ASK FATHER: Priest tells woman not to wear veil at Mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter yankeesouth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Veils can be real head turners. A couple of gals coming into church like these 2, people would notice.
 
I don’t see anything unique about Melania’s veil - it looks like a normal black veil… His daughter’s is unique but it was a special occasion, so not out of place in any way.
 
If you are to watch a Korean catholic mass on you tube you would see most women covering their heads.
 
Kris34 said:
If you are to watch a Korean catholic mass on you tube you would see most women covering their heads.
Click to expand...
How about if I saw a Korean mass in person, here in America? Would the women mostly be covering their heads? There is a Korean Catholic community here.
 
If you walk into church with the Pope and the President of the United States, you’ll turn even more heads.
Mary888 said:
From the article:
…he gave a scorching homily about women trying to seem holier than thou by what they wear to church…
Click to expand...
As an aside, does it seem as if this priest was having a day on which martyrdom seemed a faster ticket to the beatific vision than putting in year after year of parish life? It’s hazardous enough to take on short hemlines and plunging necklines. Who ventures into veil correction? Is he trying to get himself “banished” to a monastery? Wants to find his head literally on a pike? What?
 
Last edited:
Technically, it was not abrogated, it simply was not mentioned in the 1983 CIC. So what is not covered by the 1983 CIC is covered by the 1917 CIC, which does mention it.
 
If a woman has a private audience with the Pope, she IS required to cover her head.
 
I don’t know I didn’t see that on youtube.

What happens in the US isn’t necessarily what happens globally.
 
Speaking as a guy who lives in Texas, when men wear jeans to church, they are jeans that look new, and some country boys do iron them. Country boys also keep a good pair of boots looking new for church, and they always wear a shirt with a collar (normally checkered with sleeves) and a belt. This is common in places like Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma (I lived in Oklahoma City), Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, and Kansas.

In short, quite a few country boys are properly disposed, and many have good manners. From 6 to 106, these cowboys are noted for saying “Yes Ma’am, No Ma’am, Yes Sir, No Sir, Hello Mr. or Mrs. So and so, hello Miss Kathy, etc.” After spending 25 years in the South, I don’t make fun of country boys - east coast boys can learn a thing or two from them.
 
No. The entire 1917 code was abrogated. Whatever is not mentioned in the 1983 code is not part of canon law.
 
hwriggles4 said:
Speaking as a guy who lives in Texas, when men wear jeans to church, they are jeans that look new, and some country boys do iron them. Country boys also keep a good pair of boots looking new for church, and they always wear a shirt with a collar (normally checkered with sleeves) and a belt. This is common in places like Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma (I lived in Oklahoma City), Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, and Kansas.

In short, quite a few country boys are properly disposed, and many have good manners. From 6 to 106, these cowboys are noted for saying “Yes Ma’am, No Ma’am, Yes Sir, No Sir, Hello Mr. or Mrs. So and so, hello Miss Kathy, etc.” After spending 25 years in the South, I don’t make fun of country boys - east coast boys can learn a thing or two from them.
Click to expand...
This is true in ranching country out West, too. The men have dress jeans and sometimes wear bolo ties with white dress shirts and their dress boots, but to be considered dressed they at least wear a shirt with a collar that is in new condition. They are very clearly not showing up for Mass in work clothes, even though they have jeans on.
 
somecanadian said:
The priest never said a word BUT many, many, many women in the parish approached me and tried to get me to stop with comments such as:

“The boys want to see your pretty face!”

“What are you hiding?”

“Too lazy to do your hair, dear?”

I tried attending without covering but it felt so wrong that I stopped.
Click to expand...
Those ladies really needed an “I BEG your pardon?” That was so out of line. I don’t mean they couldn’t be forgiven, just that there isn’t an excuse for it.
 
Last edited:
Margaret_Ann said:
If a woman has a private audience with the Pope, she IS required to cover her head.
Click to expand...
I think you’re referring to the diplomatic protocol for a visit to the Pope, the kind of formal visits extended to heads of state.

www.romereports.com

Can you have a private audience with the pope? It depends. - Rome Reports

December 03, 2017. Tell me who you are, and I'll tell you what kind of meeting you can ask for with the pope.
www.romereports.com www.romereports.com

Pope Francis has reportedly relaxed the rules concerning how women on diplomatic visits are asked to dress, but from what I gather women who don’t follow the old protocols are subject to criticism from those who believe those rules are written in a stone set in concrete. Melania Trump knows better than to “violate” rules that have been changed, because she knows that many people are not aware the rules have changed. (Well, besides, if I were given the privilege to meet the Pope under such circumstances, I think I’d want to follow the traditional rules. The First Lady may feel the same way.)

When Prince Charles and Camilla met Pope Francis for a state visit, Camilla wore a pale gold dress and no hat. When the pair had met with Benedict XVI, in contrast, Camilla had worn a black dress and veil, as this was the protocol at the time. Her dress was correct on both occasions.

www.telegraph.co.uk

'Le privilège du blanc': how Pope Francis has relaxed the strict dress code once adhered to by The Queen, Michelle Obama and more

Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, met the Pope yesterday wearing a pale gold dress and coat by one of her favourite British labels, Anna Valentine.
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
 
Last edited:
The 1917 code has been abrogated.

Can. 6 §1. When this Code takes force, the following are abrogated:

1/ the Code of Canon Law promulgated in 1917;

2/ other universal or particular laws contrary to the prescripts of this Code unless other provision is expressly made for particular laws;

3/ any universal or particular penal laws whatsoever issued by the Apostolic See unless they are contained in this Code;

4/ other universal disciplinary laws regarding matter which this Code completely reorders.

§2. Insofar as they repeat former law, the canons of this Code must be assessed also in accord with canonical tradition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top