A Question About Headcoverings

[C. M. Sheffield]

My wife and I are convinced that I Corinthians 11:2-16 teaches that women should wear headcoverings in the public worship of the church.

This thread is not to debate this point of doctrine.

However, I recently accepted the call to pastor a church (traditional SBC), that does not practice the wearing of headcoverings for women in worship... no surprise there.

My wife has worn a headcovering for some years now. We understand that many do not share our interpretation of I Cor. 11 and have no intention of making it a matter of contention. However, we fear that this practice on her part may cause confusion or even division by others who might become alarmed with our views on this matter.

So, the question is, should we

1. discontinue the practice in spite of our convictions, or,
2. continue our practice at the risk of undermining our work of reform and dividing the body?

Again let me reiterate: This thread is not to debate the issue of headcoverings. My wife and are settled on that point.
I simply need insight and wisdom in dealing with the circumstances as they are. Thank you.

 

[N. Eshelman]

I think that part of the answer needs to be why she wears a headcovering? Do you and she believe that they are cultural? Are they to please God? Is it one way to show male headship? Is it to not offend the angels? Why is she wearing one?

If it is cultural: Then take it off if the church culture does not have them.
If it is to please God: Then why would she take it off? Does she aim to please God or men?
If it is to show male headship: Are there other ways for her to do that which are less offensive?
If it is to not offend the angels: Then keep it on.

See, the question has to run deeper than 'being convinced'. What is the purpose; and how does that purpose reflect our day (is it like a holy kiss or something else?)? What are you convicted of? The practice of covering during public worship or the prayer aspect or the RPW aspect?

I would say meditate on some of these questions and others that you and she may come up with- if you are convinced 100% that she MUST have this thing on- then taking it off is probably not the best way to start a new ministry. But if it is another reason: Maybe leaving it on is not the best way to start, either.

 

[Andres]

If you and your wife are fully convinced by scripture that wearing the headcovering is proper, then I do not think you should go against your convictions. I listened to a Q&A by Dr Joseph Pipa recently and he explained that when your are convicted of something in your conscience, you have to determine why you are convicted of that. Either scripture convicts your conscience or man convicts your conscience. It is a person's responsibility to search the scriptures and understand what is the truth on the issue. Until one is fully convinced from scripture that it is not an issue to be convicted of, then to go against one's conscience is sin.

I will be praying for you and your wife on your new calling.

 

[beej6]

I believe RC Sproul and his wife, for one, also practice headcoverings. And she is often the only one in their church who does so.

There is certainly a way to continue your practice and explain it to your new flock, if not from the pulpit (which may actually be more threatening), perhaps at a Sunday school lesson, and not the first one neither, to avoid giving the impression that this is an "essential."

 

[KMK]

Does your wife also have convictions about what kind of headcovering she must wear? If any hat will do, then wear something nondescript. It sounds to me like you have more important battles that lay ahead. You are probably going to have to decide upon which hills to die.

 

[JBaldwin]

She should wear the headcovering and not worry about it. If you and your wife don't make a big deal about it, people will accept it from the start. You may get some questions, but you can answer those privately.

 

[JOwen]

Brother,

I can relate to you situation. My second congregation, the one I am now serving did not practice head coverings when we arrived. My wife and I came to the decision 10 years earlier (in our previous congregation) that head coverings were both scriptural and binding for today based on the exegesis of 1 Cor 11. Now, in our present congregation 90% of the women now wear a head covering. How did we do it? We said NOTHING. However, my wife, who has become dearly loved and respected in this congregation, has been approached multiple times over the past several years from women asking why she wore a head covering. She took this opportunity to tell the ladies of her journey to this conviction, gave them some sermons on it, as well as some literature. Slowly head coverings began to appear throughout the congregation.

It was more of a "living room" reformation here in Lacombe, discussed over coffee and cookies than anything else. For whatever else has been done here in Lacombe from the pulpit, it is my wife that has affected reformation in our congregation regarding head coverings. Add to this her love for the Puritans; many women are reading them in our church as well.
These things take time, and often happen organically through testimony. Go slow, be gentle, have great resources, and a love for others. But don't relinquish your conviction on the matter. Bear one another burdens.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

These are some great insights and encouragements. Thank you all for your help in this matter. PB is such a wonderful place for this very reason. What fellowship we have here!

 

[Curt]

I'm wondering whether this was ever discussed between you and the pulpit committee.

 

[Simply_Nikki]

Like some others, when I began practicing head covering I was a little fearful of the "perception" it may bring. But God was gracious in placing me in a church were almost all the women covered (granted this was as small house church ) Though it was never "stated" explicitly, it was great to see others with the same conviction as I. When I decided to start attending another church (the church I attend now) I quickly noticed that i was the ONLY one who covered. But it didn't bother me at all. No one has come up to me and asked me about it and I have not approached people to make the issue a contention. I have been attending this new church since this last summer and I recall one time seeing a lady wear a hat, I thought that was nice, but she ended up not wearing it perpetually. Last week I saw a lady with a head-covering and I was ecstatic! However I don't know if she will continue to wear it or not. I've been meaning to talk to her and ask whether she will begin practicing covering or not. If so, I will definitely support and encourage her to continue doing so! If not, I won't make any quarrels about it. But maybe one day more women will see our examples and be curious enough to ask about it, or become convinced from the scriptures themselves, and encouraged that there are some in the church who practice it.

I would encourage you to follow your convictions if they are from scripture. You'd be surprised how much action speaks louder than words in this. When people see faithful obedience, it can be "contagious" without you saying anything

 

[au5t1n]

A few families cover at my church of about only 50-70 people. It's a small PCA plant, and we have a disproportionate percentage of coverers compared to the average, just because of two families! There is also another family that occasionally visits where the wife wears a very nice cover. I have been at the church for almost a year, and have only heard covering brought up once while at lunch with one of the families. No one has ever complained about it to my knowledge.

Your case is a little different since your wife is the pastor's wife; however, I see no reason why she should stop to prevent division. I think it would be ridiculous for anyone to complain about her practice or make it a source of division at all. Surely they have more important things to do than whine about the pastor's wife's headcovering. Tell anyone who complains to go volunteer at a soup kitchen or something. They obviously are looking for ways to fill their time.

 

[Honor]

i believe a smattering of everyone else. I think if it's a conviction that you strongly have (and I think the #2 posters questions are great) then you should stand firm. do i think it will bring divison? heck yeah... people divide over carpet color, or youth group or whatever.... people will complain, that's just what people do. From my own personal experiance my husband and I studied and we came to the conviction that it was a cultural thing and that it wasn't for us (if you would like a long explanation you can PM me) and when we went to our currrent church there were 2 families that did cover and we almost didn't join because of that. in the end it wasn't something the church adopted as a practice as a whole if that makes sense. so I think you have to deside how convicted you are and if you are willing to stick by it. and if you are then who cares what the other people think? I believe that Jesus is the Son of God, I could care less if that brings division to some people. Hug your wife and let her wear the headcovering or not...

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

I'm wondering whether this was ever discussed between you and the pulpit committee.

No it wasn't. Our meeting was thorough but perhaps because it was never an issue in my last church, or because there were so many other things on my mind, I failed to bring it up. Whatever the reason, I wish I had of. But alas here we are.

I've often said that the process of Baptist Churches seeking pastors is fraught with unfortunate problems. One of the most obvious is that a pulpit committee will make its recommendation with little more than a couple of hours of time spent with the man they recommend. And the congregation will in large part go entirely on what they say.

This will likely never afford the pastor or the church enough time to discuss everything that could or should be discussed. I'm realizing that more as time goes on.

However, I'm not certain there is a better way. And if there is, then I'm not aware of it. But I digress.

 

[jambo]

The head covering is one issue, the wearing of hats is another. I have found some churches that are strong on women having their head covered tend to be nothing more than fashion shows on a Sunday morning. So much so that visitors did not feel comfortable because they felt their hat was not up to it. Whereas churches where women wore a simple head covering such as a beret or headscarf seemed to me much more appealing and spiritual as the head covering issue was kept in proportion.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

The head covering is one issue, the wearing of hats is another. I have found some churches that are strong on women having their head covered tend to be nothing more than fashion shows on a Sunday morning. So much so that visitors did not feel comfortable because they felt their hat was not up to it. Whereas churches where women wore a simple head covering such as a beret or headscarf seemed to me much more appealing and spiritual as the head covering issue was kept in proportion.

I would agree with you taking issue with immodest hats. However, I suppose that any form of head covering could have the potential of becoming more about fashion than Christ. So, I would say that immodesty, and not hats, is the issue to address. I certainly wouldn't say hats were altogether ill-suited for women in public worship provided they were modest and in good taste.

 

[kvanlaan]

I'm wondering whether this was ever discussed between you and the pulpit committee.

But if you are not seeking to implement this in the new congregation as a matter of policy, why would it come up?

I find this a very interesting convesation. I am intellectually convinced of the practise for today, but not personally convicted of it (but I think we're almost there). But as you are running into now, what happens in congregations where it is not practised? If we visit my father's CRC or my brother's emergent church (if he baptizes a child, then I'll go), then my wife will invariably be the only one with a covering. It would be super-odd in the CRC (where I grew up - some would definitely be offended by it) and just one more oddity in the Meeting House.

I have found some churches that are strong on women having their head covered tend to be nothing more than fashion shows on a Sunday morning. So much so that visitors did not feel comfortable because they felt their hat was not up to it.

Sometimes it's like the Royal Ascot, not a worship service!

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

I'm wondering whether this was ever discussed between you and the pulpit committee.

But if you are not seeking to implement this in the new congregation as a matter of policy, why would it come up?

I find this a very interesting convesation. I am intellectually convinced of the practise for today, but not personally convicted of it (but I think we're almost there). But as you are running into now, what happens in congregations where it is not practised? If we visit my father's CRC or my brother's emergent church (if he baptizes a child, then I'll go), then my wife will invariably be the only one with a covering. It would be super-odd in the CRC (where I grew up - some would definitely be offended by it) and just one more oddity in the Meeting House.

I have found some churches that are strong on women having their head covered tend to be nothing more than fashion shows on a Sunday morning. So much so that visitors did not feel comfortable because they felt their hat was not up to it.

Sometimes it's like the Royal Ascot, not a worship service!

You'll have to forgive me but I don't quite understand how you can be "intellectually convinced of the practise for today" but not "personally convicted." Does not the former necessitate the later?

The key issue for you and your wife must be obedience to God. Besides, when my wife and I visit other churches, they often don't even realized why she's wearing a headcovering. In fact, she will often be complimented on her "scarf" or "bandanna" because some woman will find it fashionable (though that's not the intent). And if someone does become offended, 1) they shouldn't be and 2) you're just visiting and they'll get over it.

 

[Honor]

Whereas churches where women wore a simple head covering such as a beret or headscarf seemed to me much more appealing and spiritual as the head covering issue was kept in proportion.

so women with a head covering are more spiritual? am I reading that right?

I would agree with you taking issue with immodest hats. However, I suppose that any form of head covering could have the potential of becoming more about fashion than Christ. So, I would say that immodesty, and not hats, is the issue to address. I certainly wouldn't say hats were altogether ill-suited for women in public worship provided they were modest and in good taste.

what is an immodest hat?

I ask these questions because I really want to know.. i would elabortate but as it is I am typing as fast as I can because Chloe is crying. sorry

 

[ubermadchen]

Whereas churches where women wore a simple head covering such as a beret or headscarf seemed to me much more appealing and spiritual as the head covering issue was kept in proportion.

so women with a head covering are more spiritual? am I reading that right?

I would agree with you taking issue with immodest hats. However, I suppose that any form of head covering could have the potential of becoming more about fashion than Christ. So, I would say that immodesty, and not hats, is the issue to address. I certainly wouldn't say hats were altogether ill-suited for women in public worship provided they were modest and in good taste.

what is an immodest hat?

I ask these questions because I really want to know.. i would elabortate but as it is I am typing as fast as I can because Chloe is crying. sorry

I'd say an immodest hat was a hat that was meant to create attention. Like this weekend I was at an antique store looking for some small pilbox hats (the only hats that work well for my tiny, tiny head) and the storekeeper directed me to this very flashy women's blue and gold cowboy hat with tassels and fringe and stars. That's an immodest hat.

 

[AThornquist]

Jessica, immodest head coverings/hats include but are not limited to:

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

There are two kinds of immodesty. First, there is a kind of immodesty which fails to "cover the essentials." Most preaching today deals with this kind. But there is second kind of immodesty which deals with the wearing of fine clothes, flashy jewelry, and heavy make-up. Which is the kind of immodesty that Paul directly addressed:

"that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array" - 1Tim. 2:9

So, any hat or headcovering which was worn with the intent of impressing others and drawing attention to oneself would be immodest.

 

[kvanlaan]

You'll have to forgive me but I don't quite understand how you can be "intellectually convinced of the practise for today" but not "personally convicted." Does not the former necessitate the later?

Oh, believe me, there's a great big bag of unfulfilled sanctification going on here.

You're spot on and there's no way for me to deny it, pastor. It is something that I've been studying a lot lately and I just can't get around (though I've tried) what seems to me to be fairly undeniable at this point (though I think the last few threads have been real solidifying; it is something that I've been waffling on for some time now).

 

[bill]

My wife wears her head covering in church and she is the only one. If you are truly convinced that head coverings should be worn, as I believe is biblical, then you should not let others in the church keep you from practicing what you believe. Who knows this may be a way to educate the body about head coverings and you may see other women convicted and start wearing head coverings. That would bring you and your church back to the proper biblical practice of head coverings.

 

[Honor]

Andrew!!! that was totally not cool... what'd they do to you? Cowboy hater...
gold, blue, tassles, fringe and stars I don't thing is immodest in a cowboy hat.... it's just plain fugly. WOW.

 

[kvanlaan]

We do have a number of women at church that cover, but my wife is the youngest by about 15 years. We're odd enough anyway that this would not make us stick out any more than we already do...

 

[ubermadchen]

Andrew!!! that was totally not cool... what'd they do to you? Cowboy hater...
gold, blue, tassles, fringe and stars I don't thing is immodest in a cowboy hat.... it's just plain fugly. WOW.

Yeah, I tried to be really tactful about it even though I was cracking up inside. I just told her "I think that might be a bit too much hat for my head."

 

[Honor]

you should have bought it and burned it as quickly as possible just to save some poor unfortunate looking fashion challenged girl from getting it and wearing it for a week straight because she thought it "looked good on me" LOL

 

[AThornquist]

Andrew!!! that was totally not cool... what'd they do to you? Cowboy hater...
gold, blue, tassles, fringe and stars I don't thing is immodest in a cowboy hat.... it's just plain fugly. WOW.

Haha I meant these are immodest in church because they bring attention to oneself.

 

[jambo]

Whereas churches where women wore a simple head covering such as a beret or headscarf seemed to me much more appealing and spiritual as the head covering issue was kept in proportion.

so women with a head covering are more spiritual? am I reading that right?

No. Being spiritual does not depend on outward appearance but I was intending to say that churches I have visited where the majority of the head coverings are simple headscarves or berets, the church tends to be more down to earth, warmer and more spiritual. Whereas churches with big hats have tended to be colder and to have less interest in spiritual in spiritual matters. Now that is not to say that the spirituality of a church is gauged by the type of hat the women are wearing but it is almost an indication of those who attend church in order to be seen rather than attending church in order to worship regardless of appearances. There are of course exceptions but I would have visited churches as a missionary doing deputation and found that the churches with either no hats or simple head coverings were nearly always more interested and supportive of missions than the churches that as Kevin said above were more like Royal Ascot.

 

[Scottish Lass]

I was the only one who covered for about two years. We now have a prospective member who also covers. The pulpit committee here definitely noticed because part of the interview weekend included worship. He preached, I covered, no one said anything. (I think they had already decided we were a little strange and just chalked it up to that.)