Head Coverings

Should a physical Head Covering still be worn by women in the corporate worship of the saints?

  • Yes

    Votes: 18 66.7%

  • No

    Votes: 9 33.3%
  • Total voters
    27
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Grant

Grant

Puritan Board Graduate
Hello all. I am new to having an account with Puritan Board, but I am not new to using Puritan Board as a resource to help me wrestle with certain theological topics.

Women wearing head coverings is something that I have wrestled with in the Scriptures. When I read through the text in Corinthian’s and take Paul at his word, (at least at the English translation in the ESV) it seems that head coverings are a requirement for women in the church gathering, ONLY if they are going to be praying or prophesy. I don’t believe head coverings is a hill to die on.

I am not sure where I stand and will most likely wrestle with this for many years to come. We (me, wife, kids) currently serve and worship at a PCA church (no head coverings are worn).

The question I am looking for some guidance on is this, if my wife is not praying publicly during the corporate worship service And if she is not prophesying (taking into account the New Testament examples of prophesying) then is there any need for her to wear a head covering in the corporate worship service?

In other words the basic reading of the text seems to only stipulate a head covering for women if they pray or prophesy publically in the worship gathering.

Just looking for help. Depending on the day, some mornings I wake up believing that women should wear head coverings during the corporate worship setting, other mornings I wake up believing that they should not. Trying to humbly wrestle through this. (Yes I have read other threads I am looking for some insight on the above interpretion).

If my interpretation could be valid, then Head coverings isn’t ignored with the “cultural limitation” argument (which I do not buy). And the text could still be used to apply to our worship gatherings for a women who may publicly leads the congregation in a prayer or publically reads a bible verse (I am a comolimentarian).

Thoughts? Just trying to humbly think through this and I am open to brotherly rebuke. Is this a new interpretation?
 
While it's far from the general practice, there are several women in our congregation that wear hats to worship.
 
From what I've read, most reformed commentators no longer see a need for head coverings. R.C. Sproul made a good argument that you could find. As for your view, I've never heard of it. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I do think the conclusions of great exegetes that are basically in agreement do have a lot of weight.
 
Grant.Jones said:
Do all OPC congregations practice Head Coverings or do they vary?
Click to expand...
They vary. Many do not, although you will find individuals here and there who do (I knew a couple of families who did).

We in the Free Church of Scotland (Continuing) usually practice headcoverings, but I do not think it is an officially stated doctrine or anything. The Presbyterian Reformed Church women also usually cover; as do the FPs of Scotland.

Perhaps you may find John Murray helpful on the subject: http://www.westminsterconfession.org/worship/head-coverings-and-decorum-in-worship-a-letter.php

Dr. Richard Bacon also has an article/sermon series somewhere.

You might find some past discussion helpful: https://www.puritanboard.com/thread...prohibited-from-preaching.85306/#post-1063964

User "MW," along with John Murray, advocates that the assumption of the text is that the headcovering is to be worn, and hence to remove it while praying or prophesying publicly is a great shame. Others have advocated that the "praying" and "prophesying" are parts of worship actions intended to stand for the whole. Still others have advocated that it is simpler and more practical to just leave it on, even when other actions of worship are being performed.
 
Afterthought said:
They vary. Many do not, although you will find individuals here and there who do (I knew a couple of families who did).

We in the Free Church of Scotland (Continuing) usually practice headcoverings, but I do not think it is an officially stated doctrine or anything. The Presbyterian Reformed Church women also usually cover; as do the FPs of Scotland.

Perhaps you may find John Murray helpful on the subject: http://www.westminsterconfession.org/worship/head-coverings-and-decorum-in-worship-a-letter.php

Dr. Richard Bacon also has an article/sermon series somewhere.

You might find some past discussion helpful: https://www.puritanboard.com/thread...prohibited-from-preaching.85306/#post-1063964

User "MW," along with John Murray, advocates that the assumption of the text is that the headcovering is to be worn, and hence to remove it while praying or prophesying publicly is a great shame. Others have advocated that the "praying" and "prophesying" are parts of worship actions intended to stand for the whole. Still others have advocated that it is simpler and more practical to just leave it on, even when other actions of worship are being performed.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your reply!
 
I'm glad this topic was raised, as I think about it a good bit. I believe the reason women are still to cover their heads is that when singing the Psalms, we are speaking prayers and prophecy. I don't know whether the Reformed consensus is that this is what Paul meant in 1 Cor. 11, or that he was referring to inspired prayer and prophecy outside of Scripture. But that either way, for a woman to speak in the assembly as she must do in singing the Psalms, she must cover her head. I have probably bungled the view, but Raymond and Tyler maybe can help further.
 
Do you know if any of them address the particular matter I mentioned and if so can you give me a brief synopsis? I don't have much opportunity these days to listen to media, but if you can tell me which one of the three addresses what I mentioned above I'll try to make it happen. I've read and listened to a lot on the topic and am familiar with all the reasoning on both sides, but haven't heard anything very helpful on the narrow focus I mentioned.
 
Jeri Tanner said:
Do you know if any of them address the particular matter I mentioned and if so can you give me a brief synopsis? I don't have much opportunity these days to listen to media, but if you can tell me which one of the three addresses what I mentioned above I'll try to make it happen. I've read and listened to a lot on the topic and am familiar with all the reasoning on both sides, but haven't heard anything very helpful on the narrow focus I mentioned.
Click to expand...
Looks like sermon # 2 starting at 35:00 minutes.
 
Ryan&Amber2013 said:
From what I've read, most reformed commentators no longer see a need for head coverings. R.C. Sproul made a good argument that you could find. As for your view, I've never heard of it. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I do think the conclusions of great exegetes that are basically in agreement do have a lot of weight.
Click to expand...
Think that the head covering was tied under Paul into the female being under the headship authority of Her husband.
 
Grant.Jones said:
Hello all. I am new to having an account with Puritan Board, but I am not new to using Puritan Board as a resource to help me wrestle with certain theological topics.

Women wearing head coverings is something that I have wrestled with in the Scriptures. When I read through the text in Corinthian’s and take Paul at his word, (at least at the English translation in the ESV) it seems that head coverings are a requirement for women in the church gathering, ONLY if they are going to be praying or prophesy. I don’t believe head coverings is a hill to die on.

I am not sure where I stand and will most likely wrestle with this for many years to come. We (me, wife, kids) currently serve and worship at a PCA church (no head coverings are worn).

The question I am looking for some guidance on is this, if my wife is not praying publicly during the corporate worship service And if she is not prophesying (taking into account the New Testament examples of prophesying) then is there any need for her to wear a head covering in the corporate worship service?

In other words the basic reading of the text seems to only stipulate a head covering for women if they pray or prophesy publically in the worship gathering.

Just looking for help. Depending on the day, some mornings I wake up believing that women should wear head coverings during the corporate worship setting, other mornings I wake up believing that they should not. Trying to humbly wrestle through this. (Yes I have read other threads I am looking for some insight on the above interpretion).

If my interpretation could be valid, then Head coverings isn’t ignored with the “cultural limitation” argument (which I do not buy). And the text could still be used to apply to our worship gatherings for a women who may publicly leads the congregation in a prayer or publically reads a bible verse (I am a comolimentarian).

Thoughts? Just trying to humbly think through this and I am open to brotherly rebuke. Is this a new interpretation?
Click to expand...
The series by Todd Ruddell, which I see you're listening to, was one of the most helpful things I found on the subject when I was studying it out several years ago.

If I recall correctly, the one thing that I came out disagreeing with Rev. Ruddell on was the matter of what kind of covering is required. The Greek term used for a woman covering her head is the term for veiling, in particular. However, when the man is discussed in verse 4, the Greek forbids him having anything on his head. If memory serves, it was Brian Schwertley that pointed that out, in his series on the subject (though I'm reluctant to recommend Schwertley because of certain schismatic doctrines). If I remember correctly, I think Rev. Ruddell maintains that any kind of covering is appropriate for a woman.
 
TylerRay said:
The series by Todd Ruddell, which I see you're listening to, was one of the most helpful things I found on the subject when I was studying it out several years ago.

If I recall correctly, the one thing that I came out disagreeing with Rev. Ruddell on was the matter of what kind of covering is required. The Greek term used for a woman covering her head is the term for veiling, in particular. However, when the man is discussed in verse 4, the Greek forbids him having anything on his head. If memory serves, it was Brian Schwertley that pointed that out, in his series on the subject (though I'm reluctant to recommend Schwertley because of certain schismatic doctrines). If I remember correctly, I think Rev. Ruddell maintains that any kind of covering is appropriate for a woman.
Click to expand...
Couldn't Paul though have meant the spiritual authority of the Male Headship that His wife would be coming under, instead of meaning the literal /physical head covering?
 
Jeri Tanner said:
I'm glad this topic was raised, as I think about it a good bit. I believe the reason women are still to cover their heads is that when singing the Psalms, we are speaking prayers and prophecy. I don't know whether the Reformed consensus is that this is what Paul meant in 1 Cor. 11, or that he was referring to inspired prayer and prophecy outside of Scripture. But that either way, for a woman to speak in the assembly as she must do in singing the Psalms, she must cover her head. I have probably bungled the view, but Raymond and Tyler maybe can help further.
Click to expand...
I don't know that there is much of a consensus on the question of what is meant by "praying or prophesying." Pretty good arguments are made that the singing of Psalms is what is referred to by "prophesying." My own view is that the terms are used as a synecdoche for all of public worship. Prayers and prophesying (speaking the Word of God) are some of the chief elements of worship, and could figuratively serve as a representative of the whole. Some "high church" types do this very thing with the Eucharist, by referring to their entire service as "Holy Communion."
 
I think the text is clear that Paul is discussing a physical symbol, which visualizes and aligns with the spiritual reality of federal headship. So Paul is dealing with both a spiritual reality, which he is calling Christians to show submission and agreement to using a physical sign. I lean more towards believing my wife should have a physical covering during our corporate worship gathering. Now the next step is teaching (in love) and praying that she will see it as well. Even if we are the only family practicing the physical symbol in our congregation. After all I believe many in our local congregation are already practicing the spiritual reality.
 
Dachaser said:
Couldn't Paul though have meant the spiritual authority of the Male Headship that His wife would be coming under, instead of meaning the literal /physical head covering?
Click to expand...
It's not an either/or question. She is under male authority, therefore she should wear a headcovering. I'd encourage you to read the articles and listen to the sermons on this thread before disputing the issue.
 
Last edited:
The question I am looking for some guidance on is this, if my wife is not praying publicly during the corporate worship service And if she is not prophesying (taking into account the New Testament examples of prophesying) then is there any need for her to wear a head covering in the corporate worship service?

I wear a head covering, so maybe that affects my view, but I don't understand why you think the praying has to be "public". I think based on 1 Cor 14, where Paul wants public prayer to be intelligible so people can say "amen" to it, that when the church is gathered together and there is a public prayer, we all pray. If I am silent while somebody else up front speaks, I am still praying. Jesus said his father's house is a house of prayer. How can you think of going to church as not including everybody praying, at least part of the time?

Your church may in addition have responsive readings where the word is spoken by all, or pray the Lords prayer or some other written prayer together. But even if they don't and your wife does not speak one word, the angels for whom we wear this see us together and know that in our minds we are unified in offering up the petition or thanksgiving, and we are all praying.
 
lynnie said:
The question I am looking for some guidance on is this, if my wife is not praying publicly during the corporate worship service And if she is not prophesying (taking into account the New Testament examples of prophesying) then is there any need for her to wear a head covering in the corporate worship service?

I wear a head covering, so maybe that affects my view, but I don't understand why you think the praying has to be "public". I think based on 1 Cor 14, where Paul wants public prayer to be intelligible so people can say "amen" to it, that when the church is gathered together and there is a public prayer, we all pray. If I am silent while somebody else up front speaks, I am still praying. Jesus said his father's house is a house of prayer. How can you think of going to church as not including everybody praying, at least part of the time?

Your church may in addition have responsive readings where the word is spoken by all, or pray the Lords prayer or some other written prayer together. But even if they don't and your wife does not speak one word, the angels for whom we wear this see us together and know that in our minds we are unified in offering up the petition or thanksgiving, and we are all praying.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Yes I agree that it would be impossible for a women not to be involved in praying and responsive reading in an Orthodox Church service. I was mainly just thinking out loud with the text. As I have stated, I agree that the covering should be worn in the corporate service. Thanks for responding, I found your insight helpful. Now I have the task of graciously and patiently implementing this within my household (I am married with two young daughters).
 
Grant.Jones said:
There are many to post. Here is one link... you will need to scroll down and look for the John Cavin header:

http://www.reformedpresbytery.org/books/headcovr/headcovr.htm
Click to expand...
I would think the article would have done more justice to Calvin's views by considering his fuller treatment in his commentary on 1 Cor 11:

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom39.xviii.i.html

I am not finding any notions that what Calvin exposited therein to be a matter of cultural relevance or tradition.

See also a direct response to your linked RPNA item by Silversides:
https://www.the-highway.com/headcovering_Silversides.html
 
Grant.Jones said:
I believe Calvin saw coverings as cultural. Agree/disagree?
Click to expand...
Wasn't that the way the male authority/headship would be displayed? Would be like in certain cultures today, women would show husband respect by walking behind them.
It was the way to reflect the truth in their culture, but do not see how that command would be carried as mandatory for all cultures and all times going forward.
 
TylerRay said:
It's not an either/or question. She is under male authority, therefore she should wear a headcovering. I'd encourage you to read the articles and listen to the sermons on this thread before disputing the issue.
Click to expand...
I have never been in a Baptist church that followed this as a custom, so would this be more prevalent in Reformed Presbyterian churches?
 
Our family practices head coverings for the women. I was unconvinced of it when I married into my wife's family but upon further examination I was convicted of it through studying that passage in question as well as examining historical church practice. It's a hard sell to contemporaries, but as Ryan said earlier, it wasn't ever questioned until these last few generations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top