Time for a headcovering thread!

[Sudsy]

One thing that can and does show up with certain doctrines and practises, that Christians emphasize over other ones, is taking pride in how one follows what they believe the scriptures require of us.

I think pride can creep in when we go against certain norms in Christianity and perhaps think others are 'falling away' when they don't have the same convictions and understanding of scriptures that we have. A 'holier-than-thou attitude' or a 'super spiritual' or a 'more obedient' view of oneself.

Some areas I have seen this happen are - dress, soul winning, mode of baptism, speaking in tongues, fasting, foot washing and many others including the headcovering.

Just saying that whenever we are emphasizing things that we do that others don't and should, we should check to see if pride is a big factor behind why we emphasize it. We know that scripture says God hates pride so we don't want to give way to it.

...or raising (holy) hands when praying...

How did I forget that one.

[AndersonD]

Groups that claim there should be no set style seem to, without fail, eventually end up abandoning the covering altogether, which gives me very little confidence in their arguments there should be no prescribed style.

My own group doesn’t technically have a prescribed style but everyone wears the same style of kapp. One woman I have met so far (a seeker, like me) wears a veil instead of a kapp. In other countries, they wear colours other than black, but still have a de facto style.

It seems the younger Holdemans are wearing their coverings back as far they can get them and another shift is among Germany Baptist ladies who now wear kerchiefs, not that I blame them.

[Soloist]

It is good to resist pride, but as Jesus said

23Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

While pride is wrong, it doesn't mean we don't do what we have trouble with pride about. One does not run away from Biblical truth out of fear of pride.

[Josh]

Groups that claim there should be no set style seem to, without fail, eventually end up abandoning the covering altogether, which gives me very little confidence in their arguments there should be no prescribed style.

My own group doesn’t technically have a prescribed style but everyone wears the same style of kapp. One woman I have met so far (a seeker, like me) wears a veil instead of a kapp. In other countries, they wear colours other than black, but still have a de facto style.

It seems the younger Holdemans are wearing their coverings back as far they can get them and another shift is among Germany Baptist ladies who now wear kerchiefs, not that I blame them.

Amongst Canadians who are discouraged with the covering, it tends to move up higher. Amongst Americans it tends to move lower.

In the old days they were worn really far back. My wife’s grandma still wears the same ancient style, quite low and towards the back.

However, as far as an actual covering for church services… that is a Hutterite style kerchief. Back in the old days Holdemans didn’t even bother with coverings during the week. My wife’s grandma remembers those days (she’s in her 100s).

[AndersonD]

Groups that claim there should be no set style seem to, without fail, eventually end up abandoning the covering altogether, which gives me very little confidence in their arguments there should be no prescribed style.

My own group doesn’t technically have a prescribed style but everyone wears the same style of kapp. One woman I have met so far (a seeker, like me) wears a veil instead of a kapp. In other countries, they wear colours other than black, but still have a de facto style.

It seems the younger Holdemans are wearing their coverings back as far they can get them and another shift is among Germany Baptist ladies who now wear kerchiefs, not that I blame them.

Amongst Canadians who are discouraged with the covering, it tends to move up higher. Amongst Americans it tends to move lower.

In the old days they were worn really far back. My wife’s grandma still wears the same ancient style, quite low and towards the back.

However, as far as an actual covering for church services… that is a Hutterite style kerchief. Back in the old days Holdemans didn’t even bother with coverings during the week. My wife’s Grandma remembers those days (she’s in her 100s).

So 100 years ago was it a Mennonite practice across the board to not wear a covering through out the week? And when did it change to wearing the black covering through out the week? Cuz Hutterite ladies wear a small white cap instead of the kerchief when they are at home.

[Heirbyadoption]

My wife and I had a rather lively discussion on this recently. When does the headcovering become less about scripture and/or conviction, and more about identity?

Steve, would it be accurate to assume this is the initial thrust/question in the OP?

[Sudsy]

I guess the headcovering is not an instruction from God as John Hurt just said we can ignore the apostle Paul as he lies. Furthermore, Jesus nor any other NT writer mentions it. Case solved.

[Heirbyadoption]

I guess the headcovering is not an instruction from God as John Hurt just said we can ignore the apostle Paul as he lies. Furthermore, Jesus nor any other NT writer mentions it. Case solved.

Sudsy, for a man who claims to have "no convictions on the matter one way or another", you have me a bit confused. Are you stating the quoted part above in jest or seriousness?

[Sudsy]

I guess the headcovering is not an instruction from God as John Hurt just said we can ignore the apostle Paul as he lies. Furthermore, Jesus nor any other NT writer mentions it. Case solved.

Sudsy, for a man who claims to have "no convictions on the matter one way or another", you have me a bit confused. Are you stating the quoted part above in jest or seriousness?

Jest.

[Neto]

My wife and I had a rather lively discussion on this recently. When does the headcovering become less about scripture and/or conviction, and more about identity?

Steve, would it be accurate to assume this is the initial thrust/question in the OP?

I started it off on the wrong foot....

I think (if it matters at all what I think) that the identity factor comes in pretty soon after a distinctive style is designated, whether officially, or by de facto practice. I think that can be fine and good for those IN the group, but I think that it can help out-group people "dismiss" the entire practice as merely cultural.