On Wednesday, June 21, 2023, myself along with the associate pastor held a questions and answers night at the church and a question came to the surface regarding head coverings for women. In my error, I answered the question with the assumption those listening from the church would be aware of my doctrine and that my answer stemmed from an understanding many individuals from various denominational backgrounds either have women as individuals, or entire congregations where women have their heads covered. I was wrong.
In my answer, I stated that “there seems to be a push among Postmillennial's heading into this direction…” I made reference to some authors and well known Postmil theologians. What this has caused is for some to feel, either A) I do not understand the eschatological positions of PostMils, or B) I supplied a sloppy answer. Understanding the background of the matter, both assumptions are incorrect, but understandable. Perhaps if I took a few extra moments to build then answer, this could have been avoided. For a need of repetition and clarity, yes, we see examples of head coverings within Brethren churches, some Independent Fundamental Baptist churches, some KJV only churches and other congregations. So, what did I mean? Simply put, many are becoming aware of the necessity of having a sound eschatology. This is great news. Over the last three years of COVID, there have been new voices, or voices that have been around awhile preaching on truth and dealing with matters regarding church and state. Some of those men hold to a PostMil position. Having more exposure , many have followed their ministry, and have learned about such theologians' positions on head coverings. Naturally then, as people come into agreement with such positions, we see many women start wearing head coverings. Thus, if the theologian is PostMil (or Amil?Historic Premil) convicted by certain passages writing on this, and more follow their ministry, more people will potentially follow in such convictions. Further, the trend has also increased with the movement of Biblical patriarchy. This is not a PostMil thing. Many have seen some concerns with modern day complementarianism and the effects it has on local churches. So, to be very clear; no, you do not have to be PostMil to have wives wear head coverings, nor is PostMil the cause of head-coverings. No, you do not have to be Patriarchal to have wives wear head coverings, nor is Patriarchy the cause of head coverings. Yes, more PostMil authors are getting exposure to this issue and yes more authors who hold to patriarchy are getting exposure - the statement I made is acurate, when time is taken to reflect on the whole of the matter. We are seeing an increased number of women now covering their heads with such convictions in the background - just as in many other denominations, end time positions and view on marriage.
That said, the church I pastor has some families now practicing head coverings, which is fine. We also have sisters confused as to why some are now wearing head coverings. Without breaching confidentiality, I can go as far as some sisters concerned this is taking place and comes across as legalistic. In our culture, it also causes more repelling than attraction, which I have heard as well - that people are tripped up. Such concerns need to be handled with great care because grace is always needed. Many wear head-coverings and are not legalistic. They wear them with pure convictions, are humble and desire to be submissive to Scripture. Some wear them with a level of self-righteousness – but no person can simply judge the heart unless fruit is evident. Further, the matter can become divisive if concerns are not addressed from both sides. Some churches have split over this very issue. So, without stepping on any more landmines a safe and proper conclusion is this; it boils down to convictions. As a pastor I do not demand the church abstains from such practices or demand such practices. We are sensitive to both positions. Our doctrinal statements and confessions are clear, and we do not believe it is a matter of Biblical compliance but was culturally specific. Further, we expect all to value and respect the convictions of others. A sister is not less of a Christian or lacks submission if there is no head-covering, nor is the sister who wears one elevated in such areas. Since the church is established with its convictions, neither need to attempt to convince the other side who is right or wrong. Therefore, the church (The Milll) is not a head covering church, and all sisters are free to worship in the covering God gave them, their hair. Equally true, all sisters are free to worship with a covering. Now, I know some disagree on this. Some will point to “well, if it was culture, I guess women can preach!?” Of course not, and we have to be careful not to make straw-man arguments.
In closing, many theologians have written on the subject, as have many laymen. Why rewrite articles that have been carefully expounded upon - so here is some extra reading on the issue to aid in this area. One last thing - and this is directed towards the sisters. If you desire to understand why another sister would choose one way or the other - talk to them. Allow them time to articulate their reasons. If you do not agree, no problem. Walk away with a better perspective. Men, do the same. Here are the links;
In His Grace,
P/Steve
Commenti