The idea of the cathedral in Sir Lanka mandating that women cover their heads in church because too many women are attending Mass dressed inappropriately or even immodestly is an overreaction. It would be more to the point for the priests there to simply prohibit inappropriate attire at Mass.
The arguments that you put forth in favor of women veiling themselves are not at all compelling. Veiling made sense in earlier times when women did not go out in public without covering their heads since church is a public place but it really makes no sense today when that is no longer the custom. St. Paul lived in an age when it was considered improper for women not to cover their heads in public. But that is not the case today. It was also customary in St. Paul’s time for men and women to be segregated in churches in synagogues. Do you think that we should also go back to that rule? Think of how utterly distracting it must be for men and boys to have women and girls sitting in close proximity to them at Mass!
The argument about the angels is simply ridiculous.
The bottom line is that veiling is no longer the rule and is no longer the custom. It is simply a preference. If women want to veil themselves at Mass because they want to do that, fine. If not, that is fine as well.
The faithful should absolutely be discouraged from dressing inappropriately or immodestly for Mass, or even from dressing too casually but I don’t think that this issue should be linked to the issue of women covering their heads at Mass.
But when you answer my points, which are an attempt to merely bring out what the Biblical text says, you use the “cultural argument” which is irrelevant to the point of the text.
Paul offers reasons that transcend culture.
His points are:
1. There is a hierarchical relationship in creation extending downward from God Himself: The Father to the Son to the man to the woman. This has nothing to do with culture.
2. Paul wrote in I Corinthians 11:10 - “For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.” You said, “The argument about the angels is simply ridiculous.” You do realize that it is Paul who makes the argument, and this has nothing to do with culture either.
So it's up to you whether or not you think Paul makes a ridiculous argument.
Nobody ever seriously suggests that we should emulate ancient cultures. What is suggested is that we should take what the Bible says seriously. That requires distinguishing within the text whether we are merely being told what someone did as opposed to whether God is telling us that we should do something. Two entirely different things.
It boils down to your attitude towards the Bible as the Word of God. You can either accept what the Bible says or reject it. But you cannot logically refute Paul's transcendent arguments with the “cultural argument”.
You wrote:
“It would be more to the point for the priests there to simply prohibit inappropriate attire at Mass.”
Actually no. When a woman wears a veil she is much more likely to be modestly dressed. What the priests are trying to do is not force a whole series of dress rules on the women. No, instead, what they’re trying to do is create a new outlook about dress at Mass by insisting on a visible sign of humility (the veil). That’s how it always worked for centuries.