Debates on veils etc can get firey. In my op women should wear a veil or mantilla or whatever. Some Corinthian women weren’t wearing head coverings, maybe they didn’t feel it fit in with the society at the time, but Paul was insistent.
The wearing of a veil has been custom/tradtion ever since then. The Church has never ever said women no longer need to wear veils, they still do, she chooses not to enfroce it however. That the new Code is silent is a non argument, for it is silent on Freemasonary too. Also the new Code admits it barely touches on liturgical law.
Canon 2 For the most part the Code does not determine the rites to be observed in the celebration of liturgical actions. Accordingly, liturgical laws, which have been in effect, hitherto retain their force, except those, which may be contrary to the Canons of the Code.
Now while the new Code replaces the old Code, this means that no one can base legal or canonical decisions on the 1917 code any longer, for it has no legal force. The fact that veil-wearing became part of canon law does not mean that it is dependent on canon law for its existence or practice.
Canon 10 Only those laws are to be considered invalidating or incapacitating which expressly prescribe that an act is null or that a person is incapable. **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 says that if there is doubt one should not presume an old law is no more noting that later laws are to be related to earlier ones and harmonized with them. Canon 27 adds that Custom is the best interpreter of laws.
Canon 24 §2 A custom… cannot acquire the force of law unless it is reasonable; a custom which is expressly reprobated in the law is not reasonable. Canon 26 …Only a centennial or immemorial custom can prevail over a canonical law which carries a clause forbidding future customs.
Customs, such as veiling, can aquire the force of law. A custom, such as veiling, can prevail over law
Canon 28 Without prejudice to the provisions of Canon 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.
No express mention is made of veils so being an immemorial custom, veils are not revoked.