Is the Headcovering Really an Issue?
A Serious and Indepth Study
(2nd. Edition-revised 1997, 1999 R.J. Vogel)
Related Article:
A Woman's Headcovering. Is it Really for Today? by Various Christians
The Meaning of
1st Corinthians 11
Needless to say, since it isn't possible to speak with Paul personally, we can only read what he wrote. So this is where I will start, since it is the most reliable source. If we would just read and understand what Paul was trying to teach overall, the rest is simple. A simple read through of the first 16 verses of
1st Corinthians 11 will make it clear that Paul is NOT trying to convince the Corinthian women to put headcoverings on. Maybe this is one minor reason why there is so much confusion on the subject today. Strike one against 'rationalization' (see definitions under 'The Hindrances to Our Understanding').
Do you really think that prior to this, women went uncovered? Secular history proves otherwise. I don't discount the fact that Paul was also re-emphasizing the need for a covering, but Paul's main objective here wasn't about to headcover or not to headcover. He was primarily using an already universally accepted practice in and out of the Church, world wide, to teach the principle of headship and authority. In other words, he was using a normal Godly practice to bring out what was behind it.
You won't find complete directions for tent making in Paul's writing. You won't find exhortations about anything without getting the 'Spiritual' and eternal meaning behind it. This is explained by, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (
2Tim. 3:16). In the Bible, God has always given us shadows and types to teach us eternal principles about holiness, the atonement, sin, authority, etc. It is folly to assume that Paul is trying to force the headcovering issue foremost, instead of primarily teaching the real eternal meaning behind it. However, be this as it may, it would also be a terrible mistake to focus on the spiritual only and eliminate the headcovering practice itself.
The fact is, the headcovering has been a Godly practice amongst Christians and decent moral citizens everywhere up until recently. We in America are the ones who have the problem understanding it, because our backgrounds and culture are so defiled. Perhaps we can't understand this because of our democratic culture. Strike one against 'culture'. Why is that? Because in this country, we have lost the understanding of authority. If we don't understand or obey God's basics: His order for the family, home and Church, how can we expect to understand the need for a woman to wear a covering? One example would be this. If our children are never taught to obey their parents, how will they ever know that they need to obey the civil authorities? Answer? They won't. And guess what? Reality is not violated. We can easily observe the fruits of such by the lawlessness (an outward SIGN; manifestation) amongst our youth today.
It is noteworthy that respect for authority in this country has been declining for a number of years. It isn't too surprising, then, to see its venom spreading into the family unit and finally the Church. It's no secret that the moral climate of this country has gone downhill rapidly during the last one hundred years. I don't mean to imply that the following is the root cause, but it was a little over a hundred years ago that women covered their heads. Back then it was the natural habit of moral women (and especially the Church) to cover their heads. Now they don't. The real root is that the headcovering's disappearance is a manifestation which is directly proportional to the spiritual decline of the Church.
A Great Cloud of Witnesses
As far as a more direct teaching on headcoverings elsewhere in the Bible, it isn't there in plain language. Oh yes, in spirit it is, but only through brief examples, understanding Modesty, authority, headship and the benevolent dictatorship of God. In respect to modesty, there is a dearth in the land of America. Strike two against 'culture'.
We also still have the writings of the disciples of the Apostles, who lived in Paul's time and on, that discuss the very subject of headcoverings. They too were first hand witnesses to what the Apostles taught and practiced as Biblical truth. What did they say?
They knew that to cover a women's head with a veil was already universal spiritual knowledge. A few of them devoted entire chapters to the why, how, when and where. None were trying to convince the Church of the NEED to START wearing them, though. It was already accepted knowledge. They simply addressed the spiritual reasons FOR wearing them. After reading Tertullian (145 A.D.) and others, I get the idea that only pagan priestesses and queens, prostitutes and lesbians went without veils.
Since most American Christians have never read any of the early Church's history nor its writings, it isn't surprising that most today are in the dark about what the early Church believed. When American Christians come to Paul's chapter 11, most rationalize in trying to understand it, thereby missing the obvious. Strike one against 'autopilot, strike two against rationalization and strike three against 'culture'.
So it's not a matter of having to prove whether or not Paul wanted women to cover their heads. We don't have to speculate on what he 'probably' meant by a covering. That is only necessary now, because we look at things through our American culture. Besides, it is not very difficult to discover that most of the world had (until lately) veiled their women. It has only been in recent years that cultures like ours, that have advanced in sin, have cast off the sign of the veil. All speculation as to whether it was a sign of this or that is like searching in the dark when we ignore such a cloud of witnesses before us.