Saturday, December 27, 2008

Just Do It

Plain Sabbath Keeper writes in: "What road are you walking on?"
on December 25, 2008:

Mat 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

Mat 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

. . .

Don't worry about what the world thinks or your relatives. You are obeying GOD, and are an example to your children and to the watching world.The very first headcovering I wore was a pillow case, and my Husband cut it around the back so it would look more like a head covering( This was before I learned how to sew) and my sons played soccer at the time, and I went in front of all those Baptist Moms at the soccer game with that pillow case on my head. It is comical to think about it now, but that is what GOD was telling me to do, and I wanted GOD to see I was not ashamed to obey His Word.

Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.

Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Be encouraged.

Friday, December 26, 2008

Making Head Coverings for Others

"Montclair woman makes hats for the ill"
Jonathan Hunley, News & Messenger []
Published: December 24, 2008
Michele Hirata's life changed five years ago.

Her husband was in the Air Force in Monterey, Calif., and the couple was at a Christmas party. Another partygoer asked what she did for a living.

"I'm an artist," Hirata responded.

Only she wasn't an artist. She was a bank underwriter.

Her husband, Jeff, laughed.

But when 2004 rolled around, Michele Hirata had left that bank.

The blonde-haired woman with the easy smile has been an artist ever since. Her work hangs not on museum walls but on the heads of grateful souls worldwide. And her payment comes not in cold cash but in warm hearts.

Before that Christmas party, in August 2003, Hirata lost her mother to breast cancer, and she wanted to do something to express herself. So the next month, her mother-in-law taught her to crochet. She later taught herself to knit.

Six months later, "at 2 a.m. on a chilly winter night," according to her Web site, she used her new skills to find the answer to her mother's biggest struggle during her 17-year bout with cancer: losing her hair.

That's when Hirata made her first chemo hat, a toque made of T-shirt material that hugs the noggin and eases the frustration of living with a head injury or an illness that causes hair loss.

She's donated more than a thousand of the head coverings to folks as far away as China, Japan and England.

"This is the way I give back," said Hirata, who's lived in Montclair since March.

More of this story at the title link above. Also see the homepage:


"Fashioning warmth for soldiers"

by BRANDON SMITH, Wilmington News Journal
There was a time when, from the comfort of their own homes, America’s housewives would knit and sew clothing and blankets for the country’s soldiers.

It happened during Colonial times and during the Civil War. But it’s happening again, and one Wilmington woman is participating.

“I want to do anything I can for those young men,” said Helen Kleinman, a Wilmington resident whose son is serving in Iraq. “We owe them.”

Iraq and Afghanistan may be hot in the summer and the daytime, but temperatures there can drop below zero in the winter and/or at night, said Sue Pflederer, who leads a project called “Operation Helmetliner.” The project directs knitters across the country to fashion wool head coverings with a certain pattern and send them her way, to be sent to soldiers in the field.

Some soldiers are based in remote outposts where temperatures can be even more frigid, said Pflederer. In these places, access to items like hats and scarves is limited or nonexistent.

From her Wilmington home, Kleinman has fashioned and sent more than a dozen embroidered quilt patches. Her patches feature a stately eagle and a message that the quilt was made for soldiers by appreciative volunteers. Kleinman’s patches are stitched onto quilts, made by others, that are intended to cover wounded soldiers transported by cargo planes without heat. This is apparently a common occurrence, said Pflederer.

“Thousands” of ordinary people are helping American soldiers stay warm and know they are appreciated, according to the group’s Web site. This time the effort includes more than just housewives.

The group is called Citizen S.A.M., Citizen Support for America’s Military, and is based in Peoria, Ill. Volunteers from across the country have used Citizen S.A.M.’s patterns and guidelines to make things for soldiers and send them to Peoria, where they are then sent to a unit of soldiers in the field.

For more story, please click the title link above. Also see Operation Helmetliner at the website.

Discussing Head Veils

"General Discussion: Head Veils"

Interesting discussion with much personal example at the MusicaSacra forum

Following up on Headcoverings in Court

"Judge should apologize in head covering incident"
By Abed A. Ayoub, From News Services, Atlanta [Georgia] Journal Constitution,
December 26, 2008

A Douglasville woman was jailed recently for refusing to remove her hijab, the traditional Muslim head covering, in court. This calls into question whether constitutional rights ceased to exist in the Douglasville municipal courtroom of Judge Keith Rollins.

The hijab is worn by millions of Muslim women in accordance with their belief in Islam. Some choose to wear a hijab, a symbol of modesty, while others do not. There are many variations of the hijab; some women cover only their hair while others cover everything but their eyes, a style commonly seen in Muslim countries such as Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia.

In America, a majority of Muslim women who choose to wear a hijab cover only their hair, leaving the face visible for identification, as was the case with the woman sent to jail by Rollins.

The judge should note that followers of other religions observe the practice of headwear. Asking a Muslim woman to remove her hijab upon entering a courtroom is similar to asking a nun to remove her religious habit, a Jewish man to remove his yarmulke or a Sikh man to remove his turban.

The acts of Rollins are not only discriminatory, they are also unconstitutional.

Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prevents an individual from being deprived of or threatened with the loss of equal protection of the laws on account of race, color, religion or national origin by being denied equal use of any public facility. Denial of access to a courtroom based on religion is blatant discrimination. According to the Constitution as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, the only way a state may infringe upon the free exercise of a citizen’s religious observance is if a compelling state interest exists to justify such action. There clearly is no compelling state interest to deny individuals wearing any type of religious headwear access to justice in this fashion.

Rollins defended this unconstitutional act by pointing to a courtroom rule that prohibits head coverings. Most judges do not allow headwear, such as baseball caps, in order to preserve the integrity of the courtroom. Asking an individual to remove a baseball cap is not the same as asking him or her to remove religious headwear.

As a judge, Rollins is held to a higher moral and ethical standard. Rather than preserve the integrity of his courtroom, Rollins has done the opposite. Georgia citizens must ask how they can live in a nation free of discrimination and racial profiling when the very practices that civil rights activists from Georgia fought to abolish are being exhibited foolishly in the courtroom. For Georgia to live up to the mantra of “The New South,” acts such as those exhibited by the judge must be corrected.

Rollins has been entrusted with upholding the constitutional rights of all who enter his courtroom. It is time for him to issue a public apology for denying an individual’s access to justice. Furthermore, the courtroom policy should be amended to allow religious headwear in the courtroom; it is hard to believe that head coverings for religious observance are disrespectful in any way.

The American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) believes that all individuals, regardless of race, ethnicity or religion, should be granted access to justice and we know that the people of Georgia, who have long been engaged in the fight for civil rights, share in our belief.

Abed A. Ayoub is legal advisor for the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), based in Washington, D.C.

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

December Headcoverings by LisaMe

Covering Your Head (clockwise) for Cold and Snow, Eid al Adha, St. Lucia's Day, Kwanzaa, Yule, Chanukkah, Christmas, Santa Claus Day...

Monday, December 22, 2008

Thinking About Christian Headcovering

Several articles have reached my attention, which you may want to read, concerning women who cover their heads to pray and that passage of reading in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16.

"the voice of one crying in suburbia" has written before concerning these verses, and his family's growth in understanding this concept of women's headcovering. He's posted a response to the article that I referred to a few days ago, which discussed the concept of headcovering as a moot point in scripture, as per "exegesis". Please see his entry from December 21, 2008: "Headcovering and exegesis."

"The Family Revised" presents a very interesting personal point of view of a woman's hair (her own), and this passage in 1 Corinthians 11, on December 21, 2008: "Thoughts On My Hair". I really appreciated her thoughts here and encourage others to read.

Responding to a comment on his headcovering wife's blog about obedience and salvation, also read "If we walk in the light", December 18, 2008, "Obeying God- A salvation issue?"

Also read "Plain Sabbath Keeper"'s invitation to join her Yahoo group for "Veiled, Sabbath Keeping, Homeschoolers", as she encourages: "though you feel alone, like Elijah, GOD said there were 7,000 left that were serving Him, and have not knelt down to Baal, and Sisters that is still true. You may be the only one in your town, and even your county, that is wearing a head covering and dresses, and Homeschooling and all the other commandments GOD has given us, But feel encouraged Dear Sister, you are not all alone." This blogger has also provided a 4 part study of headcovering recently, beginning here at "part 1".

For more information on conservative Christians who also practice headcovering by women, check the article in The Ventura [California] Star: "Mennonite community", who live in the county there. Video from this article:

Friday, December 19, 2008

Shopping for pretty headcoverings

You might want to check out the new Etsy shop: "Happy Homestead". The creator is Christian blogger Melissa, of "Titus 2 Wife and Mommy". They offer home made plain or fancy coverings and headbands in many different styles and colors for women and girls. These are simple and attractive. Nice work, Ladies!


Not to take away from Happy Homestead, but I want to remind my readers to please check out the other Etsy shops offering homemade headcoverings. Click here to link to 133 listings at Etsy for "head covering" and the 107 listings for "headcovering" (one word). I believe you must sign up on Etsy to order from these individuals, but this is perhaps worth looking into.

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Another short discussion Christians not covering

"Head Coverings"

Does Paul teach in 1 Cor. 11:3-16 that women must wear a head covering when they are “praying in worship” or not? Please prove by sound exegesis.

Submitted by Brian to "The Ironing Board" at wordpress
December 17, 2008

For those who have studied this issue before, there's nothing new here. For those who haven't, the discussion shows a few simplified descriptions of different interpretations of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16, using "exegesis" and "hermeneutics". If you like that sort of thing.


For a similar discussion, but in female, less pedantic, and with censored comments, check "Keeping the Home", scroll down to: Monday, December 15, 2008
Are Christian Women to Cover Their Heads?

She has 41 comments there, including her own responses.

EDIT: This blogger has posted again on this subject, in a "part 2" at this address.

I found this article through an article at "
Visits to Candyland: Head Covering" - a Catholic blogger who disagrees with this writer.

Hebrew Roots Discussion

"Head Coverings - Men? Women?"
Posted by Yiska on December 16, 2008

Interesting thoughts and comments, especially from one commenter from India

Story we're following: head coverings in court

"Muslim Arrested Over Headscarf In Courtroom"
Wednesday, December 17, 2008 – updated: 12:15 am EST December 18, 2008
from, happening in Douglasville, Georgia

My thanks to Lucy for first bringing this story to my attention. I've seen several reports from different points of view about what happened since, but the short story is that a Muslim lady accompanied a family member to a court hearing, was told that she would not be allowed in with her head covering on, and when she got angry she was put in jail for contempt of court. Was it because she was wearing a head covering and refused to take it off? Did she get belligerent with the official? Did the officials behave badly first?

Though I've not been able to follow the stories in the news and blogs closely lately (I have quite a backlog of interesting looking articles to read), this will be one story that I will try to follow, for the US American reaction. As the husband of the woman points out in the interview, which you can watch at this link, the outcome really does pertain to everyone of any style of faith who chooses to put something on their head, from Sikhs to Jews to Mennonites to Catholics to Muslims and so on. What is the US law? And what is the US heart?

"CAIR Seeks Sanctions Against Anti-Hijab Judge in Georgia" -


EDIT: Adding this blog article, because I like it.

Heading in the wrong direction
Posted by: Marcella, at wordpress, December 18, 2008

Purple. Red with golden tassels. Olive drab with strands of fabric shimmering through like gossamer. As a student in Egypt, this sea of warm fabrics and cool colors bobbing along in a crowd was my first introduction to the hijab in any practical way. I thought it strange back then, that women would wear such things comfortably, and from my young, Western viewpoint, saw it as discriminatory. Why should a woman HAVE to wear such a thing, I wondered, shaking my head at the apparent chauvinism of Islam.

And then, becuase I was in Egypt to learn, and study society, I did. I asked women what they thought of their headcoverings, and whether or not they ever felt oppressed by them. And I’m not speaking for all of them, certainly, but I spoke with enough women to understand that a headscarf is more than just a piece of fabric required by the religion. it was a symbol of beauty, and act of expression even, and a means of keeping somthing special under wraps. Literally.

“when a woman is covered, men cannot judge her by her appearance but are forced to evaluate her by her personality, character, and morals,” said Sumayya Syed during a recent discussion posted on Islam for Today.

I myself heard this over and over and over again, and eventually, came to beleive it. And at times, desire it for myself. How many times have I felt undressed by someone’s eyes, unwillingly? I will admit that the “judgement of morals” thing might not always be the best thing for me because sometimes I want that visual striptease to be an option, but many times, I would rather be looked at with interest for the intelligence apparent in words leaving my mouth, not the apparent pleasure of what might be able to go in it.

So in the past few days, as news of that judge in Georgia has incited anger and respect among different groups of people, I’m saddened to hear that most people still think of the hijab as something shameful, or disrespectul. I wonder if our culture will ever get it.

Monday, December 15, 2008

History of Iranian Dress and Fashion

What study of head coverings and modest dress would be complete without a good look into Muslim and Middle Eastern attire? Who influences who? I found this history, with plenty of illustrations, pretty interesting:

"History of Iranian Fashion"

(illustration of Qajar woman from this website)

Headscarves OK in Sweden

Directly quoting:
Headscarf Issue Alive In Sweden
December 15th, 2008 by Fred Stopsky of "The Impudent Observer"

The world is suffering from a severe economic crisis, terrorism has devastated people of Mumbai, Israel and Palestinians still fight one another, but for some reason, the issue of what a girl wears on the top of her head is a dominant issue for some people. During the 1960s, men and women went crazy over a boy who wore his hair long, and now in the first decade of the 21st century, a major concern for some is the headscarf. A Muslim student in a Swedish school was told she could not wear her headscarf because somehow it interfered with her work in school. The student was in a hotel and catering course that entails a period of time working in a hotel. But, the hotel refused to accept the girl unless she removed her headscarf.

The young lady refused to abandon her headscarf and sued the school district. The Swedish Ombundsman against Discrimination(DO) awarded the young lady damages of $7,400 and said she had a right to wear the headscarf. The hotel apologized and the ban on wearing a headscarf has been lifted. Now, if we could resolve other religious issues in such an easy manner….

See also this article in "The Local: Sweden's News in English".

If you're interested in head coverings in Sweden, you might also find this gender-differences story interesting, from the same news source: "Boys blocked from bearing 'girls-only' Lucia crown."

Thursday, December 11, 2008

Following up on the Headcovering Obligation Truth

St. Louis Catholic, who posted the essay the other day explaining why wearing a headcovering is still an obligation for women attending Catholic mass, has published quite an interesting observation about the experience.

10 December 2008
"Some Early Thoughts on the Veiling Fallout"

I was so impressed with the first point made that I actually laughed. Not because it was funny, but because, I guess, it was so novel. It begins with a listing of all the post titles for the past little while, together with the number of comments garnered on each subject. Then the author writes:

I thank everyone who took the time to comment, whether they were impressed by, depressed by, unconcerned with, or just amused by the argument. One of the more common "anti" requirement arguments was that this issue was minor, or that it didn't matter much compared to other, bigger issues of the day facing the Church.

Yet, I must say, 78 comments on veiling posts versus 6 on other posts, ranging in matters from the St. Stan's lawsuit; advocating world government; the Immaculate Conception; the new head of an important Vatican dicastery; and high political corruption makes me think that though other matters are "more important", they sure don't rile people up like putting on a head covering at Mass.

OK, I guess the tongue in cheek attitude also had a hand in my response.


Note: There's also a huge comment list on a post at "What Does The Prayer Really Say?" in response to his reply to the question "what to wear?" to a traditional Latin mass. In the reply, he wrote: "You are not obliged to wear a head covering, but it is a wonderful custom which I bet you would get used to quickly and really like once you did. " Though not every comment is specifically headcovering oriented, I did not take the time to count all the responses.

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

But is headcovering going to remain obligatory in Islam?

Found quote in concerning Turkish foreign policy with Iran:

The veil worn by observant Muslim women is once again stirring anger in Egypt over its religious function. Is it a duty or an option? The radical organizations offer all the suitable quotations from the Koran and the important adjudicators to "prove" that Mohammed literally meant for every woman to hide her face and hands, and not to make do merely with a head covering. They believe that the eyes are the gate to the woman's soul and therefore need to be hidden. On the other hand, the sages belonging to the centrist stream of Islam believe that the veil does not appear in any of the precepts of Islam and that, at most, this is a custom which must be permitted. But of course, as usual, this is not a purely religious-legal argument aimed at fixing the way in which Muslim must women appear in public. The argument is political.

At a time when the Egyptian government is investing vast efforts to uproot religious fanaticism and is not merely making do with the arrests of members of the Muslim Brotherhood organization, but is banning women with veils from appearing as announcers on TV programs and postponing the appointment of women as religious instructors because they wear veils, the following initiative is merely the next obvious step on the way to the religious de-legitimization of the veil.

With this, I refer to a new book being published by Egypt's Wakf Ministry, written by cabinet minister, Mohammed Hamdi, who is a religious sage and religious law analyst. In the book, he "proves" through signs and omens that wearing a veil is not a religious edict but rather a custom, and as such it enjoys a lower status; with this, it will soon be possible to call for the custom to be uprooted altogether. The co-authors of the book, which will be distributed to all the imams in Egypt's 140,000 mosques, include the head of the Al-Azhar Mosque, the most important religious institution in Egypt, and the mufti of Egypt. Hamdi explained that the veil is not merely the result of a radical religious point of view, it even creates it.

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

"The Truth Unveiled" - Headcovering Obligatory in Mass

8 December 2008, in St. Louis Catholic at
"The Truth Unveiled: Head Covering Still Obligatory for Women Attending Mass"

A few notes follow:

In conducting a proper analysis of the question, one must retrace the scriptural, patristic, and canonical history of the practice in order to determine properly its value.
To begin, in I Cor. XI, 5, St. Paul declares: “[E]very woman praying or prophesying with her head not covered, disgraceth her head: for it is all one as if she were shaven.” As it is not known when St. Paul confirmed the Jewish and Roman practice of women wearing a head covering when praying, it qualifies as a true immemorial custom, because the exact date upon which it became binding upon women in the Church is beyond the memory of anyone. As St. Paul declares that his teaching is not his own, the custom could even have been confirmed by Christ the Lord Himself. Cf. 1 Cor. XIV, 37.
. . .on June 21, 1969 – after the new Roman Missal had been promulgated by Pope Paul VI – then Msgr. Annibale Bugnini, the prelate appointed by the Pope to draft the rubrics of the new Missal, issued a statement to the Press specifying that at no time had the requirement of head-covering been abrogated: “[T]he rule has not been changed.”

This essay is followed by much discussion in the comments.

Saturday, December 6, 2008

Muslim Head Scarf in Europe and the US

Because what affects those in one part of the world affects all of us.

"French Headscarf Ban Not Discrimination, Says European Court"
05.12.2008, in
Copied article:
Europe’s top courts have ruled in favor of a French school that expelled two Muslim girls for refusing to remove their headscarves for physical education classes. The ruling fuels the debate over secularism in France.

The European Court of Human Rights has dismissed a complaint by two French Muslim girls that their school violated their freedom of religion and their right to an education. The girls were expelled after repeatedly refusing to remove their headscarves for physical education classes.

photo: "Headscarves have been banned in French schools" from website

The teacher had said that wearing a headscarf was incompatible with physical education classes. The girls, Belgin Dogru and Esma-Nur Kervanci, are French nationals and were 11 and 12 respectively when they were expelled from the school in the north-western town of Flers in 1999.

For secularism's sake

Based in Strasbourg, the European Court of Human Rights ruled on Thursday, Dec. 4 that the school's move to expel the girls was not out of line, emphasizing that the girls had been able to continue their education via correspondence classes.

"It was clear that the applicants' religious convictions were fully taken into account in relation to the requirements of protecting the rights and freedoms of others and public order," the court said in a press release.

A Muslim woman adjusts the headscarf of a young girl Bildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Religion has no place in France's schools

The court also observed that the purpose of the restriction on the applicants' right to manifest their religious convictions was to adhere to the requirements of secularism, a hot topic of debate in France.

Secularism is taken very seriously in the country's state schools, and in 2004 a law was passed that bans pupils from wearing conspicuous signs of their religion at school.

France is home to Europe's largest Muslim minority.

"Morocco moves to drop headscarf"
By Richard Hamilton, BBC News, Rabat; from
From the introduction to the article:
Morocco is making major changes to religious education, in particular regarding whether young girls should wear headscarves.A picture of a mother and her daughter wearing headscarves is being removed from the latest editions of a text book.A verse from the Koran that says girls should don veils has already been taken out of the books.Other Arab countries have made similar changes, worrying that the veil could be used as a symbol of extremism.

photo of picture removed from text book from this website


"Women’s Liberation"
in, 2008-12-06

As I witnessed the ensuing barrage on Islam, Islamic values and culture, and the infamous declaration of the ‘new crusade’, I started to notice something called Islam. Today I am still a feminist, but a Muslim feminist, says Sara Bokker.
Sara Bokker begins by telling where she comes from: "I am an American woman who was born in the midst of America’s “Heartland.” I grew up, just like any other girl, being fixated with the glamour of life in “the big city.” Eventually, I moved to Florida and on to South Beach of Miami, a hotspot for those seeking the “glamorous life.”" She also writes:
Most of the women I know wearing Niqab are Western reverts, some of whom are not even married. Others wear Niqab without full support of either family or surroundings. What we all have in common is that it is the personal choice of each and every one of us, which none of us is willing to surrender.

An interesting and insightful personal experience with the coverings that are now verboten in much of Europe. Will her rights to cover her head in North America also be taken away in our secular world? Will mine?

History of Hats

Wisdom: The folklore of hats

By MICHAEL HICKEY, of (Marco Island, FL), December 5, 2008

A rather sweet and concise little article about the history and use of hats, mostly in the Western Male persuasion. But ending very sweetly with a little verse. Information that's enjoyable to read.


December 5, 2008, in "Thoughts of a Sober White Woman": "discriminated"

what happens when a woman, who doesn't usually, puts on an Eastern looking headcovering...

Friday, December 5, 2008

Blogging about Christian Headcovering

Here's a few posts over the past little while:

Why I Have Chosen to Wear a Head Covering
November 5, 2008, "(posted with permission by Love4Holiness)"

Church Etiquette

December 2, 2008, "the joy of my youth"
includes this helpful advice:
1. Women should have their shoulders, knees, and head covered while in church. However, this doesn't mean that women should wear overly baggy sweaters and shapeless skirts. It is still important to look like a woman and not a pauper. It is possible to embrace your femininity without sacrificing modesty. Head covering is preferable and not necessarily required (though this fact is debatable). It should be done with a veil (of appropriate color for your life state, etc) or a nice looking hat that is appropriate in style. Women who have never married should wear white or an ivory colored veil while married women wear black. Young girls should be held to the same standards as women to the best extent possible (ie - it may be difficult to keep a little viel on the head of a young toddler!). Also, colored veils are pretty, but look pretty juvenile on a grown woman. They look best on young girls.

Head Coverings: Should women wear them in church?
Head Coverings: Should women wear them in church? (part 2)
December 1,2, 2008, Reformation Faith Today
poster does not think that headcoverings are required

Head Coverings: Part 1 Geneva Bible

December 01, 2008, Benjamin Shaw... Associate Professor of Old Testament at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary
believing that headcovering is a social/cultural thing, based on understanding of the Geneva Bible and people of that culture

Q&A Fridays, Issue #46
12.04.2008, Michael Bunker, "A Process Driven Life"
"Christian Agrarian"
scroll down to the first question, does a divorced woman still need to cover her head?
includes these thoughts:
We should remember that the headcovering is not a punishment, it is a blessing and a sign of God's great order and glory. Women who veil themselves willfully out of obedience to God, find that it frees them from so many worldly errors, and gives them a sense of peace and belonging in God's kingdom. It should never be considered a burden.

Womans Headcoverings - Part 01 and Part 02
By Craig Simpson, "Find the Light Study Library"
Christadelphian, podcast

On Veil
December 05, 2008 - "Crazy Tune"
Orthodox Catholic
photos and historical references to the tradition of headcovering, including these comments:
I am not wise enough to say much about head coverings. But veil (head coverings) is a beautiful thing in my opinion. When I saw people wear head coverings back home in Indonesia, I put more respect to those women, for it gives a sign of contradiction in the world that glorify immodesty.

What Modesty Does to Your Life
December 4, 2008 — Anna, of "Veiled Glory"
from her video files... :)

Playing on the Edges...
December 2, 2008 - "Testimony of Grace"
with photos of her pretty new wrap style :)

Monday, December 1, 2008


Two Mannequins by LisaMe

This really wasn't made as an insult to anyone. The idea came into my head as I was thinking about all the mix of cultures around here, and the coming holiday season, and the ignorance of some people... me included... which can always use a little education. Just a little levity, I hope.

And I hope everyone in enjoying their December.

Veiling the Sacred

"The Secular War on the Supernatural"
Article by Dr. Alice Von Hildebrand, July 17, 2006

This article explains with much information the problem of forgetting the supernatural in the church, specifically the Catholic Church. I am not Catholic, and so some of this was very helpful to me in understanding the sacredness of the traditional Catholic Church. In our modern era, sacred things are forgotten, as we all seem to strive to make everyone equal. But there are secular things which are strongly representative of supernatural truths. One of those talked about much in this article is the female person, and so, we come to the section on veiling:

And this is why the female body should be veiled because everything which is sacred calls for veiling. When Moses came down form Mount Sinai, he veiled his face. Why did he veil his face? Because he had spoken to God and at that very moment there was a sacredness that called for veiling.

Now the . . . feminists after Vatican II suddenly “discovered” that when women go to Church veiled, it is a sign of their inferiority. The man takes off his hat and the woman puts on a veil. My goodness, how they have lost the sense of the supernatural. Veiling indicates sacredness and it is a special privilege of the woman that she enters church veiled.
Please read the entire article at the link above, to understand more of what the author is saying.

Saturday, November 29, 2008

Headcovering Patterns

Heather's Hook, November 29, 2008: "Great Headband/Headcovering Patterns Online"

How many times is my blog hit by people looking for head covering patterns? I'm not sure. These days, for the Northern Hemisphere, they're mainly looking for warm head scarves, but for those who like wide headband style head coverings, you'll find some cute patterns. Maybe they could even be altered by those who feel these are not true headcoverings. Or you could use them with a full scarf as an accessory. Click Heather's link above to view; then click the photos for full instructions.

Argumentation of Oppression

Dave, of DSmith7110Fall08 at blogspot, November 27, 2008: "Argumentum ad Hominem & Cultural relativism"

Did you study argumentation and debate in school? Then some of this might sound familiar. Regardless, you might find this short blog entry concerning reasoning skills interesting, or even helpful. This article seems to be covering some discussions in a classroom setting, where feminism and, in particular, wearing of hijab and long hair, were topics. Once again, I am not promoting nor am I putting down any personal statements here; I only present this to help those who are seeking understanding in these matters. It is often said by head covering women that "I cover my head, not my mind." Let us all be careful not to cover our minds in considering faith and obedience, especially in generalizing reasons for head coverings among large groups of people. Here is a portion of the entry:

Let's consider a case in point from class. There was a brief discussion on the Muslim Hijab which somehow morphed into long hair on women in American holiness churches. When it was suggested that possibly the women under consideration (either Muslim or Holiness) chose to wear the associated head dress, it was stated that this was clearly oppression and that only a [white] male would make such a statement. Now that, my friends, is a classic example of an ad homimen argument, meaning this: since x male made the claim and y female said it was oppressive, then ipso facto the male was in error because he was a male. The behavior as relates to women's head dress had already been deemed oppressive (whatever that means), so any argument to the contrary, especially when made by a male, is therefore invalid. But where is the evidence? Is it possible that western culture is being read into either situation to deem it "oppressive," or is it possible that only certain women consider it such. I'm really having a hard time with the connotations of oppressive. Am I being told that a scarf is oppressive to the same extent as honor killing is? Everything with which one disagrees can not be considered "oppressive" just to bolster the quantative data on female oppression. Doesn't this sort of data manipulation parallel to the girl who cried "wolf?" Now for the rest of the story.

As regards the hijab in the Mulsim world. This head dress did not derive from 7th century Muslim males (which were, by the way, not white males), but rather from the wives of Muhammad. It seems that these gals were on the par with superstars and could not leave their houses to go shopping or to the bathroom without being thronged. Therefore these women (not men) decided to go incognito, and the hijab was created. Later on some folks though that if it was good enough for the wives of the prophet, it was good enough for the common folks. Thus it was an imitation of women's customs, not male dictates. How it may have evolved in the present is another narrative. The moral of the story is to be careful with the facts and not read western culture into every situation.

In the second example, it was stated that women who wore long hair in US holiness churches were oppressed. Now that is really peculiar considering the historical context from which it derives. Neither does a hair style seem so oppressive a the self-imposed female assessories of the past such as girdle, corset, eye-liner, high-heels, chokers, etc. (but I do admit that is my own perspective and would not want to participate in gladitorial games that requires such equipment). Cultures have their symbols: iPods, blue jeans, hats, and hair. Faith communities also have symbols: crosses, menorah's, and head coverings. Jewish men wear a tallit when praying. For many years, only males did this but now it is common to see women in synagogue wearing a prayer shawl. In Christian faith communities, it has been women who wore the head coverings. Could common men wear them: not usually! From whence does this custom derive? From white male oppression or from female customs of the east? Take your best guess, and then you can proceed. In the first century Roman empire, it was common for women to have long hair, to wear veils, and to have head dresses. In the church of Corinth, St. Paul addressed this matter. Not that the women failed to veil themselves (as female custom dictated), but that some of the men were apparently copying older Greek traditions of wearing long hair like the Greek warriors in the Trojan war (Iliad). It was apparently no longer customary to do such. St. Paul asks the folks, "what are your customs." He appealed to the common life of Roman citizens in formerly Greek regions. Life was hard enough without asking for a fight. Holiness churches drew their idea of long hair on women from the same passage of scripture (1 Corinthians 11), such was common in the early 20th century, it released those women from hats and veils, and it actually states that a woman's long hair empowered her (at least in that day). Again, we have considered oppression what another culture considers empowerment, because of a failure to recognize what anthropologist call cultural relativism. Western values are not the touchstones for all peoples.

Thursday, November 27, 2008

Discussion of Headcovering

There's quite a discussion of headcovering for Christian women based on 1 Corinthians 11 going on over at the "A simple explanation of headcovering".

(illustration copied from the ID icon of one of the posters to this forum)

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Christian Hijab?

25 November 2008, "Stitchlove" at writes: "On headcovering....again!"

Please read. There's something for everyone inside.

Be encouraged!

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Calvin on Headcovering

Posted November 24, 2008 in "A Pilgrim's Ponderings" at blogspot: "Prophetic Calvin on headcovering":
“So if women are thus permitted to have their heads uncovered and to show their hair, they will eventually be allowed to expose their entire breasts, and they will come to make their exhibitions as if it were a tavern show; they will become so brazen that modesty and shame will be no more; in short they will forget the duty of nature…Further, we know that the world takes everything to its own advantage. So, if one has liberty in lesser things, why not do the same with this the same way as with that? And in making such comparisons they will make such a mess that there will be utter chaos. So, when it is permissible for the women to uncover their heads, one will say, ‘Well, what harm in uncovering the stomach also?’ And then after that one will plead for something else; ‘Now if the women go bareheaded, why not also bare this and bare that?’ Then the men, for their part, will break loose too. In short, there will be no decency left, unless people contain themselves and respect what is proper and fitting, so as not to go headlong overboard” John Calvin (Reformer, 1509-1564)

photo above, of a book on John Calvin's wife, Idelette, found online at


EDIT: The blog I copied this quote from has followed up on this, with his own testimony for his family's decision to wear a head covering for prayer and worship, here: "My Journey in Headcovering", his wife having posted her own thoughts of obedience in headcovering at "Grace in Bloom", which I also linked to earlier this month.

Islam: Combining Style with Modesty with Culture

Everyone is different. Every culture affects us. As Islam stretches across the globe, the interpretation of modesty and head covering shifts too. For those outside of Islam, this can be very confusing; why does my friend at work only wear a head scarf, but those ladies in the mall wear those long black robes? I can only imagine the stress it must be for a lady who trying to follow the Muslim teachings to interpret with honestly and humility: how must she really dress, in order to be modest? Ladies of all faiths, and of no faith, struggle with the same issues of course, because every culture is different, and yet modesty is always an issue, making the questions of "how large a head covering" and "should women wear pants" pertain to everyone.

The second two links in today's post deal with the specific Quranic scriptures dealing with modesty. The first link here is just an example of how modest ladies still want to be beautiful.


"Malaysia: Islam combines style with modesty"

The annual Islamic Fashion Festival is kicking off today in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The festival is all about reaching out to Muslim women and telling them that they can wear beautiful clothes and still be modest. ‘A modest woman is more sublime than a woman that reveals all’ comments Aisha Alam a well-dressed guest at the event. ‘More and more women in the region are discarding the less comfortable western styles and returning to the flowing Islamic way of dressing’. The organisers of the event are capitalising on this phenomena.

Currently the event attracts over 40 top designers from the region and as far away as Pakistan. The proceeds of the event go to worthwhile charities, mainly to alleviate hunger and poverty in the region. Guests will be treated to catwalk style displays albeit with the modest norms of Islam taken into consideration. Traditional Asian emphasis on beautiful fabrics will dominate and guests can expect to see dazzling silks used in creating the traditional Islamic women’s head coverings.

First photos found at TheHijablog at wordpress


"The Jilbab and What Garments Can Substitute It"

AUTHOR: Imaam Muhammad Naasir-ud-Deen Al-Albaanee
SOURCE: Masaa'il Nisaa'iyyah Mukhtaarah (pg. 125-131)
Found at forums

A short quote:

In brief, a khimaar covers less that a jilbaab while a jilbaab has a more ample range in terms of the parts that it covers. Also, a jilbaab is specific for only women. They were the ones who were ordered to wear it and not men. But as for the khimaar, then that is a garment that both men and women share in wearing. Even though a man is not obligated to wear it, regardless, it is a garment that both men and women partake in wearing, just like a shirt. In the same manner that a man wears a shirt to cover his ‘awrah – which is different from the ‘awrah of a woman – so does a woman. But her ‘awrah is ampler than the ‘awrah of a man.
This is a small part of a much longer article with further discussion and information.


25.11.08, in "hegab-rehab" at blogspot, the author writes:
"My eyes are open"

i have been doing A LOT of reading lately (and less blogging) - mainly islamic issue related stuff - and everytime i come across sections from Quran and Hadith concerning Islamic Dress i get kinda "thinky" about my blog. Not about shutting it down - but about excluding some kind of things from my posts - like pants, etc.

Because the more proof i come across the more i think i should follow my heart and stick to Abaya-like clothing.

Read more of her thoughts on Quranic scripture and modest apparel, along with her other blog posts with pretty pictures, showing modest Muslim women various ways to wear hijab.


I almost forgot - you might be interested in a blog entry by a simply modest blogger with photos of various women dressing modestly, from different backgrounds and cultures. "Plain Style."

Monday, November 24, 2008

The Head Scarf in Turkey

"Event of the week", in Sunday's
An unexpected softening in the stance of main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Deniz Baykal on the use of headscarves surprised everyone in the country. His motives behind this unexpected move were discussed throughout the week.

“We are setting off hand-in-hand with people who have not come together before. We are setting off with all men and women -- all who cover their heads and who do not,” Baykal said as he put CHP badge on a covered woman’s coat on Sunday. “It is not right to discriminate against people because of what they wear. It is not right to make deductions about them based on their attire.” Baykal’s remarks came during a CHP ceremony held in İstanbul last Sunday in honor of the party’s new members, who included covered women. The sudden change in Baykal’s tough stance -- he’s better known for his opposition to lifting the ban on the headscarf in the public sphere -- was interpreted by many as a tactic to gain the sympathy of conservative voters in the upcoming March elections. Opponents of Baykal’s move, including party deputies Nejla Arat and Nur Serter, claimed Baykal was straying from the party’s traditional staunchly secular line and disturbing the grass roots with his move. But Baykal defended himself during a TV program on Friday, saying that the participation of women in chadors did not mean a change in the party’s policies. He said the CHP already has a number of party members and families who wear headscarves. Baykal precipitated the annulment of a reform package that would have lifted a ban on Muslim headscarves at universities by taking it to the Constitutional Court in February.

You can also follow this story as found in the Hurryet Daily News: "Baykal defends his party on headscarf".
Main opposition leader Deniz Baykal defended his party over its choice to allow it's newest members to be headscarf-wearing women, saying their membership to the party was not a political show and the party’s original line had not changed.

Baykal defends his party on headscarf The membership of the women wearing black chador's and headscarves in the Republican People’s Party, or CHP, has drawn strong reactions from different segments of society and the party’s grassroots. As a party, it strongly opposed the ruling party-sponsored constitutional amendment on ending the headscarf ban in state universities.

Speaking on CNN Türk yesterday, Baykal said the party’s new female members who wear headscarves defended secularism, so the CHP had not deviated from its original line.

"They wanted to join our party, I didn’t offer any proposals to them in this respect. So it was not a political show. Would it be democratic for me not to accept them into the party?" he said.
(more at the link above)

Headcovering Tutorial

Hi Lisa!

I've really enjoyed your site and your blog since I've been re-interested in Christian headcovering. I found a tutorial for an Amish-type headcovering that you may not be aware of. I think she did a great job.
The main family website is here and includes a couple more nice tutorials that she has done and a nice post about why/how the family started covering.


The "Shepherd's Hill" website is all about plain living Christians, and there really is much more at the site too. Thank you, Heather! :)


Just as a little side note, because the above website is based in Alabama, US, this little article in the Birmingham News,, caught my attention: "Alabama's changing face of faith".

November 23, 2008, by GREG GARRISON

On a typical Saturday at the Riverchase Galleria, shoppers include Hindus from India with red marks called tilak on their foreheads, Mennonite teenage girls from Uniontown wearing homemade dresses and headcoverings, and Muslim women from Pakistan adorned in traditional scarves.

They pass without a sideways glance, as if nothing's out of the ordinary, perhaps a sign that religious pluralism in Alabama has arrived.

"This is a melting pot, and we are melting," said Davinderjit Bagga, a Sikh woman from India who has lived in Birmingham almost 30 years.

. . .

Sunday, November 23, 2008

Head Covering Photos

A few alternative head coverings?


Don't miss Veiled Glory's new photos: "More Jewish Headscarves"


And as a note of interest, a wordpress blogger posted a sweet photo of Married Molokan Women, from the 1940's in Baja California. Look up who the Molakans are here.

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Cancer Cap Care

I am constantly finding new businesses for head coverings for women undergoing cancer treatments, or other hair loss situations. Often, the stories of the women is quite personal. Here is another, in the NorthEastern US.

"Cranston woman’s bout with breast cancer launches new business"
November 22, 2008, By Barbara Polichetti, The Providence Journal in Rhode Island

. . . LITTLE MORE than three weeks into chemo, the hair loss had caused Manni to shave her head and to start the frustrating hunt for a way to look good in public.

Nothing –– not even a costly (but itchy) wig –– was suitable, she said, so she called her sister, Lauren Paige, in Sturbridge, Mass., and said, “Teach me to sew.”

The two set out to come up with a head covering that would be as fun as it would be functional.

“I’m sorry — I’m not a biker-style girl,” Manni said of her failed attempts to wear a traditional bandanna. “And they were too small anyway. . . ."

Instead, she and Paige came up with oversized triangular kerchiefs in all sorts of colorful prints, trimmed with sparkling beads or sequins. Manni, who admits to liking a little pizzazz in her wardrobe, ended up with a rainbow of custom kerchiefs that matched every outfit and holiday as she continued in treatment. It wasn’t long, she said, before nurses, doctors and other patients started asking where they could buy the fun head wraps.

Thus KareChiefs, Manni and Paige’s new company, was born. They decided to make it official toward the end of the summer, but were not afforded the luxury of a slow start. In September, Manni was approached by representatives of the Gloria Gemma Breast Cancer Resource Foundation and asked if she could have an ample supply of the KareChiefs available to sell at the foundation’s third annual “Flames of Hope” WaterFire celebration on Oct. 11.

That mission accomplished, the two sisters are now preparing their Web site,, to handle online ordering. . . .

Note: the website is still under construction, but you can visit to catch a glimpse of the ladies and a few of their designs.

Friday, November 21, 2008


Note: I've included two other articles on this first story as well. ~~~~~~~~~

"Non-profit group rejects donation over turban"
November 20, 2008

ROANOKE RAPIDS, N.C. (AP) -- A Halifax County man was turned away from a local mission when he refused to remove his turban while trying to make a donation.

The Daily Herald of Roanoke Rapids reports that Gary Khera, who is a Sikh, went to the Union Mission this week to donate cash or food. Khera said he previously had mailed in his donations.

A director at the mission asked Khera to abide by a rule asking males to remove all headcoverings inside. He refused, and then asked to speak to the executive director, who he said refused to shake his hand and told him that if he didn't want to remove the turban, he could make his donation elsewhere.

The Rev. Ron Weeks said his actions had nothing to do with Khera's faith or his turban.

"Roanoke Rapids charity rebuffs turban-wearing donor"

Nov. 20, 2008, ROANOKE RAPIDS, N.C.,

In which you can read the other "he-said" from the charity.

Mr. Khera is reported to have stated: "They should not turn away a donation for the needy, because they misunderstood someone else's religion."

Unfortunately, "they" misunderstood their own religion. You see, the article here points out that the charity considers their building to be "the Lord's house". In what scripture are men required to arrive bare-headed at a building? In reading the one scripture that considers men having their heads covered, you see that it is the men who are "praying or prophesying" who should not have their heads covered. Mr. Khera was not coming to pray or prophesy, but to donate money to the needy. But if it is merely a sign of respect to God to uncover one's head for those of this charity, then it must be understood that it is a sign of respect to others' understanding of God to let their hair grow long and keep it wrapped in a turban. I'm not saying it's "right" or "Godly" one way or the other. Just that we all need to think.

The article here also states that "Weeks said he may consider changing the policy because of the incident." One would certainly hope so.

EDIT: Second Follow-up

"Kids, Seniors Benefit from Mission’s Loss"
Roanoke Rapids Daily Herald, November 28, 2008


Central Asia: "Kyrgyz Draft Law, Like Others in Region, Will Restrict Freedom of Religion"
November 20, 2008

Right Side News: WASHINGTON-Kyrgyzstan has joined the roster of former Soviet republics that are intent on asserting state control over faith communities. In the process, these states are depriving many citizens of the freedom of religion guaranteed by their constitution and protected by international conventions
A new draft law that has been passed by the Kyrgyz parliament and is awaiting President Kurmanbek Bakiev's signature requires that a religious organization have 200 members before it can operate legally, a steep increase from the 10 members previously required, prohibits children from participating in religious organizations, and bans the distribution of religious materials in public places. The draft law poses an existential threat to small denominations.

. . .

The Turkmen and the Uzbek governments prohibit all but clerics from wearing religious garb in public. The prohibitions directly contradict the 1981 Declaration of the UN General Assembly, which articulates that "The right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief includes the freedom, ‘To make, acquire and use to an adequate extent the necessary articles and materials related to the rites or customs of a religion or belief.'" The UN Human Rights Committee has noted, "The observance and practice of religion or belief may include not only ceremonial acts but also such customs as (...) the wearing of distinctive clothing or head coverings..."


"Iranian female karate champion ousted from Tokyo games"
IranVNC; November 14, 2008

Washington, 14 November (IranVNC)—The first Iranian female contestant in the world karate championship contests in Tokyo was disqualified from competing moments after stepping on the mat.

Helen Sepasi, who represented the Iranian women’s Kata team, walked onto the mat wearing the Islamic head-covering, the hejab, to spar her Chinese rival, but bowed out of the games immediately after she was told that the rules of the game did not permit non-uniform attire.

Sepasi’s refusal to remove her veil was applauded by other women in the venue, according to Mehr News Agency.

Thursday, November 20, 2008

Blogging about Christian Headcovering

"Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time" (1 Peter 5:6).

Headcoverings: For Me? - "I am a 28 year-old Christian wife currently working through 1 Corinthians 11:3-16 and the need for covering my head while praying. I plan to post my learning journey on this blog. Join me!" - November 19, 2008: "Current Practice, Overscrupulous, & Because of the Angels"

"the voice of one crying out in suburbia..."
- "The random thoughts of one saved by the sovereign grace of God, in gratitude that He chose me when I would never have chosen Him..." - November 19, 2008: "More on headcovering"

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Book Review: Mennonite Women in Canada

Mennonite Women in Canada: A History
Beginning of the review in "Tuponia: Canadian History Blog":

They wear head coverings and plain dresses. They quilt, make food that "schmecks" and ride horse-drawn buggies. They talk little, obey their menfolk and produce huge broods.

Marlene Epp knows that's the stereotype of Mennonite women. After all, she's a Mennonite woman herself. She's also a university professor, a mother of two, a feminist, and a stylish dresser, by the looks of her funky Mary Jane shoes and the richly coloured scarf draped over her shoulders.

Epp teaches history and peace and conflict studies at Conrad Grebel University College, part of the University of Waterloo. She has spent years researching Mennonite women. Now she has written a book that chronicles the rich diversity of their experiences in this country.

See also: University of Manitoba Press

Monday, November 17, 2008

Quote of the Week

"Old hat is new again: Classic styles taking center stage among fall accessories"

In this photo-accompanied article on the fashion of hats, for men and women, fashion shows and designers, and even a little helpful list called "hat basics", I came across a very neat observation:

“Hats are coming back because women are embracing their femininity.”

Just made me smile. :)

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Headcovering Christian Bloggers - More

Are you researching Christian headcovering? Prayer veils? Mantillas? Women in Christian worship?

Head covering in the Bible is not a subject to be dismissed, nor is it something which all the law and the prophets hang on. It could be assumed by some people that the continual subject matter of this blog makes it look like I (and others whose posts I share) are just harping on a subject which is of little consequence. I assure you - I (and I think the others whose posts I share) realize that there are many, many matters of daily living in Christ which are important to attend to. Because the subject matter of this blog centers upon headcoverings does in no way imply that one should think that covering the woman's head is in some sort of 5 step plan to salvation, and that if she does it, she's in. Head covering is but one small obedient thing, done by only the women of God's children: one small thing found in a Book full of commands, precepts, laws, prophecies, proverbs, illustrations and wisdom (among other important things). And head covering is one obedient thing that is overlooked, misunderstood and even frowned upon in our day. But why should anything, no matter how small, be overlooked, when it comes to living for the One who I believe gave up heavenly living to dwell on earth as a person and then be treated and later killed in a most disgusting way, for my sake?

Head covering is one of many things that "come along" at some point in our growth, and for those whose hearts are full of seeking, I believe it is shameful to dismiss as some cultural thing or other that we don't need to even think about today.

I actually think there's a movement afoot. (Or should that be, "ahead"?) Please, be encouraged by what you read here. Please, continue to press on. - November 15, 2008
"Head Covering" - hopefully one of more essays to come by a lady who covers her head, believing that obedience is indeed a part of salvation - November 15, 2008
"Bible Questions Answered: Veil-The" - a question and answer lesson from an elder pastor who desires revival of - not just the old ways, but - the ways of the all of the Bible - November 15, 2008
"Headcovering.. Such a topic for all. Those who do and those who don't and those that are confused" - includes a listing of yet a few more links where one can study this subject for themselves

And finally, a thought for the day: - November 15, 2008, in:
"Various thoughts and updates" -
I am not sure if all y'all know, but I headcover. You have probably seen it in some of the pics I have posted. I do not feel that one must always headcover. And last night, because we were on a date, I considered not covering . . . . I decided to put it on anyway, and I am glad I did. I ran into our neighbors who seem very nice but are most definitely witches (as in, that is what they proclaim as their religion, not that I am being catty). She had on her cape and amulets or whatever, and I was standing in my headcovering. We said hello briefly, I talked to her husband for a moment, and then it was over. However, I was very thankful to be wearing my faith when I ran into someone who was wearing their beliefs. I was thankful that I was ready "in season and out of season...".

Yes. Headcovering is just a small thing. But so is a cup of water. A child. The rod of Moses. A stone and a sling. A tent peg. An arrow. A visit. A coin. A parchment. ... Nothing is small. Not really.

Saturday, November 15, 2008

Some Headcovering Christians: Hutterites

In "Livin the Dream", November 14, 2008:
"Peoples Of North America - Hutterites"

A personal essay, it looks like, and well written. An overview of the Hutterite Christians living in the prairies, with photos. Lots of information you probably didn't know at the linked title above.

Hutterites have a dress code. The dress code is more pronounced with some groups, i.e. the Lehrerleut and the Dariusleut in Alberta and Saskatchewan. The Schmiedeleut Hutterian Brethren's dress code is typically as follows: men wear suspenders, usually black or dark trousers, and any kind of buttoned shirt. Married men traditionally wear a beard.

Women wear below-knee-length dresses; younger women and girls wear brighter colored dresses than older women. Women also wear a Kupf-ti'echle or a black, polka-dot-peppered head covering. Girls between the ages of 3 to about 10 wear a mitz which is bonnet-like head covering.
EDIT: He's got another article on the Amish folks, who also practice headcovering, here.

By the way, do you know how some people cannot understand how you can have driver's licenses without photos? Usually that is a complaint about women who want to cover their face, or at least part of their face: their hair. But sometimes...
Alberta Hutterites won the right to avoid having their photograph taken for their drivers' licenses. In May 2007, the Alberta Court of Appeal ruled that the photograph requirement violates their religious rights and that driving was essential to their way of life. The Wilson Springs colony based their position on the belief that images are prohibited by the Second Commandment. About eighty of the photo-less licenses were in use at the time of the decision. Besides the Alberta Hutterite groups (Darius and Lehreleut), a handful of colonies in Manitoba (Schmiedleut) do not wish their members to be photographed for licenses or other identity document.
Just a funfilled fact to know and tell.

Ongoing Story of Muslim Teen Killed by Her Dad

Listen to This podcast: Toronto Life's Aqsa Parvez cover story, "Girl, Interrupted"
Posted by Graham F. Scott, November 14, 2008, This Magazine

The current issue of Toronto Life magazine features a cover story on the murder of Aqsa Parvez, the Mississauga teen who was killed last year, allegedly by members of her own family, over a dispute about — well, it's tough to say what it was about. Toronto Life's cover calls the murder an "honour killing" because Parvez decided not to wear a hijab, the head covering that some Muslim women wear to observe their religion. As writer Mary Rogan says in her story, there were plenty of other disputes between Aqsa Parvez and her family over all kinds of things, and what truly happened is still frustratingly unclear. But the hijab became the focal point in media reports about the murder last year, because it was an easy-to-grasp symbol that resonated with those Canadians who still feel ambivalent, or outright hostile, to immigrant groups, particularly Muslim immigrants from South Asia.

Last week, a coalition of groups representing women, immigrants, and social service agencies called a press conference in Toronto to formally condemn Toronto Life's story, calling it racist and Islamophobic. There is also a Facebook group that goes into further on the problems that these readers had with the article.

This podcast features excerpts from my interviews with one of the participants in the press conference, Sumayya Kassamali of the group Our Collective Dreams: Muslim Women Speak Out Against Violence, and with Sarah Fulford, Editor of Toronto Life.

Listen to the podcast at the title of the blog linked above. Other links are also available at this article.

Friday, November 14, 2008

And now for something different

After coming across this article: Legacy of the Phrygian cap", in the Aurora History Blog, I also looked up the Wikipedia article on the Phrygian cap. Amazing, the symbolism of headgear in history. Of course, we knew about that. But did you know that besides becoming a symbol of the French Revolutionaries (this link has some disputable statements, but also a lot of illustrations), it "also appears on the state flags of West Virginia, New Jersey, and New York, as well as the official seal of the United States Senate , the arms of the North Carolina Senate, and on the reverse side of the Seal of Virginia"?
Bust of Attis wearing a Phrygian cap (Parian marble, 2nd century BC), from Wikipedia.

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

"Hats and a Haircut"

A young man who is serving as a missionary in Southern Sudan writes about his prayerful decision to follow the teachings of 1 Corinthians - and not only those verses in chapter 11.

November 8, 2008: "Why I cut my hair and thoughts on the relevance of passages from 1 Corinthinas to life out here in Sudan", by Ryan Weeks.

Spending some time reading through his reports has been interesting and enjoyable too.


For more thoughts on the woman's headcovering from 1 Corinthians, see:

November 09, 2008, "A call for a new Reformation in the church: Headcoverings?", by Arthur Sido at "the voice of one crying out in suburbia" [Michigan] blog.

"Headcovering". An article with links found at The conclusion from this article:

Our freedom in Messiah allows the Lord to bless us without regard for anything beyond simple faith - to a degree. While we are young, and, for a season, the Lord allows us to be weaned on the milk of the word, and there is in that early season of our development relatively little expectation about our behavior. As we mature, we come to a place of greater expectation, learning the Lord’s discipline for those whom he loves, and we are brought into a place of abiding. The Lord draws us closer and we learn to enjoy Him particularly as a friend, while at the same time coming to greatly respect his holiness and authority. The Lord deals with us individually, in a way very personally suited to who we are. Now, you may rightly say that the Lord has blessed you greatly despite any prior ignorance and neglect of certain practices. However, there comes a time when the holy spirit convicts us of the need to change. Perhaps the spirit has been moving upon you with regard to headcovering.

Headcovering as a practice of the church is similar to the practices of baptism and the bread and wine communion.They should be practiced in the proper ways giving the Lord due honor; bringing blessing to those who practice them and bearing the appropriate and intended powerful testimony before witnesses. They should not be viewed as merely carnal practices but rather as they are in truth; spiritual. Proper instruction concerning them is certainly the duty of those appointed to minister to the assemblies of saints through teaching, but, indeed, each man is personally responsible to search out truth for himself whether what he is being taught is actually so.

Monday, November 10, 2008

Are you the only one covering?

Read a conversation between members of the community: "if you wear a mantilla.. ". Regarding Catholic women who desire to wear a head covering, but what if you're the only one? Be encouraged.

Saturday, November 8, 2008

Quebec versus the Headcovering

Do you remember the recent world making news that France rejected a woman from becoming a French citizen because she held on to her extreme form of modest Muslim dress including a face covering? (She had learned French very well, and had "integrated" in other ways.) So that this won't happen to them, perhaps, and for other reasons, the French Canadian province du Quebec has outlined a more clearly written list of requirements, so that you may know in advance what will be and will not be accepted from its citizens, should you consider moving there.

"We have consensus- Charest"
The Gazette, Montreal, November 8, 2008

The crisis over reasonable accommodation of newcomers to Quebec, seen by some in the province as a threat to their identity, has been settled, Premier Jean Charest said yesterday

"Today, we have a consensus on the measures that we have adopted," the premier said on a campaign stop in the Mauricie region, where the identity debate was set off two years ago when the village of Hérouxville adopted its code for living, which banned the burning of women, genital excision and attributes of non-Christian religions, such as head coverings and kirpans [Sikh ceremonial daggers].

"Not everyone will agree and we don't expect we will get unanimity on these measures," he added.

Starting in January, immigrants to Quebec must sign a declaration saying they will respect Quebec's common values and promise to learn French, acknowledge they understand that men and woman have equal rights and that political and religious powers are separate.The immigration application of anyone who refuses to sign the declaration will be rejected.

I hope that I don't sound ignorant for asking how the village of Herouxville adopted a code which banned "attributes of non-Christian religions, such as head coverings", when head coverings are an attribute of many varieties of those in the "Christian religions", including Roman Catholic.

The 2001 census showed the population to be 83.4% Catholic Christian (including 83.2% Roman Catholic); 4.7% Protestant Christian (including 1.2% Anglican, 0.7% United Church; and 0.5% Baptist); 1.4% Orthodox Christian (including 0.7% Greek Orthodox); and 0.8% Other Christian; as well as 1.5% Muslim; 1.3% Jewish; 0.6% Buddhist; 0.3% Hindu; and 0.1% Sikh. An additional 5.8% of the population said they had no religious affiliation (including 5.6% who stated that they had no religion at all). - wikipedia/Quebec

So which heritage and identity are we going for there, Quebec?

Friday, November 7, 2008

Christian Men in Hats?

The Gadfly blogger posts on November 6, 2008, "Right Message, Wrong Backing", concerning the reason why men are asked to remove their head coverings during a chapel service.

Malone University [Ohio] has mandatory Chapels. That is to say, there are gatherings twice a week in a room that used to be a sanctuary in a building that used to be a church where we go to sing Contemporary Christian Music and/or listen to speakers with varying degrees of spirituality and sports metaphor in their content, and we are expected to go to twenty of these throughout the semester.

Chapel has always requested that we remove our hats, hoods, and other head coverings while in Chapel. I have no issue with this. They also ask that we have our cell phones set to silent. This is no issue, either. Both are signs of respect, and I do my best to give respect where it is due.

Last school year, I noticed that the overhead displays asking us to remove our hats weren't just asking for their removal. They were asking us to remove our hats as Moses removed his shoes before the Lord (a reference to Exodus 3:5).
Therein lies the problem, says this young man. How is this verse a reason for removing a hat in worship? And isn't there a more appropriate Scripture? Reading the whole essay at the title link above, and notice his concluding remarks:

I make no judgments about Women who do not cover their heads while praying. It could well have been contextual. The references to the created order clearly require some sort of separation or distinction, though. The options are: in the context in which Paul wrote, the specific sign that was necessary was Women covering their heads and Men having their heads uncovered, but those specifics are no longer necessary, OR Paul was writing for all time and Women ought always have their heads covered, men, uncovered. I personally feel convicted by this passage of scripture, and so I always remove my hat to pray, even if I am only praying for a few seconds.

My response to the claim that we are neither Man nor Woman in Christ is simple: this is true. Neither sex nor gender has any bearing on our salvation. However, it is ignorant to think that this means we are no longer distinct. Just as Christ's sacrifice did not physically remove differentiations between Man and Woman, it has not changed the way in which we relate to the world either. Eve was a helper to Adam. A "helper" is not one who does the same exact thing as the one they help. Neither is the helper a slave or even a servant. A helper fulfills a role separate from but not inferior to the one being helped. And there is nothing to suggest the removal of this distinction, especially in light of the many New Testament references to the differing roles of Men and Women.

Malone is right to tell us to remove our hats (at least, the men). I respect their rules. However, to use the example of Moses and not Paul disrespects the passage in Exodus for using it to support what it was not intended to, the passage in First Corinthians for not using it to support the very thing it was explicitly written about, and us as students for not considering us smart enough to notice or respectful enough to follow the rules for their own sake.


And if you are considering Christian men in head coverings during worship and are wondering about why some men in the clergy do wear caps while they serve the church, when you have the time, please read the "St. Mary the Protectress" blog, November 6, 2008: "Phiro d’Kohnutho - THE FRUIT OF PRIESTHOOD - The Skull Cap of the Syrian Priesthood", an essay by Kuriakos Tharakan Thottupuram, Ph.D., D.D., including history and information on the Jewish tradition, as well as of the early Orthodox and Roman traditions. [Since I wonder about these things myself and had always read the passage in 1 Corinthians the way the young man above read it, I did find a few answers. It has to do with working in the traditions and understandings of the Jewish ways and the culture of the Roman Empire. If I am reading this right. what do you think?]

On many occasions I was asked about the significance of the skull cap worn by the priests of the Syrian Church, both in the Middle East and in India. Recently there were some inquiries about it by our readers. Hence we are trying to educate our readers about the relevance of skull caps worn by our clergy.

In the Syrian Church this skull cap is called Elbishto d’Kurobo, the cap for offering the sacrifice, and it is also called Phiro d’Kohnutho, the Fruit of Priesthood (one may find different spellings for these terms in other publications).

Clergy of other churches also wear the same or similar caps or skull caps during their liturgical functions. But all these practices share the same traditions.

. . .

We have already explained that the Jewish priests and rabbis had been covering their heads during prayers and religious services. Christian priests and bishops also followed the same custom, because they considered themselves to be the ministers of a perfected Judaism, not as a separate religion. It was the same tradition of Jewish priests that the early Christian priests and bishops accepted when they celebrated the Eucharist, which is the mystical Paschal sacrifice of the New Covenant. Thus the black skull cap became a common headwear for Christian clergy as a continuation of the Jewish priestly practice. The Christian clergy continued this practice even after the separation of the Church from Judaism.

. . .

In the Syrian Church the bishops and chorepiscopi take off their linen/velvet crown (bathrashil) or black biretta (miter) when they sing the prayers of Eucharistic consecration, when they read the Gospels, and when the Eucharistic elements are exposed. The skull cap for the Syrians is a symbol and the fruit of priesthood and it symbolizes the crown of Jesus while He was offering the eternal sacrifice; and hence it will remain on the head of the priest even during the most important moments of the liturgical services. On the other hand, crowns and birettas are objects signifying authority, and therefore are to be taken of when the Sovereign of the universe is present sacramentally or through the Word of God in the Gospels. Moreover, it is logical to think that priests are slaves before the King of kings, and have to cover their heads before their Master like the Roman slaves did.