Headcoverings for women at Mass

[beckycmarie]

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 I read…err…somewhere… that just because it wasn’t addressed in the newer Cannon doesn’t mean it has been revoked.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?

It is no longer required since it is not currently in the Code of Canon Law, but there are some traditionalists who insist it is required. Not true.

That being said, I choose to wear a headcovering. My choice has everything to do with my relationship with God, and nothing to do with what other women choose to do.

 

[IrishAm]

A woman will not feel out of place at most Tridentine Masses without a headcovering. Many women will wear them. Others will not. All those coming in faith will be welcome regardless.

 

[BigFeet]

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.

This has been discussed in multiple threads here, and what St. Paul instructed the Corinthians had nothing to do with the “culture” or “customs” of his time. He very precisely meant exactly what he said. Your own personal interpretations of scripture may make sense to you, but they are not in line with the teachings of the Church. You should not be studying the Bible on your own, with your own fallible interpretations. That’s what the protestants do.

Go to the Catholic Q &A on the EWTN website, and ask Fr. John Echert what St. Paul meant. Fr. Echert has the Licentiate in Sacred Scripture (S.S.L.) degree from the Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome with additional graduate studies at the Ecole Biblique, Jerusalem. He won’t just give you his “opinion”.

 

[Eilish_Maura]

This has been discussed in multiple threads here, and what St. Paul instructed the Corinthians had nothing to do with the “culture” or “customs” of his time. He very precisely meant exactly what he said. Your own personal interpretations of scripture may make sense to you, but they are not in line with the teachings of the Church. You should not be studying the Bible on your own, with your own fallible interpretations. That’s what the protestants do.

Go to the Catholic Q &A on the EWTN website, and ask Fr. John Echert what St. Paul meant. Fr. Echert has the Licentiate in Sacred Scripture (S.S.L.) degree from the Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome with additional graduate studies at the Ecole Biblique, Jerusalem. He won’t just give you his “opinion”.

Ohh he will give his opinion (though some may respect it more than coming from others) BUT only St Paul knows the final answer on this one re custom based or not.

 

[Spiller]

If we’re going to be traditional, let’s get the men back into prayer shawls and yarmulkes.

Matthew

Not to mention tefillen!

 

[BigFeet]

Ohh he will give his opinion (though some may respect it more than coming from others) BUT only St Paul knows the final answer on this one re custom based or not.

On the contrary. That’s the beauty of the Catholic Church. We don’t have to guess what the Bible says. It’s a Catholic book, and we have 2000 years of sacred Tradition and teaching to tell us what it means.

 

[Eilish_Maura]

On the contrary. That’s the beauty of the Catholic Church. We don’t have to guess what the Bible says. It’s a Catholic book, and we have 2000 years of sacred Tradition and teaching to tell us what it means.

So exactly where does the Church make this pronouncement and how is it reflected in current Cannon Law?

 

[Leeta]

It must have been a pretty symbolic covering, if a doily or kleenex or a see-through veil is sufficient. Why not a big hair bow?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

BigFeet

This has been discussed in multiple threads here, and what St. Paul instructed the Corinthians had nothing to do with the “culture” or “customs” of his time.

It most certainly did have to do with the customs of his time. During those days, the only women who appeared in public without head covering, were prostitutes and pagans. Showing up in this way for prayer, was considered an abomination.
Don’t forget, in St. Paul’s time, women weren’t allowed into the temple or synagogues.

Your own personal interpretations of scripture may make sense to you, but they are not in line with the teachings of the Church.

Being a little judgmental here aren’t you? For in fact what I’m stating is the teachings of the Church, which I received from Catholic Biblical scholars. Just because it doesn’t agree with your interpretations, doesn’t make it invalid.

You should not be studying the Bible on your own, with your own fallible interpretations. That’s what the protestants do.

Neo-Catholic hogwash which isn’t worth responding to.

Jim

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is closed. Please read existing threads, which have covered this issue thoroughly. Thank you all.