3. Head Covering as a Symbol of Grief
Understanding the head covering in terms of its Old Testament representation - that of grief, mourning, or sorrow eliminates any doubt as to the fact that Paul is speaking of a local, temporary issue, which has since been resolved, as is evidenced in 2 Corinthians 7:8-12. The first letter to Corinth is full of such evidence - once we abandon the idea that a head covering somehow represents subjection. The whole point of this letter was that the brethren and sisters in Corinth had not put away their former ways. His point in chapter 11 is that this fact is a grief to the whole ecclesia - which they needed to be made pointedly aware of so that they could do something about it. But only the women should wear the symbol of sorrow, as it is the ecclesia and not Christ who sorrows (compare Psalms 16:9-11; Hebrews 12:2; 1 Corinthians 15:20-23; Revelation 21:2-4).
This outward symbol of grief would also have displaced the atmosphere of gaiety and feasting - sobered them up, so to speak.
It has been suggested that Paul creates a dilemma by saying his advice can be disregarded. The people who claim a dilemma then say, “What about the Memorial? What about baptism? They were commands. Should we also disregard them? ”Let us address both the perceived “dilemma” with Paul's teachings, and the rituals of the Memorial and baptism.
We do, indeed, have a couple of rituals which we have been instructed to perform. But there is a pattern to them which is foreign to the Levitical Law.
Under the Law most laws, rituals, and ordinances (with the exception of a few matters dealing with behaviours motivated by our love for one another and our love for God) dealt with teaching things which would make Jesus recognizable as the Messiah when he arrived. Numerous studies over the years have dealt with how the construction of the tabernacle and its furnishings, the various types of sacrifices and how they were performed, how the priests were adorned, and so forth, all symbolized various aspects of Christ and his ministry. This function of the Law is summed up in Galatians 3:24-25.
But the rituals under Christ follow a different pattern. Consider baptism, commanded to be instituted as a ritual. True, it is a symbolic act whereby death and resurrection are represented by a complete immersion in water and a rising therefrom. But it does not begin or end there. There is a process which must take place in the heart of the believer in order for his/her baptism to be considered valid:
1. Self-examination
2. Confession of sinfulness
3. Repentance
4. Walk in newness of life
Likewise with the breaking of bread, there is a command that instituted it as a ritual. True, it symbolizes the death and resurrection of our Lord, and the partaking thereof identifies us with that sacrifice. But it does not begin or end there. There is a process which must take place in the heart of the believer in order for him/her to grow spiritually:
1. Self-examination
2. Confession of sinfulness
3. Repentance
4. Walk in newness of life
This is exactly what Paul says of the breaking of bread in 1 Corinthians 11:26-32.
The only other commandment we have under Jesus is found in John 15:12-14, where He says, “This is my commandment, that ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. ”He does not institute a ritual for this command because love is the fulfilling of all laws and rituals and is the natural progression of the 4 steps listed above.
And what of head coverings? Does that ritual follow this pattern? Certainly not with the traditional understanding of it! If, however, we abandon the traditional ideas, and understand the symbol of the covered head in terms of its Old Testament meaning (that of grief, sorrow, or mourning) and also understand that these instructions were given to Corinth, only to Corinth of the first century (or those from any age and place having the same problem), and only in reference to their specific situation, then it suddenly fits this pattern, as is evident in 2 Corinthians 7:8-12, a pattern Paul would have been completely aware of.
We have received no such command to wear head coverings - only to love, to be baptised, and to participate in the Memorial.
Col 2:20-23
The point is often made that the purpose of the custom is to reinforce the teaching of a spiritual lesson by acting out a role (role-playing). Having the women don head coverings won't do that. Instead, it poses the danger of thinking, “I'm okay. I'm holy. I'm righteous. I'm safe. I wore my hat to church today. ”They are in danger of stopping work on their hearts and having the right covering there because the hat “shows” their humility. The trouble is, people get hung up in the doing of the thing and totally miss the intended lesson, if indeed the intended lesson is even understood. It really becomes simple role-playing with no real living of the application. It becomes legalistic instead of spiritual. That generates Pharisaical leaven (Mark 7:1-9), as these observances give a good " show" of holiness, but are worthless in the fight against our real enemy - the flesh. That's what went wrong with the Levitical Law. The apostles wrote repeatedly that the legal ordinances of the Law were not to be imposed upon Gentile believers. Why would any of them then insist on creating new rules and laws? Was head-covering in Corinth intended as a rule of role-playing after the pattern of the Levitical Law?
