Head Covering

Interestingly, the majority of the people who subscribe to any of the various cultural views utterly ignore the church’s history regarding the head covering practices.

I mean, ironically, these folks argue a historical knowledge of the culture is the necessary lens to interpret the scriptures, and then they completely disregard 2,000 years of church history.

The church history that we can read is persuasive in favor of women wearing an artificial covering.

[Not that I believe this history controls, but it is evidence of what those who came long before us believed and practiced.]

Church history demonstrates that women veiled or covered their heads in the assemblies during worship (and private prayer and prophesy outside the assemblies).

For 2,000 years, history shows this was the practice for Christian women in every age, in virtually every denomination, and in every country.

The records recounting church history are seen through the eyes of the early writings that show the covering was viewed as a cloth veil, not a woman’s hair.

Paintings, drawings, sketches, and writings document the practice of external covering,
i.e., a woman covering her head with a shawl, scarf, or artificial cover.

The change in attitude against wearing a covering can be traced back to the feminist movement in the early 1900s. As the demand for female rights came to the forefront, the notion that a wife should submit to her husband (or even acknowledge the obligation to obey her husband) became a source of disdain, contempt, and ridicule.

Getting rid of the covering was a symbolic gesture proclaiming equality with men.

With female rights came both an unwillingness to accept the rank assigned by God and the refusal to outwardly signify the rank by veiling or covering the head.

This is not to say the feminist movement was the sole cause for the change in a practice that had existed for 2,000 years, but it nonetheless was a crucial factor for the change in attitude.

As one writer pointed out, it is bizarre that for 2,000 years Christian women wore head coverings in prayer and public worship without there being any scriptural basis for the practice.

Amazingly this recent revelation that ” there is no command for a woman to cover her head” has only been discovered in the last 100 years.

I also want to take a brief moment to defend women regarding the feminist movement.

The feminist movement could never have gained any traction without wicked men who jumped on the proverbial bandwagon in support. History well documents that most American women opposed feminism.

Without evil men who rejected God’s design, the movement would have never achieved the “success” that it has today.

God formed man and woman as equals in worth, but placed man over woman in the hierarchy. Those who oppose God, oppose His ways.

A special word of caution when you hear (or read on the internet) about the culture of Corinth at the time Paul penned the first letter to the Corinthians. There are a lot of misunderstandings, even of the uninspired secular history.

Greek-controlled Corinth was destroyed by the Romans (completely obliterated) approximately 100 years before Paul wrote the letter.

The culture in Corinth 100 years following the Roman occupation was considerably different than before Rome took over.

At the time 1st Corinthians was written, Corinth was a mixed population and in some ways comparable to America’s melting pot. There were Greeks, Romans, Jews, and several other ethnic groups living there – each who still retained aspects of their originating cultures.

To boldly say the previous Greek culture dominated is to ignore secular history to the contrary.

On the web are all kinds of comments and ideas about the culture of Corinth that are completely and utterly lacking in any historical evidence. The comments often suggest the Greek culture that existed before Rome conquered or focus on one segment of the population after the rebuilding of Corinth. These types of comments are not historically accurate.

When doing your research, be a little cautious about someone suggesting the details of the culture in Corinth because the culture changed when Rome conquered and destroyed the city.

I have not provided the church history in detail for three reasons.

First, it is not difficult to find.

Second, the church history evidence is only persuasive, not determinative.

Third, the larger this website, the harder it is to navigate.

Top of this Post

Blog Post Table of Contents

Paul uses the word “nature” in 1st Corinthians 11:14.

“Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor
to him?” 1st Corinthians 11:14 NKJV

Some suggest “nature” refers to the culture of Corinth at the time the letter was written as though Paul is pointing to the lifestyle that existed or societal norms at the time.

As I suggested throughout this site, I believe the Bible must be read in the context of the whole book to obtain a complete understanding of what God is communicating to us.

In the book of Romans, Paul uses the word “nature” (not as the values, mores, or social norms found in the local community), but in the broader sense of our physical world.

In other words, “nature” relates to the things built into us as part of God’s design. In this respect, nature is an instinctive sense of what is fitting or right.

In nature, there are innate biological differences between the two sexes that God has hardwired into us if you will.

For example, God instills in mankind a desire for sexual relations with the opposite sex.

“For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.” Romans 1:26-27 NKJV (Bold added)

In nature, we desire the opposite sex. A same-sex attraction is unnatural.

If this were not universally true, then humans would no longer exist. It is the uniting of the opposite sexes that produces offspring.

The argument suggested by some is that “nature” refers to the culture of Corinth at this specific time in history. They contend that the word “nature” in 1st Corinthians 11:14 is about the cultural norms existing in Corinth at the time.

However, this is inconsistent with the way Paul uses “nature” in Romans 1:26-27 NKJV.

I see a strong parallel between Romans Chapter 1 and 1st Corinthians Chapter 11 for determining the correct meaning of “nature” as being those things that God has put in us as part of creation.

In nature men and women instinctively understand there are differences between males and females. Even small children recognize the difference between boys and girls.

Those in Rome had exchanged the natural uses of the opposite sex for what is against nature.

In 1 Corinthians 11:14-15, Paul argues that even nature (the instinct God built into males and females) tells us that long hair on a woman brings honor whereas long hair on a man brings dishonor to himself.

Observe, that Paul does not say that long hair on a man is sinful (as some teach). He says the long hair is a dishonor to the man, not a sin.

Let’s tie all of this together.

A man or a woman who fails or refuses to enter into prayer or prophesy with the head covering that God assigns brings dishonor and shame. Paul uses the analogy of nature to make his point. A reasonable interpretation of “nature” is to give it the same meaning in both Romans and 1st Corinthians because Paul wrote both books.

It stands to reason he used the word the same way in both places.

Blog Post Table of Contents