The TV networks just pictured Pres. and Mrs. Bush paying their respects to Pope John Paul II. Both Mrs. Bush and Condoleezza Rice wore chapel veils. Here in the US, most women no longer wear a head covering in a church.

Is it proper for women to cover their head in churches in Europe? What is actually the practice? (Those are two different questions).

Thanks./ cel

I recall few women covering their heads in Italian churches. I don't think it is required at all.

I presume the reason LB and CR did so is because they want to be sure to be ultra-correct (even if head coverings in church are a pre-Vatican-II requirement and even though they aren't Catholic), and they also want to screen their facial expressions from too-close scrutiny.

I was born in Europe, and no, women aren't required to cover their heads whilst in a Catholic church. (I have been to many Catholic masses in Europe over the years with friends and family members.) However, I am almost positive that women must cover their heads in St. Peter's. I haven't been in St. Peter's since 1998, but as I remember, all the women had their heads covered. I'm sure that protocol calls for all women to cover their heads in the presence of the pope at the Vatican.

I didn't cover my head in St. Peters and I don't recall any other women doing so (no doubt some did, but the majority certainly did not).

It's true there might be a different protocol rule for the pope.

Not a requirement, but women usually wear hats or mantillas when having an audience with a live pope, so it is no surprise that the custom is followed when paying respects to a dead one.
Head coverings are not necessary on less formal occasions in Italian churches, but bare shoulders, knees or midriffs can get visitors (men and women) barred from some churches.

I did not wear a head covering when I visited the Basilica in 2002 or 2004. I did have on sleeves and a mid-calf length skirt however.

no head covering for me either

the Vatican website mentions no sleeveless tops or shorts but there is no mention of head coverings

The general impression on TV is that they (Mr. Bush and Mrs Rice) are using this to show their american voters how much they care. (even it they dont?) Its a VERY negative impression these people leave on european TV viewers. It might have been much better for them to just behave like all the others... Maybe they really have no idea what they are doing?

Watching this on FOX is just disgusting.

Even though it is no longer required at least they made an attempt vs. the embarrassing VP and his parka at the Auschwitz ceremony not too long ago.

<<Watching this on FOX is just disgusting>>

Just curious - - how so?

I assume you mean the Fox "News" channel. I often watch it, and shake my head in amazement at how incredibly slanted it is, but realistically, don't you know in advance what you're going to be getting? Is it possible that you have stumbled onto FNC for the first time today?

Watching a television channel that you know takes a specific political slant... and then crying out to the world "this is disgusting!" is just as propaganda-like as they are.

Isn't it?

Best wishes,

Rex

I agree, it's very important from a diplomatic relations perspective for the President and perhaps even more so for MS. Rice (not "Mrs.&quot to be there, particularly in light of the "caso Sgreza" -the shooting of Ms. Sgreza's security guard in Baghdad a while ago.
I note that Premier Berlusconi is having private meetings with Pres. Bush tomorrow, no doubt the Sgreza incident will be one of the talking points.

The Italian media is making much of the fact (in a positive way it seems) that 3 present and former US Presidents are paying their respects to the Pope-they have pictures of them splayed on the front page of their websites.

Of course you are right, its just this inredible lack of decency. In every word and in every report. Im not watching this, they claim to be reporting about the pope a yet its government propaganda in every word. You are right. It is sick but it is fascinating as well. How can anyody dare to use this for political purposes and make it this obvious...

I feel totally disgusted and attracted at the same time. Pictures dont mean a thing.

No

Head coerings are not required - nor evenusual in churches in europe. I saw a few elderly local women with veils - but very few.

In Italy they are very strict about legs, arms, bosom and tummies though - last time I ws in Rome I saw a couple of Britney wannabes with bare midriffs etc turned away from St. Peter's by the guards (as my grandmother would have said - raised in a barn).

And recently I saw a Judge Judy episode on which she required two young female persons (I won;t say women - idiots more like) to find sweaters or jackets to cover their tops (bare midriffs and plunging necklines) before she would hear the case. She made some comment about it being a court of law - not a beach. Good for her!

I've been flipping back and forth between CNN and FOX all day today and I really can't see any difference in their coverage of the funeral. Moreover, I certainly don't see anything overtly political about the coverage. In fact, for the first time, both of them seem to be more laid back and respectful than they usually are when reporting world events.

Actually the issue of head coverings or "mantillas" are a direct aspect of Canon Law. This might make it more clear:

The 1917 Code of Canon Law. canon 1262, stated:

1. It is desirable that, consistent with ancient discipline, women be separated from men in church.

2. Men, in a church or outside a church, while they are assisting at sacred rites, shall be bear-headed, unless the approved mores of the people or peculiar circumstances of things determine otherwise; women, however, shall have a covered head and be modestly dressed, especially when they approach the table of the Lord.

When the 1983 Code of Canon Law was promulgated this canon was not re-issued; indeed, canon 6 abrogated it, along with every other canon of the 1917 Code not intentionally incorporated into the new legislation. Thus, there is no longer any canonical obligation for women to wear a head-covering, much less the more specific veil.

There is no canonical or moral obligation for women to wear a head-covering in Church, women are certainly free to do so as a matter of personal devotion. They should, however, see it as a sign of subordination to God, as that better suits the liturgical context. Those who wear a covering or veil, and those who don't, should not judge the motives of the other, but leave each woman free in a matter that is clearly not of obligation.

Maybe I am wrong about the head covering at St. Peter's, or maybe they relaxed the dress code since 1998. I know my friend, Heather, wore one of those white "doilies" on her head. She also was barred from entering St. Peter's because her skirt was ABOVE her knees. Thankfully, two of our Italian male friends fashioned a new skirt for her from the sweaters they had draped around their shoulders. I also saw a male Italian teenager barred from entering St. Peter's because his ankles were showing. His pants were too short and he was wearing those little white tennis socks.

I don't know why you are picking on Laura Bush and Ms. Rice. Lots of women wear veils when meeting with the pope. Princess Grace, Princess Diana, Nancy Reagan, Queen Sophia of Spain, amongst them.

I really could not care less whether Mrs. Bush and Ms. Rice wore (unnecessary) head coverings.

But I do find it disgraceful that Jimmy Carter, who was the only President who received John Paul II at the White House, felt he had to withdraw, because there was no place for him in the five-member delegation approved by the Vatican.

He has to withdraw so that Ms. Rice could go...?!?

Yes, I think their is speculation that he is out of favor with the current administration due to remarks made at last summer's convention.
I would have hoped that he would have been invited under his own credentials

An interesting thread. I only wanted to know whether I needed to go shopping for mantillas before we visited churches in France. I am (barely?) old enough to remember wearing a Kleenex and bobby pin as a last minute fix before church.

US politics aside, it is a tribute to John Paul II that his funeral on Friday is being called the largest gathering of heads of state in history.

Should we really cause a commotion and mention that baseball hats should not be worn in a building, much less a church???

Thank you all for your input./ cel