The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Head coverings

Is the wearing of head coverings a practice lost or is applicable today?

In reverse order:

1. It is applicable/binding today and always.

2. It is a practice that has been lost, aka: discarded by most.

- Head Coverings and Decorum in Worship by John Murray

- Is Headcovering Biblical? by David Silverside

There are several discussions on this Board from the past too dating back to 2003.

For quite some time now, I have believed that head coverings had more than just a cultural significance.
However, the question remains what can I do about it?
The only Church I know that actually practices it, is actually Arminian, Brethren.

I understand though that even RC Sproul's wife wears a head covering when she is worshiping; however it is not something St. Andrews holds more than just a convictional (not sure if that is the right word) to those who believe that way in their congregation.

Tom

If you are truly convicted that Scripture teaches that women should wear a headcovering and men should not, then you MUST practice it regardless of what your local church prescribes. What many (most?) don't realize is that the practice of headcoverings has a very long history as well as the biblical ground it is founded upon. In David Silversides' article here: Is Headcovering Biblical?, he provides quite a list of people and churches back as far as the Reformation which enjoined headcoverings for women in the church. It wasn't until fairly recently that this practice was rejected along with many other biblical teachings which the Protestant Church had before taught and practiced. The modern church for the most part has lost its 'first love' and that is one of the main reasons that 'contemporary worship' is so widespread among other things which have either no biblical support or that are even in direct violation of biblical teaching.

This subject is treated as very sensitive one in certains evangelical churches in where I am.
(Because by its practice there often happens some quarrels or evil speakings within both sides -acceptable or not-!
...especially among the elder members...)
And if I can propose my opinion:
I'd like to leave this question to each female member as a problem of her "conscience";
so if you understand what the Scriptures tell you as it is told in 1Co:11:5, obey it, or if not,
keep your way because it's your God who tell you to do so (only if you're really with OUR GOD),
and then by your fruits we'll know who you are and what you are.

Otherwise, how do you see the explication of John McArthur in his Bible Commentary? and
that's why I take my position like above... He says like this about "uncovered" in 1Co:11:5;

In the culture of Corinth, a woman's covered head subordinate relationship to her husband.
The apostle is not laying down an absolute law for women to wear veils or coverings in all
churches for all time, but is declaring that the symbols of the divinely established male and
female roles are to be genuinely honored in EVERY CULTURE.
(From the MACARTHUR BIBLE COMMENTARY)

Welcome to The Highway Discussion Board.

QUESTION: If God inspired Paul to write that women are to have a covering on their head during corporate worship, then surely it must be obeyed. So please explain to me how HE (God) in the Scriptures can teach one thing and yet tell another that they don't have to obey what HE put into writing because of their own conscience? Is there dissimulation in God?

The basic issue is by sound exegesis of the text does God require a woman to wear a headcovering or not? It cannot be a matter of conscience which determines what the text says. Paul removes any such argument in his last remark,

So, is Paul saying that "we" (Apostles) have no custom of teaching women should wear a covering on their head over their natural hair and that no other Christian church anywhere outside of Corinth practices headcoverings? OR is Paul saying that "we" (Apostles) teach no such custom of allowing women to enter into corporate worship without a covering on their head and that there is no Christian church anywhere that allow women to enter into their assembly for corporate worship without a headcovering?

This is not a matter of scruples, i.e., Christian Liberty where one may choose to abstain from drinking alcohol, or from eating certain types of food, etc., even though Scripture teaches that all is permitted if used in moderation. What Paul is addressing is 1) the creation order of God, 2) the worship of God, and 3) how God's people are to conduct themselves as His created and redeemed people in that God-ordained worship.

Thank you for your reply and I'm dreadfully sorry if my opinion have botherd you by my stupidity.

Only one thing that I'd like to let you know that I'M ENTIRELY AGREED WITH YOU and with what you expose,
and I say that I had left my opinion of the above mentioned with "much" irony adressed to the women of nowadays in the evangelical churches who carelessly neglect these kinds of commands. (And they don't want to hear our suggestion, of course. By their ignorance? or by their pride? Who knows? Know that it's a simple history in local "modern" churches!)

Of course, the main point is definitive and irrefutable!!:

If you DECLARE that God finally recognises you by the merciful work of his beloved son on you,
why now you don't have a sense of honesty and obedience knowing that you're already under his Grace and his Watch, and that for what our Master gave his life for his Father and for each of us.(something similar in ref. Gal:2:21) So now we have only "yes" in front of his Eyes(2Co:1:19) as same as in front of his Commandments.

Now an another theme that comes and I'm sorry to propose you if my thought would bother you (I say it at first...):

How about the ones (believers) who are still in their ignorance or in their pride?
Of course, they really love (still their) God and are really eager to know Him (knowing also the Christ's work) but their way is not yet correct because of their arrogance or something like that...
So You'd like to force them to go with us in the church with same our dicipiline (that we've already recieved or obtained under his Mercy)? Or could you give them some time in order that they could "recieve" it at a certain moment?
I'd like to propose to you this position thinking of Peter's case. As we know very well, our Master has known his character, his tendency, his devotion to Him..., and also his faith! That's why He loved him anyway from beginning to the end (Jn:21:15-19). And after that, it really needed a long time for him but finally he understood the prepared sovreign purpose on his life to achieve, because his Lord was always with him. It tells us many things, I suppose.

Sooooo, what I'd like to say is that;

what it does matter to each of us who want reconcile with our Creator through our Mediator's graceful work, is that each of us could recieve, sooner or later but, CORRECTLY a "divine consciousness (/discernment)." And we're already persuaded that it is possible to recieve it if we ask him correctly. So..., in the case above, I'd like that such female members or belivers recognise their state and that they recieve this "conscience" (that the word I used before, incorrectly??), in order that they'd experience a divine relationship, our God's ultimate purpose to evry one He has chosen.

Sorry to expose my selfish opinion.


PS:
If it doesn't bother you, could you know something about and teach me if possible?:
---I think each epistle (of Paul, or Peter) was wrote destinated to each destination by the given actual situation, so why there is no reference about "the head covering" matter in the other ones? in spite of that we find various about the authority of women in church? Its problem always remains me (/us) indeed...
(Of course, it doesn't do affect the authory of the Scriptures on our life!!)

No, you did not bother me. And for certain, stupidity isn't an issue. The problem is in understanding what is written, which you have been very clear that English is not your native language. So, we both struggle; you to use a language foreign to you and me trying to understand it. I'm sure we will make out just fine even though it may require some effort and several attempts.

What is more than bothersome is to have people accuse those of us who believe that God require women to have a covering on their head during corporate worship as being Legalists. But the charge is most definitely unwarranted. For no one that I know nor have I ever read anything written by those advocating headcoverings is saying that justification = faith + headcoverings. Worship in spirit and truth is what every true believer desires. But learning the truth and expressing that truth from the heart is something that requires growth, aka: sanctification which is a life-long task.

On this particular issue, the problem, as I see it, is two-fold: 1) The modern church has thrown off all restraints to one degree or another and has determined on its own what is right and wrong (cf. Prov 30:12; Isa 5:20,21) and how God is to be worshipped. Therefore, rarely will you hear a sermon on headcoverings never mind a class where it is taught. 2) Too many who profess to be saved by grace are disciples of the Lord Christ, which means that they follow all that Scripture teaches. Biblical illiteracy is woefully widespread for few take Paul's admonition to be "Bereans" and search the Scriptures for God's truth.


There is no reference to headcoverings in any of the other Epistles because the practice of headcoverings was not disputed but rather was wholly believed as Paul made clear in 1Cor 11:16. Obviously, Corinth had a particular problem with this issue and with the profaning of the Lord's Table and so many other problems which likewise are not found in any of the other Epistles. Some problems existed in other places (churches) which are mentioned in more than one place and even by more than one author. But the fact that a problem is only mentioned to one particular church does not warrant the idea that it has no bearing or authority over anyone else, particularly over ME.

Lastly, please have patience with me and forgive me when I fail to understand what you write here due to our mutual language barrier. You are the superior for you have the ability to express yourself in my language but I have no ability to reciprocate and write or speak in your language.

Pilgrim
How would I do that, I am a man?

Tom

Men are to not cover. Just the opposite of women. 1Cor. 11:7 "For a man indeed ought not to have his head veiled, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man."

I'm going to have to assume that you are referring to my answer to your question where I wrote, "If you are truly convicted that Scripture teaches that women should wear a headcovering and men should not, then you MUST practice it regardless of what your local church prescribes."

1. Are you the head of your household, being the man? Then you are responsible and have the authority to make sure that your wife and daughters, should they still live under your roof, wear headcoverings in corporate worship. If you have daughters and they live on their own, then it is your responsibility to instruct them according to the Scriptures concerning biblical worship.

2. Since you are a man, then Paul has two injunctions for you personally: a) Men are not to have long hair... period. And, 2) Men are not to wear a covering on their heads during corporate worship. If the shoe fits, then wear it.

I thank you very much for your really kind and caring response which teached me a lot and gave me much encouragement and spiritual consolation.
So, I must confess you that for me it's not easy to thinks and express in English, hahaha.

But one thing we could share and it's the main matter for each of us: TO KNOW AND MANAGE THE DIVINE LANGUAGE COLLECTLY!!
For especially nowadays I feel a great necessity of uniting the men who accept, understand and apply in their daily life (in this perverted world) the Scriptures
knowing that it's a great opportunity and graceful gift offered by God, our Creater, to each of us throughout the life of our Master in this world.
I'm really persuaded that we are needed to be like as Act:1:8 (but always with our Christ's eyes!!):

But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria,
and unto the uttermost part of the earth.(KJV)

Here we have your words and our reallities;
"What is more than bothersome is to have people accuse those of us who believe that God require women to have a covering on their head during corporate worship as being Legalists."
"Biblical illiteracy is woefully widespread for few take Paul's admonition to be "Bereans" and search the Scriptures for God's truth."

I say "Who cares!":
We do know that He is our Creator, our respectful Holiness, our eventual Father (that... really depends on you, on me),
and He is the One who had left his Words in front of us and sent his beloved Son to this world for each of us by his own Purpose.
These reasons are sufficient to us to understand why his Commandaments are to be kept, no?


Once again I really thank you for this great privilege.
Only I really want to handle English correctly. (T_T)

As you might guess, there are different views as to what head covering means. My charismatic friend attends a church where the women are strongly encouraged to have long hair. They believe that this serves the purpose of a head covering when they are at worship. They cite 1Cor. 11:15 as their proof text. In the article by David Silversides, as recommended by Pilgrim, he shows historical evidence that the uniform dress for women in worship was some type of cloth covering for the head and hair { not the face}. This evidence is paintings on the walls of the catacombs, dating from 100-300 AD. This doctrine stayed the same at least through the time of Augustine {354-430}. As far as biblical evidence, v15 is explained by John Murray {1898-1975}, in the same article. He shows how v15 cannot mean a woman's hair as it would make nonsense of v6.

Pilgrim

If I did what you said in number one, the first thing my wife would do, is leave the Church we go to. I also doubt that I would get support from the leadership in my Church on the matter either.
My Church is probably the most "Reformed Church" where I live and while I have seen a few women wear head covers there. It is a conviction thing and on this one me trying to force my wife to wear a head covering would probably get me up for Church discipline.
If I left this Church, I would be probably not find another Church I could in good conscience go.
If you believe I should do it anyway regardless of the consequences. I am afraid I can't agree, because I know this is not a hill I would be willing to die on.
I do know something about myself, without fellowship I grow stale. Also, everyone I know that left Churches and no longer go to a Church, because of convictions. Has become bitter and so much so that it is unpleasant to be around them.

As to number 2, I don't have long hair.

Tom

You cannot FORCE your wife nor for that matter any grown child to be obedient to you as husband/father. As one man said, "You can physically force a child to sit down, but he/she is still standing up on the inside." If after teaching your wife and daughters what God has revealed in Scripture about the matter of headcoverings and listening to their responses and then expressing your decision on the matter... assuming in your particular case that you believe females under your headship should wear a headcovering during worship, they refuse to subject themselves to you, there isn't much more you can do. What you have is another problem, perhaps much more serious. You would have a wife and/or daughter(s) that do not honor you as the God-appointed head of your household. And thus, they are sinning against God and not just disobeying a man. This would be most serious and church intervention (counseling) might be your best course of action.


1. At least there are/were a few women who submitted to Scripture on this matter.

2. Re: "It is a conviction thing..." which I'm going to assume you mean that the women who wear a headcovering have a conviction vs. opinion on the matter but the church itself has a conviction that headcoverings are not taught and thus required but if a woman chooses to wear a headcovering it would be allowed?

3. Re: "force my wife..." See above. But Tom, are you seriously suggesting and believe yourself that if you as the head of your house are immovably convinced that God, through the inspiration of the Apostle Paul requires women to wear a headcovering in corporate worship, and that you thus have made the effort to teach the females in your house about this injunction in Scripture, and after entertaining questions and objections, if there were any, you have decided that all females should honor God and you by wearing a headcovering, that your local church would administer church discipline on you?

I am NOT suggesting that you nor anyone else leave their present church because they forbid women from wearing headcoverings in corporate worship. However, IF there was another acceptable church in the area who followed the teaching of women wearing headcoverings or at least allowed women to wear them, then I would certainly attend that church if the present one would not entertain studying the matter and interacting with you and how you came to understand the Scriptural teaching.

I never implied that you did. I was simply answering your statement/question/?? On how, you being a man, should practice Paul's teaching on headcoverings. So, for the benefit on those who haven't studied, or perhaps even read this portion of Scripture, I wanted to make it clear that Paul was not simply addressing the matter of WOMEN wearing a headcovering in corporate worship, but the foundation of that teaching is based upon creation; the creation of male and female and the demarcation line between them and then the responsibilities of each to outwardly express the differences, e.g., men are not to have long hair, which God gave to the woman and that women are not to cut their hair short and finally that God further instructs the women to show their respect and subordination to their husbands/men in the congregational worship by having a covering on their head/hair. As I also wrote, "If the shoe fits, wear it."