Should Christian Women Wear Head Coverings?

In this blog I’m going to be giving a summary of the controversies within scholarship surrounding the issue of head coverings. Once again I will be reviewing this topic through the lenses of two competing view points; the egalitarian and complementarian views. Egalitarians very loosely put, believe that there is no role differences related to authority between men and women. Both were created equal and therefore it is erroneous to believe that the husband should exercise headship over his wife. Complementarians hold the view that men and women have equal value and equal inheritance in Christ but by God’s design, they have different roles related to authority. For this reason husbands are to lead in the household while women are to play a supporting role to their husbands.

Key verses: 1 Corinthians 11 v 3 – 5 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. ⁴ Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. ⁵ But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved.

KATAKALUPTO

The Greek word katakalupto is used in the context of head coverings, particularly in 1 Corinthians 11, and means "to be veiled" or "to cover". It refers to the Roman practice of pulling one’s toga up over the head like a hood.

The opposite of that word is Akatakalupto and it means “uncovered”.

Peribolaion:

Another Greek word used in 1 Corinthians 11 to describe a covering, specifically referring to the "hair of a woman...like a mantle cast around" is the word Peribolaion.

These words are important in as far as they convey the idea that the covering referenced here is additional cloth that covers the hair of a woman or a man and not the hair itself.

Verse 3 serves as the overarching principle for the whole teaching on head coverings. The head covering issue is about reinforcing male headship. That is what is known as the traditional view. All of Paul’s concerns are going to flow from this. Paul goes on to give a series of arguments why women should wear head coverings. He offers five arguments in that regard.

The bible was written for us and not to us. So please note that your eyes are reading an ancient conversation. Try to transport yourself from the 21^st century back to the 1^st. It made a lot of sense to the first century audience. In the Greco-Roman era, where they wore a Toga, The clothing worn by Roman women that was similar in function to a man's outer garment was called a palla, which was a long, rectangular shawl or mantle. While Roman men wore a woolen toga over their tunics for formal occasions, respected women wore a stola (a long dress) and draped a palla over it when going in public.

Paul presents us with five different ways of teaching the head covering issue.

v The Traditional view

v The argument from Creation

v Argument from custom at the time

v Argument from nature

v Cosmic Significance

Let’s now look at each in turn

The Traditional View –

This is the view that Complementarians hold

In this view, the head covering practice is about reinforcing male or husband headship. But please note that this is only when praying or prophesying.

When man covers his head (literal) while praying or prophesying, he dishonours his head (metaphor), Jesus Christ. When woman fails to cover her head while doing the same, she dishonours her head, the husband. Note, this was largely in the Jewish Christian context. Paul asks: can a woman shave her hair to boldness, NO. so why would she pray or prophesy without a head covering?

The opposing egalitarian view

Leading egalitarian scholar and author Philp Payne in his book Man and Woman One in Christ argues that in 1 Corinthians 11, the "covering" refers to a woman's long hair being tied up, rather than a separate veil or shawl. He suggests that in first-century Corinth, this, or similar hairstyles, were markers of modesty, while loose or unbound hair symbolized improper sexual availability. Payne opposes the traditional interpretation that this passage teaches a hierarchy of male authority, arguing instead that it supports gender equality in ministry. In my opinion, to reject the headship of a husband over his wife is an argument that is unsustainable. it cannot be backed up by scripture.

Creation supports head covering.

The Complementarian view

First century believers saw how God made Adam and Eve as reflecting male headship. See verse 7. What does man is the glory of God mean? It means man is the pinnacle of all of God’s creation. He is the crowning jewel of His creation. To glorify God, he is to obey God’s every command.

Conversely, a woman is the glory of man means that she was sourced from man, and that she is the culmination of and the peak of all that man achieves. She is to honour him by submitting to his authority in everything.

Ephesians 5 v 22-24 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. ²³ For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. ²⁴ Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be subject to their own husbands in everything.

Egalitarian view

Woman being the glory of man, according to Philip Payne, affirms woman as the proper sexual partner for man. And when the scripture talks about authority, egalitarians believe this refers to her exercising her own authority over herself and not her husband’s authority over her. In his book, Payne says Corinthian women had a moral obligation to exercise control over their heads by not letting their hair down since that symbolized sexual looseness. To me, this is a case of denialism at its best. That view of a woman exercising authority over her own head seems forced.

To those who push against male authority and role distinctions here is my question. What is Paul’s point about order and purpose in the creation of man and woman in verses and eight and nine?

⁸ For man is not from woman, but woman from man. ⁹ Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.

Verse eight is telling us man is the source of woman. This implies a built-in authority status of man over woman. And verse nine is a reinforcer of verse eight in terms of that authority. But do not forget the Jewish principle of Primogeniture: the first born automatically assumes a leadership role. In this case the first one created was Adam. This was the reason Paul instructed women to wear head coverings and not men. In order to make sure that men were kept humble regarding verses eight and nine, Paul offers a counterbalance in verses 11 and 12.

1 Corinthians 11 ¹¹ Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. ¹² For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God. 

The cloth covering view absolutely fits 1 Corinthians 11 and makes way more sense than the hair done up view. It also fits the logical flow of the passage, the Greek language and the historical background.

 To keep in line with Church Custom at that time

In that era head coverings served the same purpose as an engagement or wedding ring. That she is taken. A woman who went to church without a head covering was sometimes viewed as being promiscuous. Prostitutes distinguished themselves in that culture by not having a head covering. It was their way of announcing that they were available. It was also viewed as a way of saying; I am in mourning Deuteronomy 21 v 12 When you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God delivers them into your hand, and you take them captive, ¹¹ and you see among the captives a beautiful woman, and desire her and would take her for your wife, ¹² then you shall bring her home to your house, and she shall shave her head and trim her nails.

Cosmic significance - “Because of the Angels”

1 Corinthians 11 v 10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels

Before I explain the two schools of thought held by scholarship in respect of the above verse, let me remind you that we have angels assigned to watch over believers.

Hebrew 1 v 14 Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation?

Psalm 91:11 states, "He will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways.".

1 Timothy 5:21 I charge you before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the ^[a]elect angels that you observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing with partiality.

What does ‘because of the Angels mean’ in 1 Corinthians 11 v 10?  

View One

One of the strong views that bible scholars hold is that Angels want to see Christians worshipping God and obeying Him correctly. They are displeased and offended when believers sin and break God’s laws. In fact this is such an important teaching that I tend to go along with. The relationship of God and man is something that Angels watch and Learn from Notice what the scripture says:

1 Peter 1 v 12  It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things.

They even hate to see the love of God being taken for granted.

View Two

The other view that scholars hold is that the angels Paul is speaking about are fallen angels Remember Genesis 6 and the angels that slept with the daughters of men Their agenda is to divide, to disrupt and to destroy. If you keep sinning long enough God may instruct guarding angles to step back for a while so you fall into the hands of demons who will torment you with God’s authorization.

NATURE

 ¹⁴ Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonour to him? ¹⁵ But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given ^[a]to her for a covering.

What does nature mean in this context? It means the way things are without human intervention. As created by God. A Woman covering her head brings honour to her head – The husband. Head in this case is a metaphor for leader, one in command, one in control, the one in charge or one who has the final say.

A man whose head is uncovered brings honour to his head – Jesus Christ. In the Corinthian culture, when a wife’s hair was longer than her husband’s, it showed her submission to his headship. The roles of male and female are designed by God to portray profound spiritual lessons. That is of submission and the order of God. A woman who refuses is perceived as being rebellious.

What does verse 16 mean? Here is how I understand it -  “If you dispute this, you’re on your own. Why? Because all the churches in the region are practicing this custom. Consider verse 16 from the Message translation below:

1 Cor 11 v 13-16 ^13-16 Don’t you agree there is something naturally powerful in the symbolism—a woman, her beautiful hair reminiscent of angels, praying in adoration: a man, his head bared in reverence, praying in submission? I hope you’re not going to be argumentative about this. All God’s churches see it this way; I don’t want you standing out as an exception.

There is a consistency between what Paul is asking for and what nature has done.

Conclusion

This is a Transcultural and transcendent view – It seeks to celebrate gender differences in our world based on male headship and God’s created order of how he made man and woman.

Because of the fall of mankind, the egalitarian perspective on this is not altogether wrong. There are many instances in our culture of man being abusive, undermining women, raping them disrespecting and dehumanizing them at all levels. Complementarians ought to take this seriously and follow the biblical example of loving their wives self sacrificially. Ephesians 5 v 25. But it is also worth noting that power is not inherently evil and neither is authority inherently evil.

False Dichotomy

A certain section of Egalitarians presents us with a false dichotomy; that a husband cannot be his wife’s leader, exercise headship and love her at the same time.

God’s order is that the husband is the head of the wife as God is the head of Christ but there is no inequality or inferiority implied. God and Christ are equal and united just as the husband and wife are one. This passage of scripture is not teaching that a wife or woman should submit to every man or that she is inferior to men, rather it’s teaching God’s order and spiritual headship in the marriage relationship

APPLICATION

Difference between Principles and Practices

A principle is something that is going to be true no matter what time, or what culture,or what space you are in geographically. It is a timeless truth that God wants us to observe.

Practices may differ depending upon your culture, the time in which you live and where in the world you live

MODERN CULTURE

In today’s culture, especially western or westernized cultures we no longer view a head covering as a sign of submission. Other cultures still do, such as in the middle east and many other Muslim countries. In the west scarves, veils and hats are fashion accessories. A woman has the choice to wear a head covering if she views it as a sign of her submission to the authority of her husband.

Personally, my view is informed by what the bible says. If the head covering is transcultural and transcendent, then if follows that God had a reason for it being timeless and transcultural. So this passage is not about superiority or inferiority, but about order, unity, and honouring God in worship.

1 Timothy 2 v 9-10  ⁹ I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, ¹⁰ but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

Those two verses are telling us that God is more interested in women who prioritize character and Godly living over external appearance.