BSBKJVWEBYLTASVBBEWMBT4TDBY|HymnsMusicDonate
Menu
Announcements

The Head Covering Movement

sermonindex Jun 14, 2013


Head coverings are not a popular doctrine. In fact, that’s quite the understatement. So why would I start a movement based upon it? Do I enjoy controversy? Absolutely not. Looking to be divisive? The opposite. Then what would possess me to do such a thing? The short answer is, because it’s in the Bible. See, if “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness” (2 Tim 3:16 NASB) then all Scripture deserves fair treatment. On top of that, this particular topic is not just mentioned in the Bible, but it’s defended. It’s not just one or two obscure verses but it occupies 15 consecutive verses. We can debate what Paul meant and we can debate how it applies in the 21st century, but the one thing we can’t do is ignore this topic.

Daniel Wallace is one of the leading textual critics and the founder of the “Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts”. To say this brother knows the Greek text well would be quite the understatement. He said this about the “actual head covering” view (the position I’m advocating) which I think many can relate to:

The argument that a real head covering is in view and that such is applicable today is, in some respects, the easiest view to defend exegetically and the hardest to swallow practically. Since it is never safe to abandon one’s conscience regarding the truth of Scripture, I held to this view up until recently. Quite frankly, I did not like it (it is very unpopular today). But I could not, in good conscience, disregard it. *

That’s an incredibly honest statement. Because a head covering is a visual symbol, it’s impossible to hide or delay in stating your views. It’s the first doctrine that people know you believe if you meet someone at church, even before you shake their hands. They may be feeling judged just by you wearing one (because they’re not) and you may be thinking that they must be thinking that you’re stuck in the 50′s. To top it off, your pastors or those closest to you may be concerned that you’re embracing legalism. These are real struggles that people face when even contemplating the “actual head covering” view. So suffice it to say, when Dr. Wallace noted that it’s “unpopular today” he has an accurate perception of how well it’s received. When you wear a head covering it forces everyone in your church to deal with the text and some just aren’t ready to.

Daniel Wallace again says:

The real danger, as I see it, is that many Christians simply ignore what this text says because any form of obedience to it is inconvenient. *

Now this is not to say that the only reason that people don’t embrace head coverings is fear. Some are persuaded by other interpretations and if convinced by Scripture, would change their minds. I hope that is you and you share my desire to rightly understand everything the Bible says and submit to that. But I’m worried that many read over 1 Corinthians 11, thinking “that can’t mean what I think it says. No one I know wears one and we can’t all be wrong.” Then scurry off to chapter 12, making a mental note to look into it later (which if we’re honest rarely happens). If I described your response, now is that time. We’re going to go deep into the text and wrestle through it together as a community. Don’t worry though, this blog isn’t written to scholars, I wrote it for the average Christian, the layman and laywoman, for you. In the next four posts I’ll be making a positive case for the wearing of an artificial head covering for women while in church. Likewise, I’ll argue that men are commanded to keep a bare head in the same context. I’ll do this by pointing to four reasons that Paul himself gives in 1 Corinthians 11. When I explain those reasons, I won’t be giving as much attention to competing views as this will largely be a positive case. After that I’ll make a case for why head coverings only need to be practiced when the local church is gathered together. Finally, we’ll give attention to your questions and the popular objections.

The Heart of the Matter
Before this post comes to an end I want to bring up a word of caution: make sure your heart is prepared. I figure most people reading this blog either disagree with or don’t know what to make of head coverings, so your guard is probably up. I know, I do it too and it’s not a bad thing really. We’re always in a battle against false teaching and false teachers, so it’s good to be skeptical and keep a guard up, filtering everything through the Word of God. Just make sure you won’t accept any old argument against head coverings because you don’t want it to be true. What will my husband or wife think? What will those in my church think? How will I find a spouse if he/she knows I believe this? The fear of man can be overwhelming, but we must fear God and His commands above men. We must bind ourselves to the text of Scripture and obey no matter how uncomfortable the outcome may be. So if your heart is not ready, make sure you stop and seek the Lord in prayer before moving on. Then when you’re ready give 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 a good read. Please read through this text slowly and become intimately familiar with it. This is the only chapter in the Bible that commands and explains the practice of head coverings, so you must know it well to be a good Berean (Acts 17:11).

You can learn more about this movement to de-mystify the doctrine and practice of headcovering by sisters in the Lord: http://www.headcoveringmovement.com

A
allaboard Jun 15, 2013

The best and only valuable VISUAL symbol is the fruit of the Spirit both for men and women. Because this is REAL. You can't tell by headcoverings (or any type of clothing for that matter) if one has the fruit of the Spirit or not.

There are women who wear headcoverings when the saints gather who also (away from the congregation) "wear the pants". So, what does the headcovering accomplish except make people believe something that is not true.

Excerpt from "The Issue of Headcoverings" by Eric Svendsen of New Testament Restoration Foundation

"But here Paul is thinking about a specific kind of covering. Up until this verse Paul has consistently used the word katakaluptos (“covering”) to insist that a woman be covered while praying or prophesying. Paul agrees with the contentious group that a woman does need a covering. What he disagrees with is their application. The contentious group insisted that the covering be a garment (a veil or shawl), whereas Paul is arguing that, in the case of the church (“In the Lord, however,” v 11), the covering is the woman’s own hair. Long hair, Paul argues, is the glory of a woman (v 15). he further argues this point in the very next phrase: “For, long hair is given to her as a covering.” The word “as” here is anti, and means literally “instead of.” The word for “covering” in this verse is not the same as has been used by Paul up to this point. Everywhere else in this passage Paul has used katakaluptos, which is a very generic term for “covering.” Here Paul uses the word peribolaios, which means literally “that which is wrapped around [the head].”

In other words, Paul is saying that, yes, women do need coverings (katakaluptos) on their heads when praying or prophesying. But, “in the Lord” that covering is not a peribolaios (cloth wrapped around the head) but rather the woman’s own long hair. In fact, “in the Lord” (i.e., in the church), long hair is given to a woman “instead of” (not “as”) “that which is wrapped around the head.” Women in the church have a ready-made covering and are therefore not necessarily in violation of the principles expressed in vv 3-10. Overall then, 1 Co 11:2-16 is a very liberating passage. In it, women are freed from the bondage of wearing religious head garb."

Read the full article here:
http://www.ntrf.org/articles/article_detail.php?PRKey=36

D
derektina Jun 15, 2013

Greg,
I am thrilled about this post! My husband and I both agreed on the issue of head coverings 7 years ago while attending a Bhakt Singh assembly in Sydney, Australia and I have been wearing one ever since.

The spiritual blessing is unspeakable. Personally, I become highly aware of its purpose the moment I cover my head in corporate worship.

It's a little late but when I get an opportunity I'd love to share what the teaching was that correlated the 1 Cor 11 passage to the OT passage in Gen 28. Both making important points about angels who are in Gods house....

I am greatly encouraged and once again thankful for this ministry for so many reasons!

With my love brother, your sister in Christ,

Cristina Antunes

A
allaboard Jun 15, 2013

I am glad you are blessed. I genuinely mean that. And yet there are women that are equally blessed without the scarf on their head. The important thing is that nothing should detract from Christ and it should be used to divide or exclude either those who wear one or those who don't. It should not be an essential for fellowship. I have never heard of a "head covering" movement and I think if that is what the movement is based on then by definition it will be sectarian, exclusive and divisive because it implies that one must agree with the movement and get on board with the head covering. This will take the focus off of Christ, once again focusing on something that is not related to salvation or fellowship.

In my fellowship, there are those who wear one and those who don't and I don't witness any exclusion of brethren or sense of one group over the other as being more obedient. There is genuine love between the saints, which tells me it is a non-essential for church-life and focusing on Christ.

So, if you build a movement or church on the requirement to wear a scarf or doily or whatever you want to call it on your head, you run the real risk of excluding some dear saints and only weakening the church.

sermonindex Jun 15, 2013

Brother Greg, to say I am confused as to the onus and aim of this post is to put it mildly.

I came onto the website this morning to download more brother Len's exhortations, as my dear older brother ALWAYS blesses me, teaches me via the Leading of the God the Holy Ghost.....BUT, I saw the leadline of the post and my heart sank....I did not know you were the author, which begs the question, "is this now "doctrine" of the Gospel Fellowships?"...

which further begs the question, since when did something EXTERNAL, become a "doctrine"?....if we wish to go BACK, into Scripture and look for NEGLECTED Ordinances. why not go to John 13?

to quote, and may God add His Blessing to this Precious Portion of Holy Scripture:

"Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart out of this world to the Father, having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end. During supper, when the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going back to God, rose from supper. He laid aside his outer garments, and taking a towel, tied it around his waist. Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples' feet and to wipe them with the towel that was wrapped around him. He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, “Lord, do you wash my feet?” Jesus answered him, “What I am doing you do not understand now, but afterward you will understand.” Peter said to him, “You shall never wash my feet.” Jesus answered him, “If I do not wash you, you have no share with me.” Simon Peter said to him, “Lord, not my feet only but also my hands and my head!” Jesus said to him, “The one who has bathed does not need to wash, except for his feet, but is completely clean. And you are clean, but not every one of you.” For he knew who was to betray him; that was why he said, “Not all of you are clean.”

When he had washed their feet and put on his outer garments and resumed his place, he said to them, “Do you understand what I have done to you? You call me Teacher and Lord, and you are right, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, that you also should do just as I have done to you."
John 13:1-15

lets look at that last verse again:

"For I have given you an example, that you also should do just as I have done to you."

That's RED LETTER, coming from our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ...hence a "foot washing" movement demonstrating Jesus Love, and Servanthood to the saints, would that not be of invaluable knitting us together as the Body of Christ?would that not be of Divine profit in underlining humility one to another?

I don't understand, with a world on fire, how such external displays, qualify as "doctrine". and I did read this dear mans website, and was taken aback in the first sentences by such as this:

Hello everyone and welcome to the Head Covering Movement.

My name is Jeremy and I’m the founder

"and I'm the founder"?

my question is this, is this now part of the Gospel Fellowships?

I have MANY more questions, but I wont belabor you. I could even bring up the importance of the Jerusalem Council Four very simple edicts, to help Early Church Gentile followers of Jesus, who were being confused by those who maintained all the external requirements of Moses and the Law, must be maintained to follow Messiah.

this whole thread greatly concerns me as it relates to Gospel fellowships, and whether such a formation is to be IN-clusive, or EX-clusive.
In Jesus' love, neil


A
allaboard Jun 15, 2013

Those are great observations, Hezwelling (Neil).

If there is to be a "movement" to "join", let us move closer to the Lord and join the movement of the Holy Spirit where Jesus is the Founder and those that are joined to Him walk in love amongst the brethren.

followthelamb Jun 15, 2013

Dear brothers and sisters in Christ,

I felt led to log on briefly to help clear up some confusion about this post:

1.) Greg is not the author of this article (though it may have appeared that way by accident)
2.) the movement is not affiliated in any way with gospel fellowships, it was simply food for thought as with many other articles shared

Thank you so much and may the Name of Jesus Christ be glorified in each of us this day and always increasingly.

In His love,
Your sister


sermonindex Jun 15, 2013

Saints,

Just again to clarify what was shared. It is a blog website that is not run by myself but brother Jeremy who runs www.gospelebooks.net Which is a great website for kindle ebooks.

I am more partial to encourage the "re-thinking" of this practice in the church and therefore am not ashamed to encourage the consideration of it. As towards Gospel Fellowships this is not an issue of fellowship either way sisters interpret the passage.

There is a footnote in the Principles volume to encourage this practice but it is not a major issue or nor theme to dis-fellowship or fellowship around.

brother Niel quoted Ravenhill and their movement had sisters to be covered I believe as did most holiness pentecostal groups and most other denoninations in the early 1900's and before.

Again it is not an issue to dis-fellowship or approve. I believe the wording "movement" simply is a movement to discuss and re-think the intrepretation of it in the Church.

Watchman Nee considered it important for spiritual reasons therefore his entire little flock church in China practiced this for sisters to wear coverings in meetings.

Thank you saints for the humble heart to learn of the Lord, re-think things and if disagreed then that is fine. But we should not discourage other sisters who feel it was shown by the Holy Spirit for them to do it.

So neither compulsion or requirement is the case but all are left to the Spirit's leading and Scriptures for themselves.

A
allaboard Jun 15, 2013

what are the spiritual advantages of making godly, spirit filled sisters wear one? Serious question.

sermonindex Jun 15, 2013

what are the spiritual advantages of making godly, spirit filled sisters wear one? Serious question.

Brother, I am going to respond in short to this post but is not my objective to defend this practice or promote it overtly. I would say personally it is not "making" anyone wear headcoverings. It is in scripture and if true then a practice the Lord gave for the Church.

So we would have to say it is God making or desiring sisters to do this.

God never will force, we must come to these things by His grace and with a willing heart.

G
ginnyrose Jun 16, 2013

It is all about submission.

Women are called to submit.

Men are called to submit.

Sometimes God asks us to do things that seem weird: like forbidding Adam and Eve from eating from the one tree in the garden. Why single out ONE tree? God had his reasons and to violate it was costly for these people. Whether it makes sense of not is not the issue. Submission is.

And the benefits? Read the WORD...there are practical benefits but one would be amiss to wear it for those reasons. God loves it when we serve Him with joy and delight. When this is done there are blessings.

God bless.

A
allaboard Jun 16, 2013

Ginny,

Just the way you responded is another reason the head covering seems unattractive and does not achieve the objective so many speak about.

When you flatly say, "It's about submission, women are called to submit, men are called to submit", you make God sound like Allah and the headcovering sounds like the Christian Burkha.

And, the very fact that you tie it to submission, tells me that you cannot help but judge those who don't wear it as being unsubmissive. No matter how much you deny that, the very fact that you believe wearing a head covering proves that a women is submissive, then conversely, is an indication to you (and others I am sure) that those who do not wear them are rebellious. how could you not think that? Either you think others are rebellious who refuse to wear one after they have receive the "teaching" or you think others are just ignorant and must not have had the "teaching", yet.

There are blessings when one is yielded to the Lord in their heart, dear sister. And when one is yielded and submissive in their heart to the Lord it is manifested in many different fruits of the Spirit.

I remain unconvinced, as I have not heard any compelling evidence that God is commanding women to wear a head covering.

A
allaboard Jun 16, 2013

I think I will defer to the book that Greg markets:

What the PRINCIPLES FOR THE GATHERING OF BELIEVERS UNDER THE HEADSHIP OF JESUS CHRIST says:

page 282
"Who do you talk about the most? Jesus Christ? Or your Bible
translation? Jesus Christ? Or your particular doctrine, theology, eschatology...? Jesus Christ? Or your ministry? Jesus Christ or your gifts? Jesus Christ or your head-covering? Jesus Christ or your children, your family...? Jesus Christ or your denomination? It can be a number of things, brothers and sisters, and they’re not all bad.
Everything should pale in comparison with our love for Him. Love for Christ; the pursuit of Christ. I tell you, this Remnant that God is raising up that is scattered all over the earth shares one thing in common: to you who believe, He is precious! Christ is precious!
Hallelujah"

And that book only refers to it as a discipline or godly tradition not a command. A discipline such as Bible reading.

In the Chapter on Assemblies:
"ONE OF the hidden jewels of the Church is godly DISCIPLINE. there has been a great lack of teaching and encouragement in modern evangelicalism towards the godly disciplines of: Fasting, waiting on God, early rising, head coverings, prevailing prayer, systematic Bible reading, Bible memorization, kneeling in prayer, and many other godly TRADITIONS in Church history."

R
rbanks Jun 16, 2013

allaboard,

I just had to reply to your excellent postings! I believe you have displayed a right spirit in your comments.

It would be wonderful if Greg and some other sisters could really comprehend the spirit of what you have stated in your posts but I'm afraid it will fall on deaf ears.

Jesus said "he that hath ears to hear let him hear" but sometimes we let the letter of the word bind us instead of the Spirit setting us free.

The letter kills but the Spirit ministers life!

Blessings...from brother rbanks

G
ginnyrose Jun 16, 2013

Allaboard,

It is not my idea that one submits to authority. If I had my own way I would be my own boss and do things MY way! Having acted like that too many times has proven to me that I am not a good god! AND...I have never seen anyone else with an independent mindset function well as a god, either.

Allaboard, all of life consists of submitting to authority. The ones that refuse to do so are dysfunctional at all levels, some ending up in the slammer. When we follow the LORD Jesus, are filled with his Spirit, we are submitting to authority and many times He asks us to do things we do not like.

Sure, I wear a head covering..but I must say it is God who judges people. I know what the WORD says and if I be judged for doing so, so be it. God has been good to me. I know because his Spirit abides within me. I have a lot to learn still, but my desire is to be obedient in all things. He died a horrible death on the cross to redeem me so how can I complain about wearing something so simple as a head covering? It is painless, does not inconvenience me at all. And the angels take note of it as well. God is good. Since this is the case how else can I show my love for him then by being obedient? Jesus says if you love me, keep my commandments.

Allaboard, this is my conviction and I am sorry you do not share it as well. No amount of debate can deter me from it. Unless I feel so compelled, I will not say any more on this subject.

ginnyrose

sermonindex Jun 16, 2013

It seems the head covering is the female version of male circumcism. How many Jews were circumcised outwardly yet failed to keep the law. Paul reminds us that the one who is uncircumcised yet keeps the law in his heart is approved by God.

So if the sister wears a head covering as a sign of outward submission but in her heart is not submitting to God is she approved by God? It seems the sister who is not wearing the head covering but submitting to God is the one God approves.

I believe I read it is man that loooks at the outward appearance but God looks at the heart. God is more concerned about what is in the hear of a sister then what is on her head. I read in 1 Peter 3 that a sister's adorning is not to be external but internal. The internal adorning that comes out of a heart governed by the Holy Spirit. Peter speaks of a gentle and quiet spirit that is precious in God's sight.

In the New Testament believers are exhorted to clothe themselves with Christ. In doing so the fruit if the Spirit will flow out of their hearts as rivers of living water. That fruit of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness goodness , faithfulness, gentleness self control. These virtues of the heart are far more precious to God in a sister than whether their head is covered or not.

In ny walk with God the sisters I have met that have shown the beautiful fruit of tthe Spirit did not have a cloth on their head. But they had the covering of Jesus himself. That covering of being clothed in Christ himself.

As usual, my thoughts.

Bearmaster.

A
allaboard Jun 16, 2013

If one is submitting to authority but not wearing a head covering, are they in rebellion?

If one is not submitting to authority but wearing a head covering are they in submission?

Yes, Bearmaster, your thoughts are closer to the character and nature of God. The covering of Christ trumps any article of clothing.

But would it not make our Christian life easy if all we had to do to prove we were not rebellious was to wear a small article of clothing on our head instead of yielding to inward circumcision?

It seems to me that one could also become quite proud of their outward "status symbol". Almost to shame other women for not being as "spiritual".

sermonindex Jun 16, 2013

Head covering [women] or uncovering [men] is scriptural and there is no argument with that, It is men and women. It is outward and it is visible, which is its meaning and purpose. It is for the angels and not principally for the man.

If you ever get the responsibility of employing a man and you find one who calls you "master" you can be certain that it will be his countenance and not the words which will decide who you employ. When you walk down the queue to select your labourers it will not be the ones who have removed their hats when you pass by which you will employ, but the one who removed his hat, calls you master and shows a good spirit to serve you according to days wage.

If Satan is looking for his labourers who will he choose? The one who wears the hat or the one who removes it? He will choose both because he is looking for hypocrisy at work and if he sees it he will seek to have its benefit. On the other hand if he sees a sincere heart and a covering he will flee.

sermonindex Jun 16, 2013

AA writes..........

"And, the very fact that you tie it to submission, tells me that you cannot help but judge those who don't wear it as being unsubmissive. No matter how much you deny that, the very fact that you believe wearing a head covering proves that a women is submissive, then conversely, is an indication to you (and others I am sure) that those who do not wear them are rebellious. how could you not think that? Either you think others are rebellious who refuse to wear one after they have receive the "teaching" or you think others are just ignorant and must not have had the "teaching", yet."

Brother, you have captured the very essence of it. Sometimes we have glimpses of that truth coming out, but most times it is hidden. On this very forum, someone of the head covering persuasion suggested that they did not know if Corrie Ten Boom was saved because she did not cover her head.

Andrew, are you suggesting that if a man ever wears a hat, he is in rebellion? For those of the head covering persuasion do not simply cover their heads when praying or prophesying, they cover their heads all the time in public. So, conversely, following that logic, men would not be allowed to cover their heads in public, as a sign of their own submission.............bro Frank

sermonindex Jun 16, 2013

Andrew, are you suggesting that if a man ever wears a hat, he is in rebellion?...........bro Frank

No

This discussion is locked.

Archived
1 of 55 posts