Wearing a Veil?

[Baelor]

The veiling of women, dear friend, is an immemorial custom of apostolic origin, therefore even if it was nullified as a law, the binding of immemorial custom would remain.

The Church does not believe that there is a moral or canonical obligation to wear veils. It has said this explicitly, and has abrogated the canonical requirement to wear veils. Can you point us to the standing Church teaching (i.e. a Church document) that requires women to wear veils?

The Church would not be required to “teach” respecting an immemorial custom of apostolic origin, that any man can read about in Sacred Scripture, in a passage that is as clear as they noon day sun (I Cor. 11: 2-16).

The Church does not operate in this way; the Church does teach respecting “immemorial customs.” We know they are immemorial because the Church teaches them. The Church has abrogated the law on veils, and therefore it is necessarily not immemorial.

Canon Law says that an immemorial custom not only has the force of law, but that Canon Law cannot abrogate it. You would need a papal or magisterial statement abrogating the head covering requirement because it is an immemorial custom. However, to date the Church has made no such authoritative statement. Moreover, we are not at liberty to discard immemorial customs at will, simply because our fanatical feminist culture takes a strong objection to them and wants to push them into disuse.

Where has the Church declared veiling an immemorial custom? The requirement to veil has been abrogated. Thus it is not immemorial and subject to regulation and change.

The Church does not and has not required the faithful to determine immemorial customs and moral requirements for themselves. Reason will lead us to most of the moral positions of the Church, but not to positions that are allegedly correct but that the Church does not explicitly espouse. There is not any onus on the faithful in the manner you describe.

 

[Portrait]

The Church does not believe that there is a moral or canonical obligation to wear veils. It has said this explicitly, and has abrogated the canonical requirement to wear veils. Can you point us to the standing Church teaching (i.e. a Church document) that requires women to wear veils?

Dear Baelor,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Hope all is well and thankyou for the above response.

If you are alluding to Inter Signiores, dear friend, please consider the following:

1. The direct and immediate object of that document was to affirm that only men could be admitted to the priesthood. The statement by Cardinal Seper on head coverings is obiter dicta, not essential to the holding and not binding as a pronouncement of law in any way.
2. The Cardinal was refering, not to women covering their head in Church, but merely to the custom of women covering their hair everywhere, as had been the case in some parts of the world formerly. If you read his exact words, dear brother, there is nothing that compels the conclusion that he was referencing liturgical veiling. To say otherwise would be to argue that the Cardinal made a somewhat seditious statement, since this document came out prior to the 1983 Code of Canon Law and and no man doubted that Canon 1262 of the 1917 Code was binding.
3. Moreover, dear friend, this document was issued by the CDF, which does not have any competence over liturgical law. If this document was designed to amend the 1917 Code, it would have had to have come from the Pope himself. If it was designed to change liturgical law, then clearly it would have come from the congregation with the competence to do so.

These are, I think, cogent reasons demonstrating that that passage in Inter Insigniores was not intended to, nor indeed could it, overthrow a canon in the 1917 Code. Moreover, even if it was addressing the liturgical practice, which is highly doubtful, it lacked both the competence and the authority to do so. Even subsequent to the promulgation of the 1983 Code the devout and biblical practice of veiling stands as both liturgical law and as an immemorial custom.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[Baelor]

The biblical case for women donning a veil in divine worship is extremely cogent and is not culturally conditioned.

By abrogating the requirement, the Church has stated that it is not a temporally universal norm.

That the biblical requirement to veil is not some timebound cultural custom, is perfectly clear from from I Cor. 11: 10: “That is why a woman ought to have a veil on her head, because of the angels” (emphasis mine).

By abrogating the requirement, the Church has stated that veiling is nor a moral requirement. It is still a wonderful devotion, but not a moral imperative.

Thus, dear friend, it is quite evident that St. Paul’s teaching does have perpetual validity and cannot be dismissed as culturally conditioned and therefore irrelevant in the 21st. century, as some erroneously contend.

The Church does not believe that St. Paul’s teaching has perpetual validity.

If you are alluding to Inter Signiores, dear friend, please consider the following

I was not. I was referring to the fact that the canon requiring women to veil in Church has been undeniably abrogated, and that the Church does not require women to veil.

If you disagree, please cite the standing Church teaching that demonstrates irrefutably that women must veil during Mass. Please cite a Church document still in force today.

 

[DebChris]

I was not. I was referring to the fact that the canon requiring women to veil in Church has been undeniably abrogated, and that the Church does not require women to veil.
.

The length of a person’s hair and/or whether or not a woman chooses to wear a head covering or not wear a head covering is not a prerequisite for salvation. Indeed, the requirements for salvation are not gender specific. Our salvation lies in our acceptance of the sacrifice of the Cross. Have we accepted Jesus Christ as our personal Lord and Savior? Our salvation is not a matter of what we eat, drink, or wear. Are we willing to submit our will to God’s Will?
If God should speak through me (to prophesy), even though my head is unveiled, who am I to stand in His way, to stifle the Holy Spirit working through me? Likewise, if a man is to prophesy in God’s name while wearing his cultural garb, including headdress, who am I to refuse to listen?

Some of the saints, especially during the Middle Ages, pointed to the modest dress of Muslim women as an example for Christian women to also follow. A woman’s hajib encompasses modesty, inner pride, and a desire to please her Creator. Wearing something on my head, whether it be a nice hat or scarf, is a matter of discipline not “law.” Not having that head covering will not keep me from attending Mass, nor is it any reason for a woman to feel guilty.

 

[Portrait]

By abrogating the requirement, the Church has stated that it is not a temporally universal norm.

By abrogating the requirement, the Church has stated that veiling is nor a moral requirement. It is still a wonderful devotion, but not a moral imperative.

The Church does not believe that St. Paul’s teaching has perpetual validity.

I was not. I was referring to the fact that the canon requiring women to veil in Church has been undeniably abrogated, and that the Church does not require women to veil.

If you disagree, please cite the standing Church teaching that demonstrates irrefutably that women must veil during Mass. Please cite a Church document still in force today.

Dear Baelor,

Hello again and thankyou for your response.

Please understand, my dear friend, that I have no quarell with the fact that the *legal *obligation for veiling was rescinded by the 1983 Code, but legal obligation is not the same as moral obligation, based upon timeless biblical teaching and immemorial custom. Please see my earlier post # 192. The former involves coercion whilst the latter is voluntary and freely done out of obedience to the teaching of Scripture, which is, after all, the teaching of Holy Mother Church.

Sorry, old chap, but by abrogating the legal requirement, which was probably for very practical reasons (again see # 192), it does not follow that the Church has stated that veiling is no longer a moral obligation. That is merely your personal understanding and it does not stand up to scrutiny, as I have shown. Canon law cannot abrogate immemorial custom of apostolic origin - our Church simply does not operate in this manner.

Again, I am not contending that the Church has not legally abolished the requirement for women to veil at Mass, rather I am contending, dear friend, that the moral obligation to do so remains perpetually valid and is firmly based upon the teaching of St. Paul in Sacred Scripture.

The Church teaching that a women should not go to Holy Mass bare headed is given in I Corinthians 11: 2-16 and the Church has always understood that passage as having continued validity, as I am sure you are aware, my dear brother.

God bless and goodbye for now.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax:tiphat:

 

[jilly4ski]

Dear Baelor,

Hello again and thankyou for your response.

**Please understand, my dear friend, that I have no quarell with the fact that the *legal ***obligation for veiling was rescinded by the 1983 Code, but legal obligation is not the same as moral obligation, based upon timeless biblical teaching and immemorial custom. Please see my earlier post # 192. The former involves coercion whilst the latter is voluntary and freely done out of obedience to the teaching of Scripture, which is, after all, the teaching of Holy Mother Church.

Sorry, old chap, but by abrogating the legal requirement, which was probably for very practical reasons (again see # 192), it does not follow that the Church has stated that veiling is no longer a moral obligation. That is merely your personal understanding and it does not stand up to scrutiny, as I have shown. Canon law cannot abrogate immemorial custom of apostolic origin - our Church simply does not operate in this manner.

Again, I am not contending that the Church has not legally abolished the requirement for women to veil at Mass, rather I am contending, dear friend, that the moral obligation to do so remains perpetually valid and is firmly based upon the teaching of St. Paul in Sacred Scripture.

The Church teaching that a women should not go to Holy Mass bare headed is given in I Corinthians 11: 2-16 and the Church has always understood that passage as having continued validity, as I am sure you are aware, my dear brother.

God bless and goodbye for now.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax:tiphat:

The point Portrait, is that because of the Church’s failure to teach veiling as a moral imperative, it therefore cannot be a moral imperative, if we believe the Church is infallible in moral teachings.

Lets use an example:
Mass is required on Sundays, it is both a legal and moral imperative and a positive obligation, listed in scripture and canon law. We also veil for similar reasons that we attend Mass, it is personally edifying, but really for the honor entitled to God that we veil/attend Mass.
Indeed the Church could not leave out of canon law the obligation to attend Mass on Sunday’s even if it wanted to, because ecclesiastic law follows moral law and cannot contradict moral law. Leaving a positive duty out of the law is contradicting. If the Church failed to teach that we were to attend Mass on Sundays (despite the clear references in scripture) we would indeed question the infallibility of the Church on matters of faith and morals. But in this case the Church has removed the requirement to veil, by an absence of teaching, and since the Church cannot contradict moral imperatives veiling cannot be a moral imperative.

Legality must follow morality. And it cannot contradict morality.

 

[FatherOfTwelve]

By abrogating the requirement, the Church has stated that it is not a temporally universal norm.

By abrogating the requirement, the Church has stated that veiling is nor a moral requirement. It is still a wonderful devotion, but not a moral imperative.

The Church does not believe that St. Paul’s teaching has perpetual validity.

I was not. I was referring to the fact that the canon requiring women to veil in Church has been undeniably abrogated, and that the Church does not require women to veil.

If you disagree, please cite the standing Church teaching that demonstrates irrefutably that women must veil during Mass. Please cite a Church document still in force today.

Ahh, he did “THE BIBLE”

Hate jumping in the middle, but here’s two cents.
The church (truth) stands on three witnesses.

1. Sacred Scripture - Like Prego, it’s in there. The HOLY SPIRIT speaking through St. Paul put the requirement in scripture. It will NEVER be “Abrogated” from the scripture.
2. Sacred Tradition - Catholic women have been veiled at Mass for two thousand years. Nuns, Sisters and Lay. Think about that for a second. The Nuns/Sisters “Honor” their Head; they are married to Jesus Christ. The lay, they honor their husbands.
3. Magisterium - Now here’s the tricky one. Can they teach by example? Yes they can, I guarantee every bishop on this planet removes his little red beanie at the prayer of consecration. WHY???
   He is OBEYING 1st Cor chapter 11.
   The Bishop/MAN removes his head covering because he is now truly in Persona Christi. He WILL NOT dishonor his head, the Father. The men attending Mass never wear head coverings because “7* For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God”
   In Mass the woman is veiled because she is “; but woman is the glory of man.” Man’s “Glory” shall be covered.
   The Magisterium Obey the Scripture/Tradition and sound doctrine, they just don’t have the :ballspin: to preach it. Same as contraception, abortion, purgatory, etc. etc.
   Okay, I’ll stop the rant….

And yes below is my daughter the Sister, they veil because the Bible tells them so

 

[jilly4ski]

Ahh, he did “THE BIBLE”

Hate jumping in the middle, but here’s two cents.
The church (truth) stands on three witnesses.

1. Sacred Scripture - Like Prego, it’s in there. The HOLY SPIRIT speaking through St. Paul put the requirement in scripture. It will NEVER be “Abrogated” from the scripture.
2. Sacred Tradition - Catholic women have been veiled at Mass for two thousand years. Nuns, Sisters and Lay. Think about that for a second. The Nuns/Sisters “Honor” their Head; they are married to Jesus Christ. The lay, they honor their husbands.
3. Magisterium - Now here’s the tricky one. Can they teach by example? Yes they can, I guarantee every bishop on this planet removes his little red beanie at the prayer of consecration. WHY???
   He is OBEYING 1st Cor chapter 11.
   The Bishop/MAN removes his head covering because he is now truly in Persona Christi. He WILL NOT dishonor his head, the Father. The men attending Mass never wear head coverings because “7* For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God”
   In Mass the woman is veiled because she is “; but woman is the glory of man.” Man’s “Glory” shall be covered.
   The Magisterium Obey the Scripture/Tradition and sound doctrine, they just don’t have the :ballspin: to preach it. Same as contraception, abortion, purgatory, etc. etc.
   Okay, I’ll stop the rant….

And yes below is my daughter the Sister, they veil because the Bible tells them so

Actually they veil because their constitution tells them they have to. They might have written the constitution that way to reflect biblical practice, but as Sisters, they owe their obedience to their constitution and their superior.

 

[DebChris]

The point Portrait, is that because of the Church’s failure to teach veiling as a moral imperative, it therefore cannot be a moral imperative, if we believe the Church is infallible in moral teachings.

Lets use an example:
Mass is required on Sundays, it is both a legal and moral imperative and a positive obligation, listed in scripture and canon law. We also veil for similar reasons that we attend Mass, it is personally edifying, but really for the honor entitled to God that we veil/attend Mass.
Indeed the Church could not leave out of canon law the obligation to attend Mass on Sunday’s even if it wanted to, because ecclesiastic law follows moral law and cannot contradict moral law. Leaving a positive duty out of the law is contradicting. If the Church failed to teach that we were to attend Mass on Sundays (despite the clear references in scripture) we would indeed question the infallibility of the Church on matters of faith and morals. But in this case the Church has removed the requirement to veil, by an absence of teaching, and since the Church cannot contradict moral imperatives veiling cannot be a moral imperative.

Legality must follow morality. And it cannot contradict morality.

And attending the Obligation Mass supersedes any requirement to wear or not wear a head covering in the assembly. It is in the Mass that we hear God’s Word proclaimed, and explained. It is during the Mass that we share in the Divine Sacrifice that made our salvation possible. It is during the Mass that we receive Christ in the Eucharist and allow ourselves to be transformed into His image and likeness. We gather in community because we are each a part of the Body of Christ. The Eucharist is the “source and summit” of our Faith.
Even if asked to remove my head covering, and I have been, I would rather remove it than miss this great Gift. When I do cover, I wear a scarf, the only socially accepted head covering in my overseas parish.

 

[FatherOfTwelve]

Actually they veil because their constitution tells them they have to. They might have written the constitution that way to reflect biblical practice, but as Sisters, they owe their obedience to their constitution and their superior.

Sorry, but they obey God. The one’s that have it in their constitution are obeying, the one’s that don’t, their orders are dying…

 

[FatherOfTwelve]

Actually they veil because their constitution tells them they have to. They might have written the constitution that way to reflect biblical practice, but as Sisters, they owe their obedience to their constitution and their superior.

And beside that, THAT"S the ONLY comment you have towards my most magificent post And I put so much thought into it…

God Bless!!!

 

[Walking_Home]

Baelor:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baelor View Post
By abrogating the requirement, the Church has stated that it is not a temporally universal norm.

By abrogating the requirement, the Church has stated that veiling is nor a moral requirement. It is still a wonderful devotion, but not a moral imperative.

The Church does not believe that St. Paul’s teaching has perpetual validity.

I was not. I was referring to the fact that the canon requiring women to veil in Church has been undeniably abrogated, and that the Church does not require women to veil.

If you disagree, please cite the standing Church teaching that demonstrates irrefutably that women must veil during Mass. Please cite a Church document still in force today.

Ahh, he did "THE BIBLE"

Hate jumping in the middle, but here’s two cents.
The church (truth) stands on three witnesses.

1. Sacred Scripture - Like Prego, it’s in there. The HOLY SPIRIT speaking through St. Paul put the requirement in scripture. It will NEVER be “Abrogated” from the scripture.
2. Sacred Tradition - Catholic women have been veiled at Mass for two thousand years. Nuns, Sisters and Lay. Think about that for a second. The Nuns/Sisters “Honor” their Head; they are married to Jesus Christ. The lay, they honor their husbands.
3. Magisterium - Now here’s the tricky one. Can they teach by example? Yes they can, I guarantee every bishop on this planet removes his little red beanie at the prayer of consecration. WHY???
   He is OBEYING 1st Cor chapter 11.
   The Bishop/MAN removes his head covering because he is now truly in Persona Christi. He WILL NOT dishonor his head, the Father. The men attending Mass never wear head coverings because “7* For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God”
   In Mass the woman is veiled because she is “; but woman is the glory of man.” Man’s “Glory” shall be covered.
   The Magisterium Obey the Scripture/Tradition and sound doctrine, they just don’t have the :ballspin: to preach it. Same as contraception, abortion, purgatory, etc. etc.
   Okay, I’ll stop the rant….

And yes below is my daughter the Sister, they veil because the Bible tells them so

---

Yea – just like a “sola scriptura” protestant. From the looks of it – there is more than one floating around.

 

[FatherOfTwelve]

---

Yea – just like a “sola scriptura” protestant. From the looks of it – there is more than one floating around.

The Tradition, the Magisterium too, you did not see how they agree???

BTW, I’m Catholic. Thousands upon thousands of Cathoilcs agree…

 

[wisecath]

If a woman believes that wearing a veil & burka are pretty, then let them do so. As long as the woman is doing this on her own free will & doesn’t face violence if she refuses, it must be her right to do so. There are women who think the veils & burkas are beautiful & wear them because they believe it’s fashion.

 

[Walking_Home]

Walking_Home:

Yea – just like a “sola scriptura” protestant. From the looks of it – there is more than one floating around.

The Tradition, the Magisterium too, you did not see how they agree???

---

The requirement for women to cover – has been abrogated. So no – the Church does not agree with “Portraits” and your – imposition that women cover.

 

[FatherOfTwelve]

---

The requirement for women to cover – has been abrogated. So no – the Church does not agree with “Portraits” and your – imposition that women cover.

The Bishops OBEY it…

Thousands (maybe a million) of Women Obey it…

OK MILLIONS of Lay Men Obey it…

In Scriptue, Tradition and the Magisterium… Yea, the Church DOES agree:thumbsup:

 

[Walking_Home]

Walking_Home:

The requirement for women to cover – has been abrogated. So no – the Church does not agree with “Portraits” and your – imposition that women cover.

The Bishops OBEY it…

---

As has been stated various times – the Church does Not require women to veil. So you and “Portrait” – should not be imposing – what the Church does not.

 

[FatherOfTwelve]

---

as has been stated various times – the church does not require women to veil. So you and “portrait” – should not be imposing – what the church does not.

why do the bishops obey it???

 

[Walking_Home]

If a woman believes that wearing a veil & burka are pretty, then let them do so.** As long as the woman is doing this on her own free will & doesn’t face violence if she refuses**, it must be her right to do so. There are women who think the veils & burkas are beautiful & wear them because they believe it’s fashion.

---

When so called Catholics – impose on women – what the Church does not — that is doing violence to women.

 

[Debora123]

The length of a person’s hair and/or whether or not a woman chooses to wear a head covering or not wear a head covering is not a prerequisite for salvation. Indeed, the requirements for salvation are not gender specific. Our salvation lies in our acceptance of the sacrifice of the Cross. Have we accepted Jesus Christ as our personal Lord and Savior? Our salvation is not a matter of what we eat, drink, or wear. Are we willing to submit our will to God’s Will?
If God should speak through me (to prophesy), even though my head is unveiled, who am I to stand in His way, to stifle the Holy Spirit working through me? Likewise, if a man is to prophesy in God’s name while wearing his cultural garb, including headdress, who am I to refuse to listen?

Some of the saints, especially during the Middle Ages, pointed to the modest dress of Muslim women as an example for Christian women to also follow. A woman’s hajib encompasses modesty, inner pride, and a desire to please her Creator. Wearing something on my head, whether it be a nice hat or scarf, is a matter of discipline not “law.” Not having that head covering will not keep me from attending Mass, nor is it any reason for a woman to feel guilty.