Women covering their heads at Mass

[condan]

Crusader:

Women covering their heads in church is no longer even part of the code. You cannot abrogate it more than that.

Then why do they do it when having an audience with the Pope?

 

[Crusader]

condan:

I do it and I don’t give a rip what people think. I am very subtle in that I wear a chapel cap (like a large lace yarmulke). I also have something called a “whisper veil” which is a small piece of tulle. I vary them with my outfits.

Vatican II never made any comment whatsover about women covering their heads. In the post-Vatican II days, people just stopped. Any reference was omitted from the 1983 version of the CCC but I don’t think that necessarily negates the requirement.

I do it because:
*it denotes that I am in total submission to my God
*it symbolizes my adherence to the natural order that God has established (God, husband, woman, children)
*it is a symbol of feminity, of which I am very proud (I believe very strongly in the differences between the sexes)
*in church, I am in the presence of the King

I do think that it does send a subtle message to people that maybe, just maybe, we have gotten it wrong over the last few years. I have had older people remark positively and appreciately to me. My peers have gotten used to it, though I had one obnoxious Deacon laugh at me for it.

If you want to wear a veil, please do so. I could use the company and maybe, one person at a time, we can help return our Church to her glory.

ps: I get them at halo-works.com/shopping/smveils.html

She has a wonderful selection of veils in all styles, sizes and colors. There is something for everyone.

If you think the Catholic Church is not glorious, and if you think wearing doilies will “return our Church to her glory”, then I would suggest you might be precisely the sort of person that covers her head in Church not because you feel comfortable doing it in God’s presence, but perhaps because you want to make a statement…

 

[Maddalena]

Karl Keating:

When it comes to a private audience with the Pope, what matters is the formality of the occasion. For the most formal or official (state) visits, a woman must wear a long-sleeved, full-length black dress with a black mantilla. For less formal visits, a woman must wear a mantilla along with a long-sleeved black dress that is calf- or knee-length.

So why so many restrictions on what a woman must wear when she’s meeting the Pope? You can be perfectly modest without having to dress like you’re mourning, the way they did in Victorian times. Why doesn’t a man have to dress weirdly, too? (I’m not trying to sound like a weird feminist, that is why I’m asking so I’ll get a good answer).

 

[Crusader]

condan:

Then why do they do it when having an audience with the Pope?

During the Mass vs. a special audience with the Pope. Apples and oranges…

Karl outlined quite clearly when women have to cover their heads, and that does not include a papal Mass…

 

[Detroit_Sue]

condan:

Try www.halo-works.com.

I saw their ad in the National Catholic Register. Beatiful stuff, even wedding mantillas.

She has a nice assortment of chapel caps which is what I wear mostly.

Their styles are so beautiful!

I agree with you 110%

 

[condan]

Crusader:

If you think the Catholic Church is not glorious, and if you think wearing doilies will “return our Church to her glory”, then I would suggest you might be precisely the sort of person that covers her head in Church not because you feel comfortable doing it in God’s presence, but perhaps because you want to make a statement…

Of course I think our Church is glorious but, sadly she has been through some very rough times of late. Mass has often become a “mess”. There is a lot we can do to return to a time when the majority of Catholics were knowledeable of their teachings of our faith, when most Catholics did not contracept, when most Catholics believed in the real presence in the Eucharist, when most Catholics didn’t believe that abortion was a choice…

You are absolutely right. I am making a statement. That statement is:

*it denotes that I am in total submission to my God
*it symbolizes my adherence to the natural order that God has established (God, husband, woman, children)
*it is a symbol of feminity, of which I am very proud (I believe very strongly in the differences between the sexes)
*in church, I am in the presence of the King

There was an earlier post about being charitable when disagreeing. I don’t like when people “suggest” or “suppose” anything about me. (It is kind of ridiculous since you couldn’t possibly know what is in my mind or in my heart.) If you would like to exchange ideas with me, please do it with Christian civility.

 

[system]

condan:

There is a lot we can do to return to a time when the majority of Catholics were knowledeable of their teachings of our faith…

Yes, there is a lot we can do. But how does covering your head accomplish any of it?

You are absolutely right. I am making a statement. That statement is:

That’s an awful lot for a little veil to be saying. How is anyone around you supposed to know that?

 

[condan]

Melman:

Yes, there is a lot we can do. But how does covering your head accomplish any of it?

It doesn’t. Its my personal choice. It seems that it might bother you. Why?
Melman:

That’s an awful lot for a little veil to be saying. How is anyone around you supposed to know that?

They don’t need to know anything about it. They need to focus on what is happening on the alter, not on what I’m wearing on my head.

If folks can waltz into church in beachwear, then my “little veil” as you call it, shouldn’t bother anyone at all.

 

[condan]

<<what do you mean, “no other meaningful contribution?” … I support that person for clarifying her post with a picture of what she’s talking about. >>

Except that the picture-post in question was that person’s first contribution to the thread. It did not appear to be in response to anyone in particular, and wasn’t clarifying any previous post. So what point was he/she trying to make?

I didn’t realize that a posted reply had to be to a response to a previous reply. I appears obvious that the point she was trying to make is that women do wear veils.

Why the hostility? My goodness…

 

[dcs]

Crusader:

What Ms. Bush did or did not do is a non-issue. There is no requirement that women cover their heads in the presence of the Pope of Rome. Do you have any actual proof to suggest otherwise?

Certainly:

initaly.com/regions/papaudi.htm

“1.) It is most certainly a requirement that women cover their heads in the presence of the Pope. I’m not making this stuff up.”

That’s a direct quote and it directly conflicts with your last posting.

Not at all, since I was responding to your post in which you mentioned that women were no longer required to wear the veil in church. I for one never claimed that they are and I don’t think anyone else in this thead has claimed it either. There are two separate issues, whether a woman is required to have her head covered in church (she is not), and whether she is required to have her head covered in the presence of the Pope (she is).

 

[dcs]

Crusader:

If you think the Catholic Church is not glorious, and if you think wearing doilies will “return our Church to her glory”, then I would suggest you might be precisely the sort of person that covers her head in Church not because you feel comfortable doing it in God’s presence, but perhaps because you want to make a statement…

It is certainly not helpful to cast aspersions on other people’s motivations.

 

[catholiclady]

I wear one at my Church but then so does almost every woman there. And if you forget yours, they have a box of them in the vestibule you can borrow.

Even though Canon law no longer requires it, it is not a forbidden gesture. Some men still wear a suit and tie to Mass because they feel “dressing” up for the Lord is more fitting than shorts and t-shirts - I think those who wear veils or hats do it out of respect for the Lord and should not be belittled for doing so.

 

[condan]

Crusader:

During the Mass vs. a special audience with the Pope. Apples and oranges…

Karl outlined quite clearly when women have to cover their heads, and that does not include a papal Mass…

I’m sorry… Did I say they had to cover their heads during a Mass or did I use the phrase “audience with the Pope”?

 

[system]

condan:

Why the hostility? My goodness…

Hostility? There’s no hostility. I simply read what you posted and had some questions.

For example, first you say that your veil “makes a statement”. But when I ask how anyone is supposed to know what your statement is, you change your tune and say “they don’t need to know anything about it”. You can’t have it both ways.

You also said “There is a lot we can do to return to a time when the majority of Catholics were knowledeable of their teachings of our faith, when most Catholics did not contracept, when most Catholics believed in the real presence in the Eucharist, when most Catholics didn’t believe that abortion was a choice…” , the implication being that wearing veils was part of the “lot we can do”. How does it help? What’s the connection? If you’re expecting people to think “Oh, she’s wearing a veil, like they did 50 years ago… you know, things were better 50 years ago… I guess I’d better wear a veil too”, that seems like a lot to ask.

What you wear doesn’t bother me. (But you might want to consider whether it will cause others that are dressed completely appropriately, to be a little confused or distracted.)

 

[raphaela]

Veils and Mantillas bring mass back to tradition, not liberal sensibility. The church was at it always had been until Vatican II (with very few changes that i can’t recal right now). I think it is a beautiful symbol of the church and should return. I’d wear one, though i’m not sure how!! I think anyone who wishes to wear one should and no one has the right to gawk at them because they are. So wear one if you want, who cares what people say about your devotion to God and the church!

 

[goat]

(But you might want to consider whether it will cause others that are dressed completely appropriately, to be a little confused or distracted.)

Why would anyone be “confused or distracted” at the mere sight of a lady wearing a mantilla? Have people become so rigidly informal that a glimpe of the formal causes them to cower?

 

[condan]

Melman:

Hostility? There’s no hostility. I simply read what you posted and had some questions.

For example, first you say that your veil “makes a statement”. But when I ask how anyone is supposed to know what your statement is, you change your tune and say “they don’t need to know anything about it”. You can’t have it both ways.

Sure I can. The statement is in my heart, for myself. It also sets an example for my family, within my family. It is a mother’s responsibility to get her children to heaven, a responsibility I take very seriously. My husband also wears a jacket and a tie for the same reasons.
Melman:

You also said “There is a lot we can do to return to a time when the majority of Catholics were knowledeable of their teachings of our faith, when most Catholics did not contracept, when most Catholics believed in the real presence in the Eucharist, when most Catholics didn’t believe that abortion was a choice…” , the implication being that wearing veils was part of the “lot we can do”. How does it help? What’s the connection? If you’re expecting people to think “Oh, she’s wearing a veil, like they did 50 years ago… you know, things were better 50 years ago… I guess I’d better wear a veil too”, that seems like a lot to ask.

Again, it is my personal choice. In a previous post, I listed my reasons.
Melman:

What you wear doesn’t bother me. (But you might want to consider whether it will cause others that are dressed completely appropriately, to be a little confused or distracted.)

If you state that I am not “dressed completely appropriately” then my “Catholic do-rag” as I call it, must touch some chord in you. So, I am not dressed “completely appropriately” when girls are coming in with yoga pants with the words “sweet thing” on their butts? Men come in rumpled shorts and beadhead, but I’m not “dressed completely appropriately”. Altar servers wear sneakers on the altar and I’m not “dressed completely appropriately”? Women wear skin-tight pants and belly shirts showing their body studs and I’m not “dressed completely appropriately”?

I think that is the statement in which your hostility is evident, by intimating that by covering my head I am somehow “not dressed completely appropriately”.

 

[condan]

goat:

Why would anyone be “confused or distracted” at the mere sight of a lady wearing a mantilla? Have people become so rigidly informal that a glimpe of the formal causes them to cower?

Thanks! My husband in his jacket and tie never gets the hairy eyeball either.

 

[system]

condan:

The statement is in my heart, for myself

See again, you’re contradicting yourself again because you also said “I do think that it does send a subtle message to people”

My husband also wears a jacket and a tie for the same reasons. Again, it is my personal choice. In a previous post, I listed my reasons.

You listed some things that you believe, and you claim that the veil (and now a suit/tie) signifies these things. I just don’t see how. Creating your own personal dress code is fine, but don’t expect others to see anything special in it.

If you state that I am not “dressed completely appropriately” then my “Catholic do-rag” as I call it, must touch some chord in you.

Where did I say you weren’t dressed appropriately? I simply did not, you’re looking for hostility where none exists. Remember your plea for “civility”?

What I did say, was that you others around you who are also dressed decently, might see the veil and wonder “what’s that all about? Did the Church bring those back? Am I dressed well enough myself?” When in fact they are doing what the Church requires, and probably have more important things to worry about.

You may not admit to it, but it seems pretty clear to me than part of your motivation is to protest against those who come in dressed badly. But I’m saying that any such message is probably not being received by anyone. I guess you may disagree.

 

[condan]

Melman:

See again, you’re contradicting yourself again because you also said “I do think that it does send a subtle message to people”

That’s not a contradiction…the opertative word being “subtle” and the message is that we are in the presence of God and should show reverence, each in his own way.
Melman:

You listed some things that you believe, and you claim that the veil (and now a suit/tie) signifies these things. I just don’t see how. Creating your own personal dress code is fine, but don’t expect others to see anything special in it.

I haven’t created my “own personal dress code”. The house of the Lord has one. The head-gear is a personal choice of mine and should bother no one.
Melman:

Where did I say you weren’t dressed appropriately? I simply did not, you’re looking for hostility where none exists. Remember your plea for “civility”?

When you said: “(But you might want to consider whether it will cause others that are dressed completely appropriately, to be a little confused or distracted.)”
Melman:

What I did say, was that you others around you who are also dressed decently,might see the veil and wonder “what’s that all about? Did the Church bring those back? Am I dressed well enough myself?”

That’s OK, I wonder why they show up in sweats.When in fact they are doing what the Church requires, and probably have more important things to worry about. I think you can make a compelling argument that the vast majority of Catholics are doing what the Church requires.
Melman:

You may not admit to it, but it seems pretty clear to me than part of your motivation is to protest against those who come in dressed badly. But I’m saying that any such message is probably not being received by anyone. I guess you may disagree.

If what I think is pretty clear to you, do you by any chance know the numbers for the next mega-millions jackpot? I am protesting no one. I am showing reverence for my Lord and my King. What I am bothered by is the intolerance for other points of view and the audacity that some have to project what I think and feel and who think that their form of worship is the only valid one.

Further, there are several other posters who said they cover their heads. We may be few and far between but our hearts are sincere and turned towards the Lord as we raise our families.