Attending EF form with no head covering

[YoungTradCath]

It’s not “rebellion” and it isn’t “customary.”

The OP needs to decide what she wants and do that. I would be mortified to wear a mantilla, because to me it’s just a way to call attention to myself. There are few simple head coverings available for warm weather. A simple knit hat is nice in cooler times. Going without is also fine. Many do.

Sanctity is not measured by what’s on your head but in your heart.

Well, yes, it is customary. And we already have a photocopied letter from a Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church explaining this. His Excellency’s opinion is that a head covering should be worn at that Form of the Mass, but it would not be a sin not to.

 

[domandcarols]

I own three mantillas. I quit covering after a woman noticed I was wearing a black mantilla and asked me if I was a virgin.

Ew… That’s so creepy…

 

[odile53]

Sorry this thought popped into my head when someone mentioned Grace Kelly in a long cotton scarf and an Audi: Isadora Duncan. Not good. And yeah, it really happened.

Don’t mix long flowy scarves of any sort and convertibles, or any other machinery/heavy equipment! Even a vacuum cleaner, an elevator door, or a revolving door or a power car window can injure you if it snares a long veil, scarf, mantilla (or very long hair, too, for that matter!) When around equipment like this, make sure you know where the hair/headcovering is in relation to the equipment, and avoid entanglements.

 

[TrueLight]

Well, yes, it is customary. And we already have a photocopied letter from a Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church explaining this. His Excellency’s opinion is that a head covering should be worn at that Form of the Mass, but it would not be a sin not to.

Yep.

And also some traditional parishes actually have it written in their rubrics on dresscode which includes not wearing short dresses or shirts/dresses with extremely long sleeves.

For example, one FSSP parish has a dress code that says women’s skirts should cover thier knees when seated and that women should cover their heads out of modesty.

It doesn’t mean there aren’t people who don’t adhere to the policy, but the dresscode is all there for people to see.

If one doesn’t like or agree with it, one can always go somewhere else.

 

[YoungTradCath]

The whole point of going to the EF because one prefers it is not to preserve it as some quaint antiquity piece in a glittery gallery of other quaint antiquity pieces. It is to make it thrive through the whole corpus of traditional, pious Catholic practices. If we treat the EF as some sort of mostly dead, cut-off liturgical game and relegate it to footnote status, then that is what it is going to become. The biggest thing the EF needs right now to retain its teetering status as a mainstream liturgy of the Church is strong, unashamed identity. This will make many of the erroneous “V II changed everything” cheerleaders upset and even more tired and it will be highly unconventional in today’s society, but it will further burn the EF in as an intrinsic, permanent institution in the Roman Catholic Church. No doubt most supporters of the EF want it to grow in availability and celebration, so how about we start acting and thinking like it?

It’s not going to get there by a hodgepodge of people who only semi-care and who have no real unifying characteristics. You will notice that every community, group, movement in the world that has not only survived but thrived has one thing in common: strong outward identity. That is what the EF requires if it is expected to grow, especially if it is expected to bring about this “reform of the reform.” We must not only retain our ancient and venerable liturgy, but we must support it and nurture it with the other cultural and spiritual practices and exercises that identified it when it was the only “F.” This starts with a correct philosophy. As you may have surmised, my own philosophy is not only to propagate the EF as a fully-equipped Form of the liturgical life of the Church, but also, by its being, propagate the countless other traditional practices of the Church, of which women wearing a head covering at mass is one. They are inseparable. The EF by its very nature awakens those traditional practices, and those traditional practices further solidify the EF by showing its influence in Catholic culture. They aren’t required? Pawh. Rain down the hats and mantillas.

 

[MissRose73]

Yep.

And also some traditional parishes actually have it written in their rubrics on dresscode which includes not wearing short dresses or shirts/dresses with extremely long sleeves.

For example, one FSSP parish has a dress code that says women’s skirts should cover thier knees when seated and that women should cover their heads out of modesty.

It doesn’t mean there aren’t people who don’t adhere to the policy, but the dresscode is all there for people to see.

If one doesn’t like or agree with it, one can always go somewhere else.

I wish some of the dress codes from traditional / EF Mass parishes would trickle down to parishes that do the OF Mass exclusively. I am not asking for a prohibition on women in pants like some of them do. I am not asking for all females to wear something on their head. But at least some sense of modesty, decency and appropriate clothing for Mass should be for both men & women that seems to be more prevalent at EF Masses would be nice to see a bit more of at OF Masses.

My attendance at EF Masses has changed the way I dress for Mass. I tend to wear dresses or skirts that go below the knees that are modest & appropriate. If I choose to wear pants less for Mass but if I do, they are dressy & not tight.

 

[severus68]

The whole point of going to the EF because one prefers it is not to preserve it as some quaint antiquity piece in a glittery gallery of other quaint antiquity pieces. It is to make it thrive through the whole corpus of traditional, pious Catholic practices. If we treat the EF as some sort of mostly dead, cut-off liturgical game and relegate it to footnote status, then that is what it is going to become. The biggest thing the EF needs right now to retain its teetering status as a mainstream liturgy of the Church is strong, unashamed identity. This will make many of the erroneous “V II changed everything” cheerleaders upset and even more tired and it will be highly unconventional in today’s society, but it will further burn the EF in as an intrinsic, permanent institution in the Roman Catholic Church. No doubt most supporters of the EF want it to grow in availability and celebration, so how about we start acting and thinking like it?

It’s not going to get there by a hodgepodge of people who only semi-care and who have no real unifying characteristics. You will notice that every community, group, movement in the world that has not only survived but thrived has one thing in common: strong outward identity. That is what the EF requires if it is expected to grow, especially if it is expected to bring about this “reform of the reform.” We must not only retain our ancient and venerable liturgy, but we must support it and nurture it with the other cultural and spiritual practices and exercises that identified it when it was the only “F.” This starts with a correct philosophy. As you may have surmised, my own philosophy is not only to propagate the EF as a fully-equipped Form of the liturgical life of the Church, but also, by its being, propagate the countless other traditional practices of the Church, of which women wearing a head covering at mass is one. They are inseparable. The EF by its very nature awakens those traditional practices, and those traditional practices further solidify the EF by showing its influence in Catholic culture. They aren’t required? Pawh. Rain down the hats and mantillas.

So basically you want to to split Catholics into two, the fervent EF supporters who want it as their own and the others. I attend OF masses. I would want to attend an EF mass ever so often but it looks like I would not be welcome if those like you have their way. Where is the universal Church then?

 

[piouswoman]

Getting back on topic. I’ve seen women at the EF (diocesan) without head covering, though predominantly women do wear hats or mantillas. I think that covering the head is nice and I’ve taken to wearing a scarf even at the Novus Ordo. Wearing a mantilla, scarf, or hat is not a common practice today, but once a woman begins it becomes natural, and it really does complete an outfit anyway. By the way…I spent between 6-7 years at the SSPX…they expect a woman to cover her hair.

 

[TrueLight]

So basically you want to to split Catholics into two, the fervent EF supporters who want it as their own and the others. I attend OF masses. I would want to attend an EF mass ever so often but it looks like I would not be welcome if those like you have their way. Where is the universal Church then?

Hi Severus,

If you know that an EF mass tends to be more formal, why would you not dress in dress pants?

Sometimes when I am invited out to dinner, I ask what the dress code is. Not because I wouldn’t be admited inside a restaurant in jeans and a cute top (most restaurants are flexible when it comes to women’s attire), but because I do not need to stick out.

For the same reason, if in Rome…

 

[babochka]

How about a bandana or wide headband? Or a scarf tied behind your neck like a bandana? Or a scarf in “babushka” style, tied under your chin.

In my Byzantine parish, we have a few women who cover their heads. Some wear veils, some scarfs, some hats. One wears a bandana. We have an FSSP parish locally, and about 1/2 of those women cover their head; most wear veils.

Why don’t you just go with a scar around your neck, and if you feel you need to, pull it over your head for the Mass. I don’t think anyone at Mass will confuse you for a Muslim.

Elizabeth

 

[severus68]

Hi Severus,

If you know that an EF mass tends to be more formal, why would you not dress in dress pants?

Sometimes when I am invited out to dinner, I ask what the dress code is. Not because I wouldn’t be admited inside a restaurant in jeans and a cute top (most restaurants are flexible when it comes to women’s attire), but because I do not need to stick out.

For the same reason, if in Rome…

Hi TL,

All churches are houses of God so i strongly believe everyone should be welcome. Of course if someone tries to steal the chalice or the vestments (they did at my church), they should at the least be kicked out unceremonously. However, if a couple in jeans walks in to atttend an EF mass, who has the right to say they should not be there if they are happy to receive the Body of Christ kneeling etc and they do not notice or care that they ‘stick out’.

.Yes, we tend to follow the dress code in invitations etc but that is about adhering to human rules.

At the heart of it, the Mass is about receiving Christ.

 

[YoungTradCath]

So basically you want to to split Catholics into two, the fervent EF supporters who want it as their own and the others. I attend OF masses. I would want to attend an EF mass ever so often but it looks like I would not be welcome if those like you have their way. Where is the universal Church then?

I attempted to broaden the discussion about head coverings, giving it context in a bigger picture. I’m sorry if you didn’t see that.

 

[severus68]

I attempted to broaden the discussion about head coverings, giving it context in a bigger picture. I’m sorry if you didn’t see that.

Yes, but by trying to make the EF elitist only for those who agree to and adhere to rules on externals. I may just be dumb, sorry.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Well, yes, it is customary. .

This is semantic. “Customary” is whatever the custom is in the culture you are in. Head covering was not a custom, but a mandate decades ago. With the reappearance of a now non-standard form of Mass, what is customary is yet to be decided. If a Bishop is to speak on the matter, it is the Ordinary whom you consult.

That said, I have no personal interest in whether a woman chooses to cover her head or with what at such a Mass. However, not doing so in no way constitutes rebellion against a thing.

 

[Julia_Mae]

The biggest thing the EF needs right now to retain its teetering status as a mainstream liturgy of the Church is strong, unashamed identity. This will make many of the erroneous “V II changed everything” cheerleaders upset …

Upsetting people is hardly a reason to promote some form of Mass over another. There is no reason to promote one form of Mass over another. The Church has defined what the Ordinary Form of the Mass is. Just as we resist the unnecessary multiplication of EMs, we should resist Extraordinary forms somehow becoming the Ordinary by the will of some people instead of the Will of the Pope. When appropriate ecclesiasticall authority comes out with a mandate for head-covering, we’ll be having a different discussion.

 

[Ohana]

Back in the day when we all wore head covers - Mom got a lot of teasing about her hats- there was a little lacey round skull cap type thing. It was flat, not fitted, 6 or 7 inches round. You could carry it in your purse in a little bag or plastic bag and pin it on with a hairpin. It just covered the top of the head but met the requirement to have a head covering. Should be easy to make.

 

[YoungTradCath]

This is semantic. “Customary” is whatever the custom is in the culture you are in. Head covering was not a custom, but a mandate decades ago. With the reappearance of a now non-standard form of Mass, what is customary is yet to be decided. If a Bishop is to speak on the matter, it is the Ordinary whom you consult.

That said, I have no personal interest in whether a woman chooses to cover her head or with what at such a Mass. However, not doing so in no way constitutes rebellion against a thing.

A bishop did speak on the matter. In fact, Cardinal Burke, just last year. We have a link photocopy of the letter in this thread. We know it isn’t required.

 

[Deo_Gratias42]

. By the way…I spent between 6-7 years at the SSPX…they expect a woman to cover her hair.

Good for them. Perhaps they’d like to inform their penitents that they don’t have the faculties to hear confessions therefore they haven’t actually absolved anyone of their sins and that they should seek out their nearest priest who actually does have the faculties to hear Confessions.

Really, I don’t care what the SSPX expect. They also think it’s a mortal sin for a woman to wear pants.

I don’t approve of the whole EF and OF separation or the idea of there being separate parishes for EF and OF Masses. I think having the two under one roof keeps each from going off into the ditch on the extreme side.

 

[YoungTradCath]

They also think it’s a mortal sin for a woman to wear pants.

Do they really?

 

[ringil]

My husband is actually the one who would like to go back to the local EF community. I like it but honestly prefer Divine Liturgy or the OF done extremely traditionally. however I do like the missa cantata EF.

However I don’t have a head covering…the scarves I have make me look like a Muslim which isn’t the look I’m wanting.

does anyone here frequent the EF without a head covering? The last time I was there about a quarter of the female attendees there didn’t cover.

A head covering is NOT required to attend the EF. My wife doesn’t wear one and about half of the women at the church I have attended do.