E
Eilish_Maura
Guest
Exactly where is this required for the TLM? Is it a holdover from older Cannon law or just habit? TIA
- Status
N
ncguy
Guest
I don’t know the answer to your question. But my basic knowledge of the bible tells me this is a tradition from 1Corinthinans, Chapter 11. I would be curious to hear from others who know the answer to the OP’s question.
B
BigFeet
Guest
There has always been a requirement for women to cover their heads in a Catholic church (as St. Paul taught us in 1 Cor 11) up intil 1983, when it was no longer included in the new Canon. As such, it is no longer required, but remains a beautiful devotion and sign of humble reverence.
There are many posts within CA covering this topic.
There are many posts within CA covering this topic.
J
japhy
Guest
The 1983 Code of Canon Law did not retain the law necessitating headcoverings for women; thus, it is no longer required by law for women to wear them, nor should a church exclude a woman because of her lack of headcovering.
On the other hand, it is only fair for the woman to understand why those communities prefer headcoverings for women, and, if they are so moved, to submit themselves to this tradition in an act of humility.
On the other hand, it is only fair for the woman to understand why those communities prefer headcoverings for women, and, if they are so moved, to submit themselves to this tradition in an act of humility.
E
Eilish_Maura
Guest
So a woman can go any mass - EF or OF - and not worry about the headcovering issue?
S
Subrosa
Guest
Hi EM -
If you’re going to the TLM you will want to wear a headcovering. The Latin Mass still works under the old rules. You will raise eyebrows if you don’t!
Sub
E
Eilish_Maura
Guest
They are subject to the same Cannon Law - though some want to go pretty far back.
Is it part of the GIRM for the TLM?
J
japhy
Guest
I don’t believe OLD canon law is still binding, and to my knowledge the headcovering is not part of the rubrics of the EF of Mass. You are not required to wear a headcovering, but it is usually strongly encouraged.
R
Red_Meg
Guest
I can’t speak for eyebrows
but actually Canon Law is Canon Law, regardless of whether you attend Mass under the new or old form. I raised this very question not long ago with the FSSP priest who takes care of a chapel near my house and he definitely agreed that nobody was required to wear a veil at the TLM.That being said, you may be the only one there without one, but nobody can claim under force of law that you must wear one.
Margaret
S
Spiller
Guest
There is no requirement for a woman to cover her head at an EF.
P
pnewton
Guest
I have a question that I have always wondered. When a headcovering was required, or where it is still expected, does a plain hat qualify, or are they every used?
P
Phemie
Guest
Of course a plain (or elaborate) hat will do. Believe me, before Vat II there were more hats than veils/mantillas in our little country parish. And at school Masses or visits to the church for confession or catechism, it was often a kleenex bobby-pinned to the hair of the forgetful girl who didn’t have anything else to cover her head with.
When I was in middle school the style for a year or two was to wear a little triangle kerchief with strings to tie it (IIRC, that was around the same time as go-go boots). It became the de rigueur head covering for church too. We might have had a veil folded up in a plastic case in our purses on the off chance that we’d have to enter a church somewhere. Like Scouts, our motto was “Be prepared”.
L
LilyM
Guest
Nu-uh. Saw photos a while back from one of our TLM communities here in Sydney - there was quite an amount of happily bared female heads and no-one fussing about them.
P
pnewton
Guest
I only ask because I do intend to go to a TLM when I can. My wife has no veil, but several hats. To her, dressing properly is always important and I know she would like to dress in accord to the norm, and she always tries to dress her best for Mass.
L
lak611
Guest
A hat would be fine. My mom has some old pictures of her Easter outfits from years ago. She always wore a hat, not a veil.
C
CradleCath
Guest
Oh Yes, My Mother loved her hats & Mass gave her an excuse to wear one. Though, she wore it shopping & to meetings, etc. And, of course, the little girls & teenage girls wore hats to Mass, too. The veils & mantillas were just something we were given to put on before we processed to daily Mass at school. At the Sacred Heart Academy where I attended high school…on Mondays we were required to wear our white dresses (uniforms), white heels, gloves & our own hats (that was the day we assembled for Primes). The rest of the week, we wore our regular blue & white uniforms & were handed a veil before we entered the chapel.
Milliner’s shops did quite a business in the 50’s/ Geezzzz, when did I get to be the “old Lady” who told about the fashions of an earlier day???!!!
D
Dani_Girl0517
Guest
I was just wondering about this the other day. I read…err…somewhere… that just because it wasn’t addressed in the newer Cannon doesn’t mean it has been revoked. Does anyone know more about that? I am still learning so bear with me.
Oh, and what about going to the blessed sacrament chapel for adoration? Should we simply be mass appropriate, as our Lord is present there? Or do more (I don’t know what more would be other than a veil) as we are there with Him predominantly alone?
Oh, and what about going to the blessed sacrament chapel for adoration? Should we simply be mass appropriate, as our Lord is present there? Or do more (I don’t know what more would be other than a veil) as we are there with Him predominantly alone?
D
drafdog
Guest
If we’re going to be traditional, let’s get the men back into prayer shawls and yarmulkes.
Matthew
Matthew
T
tcraig
Guest
That is really more wishful thinking on the part of those who would like to see all women cover their heads, rather than fact. The 1917 Code of Canon Law also stated that men and women were to sit on different sides of the Church. That wasn’t addressed in the new Canon, yet you do not see those who insist that headcovering is still a requirement also insisting that separating the sexes during mass is also still a requirement.
My very traditional FSSP priests, who encourage headcovering, say that it is no longer a requirement under Canon Law. Most women in the U.S. do cover their heads; in Europe however (and I have attended the TLM in a few countries there) headcovering is practically nonexistent except in winter (obviously for warmth, as the older churches are generally meatlockers in winter, LOL).
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
But this had to do with the culture of Paul’s time, where women were required to cover their heads in general, not just for Mass.
Paul also said woman should be silent and not teach men. If we took Paul literally, we wouldn’t allow women to teach CCD or in school.
Jim
- Status