CC - Can we talk headcoverings? Challenge my thinking for me.

[abba12]

Can we have a bit of a debate about this to help me clarify my own thoughts, or see others perspectives? This thread is working from the assumption that we are supposed to cover, and just that the how and where are a little more blurry, so I'm not really interested in debating the validity of covering itself. I know we have a few headcoverers on the forum, so I'm appealing for someone who would give me some solid arguments for covering full-time.

 

I have covered during public prayer and worship, including bible studies and other gatherings (family excluded) for 5 years now. But every so often I feel a pull to cover full-time. A number of arguments come to mind as to why we are NOT called to cover full-time, but still it plays on my mind and I am unsure if it is God trying to tell me something, or just pressure since most headcoverers I know of do so full time and because I am treated differently in public when I cover, and perhaps kind of like the courtesy and chivalry I tend to receive (not the correct motivation, of course)

 

I tried googling for information and mostly found extreme people or overly simplistic arguments. So, I'm going to lay out my most convincing arguments for not covering full time, and I'm wondering if any of our full-time covering posters would like to make a counter argument or try to convince me otherwise (or link to an article which does). 

 

- The context of the verse seems, to me, to indicate that Paul is speaking about a Congregational setting. The following short articles sum it up very well

http://www.headcoveringmovement.com/articles/where-are-head-coverings-to-practiced-in-church-or-everywhere
http://www.headcoveringmovement.com/articles/is-the-lords-supper-the-first-time-paul-dealt-with-church-issues
http://www.headcoveringmovement.com/articles/can-head-covering-be-limited-to-church-if-the-arguments-paul-uses-apply-at-all-times

- One of the biggest things that sticks out to me against it being a full time command is that this verse, alongside calling women to cover, also commands men NOT to cover their heads. But I see no evidence that anyone has ever taken this to mean men should not wear hats while working out in the fields or through their days. Surely something so big as men not being allowed to wear hats during their workday would be mentioned more than once in the bible. If a man is not called to remain uncovered full time, then what is the logic that says a woman should remain covered full time? He seems, to me, to address men and women equally in this pair of commands.

 

- I've never been convinced by the 'we are called to pray without ceasing' argument. I think there's a big difference between public prayer and prophecy, and my daily talking to God. I have been known to cover when I am specifically praying through the day for something important. But my general talking to the Lord as I go about my day seems quite different, to me, than public prayer. Also, I reference my above point, men are equally called to pray without ceasing, and yet regularly cover their heads with hats through the day. 

 

So, can anyone make, or link to, a good point against these arguments, or an argument I haven't considered? I don't want to offend anyone, I am genuinely looking to see if I can be convinced to cover full time, because every year or so this topic bothers me again, and I begin wondering about full time covering. If this is of God I don't want to ignore His placing this on my conscience, but the three arguments I've made seem quite logical to me and seem like what the bible is saying. I have no one in real life I can talk this out with so I was hoping the hive might be able to help.   

 

 

 

[TianXiaXueXiao]

I don't think it's appropriate to cover all the time. I cover during corporate prayer at home and at church. It makes a statement to God and before others that I'm committed to the offering I'm making. I am not making such spiritual offerings at all times. Sometimes I'm just working on something, watching TV, or playing a game where my focus and attention are not specifically directed at God. It would be arrogant of me to pretend otherwise. It would render the times that I do cover meaningless. When privately in prayer, I'm not going to make a show of it by covering my head, either.

[abba12]

I don't think it's appropriate to cover all the time. I cover during corporate prayer at home and at church. It makes a statement to God and before others that I'm committed to the offering I'm making. I am not making such spiritual offerings at all times. Sometimes I'm just working on something, watching TV, or playing a game where my focus and attention are not specifically directed at God. It would be arrogant of me to pretend otherwise. It would render the times that I do cover meaningless. When privately in prayer, I'm not going to make a show of it by covering my head, either.

 

Well, you're agreeing with me rather than arguing against lol. But you do make a really good point, thanks for that. I hadn't considered it that way before.

[Rosie_0801]

 A number of arguments come to mind as to why we are NOT called to cover full-time, but still it plays on my mind and I am unsure if it is God trying to tell me something, or just pressure since most headcoverers I know of do so full time and because I am treated differently in public when I cover, and perhaps kind of like the courtesy and chivalry I tend to receive (not the correct motivation, of course)

 

Look at that the other way. If you covering inspires people to be a bit more courteous and chivalrous, you've just done something good in their day.

 

 

 

Irrelevant to the topic, but I only cover deliberately if I'm going to the Jewish bookshop. It somehow seems polite. :lol:

[MercyA]

Arrgh, I love talking coverings, but it's a co-op morning for me! I'll have to be super quick.

 

I'm not going to argue with you too much, because I think covering for public worship is a reasonable interpretation of the passage. :)

 

However, I do cover whenever I pray for a couple reasons.  The first is Paul's (rhetorical) question in verse 13: "Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?" Whenever and wherever I'm praying, I'm praying "unto God."

 

Secondly, I have to consider the Scriptural injunction that â€œwomen keep silence in the churches†(1 Corinthians 14:34, 1 Timothy 2:11). It would seem that the praying and prophesying in view in 1 Corinthians 11 must therefore take place outside of church.

 

Thirdly, the reasons given for covering in the passage seem to be applicable outside of the worship service as well: 1. because it displays the proper order of Biblical headship, 2. "because of the angels," and 3. because even "nature itself" testifies that a woman should be covered. 

 

Finally, I'd rather err on the side of obedience in matters like this. At this point, I'm not comfortable praying without covering, but I'm not sure if that's habit or conscience. :)  [ETA: My conscience and my understanding of Scripture do compel me to at least cover during the worship service, but always covering for prayer is probably also a habit for me at this point. I've been covering about 11 years.]

 

Not looking to argue here, ladies, just to answer abba's question. Have to run, peace to all!

[barnwife]

This is a timely thread for me. I am Catholic. We sometimes attend the Tridentine (Latin) Mass. When there, I always cover as per tradition. And I like doing so. I like the symbolism. I just like it.

I have often considered covering at all Masses. But I've never done so at our local parish. If I chose to do so, I would be the only woman there who covers. And that's always stopped me. 

But this thread is making me remember that it really isn't about what everyone else is doing/thinking. It's about me and what I feel I need to do.

Hmmm...I hope more ladies weigh in.

[speedmom4]

As a Catholic I have been interested in veiling (the proper term for Catholics) for some time. It was required for all women to veil while inside the Church prior to Vatican II, which occurred in the 1960s. There are still women who still veil and in some traditional parishes it is quite common. My personal concern with it is that if I were to veil in my parish it would be bringing attention to ME. That is the exact opposite of what I would want. 

 

I believe veiling is a beautiful practice but the motivation behind it is of the utmost concern for me. 

 

Anyway, I have no answer. It's a deeply private issue. I hope you find peace in your decision! 

 

God Bless!

[Jennifer132]

I started covering during church services about two years ago. I have thought some on covering full time, but as yet, am undecided. There have been times outside of church that I have felt convicted to cover. The Headcovering Movement website recently had an article about this topic too--

http://www.headcoveringmovement.com/articles/why-ive-chosen-to-wear-a-head-covering-almost-all-the-time#more-5882

 

Romans 14 has a lot to say about the conscience, and not violating your own conscience. While Paul is speaking of eating certain food in that passage, I think the principle he's getting at may apply to covering in church vs. part time--Romans 14:23 "But if you have doubts about whether or not you should eat something, you are sinning if you go ahead and do it. For you are not following your convictions. If you do anything you believe is not right, you are sinning".

 

I hope that helps some!

[Guest]

I have never seen anything in scripture that has bound me to cover. And I feel no compulsion to do it. So I don't. I studied it in length some years back and between myself and my husband we couldn't square it as a universal command.

 

In context that has fallen under culturally appropriate modesty and reverence. I'm fine using the 21st century analogs to that.

[MercyA]

I like the symbolism. I just like it.

 

I do, too. It is a physical symbol of a spiritual reality, like water in baptism and bread and wine in communion. I think physical reminders can be powerful things. (I'm not making a judgement here about the Catholic teaching on real presence, just sharing my thoughts!)

[TianXiaXueXiao]

Well, you're agreeing with me rather than arguing against lol. But you do make a really good point, thanks for that. I hadn't considered it that way before.

I know. I really wanted to comment. Were I to become a monastic, I'd cover full time. 😉

[MercyA]

I started covering during church services about two years ago. I have thought some on covering full time, but as yet, am undecided. There have been times outside of church that I have felt convicted to cover. The Headcovering Movement website recently had an article about this topic too--

http://www.headcoveringmovement.com/articles/why-ive-chosen-to-wear-a-head-covering-almost-all-the-time#more-5882

 

Thanks for sharing! Here is one of my favorite articles on the topic,

http://pursuingtitus2.com/2008/09/06/the-view-from-the-veil-my-journey-into-full-time-headcovering/,

written by a Stanford graduate and fellow homeschooling mom.

[TammyS]

Ok, I don't headcover.  I'm neither for nor against it (I haven't really studied it).  So my input is from a fully practical POV.

 

If I were going to cover at all, I'd probably cover all the time.  And I would do this because I would HATE the constant worry about whether I should cover here, or whether I should cover there, or whether I should cover everywhere.  Just sayin.

[milovany]

Not that all Eastern Orthodox women cover (many do, many don't), but for me, where we live (where it's traditional to cover), it was really nice to have the decision removed from "what do I think the Bible says about it?" to "What is the traditional practice?"  In looking at the all the women saints in the icons, and seeing the vast majority of them covered (just the rare exception like St. Mary of Egypt who lived in the wilds for dozens and dozens of years), and knowing that it's been the traditional practice since the beginning, I just chose to join in.  I don't feel extra special because I cover at all.  It's nothing like that.  I just look at the pictures of Orthodox women around the world covered during church services and I join together with them. 

[abba12]

Arrgh, I love talking coverings, but it's a co-op morning for me! I'll have to be super quick.

 

I'm not going to argue with you too much, because I think covering for public worship is a reasonable interpretation of the passage. :)

 

However, I do cover whenever I pray for a couple reasons.  The first is Paul's (rhetorical) question in verse 13: "Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?" Whenever and wherever I'm praying, I'm praying "unto God."

 

Secondly, I have to consider the Scriptural injunction that â€œwomen keep silence in the churches†(1 Corinthians 14:34, 1 Timothy 2:11). It would seem that the praying and prophesying in view in 1 Corinthians 11 must therefore take place outside of church.

 

Thirdly, the reasons given for covering in the passage seem to be applicable outside of the worship service as well: 1. because it displays the proper order of Biblical headship, 2. "because of the angels," and 3. because even "nature itself" testifies that a woman should be covered. 

 

Finally, I'd rather err on the side of obedience in matters like this. At this point, I'm not comfortable praying without covering, but I'm not sure if that's habit or conscience. :)  [ETA: My conscience and my understanding of Scripture do compel me to at least cover during the worship service, but always covering for prayer is probably also a habit for me at this point. I've been covering about 11 years.]

 

Not looking to argue here, ladies, just to answer abba's question. Have to run, peace to all!

 

Sorry for catching you on co-op morning! I figured you'd like this thread :)

 

I'm just.... struggling to find those arguments convincing for full time covering.

 

Of your first point, the bible also says a man should not pray while covered. But I simply don't see ANY men removing hats as they pray privately through the day, or any reference to men doing so. The command to cover and not cover seems to apply equally to men and women, just in opposite ways. But if I should cover all the time, my husband should never cover his head at all?

 

I disagree with the second point off the bat, since I think the keeping silent command is referring to preaching, teaching, judging prophesy, etc. I don't believe women are forbidden from praying or reading the bible aloud in congregation, so we're coming from very different perspectives there. This article handled some of the concepts well (from a part time covering perspective) - http://www.headcoveringmovement.com/articles/how-do-we-harmonize-1-corinthians-11-and-14- obviously I agree with the third view.

 

The third point, again I come back to, no one argues that men should be always uncovered. While Paul was addressing the women in Corinth in the letter, I don't feel that command itself was directed only towards women. A mans head being uncovered all day is also a display of headship and nature itself.

 

Your final point is quite good though, and one I keep coming back to as this plays on my mind every so often. I still, despite all this argument otherwise, feel a draw to cover more than I do. Maybe not full time... maybe my conscience is bothering me to cover at certain times when I am not... I know I have felt at home during an emotional period a need to cover my head, and have done so. Maybe I need to listen to that more? I don't know, it's an interesting question

 

Of course, I want to restate for the sake of this thread that I totally respect your decision to cover, I don't think it's 'wrong' by any means. The bible talks about following our conscience even when it is more conservative than anothers, regularly.

 

 

 

I started covering during church services about two years ago. I have thought some on covering full time, but as yet, am undecided. There have been times outside of church that I have felt convicted to cover. The Headcovering Movement website recently had an article about this topic too--

http://www.headcoveringmovement.com/articles/why-ive-chosen-to-wear-a-head-covering-almost-all-the-time#more-5882

 

Romans 14 has a lot to say about the conscience, and not violating your own conscience. While Paul is speaking of eating certain food in that passage, I think the principle he's getting at may apply to covering in church vs. part time--Romans 14:23 "But if you have doubts about whether or not you should eat something, you are sinning if you go ahead and do it. For you are not following your convictions. If you do anything you believe is not right, you are sinning".

 

I hope that helps some!

 

That link helps a LOT. Thanks, I'll be showing it to my husband tonight. 

 

 

Not that all Eastern Orthodox women cover (many do, many don't), but for me, where we live (where it's traditional to cover), it was really nice to have the decision removed from "what do I think the Bible says about it?" to "What is the traditional practice?"  In looking at the all the women saints in the icons, and seeing the vast majority of them covered (just the rare exception like St. Mary of Egypt who lived in the wilds for dozens and dozens of years), and knowing that it's been the traditional practice since the beginning, I just chose to join in.  I don't feel extra special because I cover at all.  It's nothing like that.  I just look at the pictures of Orthodox women around the world covered during church services and I join together with them. 

 

I kind of wish I lived in a community where covering was normal. Not that I am usually one to follow the crowd, but, I think I'd be quite happy to cover full time whether commanded or not if it were normalized and accepted. As it stands, I am the only one who covers in any church I've been to my entire adult life, and people haven't always been nice about it. It makes the concept of a leap from part time to full time even more intimidating. 

[TianXiaXueXiao]

Not that all Eastern Orthodox women cover (many do, many don't), but for me, where we live (where it's traditional to cover), it was really nice to have the decision removed from "what do I think the Bible says about it?" to "What is the traditional practice?" In looking at the all the women saints in the icons, and seeing the vast majority of them covered (just the rare exception like St. Mary of Egypt who lived in the wilds for dozens and dozens of years), and knowing that it's been the traditional practice since the beginning, I just chose to join in. I don't feel extra special because I cover at all. It's nothing like that. I just look at the pictures of Orthodox women around the world covered during church services and I join together with them.

Do you cover full time, Milovany? Do others in your church community do this? The only orthodox I know of who do this are either monastic or are considering the monastic vocation.

[Katy]

Not a coverer, but I'm wondering why you have to make a moral rule about it.  If you feel you should cover more, why not either do so only when you have that feeling, or do a trial period of a short time - maybe a month. And then evaluate how you feel.

 

Or do something not so obvious, like always wearing a barrette with fabric or a headband.  No one would know it was a cover but you and God.  So all your prayers would be covered, but also secret. 

 

I have one friend that covers, but she doesn't cover all of her hair.  She just wears fabric on her head somehow. Sometimes that means a scarf, but sometimes it's just a lace headband.

 

I wear dresses most of the time, and that is partially a spiritual decision. But I've never talked about that with anyone, because it just works for me in other aspects of my life as well.

 

ETA:  My point is, when something isn't clearly scriptural to you, and you're not sure if you're being convicted to do something by the Holy Spirit or not, then follow your conscience. A trial period, or a secret headcovering for a trial period, will give you more time to listen to God for the answer more clearly than doing nothing will.  I realize the heart is deceitful, but I also believe if you make a sincere effort to ask what the Lord wants from you, you will ultimately get an answer you are satisfied with.

[milovany]

Do you cover full time, Milovany? Do others in your church community do this? The only orthodox I know of who do this are either monastic or are considering the monastic vocation.

 

No, not full time and I apologize as I recognize that that's the main question in this thread.  I was just speaking about the initial decision to cover itself (whether full time or not).  No, I don't cover full time and only one Orthodox woman I know does (and she wears a second covering during Divine Liturgy; so she has her regular covering and then wears a longer scarf type covering for DL).  At our parish, we cover during church services (which are prayer services, thus covering while praying), and maybe during prayers at home, but not in going about our days.  I am considering doing that some time down the road -- but it wouldn't be for religious reasons. 

[MercyA]

Do you cover full time, Milovany? Do others in your church community do this? The only orthodox I know of who do this are either monastic or are considering the monastic vocation.

 

I have an orthodox friend who covers full time, and she is not monastic. I'll have to send her an email and find out why.  :)

[MercyA]

Thanks for your response, abba, and for starting this thread!  :)

 

Of your first point, the bible also says a man should not pray while covered. But I simply don't see ANY men removing hats as they pray privately through the day, or any reference to men doing so. The command to cover and not cover seems to apply equally to men and women, just in opposite ways. But if I should cover all the time, my husband should never cover his head at all?

 

This is an interesting point and one that is not often considered. However, in my culture, I DO see men removing hats for prayer outside of church; for example, at a family gathering before a meal or at a sporting event when a prayer is said. I guess my focus has been on deciding for myself what I need to do and feel comfortable with. In the same way, male believers should seriously consider what their response to the passage should be. I do see and understand your point, though. It's a fair question to ask!

 

Your final point is quite good though, and one I keep coming back to as this plays on my mind every so often. I still, despite all this argument otherwise, feel a draw to cover more than I do. Maybe not full time... maybe my conscience is bothering me to cover at certain times when I am not... I know I have felt at home during an emotional period a need to cover my head, and have done so. Maybe I need to listen to that more? I don't know, it's an interesting question

 

I really believe that the conscience, when informed by the Holy Spirit and Scripture, is an excellent guide. My husband was also very helpful to me as we worked through these issues together. The final decision was his, although I am very happy with it.

I kind of wish I lived in a community where covering was normal. Not that I am usually one to follow the crowd, but, I think I'd be quite happy to cover full time whether commanded or not if it were normalized and accepted. As it stands, I am the only one who covers in any church I've been to my entire adult life, and people haven't always been nice about it. It makes the concept of a leap from part time to full time even more intimidating. 

 

I do feel fortunate to live in a community full of Mennonite, German Baptist Brethren, Amish, and Apostolic ladies. However, when I first started covering, I had only my orthodox friend for moral support. :)

 

I've found that fellow Christians tend to be much more judgmental of my covering than the world at large. Sometimes I wanted to wear a t-shirt that said, "Not a legalist."  :D Now, I just don't care as much what people think. I think my covering has helped me with that.

 

Ok, I don't headcover.  I'm neither for nor against it (I haven't really studied it).  So my input is from a fully practical POV.

 

If I were going to cover at all, I'd probably cover all the time.  And I would do this because I would HATE the constant worry about whether I should cover here, or whether I should cover there, or whether I should cover everywhere.  Just sayin.

 

Yes, this was also a factor in my decision to cover full-time. I thought taking it on and off would be more distracting and draw more attention to *me* than just wearing it most of the time.

 

Thanks again for this interesting discussion!

[MercyA]

I asked my Orthodox friend why she covers full-time, and she gave me permission to share her reply: 

 

"The Eastern Orthodox ladies are right about full time covering being a monastic thing now.  That doesn't mean that lay people can't wear them full time if that is their conviction and certainly depending on the parish many ladies wear their head covered during the services though not full time.  I actually asked my priest for a blessing to wear my head covered full time before I started.  He said that it could be a good thing as long as I promised to never judge someone who didn't wear her head covered which I eagerly agreed to.  I read the writings of John Chrysostom and Tertulian who wrote about head covering and realized that in the past all Christian women wore their heads covered.  I decided a change in social norms in the past hundred years weren't a certain argument against it.  Also I had longed to wear my head covered for many years before I became Orthodox and seeing women covering their heads during services drew me to the Orthodox faith.  You had just started wearing head coverings and a dear friend in our Orthodox church had been wearing her head covered full time since the seventies.  My husband liked the look of the Jewish Orthodox head scarves.  I found that I was more aware of being the Christian I want to be while I was wearing my head covered.  The church has many little t traditions that can be accepted or not while the big T Traditions are important for everyone.  I consider head coverings to be a little t tradition which I have found beneficial for my salvation.  I have been covering my head full time for twelve years and I have been Eastern Orthodox for fifteen years."

[mommaduck]

Do you cover full time, Milovany? Do others in your church community do this? The only orthodox I know of who do this are either monastic or are considering the monastic vocation.

I cover full time and have since long before my conversation. It's personal and has nothing to do with being monastic. I do know several other Orthodox ladies that cover full time. Again, it's personal and something they chose.

[ktgrok]

Thinking back, I bet in Jesus's day men did go uncovered 24/7. I mean, I can't picture men in ancient times in hats, but that may be my ignorance. But going forward, didn't medieval monks wear hoods? I wonder when hats for men became a thing?

[ktgrok]

Also, to correct something above, in Catholic circles it is usually a veil now, but for much of history women wore hats, not veils. The veil became popular in the USA only after Jackie Kennedy started wearing a mantilla. Before that women wore hats to the store, hats about town, and hats to church. Taking off your hat was a sign of informality, soemthing you'd do when you got home, like kicking off your shoes. Taking off your hat in church would be about as weird as kicking off your shoes under the pew. 

 

I go back and forth on this issue myself. 

[mommaduck]

Also, to correct something above, in Catholic circles it is usually a veil now, but for much of history women wore hats, not veils. The veil became popular in the USA only after Jackie Kennedy started wearing a mantilla. Before that women wore hats to the store, hats about town, and hats to church. Taking off your hat was a sign of informality, soemthing you'd do when you got home, like kicking off your shoes. Taking off your hat in church would be about as weird as kicking off your shoes under the pew.

 

I go back and forth on this issue myself.

Actually, MOST of history, it was a cloth type covering. Hats went off and on over the past 500yrs, and that mainly in the West.

[ktgrok]

Actually, MOST of history, it was a cloth type covering. Hats went off and on over the past 500yrs, and that mainly in the West.

 

Oops, meant to say "much of modern history". I didn't mean to suggest women were wearing cute hats in ancient times! Oops!

[milovany]

I was trying to picture St. Helen in a fascinator. 

[abba12]

I was trying to picture St. Helen in a fascinator. 

 

Oh darn, now I'm trying to picture Mary in a race day fascinator, one of those huge monstrosities lol

 

A thought has occured to me...

The bible references helmets of armour, donning helmets and in the Armour of God analogy. And surely going to war and being in battle is a time when men would have been praying! Maybe not out loud (or maybe so!)  but if we apply the principle of praying inwardly requiring a covering, I doubt God was telling soldiers to go into war without helmets, or take their helmet off when they pray before facing a particularly frightening foe. 

 

I totally acknowledge that some people have chosen to cover full time not from biblical command but personal choice or tradition. That makes sense and I am still mulling over that article which has me considering wearing my covering more often but not full time out of choice alone, with the knowledge it's not required. But I keep thinking, would it be wrong to wear it while out shopping (when I feel vulnerable and would like that symbol)  but not wear it when visiting my father (who would give me no end of grief over it) lol. That seems wrong, and like I'm trying to have my cake and eat it too at this point. I should want to be a witness to him as much as to the people at the store....  But if I can wear it by choice because of it's reminders and it's witnessing and the way it makes me feel protected, then can't I chose to not wear it in situations that would go badly? It seems wrong but then, personal choice isn't supposed to have rules and restrictions! 

 

I'm just thinking out loud here. I don't know how much sense I'm making, I feel like I keep going in circles. 

[Guest]

If you cover in public, be ready for a number of kind and suffering people to wish you well with your chemotherapy.  

 

I wear a headcovering all the time because I have lost all my hair; it is camo, not piety, that compels me.  People stop me at least once a week and ask how I am doing, and can they pray for me, and so on.  I tell them that it isn't cancer, but that I would welcome their prayers!  And then I ask them, "How are YOU doing?"  Because almost without exception, they have faced down cancer.  Or are doing so.  There's a lot of suffering in the world, that's for sure.  

 

I'm Orthodox Christian, and at my parish, some cover during services and some don't.  I don't know that I will if I get my hair back, but I think I might.  By and large, it is a matter of conscience, although there are parishes that require headcovering and a smaller number that forbid it.  (The latter is to try to help visitors feel less weirded out and/or to reduce the appearance of ethnicity/old world kind of thing--because sometimes people think THAT is what Church is about.  But it's not.)

 

[MercyA]

I'm just thinking out loud here. I don't know how much sense I'm making, I feel like I keep going in circles. 

 

You're making sense.  :) I guess my advice would be to just keep doing what you've been doing, cover at home when you feel led, continue to pray about it, and see where it goes from there. What does your husband think? 

 

ETA: I wouldn't cover in public without being solid on my reasons for doing so first. 

[Violet Crown]

Also, to correct something above, in Catholic circles it is usually a veil now, but for much of history women wore hats, not veils. The veil became popular in the USA only after Jackie Kennedy started wearing a mantilla.

Except in my part of the country, where most Catholic women wore mantillas to Mass. Btw full mantillas, or shorter veils, are making quite the comeback among younger women at the Spanish Masses. And hats on women at a Spanish Mass are frowned upon (ask me how I know ... or maybe don't ...).

[TammyB]

Doesn't Paul say that a woman's long hair is her covering? I know many women who do not cut their hair for that very reason. It is their covering.

[TammyB]

Doesn't Paul say that a woman's long hair is her covering? I know many women who do not cut their hair for that very reason. It is their covering.

[MercyA]

Doesn't Paul say that a woman's long hair is her covering? I know many women who do not cut their hair for that very reason. It is their covering.

 

I wrote an answer to this question years ago and have abbreviated it here:

 

Throughout the history of the Christian church, the covering mentioned in 1 Corinthians 11 has been recognized to be a physical, cloth covering. While Scripture clearly teaches that a woman’s long hair is “a†natural covering, the argument that the hair is “the†covering referred to by Paul doesn't hold up on close examination.

 

1 Corinthians 11:6A states (emphasis added):

 

For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn...

 

This verse (and most of the chapter) wouldn't make logical sense if the covering is only a woman’s hair. If that were the case, the verse would read something like this:

 

For if the woman be not covered with hair (if she is shorn), let her also be shorn.

 

A woman with her hair already cut off wouldn't be commanded to cut off her hair again, nor would we expect men to be able to remove their hair while praying or prophesying (vs. 7)!  :)

 

Paul mentions women’s long hair in verses 14-15 to enforce a point: even the natural order of things teaches that a woman should be covered:

 

Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

 

The Greek word for covering used in this verse (peribolaion) is different from the Greek word used for covering in all of the other verses of the chapter (katakalupto). Paul does not write that "her hair is given her for a katakalupto,†but switches to a new term, peribolaion, when speaking of a woman’s natural covering of hair.

 

ETA: Here's an interesting pictorial history of head coverings from the 200's to the 1960's.

[Katy]

...

 

 

 

ETA: Here's an interesting pictorial history of head coverings from the 200's to the 1960's.

 

Wow, that is really interesting. 

 

How all the early Lutheran women had the same distinctive short style.

 

How the 1530's German Anabaptist one had everything covered but her breasts completely exposed.  I knew that was the fashion in those days, but I thought it was only in the courts, not common fashion.

[Bluegoat]

Wow, that is really interesting. 

 

How all the early Lutheran women had the same distinctive short style.

 

How the 1530's German Anabaptist one had everything covered but her breasts completely exposed.  I knew that was the fashion in those days, but I thought it was only in the courts, not common fashion.

 

It looks to me like she is being burned at the stake in that picture, so it may be that she is meant to be a particular sort of person.

[Pam in CT]

re: 1530s Anabaptist woman:

It looks to me like she is being burned at the stake in that picture, so it may be that she is meant to be a particular sort of person.

:svengo: It may also be that she did not freely choose her outfit.

[Bluegoat]

re: 1530s Anabaptist woman:

:svengo: It may also be that she did not freely choose her outfit.

 

I doubt she is a real person.  My guess is that the larger picture is one of people who represent various sorts of sins, or a picture of an event where she is supposed represent a particular class or religious group.

[Jerico]

I always interpreted 1 Cor. 11:15 as if one is praying in church. The church we went to where at least half of the women covered was the church where women did not speak in church. at all.

[Spryte]

I always interpreted 1 Cor. 11:15 as if one is praying in church. The church we went to where at least half of the women covered was the church where women did not speak in church. at all.

Why didn't they speak? Do you know the source for that prohibition? Is it the same one you referenced?

 

For clarity, I'm not part of this world, but I do participate in clothing restrictions when visiting my sister for shabbos, because it is respectful (skirts, elbows, knees, collarbones covered, but I don't wear a wig or cover my hair). I'm just always interested in where and how these practices arise. I understand where they come from, for her (as an Orthodox Jew) but not clear on where they stem from for non- Jews. Thanks for the interesting, enlightening discussion.

[abba12]

Why didn't they speak? Do you know the source for that prohibition? Is it the same one you referenced?

 

For clarity, I'm not part of this world, but I do participate in clothing restrictions when visiting my sister for shabbos, because it is respectful (skirts, elbows, knees, collarbones covered, but I don't wear a wig or cover my hair). I'm just always interested in where and how these practices arise. I understand where they come from, for her (as an Orthodox Jew) but not clear on where they stem from for non- Jews. Thanks for the interesting, enlightening discussion.

 

Later in the same book, 1 Corinthians 14

 

As in all the churches of the saints, 34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. 35 If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.

 

Many people (myself included)  take the verse to mean entering into biblical debates, ministering and preaching, judging prophesy etc, rather than full silence. I think a woman can pray and read the bible in church, the issue is of unsubmissive speech, not speech altogether and earlier in this chapter he mentions 'silence' again when referring to a specific type of speech restriction (not praying aloud in tongues without an interpreter) 

 

But other churches do take this to mean complete silence during church. 

[justasque]

ETA: Here's an interesting pictorial history of head coverings from the 200's to the 1960's.

 

Interesting!  Note, though, some of the pictures were painted much later than the period they portray - for example, the one of 1620 New England was actually painted in 1914 (Jennie Augusta Brownscombe, The First Thanksgiving at Plymouth).

[Spryte]

Later in the same book, 1 Corinthians 14

 

As in all the churches of the saints, 34 the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. 35 If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.

 

Many people (myself included) take the verse to mean entering into biblical debates, ministering and preaching, judging prophesy etc, rather than full silence. I think a woman can pray and read the bible in church, the issue is of unsubmissive speech, not speech altogether and earlier in this chapter he mentions 'silence' again when referring to a specific type of speech restriction (not praying aloud in tongues without an interpreter)

 

But other churches do take this to mean complete silence during church.

Thank you so much for explaining that to me. :)