Speaking Of H-h-hats In W-w-worship
The chain of command is: God, Christ, husband, wife. But we must understand that authority is not the same as status, and furthermore that Christian authority is not the same as worldly authority. "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave" (Matthew 20-25-28). Christian authority -- headship -- is, then, service and responsibility, not domineering power.
God is the head of Christ, who is the head of every man. And the husband is the head of his wife. Christian headship is, then, a biblical family office to which men are called and elected by God (and voted into office by the wife who votes yes to his proposal of marriage). In addition the office of headship provides a double bind. Husbands are under Christ and in service to their wives. Husbands are bound by the authority of Christ and by loving service to their wives, who by virtue of their marriage concur with God's calling and election of their husbands. Husbands are responsible to Jesus Christ for themselves, for their wives and for their children. Wives are responsible to their husbands for themselves and for their children. And children are in the process of learning Christian service and responsibility. That's the model.
Paul then began a discussion about the tradition of Christian worship, as he understood it. Differentiating between husbands and wives, Paul said that "Every man who prays or prophesies" (1 Corinthians 11:4) does one thing, or does it one way, "but every wife who prays or prophesies" (1 Corinthians 11:5) does it another way. Before we get into the different ways that husbands and wives attend to their various responsibilities in worship, notice that both husbands and wives are described as praying and prophesying. This has nothing to do with worship leadership, but everything to do with worship participation. Paul was not discussing worship leadership responsibilities, but family or common responsibilities in worship. From the earliest times Christians prayed and sang together. That's what Paul is talking about.
To see the ordinary way that this played out requires us to understand what Paul meant by "prophesies." The Greek word can mean to foretell events and to divine, as in using divine powers to know things not knowable through the ordinary senses. Of course, Christians know God through the power and presence of the Holy Spirit through regeneration. And though Jesus spoke things that are difficult to understand, He did not teach mystical prognostication as was practiced in pagan religions. Though there are mysterious things about Christianity, Christianity is not a mystery religion. Rather, in the context that Paul uses this word, it is better understood to mean "speaking under inspiration." Again, we are not talking about some magical or mysterious thing, though the process remains mysterious because we don't know how it happens, other than attributing it to the power and presence of the Holy Spirit.
I want to suggest that Paul was talking about the ordinary things of worship -- praying, singing, reading scripture, etc. All of these things occur under the influence and inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and both men and women do them. Both men and women are to live and worship under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and both will at times speak under the influence of the Holy Spirit in prayer and song.
At the same time, we must not limit our understanding of worship to mean an hour on Sunday mornings. True Christian worship is a way of living in thankfulness and faithfulness to God in all things -- all things, not some things, all the time, not just some of the time. Thus, worship must be at the very center and heart of everything that we do. Worship effects the way we live our lives, not just what we do on Sunday mornings, though it has a particular focus on Sunday mornings.
All that having been said, it seems most likely that Paul was discussing some of the cultural norms -- Christian cultural norms -- of worship participation, which effect Sunday mornings and often spill over into our everyday living. Paul called attention to the social norm that men who participated in Sunday morning worship with their heads covered dishonored their head -- Christ. And the opposite was true for women. Paul's comments testify that such a norm was in existence at that time. That may seem odd at this point in history. But the traditional practice up until the 1960s was for men to take their hats off when they came into church, and for women to wear hats to church -- and not just in America, but universally, virtually everywhere there was Christian worship.
What has happened since the 1960s is interesting. Women today seldom, if ever, wear hats to church, regardless of the denomination. Things have changed for women in response to the Women's Rights Movement. Nonetheless, men still remove their hats in church, if they wear them to church.
I doubt that God ultimately cares whether or not people wear hats. That is not the issue. Rather, the issue is honoring the principle of headship, and doing so in various cultural ways as a testimony to the wider society. Paul simply cited a particular cultural practice of the day that was in use to symbolize the idea of honoring authority. And that cultural practice continued from the First Century to the Twentieth. Styles of hats (head coverings) changed with national and historical trends, but the basic rules of hat wearing in church did not change for twenty centuries, until Women's Liberation became popular.
I had jury duty a couple of weeks ago, and before the judge (a woman) came into the room the bailiff instructed all who were present to remove their hats. Something of this biblical cultural practice regarding hats and authority still survives. There is real power in cultural norms.
Paul's point was that it was important to honor authority, and that because men and women had different kinds of authority they showed that honor in different ways. Men, husbands, who were in direct authority to Christ came to church "hat in hand" so to speak, in visible submission to Christ. And women, who were in authority to Christ through the authority of their husbands, kept their heads covered in honor of the authority of Christ through Christ's representatives -- their husbands. Head coverings symbolized authority and power, service and responsibility. There is some good symbolism in all of this, and I think that Paul's point was to honor God through various cultural practices or norms.
The issue is not women's rights or male domination, both of which are manifestations of pride and self-concern, and are -- or should be -- foreign to Christianity. This misunderstanding is not new. The issue is God's honor and authority. The disciples themselves had misunderstood Jesus' authority, and asked to "sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory" (Mark 10:37). The story continues:
Jesus said to them, "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?" And they said to him, "We are able" (Mark 10:38-45). They actually thought they were, but He knew they were not.
The disciples misunderstood what Jesus was doing! They thought that He was conferring status and they wanted to be at the head of the line. But Jesus was not conferring status, at least not as they understood it. He was conferring obligation and responsibility -- servanthood. They had been interested in getting the honor and status of association with Jesus Christ. But Christ was interested in serving the Lord Himself and enlisting others to serve the Lord in His stead. They wanted to get, He wanted them to give. It is a classic problem in the life of the church. People come to Christ and to His church with the wrong hopes and dreams. People have it arsy varsy. They want what is best for themselves. Christ wants what is best for God.
God is the head of Christ, who is the head of every man. And the husband is the head of his wife. Christian headship is, then, a biblical family office to which men are called and elected by God (and voted into office by the wife who votes yes to his proposal of marriage). In addition the office of headship provides a double bind. Husbands are under Christ and in service to their wives. Husbands are bound by the authority of Christ and by loving service to their wives, who by virtue of their marriage concur with God's calling and election of their husbands. Husbands are responsible to Jesus Christ for themselves, for their wives and for their children. Wives are responsible to their husbands for themselves and for their children. And children are in the process of learning Christian service and responsibility. That's the model.
Paul then began a discussion about the tradition of Christian worship, as he understood it. Differentiating between husbands and wives, Paul said that "Every man who prays or prophesies" (1 Corinthians 11:4) does one thing, or does it one way, "but every wife who prays or prophesies" (1 Corinthians 11:5) does it another way. Before we get into the different ways that husbands and wives attend to their various responsibilities in worship, notice that both husbands and wives are described as praying and prophesying. This has nothing to do with worship leadership, but everything to do with worship participation. Paul was not discussing worship leadership responsibilities, but family or common responsibilities in worship. From the earliest times Christians prayed and sang together. That's what Paul is talking about.
To see the ordinary way that this played out requires us to understand what Paul meant by "prophesies." The Greek word can mean to foretell events and to divine, as in using divine powers to know things not knowable through the ordinary senses. Of course, Christians know God through the power and presence of the Holy Spirit through regeneration. And though Jesus spoke things that are difficult to understand, He did not teach mystical prognostication as was practiced in pagan religions. Though there are mysterious things about Christianity, Christianity is not a mystery religion. Rather, in the context that Paul uses this word, it is better understood to mean "speaking under inspiration." Again, we are not talking about some magical or mysterious thing, though the process remains mysterious because we don't know how it happens, other than attributing it to the power and presence of the Holy Spirit.
I want to suggest that Paul was talking about the ordinary things of worship -- praying, singing, reading scripture, etc. All of these things occur under the influence and inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and both men and women do them. Both men and women are to live and worship under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and both will at times speak under the influence of the Holy Spirit in prayer and song.
At the same time, we must not limit our understanding of worship to mean an hour on Sunday mornings. True Christian worship is a way of living in thankfulness and faithfulness to God in all things -- all things, not some things, all the time, not just some of the time. Thus, worship must be at the very center and heart of everything that we do. Worship effects the way we live our lives, not just what we do on Sunday mornings, though it has a particular focus on Sunday mornings.
All that having been said, it seems most likely that Paul was discussing some of the cultural norms -- Christian cultural norms -- of worship participation, which effect Sunday mornings and often spill over into our everyday living. Paul called attention to the social norm that men who participated in Sunday morning worship with their heads covered dishonored their head -- Christ. And the opposite was true for women. Paul's comments testify that such a norm was in existence at that time. That may seem odd at this point in history. But the traditional practice up until the 1960s was for men to take their hats off when they came into church, and for women to wear hats to church -- and not just in America, but universally, virtually everywhere there was Christian worship.
What has happened since the 1960s is interesting. Women today seldom, if ever, wear hats to church, regardless of the denomination. Things have changed for women in response to the Women's Rights Movement. Nonetheless, men still remove their hats in church, if they wear them to church.
I doubt that God ultimately cares whether or not people wear hats. That is not the issue. Rather, the issue is honoring the principle of headship, and doing so in various cultural ways as a testimony to the wider society. Paul simply cited a particular cultural practice of the day that was in use to symbolize the idea of honoring authority. And that cultural practice continued from the First Century to the Twentieth. Styles of hats (head coverings) changed with national and historical trends, but the basic rules of hat wearing in church did not change for twenty centuries, until Women's Liberation became popular.
I had jury duty a couple of weeks ago, and before the judge (a woman) came into the room the bailiff instructed all who were present to remove their hats. Something of this biblical cultural practice regarding hats and authority still survives. There is real power in cultural norms.
Paul's point was that it was important to honor authority, and that because men and women had different kinds of authority they showed that honor in different ways. Men, husbands, who were in direct authority to Christ came to church "hat in hand" so to speak, in visible submission to Christ. And women, who were in authority to Christ through the authority of their husbands, kept their heads covered in honor of the authority of Christ through Christ's representatives -- their husbands. Head coverings symbolized authority and power, service and responsibility. There is some good symbolism in all of this, and I think that Paul's point was to honor God through various cultural practices or norms.
The issue is not women's rights or male domination, both of which are manifestations of pride and self-concern, and are -- or should be -- foreign to Christianity. This misunderstanding is not new. The issue is God's honor and authority. The disciples themselves had misunderstood Jesus' authority, and asked to "sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory" (Mark 10:37). The story continues:
Jesus said to them, "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?" And they said to him, "We are able" (Mark 10:38-45). They actually thought they were, but He knew they were not.
The disciples misunderstood what Jesus was doing! They thought that He was conferring status and they wanted to be at the head of the line. But Jesus was not conferring status, at least not as they understood it. He was conferring obligation and responsibility -- servanthood. They had been interested in getting the honor and status of association with Jesus Christ. But Christ was interested in serving the Lord Himself and enlisting others to serve the Lord in His stead. They wanted to get, He wanted them to give. It is a classic problem in the life of the church. People come to Christ and to His church with the wrong hopes and dreams. People have it arsy varsy. They want what is best for themselves. Christ wants what is best for God.
