M
mrsdizzyd
Guest
No need to apologize! 
Exactly. And thatās about the same percentage of priests who never say or do anything about it.This is very true, but given that something like 90% of Catholics see nothing wrong with contraception and just as many use them, says something is seriously wrong here.
If āescorted outā involves any degree of hand-on-arm, hand-on-shoulder, or any physical contact at all, thatās assault, and such a church would deservedly be in line for criminal and civil complaints, I would surely hope if thatās what it took to end such an outrageous practice.We have a non-diocesan TLM where head-covering is obligatory. Women will be approached and required to wear, or else escorted out. They get 100% compliance, and I donāt think any have had to leave. But still ⦠it cuts against our current culture.
You might be surprise at the things that get said here by people who are not joking. I learned the hard way that around here you really need to sign post a joke.Traddy1962:![]()
Yesterday I would have thought so. But as flags flew on my posts ⦠letās say I learned a lot about CAF people.Your joking right?
Are you seriously comparing a woman who does not comply with an arbitrary demand at an illicit Mass to wearing a swastika in a synagogue?Bring some pork chops in the synagogue wearing a swastikaā t-shirt?
i can confirm that veils or other womenās head coverings have not been required in St. Peterās Basilica for years as of now.An example, for a time (I think still) women are not permitted with certain attire to enter St. Peterās Basilica. For a time, (maybe still) they had to be veiled even after Vatican II.
Whether they have never had to escort women out because of 100% compliance or not, this would be enough for me to look for a Parish offering a welcoming EF Massā¦any Parish that refers to the EF as a āTLMā would be a first warning for me, but a faux rule not coming as a directive of a Bishop, would be the final deal breaker.We have a non-diocesan TLM where head-covering is obligatory. Women will be approached and required to wear, or else escorted out
Including in 1985 when I was first there, a mere 2 years after the new code of canon law was promulgated.i can confirm that veils or other womenās head coverings have not been required in St. Peterās Basilica for years as of now.
Are you sure about that? Iāve seen some very striking ones that do anything but that.A veil only mutes and moderates it.
Never happens ?Therefore, nothing has been āforgottenā if a woman shows up without a veil.
Frankly, that is totally ridiculous. Head covering is NOT obligatory at either EF or OF.Women will be approached and required to wear, or else escorted out.
You donāt believe that the modern Church has authority? Change is not inherently bad. The Mass Paul and Peter experienced would not be the same as the current TLM.True, it doesnāt follow or make sense. Thatās the problem that we face in the modern Church today
I think that is wrong. There is no requirement mandated by the Church for women to wear head coverings during Mass. It may be common practice at EF Masses, but it is not a requirement of the Mass.We have a non-diocesan TLM where head-covering is obligatory. Women will be approached and required to wear, or else escorted out.