If you're new here, you may want to sign up for email alerts or subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for reading!
Early Christian Mosaic in Basilica of Sant' Apollinare Nuovo in Ravenna, Italy
I came across some references to early Christian ritual vestments this morning in Matthew Brown’s The Gate of Heaven. He cited The Awe-Inspiring Rites of Initiation by Edward Yarnold, and The Archæology of Baptism by Wolfred N. Cote. I looked up these references and they were intriguing in describing an early Christian practice of face veiling during initiation rites:
In some places a white linen cloth was also spread over the candidate’s head. Theodore took this to be a mark of freedom: slaves have to uncover their heads. John the Deacon believed it to be a symbol of the priesthood: ‘for the priests of that time always wore on their heads a mystic veil.’ St. Augustine in a Low Sunday sermon takes the opposite view to Theodore: it is unveiling that symbolizes freedom:
Today is called the octave of the infants [newly baptized, not necessarily young]. The veils are due to be removed from their heads and this is a sign of freedom… Today, as you see, our infants mingle with the faithful and fly as it were from the nest.1
In another place Yarnold informs us:
St. Cyril tells the candidate that when he is exorcised he will be breathed on and his face will be covered to secure for him peace of mind from the dangers of a roving eye. 2
Wolfred Cote likewise agrees:
Some days before baptism they were veiled, or with their faces covered, in order that their mind might be more at liberty, and that the wandering of their eyes might not distract their soul. 3
I looked up St. Cyril of Jerusalem’s word about this in the Procatechesis or Prologue to his catechetical lectures in the fourth century CE (see my intro to these lectures). As part of the initiation rite was an exorcism, or a casting out of Satan and any devils from the initiate. As part of that rite, Cyril tells us that the face was veiled as a means of focus:
Thy face has been veiled, that thy mind may henceforward be free, lest the eye by roving make the heart rove also. But when thine eyes are veiled, thine ears are not hindered from receiving the means of salvation. 4
The early Christian veil served many more symbolic purposes than shielding the eyes, but these we will study at another time.
Notes:- Yarnold, The Awe-Inspiring Rites of Initiation, 33, link. [←]
- Yarnold, The Awe-Inspiring Rites of Initiation, 10, link. [←]
- Cote, The Archaeology of Baptism, 70, link. [←]
- Cyril of Jerusalem, Procatechesis 9, link. [←]
17 Comments
I have often wondered about the veil and if we know anything regarding its purpose and function. The information you have here is interesting, but it doesn’t answer the question of why only women would wear a veil, and its symbolic function. Has anyone seen/read/heard any explanation for the meaning of the veil?
I think the apostle Paul explained it well to the Corinthians in 1 Cor. 11:1-16. There have been many exegetical studies of these scriptures that we could look at (here is one), but basically it is because the woman is subject to the man who is then subject to God. The woman covering their head is a symbolic action of submission to their husband, and therefore submission to God and Christ. Paul also expressed this is Ephesians 5:22-25. I will explore the meaning of the actual veil as a head covering more in a future post, but this was mainly focused on the early Christian action of veiling the face.
Just a reminder everyone that we shouldn’t directly refer to the temple ceremony here.
K, but then I wonder why these documents seem to mention that they only veiled themselves once? Paul doesn’t talk about *why* it is a dishonor for her to not be covered. That is what I am wondering about. There must be something else to this.
The symbolism of the veil itself is apart from the action of veiling. Paul’s discussion in 1 Corinthians doesn’t discuss the latter necessarily. This commentary on the scripture is insightful: http://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/d006rpVeil_2_Goodman.htm
I hope to get into another discussion why the women wore the veil, and why Paul talked about it, in a future post. This post is concerned with the early Christian references to the action of veiling the face.
Another point of view concerning women and veils: Part of the ancient Hebrew concept of a betrothed women was that she represented a holy temple. This is why she was veiled. Since, according to Paul, the glory of God is the glory of man and a woman is the glory of man, then to a man the women should represent the glory of God. The woman was created for man as a holy temple. Like a temple, the veiled women represents the presence or holiness of God.
Doesn’t Paul’s statement in verse 10, “because of the angels” refer to the Book of Enoch tradition of angels falling from Heaven to have relations with women?
Do you have a link to this tradition for further information about it…?
The New Living Translation of verse 10 is “So a woman should wear a covering on her head as a sign of authority because the angels are watching.”
Apparently that particular verse is confusing to many theologians, but this pastor gives two popular views:
Brad, I think this is what Justin is getting at:
“However, Enoch’s theology differed from that of the later Church on a number of points. According to the story of the Watchers in chapters 6-16, fallen angels took human wives and bore offspring by them (a variation of the account of the Nephilim given in Gen. 6:1-4). From this it follows that angels are not entirely or eternally spiritual beings, but can take on material bodies. Several church fathers wrote about the fallen angels’ earthly activities and two of them, Tatian and Lactantius, speculated on the nature of the fallen angels’ material bodies. It has even been argued that 1 Cor. 11:10 (‘a woman should [cover] her head, because of the angels’) warns women to dress modestly so they do not arouse lust in the fallen angels—putting this teaching on angelic physical bodies in the New Testament!” (http://beforethenewtestament.com/rich_text.html)
There are certainly societies where women may not appear in public without a veil. However, I believe that not all cultures where veiling of women is common require strict observance.
Although the veil most probably goes back to the subordination of women, in societies where the veil is an accepted part of everyday life, wearing a veil can take on some interesting connotations. One is the notion of freedom you have already pointed out. But more common is the simple sense of being properly dressed. By properly dressed, I mean, not casually dressed, but more formally attired.
Women who may work outside the home would typically not wear a veil, especially while actively working as it would interfere with their work. Two things follow from this. First, single women would typically be required to work outside the home and, therefore, more inclined to be seen unveiled. As such, the distinction between veiled women and unveiled women is often an indication of their marriage status.
Secondly, women who are being supported adequately by a husband would not be required to work outside the home. These women would not need to go unveiled as working women often would. Hence, the veil is a sign of affluence, stability and status in society.
I think it is interesting to note how far the symbolism of the veil has shifted from its ancient roots to modern connotations. I think it is unfortunate that some women today only relate with the modern “oppressive” connotations of the veil (which is largely created by the western media, the women who actually wear veils in modern societies will report a wider range of experiences and motivations). As your post and some of these comments point out that the wearer of the veil was actually in a rather exalted or protected position compared to those around them that were not veiled. Another famous veil reference in the scriptures is that of Moses having to veil his face before the house of Israel after having communed with the Lord, the house of Israel not being able to endure Moses’ presence in essence. The other veil is of course the veil of the temple with the most exalted or divine space being behind the veil from the perspective of the majority of the population.
You may find some insight in what Cyril of Jerusalem said about the early Christian prayer circle. He said that some of the participants’ words during this activity were those of the Seraphim who surround God’s throne in the heavenly temple. Cyril noted that the Seraphim used one of their sets of wings to veil their faces (see Edward Yarnold, Cyril of Jerusalem [New York: Routledge, 2000], 183).
Fascinating reference Sporgsmal. Thank you for pointing this out!
In Cyril’s fifth lecture on the mysteries (ordinances) he notes that the early Christian initiates gathered “round God’s altar” and pronounced certain prayers, including:
As a woman in the church I am pleased with the insight that the early Christian veil was a sign of freedom. It fits well with my understanding of the veil itself.
In Genesis 20: 16 we see an illustration of this very principle that you have discussed. It is here that Abimelech allows Abraham the freedom to dwell wherever it pleased him in his land. In turn, Abraham becomes a “covering of the eyes” for Sarah and all that is with her.
I love this concept of freedom…
Thanks.
An interesting sidenote: In the Kabbalah, the feminine aspect of God (represented by the Menora in the temple) was veiled when the temple was ransacked and defiled by invaders. According to the Kabbalah, this aspect of God will remain veiled until the Messiah comes in glory. I would think that the veil MIGHT be considered in that light.