. You have your interpretation of Biblical scripture and as unique as it is, that is your right.

[Mary]

And yet none of this are actual verses from the Bible commanding women to be covered in this manner. It is a tradition that is desert/some muslim orientated, whether you or frankly anyone thinks otherwise.
It is your choice to wear the niqab, it's not required by Christianity and it never has been.

Did you miss these very obvious passages:

31Now Susanna was exceeding delicate, and beautiful to behold.

32But those wicked men commanded that her face should be uncovered, (for she was covered,) that so at least they might be satisfied with her beauty.

33Therefore her friends and all her acquaintance wept.

This is from the Bible: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...13&version=DRA

7The man indeed ought not to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man.

8For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man.

9For the man was not created for the woman, but the woman for the man.

10Therefore ought the woman to have a power over her head, because of the angels.

From the Bible: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...11&version=DRA

This comment by Clement:

it has also been enjoined that the head should be veiled and the face covered

This comment by Nikodemus:

"We read in the Sacred Scripture that, when they left the house, the women of old times were covering not only their head, but also their face.

[Mary]

Mary, seriously, I'm through arguing with you. We can agree to disagree. You know that I have never opposed your right to wear what you want. You have your interpretation of Biblical scripture and as unique as it is, that is your right.

One more time:

32But those wicked men commanded that her face should be uncovered, (for she was covered,) that so at least they might be satisfied with her beauty.

Bible: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...13&version=DRA

Does it say that her face was covered?

Yes...

Does it say that the men who wanted to uncover her face were wicked?

Yes.

There has to be a limit to the denial.

[riverman]

lol It's not a commandment, Mary, and you know it. Christianity is shaped by culture, and certainly in the context of the Orthodox churches, of which you claim to be an adherent to, it is neither asked or demanded by the clergy.
Think about it, why aren't Christian clergy, who know far more about scripture than you, demanding that women do this...the obvious answer is that it's not a Christian tradition.
Even further, only some muslim women do this, it's not even a 'standard' muslim tradition.
1. Cultural garb, pre-Islam, worn by some
2. Islamic garb, worn by some, taken from previous cultural usage

You simply cannot contort this into a Christian tradition or commandment.

[Mary]

lol It's not a commandment, Mary, and you know it. Christianity is shaped by culture, and certainly in the context of the Orthodox churches, of which you claim to be an adherent to, it is neither asked or demanded by the clergy.
Think about it, why aren't Christian clergy, who know far more about scripture than you, demanding that women do this...the obvious answer is that it's not a Christian tradition.
Even further, only some muslim women do this, it's not even a 'standard' muslim tradition.
1. Cultural garb, pre-Islam, worn by some
2. Islamic garb, worn by some, taken from previous cultural usage

You simply cannot contort this into a Christian tradition or commandment.

1) Do you acknowledge that the face veil is in the Bible?

32But those wicked men commanded that her face should be uncovered, (for she was covered,) that so at least they might be satisfied with her beauty.

Source: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...13&version=DRA

2) How do we know if we have to follow it?



That's the whole point of the Bible.

3) We look at commentaries by religious authorities:

"We read in the Sacred Scripture that, when they left the house, the women of old times were covering not only their head, but also their face.

And until today the women of the Ottomans walk with their cheeks wrapped. Let these be heard by the women of the Christians and let them feel shame!

For this let them force themselves, for the love of God, to straighten this indecency from now on and, when they leave the house, be wrapped on the head with honor and decency, as is becoming Christian women. And if not, they will be condemned on the day of Judgment by the women of the Israelites(the Jews) and of the Pagans!"

- Nikodemus the Hagiorite

There's no debate about this, it says very clearly what you're supposed to do. There is even condemnation on the Day of Judgment involved, if you don't do it.

In what way is this not clear? There are two options:

a) Cover your face in subjection
b) Condemnation on the Day of Judgment

There is no:

c) It's not a commandment so I don't have to do it
d) It's just Mary's interpretation so I can ignore it
e) No priest ever told me to

[Mary]

The face veil should also cover the eyes. It comes out in Clement's text.

For it is common to both to be covered, as it is to eat and drink. The necessity, then, being common, we judge that the provision ought to be similar. For as it is common to both to require things to cover them, so also their coverings ought to be similar; although such a covering ought to be assumed as is requisite for covering the eyes of women.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02092.htm

But feminine motions, dissoluteness, and luxury, are to be entirely prohibited. For voluptuousness of motion in walking, "and a mincing gait," as Anacreon says, are altogether meretricious.

"As seems to me," says the comedy, "it is time to abandon meretricious steps and luxury." And the steps of harlotry lean not to the truth; for they approach not the paths of life. Her tracks are dangerous, and not easily known. The eyes especially are to be sparingly used, since it is better to slip with the feet than with the eyes. Accordingly, the Lord very summarily cures this malady: "If your eye offend you, cut it out," He says, dragging lust up from the foundation. But languishing looks, and ogling, which is to wink with the eyes, is nothing else than to commit adultery with the eyes, lust skirmishing through them. For of the whole body, the eyes are first destroyed. "The eye contemplating beautiful objects (καλά), gladdens the heart;" that is, the eye which has learned rightly (καλῶς) to see, gladdens. "Winking with the eye, with guile, heaps woes on men." Proverbs 10:10 Such they introduce the effeminate Sardanapalus, king of the Assyrians, sitting on a couch with his legs up, fumbling at his purple robe, and casting up the whites of his eyes. Women that follow such practices, by their looks offer themselves for prostitution. "For the light of the body is the eye," says the Scripture, by which the interior illuminated by the shining light appears. Fornication in a woman is in the raising of the eyes. Sirach 26:9

"Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, and concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: for which things' sake comes the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience," Colossians 3:5-6 cries the apostle.

But we enkindle the passions, and are not ashamed.

Let the woman observe this, further. Let her be entirely covered, unless she happen to be at home. For that style of dress is grave, and protects from being gazed at. And she will never fall, who puts before her eyes modesty, and her shawl; nor will she invite another to fall into sin by uncovering her face. For this is the wish of the Word, since it is becoming for her to pray veiled.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02093.htm