Should Women Wear Veils In Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rogerteder
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No. Wearing veils in church has never been a tradition in my country, and I do not think women would ever consent to it. It is just very alien to us. In old times, married women covered their heads during mass as well as outside of church as a sign of submission to husbands though.
 
Well the truth is yes, they should.

All those people who say no should reconsider. This is what Sacred Scripture recommends to do in the presence of Angels.

Now you can say you do not have to if you do not want to, which is true. We all have free will. No one should look down on those who do not or say that they are bad or anything like that.

But the truth is that women should, but have the choice not to.

Opinion does not really matter, and comfort does not matter that doesn’t change the fact that women should wear a veil, it just shows that each person has different reasons not to. I can choose not to go to daily Mass to go to a ballgame, that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t go to daily Mass if I can. It doesn’t make it a requirement either but it is certainly a good Catholic thing to do.

Just because you don’t like something or it isn’t in fashion doesn’t change the fact that it is a good and holy thing to do.

God Bless
Scylla
 
I can understand the visceral reaction of some modern women to the idea of covering our heads (whether by veil, scarf, hat or whatever) because I used to feel the same way. It’s a symbol of patriarchal oppression, yadda yadda yadda. After my conversion to Christianity and subsequent interest in traditional Catholic practices, I read up on the rationale, and at that point I ceased to see anything objectionable about it and a lot about it to be commended, especially in this day and time where we women do have choices. I now cover my head every time I attend mass, whether it is an EF mass or an OF mass. I don’t make it big show of it - I simply tie a lacy scarf around my head. And, I have noticed several other women at the OF mass doing it too. I have no idea whether they are covering their heads as a personal devotion as I am, and it isn’t my place to judge anyone either way. I do think it is a beautiful custom, and I am glad to see it returning in some places, even in a small way.
 
ibkc said:
I can understand the visceral reaction of some modern women to the idea of covering our heads (whether by veil, scarf, hat or whatever) because I used to feel the same way. It’s a symbol of patriarchal oppression, yadda yadda yadda. After my conversion to Christianity and subsequent interest in traditional Catholic practices, I read up on the rationale, and at that point I ceased to see anything objectionable about it and a lot about it to be commended, especially in this day and time where we women do have choices. I now cover my head every time I attend mass, whether it is an EF mass or an OF mass. I don’t make it big show of it - I simply tie a lacy scarf around my head. And, I have noticed several other women at the OF mass doing it too. I have no idea whether they are covering their heads as a personal devotion as I am, and it isn’t my place to judge anyone either way. I do think it is a beautiful custom, and I am glad to see it returning in some places, even in a small way.
Click to expand...
That is beautiful, especially your doing it an the OF Mass. God bless you in that.

Maybe you can share some of the rationale behind head coverings that you think are meaningful?

Pax Christi tecum.
 
I also cover my head at any Mass or at adoration. I think it is ridiculous actually, and a bit misplaced, to ONLY cover one’s head at an EF Mass. Hello!!! Jesus is JUST as present at an OF Mass as He is at an EF Mass!!! :rolleyes: Just because everyone is speaking Latin doesn’t make a difference - Mass is Mass, and Jesus is Jesus.

Sorry - just a bit of a rant there. 😉

~Liza
 
strugglingalong said:
Also Mary is an example for women and she always has her head covered. Ever see a picture of her without her head covered? Ever see a picture of Joseph with his head covered?

Pax Christi tecum.
Click to expand...
Joseph was a devout Jewish man and would have almost always had his head covered.

The reason Mary had her head covered was that was the social custom of the time, not because it was a message for all time. If that was the case, all men should stop wearing pants in order to emulate Christ.

If women want to wear something on their heads in church, that’s fine, but it doesn’t mean they must, nor does it mean they are more spiritually advanced than those who do not.
 
Rogerteder said:
I just finished reading a paper by Bob Sungenis on head coverings for women in Church. The purpose of the paper was to determine whether the new (1983 code) code of canon law did away with the mandate, for women, to wear a veil in church. Sungenis concludes that the law is still in force for women to wear viels in Church.

I’ll summarize his arguments (he can be a little long winded as you may know).
  1. The new code does state that, in general, that the 1917 code is abrogated.
  2. The new code states that if the new code does not specifically mention the termination of a law, of the old code, it may not necessarily be abrogated.
  3. The new code specifically says that if a law has been practiced for over 100 years that the law is still in effect unless it is specifically mentioned to no longer be in force.
  4. The new code does not specifically mention head coverings.
  5. Head coverings, for women, in Church have been a law for roughly 1,970 some years. They have been required in scripture(by Saint Paul), and by tons of Church Fathers (Sungenis quotes a bunch of them). Also, by “tons” of Popes in which Sungenis quotes.
  6. There was a passing, ambiguous statement by Paul VI that may have seemed to indicate that head coverings were null and void. The topic of the Pope’s letter was not head coverings, nor did his statement specifically abrogate head coverings.
Conclusion: Sungenis asserts since head coverings have never been specifically terminated, and have been in practice for 1,970(and more) that they are still required for women to wear in church.

Id be interested in your thoughts?
Click to expand...
My thought is that hundreds of years ago there were societal reasons for women to cover their hair. Those reasons are no longer valid. Exposing your hair today does not mean the same thing.
 
sancte_joseph said:
and thirdly: you said it has nothing to do with faith in Christ…well if you truly believe…then meditate…should you not humble yourself as we all should…**a great sign reverance and love of the Lord is a veil…**a sign that unfortunatly men don’t have
(other than dresing well for church…but everyone should do that)
Click to expand...
Obviously the Church has a different viewpoint.

Read LilyM’s quote once again.

"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 their head (1 Cor 11:2-16); such requirements no longer have a normative value …"

It’s not as if a thousand years ago a woman put on her headcovering to show reverence when she went to Church. She in all probability was already wearing one due to social customs.

However, if a woman wants to see it as reverence and wear one that’s fine.
 
Sure said:
The reason Mary had her head covered was that was the social custom of the time, not because it was a message for all time.
Click to expand...
Really? How do you explain the fact that when Mary appears now, as in Fatima or Medjuorgje or anywhere, she has her head covering? That seems to say it is timeless.

Pax Christi tecum.
 
strugglingalong said:
Really? How do you explain the fact that when Mary appears now, as in Fatima or Medjuorgje or anywhere, she has her head covering? That seems to say it is timeless.

Pax Christi tecum.
Click to expand...
Because that is how the people “expect” to see her.
 
BSHoop96 said:
Because that is how the people “expect” to see her.
Click to expand...
So are you saying that they don’t really see her as she appears, but only are seeing what they *want *to see? Be very careful with that.

~Liza
 
May I put my two cents worth in?This country cousin is old enough to remember when head covering was mandatory.Now I wear my headscarf to Mass and stick out like a sore thumb.Oh well…Personally,I think much stricter dress codes should be in place…totally across the board.NO bare shoulders,no armpits showing,or short skirts,skintight anything and on and on.It’s disgraceful how people dress for church these days.
 
mammallama said:
May I put my two cents worth in?This country cousin is old enough to remember when head covering was mandatory.Now I wear my headscarf to Mass and stick out like a sore thumb.Oh well…Personally,I think much stricter dress codes should be in place…totally across the board.NO bare shoulders,no armpits showing,or short skirts,skintight anything and on and on.It’s disgraceful how people dress for church these days.
Click to expand...
Yes, thank you for sharing! You’re absolutely, 100% right! It is embarrassing at best and scandalous (possibly leading others to sin) at worst the way people dress for Holy Mass. How a Christian can dress as some do for Holy Mass is beyond me…

And keep sticking out like a sore thumb! Good for you!

Pax Christi tecum.
 
lizaanne said:
So are you saying that they don’t really see her as she appears, but only are seeing what they *want *to see? Be very careful with that.

~Liza
Click to expand...
You might want to be very careful as well.
Do you understand that the Vatican has never yet supported the visions at Medjugorje?

Rather, see this:

"Vatican to Probe Medjugorje Sightings

27 June 2008 Sarajevo _ The Vatican announced it will form a commission to investigate the apparitions of the Virgin Mary in Bosnia’s southern town of Medjugorje.

Local media quoted on Friday Bosnian Cardinal Vinko Puljic saying that this will be the first Vatican commission ever to visit Medjugorje.

In 1991, a Commission set up by the Bishopric Conference in the former Yugoslavia visited the town, but ruled that nothing out of the ordinary ever took place. The Vatican has never investigated the sightings, nor has it recognized them.

Puljic stressed that no swift decision should be expected as the commission will look separately into the apparitions as well as into the work of local clerics. The process of recognition of apparitions by the Vatican usually takes decades. …"

balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/11395/

The Vatican has simply ALLOWED visits by pilgrims, no more than that.
 
catharina said:
You might want to be very careful as well.
Do you understand that the Vatican has never yet supported the visions at Medjugorje?

Rather, see this:

"Vatican to Probe Medjugorje Sightings

27 June 2008 Sarajevo _ The Vatican announced it will form a commission to investigate the apparitions of the Virgin Mary in Bosnia’s southern town of Medjugorje.

Local media quoted on Friday Bosnian Cardinal Vinko Puljic saying that this will be the first Vatican commission ever to visit Medjugorje.

In 1991, a Commission set up by the Bishopric Conference in the former Yugoslavia visited the town, but ruled that nothing out of the ordinary ever took place. The Vatican has never investigated the sightings, nor has it recognized them.

Puljic stressed that no swift decision should be expected as the commission will look separately into the apparitions as well as into the work of local clerics. The process of recognition of apparitions by the Vatican usually takes decades. …"

balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/11395/

The Vatican has simply ALLOWED visits by pilgrims, no more than that.
Click to expand...
If you’re referring to me, I just threw that in. You can easily just look at Fatima. Ever see Our Lady of Fatima, apparitions of which are approved, without her head covered? No. I’ve never even seen a n image of Our Lady without her head covered.

Pax Christi tecum.
 
catharina said:
Do you understand that the Vatican has never yet supported the visions at Medjugorje?

The Vatican has simply ALLOWED visits by pilgrims, no more than that.
Click to expand...
There has been bickering about this since day one.I suggest reading reports from unbiased third parties.A very good book that goes into depth about this whole event is "The Miracle Detective"written by Randall Sullivan…The Holy See is still investigating Medjugorje and probably will for many years to come,per usual.They like to take their time.
 
catharina said:
You might want to be very careful as well.
Do you understand that the Vatican has never yet supported the visions at Medjugorje?
Click to expand...
Who said ANYTHING about Medjugorje??? :eek: I don’t believe I ever mentioned it!

Wow - now we are making things up? :confused:

Let’s stay on topic here.

As it has been suggested, Mary has never appeared without her head covered. No specific visions have been referenced.

~Liza
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top