Skip to comments.Does a woman still need to Pray with her head covered
Posted on 03/16/2009 11:28:45 AM PDT by Mind Freed
1 Corinthians 11:3-6
3Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her headit is just as though her head were shaved. 6If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
Not in the Catholic Church.
I remember when I was a little boy, and my mother and I went to church to make a visit. She left home without her hat - she wore a glove on her head when she entered the church.
You may still wear a veil, of course, but I think Vatican 2 changed that. I may be incorrect about that, however.
In the 50’s to the early 60’s most women went to church with their heads covered and wore white gloves. Then “feminism” came along ... . This “tradition” went away. My take is that regardless of feminism, this is not a requirement in our time.
This link sums it up for me:
Q. I periodically re-read sections of the bible. Each time I find more that I did not see before. This time I am in 1 Corinthians 11. I am concerned that I need to cover my head when I worship or pray. This chapter speaks about honoring your head (authority over you). It says men should be uncovered and women covered. I know that women used to wear hats etc. to church on Sundays but thats no longer the case anymore (at least in my church). Can you expand on what this chapter is referring to?
Should Women Cover Their Heads In Church?
A. I believe that Paul was using a local custom to illustrate a timeless truth, and that is that our God is a God of order. He has established a hierarchy in His creation that begins with Him, then goes to Jesus, man and woman in that order. In the society of the day, a woman going out in public with her hair uncovered was a demonstrating her rebellion against that hierarchy. It was a sign that she was available, and therefore an insult to her husband. Paul was reminding them that our worship services are regularly attended by angels and out of respect for them we should be careful to adhere to the established order while in worship.
Today the head covering for women is not customary, but we should still be careful to act in a manner that pleases the Lord and is acceptable in His sight, especially in worship. For instance how many people routinely show up late for worship, or fail to demonstrate the proper reverence while there, or in other ways by action or appearance distract other worshipers? Would they look or act this way if they could see their angelic visitors, or even the Lord Himself in their midst? Worship is not a time for musicians to show how talented they are or for worshipers to call attention to themselves by the way they act or look. Its a time to pay homage to the Lord, to focus on Him, and to express our gratitude to Him. Its not about us, its about Jesus.
A big NO!
Having one’s head covered doesn’t necessarily mean LITERALLY having it covered. Some sound orthodox exegesis could help the understanding of this. ;-)
With all we have to deal with, do you even think that God has time for such silly issues as this?
Both the act of a man "uncovering his head" and a woman "covering her head" are symbolic. In the culture and time these verses were written, both of these acts were symbols of respect and reverence.
So, I believe that Paul was speaking in contemporary terms (with contemporary examples) to the Church, telling them that their attitude in worship must be respectful and reverent and that message should be obvious to all who see them in the act.
That message is clear today. Should I uncover my head and my wife cover hers? I say no.
Should we conduct ourselves in a way that makes our respect, reverence and worship of Jesus as our Lord obvious to those around us? I say yes.
Paul said this, not Christ,,important difference. You don’t necessarily have to obey the word of Paul. Just saying.
No....unless the persons religion dictates this and the person believes that his/her religion is the way things are supposed to be.
That being said, there are extremes that are NOT ok no matter what is believed. The head scarf thing can be debated to be an extreme but I think is as simple as removing your hat when you walk into a room. Just benevolence.
Personally, I think Paul blew it on this one but then I’m no biblical scholar. Paul did write some great stuff. Really great stuff.
We believe the Bible teaches that a womans covering is her hair so that her hair should be uncut. (New King James Version)1 Corinthians 11:15
But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering.
We also believe a woman should keep silent in The Church Assembly 1 Corinthians 14:33-35
Head covering was a cultural practice in biblical times in Israel that showed respect and submission. If we in America have a cultural practice that shows the same, and if we refuse to do it when praying, then we are in error as much as the woman in Israel 2,000 years ago who prayed with her head uncovered.
It's not the 'thing' we do to show respect and submission to God - it's the state of our hearts, and whether we truly respect and submit to Him.
The Abaptist churches still generally require women to wear a covering. The Anabaptist churches include Amish, Mennonite, and Breathern in Christ. Some of the more liberal churches have dropped this requirement, but many still follow this custom.
They cite your Bible verse.
Good point,,expecially about the musicians. Sometimes you just got to shake your head at the overblown “productions” during worship. It’s like you stumbled into the American Idol studio. Same with those hare krishna-like chanting “praise” songs that repeat the same verse over and over. Just my opinion. I think the old hymns were discarded too quickly.
Please excuse me, should be Brethern in Christ.
Very well put.