I disagree with the disobedience part. If you look at the passage, Paul addresses this in a cultural context. Head coverings were a cultural sign of respect and obedience in this time and place, however culture and times have changed and head coverings specifically are not relevant anymore. Paul's point to this passage is that the head of the wife is man, and women should respect and obey their husbands as well as God. He used the example of head coverings because of its cultural significance back then.
I believe that they do pertain specifically to head coverings. This is seen in verses 5-6 of that same passage, where it says
"But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
"For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered."
That requires a head covering, since without one, she should be shorn (hair cut short) or shaven.
Her hair is part of a woman's glory (v. 15), thus covering it is a sign of modesty. Someone objected that this would mean a covering for a covering, but such double covering is very common in life and in nature.
dust jacket on a hardback book is a covering over a covering. Cellophane wrapping over a box is a covering over a covering. A woman who uses an umbrella in the rain has a covering over a covering. With a hat, that is three layers of covering. The tent of the tabernacle in the Old testament had two layers of covering.
So, a woman's hair is given her for her glory and beauty, and hence should be covered in worship and prayer as a sign of modesty and humility.
About the third statement proving your point that this is cultural, apparently you just saw the world "custom," but it is not saying that head coverings are just a cultural custom that is not important. He says that it is not the custom to dispute these things, meaning they should be obeyed.
Yes, this is my house as well. (We are Latin Rite Catholic.) Head coverings are for any time we are in the Real Presence, not necessarily every day. My girls are totally on board with this. And they are safe, seen, beautiful, treasured, healthy, and free. Very different from the way I was raised — on purpose. God bless you!
I'm interested in chatting on the first point she raised about women living under the authority of a father or husband, and the bit about career women-- I struggle with whether that contradicts a vocation to religious life or consecrated virginity. I know in those cases it would be life under the authority of a Bishop/religious superior, but there's a long tradition of female religious being, in effect, career women. St. Hildigard of Bingin and St. Theresa of Avila come to mind-- both highly prolific and influental authors, and in St. Hildegard's case, a scientist and composer as well. The first female doctor of computer science was a religious sister too.
I do think that marriage and children are not compatible with a high powered career for the vast majority of women, and leads to serious compromises for all of them who try to do both. But I do think there's a wide variety of possibility for being a woman, and while most are called to be wives and mothers, it's not all of them.
Being a religious or even a wife and mom doesn’t exclude vocations within those vocations. Tons of nuns and moms are cheese makers, seamstresses, writers, artists, shepherds, homesteaders, botanists, astronomers, midwives, etc. It’s the *way* it’s done that is the distinction.
If a woman has a career that displaces her husband, children, superiors, etc., so that she can rule independently of them or to avoid being guided and protected, that is going to imperil her soul and the souls of those over whom she has authority. It’s the same sin of Eve, repeated.
I totally agree. I just don’t want their main pursuit to be preparing for a career only. I hope to prepare them to be homemakers who can branch out with other business endeavors while being faithful first in their homes.
I was raised with similar principles. They have brought a lot of direction and freedom in my life.
I love hearing from sisters who were raised similarly and found it to be a blessing.
This sounds exactly like our home.
I agree that head covering is biblical according to I Corinthians 11. Disobedience in this area is one of many causes of weakness in the church.
This organization gives testimony from women on the subject. https://www.headcoveringmovement.com/
I disagree with the disobedience part. If you look at the passage, Paul addresses this in a cultural context. Head coverings were a cultural sign of respect and obedience in this time and place, however culture and times have changed and head coverings specifically are not relevant anymore. Paul's point to this passage is that the head of the wife is man, and women should respect and obey their husbands as well as God. He used the example of head coverings because of its cultural significance back then.
I have written an article explaining how our family interprets this in Scripture. https://abidinghome.substack.com/p/christian-headcovering
I don't agree, it is not cultural, it is spiritual and biblical.
"Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
"Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
"But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
"But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
Those do not pertain to head coverings specifically. You prove my point further with the third statement.
I believe that they do pertain specifically to head coverings. This is seen in verses 5-6 of that same passage, where it says
"But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
"For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered."
That requires a head covering, since without one, she should be shorn (hair cut short) or shaven.
Her hair is part of a woman's glory (v. 15), thus covering it is a sign of modesty. Someone objected that this would mean a covering for a covering, but such double covering is very common in life and in nature.
dust jacket on a hardback book is a covering over a covering. Cellophane wrapping over a box is a covering over a covering. A woman who uses an umbrella in the rain has a covering over a covering. With a hat, that is three layers of covering. The tent of the tabernacle in the Old testament had two layers of covering.
So, a woman's hair is given her for her glory and beauty, and hence should be covered in worship and prayer as a sign of modesty and humility.
About the third statement proving your point that this is cultural, apparently you just saw the world "custom," but it is not saying that head coverings are just a cultural custom that is not important. He says that it is not the custom to dispute these things, meaning they should be obeyed.
Bravo Stacey!!
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
Yes, this is my house as well. (We are Latin Rite Catholic.) Head coverings are for any time we are in the Real Presence, not necessarily every day. My girls are totally on board with this. And they are safe, seen, beautiful, treasured, healthy, and free. Very different from the way I was raised — on purpose. God bless you!
I'm just a boring ol' Novis Ordo Catholic.
I'm interested in chatting on the first point she raised about women living under the authority of a father or husband, and the bit about career women-- I struggle with whether that contradicts a vocation to religious life or consecrated virginity. I know in those cases it would be life under the authority of a Bishop/religious superior, but there's a long tradition of female religious being, in effect, career women. St. Hildigard of Bingin and St. Theresa of Avila come to mind-- both highly prolific and influental authors, and in St. Hildegard's case, a scientist and composer as well. The first female doctor of computer science was a religious sister too.
I do think that marriage and children are not compatible with a high powered career for the vast majority of women, and leads to serious compromises for all of them who try to do both. But I do think there's a wide variety of possibility for being a woman, and while most are called to be wives and mothers, it's not all of them.
Agree.
Being a religious or even a wife and mom doesn’t exclude vocations within those vocations. Tons of nuns and moms are cheese makers, seamstresses, writers, artists, shepherds, homesteaders, botanists, astronomers, midwives, etc. It’s the *way* it’s done that is the distinction.
If a woman has a career that displaces her husband, children, superiors, etc., so that she can rule independently of them or to avoid being guided and protected, that is going to imperil her soul and the souls of those over whom she has authority. It’s the same sin of Eve, repeated.
I totally agree. I just don’t want their main pursuit to be preparing for a career only. I hope to prepare them to be homemakers who can branch out with other business endeavors while being faithful first in their homes.
Exactly. My mom is a mom first and then a florist as a small business. She loves it, but she's always a mom first.
I'm curious about the head covering. What do you mean it's biblical?
I was able to grab the link. https://abidinghome.substack.com/p/christian-headcovering
Thank you!!
If you look at my pages I have one labeled Christian Headcovering.
It is within 1 Corinthians 11:3-16😇
I sometimes wonder where my mind goes as I’m reading scripture 🤦🏻♀️ so interesting!!