|
The product offered consists of some 43 different styles of
bonnets and kerchiefsfor
both adults and children. The styles appear to approximate most
any headcoverings for women found in the various cultures in the
world. Some are completely plain; others have lace and trim,
often described with the words "very feminine." A full range of
colors is available, including patterns and textures such as
eyelet, gingham and denim. Some of the styles cover one's entire head, others only the top and
back. Paper patterns are also available for those who would like
to sew their own coverings.
Various fabrics are available depending on the style
chosen, including cotton, batiste, chintz, French and Japanese
lace, polyester, and tulle. Some of the designs can be made from
more than one type of fabric at the customer's request. Tips on
fabric care are included with the link to the color charts.
The Testimonies page of the website offers links to
close to thirty testimonies contributed by women who have chosen
to wear headcoverings for religious reasons. A few themes repeat
themselves among the testimonies of different women. The overall
reason for choosing to wear a headcovering appears to be the
belief that one must obey the specific commands of the New
Testament canon in order to be in right relationship with God as
a Christian.[2]
Namely, in I Corinthians 11, Paul exhorts the women in his
audience to pray and prophesy only with covered heads. (See
Resources below for a more in-depth discussion of the exegesis.)
The women who have chosen to follow this advice
literally, believe that:
1)
The headcovering is a sign of obedience to God's command.
Not only do the women believe that they are obeying God simply
by wearing the covering, but some also refer to it as a reminder
of other obedient behavior. They are to submit to the authority
of their husbands, and also to behave with kindness and
humility. The covering acts as a kind of string-on-the-finger as
it were, helping them to remember the broader injunctions of
love. A cancer survivor who has chosen to wear the covering
states, "Rebellion was the reason the Lord had allowed my
sickness in the first place."
2)
The headcovering is necessary to show submission both to God and
to human males as per their reading of the command. In one
testimony, it is pointed out that women should be submissive
unless their husbands are perceived to be disobeying God's
commands. In that case, remembering that God is sovereign
over the husbands as well, the women are advised to follow
their understanding of God's commands.[3]
This applies specifically to those husbands who may not want
their wives wearing a covering.
3)
The headcovering gives them an opportunity to witness
to the grace of God in their lives as obedient Believers.
More than one woman has been asked, "What is that thing on
your head?" when in public places. The women appreciate
these opportunities to share their stories, both to bring
"glory to God" and to try to persuade others of the truth of
their position.
4)
Scripture is the ultimate authority for daily living
in material as well as spiritual ways, and all decisions
should be made with Scripture as a conversation partner, not
with our "imperfect brains." Scripture offers a plain
understanding for daily life, according to one testimony:
"It never seemed right that a knowledge of ancient
Greco-Roman social history should be prerequisite to a
proper interpretation of Scripture, particularly where a
culturally-based interpretation appeared to set aside the
plain teaching of the passage." Husbands and wives study
Scripture to determine God's commands for their contemporary
situations. This is not the only indicator of truth,
however. One testifier states, "Over the following weeks I
was amazed at how many people, especially men, quietly told
me that they thought the passage was relevant for today."
Other specific behaviors seem to be held in common among the
women who choose to wear the headcovering. For instance,
homeschooling, women teaching only other women and children,
comments regarding the recognition of "God's hand" in one's
life, the use of Hebrew words in place of English words
(i.e., "Ruach Hakadosh" for Holy Spirit), a belief in God's
sovereignty over child-bearing (and therefore a refusal to
use contraception) and modesty in dress (including the
wearing of dresses only) occur in several testimonies.
Far from a sense of oppression, the women speak of
deriving a sense of peace and purpose from their obedience
and submission. They experience a strong sense of love from
gatherings where women are wearing headcoverings. They
compare their willingness to cover as a love for God similar
to the love for their husbands which delights to do those
things that their husbands appreciate. They experienced
greater grace in their lives (no specific examples are
given) once they began wearing coverings. The covered
daughters of covered women are described as mature and well
behaved beyond the appearances of their peers who are of
"the world." They live less complicated, stressful lives by
submitting to the authority of their husbands and male
pastors and teachers. They feel a sense of place and
strength in their ministry in the home, and in some cases,
even power. A woman's power is seen to be manifest in her
rightful place as administrator of homelife.
According to Paul, there is a specific benefit
to wearing the covering: angelic protection. Not only do the
women claim this protection for themselves, but also the
effect is believed to apply to one's entire household when
the women are obedient to the command to cover their heads.
This is an additional source of power for their lives. The
women who refer to this angelic theology, quote from the
same source: Demons in the Church, by H. Skolfield.
The testimonies are full of references to works by men
exegeting I Corinthians 11 and commenting more broadly
on its themes, as in the above-mentioned work. Most of
the resources named on this page of the website are
available for sale, many of them in cassette form. One
of the testimonies includes an exegesis by the
testifier's husband; another is available in its
complete form on-line through a link to Apostolic
Press. This latter exegesis, by "Brother Doug Savin"[4]
of Toronto, Canada, is put forward in the belief that
Scripture can be understood without any doubt as to the
conclusions of the interpreter. "Let us analyze that
chapter [I Corinthians 11] in context of the whole
Scripture to eradicate any doubt as to what it really
means." [Emphasis mine.]
Brother Savin identifies two problems that
have contributed to the controversy over headcovering:
"the way the King James Version translates the Apostle
Paul's letter [from] the Greek language in which it was
originally written" and "that some take this chapter to
be directed only to the Corinthian church." Brother
Savin continues by pointing out his understanding of the
passage as a direction not only to others outside of
Corinth, but also to those in other eras of history.
Another difficulty that Brother Savin addresses is
the applicability of the passage to married women
and men only, versus its universal application.
Based on his reading of the Greek, he concludes that
the passage is meant for women and men in general,
all
meant for women and men in general, all women being
submissive to all men, not only wives to husbands.
Angelology is given an extended
treatment, with references to other passages to help
determine why Paul brought up the subject of angels
in this particular context. The submission of women
to men is an opportunity for witness to the angels
who can only know about God's marvel of salvation
through watching the Church.
In his "last statement" about
headcovering, Brother Savin calls it "self-evident"
according to Paul, who refers his audience to the
observable practice of Jewish women who worshipped
God with covered heads. "Gentile converts should
have realized that this was proper simply by
observing the Jewish converts who continued to wear
the veil during worship." He also discounts the
possibility of Paul counting a woman's hair as her
covering, reasoning that Paul has changed his topic
to hair length. "[Paul] would not systematically
expound universal truths about God and, using them
as a base, lay down the proper decorum for public
worship and then say, 'I was just teasing you; the
woman's hair is really her headcovering.' "[5]
He concludes by quoting Paul's final
point, that the churches at that time know no other
practice, i.e., you should go along with it, too.
Relying on his earlier finding that the passage is a
universal one and not a time-bound or
geographically-specific one, Brother Savin invokes
this statement to apply to contemporary church life.
Paul has, in effect, pronounced a final blessing on
the practice because it falls in line with what is
common in the culture.[6]
Brother Savin further supports his conclusions by
citing pictorial evidence from art in the Roman
catacombs, a drawing from the 10th
century C.E., and a painting of Rembrandt, as well
as a statement from Clement of Alexandria in the 2nd
century C.E.
The visitor to this website may be struck by the
combination of traditional and technological
cultural elements in the presentation, as I was.
On the one hand, the entire purpose for the
website is to promote a mode of dress originated
thousands of years ago in a culture completely
different from the culture of the website
psychologically, socially, geographically, and
to a certain extent, even theologically. Not
only dress, but also other behaviors are
encouraged: female submission to male authority,
attention to details of fabric use, adherence to
certain assumptions about biology (i.e.,
contraception), and assumptions of sexual
attraction (certain hairstyles and clothes as a
"turn on").
On
the other hand, the usage of a website to make
this belief known is a participation in what is
perhaps the most progressive aspect of "the
world" today.
The technology of the Internet provides great
opportunities not only for the spread of a
message, but also for the effective commercial
promotion of one's product line. However, it
also is an open door to the same types of
"worldly" sexuality and female assertiveness
from which the groups promoting headcovering are
retreating.
One of the testimonies points out that
headcovering is a neglected practice – one that
was commonly accepted in the culture up until
about 100 years ago. Interestingly, it is
elements of this time period, basically the
Victorian era, which the graphics in the website
seek to emulate. The images hearken back to the
stereotypical "good old days" when women dressed
more modestly and were not even allowed to vote,
much less hold ordained office in mainline
churches. The Victorian era was a time of
idealized and idolized femininity – a kind of 19th
century chivalry that appreciated women as pure
and modest, in need of rescue and protection and
contributors to society through aesthetics and
gracefulness and not through intellectual
discovery or political assertiveness. In this
context, the headcovering protects women from
untoward advances, and protects men from sexual
temptation.
The Victorian era was the setting for Charles
Sheldon's classic, In His Steps, which
popularized the phrase, "What would Jesus do?"
One of the testimonies makes reference to this
mindset when its writer confesses unkind
behavior while not wearing a covering. She
realized her mistake and said, "Jesus would
NEVER have said what I said." In this context,
the headcovering is a protection from sin.
The social changes over the past century have
indeed shaken up our certainty about the world
and our places in it. Theologically, biblical
criticism as a discipline seems to be rejected
by this group of testifying women who make such
statements as, "It just means what it says," and
"How do we decide what parts to throw out, and
what parts to keep?" [Referring to Scripture
passages]. The Jones family chose a quote from
Martin Luther to drive home this point:
If I profess with the loudest voice and clearest
exposition every portion of the Word of God;
except precisely that little point which the
world and the devil are at that moment
attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however
boldly I may be professing Him. Where the battle
rages there the loyalty of the soldier is
proved; and to be steady on all the battle front
besides, is mere flight and disgrace if he
flinches at that point.[7]
In this context, the headcovering is a
protection from being out of relationship
with God. By fulfilling the commands, the
women have a sense of peace and love in
their relationships with God.[8]
To the extent that it involves a woman's
suppression of herself in the world, it is
seen as God's will. As one testimony put it,
"But just as the resurrected life outshines
the execution-stake ('cross'), so living the
resurrected life transcends the daily
self-death." The quote brings to mind images
of the joyful early church martyrs. In this
context, the headcovering is a protection
against God's abhorrence of pride, vanity
and disobedience.
In sum, the women who have
chosen to wear headcoverings are invested in
their relationships with God and their
communities to the best of their abilities
to live God's desires for them as they
understand them. This website provides a
helpful material and spiritual meeting
ground for these women.
|