Why do Catholic and Orthodox leaders

Tra Phull said:

Just read 1 Cor 11:4-10

My gosh - these bishops better not be praying or protesting with their heads covered by these hats...

Click to expand...

Look closer at 1 Corinthians 11:10, since you've just cited it:

"it is for this reason that a woman ought to have a symbol of authority over her head"

For the woman, the headcovering is a symbol of submission before authority, whereas for the priest or bishop, the headcovering is a symbol of the authority vested in him. It shouldn't escape your notice how in their development many of these more 'outlandish' head dressings are derived from the headgear worn by Roman officials, the mitre being one such example (originally being worn by officials of the imperial Byzantine court).

This would not have been the case at the time of the writing of 1 Corinthians or any other part of the NT, as the partition of the Roman Empire itself into Eastern and Western regions or halves significantly postdates the writing of the NT (e.g., Diarchy 286, founding of Constantinople 330, fall of Rome 476, etc), so obviously headgear based on any kind of distinctly 'Byzantine court' style would've postdated that time as well. You can't have headgear based on the styles found in places that don't exist yet.

But I suppose why let a little thing like the linear progression of time in the actually-existing world get in the way of browbeating other Christians in churches you don't belong to for doing things that you don't think they should do.

Say, how many women in whatever church you belong to cover their heads in church, in keeping with the verses you've cited? In mine, it's all of them! Can I expect you to come to liturgy anytime soon, then?




Oh, wait...our priests and bishops look like this:




Gee, I wonder which impulse will win out...

(Not really. I think we both already know.)

SteveIndy said:

To be seen of men. We are to be known by our life and deeds and not by a costume.

Click to expand...

That's exactly what I think each time I see a pastor conducting a worship service or giving a sermon while wearing jeans.

He obviously wants the people to think of him as 'just plain folks'--or a pal to the young people in attendance--or terribly UNpretentious (which is something of an irony, isn't it?).

You didn't realize that the tone of a thread which you started in which you repeatedly called the headgear of other churches' leaders "bizarre and outlandish" and intimated what the bishops of those churches "better not do" based on an ahistorical reading of scripture might be interpreted as somewhat more heavy-handed and critical than is called for given the rather plain answer you were already given in post #2?

Hmm. That's possible, I suppose, and I apologize for using that word. I should've used something a bit less heavy myself, like "criticizing". Sorry about that. I know from subsequent replies (after the insulting ones, I mean), you seemed happy to be receiving background historical information, which I appreciate in everyone no matter their tradition.

Tra Phull said:

.
From the beginning, all I asked was "why?"

Click to expand...

What I'm seeing are a lot of follow-ups that changed the subject as well as a re-working of some of the answers that were given. Several of us, for instance, gave a fairly specific answer to the "headgear" question, including the scriptural basis, and several times thereafter were told that our answers were "it's tradition, OK."

Tra Phull said:

I am happy to be receiving background information.

I am sorry if any of my replies seemed "insulting"'.

From the beginning, all I asked was "why?"

It's tradition, OK.

I have learned that Albion doesn't think highly of preachers in jeans.

I have learned of the short dresses and pants in Ellen White's Day, and doubt that Paula White would wear that.

I have gained perspective on Chalcedonian "schism"

I don't even see myself as "criticizing", I have posted that it is my OPINION that the hats are bizarre and outlandish, and I know it's only my opinion.

I have been to services where women's heads are covered, some Episcopalian, some Pentecostal.

I have encountered people who thought it was shameful that a man had long hair, but I don't think it had anything to do with Corinthians.

I don't have anything against Catholics or Orthodox - my son is Greek Orthodox.

In the Air Force, there was the one building - the Chapel - for Protestants and Catholics. I used to remove the Chick tracts that some Protestants left for the Catholic service - we turned them in to Father Cordoza, who had a whole drawerful of them, he showed me in his office...

I don't know when and if I will show up at a liturgy - kinda confused on what to wear.

Click to expand...

It's okay. None of us are immune from making mistakes and insulting people without meaning to. After all, I just insulted you by using the word "browbeating" without thinking about possible alternatives, and I didn't mean to insult you or anyone. Again, I'm sorry for being careless with my words and potentially causing offense.

I would imagine rather standard conservative dress would be appropriate at any one of the more conservative liturgical churches, though there may be some specifics that vary according to which particular tradition/jurisdiction you're visiting (e.g., in Coptic, Ethiopian, and Eritrean Orthodox churches, you remove your shoes in recognition of the fact that you are on holy ground; cf. Exodus 3:5).

Tra Phull said:

I think I could eat the bread but not drink the wine, something like that.

Click to expand...

The bread you would've been given at a Greek Orthodox service is called antidoron (other churches call it other things; in the Coptic Orthodox Church, it is called orban). It is bread that is blessed but not consecrated -- i.e., not the loaf that is chosen for the day's Eucharistic service (communion). It is given to all visitors regardless of their status in the Church.

Tra Phull said:

wear such bizarre and outlandish headgear?

Click to expand...

Tra Phull said:

Well, ViaCrucis, it is MY OPINION that these hats are bizarre and outlandish, and everyone has opinions.

I am widening my phylacteries right now in an attempt to assimilate more Jewish customs into my psyche.

Click to expand...

If someone hasn't already said it, the current form of the bishops mitre came after the fall of the eastern Roman Empire. It was a representation for the people at the time that the Church was taking on the spirtual mantal of the empire in leading its now persecuted people. That's why it resembles an imperial crown

Tra Phull said:

wear such bizarre and outlandish headgear?

Click to expand...

Why do you think that perfectly normal liturgical dress is bizarre and outlandish?

Tra Phull said:

wear such bizarre and outlandish headgear?

Click to expand...

It can be argued, from a historical perspective, that the Cap of Cybele is one of the oldest and most sacred pagan religious symbols of humanity, dating back to 2,000 B.C., also the skull cap was worn by the sun priests of Egypt. It is a thin, slightly rounded skullcap now commonly known by various titles including the Yarmulke (Jewish) and Kufi (Muslims). The Roman Catholic Church calls it the Zucchetti. Vatican Hill was the site of the largest ancient temple to Cybele. Ashtoreth the goddess of fertility, sexuality and war; was known as Cybele in Rome.

Also from a historical perspective, it can be argued that the Mitre hat that is worn by Catholic priests, cardinals and the Pope, represents Dagon the Babylonian fish god.
The ancient Babylonians worshiped Dagan, the god of agriculture, plenty (food) and good fortune. The Babylonian priests wore a headdress that represented the worship of Cybele and Dagon. It featured an open-fish mouth on the head, with the rest of the fish body forming a cloak. In the Roman Empire, it was worn by the head priest of Cybele (the Magna Mater) or the Great Queen Mother Goddess. Today the Catholic Cardinals, Bishops and the Pope all wear the open fish-mouth mitre, which represents the worship of Cybele and Dagon.

Excuse me, what?

chilehed said:

Why do you think that perfectly normal liturgical dress is bizarre and outlandish?

Click to expand...

Normal according to what? To a liturgy? A liturgy is a rite or body of rites prescribed by a body of men for public worship. If it is perfectly “normal” it is a normal unknown to the New Testament unless you consider the Pharisees to be normal; Christ considered them to be abnormal. Whether it be Catholic or Protestant their worship service plays upon the ignorance of the congregation to believe everything put forth by their leaders as "perfectly normal." The Pharisees wore their costumes, collars, post-nominal titles or initials to be seen and acknowledged of men and to boost their egos to think themselves as more exalted or holy than the common man or woman. And, likewise, the Pharisees of today want to be recognized as Pope, Pastor, Reverend, Bishop, Doctor, etc., especially in a public setting. All of this is only “normal” if you are of the world and practice your Christianity in front of men.