I have written before about men’s hair, John Wesley and related subjects. I am not much of a one for “selfies” or drawing attention to myself. All the same, I approach the two-year mark since I “gave up barbers” (to which my Bishop once commented with a smile on his face “I would never have guessed“). I usually tie it up into a ponytail for anything like ministry or church meetings in England, or simply in warm summer temperatures.
There it is, whether you approve of long-haired men or not. At my age (56), I am lucky to have all my hair, even if it has thinned a little on top over the past ten years.
And western too, right up to the mid 19th century.
Note Cromwell’s Puritain Roundheads vs the long-haired high-church Anglican Cavaliers.
“Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?” 1Corinthians 3:14.
I speak, of course, as one who bears the insurmountable burden of the idolatry of the nations.
There is “long hair” by contemporary standards and then, there is LONG HAIR (waist-length at least).
This is an interesting article on the question – http://seanorr.com/biblebelt/is_it_christian_for_men_to_have_.htm Conservative Americans can get quite up-tight about it. Commies, boh! Let’s go geddem! Where’s muh durn piece!
The point is that even since Biblical times, many Christian men – including priests and bishops – have had long hair. King Charles I, John Wesley, plenty of others in history. It is also the usage in the Eastern Orthodox Churches.
Christians manage to get so hung up on persnickety details like length of hair or the wearing of headcovering (yes for women, no for men) — even when the opinion and practice regarding the particular detail has changed over time — and yet manage to overlook so many greater issues, such as humility, love for the poor, etc.
This is typical of many who do not see the advantage of going from the Universal to the Particular, seeing the big picture before the details. A forest is made up of trees and only then of branches, twigs and leaves. There is still immense pressure to make people conform to fashions, as has always been the case. One thing for which we can be grateful in our time is greater tolerance in these matters which do not touch upon essential morality.
The way we dress and wear our hair, beards, etc. can mean things to people that we don’t intend, but I feel completely unconcerned. My wife tells me that long hair means 1960’s hippiedom and left-wing politics. Buzz-cut heads mean right-wing conservatism and authoritarian leanings. I just don’t care. I am neither.
We just need to be ourselves, and I enjoy “jamming” or confusing these associations with outward signs.
“My wife tells me that long hair means 1960’s hippiedom and left-wing politics. Buzz-cut heads mean right-wing conservatism and authoritarian leanings.”
With all due respect to Mrs. Chadwick, not necessarily anymore. There are plenty of right-wing “rednecks” running around the American South and other rural areas with beards and shoulder-length hair or longer, or with ponytails.
I say go for it Father, keep your hair however you like it. Although I’m barely in my thirties I’ve almost always had a pony tail and these days I’m totally ok with it. I have always just liked to wear my hair longer, no apologies. Yours looks awesome. It’s nice to see Western clergy that aren’t afraid to break out of the crew cut and cuff link mold.
Thanks for the encouragement. It’s nice to know you are of the Longhair Fraternity. There are some great guys on http://www.mlhh.org/ – and nothing against public decency! There is even a Roman Catholic priest and a Rabbi from Australia who writes occasionally. It would be good to see other western priests break out of the “corporate” mould.
I’m a fan of the Vianney look! http://ekladata.com/Z2EvxNLuoEq2s7Rbo7Ce4-nKsPg.jpg
The various representations give a more or less styled look. As a “St Seraphim of Zarov” of the west, he wouldn’t have bothered with hair styling or even washing very much. He probably crudely cut it with scissors once it got beyond his shoulders. He wouldn’t have thought of cutting it short in the first half of the 19th century.