[quote=ddimitro]Yes, the requirement for a lady to be veiled in a church or before the Blessed Sacrament (e.g. during a sick call) is still Canon Law.
Although not specifically mentioned in the revisions of 1983, I can support my claim with the following: (from 1983)
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. [emphasis mine]
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. [emphasis mine]
So, since it was specifically mentioned in the Canon Law of 1917, Canon 1262 (quoted below) and not again mentioned in the revision, it holds:
“…mulieres autem, capite cooperto et modeste vestitae, maxime cum ad mensam Dominicam accedunt.” (the non-literal translation is that ladies should be dressed modestly with head covered, especially when approaching the Holy Table.)
Whether or not it’s enforced is not the issue. The issue is that it is still Canon Law.
1917 Canon Law (Latin): mercaba.org/Codigo/1917_1161-1289.htm
1983 Canon Law: ourladyswarriors.org/canon/c0007-0022.htm
I am not an expert in Canon Law, but I do not think the above is correct. This writer cites Canon 20 of the 1983 Code:
[quote=ddimitro]…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…%between%
Now please note that Canon 6 of the 1983 Code abrogates the entire 1917 Code of Canon Law, including Canon 1262 of that Code:
[quote=1983 Code of Canon Law]…Can. 6 §1. When this Code takes force, the following are abrogated:
1/ the Code of Canon Law promulgated in 1917;…%between%
Unless there is a Canon in the 1983 Code addressing this subject, or unless there is some binding law concerning this subject in some other source not abrogated by Canon 6, it would seem that this particular requirement is indeed no longer binding under Law.
As I have said, though, I am not an expert in Canon Law, and I will readily stand corrected if someone more knowledgeable will clarify this.