In all the PCA Churches I have attended. including my present membership, very few women cover their head, usually none. I require that my wife and daughters put something on their head, even if it is only sunglasses or a bobby pin, and that they know WHY it is there: to show the angels that they willingly submit to the hierachy instituted by God since Creation, and reaffirmed by Paul. While this idea is found in the non-Biblical book of Enoch, can you not see why angels, who are far more intelligent, powerful and yet are ministering spirits whom we will judge might be irritated at seeing women explicitly reject a sign of submission that dates from the time of Abram and is specifically commanded through Paul? The holy angels would keep their place, of course, but to see sinners against God reject the very hierarchical structure that keeps them below us? As the Psalm ACTUALLY says, we are created only a little lower than GOD, the translatoer having deliberately altered it to a little lower than the angels from the difficulty of believing such! The demons are by the uncovered women given even more reason to accuse, as women CLEARLY gave up head coverings BECAUSE of the cultural influence of the 1960's sexual revolution AND after Vatican 2! Of COURSE this is cultural, and by not covering their heads as done since the time Rebekah first saw Isaac at a distance, and as women saw their mothers, grandmothers, ect all the modern women are aligning themselves with modern western culture and against their Christian upbringing.
Sure, this is not about salvation. No question most women, or men, do not even think or give this any importance. As a physician I would say this is NOT a disease; but it IS a SYMPTOM of a disease. A very bad disease that first displayed itself as Eve took the lead and gave Adam the forbidden fruit; just as Paul alludes this, in context, along with women to keep silent and not excerzise authority. This is a symptom of a very ugly disease. It is far, far more important to clean the INSIDE than worry about the outside. Most if not all the women attending a PCA Church are aware they are forbidden from authority positions, and they willingly submit; many do so joyfully. THAT is the important matter, and not headcovering. The PCA treats the disease by rightfully forbidding women preachers, and the OPC is not far off as the deaconate is a SERVICE and not authority driven position. The PCUSA, centrally speaking, is not a Christian Church, so let them continue to die. I have no interest in them, I'd rather be in a Roman mass, thank you very much.
However, while headcovering is merely a SYMPTOM, and we are not to focus on the externals, why not remove the ugly CULTURAL reference to the rejection of the clear Biblical hierarchy? Really, why NOT put something on your head ladies?
1- Is it because it does remind you that you are under male leadership, then shame on you! Repent and submit.
2- Is it because you don't want to be counter-cultural, to just fit in and not call attention to yourself as a modest woman? Well, OK, but can you put something unobtrusive on so that at least YOU acknowledge submission to the angels that ARE looking intently at what we do, both good and evil angels. And by the way, why NOT be counter-cultural and make a stand on occasion?
3- Is it because you've not thought about it? Fine, it really is no big deal until someone points it out. Where there is Law, sin increase, the more you know the more you are responsible for and ooops.... you just got told.
I have been tempted at times to go to Church with a huge hat on to make the point that to this day men still know it is respectful to remove your hat. Yet 2 wrongs do not make a right, and I did promise to be peacefulm, and this is a minor matter, only a symtom.
Now, if you're talking about a culture where nobody has headcoverings, well then, ignorance is bliss, sayeth the Bible in paraphrase. Where there is no law, there is no sin. Every person violates their own conscience, for every person has SOME form of conscience. But where there is no knowledge, there is no sin. So yes, there is culture, but there is also the FACT that our culture has been informed by the Bible and we knew perfectly well until the 1960's that women put on something on their heads as a sign of submission. It is NO shame for a micronesian Church to be full of bare-breasted, head uncovered women because that is normal. It IS a shame that we capitulated so rapidly, without even discussion, to the 1960s which has been so destructive to the family. One pill, the birth control pill, and we flush all our Biblical informed CULTURAL norms down the drain, and get 23 types of STD's (last time I checked, and oh, there's a new kind of mycoplasma out we have no available test outside a research lab for and no reliable treatment so make that 24), abortion on demand and all the other wonderful stuff so well promoted by the disgusting PCUSA hierarchy. One little pill and we no longer see the beauty of Sunday morning feminine hats. Thank you very much.
And as to men with long hair, y'all miss the point of why "even nature" is against it: it is not functional. Remember Absalom and why he died? Because of the pride of his luxurios hair in some tree branches, accursed dying on a tree because of long hair. So freaking poetic aint it? Men are supposed to concentrate on functionality, not beauty. Long hair is a hazzle, and that is precisely why in almost every culture men keep it short. It interferes with getting things done. Women are the finer examples. They are not the "weaker vessel" as most translate Peter, but the more "FRAGILE vessel" Women are more complicated down to the genetic level (trust me or look up Barr bodies). They were not made from dust like Adam but FASHIONED from his side. They are SUPPOSED to be about the finer things, the beautiful things, the things men ought aspire to, yes they are the glory of men. It is right, up to a point, for women to fuzz about their totally useless hair (sure, there is a balance here as Scripture admonishes agains overdoing it).
When a man focuses on his looks too much, it is a shameful thing. Again, these are cultural issues, and there must be a balance. But men who keep long hair when it interferes with their function are showing a symptom of a problem.
My son kept long hair, and I never said anything until he came home closely shorn and when asked, he had just donated his hair for a charity that makes wigs for women that undergo chemotheray. Now THAT is functional long hair, and that he never said anything until I asked filled my heart with joy: functional, charitable and quietly humble when many in our family criticized him (not me, thank God for restraining my mouth for once). My son did RIGHT as a man by keeping his hair long, and he did so in meekness despite pressure. Forgive an old man proud of his son. I would have much more to write on this but time grows short, but as John McArthur quips, saying you have much more but no time is the best thing to say when you run out of material.
Well, JM will probably tell me I'm too emotional again. Too bad emotional and rational are not mutually exclusive categories.
JR
