Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumRussian Orthodox Church organises against Pussy Riot punks
Church + state = oppression. People are so stupid.
Still, have to hand it to the girls. They know how to pick a name.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)Take the fucking kerchiefs off! It'll be ok... oh, no it won't. Because the men are abusive to women who don't obey!
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)She made sure we were all baptized, but we hardly ever went to church. She set up a little "home church" in our house with a candle and a crucifix. That's where we prayed, safe from predator priests,their hate-filled sermons, and that whole kerchief-wearing requirement for women when in church, the Christian version of the hijab.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)the kerchief wearing requirement for women in church is the "Christian version of the hijab".
I would have to disagree.
Even men of the Jewish faith wear yarmulkes on their heads
during religious services..
The kerchiefs on women's heads are worn only in a church service;
They are NOT, like the hijab, required to be worn EVERYWHERE,
and every day, outside of the home.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Of course the hijab rules are more extreme, requiring they be worn everywhere outside the home (rather than just at church with the kerchief), but same mentality, IMO. And a lot of the old babas wear them all the time, just out of custom, like the women in the OP picture. Although you don't have to wear the kerchief everywhere, it's still a requirement that has no counterpart for men in Christianity.
I'm not sure what your point re yarmulkes is, since I was talking about Christianity, but yarmulkes hardly cover anything up anyway. And I am no expert on judaism, but I have known women in certain ultra-orthodox Jewish sects who were required to hide their natural hair and had to wear wigs or full kerchiefs all the time--not just a small piece of round cloth bobby-pinned to the tops of their heads like the men.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)covering their "shameful" manly heads in synagogue however small a part of the head is covered.
No, there's no counterpart in Christianity for men, but Christianity does comes out of Judaism.
I guess I'm not sure why you are trying to compare Women in Christianity
with Women in Islam.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)whathehell
(29,067 posts)to one degree or another?
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)whathehell
(29,067 posts)There's a reason John Lennon wrote the song
"Woman is the Nigger of the World".
Lars77
(3,032 posts)whathehell
(29,067 posts)When you check on the REAL lives of soviet women,
you get the true picture....Women got the chance to
work in the professions -- and then come home, make dinner, clean house,
and take care of the shopping and child care with very little help from husbands.
In addition, wife beating continues to be VERY common in Russia and much of Eastern Europe,
so, sorry, no sale.
Lars77
(3,032 posts)I was thinking more of a political system so i didnt really answer your question.
You say yourself that the oppression of women is common in Russia and Eastern Europe and you are right, but not due to communism of course.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)"Not due to communism, of course",
No, but in spite of it, it seems...One could say the
same of many religions and philosophies. Many of them
sound good on paper.....How they play out in reality,
for most, at least, is another story entirely.
knitter4democracy
(14,350 posts)If that were true, then why does the priest cover his head during most of the liturgy as well? It's about respecting the holiness of the place and preparing for prayer (a kerchief or shawl does wonders in shutting out the rest of the world so I can prepare for Holy Communion).
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)I don't know what the priests wear at your church, but the Orthodox priests I've seen wear the fancy hats to show status, not to cover their shame. The lay people are another story. Why is it that men do not need to "show respect" by wearing a shawl/covering at your church?
knitter4democracy
(14,350 posts)It's tradition for men to remove head coverings when in a holy place (tradition is more than just our church and/or culture--quite pervasive throughout many cultures) to show respect and for women to cover their heads (usually with fancy coverings involving lots of work).
I've always thought it was more about how a man's head covering often shows his status, which means he'd be competing with the priest and the other men, and that such behavior in women is okay for some reason.
The hat the priest wears isn't about status (especially since they tend to wear certain ones only during liturgy and nowhere else) as much as it is about the meaning behind the hat and preparing for prayer. He removes it for Holy Communion, just like the other men do, only to put it back on afterward.
I personally always like how women use their headscarves as a way to express their individuality as well. We wear ones that match our outfits, are lacy or embroidered as we prefer, and show our own personal preferences. In my church, it's entirely choice on whether to wear one or not, so even just wearing one is an expression of a woman's individuality.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)told, the reason you wore hats, scarfs or veils to church was to cover your hair so it wouldn't distract the men. Yep, right out of Sister's mouth.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)and never heard anything like that....I expect that was just one nun's "guess".
In any case, the fact that the practice entailed wearing "something",
however flimsly, on the head for a forty minute religious service,
rather than being obligatory outside garb, every day
undermines whatever trace of "original" connection there might be.
While I appreciate the obvious, if not entirely explicable desire to equate Catholicism
with Islam, it doesn't hold much water.
Orthodox Jewish practices (which STILL requires head coverings
for women AND men) are more similar to Islam
and, historically, that connection makes a lot more sense.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)whathehell
(29,067 posts)and if you are, as you say, "too lazy to look it up"
You must excuse us from accepting it at face value.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)and Catholic school, for me, was such an eternity away. I did have to go to church recently though for a funeral and it seems the women don't cover their heads anymore anyway.
whathehell
(29,067 posts)St. Paul said a lot of things..They didn't necessarily become church law.
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)It sounds like a kinder, gentler Spanish inquisition, doesn't it?
Joe Shlabotnik
(5,604 posts)Christ, they'd lock me up and throw away the key! Seriously though, its got nothing to to with 'hooliganism', it is all about maintaining authoritarian control, and being good worker-drones. My Grandmother grew up there under Stalin, and she was taught to fear and obey both the state and also the church. That grooming never left her.
Confusious
(8,317 posts)I thought they did away with that, communism and all.
Joe Shlabotnik
(5,604 posts)it just went underground. In the big cities the church's property was seized, but often remained open to the public, and priests learned to keep a lid on it. In rural many areas (where my grandmother was from) not much changed, just the level of fear ratcheted up. The soviets knew that they'd never route out religion, especially for it's agrarian citizens who were not much better or worse off then before the revolution.
knitter4democracy
(14,350 posts)It helped to control the masses. That, and the purges were starting to turn people against him.
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)It seems to be something that some people believe is fashionable nowadays. Not being one of those, it bothers me.
It reminds one a little bit of what that eminent critic of Russian society and culture, Fyodor Dosteyevsky, wrote about in the story of the Grand Inquisitor embedded in The Brothers Karamazov. Dostoyevsky may have been using the Roman Catholic Church as a stand in for the Russian Orthodox Church. In any case, for those not familiar with the story, the Grand Inquisitor condemns a stranger to death, knowing full well that the stranger is Christ returned to earth. He tells Christ that is it necessary to kill him all over again if the Church is to maintain its authority. Authority, not Christ, is what is tantamount.
So, authority goes unquestioned because if it is challenged, then it is no authority. The Church backs Putin, who rigs elections and murders his opponents the way it once backed the Romanovs, who plunged the nation into unnecessary wars, freed surfs only belatedly and winked at pogroms.
knitter4democracy
(14,350 posts)He came up through the ranks, and frankly, I've not heard good things about him in church (we go to a Russian Orthodox church here in Battle Creek). When the bishop came, I was shocked by his language in his sermon (that his translator cleaned up quite a bit) on how we have to stand up against Islam and losing people from the faith. I am reminded, yet again, that most of the best saints in our faith have historically ignored and/or stood up to those in power, even those in power in the Church.
RZM
(8,556 posts)Though to be fair, a lot of the church hierarchy was as well. Many not entirely willingly, I'm sure.
Still, I'm not aware of such accusations against Alexei. Alexei seemed a pretty genuine man of the faith, with his primary loyalties to the church and people. Kirill is probably very loyal to the church, but he seems to be quite the backer of the Putin clique as well.
knitter4democracy
(14,350 posts)There's going along to stay safe but making sure to put faith first, and then there's being a KGB patsy and shill.
Patriarch Alexei was a good leader for our church. We miss him.
yortsed snacilbuper
(7,939 posts)knitter4democracy
(14,350 posts)It's part of the faith, beauty and making earth appear to be heaven.
yortsed snacilbuper
(7,939 posts)Patriarch Kirill's watch has been a subject of controversy ever since he wore it on a visit to Ukraine in 2009. Perceptive observers identified the model as a Breguet, which costs about 30,000 euros.
I think he sold his soul for a watch!
http://news.yahoo.com/photos/photo-of-the-day-slideshow-slideshow/patriarch-kirills-watch-subject-controversy-ever-since-wore-photo-004828856.html
knitter4democracy
(14,350 posts)The watch is insane for him to own with so many believers starving and suffering and so many churches still needing to be rebuilt and fixed up.
St. Nicholas would smack him upside the head for the watch. Vestments are one thing; the watch is another.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)FraDon
(518 posts)n/t
whathehell
(29,067 posts)How "progressive" of you.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)"Eternal boyhood is the dream of a depressing percentage of American males, and the locker room is the temple where they worship arrested development" Russell Baker
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002599523#post4
i stole it from another post today
whathehell
(29,067 posts)I like that one...Thanks for the link!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)they're hurting harming harming hurting with their nasty language and monkey-like rutting, and Jesus cries along with Andrea Dworkin every time the world is forced to suffer a naked boob.