D
dominikus28
Guest
In 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 it says that women should have their heads covered when in church. I understand that this was a custom before Vatican II but what happened to it now?
- Status
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
It wasn’t ban but it was no longer required. Woman can still use it. My mom still wears it the last time I remember.
O
otjm
Guest
If one were to go to the Middle East, one would find that it is still custom for many women to have at least a head covering; many wear even more.
How much of that was cultural at the time is a debate I will leave to others. Women are free to wear some form of head covering, but the Church has seen fit not to require it; which logically would lead one to believe that the Church does not feel that St. Paul’s admonition is an issue of faith or morals.
B
bear06
Guest
I’d search the forums for some lengthy debate on the issue.
R
RomanRevert
Guest
The rule for women covering their heads was never abrogated (kind of like the Mass of Pius V) so actually, that law is still in effect. It is just ignored like so many other laws of the Church. Apparently, in this age of liberation, it is not en vogue to obey Church laws. Pity, really. Yet another fruit of the pernicious “spirit of Vatican 2.”
Here is an article that outlines this quite nicely:
lumengentleman.com/content.asp?id=220
P
puzzleannie
Guest
Oh hey we have not had our monthly knock-down drag-out on this topic, let’s get another one in before the old year ends. Paul was writing more about the cultural based customs of his day than making a religious law for all time, the head covering customs of former days in church reflected the customs of the time and place, when women stopped wearing hats in fashion, they stopped wearing them in church, so the discipline changed, as it did when women commonly wore headcovering all the time after marriage, until well into the last century. get over it.
S
Sarabande
Guest
I remember reading that for centuries women always covered their heads whether they were out and about or in worship. In earlier times this was because women who didn’t cover their heads were usually prostitutes or loose women in general. So, that may partly explain the modesty aspect of covering your head as a woman.
As an 18th c. Revolutionary War reenactor, I’ve also had to do some reading on women from that century - especially camp followers, which is what I portray. Even as late as the 18th century, the idea of women with uncovered heads at camp was considered very immodest. If you decide to have the impression of a women who goes uncovered, you’d have to be ready to be portrayed as a tart. The other reasons for always having some sort of cap or covering was to help keep the dirt out of your hair since most people probably washed their hair maybe once a month. So even then, the cultural mores of that time encouraged head covering. As the 18th c ended and the 19th century went on, it seems as if that cultural thing loosened a bit where young, unmarried ladies didn’t have to wear something on their heads all the time unless at church or until they got married. It really wasn’t until later, perhaps late 19th century/20th century that having a bare head would not automatically label you as loose or an immoral woman. This may also factor into the reasonings of why wearing the veil is no longer required.
Anyway, before I bore you guys any longer with my useless history info, I’m not really into debating the aspect of whether or not women should wear a head covering. When I attend a TLM I will wear my veil. If I attend a NO mass and remember it, I will wear it. I also cantor the NO masses, but am not able to wear it as I do not want to give the impression of being “holier than thou” since no one in that parish wears a veil. I’ve approached a very respected priest at that parish about and he advised me what I also thought. So for now, no wearing of the veil while I cantor.
As an 18th c. Revolutionary War reenactor, I’ve also had to do some reading on women from that century - especially camp followers, which is what I portray. Even as late as the 18th century, the idea of women with uncovered heads at camp was considered very immodest. If you decide to have the impression of a women who goes uncovered, you’d have to be ready to be portrayed as a tart. The other reasons for always having some sort of cap or covering was to help keep the dirt out of your hair since most people probably washed their hair maybe once a month. So even then, the cultural mores of that time encouraged head covering. As the 18th c ended and the 19th century went on, it seems as if that cultural thing loosened a bit where young, unmarried ladies didn’t have to wear something on their heads all the time unless at church or until they got married. It really wasn’t until later, perhaps late 19th century/20th century that having a bare head would not automatically label you as loose or an immoral woman. This may also factor into the reasonings of why wearing the veil is no longer required.
Anyway, before I bore you guys any longer with my useless history info, I’m not really into debating the aspect of whether or not women should wear a head covering. When I attend a TLM I will wear my veil. If I attend a NO mass and remember it, I will wear it. I also cantor the NO masses, but am not able to wear it as I do not want to give the impression of being “holier than thou” since no one in that parish wears a veil. I’ve approached a very respected priest at that parish about and he advised me what I also thought. So for now, no wearing of the veil while I cantor.
R
RomanRevert
Guest
As Flip Wilson would say … “It’s the Church of What’s Happening Now!”
I would sincerely hope that Holy Mother Church does not take Her queues from today’s society. If she does, we are all in trouble.
R
RomanRevert
Guest
Not trying to pile on here, but here is another interesting tidbit that includes a copy of a newspaper article that was an interview with none other than Annibale Bugnini …
lumengentleman.com/content.asp?id=228
So, the law never went away, was never abrogated … it is simply ignored for convenience. Since some say it is no logner required, I would ask them to show me where it says that … officially.
lumengentleman.com/content.asp?id=228
So, the law never went away, was never abrogated … it is simply ignored for convenience. Since some say it is no logner required, I would ask them to show me where it says that … officially.
B
bear06
Guest
O
otjm
Guest
Your reference to Lumengentleman’s arguement that the rule has not been abrogated overlooks one very minor item: when the lawgiver removes one law in a revision of the law, it is presumed that the lawgiver knows what they are doing. His whole argument about presumptions overlooks that one, mostly because it is convenient to his argument.
Rome considered the matter disciplinary and culturally related and eliminated it as a law.
Women are free to wear a head covering; by eliminating the requirement, Rome did not intend that it be forbidden.
But it is not required.
Rome considered the matter disciplinary and culturally related and eliminated it as a law.
Women are free to wear a head covering; by eliminating the requirement, Rome did not intend that it be forbidden.
But it is not required.
C
Coder
Guest
1 Cor. 11:16: But if anyone is inclined to be argumentative, we do not have such a custom, nor do the churches of God.
usccb.org/nab/bible/1cori…inthians11.htm
usccb.org/nab/bible/1cori…inthians11.htm
S
Sarabande
Guest
Thank you. I found this interesting and I have forgotten this verse:
1 Cor 11:6 For if a woman does not have her head veiled, she may as well have her hair cut off. But if it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should wear a veil.
Most women have their hair cut off today and no longer wear their hair long like they did in biblical times. If the part of Scripture as to wearing the veil is to be followed literally, would it be the same for this verse as well? Since most women do not have their hair down to their waists and keeps it comparatively short to women from biblical times by cutting and trimming, does this verse apply to them? I’m just wondering - not trying to be argumentative.
B
blackrobe
Guest
Not so. As has been repeatedly [but apparently futilely] documented in these forums, the 1983 Code of Canon Law explicitly abrogated the entire 1917 Code of Canon Law. There is no rule requiring women to cover their heads at Mass. To hold otherwise is to deny the clear statement of Canon Law.
JSA+
R
RomanRevert
Guest
Thank you. I did not know that. Can you please send a link?
H
havemercy
Guest
Head covering isn’t mentioned in the current Canon Law, and so many have taken this to mean that head covering was abrogated. I wonder what real Canon lawyers have to say about this interesting fact and its consequences…
S
Sure
Guest
Here is a quick analysis by Ed Peters, a very well-known and published canon lawyer:
He answers that no veils are required by canon law.
canonlaw.info/2006/09/vatican-ii-canon-1262-and-chapel-veils.html
S
scylla
Guest
As it is not a cultural norm and not required there is no law that says women have to wear veils. No woman should be looked down upon for not wearing one at all.
Now since the Bible recommends it, tradition recommends it and since it is done out of respect for the Angels at Mass it should be done. If it is a good thing to do then it should be done out of respect and also in imitation of the Blessed Mother.
Since these days respect isn’t something that is held up as something good it is perfectly understandable for many people to ignore this. Since many women and men do not see holiness as something to foster, it is understandable also to see imitating the Blessed Mother as something to ignore.
The result is then that many Catholics do not see respect or humility as something to conform to, but just to misrepresent by redefining humility to mean that everyone else shut their mouths and not tell anyone else how to better respect God or His creation.
God Bless
Scylla
Now since the Bible recommends it, tradition recommends it and since it is done out of respect for the Angels at Mass it should be done. If it is a good thing to do then it should be done out of respect and also in imitation of the Blessed Mother.
Since these days respect isn’t something that is held up as something good it is perfectly understandable for many people to ignore this. Since many women and men do not see holiness as something to foster, it is understandable also to see imitating the Blessed Mother as something to ignore.
The result is then that many Catholics do not see respect or humility as something to conform to, but just to misrepresent by redefining humility to mean that everyone else shut their mouths and not tell anyone else how to better respect God or His creation.
God Bless
Scylla
T
tcraig
Guest
Here is the exact quote from the Vatican website:
You can find the full Code of Canon Law here.
My FSSP priests in the U.S. said that headcovering is no longer required under Canon Law, though they do encourage it.
I currently live in Germany, and have attended TLM’s in several European countries. Headcovering is rare to nonexistent over here, though you do occasionally see hats in winter (unheated churches).
Headcovering has a long tradition in both Scripture and custom. For this reason alone, women shouldn’t feel as if they are doing something “strange” by covering. Canon Law also does not forbid women covering their head in Church; it simply no longer requires it.
But we should refrain from taking internet opinion from laypersons (which is all that Lumen Gentleman’s website is) as official Church doctrine.
H
HelenMary
Guest
I wear a veil now as an adult although I didn’t as a kid or teenager. When I made my First Communion I was excited to wear a veil because it made me feel more special. In my present parish, my mom and I were two of only a handful of veiled women a few years ago. Now, there are many more.
When I visited my husband’s family and went to a school Mass, I was the only veiled woman present. His much younger brother, who was in high school at the time, told me later that his teacher had noticed me and told the class that I was “weird.” It saddened me at first but then I realized that this mortification was good for me. I won’t stop wearing the veil. I prefer it. I still feel special.
When I visited my husband’s family and went to a school Mass, I was the only veiled woman present. His much younger brother, who was in high school at the time, told me later that his teacher had noticed me and told the class that I was “weird.” It saddened me at first but then I realized that this mortification was good for me. I won’t stop wearing the veil. I prefer it. I still feel special.
- Status