Head coverings?

Why would this be practiced seemingly more in reformed circles rather than Baptist churches?

Danielle, I’m happy for you to add to the list. I think that is a good question, and I know some who face it. I put this in the general forums, hoping some gentlemen who have studied this through might chime in. We’ll just be patient for awhile…then I’ll start typing in all caps. :bigsmile:

[Ron Bean] [URL=http://put_url_here] http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=7452[/URL]

Here is one sermon on the subject.

Thank you very much. For those who have not looked, this is Dr. Mike Barrett of Faith Free Presbyterian Church in Greenville, SC. So, yes, this is a pro-head covering message (actually the first of three), although he answers some objections that are commonly brought up. The content of the first message I received first hand from him, when I made an appointment many moons ago to talk with him on this subject.

I am now listening to the second of the series, in which he is addressing the idea of “culture” as was brought up here. He states that what Paul was instructing the women to do was not in accordance with common cultural practices of the day (Greek, Roman, Jewish). That the wearing of head coverings in public worship was distinctively Christian and flew in the face of every other religious group of his day.

He is beginning to address the questions about “power” and “because of the angels.” Something that I never considered before is that this was very significant instruction for the men as well…to be told not to cover their heads as was the custom of the Jews. Interesting.

This is what I wrote down from the remainder of these lessons. These are not things I claim; they are what was put forth by Dr. Barrett:



Further notes from the second installment:

He says long hair is the glory of the woman and a covering provided for her head during the course of normal everyday life which sets her apart from the man; but when a woman participates in public worship, where the focus is upon the glory of God alone, her own glory is to be covered.

“I have received”=this was not the devising of men. This was divine revelation that Paul received. It is not just a recommendation. It was not for the people at the church of Corinth to debate or contend about (1 Cor 11:16). Custom=practice. There is no such practice that allows uncovered women and covered men.

There is no “doctrine” of head covering. It is a practice, because of a doctrine. It is representative of a hierarchy (v. 3). In function as Mediator there is subordination by Christ under God the Father, although they are one. There is no difference in essential worth between men and women, but there is a difference in function/role.

From third Sunday School lesson:

It doesn’t make sense that Paul would put forth such a strong argument only to leave it to everyone’s personal choice whether to adhere to this or not.

Speaking to when the head covering is to be worn. Verse 4 delineates that this is to be in places of public worship, not in every day life. “Prayer” is a generic word for praying, while “prophesying” is public worship activity. He cites the WCF, chapter 21, section 5 to say that this includes public praise in the form of congregational music.

1 Chron 25:1 – “prophesy” appears here. The Septuagint translates this word as above…a sort of all-encompassing public praise and thanksgiving in the context of music. Other scriptures are shared which make this same point. The head covering gave the women the right and privilege to participate in the public worship, unlike in the Mosaic economy. Worship is not intended to be passive…a spectator sport, so this covers all the bases of participating in a worship service.

Verse 10 – “power” has the idea of authority, not in the sense of ability. It is in the sense of “right.” By metonomy (an association between two words) Paul means women have the “right” upon their head. It symbolically gives the woman the right to participate in the public worship.

Verses 5,6 she brings dishonor if she is not covered and attempts to participate in worship publicly. There is a degrading that comes upon her if she does not obey this. She might as well cut her hair off completely. Dishonor is brought unto the Lord, and shame upon the woman.

Verse 10 – “because of the angels”. Some interpret this “because of the ministers”…Dr. Barrett says it makes no sense to say it means this. Angelic beings observe what takes place here. What we do is witnessed by angels (1 Cor 4:9). Job 38:7—they are the witnesses of creation. They saw God establish this hierarchy. We are going to sit in judgment over these beings who observe us. What authority or right do we have to sit in such judgment? We must be aware that we are compassed about with this great cloud of witnesses.

Man existed independently of woman. He was made first, in God’s image. The woman is the glory, the asset of the man. Eve came afterwards. Woman did not have an independent existence from man. Men do not have covering because he is in the image of God. A covering for him brings dishonor to that image of the glory of God. It dishonors Christ, the express image and glory of God. Eve was made from Adam, but everyone ever after has come out of woman (v. 11). There is dependency within the order God established. Because it is this way in creation, then this is the way it must appear in public worship.

“Long hair” (for men) - the word means “to order”. It is a shame for men to have a distinctively feminine hairstyle. There is to be a difference. There is a natural order that makes men and women distinct.

Attention is to be given to God, not ourselves. The woman’s glory needs to be subdued in the place where all attention is to be given to God.

[Richard Pajak] I contend that though Eve was made from Adam’s rib that she was nevertheless, like Adam, made in God’s image. It makes no difference that she came from Adam, she wasn’t made in Adam’s image…Adam after all had a more inconspicuous origin having been made from the dust.

I’m sorry Richard…yes, he did say that as well. I was trying to take notes in Word while listening on my laptop and keeping tabs on the kids too. :tired:

I have taken this to the ladies forum, and have provided there the discussion from a number of conservative commentaries on this. Click http://sharperiron.org/forum/thread-bonnets-babushkas-and-beanies] here .

post deleted…plugged into wrong forum by mistake :8)

I found a pdf file of a booklet on head coverings written by Dr. Mike Barrett at Faith Free Presbyterian church. This is essentially the SS lessons in printed form…so forget my scrambled notes. http://www.faithfpc.org/docs/headcovering.pdf] Click here to see it. I am posting it in the ladies forum as well, where the discussion has been transplanted.