Head Covering in Modern Times

Status
Not open for further replies.

GospelAdorned

Puritan Board Freshman
I would like to ask if you would share Puritan and Reformed links on the practice of men and women uncovering and covering in 1 Corinthians 11. I have been researching the subject for quite a few years (since God saved me as an adult who grew up in pagan culture). I am gathering studies and commentaries on the subject, for myself and to help others study it for themselves. I would love any content new and old (the only modern Reformed well-known preachers I know who spoke extensively on head covering are RC Sproul and Alexander Strauch). Thank you for your help!
 
Whichever position you find yourself convinced of, this thread is worth checking out for resources:
 
Thank you, Logan! It looks like the thread shared is in support of head covering being cultural not a modern practice. I haven't seen many old writings taking that position, so this will be interesting to read. A question that comes into my mind is, I thought the church was covering all the way into the 1900s until the feminist revolution and religious veil burning in Washington fifty years ago, so I wonder why or how this practice lasted so long?
 
Last edited:
Thank you, Logan! It looks like this thread is in support of head covering being cultural not a modern practice. I haven't seen many old writings taking that position, so this will be interesting to read. A question that comes into my mind is, I thought the church was covering all the way into the 1900s until the feminist revolution and religious veil burning in Washington fifty years ago, so I wonder why or how this practice lasted so long?
This in part is what led my wife and eventually myself to take a pro-head covering position. It seemed so obvious to all of the old commentators. Correlation of course does not equal causation, but it seems odd to me that the onset of feminism and lack of modesty occurred alongside the end of head coverings. Calvin’s commentaries were helpful for me
 
Yeah it's tough. I personally believe they should be the norm in practice, but because my church and the Church in general does not practice this, it's basically just something I don't think about, and if my wife were to wear one I'm sure this would cause all sorts of controversy. When people do something that stands out from the rest, it is generally judged pretty negatively. That's groupthink for you. On this one I'll just trust my leadership and not concern myself about it.
 
This in part is what led my wife and eventually myself to take a pro-head covering position. It seemed so obvious to all of the old commentators. Correlation of course does not equal causation, but it seems odd to me that the onset of feminism and lack of modesty occurred alongside the end of head coverings. Calvin’s commentaries were helpful for me
You're 100% correct. In fact, this reminded me of another excellent sermon on headcovering which touches on the correlation to feminism. Feminism and Head Coverings
 
Hi Jennifer, I believe along with friends above that the Scriptures teach women should cover their heads in public worship. It’s an apostolic matter wherein Paul gave his authoritative reasoning (and directive) in 1 Corinthians 11. All of his reasoning still applies to the church today. I read everything I could find and listened to a lot of sermons! The ones that shone the light that clinched it for me were from this 3-part series by Rev. Todd Ruddell. https://web.sermonaudio.com/broadcasters/ccrpc/series/5496
 
When people do something that stands out from the rest, it is generally judged pretty negatively. That's groupthink for you. On this one I'll just trust my leadership and not concern myself about it.
Respectfully brother, this is not biblical thinking. Search the Scriptures to ensure what you belief is true. Yes, we are to submit to those in authority over us but we must guard against believing anything on implicit faith. In addition, if something is to be true and biblical, then let the entire world shun us but we must obey God. One of my favorite quotations from Knox is, "One with God is a majority".
 
Respectfully brother, this is not biblical thinking. Search the Scriptures to ensure what you belief is true. Yes, we are to submit to those in authority over us but we must guard against believing anything on implicit faith. In addition, if something is to be true and biblical, then let the entire world shun us but we must obey God. One of my favorite quotations from Knox is, "One with God is a majority".
Agreed.

Hi Jennifer, I believe along with friends above that the Scriptures teach women should cover their heads in public worship. It’s an apostolic matter wherein Paul gave his authoritative reasoning (and directive) in 1 Corinthians 11. All of his reasoning still applies to the church today. I read everything I could find and listened to a lot of sermons! The ones that shone the light that clinched it for me were from this 3-part series by Rev. Todd Ruddell. https://web.sermonaudio.com/broadcasters/ccrpc/series/5496
Thank you so much, Jeri! I am looking forward to listening! In this series, did he mention if there is any differentiation between unmarried men and women and married who are uncovering and covering?
 
Thank you so much, Jeri! I am looking forward to listening! In this series, did he mention if there is any differentiation between unmarried men and women and married who are uncovering and covering?
I don’t remember that specifically but he is so thorough, I’d have to say probably. :)
 
A short letter by John Murray, containing what I find to be a judicious interpretation of 1 Cor. 11.


Prof. Murray concludes that a covering is presupposed as the accepted practice for women in public worship. Therefore, the practice can be considered both cultural and relevant for today. I agree with Murray that it should be a matter of guidance rather than express legislation.
 
I don’t remember that specifically but he is so thorough, I’d have to say probably. :)
A married Reformed Baptist sister shared an interesting point :): I definitely believe it’s for women and men. All men. Married or not. Should not cover their heads. All women, should cover their heads. Only the ESV says wives. We are reflecting the wisdom of God in creation. We are acknowledging that we are equal, but different. It’s doing things decently and in order in the assembly. When we pray and prophesy we want those looking on us to know we are not doing it from a place of authority. That we desire to be female and in the place God put it. That’s why we have female pastors now. Because the church doesn’t keep that symbol in front of their eyes. I think the reformed circles go too far at times with women being silent. To the point women aren’t praying or prophesying, using and seeking the best gift. So it’s to the detriment of the church both ways.
 
Respectfully brother, this is not biblical thinking. Search the Scriptures to ensure what you belief is true. Yes, we are to submit to those in authority over us but we must guard against believing anything on implicit faith. In addition, if something is to be true and biblical, then let the entire world shun us but we must obey God. One of my favorite quotations from Knox is, "One with God is a majority".
I hear ya, brother. Thanks for the encouragement!
 
A married Reformed Baptist sister shared an interesting point :): I definitely believe it’s for women and men. All men. Married or not. Should not cover their heads. All women, should cover their heads. Only the ESV says wives. We are reflecting the wisdom of God in creation. We are acknowledging that we are equal, but different. It’s doing things decently and in order in the assembly. When we pray and prophesy we want those looking on us to know we are not doing it from a place of authority. That we desire to be female and in the place God put it. That’s why we have female pastors now. Because the church doesn’t keep that symbol in front of their eyes. I think the reformed circles go too far at times with women being silent. To the point women aren’t praying or prophesying, using and seeking the best gift. So it’s to the detriment of the church both ways.
Yes, I agree that the apostle has all women (and men) in view, married or not. Her last point is interesting re: women not 'using and seeking the best gift' i.e. praying and prophesying. I'm not sure exactly what she's saying- does she mean praying/prophesying aloud in public worship (and what would she mean by prophesying?)
Just to offer a thought on this- the singing of Psalms in public worship is the venue women have for offering public prayer and for participation in prophesying. And one great argument for covering our heads! That the Lord may soon restore the singing of Psalms in public worship!
 
Yes, I agree that the apostle has all women (and men) in view, married or not. Her last point is interesting re: women not 'using and seeking the best gift' i.e. praying and prophesying. I'm not sure exactly what she's saying- does she mean praying/prophesying aloud in public worship (and what would she mean by prophesying?)
Just to offer a thought on this- the singing of Psalms in public worship is the venue women have for offering public prayer and for participation in prophesying. And one great argument for covering our heads! That the Lord may soon restore the singing of Psalms in public worship!
The singing in public worship is what showed me that covering while "praying and prophesying" in 1 Cor 11 (which is the prophesying my friend is referring to) can be relevant to the corporate gathering on the Lord's Day and not just prayer meetings! Our church has corporate prayer on the Lord's Day, as well, with both men and women praying out loud, but I know many don't but still cover.
 
Hi Jennifer, I believe along with friends above that the Scriptures teach women should cover their heads in public worship. It’s an apostolic matter wherein Paul gave his authoritative reasoning (and directive) in 1 Corinthians 11. All of his reasoning still applies to the church today. I read everything I could find and listened to a lot of sermons! The ones that shone the light that clinched it for me were from this 3-part series by Rev. Todd Ruddell. https://web.sermonaudio.com/broadcasters/ccrpc/series/5496
Hi Jeri. About a year ago I started to use a covering in worship. For years I thought it was the correct thing to do but I always found an excuse to refrain, mostly embarrassment and a fear of being seen as weird or holier-than-thou. But I think as the Satanic attacks on God’s creation order have accelerated in our day and the church seems to follow the culture of feminism in so many ways, in some small measure I needed to repent of my fears and be obedient to the apostolic ordinance, as Rom termed it.
When I was sorting through this issue I found Rev. Ruddell’s sermons very helpful. I hope more women return to this practice of the universal church. It was only in my lifetime that this was discarded. I hope I live to see its return.
 
I would like to ask if you would share Puritan and Reformed links on the practice of men and women uncovering and covering in 1 Corinthians 11. I have been researching the subject for quite a few years (since God saved me as an adult who grew up in pagan culture). I am gathering studies and commentaries on the subject, for myself and to help others study it for themselves. I would love any content new and old (the only modern Reformed well-known preachers I know who spoke extensively on head covering are RC Sproul and Alexander Strauch). Thank you for your help!

Hi Jennifer,

This is a free E-book which my former Pastor wrote on the head covering in worship.

The Headcovering in Worship by Rev. David Lipsy

I hope this is of help to you!
 
It is not about culture. Paul said to wear it because of the angels.

I have my opinion about what that means, but I wont go down that road now All you need to know is that Paul didn't say to wear one because of the Corinthian culture. He said to wear one because of the unseen angels. The whole culture debate, in my opinion, evades what Paul said.
 
It is not about culture. Paul said to wear it because of the angels.

I have my opinion about what that means, but I wont go down that road now All you need to know is that Paul didn't say to wear one because of the Corinthian culture. He said to wear one because of the unseen angels. The whole culture debate, in my opinion, evades what Paul said.
Hi Lynnie! I'm looking for links for primary research - if you have any that helped you please send along! Thank you!

Hi Jennifer,

This is a free E-book which my former Pastor wrote on the head covering in worship.

The Headcovering in Worship by Rev. David Lipsy

I hope this is of help to you!
Thank you, Jakob! I will listen!
 
Hi Jennifer. I've been wearing it for 40 years and whatever hub and I read back then is lost in the mists of memory. It would have probably been mostly old dead Reformed guys.

I would suggest a few things for you to look into and think about. First, in Ch 11, the word translated "tradition, handed down, delivered over", is the same for both head coverings and communion.

Verse 2: παρέδωκα 23: παρέδωκα

Why do we often see headcoverings as "tradition" and think of turkey at thanksgiving, or Christmas trees, or fireworks on the fourth of July, but with communion we see "handed down" which we know was from Jesus? Why? Same word. Who was headcoverings handed down from? Jesus? Paul? Other apostles? In the context of the passage, why would one be perpetual and one just for back then, when the same word is used?

In second Thess 2:15 Paul praises them for holding onto traditions taught orally or in writing. Does this verse apply?

Second- look up the Greek interlinear and note the way her headcovering, the sign of being under the husband's authority, is one word. It is used several times. Later, speaking of the analogy of her long hair, it is a different word. If Paul wanted to say her hair is that sign of authority, why didn't he say so with the same word? Why switch words? How can anybody say her hair fits the command?

Going back to what I said before, Paul said it is a sign to the angels and that is why we are commanded to wear it. So why would somebody say it is a sign to people in the local culture? Are angels present when we gather? Are they ministering spirits? Can they see it? Could there be a reason to God's glory that we do this?

( note to be fair- Michael Heiser sees it as probably a sign to fallen angels who might want to go for a romp with a human woman, and it protects her from the Nephilim baby thing. I disagree, but, he is way smarter than me and I think he is wrong, but maybe he is right).

I think once you see that the same exact word is used for communion and headcoverings, together in this one chapter, you will find it to be an inescapable perpetual command, without needing a lot of mental gymnastics to rationalize that one of them ceased.

Of interest- we have asked dozens of people in leadership (and wives) the past decades if they believe women should wear headcoverings when they brought the subject up first. All but one I can recall said they had to admit it appears the bible says we should. This is what you get:

I dont want to be legalistic.
My pastor (or elders) wouldn't like it or would be against it.
I dont want to cause division.
I dont want to draw attention to myself.
I grew up in the catholic church and it reminds me of having to wear one.
It would cause trouble in the denomination if I supported it.
Ad nauseum.

My husband drops it, but me being more outspoken, I always said- Wait, are you telling me you think this is a new Testament command, but you wont do it for that reason? They say Yes.

I find this horrifying. People here who have studied it and come to the conclusion that they don't believe it is for today I give a pass to, even if I disagree. But do you have any idea how many will admit they DO think it is a command of Paul, but, but, but, all the buts.....well, they are disobeying what they themselves say they think is a NT command! This should make any person here shudder, to think of brethren ignoring what their own conscience and mind tells them what they should do ( even if you think they are weaker brethren with weak consciences).

I have to go. But please look at these Greek words above. Think about the reason to do it- because of the angels. Once you start, you get a heightened awareness of the unseen angelic realm, which is comforting, glorious, and helpful if people get contemptuous about it to you. That guy linked above, RS Clark, has a profound aversion to such experiential things, and is very critical of Lloyd-Jones, Iain Murray, Jonathan Edwards, and other men with an experiential aspect to their writings. I wont even read him anymore.

Have fun. You can look like a British royal in a hat if you don't like the alternatives like the doilies or scarves. You look very pretty; if you decide to do this try the Princess Kate look!
 
A married Reformed Baptist sister shared an interesting point :): I definitely believe it’s for women and men. All men. Married or not. Should not cover their heads. All women, should cover their heads. Only the ESV says wives. We are reflecting the wisdom of God in creation. We are acknowledging that we are equal, but different. It’s doing things decently and in order in the assembly. When we pray and prophesy we want those looking on us to know we are not doing it from a place of authority. That we desire to be female and in the place God put it. That’s why we have female pastors now. Because the church doesn’t keep that symbol in front of their eyes. I think the reformed circles go too far at times with women being silent. To the point women aren’t praying or prophesying, using and seeking the best gift. So it’s to the detriment of the church both ways.
I wonder if any applications to outside the worship context. :think:

That is, I think most of us would agree that, to the degree that this would be morally binding, it would be so within the assembly, correct (Or no?)? So does it only apply to worship? Would it extend to other public fora? Morally? As a matter of general propriety? Culture? And what would it mean for us to say yes/no? Would a hat suffice?

Culturally, I believe men in Western societies are to take their hats off indoors and women are not required to do so, when in public (could be misinformed about this). Naturally outside will depend on the weather, but generally speaking, everyone used to wear a "head covering" outdoors to protect from the sun and elements. A custom to which I think we should return.

All this just musing out loud and wondering what this might look like?
 
I think if one grants headcovering in worship is a command, it would imply it is, at minimum, not a bad thing elsewhere. That said I know of no biblical command to cover outside worship and 1 Corinthians 11 seems to suggest that such a requirement doesn't exist.
 
I think if one grants headcovering in worship is a command, it would imply it is, at minimum, not a bad thing elsewhere. That said I know of no biblical command to cover outside worship and 1 Corinthians 11 seems to suggest that such a requirement doesn't exist.
As a requirement, no. But doesn't the fact that Paul refer to it as a creational norm seem to imply a norming application outside worship? Again, I'm not even convinced of headcoverings as a universal rule rule of worship anyway. But frankly, I would love to see a society where it is the norm, and everyone followed that norm into worship as well.

I dunno, does this make sense? It does in my head... but that's what worries me. :lol:
 
I found this report very helpful - https://www.reformedpresbytery.org/wp-content/uploads/Headcoverings-RPNA.pdf especially the historical section which found that head coverings was not the absolute norm in reformed churches until the mid 20th century as is often claimed

The linked thread I posted at the beginning covers that as well. I think it would be helpful if we recognized that the history is more nuanced than that and move beyond "the church universally practiced and no one thought this was cultural until feminism" because that's simply not true. Yet it's repeated multiple times in every conversation.

For example, out of two dozen Puritan and Reformed (1500s/1600s) commentaries I looked at, not a single one said that a man praying with his head uncovered was required except by custom. So are you certain they are saying the opposite of the women? Why? What was their historical and cultural context? Go back and read the sources. It might surprise you that the "custom" position may have been the almost universal position, although that is masked by the custom of the times matching for women (and sometimes for men).

The cultural argument (at least the Reformed one) does not dismiss the passage at all, it applies the principle more broadly than just restricting it to a female covering during corporate worship.

I've listened to Rom's and Todd's sermons and read Silversides' articles, I'd encourage others to read Fentiman's paper linked above to round out your understanding of the history.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top