Should women cover up?

[AV1611]

What are the views of PB members?

 

[Coram Deo]

yes she should for worship and for modesty outside of worship.......

 

[Davidius]

I'm still undecided on this one, but I've seen some persuasive arguments for the wearing of headcoverings by women during worship.

 

[calgal]

Why is a covering modest? I can understand Catholic and Orthodox women using the covering in church but outside? Other than cultural or climate related reasons I see nothing that makes a head covering mandatory.

 

[Herald]

We don't practice it, but I am in agreement with 1 Cor. 11. The question is how to introduce it to a church that doesn't practice it. That is the real hurdle to jump In my humble opinion.

 

[Coram Deo]

There are several passages indicating headcovering was and is required...

"And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she lighted off the camel. For she had said unto the servant, What man is this that walketh in the field to meet us? And the servant had said, It is my master: therefore she took a veil, and covered herself." Genesis 24:64,65

And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse." Numbers 5:18

The point being, in order to uncover, she must have been previously covered. The passage makes the assumption that any woman brought before a priest *will* be covered.


Isaiah 47:2 Take the millstones, and grind meal: remove thy veil, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers. 3 Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen: I will take vengeance, and I will not meet thee as a man.

The Removal of the veil seem to indicate nakedness hence modesty....


1 Corinthians 11

1 Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ.
2 Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. 3 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. 6 For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. 7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man is not from woman, but woman from man. 9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. 10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 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.
13 Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? 15 But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her[a] for a covering. 16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.

Now Paul is correcting abuse in the church of Corinth regarding the requirement of headcoverings......

Plus the Song of Solomon talks about the hair which is beneath the head veil and speaks of hair in a sexual way which is pleasing only to a woman's husband......

Michael

Why is a covering modest? I can understand Catholic and Orthodox women using the covering in church but outside? Other than cultural or climate related reasons I see nothing that makes a head covering mandatory.

 

[Romans922]

yes she should for worship and for modesty outside of worship.......

If you think this then why are your wife and daughter not wearing one in the picture?

 

[Coram Deo]

I am working with coverings with my daugther now... She is 2 and active and hard to keep anything on her head for long.... lol

As per my wife.... She wears the headcovering in worship and as her head I am patiently teaching my wife about the modesty scripture passages... No husband should force... I need to lovely teach her and be patient with her to come to such an understanding...

If after a long while a wife still does not believe in it then she should still cover out of obediences to her husband but a husband should never be forceful or speak bitter against her......

If you think this then why are your wife and daughter not wearing one in the picture?

 

[Coram Deo]

Let John Calvin speak for this.......


"So if women are thus permitted to have their heads uncovered and to show
their hair, they will eventually be allowed to expose their entire breasts,
and they will come to make their exhibitions as if it were a tavern show;
they will become so brazen that modesty and shame will be no more; in short
they will forget the duty of nature... So, when it is permissible for the
women to uncover their heads, one will say, 'Well, what harm in uncovering
the stomach also?' And then after that one will plead [for] something else:
'Now if the women go bareheaded, why not also [bare] this and [bare] that?'
Then the men, for their part, will break loose too. In short, there will be
no decency left, unless people contain themselves and respect what is proper
and fitting, so as not to go headlong overboard."

 

[calgal]

So why wear a head covering outside of worship. The requirement was during church and again is a cultural norm in the middle east. I do not see anything requiring a headcovering OUTSIDE of church.

There are several passages indicating headcovering was and is required...

"And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she lighted off the camel. For she had said unto the servant, What man is this that walketh in the field to meet us? And the servant had said, It is my master: therefore she took a veil, and covered herself." Genesis 24:64,65

And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse." Numbers 5:18

The point being, in order to uncover, she must have been previously covered. The passage makes the assumption that any woman brought before a priest *will* be covered.


Isaiah 47:2 Take the millstones, and grind meal: remove thy veil, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers. 3 Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen: I will take vengeance, and I will not meet thee as a man.

The Removal of the veil seem to indicate nakedness hence modesty....


1 Corinthians 11

1 Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ.
2 Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. 3 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. 6 For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. 7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man is not from woman, but woman from man. 9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. 10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 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.
13 Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? 15 But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her[a] for a covering. 16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.

Now Paul is correcting abuse in the church of Corinth regarding the requirement of headcoverings......

Plus the Song of Solomon talks about the hair which is beneath the head veil and speaks of hair in a sexual way which is pleasing only to a woman's husband......

Michael

 

[jawyman]

At what point does the "requirement" for women to wear a headcovering become legalism? This is just my worth.

 

[Coram Deo]

Because Genesis 24:64,65, Numbers 5:18, Isaiah 47:2 plus the Song of Solomon all speaks about it in terms of modesty....... It has nothing to due with cultural norms.......

It says in Isaiah 47 Remove thy Veil.... Show thy nakedness...

That is modesty and this is outside of worship...... Only Corinthians 11 passage speaks about it in terms of prayer... I am not convinced that it speaks of worship directly, but the woman should aleast be covered in worship because of prayer and the reading of the scriptures... But the other passages are outside the context of worship and prayer but deal directly with modesty......

So why wear a head covering outside of worship. The requirement was during church and again is a cultural norm in the middle east. I do not see anything requiring a headcovering OUTSIDE of church.

 

[Coram Deo]

Requiring shapes, patterns, colors beyond the scripture is legalism.....

Legalism is never what the scripture commands....

The only thing require is that the hair is covered not by some small piece of cloth but that the hair is covered and is simple and unadorning which becometh a godly woman.......

At what point does the "requirement" for women to wear a headcovering become legalism? This is just my worth.

 

[MW]

Because Genesis 24:64,65, Numbers 5:18, Isaiah 47:2 plus the Song of Solomon all speaks about it in terms of modesty....... It has nothing to due with cultural norms.......

Have you given consideration to the possibility that this was regarded as modest BECAUSE it was the cultural norm?

 

[Coram Deo]

Modesty is never a cultural norm.. I don't buy that..... Modesty is Modesty. Whether is was 3000 years ago or 1000 years from now.... It remains the same.. God said Be Holy for I am Holy... God never changes He was the same yesterday, today and tomorrow....

I have never been big on the whole cultural thing to explain things away.... In fact I am against Cultural Relevancy.....

Have you given consideration to the possibility that this was regarded as modest BECAUSE it was the cultural norm?

 

[MW]

.... In fact I am against Cultural Relevancy.....

Are you? You don't look like a Jew to me. Why the coloured clothing? Shirts and pants which are shaped according to the body. You sure look like you've been culturally shaped. You probably even eat with a knife and fork.

 

[Coram Deo]

Let the followings names be put forth of those down through church history who believes that the headcovering is for today and not a cultural norm and that it deals with modesty.....

Tertullian
Irenaeus
Hermas
Hippolytus
Clement of Alexandria
Martin Luther
John Calvin
John Knox

Others like Augustine speaks of the headcovering for today and not a cultural norm but does not make clear it is for modesty....

John Chrysostom
Augustine
Jerome
George Gillespie

 

[MW]

I think you will have a very difficult time in establishing that these men maintained headcovering as a *moral* norm and not because they were accepted as modest within the social mores of the day. From personal reading I am sure that Calvin and Gillespie regarded them as "cultural;" as did a great host of reformed commentators.

 

[Romans922]

Why is modesty defined as having a headcovering? Where is this definition in Scripture.

 

[Coram Deo]

I beg to differ..... Calvin as I quoted earlier believed it to be a moral norm in terms of modesty........ I never said Gillespie believed it to be under modesty, I did not list him under that catagory but he did believed it to be norm today aleast for worship..

Gillespie, the youngest and one of the most brilliant commissioners at
the Westminster Assembly, addresses the issue of women speaking as a voice of one in the public worship services of the church when he says, "But where find we that women who were prophetesses, and immediately inspired, were allowed to deliver their prophecy in the church? I suppose he had a respect to 1 Cor. xi:5, 'But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered, dishonoreth her head,' which is meant of the public assembly, for the Apostle is speaking of covering or uncovering the head in the church. . . . So that the Geneva annotation upon ver. 5, gives a good sense of that text, 'That women which show themselves in public and ecclesiastical assemblies, without the sign and token of their subjection, that is to say, uncovered, shame themselves.'"19

b. "As for the veils wherewith the Apostle would have women covered whilst they were praying (that is, in their hearts following the public and common prayer), or prophesying (that is, singing, 1 Sam. 10:10; 1 Chron. 25:1), they are worthy to be covered with shame as with a garment who allege this example for sacred significant ceremonies of human institution.


Need I quote ALL of Tertullians work on headcoverings.......................

I can also quote others too.....

I think you will have a very difficult time in establishing that these men maintained headcovering as a *moral* norm and not because they were accepted as modest within the social mores of the day. From personal reading I am sure that Calvin and Gillespie regarded them as "cultural;" as did a great host of reformed commentators.

 

[ServantOfKing]

You know, it used to be quite scandalous for a woman to even show her ankles.
The horrors!

 

[Coram Deo]

Your find it in earlier posts of this thread......

Why is modesty defined as having a headcovering? Where is this definition in Scripture.

 

[Coram Deo]

Actually I concur but I am sure you were being sarcastic....

I do not believe a woman should not show her legs...... but that is for another debate another time......


The Horrors......

You know, it used to be quite scandalous for a woman to even show her ankles.
The horrors!

n

 

[ServantOfKing]

I only said that to show that I agree with Rev. Winzer that what is considered to be modest is largely cultural.
Modesty begins in the heart, it is desiring that our appearance directs others' attention to the Lord Jesus and not at our own appearance for our own glory. A woman can be completely covered from head to toe like a Muslim, but if her heart is in the wrong place it is worthless.

 

[Coram Deo]

Well Maam, I kindly disagree with your first sentence...........

You are right that modesty begins in the heart but mankind is also without excuse regarding sin and modesty is morally binding on all people and all nations...

I only said that to show that I agree with Rev. Winzer that what is considered to be modest is largely cultural.
Modesty begins in the heart, it is desiring that our appearance directs others' attention to the Lord Jesus and not at our own appearance for our own glory. A woman can be completely covered from head to toe like a Muslim, but if her heart is in the wrong place it is worthless.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Does the poll question distinguish between public and family/private worship?

 

[Coram Deo]

I am sorry, you have a point.... This thread is not about headcoverings and modesty... It is about headcoverings in worship.....

I am going to bail in order that the thread might get back on track.......

Does the poll question distinguish between public and family/private worship?

 

[satz]

I get the feeling it was referring to public worship, though the discussion has since gone down a different path.

 

[MW]

I beg to differ..... Calvin as I quoted earlier believed it to be a moral norm in terms of modesty........

Let's be clear: a moral is that which is binding on all men at all times and places. At no point does Calvin call this particular action a "moral" norm. Decorum is the moral norm. If this particular action were a "moral" norm, he could not say that men have the liberty to put their cap on after the service in order not to catch cold, and women would be required to wear their covering always.

Gillespie, the youngest and one of the most brilliant commissioners at
the Westminster Assembly, addresses the issue of women speaking as a voice of one in the public worship services of the church when he says, "But where find we that women who were prophetesses, and immediately inspired, were allowed to deliver their prophecy in the church? I suppose he had a respect to 1 Cor. xi:5, 'But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered, dishonoreth her head,' which is meant of the public assembly, for the Apostle is speaking of covering or uncovering the head in the church. . . . So that the Geneva annotation upon ver. 5, gives a good sense of that text, 'That women which show themselves in public and ecclesiastical assemblies, without the sign and token of their subjection, that is to say, uncovered, shame themselves.'"

First, the Geneva notes call it a political law: "It appears, that this was a political law serving only for the circumstance of the time that Paul lived in, by this reason, because in these our days for a man to speak bareheaded in an assembly is a sign of subjection."

Secondly, Gillespie specifically calls the covering of the head a "customary sign: "customary signs have likewise place in divine service; for so a man coming into one of our churches in time of public worship, if he sees the hearers covered, he knows by this customary sign that sermon has begun."

 

[jbergsing]

I'm undecided. We don't practice it in our church.