The obligation of the continual covering of head and all hair of Christian women

[coffeeandcigarette]

I worked in one of the best companies in the world. It was ok but it's not all it's made out to be. More importantly, God doesn't consider such to be either necessary or even indispensable to serve Him well and give Him glory. God rather wants a life of contentment gladly lived out in surrender to His Will.

Look at the great Saints, look at a St. Francis or a St. Therese, or the parents of St. Therese, St. Louis Martin and St. Zelie Guerin, both Saints, both poor, but both holy, both content, both happy, both living lives for God's Glory. The lives of the Saints are a stinging rebuke to any "prosperity Gospel", whether Protestant or traddy.

Are you serious? St. Francis grew up rich and gave up riches for God's sake. He was a single man, no children, no education to pay for, nothing. Zelie and Louis Martin were rich, ran two successful businesses, had a houseful of servants, and paid for all their daughters to live with nurses or at boarding school. Where are you getting your information??

He means that they were poor when they lived according to Gods will.

Zelie and Louis were never poor, ever. They were doing God's will in a house full of servants, running businesses, and paying for a fancy education for their daughters. There are plenty of rich saints.

[Xavier]

St. Francis showed what Our Lord meant by treasure in heaven, he could have become rich just by inheritance from his father. But he chose to remain poor for love of the Lord. He did what the Rich Young Man in the Gospel couldn't or wouldn't. Not everyone is called to that degree of voluntary poverty, but definitely we are all meant to practice in some degree that poverty of spirit described in the first beatitude, right?

Mat 5:[3] Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Fr. Lapide's commentary on it is: "So also S. Bernard says, "The poor in spirit—i.e., with the will of the spirit, with spiritual intention and spiritual desire, for the alone sake of pleasing God, and the salvation of souls. And Christ uses this expression, in spirit, because of those who are poor by a miserable necessity, not by a laudable will."

2. It is what S. Augustine says, "A rich man, who is able to despise in himself whatsoever there is in him by which pride can be puffed up, is God's poor man." And S. Jerome says, "The poor in spirit are they who are voluntarily poor because of the Holy Spirit."

3. In spirit signifies the end of this poverty—namely, that the contempt of wealth be referred to the spirit, that, being freed from earthly things, we may the better reach forward to heavenly things.

The root and oundation of blessedness and evangelical perfection are voluntary poverty and humility, just as the root of all sin is pride and covetousness." Source

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Martin_and_Marie-Az%C3%A9lie_Gu%C3%A9rin both Louis Martin and Zelie Guerin intended to choose religious life at first. Of course the will of God was different for them. So they married and gave birth to Saints and became Saints. But they lived in a way that was really poor in spirit.  "Louis arranged a little den for himself high up in the attic, a true monastic cell for praying, reading and meditation. Even his daughters were allowed to enter it only if they wished spiritual converse and self-examination. As in a monastery, he divided the day into worship, garden work and relaxation".

[John Lamb]

The irony with Louis & Zelie Martin is that neither of them wanted wealth, marriage, or a family to begin with. They were both set on being religious, but were turned away. Later on though they both loved having children.

[queen.saints]

The groups with, I believe, the statistically highest birth rates in America are the Fundamentalist Mormons, Amish, Orthodox Jews, and Fundamentalist Christians. They would all qualify as "obsessed" with modesty by the standards being promoted here, and yet, ironically, their non-obsessed counterparts are the famously sterile ones.

My father always said that purity is fruitful and that has certainly played out in our lives. I'm grateful that my father cared about how we dressed and didn't have "bigger fish to fry".

[Jayne]

Zelie and Louis were never poor, ever. They were doing God's will in a house full of servants, running businesses, and paying for a fancy education for their daughters. There are plenty of rich saints.

Yes they were materially well off, but they had the right attitude to money.  They lived below their means so that they could be more just and generous with others.

Louis and Zélie each came from prosperous bourgeois families. Before marrying, both earned their livelihoods as masters of delicate crafts. Louis became a watchmaker; Zélie a maker of point d'Alençon, the specialty lace of her home region. After they married, both businesses continued at their home in Alençon. For such luxury goods, household production endured amid the rise of industrialization. But the liberalizing economy left fewer safeguards against pursuing profit alone, without regard for the common good. Louis resisted these temptations by, for example, absolutely refusing to open the shop on Sunday, despite the contrary prevailing norm. Zélie's trade was based on a "putting-out" system, and she bore constant solicitude for her workers. She took it upon herself to visit them when they were ill, and she helped arrange their hire by other lace makers when she lacked in orders. The Martins' labors brought to the family financial stability, all while they gave generous alms and saved for emergencies, dowries, and retirement. As the new economic world reduced men and women to contractual obligations, these two succeeded without relinquishing timeless principles.

https://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/the-holy-household-of-louis-and-zelie-martin

[Gardener]

I have had the honor of having Greg in my home when he visited Colorado. He was a perfect gentleman, great with the kids, brought flowers for my wife and Heinrich's wife, is an engaging conversationalist, and has no air of pretension. What you see is what you get. It's refreshing and great. But ultimately, what he says and does comes from a place of experience, not theory; facts, not feelings. He wouldn't say anything to anyone if he didn't care. I think that last bit may get lost on some who are surprised at his blunt demeanor. But he does care. If he didn't, he'd simply move along.

I will say that I'm not wildly financially successful compared to many of my peers. But when I decided to get married, I went to someone similar to Greg. A very successful person with great material success. I asked what to do. I did it. It worked much better than the insane ideas I had. I didn't balk about what should be, but focused on what is. We are friends with couples whose husbands have chosen a more "spiritual" route when they didn't have to. It's nothing but pain for the women. There's nothing virtuous about wondering if one will be able to feed their kids; to be unable to afford basic dentistry, fix things that break around the house so it doesn't turn into a literal hovel, etc.

When a man accepts the willingness of a woman to place herself at his mercy, he takes on a duty to put aside his childish notions of holiness and career suitability and to get his hands dirty if need be. The tweed jacket, waxed mustache, Belloc quoting poverellos who think literal poverty = holiness need to take a look at the holiness of the ghetto, Appalachia's hill folks, India's street kids, etc. Nothing holy there. It's just pain.

So if Greg hurts folks a little, he's really just trying to save someone a greater pain.

Make sure the head covering is thin enough to hear his word's clearly, ladies. Might save you the necessity of using it to cover your face in shame.

[Gardener]

Zelie and Louis were never poor, ever. They were doing God's will in a house full of servants, running businesses, and paying for a fancy education for their daughters. There are plenty of rich saints.

Yes they were materially well off, but they had the right attitude to money.  They lived below their means so that they could be more just and generous with others.

Louis and Zélie each came from prosperous bourgeois families. Before marrying, both earned their livelihoods as masters of delicate crafts. Louis became a watchmaker; Zélie a maker of point d'Alençon, the specialty lace of her home region. After they married, both businesses continued at their home in Alençon. For such luxury goods, household production endured amid the rise of industrialization. But the liberalizing economy left fewer safeguards against pursuing profit alone, without regard for the common good. Louis resisted these temptations by, for example, absolutely refusing to open the shop on Sunday, despite the contrary prevailing norm. Zélie's trade was based on a "putting-out" system, and she bore constant solicitude for her workers. She took it upon herself to visit them when they were ill, and she helped arrange their hire by other lace makers when she lacked in orders. The Martins' labors brought to the family financial stability, all while they gave generous alms and saved for emergencies, dowries, and retirement. As the new economic world reduced men and women to contractual obligations, these two succeeded without relinquishing timeless principles.

https://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/the-holy-household-of-louis-and-zelie-martin

One has to have means to live below them. Which, I think, is Greg's point.

[Jayne]

One has to have means to live below them. Which, I think, is Greg's point.

Nobody is disagreeing with the idea that a man ought to provide for his family.  But the attitude to wealth should be the one taught by the Church, not something that sounds more like the Protestant prosperity gospel heresy.

[Gardener]

To take it as that is to miss the point.

[christulsa]

Well I guess I just fail to see how a man is a Catholic gentleman to be admired across a Catholic forum who habitually brags about his successes while insulting trad men who don't measure up for him, spending years on end arguing with a grandmother because he doesn't like her personality, and justifies lying, cheating, and manipulating others.  And that isn't even a value judgment per se, but observable facts most here would honestly admit represents his posting history.   Perhaps those facts can be defended, or not, but they are facts.

Anyway, to each his own.

And that is all I will say again on the subject.

[coffeeandcigarette]

St. Francis showed what Our Lord meant by treasure in heaven, he could have become rich just by inheritance from his father. But he chose to remain poor for love of the Lord. He did what the Rich Young Man in the Gospel couldn't or wouldn't. Not everyone is called to that degree of voluntary poverty, but definitely we are all meant to practice in some degree that poverty of spirit described in the first beatitude, right?

Mat 5:[3] Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Fr. Lapide's commentary on it is: "So also S. Bernard says, "The poor in spirit—i.e., with the will of the spirit, with spiritual intention and spiritual desire, for the alone sake of pleasing God, and the salvation of souls. And Christ uses this expression, in spirit, because of those who are poor by a miserable necessity, not by a laudable will."

2. It is what S. Augustine says, "A rich man, who is able to despise in himself whatsoever there is in him by which pride can be puffed up, is God's poor man." And S. Jerome says, "The poor in spirit are they who are voluntarily poor because of the Holy Spirit."

3. In spirit signifies the end of this poverty—namely, that the contempt of wealth be referred to the spirit, that, being freed from earthly things, we may the better reach forward to heavenly things.

The root and oundation of blessedness and evangelical perfection are voluntary poverty and humility, just as the root of all sin is pride and covetousness." Source

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Martin_and_Marie-Az%C3%A9lie_Gu%C3%A9rin both Louis Martin and Zelie Guerin intended to choose religious life at first. Of course the will of God was different for them. So they married and gave birth to Saints and became Saints. But they lived in a way that was really poor in spirit.  "Louis arranged a little den for himself high up in the attic, a true monastic cell for praying, reading and meditation. Even his daughters were allowed to enter it only if they wished spiritual converse and self-examination. As in a monastery, he divided the day into worship, garden work and relaxation".

I am not sure how poor their lifestyle was actually. There really isn't much poor about it. They had plenty of luxuries and they all went touring around Europe, he went by himself multiple times to relax and see exotic things. I am not saying this is bad, but he was living a normal upper middle class life.
You started off saying the saints are a great example in terms of poverty, and now you are talking about spiritual poverty. Anyone here will agree about spiritual poverty for sure; but that was not the conversation that was being had.

[coffeeandcigarette]

The groups with, I believe, the statistically highest birth rates in America are the Fundamentalist Mormons, Amish, Orthodox Jews, and Fundamentalist Christians. They would all qualify as "obsessed" with modesty by the standards being promoted here, and yet, ironically, their non-obsessed counterparts are the famously sterile ones.

My father always said that purity is fruitful and that has certainly played out in our lives. I'm grateful that my father cared about how we dressed and didn't have "bigger fish to fry".

I wouldn't actually say they are "obsessed." Their rules are relatively normal. Amish, Orthodox Jews, and Fundy Mormons/Christians all wear tea-length dresses all the time, sometimes slightly shorter. No one is going on about ankles or skirts trailing on the ground. Out of those you mentioned only the Amish practice real headcovering; I don't think you can count a fancy wig over a buzz as modest or laudable. They also almost all wear half sleeves regularly. What part of their wardrobe would you say reflects an obsessive attitude? Are you saying they talk about modesty all the time? They don't. They all tow the line in general, the only time it comes up is if some young person wants to flout the rules. I would say most of them are pretty much like most of our trad families.

[coffeeandcigarette]

Well I guess I just fail to see how a man is a Catholic gentleman to be admired across a Catholic forum who habitually brags about his successes while insulting trad men who don't measure up for him, spending years on end arguing with a grandmother because he doesn't like her personality, and justifies lying, cheating, and manipulating others.  And that isn't even a value judgment per se, but observable facts most here would honestly admit represents his posting history.   Perhaps those facts can be defended, or not, but they are facts.

Anyway, to each his own.

And that is all I will say again on the subject.

I have no horse in this race, but he is going to out you if you don't be quiet. He has kept your issues hushed and you just keep on going...watch yourself.

[Heinrich]

I would rather be poor in Colorado than rich just about anywhere else. Even traveling to Europe and being among the grandiosity of Christendom, my adopted love, Munich and Bavaria, does not console a Wanderlust and quench a spiritual thirst near what Colorado generates within me. The FSSP parish in Colorado Springs provides a fire hose helping of spiritual saturation as long as the two priests are able to walk. It took me a move back to the Midwest with a lower cost of living coupled with higher income to realize that a sense of wealth is subjective. I didn't realize I left everything for more, only to discover that the novelty here and perceived Heimweh*(I grew up here in the Midwest) was browner than the Nebraska prairie.

Greg's visit coincided with Mother's Day last year. Gardener and I were flat footed morbs as Greg pulled out flowers and chocolates for the ladies while we stood with our suds in buckets.

Chris,

Greg once was my bete noir in the fora(here and Fisheaters), but after his depth charge detonation of the submariners(not just Matthew's Bering Sea spillage incident) over at Cathinfo did I realize that he may be on to something. The only time he stepped overboard in my estimation is when he chastised someone here who for all intents and purposes was suffering from clinical depression. JoeVoxpopulussuxx put him in his place and that was that. My recommendation is just to let it go, bro. Your goodness will be its Justice.

[Gardener]

Indeed on Colorado. I took a hit coming back due to the cost of living increase.