Wearing of Veil Inside the Church....

[thewanderer]

Just to make the point clear. Seeing the whole of what we’re discussing, i would be of the opinon that abrogating the requirement of wearing veil by women is actually abrogating the teaching of the Aposlte Paul on the wearing of veil by the women during prayer,

That;s why im looking for the reason or reasons why the abrogation the since this is matter of importance during the Apostles time. as predicated by the Church Fathers.

Le me clarify what I meant then. Women are still allowed to veil if they so desire,it is just that they are no longer required to veil.

I am not sure about this, so correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds to me as though you are asking because you are not sure that the church had the authority to remove the requirement. If that is where your question is coming from then it might be helpful to realize that there are other rules laid down in the Bible that are no longer required and so
perhaps you are looking for what circumstances in general allow something written in the Bible to be set aside, and then to figure out if that is what happened this time. If this is in fact what you are looking for, it will probably help to get it out in the open, if not, feel free to correct me.

 

[agnes_therese]

Just to make the point clear. Seeing the whole of what we’re discussing, i would be of the opinon that abrogating the requirement of wearing veil by women is actually abrogating the teaching of the Aposlte Paul on the wearing of veil by the women during prayer,

As far as I’m aware, veiling was never classified as dogma. It sounds as though you’re trying to say that the Church has to right to change custom. I’d like to see your basis for that.

That;s why im looking for the reason or reasons why the abrogation the since this is matter of importance during the Apostles time. as predicated by the Church Fathers.

Yes, it was important “during the Apostles time”. You’ll note that St. Paul says “For if a women will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a women to be shorn or shaven, let her wear a veil.”
It is no longer “disgraceful” for a women to have short hair; and shaving the hair was a punishment for adultery, also a custom no longer in use.
Customs and societies change. Do you anoint visitors to your home? I expect not.

 

[MissRose73]

I freely choose to Veil for Mass, Confession, Adoration, etc. I’ve been doing it for just over a year now, and its second nature for me to wear a veil (or other type of head cover). I do so partly because I do go to the EF Mass, and most of the women cover heads there, and I do so for OF too even if very few women do so at those Masses.

I was not aware initially of St Paul’s passage about veiling. But those were different times, and wearing a veil back then was a requirement for just about most everything a woman did in public, no matter if it was secular or religious. I’ve read various other documents and writings regarding the custom of women covering heads in church. They are fascinating especially some of the older writings.

Now if only more people would dress a bit more modestly and nicer for Mass…but that’s another topic all together.

 

[VeiledCatholic]

I’ve been covering my head out of obedience to Scripture since 2006 when I was in the non Catholic church world. What a blessing and gift it is, plus a powerful witnessing tool.
The Scriptures state we are to cover when we pray and prophesy, Plus we wear it as a sign of obedience to God, Christ and our husbands. And also…because of the angels. Can’t argue with that.
Yes, the early church fathers, plus some Catholic articles are very supportive of it.
Since I pray all the time through out the day, I just leave my covering on…except for at night / shower / or if we are at home and my beloved wants to see my hair down.
Veil on my sister.

 

[fredms3]

Le me clarify what I meant then. Women are still allowed to veil if they so desire,it is just that they are no longer required to veil.

I am not sure about this, so correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds to me as though you are asking because you are not sure that the church had the authority to remove the requirement. If that is where your question is coming from then it might be helpful to realize that there are other rules laid down in the Bible that are no longer required and so
perhaps you are looking for what circumstances in general allow something written in the Bible to be set aside, and then to figure out if that is what happened this time. If this is in fact what you are looking for, it will probably help to get it out in the open, if not, feel free to correct me.

The Church has the authority to do that…what i would like to be informed on the Canon 1983 is what was the reason why it was abrogated. I believe, correct me if i’m wrong, was deleted for no reason at all.

I i were to comment on that, i would say that it was deleted perhaps it is not important. Do you agree with that?

 

[fredms3]

As far as I’m aware, veiling was never classified as dogma. It sounds as though you’re trying to say that the Church has to right to change custom. I’d like to see your basis for that.

Yes, it was important “during the Apostles time”. You’ll note that St. Paul says “For if a women will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a women to be shorn or shaven, let her wear a veil.”
It is no longer “disgraceful” for a women to have short hair; and shaving the hair was a punishment for adultery, also a custom no longer in use.
Customs and societies change. Do you anoint visitors to your home? I expect not.

Right, wearing veil was not declared a dogma, Since it is not, would mean that it is not important? Let’s see what St. Paul said that every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors his head…And who is the head of the woman?

And by the way, St. Paul said: Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.

1 Corinthians 11

1 Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.

On Covering the Head in Worship
2 I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you. 3 But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man,[a] and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved. 6 For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head.

I would like Catholics women imitating the Blessed Mother ---- anywhere she appears — She has her head covered…

God the Father definitely love women wearing veil when praying or prophesizing…

 

[T_More]

I belong to a very tradtional parish, and many of the women wear veils/mantilla’s. My daughter has been wearing one since her baptism (she was 9 then) and my wife will be wearing one (we just entered the Church this past Easter Vigil) from now on, of her own choice. I love them and they are very dignified.

There is a deeply significant meaning to them for women, and they are symbolic in connection to their anatomy, which I will not get any further into for the sake of modesty. It is very much reflective of the relationship of Christ the head, and His mystical body the Church, and the old Jewish temple and the temple veil.

 

[fredms3]

No, she does not. It is not a requirement, and therefore no justification is necessary. The wife does not have to justify herself to her husband or to her pastor. It would be the courteous thing to do, but even something like “I do not feel that that is the next step in my spiritual development” is sufficient enough, and basically simply a recognition of the nature of veiling as a personal devotion anyway.

If I may ask…How would you justify that to the Blessed Mother who always wear veil everytime she appears to us her children.

Does she not telling us the importance of wearing veil as we are told by St. Paul that woman who prays without her veil on dishonors her head, who is her husband and whose head is Christ.

 

[Baelor]

Before I respond, let me state that you started this thread with a question, a question which was hiding an agenda. I, at least, do not appreciate your lack of honesty as to the motives of this thread, which are now clear but were concealed prior.

If I may ask…How would you justify that to the Blessed Mother who always wear veil everytime she appears to us her children.

She wore a veil while alive, like most women. My impression is that she appears to us in the clothing of her own time. There is nothing to justify.

Does she not telling us the importance of wearing veil as we are told by St. Paul that woman who prays without her veil on dishonors her head, who is her husband and whose head is Christ.

The Church does not require women to veil. Has your eye ever caused you to sin? How about your hand? One must understand the Bible contextually, considering the variety of dimensions that constitute a full comprehension of it.

 

[Walking_Home]

Before I respond, let me state that you started this thread with a question, a question which was hiding an agenda. I, at least, do not appreciate your lack of honesty as to the motives of this thread, which are now clear but were concealed prior.

She wore a veil while alive, like most women. My impression is that she appears to us in the clothing of her own time. There is nothing to justify.

The Church does not require women to veil. Has your eye ever caused you to sin? How about your hand? One must understand the Bible contextually, considering the variety of dimensions that constitute a full comprehension of it.

---

Ditto.

 

[thewanderer]

The Church has the authority to do that…what i would like to be informed on the Canon 1983 is what was the reason why it was abrogated. I believe, correct me if i’m wrong, was deleted for no reason at all.

I i were to comment on that, i would say that it was deleted perhaps it is not important. Do you agree with that?

Well that depends on what you mean, and why it was deleted. I’ll try to explain what I was getting at earlier a little better to see if it helps. A custom is always kept up because of the meaning it has both for the individuals and for the community as a whole. The significance of women veiling themselves became obscured as the custom became a sign to many of the persecution and unfair treatment of women. Many women had already stopped veiling before the canon law was changed. In other words, the sign of the veil largely both post it’s meaning and took on a false meaning. That to seems quite likely to be the reason for removing the requirement that women veil. It can still be a wonderful personal devotion, but because it no longer has the same meaning today it can lead to all sorts of misunderstandings and could become a stumbling block for many people against the Church. If the veil is seen as a sign of unfair subjection of women and it is required by the Catholic Church then it would appear as though the Church supports the unfair objection of women. Does that help to answer your question at all?

 

[fredms3]

Before I respond, let me state that you started this thread with a question, a question which was hiding an agenda. I, at least, do not appreciate your lack of honesty as to the motives of this thread, which are now clear but were concealed prior.

She wore a veil while alive, like most women. My impression is that she appears to us in the clothing of her own time. There is nothing to justify.

The Church does not require women to veil. Has your eye ever caused you to sin? How about your hand? One must understand the Bible contextually, considering the variety of dimensions that constitute a full comprehension of it.

1. Hidden agenda? Why, does my wanting clarification on the issue of wearing veil Canon 1917 and Canon 1983 seems to you some kind of a hidden agenda? If we know the truth, then what are there to be afraid of?

2.Even now that she’s in heaven, IMHO,the Blessed Mother still wears a veil, and her numerous apparitions would proved that. We don’t actually have to justify, one thing is important her: we have to follow Mama Mary’s example. If you believe that Mary is our mother then as the saying goes: “Mother knows best.”

3.The Church abrogated it. Only there is no reason why it was abrogated. On the other hand, we can never see and IMHO again will never see even at the end of the world, the Blessed Mother not wearing a veil.

The Blessed Mother always honors her Head — God ----- (If my interpretation on 1 Cor. 11 serves me right).

I am not saying anything against the Canon abrogating the wearing of veil but what i’m showing is it’s importance in the light of the very example of the Blessed Mother who is the Mother of the Church, the Help of Christians, the Seat of Wisdom etc…

 

[Cat]

1. Hidden agenda? Why, does my wanting clarification on the issue of wearing veil Canon 1917 and Canon 1983 seems to you some kind of a hidden agenda? If we know the truth, then what are there to be afraid of?

2.Even now that she’s in heaven, IMHO,the Blessed Mother still wears a veil, and her numerous apparitions would proved that. We don’t actually have to justify, one thing is important her: we have to follow Mama Mary’s example. If you believe that Mary is our mother then as the saying goes: “Mother knows best.”

3.The Church abrogated it. Only there is no reason why it was abrogated. On the other hand, we can never see and IMHO again will never see even at the end of the world, the Blessed Mother not wearing a veil.

The Blessed Mother always honors her Head — God ----- (If my interpretation on 1 Cor. 11 serves me right).

I am not saying anything against the Canon abrogating the wearing of veil but what i’m showing is it’s importance in the light of the very example of the Blessed Mother who is the Mother of the Church, the Help of Christians, the Seat of Wisdom etc…

I’m a 54 year-old woman and a convert to Catholicism (8 years ago )

Please correct me if I make any mistatements in these paragraphs.

It sounds to me like you are questioning Holy Mother Church. What I heard you saying over and over in this thread is that the Church is contradicting the Holy Scriptures and the Blessed Mother.

Do you agree that we must always interpret Scripture in the light of the teaching of the Church, as Scripture does not “trump” the Church? The body of Church teaching comes from three sources: Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium. These three do not contradict each other, but rather, they complement each other.

Same for teachings regarding the Blessed Mother Mary. Do you agree that we must interpret the Marian doctrines and devotions in the light of the Church?

There are many excellent bishops in the United States, and of course, our esteemed Holy Father. Do you think that these bishops and our Holy Father are all in error because they allow women under their shepherding care to attend Mass or be in the Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament with uncovered heads? What I hear you saying in this thread is that you think you are correct and these very apostles of the Lord, as well as the Vicar of Christ, are wrong. Am I hearing you correctly?

I hope you will understand that I and many other Catholic women would never rely on my own imperfect understanding of the Holy Scriptures, but rather, I will trust my wise and experienced bishop, and my Pope who speaks for Christ Himself, in the matter of veiling.

And I agree with all the others on this thread who say the Church does not forbid a woman from covering her head in Mass, so I am having a hard time understanding the purpose of this topic. What I am hearing is that you are casting doubts on the authority of the Church, and that concerns me.

 

[agnes_therese]

The Church has the authority to do that…what i would like to be informed on the Canon 1983 is what was the reason why it was abrogated. I believe, correct me if i’m wrong, was deleted for no reason at all.

I i were to comment on that, i would say that it was deleted perhaps it is not important. Do you agree with that?

I don’t know exactly what the reason was. The Church has the authority to change custom without explaining the reasons in detail to me. Do you agree with that?

 

[agnes_therese]

I am not saying anything against the Canon abrogating the wearing of veil . . .

Yes, you are. You’re arguing against canon law with every post you make on this subject.

You have a right to your opinion. And the rest of us have a right to follow the Church and Canon Law.

 

[TrueLight]

I don’t feel strongly about it any other women’s practice of veiling.

I veil because I feel called to and also because I attend the EF and it’s pretty common in the EF.

However, remember that it is a practice. It seems to me that the Church is returning to a lot of her earlier practices. Do not be surprised if some Bishops start to highly encourage it in the upcoming years.

 

[Baelor]

1. Hidden agenda? Why, does my wanting clarification on the issue of wearing veil Canon 1917 and Canon 1983 seems to you some kind of a hidden agenda? If we know the truth, then what are there to be afraid of?

I simply wish that you had stated the full extent of your inquiry up front. The fact that you did not do this is the definition of a hidden agenda, since clearly you were interested in historical precedent, the example of Mary, etc., and clearly feel that it is problematic that women are not required to be veiled. None of this is present in your OP, making is disingenuous since the questions that you had existed at the time of the OP.

2.Even now that she’s in heaven, IMHO,the Blessed Mother still wears a veil, and her numerous apparitions would proved that. We don’t actually have to justify, one thing is important her: we have to follow Mama Mary’s example. If you believe that Mary is our mother then as the saying goes: “Mother knows best.”

Your opinion on what Mary wears in heaven is irrelevant, but noted. Mary while alive wore a veil and robes, as did most women of that era. The fact that she appears in that garb demonstrates nothing other than the fact that she appears in that garb.

I am not saying anything against the Canon abrogating the wearing of veil but what i’m showing is it’s importance in the light of the very example of the Blessed Mother who is the Mother of the Church, the Help of Christians, the Seat of Wisdom etc…

So you admit an agenda in the same post in which you declaim against the accurate charge that you have one.

The Blessed Mother appears in the clothing from her own time. How you construe this to mean she advocates veiling by virtue of having a veil because that is what was worn at the time is beyond me.

 

[fredms3]

I don’t know exactly what the reason was. The Church has the authority to change custom without explaining the reasons in detail to me. Do you agree with that?

Tnx for being honest that you don’t know the reason. I also don’t know the reason, what i read in one of the post here is that it was abrogated without the Church giving the reason why.

No question that the Church can do that, however, the laity always has the right to ask the question ‘why’ until the reasons are given. The Church cannot deny that right?

 

[fredms3]

Yes, you are. You’re arguing against canon law with every post you make on this subject.

You have a right to your opinion. And the rest of us have a right to follow the Church and Canon Law.

Arguing is not the same as denying…do you agree with that?

 

[thewanderer]

As you have failed to make any response to my previous post I can only assume that you somehow missed it. I will repost it here in case it is able to help answer your question as to why the practice is no longer required.

Well that depends on what you mean, and why it was deleted. I’ll try to explain what I was getting at earlier a little better to see if it helps. A custom is always kept up because of the meaning it has both for the individuals and for the community as a whole. The significance of women veiling themselves became obscured as the custom became a sign to many of the persecution and unfair treatment of women. Many women had already stopped veiling before the canon law was changed. In other words, the sign of the veil largely both post it’s meaning and took on a false meaning. That to seems quite likely to be the reason for removing the requirement that women veil. It can still be a wonderful personal devotion, but because it no longer has the same meaning today it can lead to all sorts of misunderstandings and could become a stumbling block for many people against the Church. If the veil is seen as a sign of unfair subjection of women and it is required by the Catholic Church then it would appear as though the Church supports the unfair objection of women. Does that help to answer your question at all?