Head Covering During Mass

[adrift]

You are very judgmental. You could not possibly know how much thought I have given to it. What makes you think I just read it today?

The custom of not wearing hats for women has been for over thirty years and despite what you believe it was the result of changing fashion just as it was for men. The custom has never changed that it is alright for men to wear hats indoors. Sorry if you think that is gender bias. It is what it is. Society has always had gender bias.

I don’t see any symbolism in wearing a hat. It means nothing to me.
I asked about my quote from Paul. Paul equates it to women not cutting their hair. He makes a very geometric statement.
If women do not cut their hair than they should wear a veil.

 

[Tom317]

IMO, one of the main problems with no more head coverings is that there has been a huge blurring of the lines between genders over the last 30-40 years…this is NOT a good thing. God knew what He was doing when He mandated the husband to be the head of the wife, and He knew what He was doing when He made men to be spiritual leaders of the domestic Church. However, most women today find all of that to be chauvanistic and too binding on their freedoms. The very thought of a man holding spiritual leadership role in families is disgusting to many modern women.

It is bad for the Church.

It is bad for families.

It is bad for the world.

 

[adrift]

It is not explicit in the 1983 Law, but was explicit in the 1917 Law. Since it is a custom/law/practice from the Church’s inception, the 1983 Law could not actually remove it anyway–which is likely why it was not included in the 1983 Law.

What nonsense. It is like saying the Church for centuries did not allow the reception of the blood so it can’t allow it now.

There is not basis for it cannot be removed.

 

[adrift]

IMO, one of the main problems with no more head coverings is that there has been a huge blurring of the lines between genders over the last 30-40 years…this is NOT a good thing. God knew what He was doing when He mandated the husband to be the head of the wife, and He knew what He was doing when He made men to be spiritual leaders of the domestic Church. However, most women today find all of that to be chauvanistic and too binding on their freedoms. The very thought of a man holding spiritual leadership role in families is disgusting to many modern women.

It is bad for the Church.

It is bad for families.

It is bad for the world.

Not in my Family. You make to many assumptions

 

[Tom317]

You are very judgmental. You could not possibly know how much thought I have given to it. What makes you think I just read it today?

The custom of not wearing hats for women has been for over thirty years and despite what you believe it was the result of changing fashion just as it was for men. The custom has never changed that it is alright for men to wear hats indoors. Sorry if you think that is gender bias. It is what it is. Society has always had gender bias.

I don’t see any symbolism in wearing a hat. It means nothing to me.
I asked about my quote from Paul. Paul equates it to women not cutting their hair. He makes a very geometric statement.
If women do not cut their hair than they should wear a veil.

Not judgmental (easy to use that card btw). Just stating my views.

Did you read it before, yes or no?

It means nothing if you see the symbolism, God does.

Also, what the culture thinks means nothing to men when they are in Church because the Church says nothing about what exactly to wear. Perhaps to some women a bikini is modest dress?

So, by your reasoning, men should be able to wear hats in Church because the 1983 Law does not hold the prohibition.

Now, please, follow me on this. You say that women do not have to wear head coverings because the 1983 Canon Law no longer contains a mandate for it, right? Well, regarding head coverings, your argument is based in Canon Law and the fact that the 1983 Law does not contain the mandate. Therefore, using your method of arguing, we should see that the Canon Law no longer prohibits men from wearing hat sin Church, which means men are free to wera hats in Church.

 

[Tom317]

Not in my Family. You make to many assumptions

Yes it is, you just cannot see it.

 

[Tom317]

What nonsense. It is like saying the Church for centuries did not allow the reception of the blood so it can’t allow it now.

There is not basis for it cannot be removed.

Please, I beg you. Read the Canons before you write. I am not making this stuff up, it is in the Canons.

 

[Tom317]

To all,

I am done with this topic, for now. I plan to try to raise this topic with appropriate people. Hopefully I will be able to do so and get a definitive response. If and when I do, I will return at that time. I will, of course, obey the Church in every regard, for she is our Mother and Ark of Salvation, she belongs to our Lord and is our true refuge.

God Bless to all and thanks for the challenging and enjoyable talk.

 

[adrift]

Please, I beg you. Read the Canons before you write. I am not making this stuff up, it is in the Canons.

Let me get this straight. You say that canon law cannot change a canon law because canon law says it can’t:shrug:
That is circular reasoning

 

[itsjustdave1988]

…Do we see Mr. Akin trying to do any “harmonization”? …

I’ve read the canons, and I don’t find a binding obligation convincing either based upon explicit canon law, or based upon binding custom.

The Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has stated that head coverings are no longer normative…

**INTER INSIGNIORES, 15 Oct 1976
Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

…it must be noted that these ordinances, probably inspired by the customs of the period, concern scarcely more than disciplinary practices of minor importance, such as the obligation imposed upon women to wear a veil on the head (1 Cor 11:2-6); such requirements no longer have a normative value.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

To all,

I am done with this topic, for now. I plan to try to raise this topic with appropriate people. Hopefully I will be able to do so and get a definitive response. If and when I do, I will return at that time. I will, of course, obey the Church in every regard, for she is our Mother and Ark of Salvation, she belongs to our Lord and is our true refuge.

God Bless to all and thanks for the challenging and enjoyable talk.

Tom,

By analogy, the long standing (1200 year) custom in the Latin Church of giving Holy Eucharist to infants, over time, was no longer normative. Not only was this custom no longer normative after long usage, but later, canon law prohibited it in the Latin Church, right?

 

[adrift]

Yes it is, you just cannot see it.

What do you know of my Family?

The very thought of a man holding spiritual leadership role in families is disgusting to many modern women.

It is bad for the Church.

It is bad for families.

It is bad for the world.

Basically I agree with this but my comment that it is not true of my family and I can’t think of one family that it is true that modern women find it disgusting that their husband has the spiritual leadership. I think you generalize to much.

 

[ICXCNIKA]

This thread is ridiculous. The OP is obviously an idiot.

 

[maryjk]

This thread is ridiculous. The OP is obviously an idiot.

 

[beckers]

This thread is ridiculous. The OP is obviously an idiot.

I was about to say something until i realized you were the OP.

I see that you are trying to be the spiritual head of your household but i just don’t think you should *force *head coverings on to your wife. It’s not the norm today (right or worng) and it will take some time for her to get use to the idea. You have planted the idea in her head so pray for her and let the holy spirit work on her. You can’t force someone to love something.

I have never seen a man wear a baseball cap in the church and i have even seen people ask men to remove their caps during the national anthem at baseball games. Basically if a man wears a hat into church people will look at you strange and here in Texas someone would probaly remove it for you.

 

[Tom317]

Update to those who care:

I have made my contact with a Canon Lawyer and have asked primlimary questions. The Lawyer is a Priest and frequently travels to Rome and Spain for talks and for meetings. I am trying to get him to look at an analysis of the topic, and if he agrees it has merit, we might be able to move it forward.

 

[Tom317]

Considering the overall direction of the Church/faith, I have serious doubts that I will make any progress on this issue, it is perceived as un-important when compared to other matters.

However, I do wonder. If the Church formally states that women should continue to wear head coverings, would women in the United States obey, or laugh it off just like contraceptives?

 

[Tom317]

I was about to say something until i realized you were the OP.

I see that you are trying to be the spiritual head of your household but i just don’t think you should *force *head coverings on to your wife. It’s not the norm today (right or worng) and it will take some time for her to get use to the idea. You have planted the idea in her head so pray for her and let the holy spirit work on her. You can’t force someone to love something.

I have never seen a man wear a baseball cap in the church and i have even seen people ask men to remove their caps during the national anthem at baseball games. Basically if a man wears a hat into church people will look at you strange and here in Texas someone would probaly remove it for you.

I agree that men should not wear hats, but can’t you see the double standard?

 

[maryjk]

However, I do wonder. If the Church formally states that women should continue to wear head coverings, would women in the United States obey, or laugh it off just like contraceptives?

If the church formally states that women should wear head coverings, I would wear one. No matter how ridiculous I would look.

Of course, I haven’t laughed off the contraceptive rule either.

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

However, I do wonder. If the Church formally states that women should continue to wear head coverings, would women in the United States obey, or laugh it off just like contraceptives?

In this case, I would wear a head covering (in church), but it is highly unlikely I would wear a mantilla. Mantillas are not part of my cultural background; wearing one would make as much sense to me as wearing a grass skirt. I would wear a hat.