|
|
Post by passthepeace1 on Jul 12, 2005 11:05:55 GMT -5
Are women still truely obligated to where head covering at Mass? I found something today that says Pope Pius X included it in Canon Law (#1262), has this been over turned?
And a general question...can Canon Law be overturned?
Peace be with you...Pam
|
|
|
|
Post by Mystic Rose on Jul 12, 2005 11:18:40 GMT -5
I believe that it is part of the Vatican II documents where it was it was made as not obligatory anymore and yes it was overturned.
Canon Law can be overturned as long as it is not part of Dogmatic Teaching.
So now although the Church still recommends the use of such attire it is a recommendation and it is not obligatory. Even in the Vatican II documents it was not done away with as some interpret it to mean or as some would say " in the spirit of".
Merely they have said that the Church can no longer require it as an obligation .... but they can recommend it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mystic Rose on Jul 12, 2005 11:22:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by passthepeace1 on Jul 12, 2005 11:25:05 GMT -5
Mystic, Thanks, I just found this on the web... www.jimmyakin.org/2004/07/head_coverings_.htmlI personally would like to wear headcovering, but feel akward about it, because no woman at my parish does...I know that is a sorry excuse, but it's the true...guess I'm chicken.  I have often wondered if maybe it would make a silent statement against the very immodest clothes I see at my parish. It's shocking sometimes! |
|
|
|
Post by Mystic Rose on Jul 12, 2005 11:31:03 GMT -5
I personally wear one and there are times that I am the only one that does, the last time that I went I did not wear one because I went with someone else and I had just moved here and could not find it.... But, I tell you what it makes me feel like I am naked without one ....So much so I felt embarassed to go and recieve the host the way I was and it was not that Iw as improperly dressed. That and I had not gotten to confession.... You become suddenly unaware of what others think when you see the Lord and you know that the Lord is pleased.... trust me ... or you will....  |
|
|
|
Post by passthepeace1 on Jul 12, 2005 11:34:24 GMT -5
I personally wear one and there are times that I am the only one that does, the last time that I went I did not wear one because I went with someone else and I had just moved here and could not find it.... But, I tell you what it makes me feel like I am naked without one ....So much so I felt embarassed to go and recieve the host the way I was and it was not that Iw as improperly dressed. That and I had not gotten to confession.... You become suddenly unaware of what others think when you see the Lord and you know that the Lord is pleased.... trust me ... or you will.... Thanks, I need some encourging words..lol..please pray for me.. I also just found this on the web..written by Robert Sungenis, he is commenting on Akin's POV.. www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/covering.htmI just started reading it...but I think it will help me. Thanks again...Pam |
|
|
|
Post by Mystic Rose on Jul 12, 2005 11:39:44 GMT -5
Do not read that ----- as the symbolism has nothing to do with being under men but being under the Lord and attired properly under Him .....
It has to do with the directives that state we are to adorn ourselves in a way that will not entice other men .....
This man's use of Scripture is faulty
|
|
|
|
Post by Mystic Rose on Jul 12, 2005 11:41:27 GMT -5
If this was true the way this person thinks then we would also have to wear the very same head coverings all the time even at home to show the same type of respect so therefore the argumetation is faulty
|
|
|
|
Post by shannonrose on Jul 12, 2005 15:35:47 GMT -5
I believe that it is part of the Vatican II documents where it was it was made as not obligatory anymore and yes it was overturned. Canon Law can be overturned as long as it is not part of Dogmatic Teaching. So now although the Church still recommends the use of such attire it is a recommendation and it is not obligatory. Even in the Vatican II documents it was not done away with as some interpret it to mean or as some would say " in the spirit of". Merely they have said that the Church can no longer require it as an obligation .... but they can recommend it. This was actually just left out of the revision of Canon Law-- no where is it specified that women are not required to cover their heads. It comes down to a question of whether or not somethinf NOt rewritten in a current Code of Canon law has been aborrgated, or not. Also, even if the Church doesn't require it, it is still a lovely practice of modesty. |
|
|
|
Post by shannonrose on Jul 12, 2005 15:38:51 GMT -5
I personally wear one and there are times that I am the only one that does, the last time that I went I did not wear one because I went with someone else and I had just moved here and could not find it.... But, I tell you what it makes me feel like I am naked without one ....So much so I felt embarassed to go and recieve the host the way I was and it was not that Iw as improperly dressed. That and I had not gotten to confession.... You become suddenly unaware of what others think when you see the Lord and you know that the Lord is pleased.... trust me ... or you will.... Thanks, I need some encourging words..lol..please pray for me.. I also just found this on the web..written by Robert Sungenis, he is commenting on Akin's POV.. www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/covering.htmI just started reading it...but I think it will help me. Thanks again...Pam I also always cover my head in the presence of the Eucharist. Sometimes with a mantilla, and sometimes with hats, and ocassionally with scarves. I am usually the only one- but since I have started to cover at Mass- there have been some other women who have also from time to time. |
|
|
|
Post by passthepeace1 on Jul 12, 2005 17:35:33 GMT -5
I also always cover my head in the presence of the Eucharist. Sometimes with a mantilla, and sometimes with hats, and ocassionally with scarves. I am usually the only one- but since I have started to cover at Mass- there have been some other women who have also from time to time. Thanks for your input! I am really shocked by the decline of modesty at my parish. I talking about attire that wouldn't even be permitted in schools or work. It seems like common sense should tell someone, if you can't where it a work or school, it should be taboo for church. Complaints have fallen on deaf ears, so I was thinking that wearing headcovering and female modesty would be a good way to witness to modesty. But as I start to surf on the subject I am starting to wonder if it's custom that never should have disappeared to begin with. Peace be with you...Pam |
|
|
|
Post by Debbie on Jul 13, 2005 5:00:02 GMT -5
Mystic, Thanks, I just found this on the web... www.jimmyakin.org/2004/07/head_coverings_.htmlI personally would like to wear headcovering, but feel akward about it, because no woman at my parish does...I know that is a sorry excuse, but it's the true...guess I'm chicken. I have often wondered if maybe it would make a silent statement against the very immodest clothes I see at my parish. It's shocking sometimes! I feel the same way too. Hi by the way... Pam and Nina and Debi... |
|
|
|
Post by Debbie on Jul 13, 2005 6:14:45 GMT -5
I personally wear one and there are times that I am the only one that does, the last time that I went I did not wear one because I went with someone else and I had just moved here and could not find it.... But, I tell you what it makes me feel like I am naked without one ....So much so I felt embarassed to go and recieve the host the way I was and it was not that Iw as improperly dressed. That and I had not gotten to confession.... You become suddenly unaware of what others think when you see the Lord and you know that the Lord is pleased.... trust me ... or you will.... Thanks, I need some encourging words..lol..please pray for me.. I also just found this on the web..written by Robert Sungenis, he is commenting on Akin's POV.. www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/covering.htmI just started reading it...but I think it will help me. Thanks again...Pam Hi Pam, Sungenis has fallen away from the complete fullness of truth and has started to believe in heresies... We must pray for him. God's Peace, Debbie |
|
|
|
Post by Mystic Rose on Jul 13, 2005 9:57:34 GMT -5
Mystic, Thanks, I just found this on the web... www.jimmyakin.org/2004/07/head_coverings_.htmlI personally would like to wear headcovering, but feel akward about it, because no woman at my parish does...I know that is a sorry excuse, but it's the true...guess I'm chicken. I have often wondered if maybe it would make a silent statement against the very immodest clothes I see at my parish. It's shocking sometimes! I feel the same way too. Hi by the way... Pam and Nina and Debi... Hello woman how are you! I will call you soon I am sorry I have not had a chance to call as of late a lot has taken place as you are aware ... Much love to you and your family Debs Lovingly in Christ Mystic |
|
|
|
Post by Schola on Jul 20, 2005 8:32:38 GMT -5
Hi Pam, Sungenis has fallen away from the complete fullness of truth and has started to believe in heresies... We must pray for him. God's Peace, Debbie Like which? Just curious. Sungenis argued for a geo-centric worldview before this pope admitted the evoutionary Darwinian concepts might be completely in error (which trads have been arguing all along, regardless of JPII's insistence that Darwinian evolution can be accepted if theistic). He also argued against the NIV and NAB while many Catholics stand with the idea of an ecumenical bible. I think regardless of his status he raises the best arguments against them. Let's remember that because someone questions VII he doesn't lose his ability to reason or think. This is the biggest problem of today IMO. It's fine if Karl Keating questions fast days and other changes of the Council because he is a "respected" apologist, while these 'questions' which are not new by the way, raised by Cardinal Ottaviani, ArchBishop Lefebvre or even the great Dr. Von Hildebrand, are considered out of the question. I guess we traditionalists will just have to wait for conservative Catholicism to 'discover' these errors for them to be considered reasonable objections. |
|
