Catholic FAQ


Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Liturgy and Sacraments
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #1  
Old Sep 11, '06, 9:18 am
catholicknight catholicknight is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2006
Posts: 120
Religion: Anglican Catholic
Default Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Yes, even the Vatican insists that women are still required to cover their heads during mass. As pointed out in a previous story, the issue first came up in 1969, in which the secular media wrongly reported rumors that the Church was changing the 2000 year old custom. The Vatican responded to the false reports with the following press release. The mainstream media virtually ignored it. As far as I can tell, only one American newspaper ran the article -- The Atlanta Journal (June 21, 1969, page 6-A).

Quote:
Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

VATICAN CITY (UPI) - A Vatican official says there has been no change, as reported, in the Roman Catholic rule that women cover their head in church.

The Rev. Annibale Bugnini, secretary of the New Congregation for Divine Worship, said the reports stemmed from a misunderstanding of a statement he made at a news conference in May.

"The rule has not been changed," he said. "It is a matter of general discipline. It began as a custom in the time of St. Paul and was later incorporated into canon law."
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: St. Paul draws upon the marriage relationship as a symbol (a sacrament) illustrating the relationship of Christ and his Church. The man represents Christ, and Paul commands the men to love their wives and die for them if necessary. In turn, he never commands the wives to love (and die for) their husbands -- only obey them. The veil worn over the top of the woman's head serves two purposes. The first is to illustrate that the wife is obeying her husband (or daughter is obeying her father) and submitting to his authority as head of the household. (This doesn’t mean she placates to his every whim, but rather she allows him to have the final say on spiritual matters in the home.) Second, it becomes a demonstration of her sanctity because of this. It’s a symbol of holiness, because she has voluntarily “died” to her own aspirations of spiritual authority, and submitted to the spiritual authority of her husband (or father), just as the Church does for Christ.

That which is veiled is holy. We veil the tabernacle in Church, because we believe the blessed sacrament (eucharist) is holy. Every image of the Blessed Virgin Mary always depicts her wearing a veil over her hair. Once again, this is a depiction of holiness, because of her willingness to die to self, to obey the plan of God.
__________________
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT
Putting the sword to the 'dictatorship of relativism!'
  #2  
Old Sep 11, '06, 9:32 am
Timidity Timidity is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2004
Posts: 2,248
Religion: Catholic (Latin-Rite)
Thumbs down Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

Quote:
Originally Posted by catholicknight View Post
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Yes, even the Vatican insists that women are still required to cover their heads during mass. As pointed out in a previous story, the issue first came up in 1969, in which the secular media wrongly reported rumors that the Church was changing the 2000 year old custom. The Vatican responded to the false reports with the following press release. The mainstream media virtually ignored it. As far as I can tell, only one American newspaper ran the article -- The Atlanta Journal (June 21, 1969, page 6-A).
Um, that was 37 years ago. In case you haven't noticed, times change. Specifically, there was a new Code of Canon Law in 1983. The head covering was in the 1917 canon, but removed from the 1983.

This story is 23 years out of date.
__________________
I could be wrong; I've been wrong before, and no doubt I'll be wrong again.
  #3  
Old Sep 11, '06, 9:37 am
catholicknight catholicknight is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2006
Posts: 120
Religion: Anglican Catholic
Thumbs up Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

Canons 20-21 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law make clear that later Canon Law abrogates earlier Canon Law only when this is made explicit and that, in cases of doubt, the revocation of earlier law is not to be presumed; quite the opposite:

Quote:
Canon 20 A later law abrogates or derogates from an earlier law, if it expressly so states, or if it is directly contrary to that law, or if it integrally reorders the whole subject matter of the earlier law. A universal law, however, does not derogate from a particular or from a special law, unless the law expressly provides otherwise.

Canon 21 In doubt, the revocation of a previous law is not presumed; rather, later laws are to be related to earlier ones and, as far as possible, harmonized with them.
Canons 27 and 28 add to the argument:
Quote:
Canon 27 Custom is the best interpreter of laws.

Canon 28 Without prejudice to the provisions of can. 5, a custom, whether contrary to or apart from the law, is revoked by a contrary custom or law. But unless the law makes express mention of them, it does not revoke centennial or immemorial customs, nor does a universal law revoke particular customs.
Hence, according to Canon Law and immemorial custom, women are still to veil themselves.
__________________
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT
Putting the sword to the 'dictatorship of relativism!'
  #4  
Old Sep 11, '06, 9:39 am
Sir Knight Sir Knight is offline
Banned
Book Club Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2004
Posts: 7,611
Religion: Roman Catholic
Unhappy Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timidity View Post
there was a new Code of Canon Law in 1983. The head covering was in the 1917 canon, but removed from the 1983.
I just spent $39.95 on the 1917 edition this week-end. Didn't see the 1983 version anywhere.
  #5  
Old Sep 11, '06, 9:50 am
catholicknight catholicknight is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2006
Posts: 120
Religion: Anglican Catholic
Default Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

There is certianly nothing wrong with the 1983 Code of Canon Law, and it is the operating Canon Law of the Church today. However, as I pointed out above, the 1983 Code defers to the 1917 Code whenever it is silent on a particular subject. Changes in Canon Law only happen when they explicitly say they happen. The 1983 Code of Canon Law is silent about a number of things, of which head coverings for women is just one particular topic.
__________________
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT
Putting the sword to the 'dictatorship of relativism!'
  #6  
Old Sep 11, '06, 9:56 am
Marilena Marilena is offline
 
Join Date: October 16, 2005
Posts: 2,386
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

Quote:
Originally Posted by catholicknight View Post
There is certianly nothing wrong with the 1983 Code of Canon Law, and it is the operating Canon Law of the Church today. However, as I pointed out above, the 1983 Code defers to the 1917 Code whenever it is silent on a particular subject. Changes in Canon Law only happen when they explicitly say they happen. The 1983 Code of Canon Law is silent about a number of things, of which head coverings for women is just one particular topic.
I have a point on both sides of the issue. When I attend the TLM I wear a head covering. Women who attend the Novus Ordo are not
required to wear a head covering. Not all women care to wear one
either. I go to the Novus Ordo every now and then, and I do not wear a head covering when I attend the Novus Ordo. Is it just a
matter of prference? I don't know. I have not heard the Holy Father
state that women must cover their heads at Novus Ordo Mass.
So what is the big deal?
  #7  
Old Sep 11, '06, 10:06 am
Saint_Michael Saint_Michael is offline
 
Join Date: September 6, 2006
Posts: 689
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

I wish we would readopt the old customs that were abandoned recently.

Women wear head coverings and men dress up a bit more too, shirt, tie, dress pants etc... It's just a discipline and a sign of respect IMO.

However before we worry about head coverings, there's probably a lot more issues that need to be resolved first. I highly doubt we ever see a resurgence of head coverings. Not one woman in my Parish wears one, and we have thousands attend on the weekends.
  #8  
Old Sep 11, '06, 10:16 am
catholicknight catholicknight is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2006
Posts: 120
Religion: Anglican Catholic
Default Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marilena View Post
I have a point on both sides of the issue. When I attend the TLM I wear a head covering. Women who attend the Novus Ordo are not
required to wear a head covering. Not all women care to wear one
either. I go to the Novus Ordo every now and then, and I do not wear a head covering when I attend the Novus Ordo. Is it just a
matter of prference? I don't know. I have not heard the Holy Father
state that women must cover their heads at Novus Ordo Mass.
So what is the big deal?
Check out 1st Corinthains 11:1-16 on the matter, and St. Paul will explain the "big deal" as he sees it. I reccomend using the RSV-CE edition for a good translation on this topic.
__________________
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT
Putting the sword to the 'dictatorship of relativism!'
  #9  
Old Sep 11, '06, 10:19 am
catholicknight catholicknight is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2006
Posts: 120
Religion: Anglican Catholic
Default Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint_Michael View Post
I wish we would readopt the old customs that were abandoned recently.

Women wear head coverings and men dress up a bit more too, shirt, tie, dress pants etc... It's just a discipline and a sign of respect IMO.

However before we worry about head coverings, there's probably a lot more issues that need to be resolved first. I highly doubt we ever see a resurgence of head coverings. Not one woman in my Parish wears one, and we have thousands attend on the weekends.
I think the failure to observe this apostolic custom is the result of feminist influences over our modernist culture. So long as Catholic women embrace feminist modernism, the apostlic custom of head covering will be ignored.
__________________
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT
Putting the sword to the 'dictatorship of relativism!'
  #10  
Old Sep 11, '06, 10:22 am
YachtsMan YachtsMan is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: September 7, 2006
Posts: 39
Religion: Christian
Default Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

The tenor of this thread gives some insight as to why many people pay so little heed to "traditionalists." Talk about a waste of time.
  #11  
Old Sep 11, '06, 10:27 am
aurora77 aurora77 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: August 22, 2005
Posts: 1,864
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

So, then, are we (women) required to have long hair and men short? That is also in St. Paul's letter. Just something I've always wondered--if those in favor of head covering also felt women should not cut their hair, or at least keep it long. I don't think it's a big deal either--if our bishop says cover, I'll do it, if he says no, OK.
  #12  
Old Sep 11, '06, 10:36 am
catholicknight catholicknight is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2006
Posts: 120
Religion: Anglican Catholic
Default Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

If you look at the context, I think Paul's mention of hair length is an illustration. He's simply using cultural norms to make a point. He cites no ecclesiastical custom for hair length on men and women.
__________________
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT
Putting the sword to the 'dictatorship of relativism!'
  #13  
Old Sep 11, '06, 10:39 am
catholicknight catholicknight is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2006
Posts: 120
Religion: Anglican Catholic
Default Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

Quote:
Originally Posted by YachtsMan View Post
The tenor of this thread gives some insight as to why many people pay so little heed to "traditionalists." Talk about a waste of time.
How is debating proper liturgical custom a "waste of time?" I disagree. If genuflecting before the sacrament is important, than so is head veiling.
__________________
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT
Putting the sword to the 'dictatorship of relativism!'
  #14  
Old Sep 11, '06, 10:51 am
YachtsMan YachtsMan is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: September 7, 2006
Posts: 39
Religion: Christian
Default Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

Quote:
Originally Posted by catholicknight View Post
How is debating proper liturgical custom a "waste of time?" I disagree. If genuflecting before the sacrament is important, than so is head veiling.
Because it's a non-issue. It's not open to debate. The very people who bemoan "liturgical abuses" (and other variances) seem to be the first to suggest they know "better" than the Church on other items. That's horribly hypocritical, leading to a loss of credibility.
  #15  
Old Sep 11, '06, 10:53 am
catholicknight catholicknight is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2006
Posts: 120
Religion: Anglican Catholic
Default Re: Women Required To Cover Head, Vatican Insists

Quote:
Originally Posted by YachtsMan View Post
Because it's a non-issue. It's not open to debate. The very people who bemoan "liturgical abuses" (and other variances) seem to be the first to suggest they know "better" than the Church on other items. That's horribly hypocritical, leading to a loss of credibility.
So are you saying we shouldn't "bemoan liturgical abuses" and just accept the liturgy for whatever it is, wherever we find it, regardless of what's being (or not being) done?
__________________
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT
Putting the sword to the 'dictatorship of relativism!'
Closed Thread

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Liturgy and Sacraments

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
8476Meet and talk,talk talk
Last by: speedyg
5153CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: Vim71
4429Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: daughterstm
4037OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: eschator83
3863SOLITUDE
Last by: beth40n2
3762Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: daughterstm
3330Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: Amiciel
3286Poems and Reflections
Last by: PathWalker
3225Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: 4elise
3114For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: Weejee



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:16 am.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.