Posted on 05/22/2007 6:24:41 PM PDT by NYer
ROME, MAY 22, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.
Q: A friend of mine told me that according to the Scriptures a woman should cover her head in the presence of Our Lord (holy Eucharist/during Mass). In our churches this is not practiced. Can you please write and tell me as to how and when the practice of women covering their heads came to an end, or is it that we are doing something which is not proper? -- J.M., Doha, Qatar
A: The Scripture text referred to is probably 1 Corinthians 11:4-16:
"Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered brings shame upon his head. But any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled brings shame upon her head, for it is one and the same thing as if she had had her head shaved. 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. A man, on the other hand, should not cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; nor was man created for woman, but woman for man; for this reason a woman should have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels. Woman is not independent of man or man of woman in the Lord. For just as woman came from man, so man is born of woman; but all things are from God.
"Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head unveiled? Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears his hair long it is a disgrace to him, whereas if a woman has long hair it is her glory, because long hair has been given (her) for a covering? But if anyone is inclined to be argumentative, we do not have such a custom, nor do the churches of God."
A full treatment of this text is beyond the scope of this column. But we may say that this passage contains some elements that have perennial theological value and others which reflect transitory social mores which apply only to the specific time and place of the Corinthians.
For example, during the course of history there were times when it was common for men, and even clerics, to wear their hair long; and none felt that St. Paul's words considering the practice a disgrace applied to them.
Likewise, liturgical norms tell bishops to keep their skullcaps on during some of the prayers during Mass, and they may use the mitre while preaching, without falling under St. Paul's injunction that this practice brings shame upon his head. The norms, however, do ask him to remove his head covering for the Eucharistic Prayer and when the Blessed Sacrament is exposed.
Apart from bishops, and some canons, custom still dictates that all other men should uncover their heads in church except for outdoor Masses.
During St. Paul's time it was considered modest for a woman to cover her head, and he was underscoring this point for their presence in the liturgical assembly.
This custom was considered normative and was enshrined in Canon 1262.2 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law alongside the recommendation that men and women be separated in Church and that men go bareheaded. This canon was dropped from the new Code of Canon Law promulgated in 1983, but the practice had already begun to fall into disuse from about the beginning of the 1970s. Even though no longer legally binding, the custom is still widely practiced in some countries, especially in Asia. It has been generally abandoned in most Western countries even though women, unlike men, may still wear hats and veils to Mass if they choose.
Sociological factors might also have been involved. The greater emphasis on the equality of man and woman tended to downplay elements that stressed their differences.
Likewise, for the first time in centuries, not donning a hat outdoors, especially for men, ceased being considered as bad manners, whereas up to a few years beforehand it was deemed unseemly to go around hatless.
This general dropping of head covering by both sexes may also have influenced the disappearance of the religious custom.
I still have her hats. I'll have to have the right suit to wear with each one of them.
IF I lose another 20 pounds I will be able to fit into her black wool Chanel suit -- it has an adorable little hat that goes with it - a tiny black wool triangle with a little cloud of netting and a few jet spangles. It's cute.
Thank you! Good responses both.
It is NOT o.k. to wear a hat to church that says, "Well, HelLO there!"
I’m glad I’m not Orthodox.
When I was a girl, I had to cover my head in church and it felt demeaning. It made it seem as though there was something shameful about women that mandated our covering our heads. If other women want to cover their heads in church, that’s fine. But I’ll never wear a hat or veil in church again.
By the time that the new Code of Canon Law was issued in 1983, women covering their heads in public was no longer the cultural norm in Western countries. The Church’s decision to omit this requirement from the CCL was certainly not done to shock or offend anyone. Moreover, the Church has the authority to change rules such as this, especially since this particular requirement was not something essential to the nature of the liturgy. Times change. Get over it.
So if a woman does not cover her head in Church, she is not acknowledging that Christ is present or she is disobeying His Mother?
Please, if you want to wear a hat, mantilla, or veil, go right ahead. But don’t try to elevate yourself over those who don’t.
Ah, Chanel! And I did love those little tiny hats with the veils. I always dreamed of wearing those things, but unfortunately, by the time I got old enough to wear them, everybody else had dumped them and was wearing coveralls, sandals, and no bra. Such is life.
I don’t find it demeaning, but I do think it’s odd when people obsess on it, and that was one of the things I never liked about some of the Tridentine folks. Sometimes you’d think the main point of the liturgy was getting women to cover their heads.
It’s no longer something that people do in our society - of course, someday, it may again be common, who knows? - and wearing or not wearing a hat really doesn’t say a thing about one’s piety or faith. So unless the Muslims take over and force us all to wear garbage bags, I think it will remain optional for Christians.
which puts your at odds with Holy Scripture:
1Cr 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God.
1Cr 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, dishonoureth his head.
1Cr 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with [her] head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
1Cr 11:6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
1Cr 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
1Cr 11:8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
1Cr 11:9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
1Cr 11:10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on [her] head because of the angels.
1Cr 11:11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.
1Cr 11:12 For as the woman [is] of the man, even so [is] the man also by the woman; but all things of God.
1Cr 11:13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
I’m pretty sure I was a Catholic that was accidentally born into a Lutheran family, LOL!
And somebody else explaining why they cover their head is not attacking you . . . unless, again, you let it be so. Covering the head is a traditional sign of respect, not a sign of the subjugation of women, and adhering to an ancient custom is not saying that those who don't are disrespectful of Christ. Do as you like, but don't accuse others of attacking you when they've done no such thing.
I think your violent reaction ("something shameful about women" - "never wear a hat or veil in church again") has more to do with your personal feelings, maybe with your personal experience, than with the Church.
My grandmother was a little tiny person - I take after my dad's side of the family.
For $10, you've got to check this out.
That’s the one we have.
Yes, it was Miss Manners.
I think my hat says, “I bought this hat in 1999.” I’m thinking of asking my mother for a new hat for my birthday!
Amazon.com is the place to go for CDs and DVDs.
(Unless I stumble across it in the $4.99 bin at WalMart.)
It’s better than, “My grandmother bought this hat in 1953!”
My husband does the same thing.
I check movies out of the library :=).
Oh, I don’t know. Sounds like your grandmother had better taste (and more money) in 1953 than I’ll ever have.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.