Why I Choose Not to Wear a Hijab-Style Covering

 

Christian women who cover their heads have many styles available to them: hats, scarves, veils, wide headbands, and wraps. Some women choose a style that closely resembles a Muslim hijab, covering the hair, ears, and neck.

I personally choose not to.

My decision is not a judgment against Christian women who wear that style, nor is it criticism of Muslim women. It is simply an application of my own conscience and circumstances.

What Does My Covering Communicate?

Clothing communicates, whether we intend it to or not. In modern American culture, a tightly wrapped scarf that conceals all the hair and neck is most strongly associated with Islam. If I wore one, most people who saw me could reasonably assume that I was Muslim.

That is not the message I want my covering to send.

I wear a head covering as a Christian response to 1 Corinthians 11. I want the covering to be recognizable as feminine and intentional without creating unnecessary confusion about my faith. For me, a hat, veil, scarf, or wide headband accomplishes that more naturally.

I also do not believe Paul requires every strand of hair or the entire neck to be concealed. His instruction concerns a covered head, but Scripture does not specify the covering’s dimensions, fabric, or style. A hijab-style covering may fulfill the instruction, but I do not believe it is necessary to do so.

Liberty Works in Both Directions

My reasons for not wearing a hijab-style covering do not create a rule for every Christian woman.

Another woman may live in a culture where that style does not communicate Islam exclusively. She may find it practical, comfortable, beautiful, or particularly secure. She may believe that covering all her hair best expresses her understanding of the passage. She remains free to make that choice.

Christian liberty does not mean that our choices are meaningless. We should consider what our clothing communicates, how it affects others, and whether we can wear it with a clear conscience. But liberty also means that we must not turn personal wisdom into a universal command.

A hijab-style covering is not inherently sinful, and a Christian woman does not become Muslim by wrapping a scarf around her head. Fabric has no religion of its own. Meaning comes from the beliefs, intentions, and cultural associations connected to it.

For me, the possibility of communicating an unintended religious identity outweighs the benefits of that style. For another Christian woman, the circumstances may be different.

I can explain why I choose not to wear it without insisting that no Christian woman should.

Does my covering communicate my Christian conviction clearly within my particular culture?

Can I honor another woman’s liberty without treating her application as either mandatory or forbidden?

For more practical guidance on choosing and wearing a Christian head covering, see Recovering Covering: Scripture, Conscience, and the Beauty of Biblical Head Covering.

Thou Shalt Not Wear Pants? ... (or maybe you can)

 

A woman shall not wear a man’s garment, nor shall a man put on a woman’s cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God.
—Deuteronomy 22:5

Does this verse prohibit women from wearing pants?

The short answer is no—not simply because they are pants. Deuteronomy 22:5 does not identify one particular garment as permanently belonging to men. It prohibits a woman from wearing what belongs distinctively to a man and a man from wearing what belongs distinctively to a woman.

Men and women in the ancient world both wore garments that would look somewhat robe-like to us. That did not mean their clothing was interchangeable. Differences in cut, length, fabric, ornamentation, and manner of wearing could still identify clothing as masculine or feminine.

The same principle applies today. A man’s suit and a woman’s suit may contain similar pieces, yet we recognize that they are designed and styled differently. Likewise, men’s and women’s pants are normally cut, sized, and marketed for different bodies. A pair of pants made and recognized as women’s clothing is not automatically “a man’s garment.”

The command addresses the deliberate crossing or obscuring of the distinction between male and female. Clothing communicates. A person can use it to present truthfully as the sex God created—or to imitate, disguise, or present as the opposite sex.

That principle remains relevant even when particular styles change.

There was a time in Western culture when pants were viewed almost exclusively as male attire. A woman wearing them then may have communicated something different from what a woman wearing ordinary women’s slacks communicates today. Cultural meaning does not determine whether male and female are real, but it does affect what a particular garment communicates.

This means that Deuteronomy 22:5 should not be reduced to:

Men wear pants; women wear dresses.

Scripture does not give us that formula. Nor does it teach that any garment ever associated with men remains exclusively masculine for all people, places, and centuries.

At the same time, we should not empty the verse of meaning by saying, “Clothing does not matter as long as I know I am a woman.” God created male and female, and Christians should not deliberately use clothing to deny, mock, or erase that distinction.

The relevant questions are:

• Is this garment made and commonly recognized as women’s clothing?
• Does it present me truthfully as a woman?
• Am I trying to imitate men or obscure the distinction between the sexes?
• Does my clothing reflect modesty and honor God?

A Christian woman may answer those questions and conclude that women’s pants are appropriate. Another may choose skirts or dresses as a personal conviction. Both choices can be made sincerely.

The difficulty begins when a personal application becomes a universal command.

A woman who wears a head covering has accepted one biblical distinction between men and women in worship. That does not automatically commit her to a dresses-only interpretation of Deuteronomy 22:5. The two passages deserve to be studied on their own terms.

Deuteronomy 22:5 teaches us to honor the distinction between male and female. It does not teach that the presence of two pant legs turns a woman’s garment into a man’s.

If Worship Is Warfare, Is My Head Covering Part of the Armor?

 

Sometimes, when I put on my head covering before worship, it feels a little like preparing for battle.

That does not mean I believe the fabric has supernatural power. I do not believe it protects me from demons, places me under some special protection unavailable to other Christians, or signals to spiritual beings that they cannot touch me.

The fabric is still just fabric.

But Scripture tells us that the Christian life includes spiritual conflict:

“For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness.”
—Ephesians 6:12

Corporate worship is part of that conflict. We gather to proclaim what is true in a world filled with lies. We confess sin, pray, sing God’s praises, hear His Word, and proclaim Christ’s victory. We resist the world, the flesh, and the devil by directing our attention and allegiance toward God.

Paul’s reference to angels in 1 Corinthians 11 also reminds us that worship includes a spiritual reality beyond what we can see. The gathered church does not worship in isolation from the heavenly realm.

So where does the head covering fit?

It Is Not Another Piece of Armor

The armor of God is not a collection of physical objects. Paul names truth, righteousness, readiness produced by the gospel, faith, salvation, the Word of God, and prayer.

A cloth covering is not added to that list.

It is not the helmet of salvation. It is not a shield against spiritual attack. Demons are not repelled by cotton, linen, lace, or silk. Treating the covering as a supernatural defense assigns power to an object that Scripture never gives it.

My protection and security come from Christ—not from something in my wardrobe.

But It Can Still Prepare Me

Physical actions can help prepare us for meaningful moments. A pastor may straighten his Bible before preaching. A soldier puts on a uniform before reporting for duty. Neither object supplies the inward character required for the task, but the action reminds the person of what she is about to do.

Putting on my covering can serve in a similar way.

It reminds me that I am entering worship under God’s authority. I am laying aside my own glory, taking my place among God’s people, and preparing to pray, listen, confess, and praise. The covering does not equip me for spiritual battle, but it reminds me to use the equipment God has actually provided.

My head covering is not part of the armor of God and possesses no protective power. But putting it on helps prepare me to enter worship consciously, reverently, and ready to stand in the spiritual battle with the armor God actually provides.

The covering is a symbol of obedience, not a spiritual weapon. Its meaning comes from the truth to which it points—not from the material itself.

When I put on my covering, am I trusting the symbol—or the God who gave the instruction?

Does the act help prepare my heart for worship, prayer, and faithful attention to God’s Word?

For more about the biblical meaning of head covering—and what Scripture does not claim for it—see Recovering Covering: Scripture, Conscience, and the Beauty of Biblical Head Covering.

Book Review: Because of the Angels

 

 

 

Opening Statement and “What’s the Point?”

Because of the Angels: First Corinthians Eleven and Head Coverings in Divine Worship, by Paul C. Edgerton, offers a substantial modern defense of Christian head covering. Rather than treating the practice as an antiquated social custom, Edgerton places it within the larger reality of divine worship.

He summarizes his central purpose this way:

“Above all, the reader will find the practice of head covering to be rooted in worship rather than inequality.”

(up front, this is the second book I read on the topic that I keep to give away, and it was the inspiration for me to dig deeper into "because of the angels") 

Tone, Author, and Audience

The tone is thoughtful, reverent, academic, and distinctly liturgical. Edgerton takes both Scripture and historic Christian practice seriously without allowing modern discomfort to overrule the biblical text. He also brings a beautiful and mysterious quality to his discussion of angels while grounding his theology firmly in Scripture. His treatment of “because of the angels” made those words the most emotionally powerful part of the passage for me.

The Rev. Dr. Paul C. Edgerton is a presbyter in the Reformed Episcopal Church and holds degrees in theology and worship studies. His education and pastoral experience qualify him to explore the relationship between Scripture, church history, theology, and worship. The book addresses both clergy and laypeople, although its liturgical and  sacramental perspective may feel unfamiliar to some evangelical readers.

Purpose and Promise

Edgerton seeks to recover head covering as an ancient, biblical, and theologically meaningful Christian practice. He argues that Paul’s instruction in 1 Corinthians 11 cannot be dismissed as a temporary Corinthian custom. He also considers what the passage reveals about creation, authority, glory, men and women, marriage, ministry, and worship.

Does the book accomplish its purpose? Yes. Edgerton places head covering where Paul places it: within divine worship. He does not reduce it to modesty, marriage, or female submission. Instead, he presents it as a visible acknowledgment of God’s created order within a worshiping assembly that includes both earthly believers and heavenly beings.

His treatment of the angels is especially valuable. Rather than depicting them as predatory beings from whom women must protect themselves, Edgerton connects them to the worship of God. The church does not worship alone; earthly worship participates in a heavenly reality in which angels are also present before God.

Within that setting, Paul’s instruction makes theological sense. Human glory is ordered appropriately so that worship directs attention toward God’s glory. The covering is not a supernatural shield, and the fabric possesses no spiritual power. It is an embodied act of obedience acknowledging God’s order in the presence of the earthly and heavenly assembly.

Why Does It Matter?

“Because of the angels” is among the most difficult and sensationalized phrases in 1 Corinthians 11. Some interpretations make women responsible for preventing angelic lust or imply that a covering protects them from spiritual attack. Such explanations can burden a simple act of obedience with fear and superstition.

Edgerton offers something better: an interpretation rooted in Scripture, reverence, worship, and the unseen reality surrounding the gathered church. The angels do not make the covering magical. Their presence reminds us that Christian worship participates in something much larger than what we can see.

What Sets This Book Apart?

Many books argue that Paul’s instruction still applies; Edgerton helps explain why head covering belongs in worship and what it communicates there. He treats covered and uncovered heads not as arbitrary dress requirements, but as meaningful signs within the worship of God. His discussion of angels, glory, and the heavenly assembly gives the practice a depth missing from many treatments of the passage.

Overall Impression and Verdict

Edgerton and I do not approach every detail from precisely the same denominational background. Nevertheless, his central understanding of head covering as an act rooted in divine worship is thoughtful, reverent, and persuasive. His treatment of “because of the angels” is one of the book’s greatest strengths.

Highly recommended. This is one of the two books about Christian head covering that I personally give to women who want to study the subject more deeply.

 

Product Review: Leto Collection

 (WARNING: this is NOT a Christian company and some of the images are not what many would consider "modest")

I got a couple of bandanas from the Leto Collection. 

Colors are true to the website and they're very pretty - my color profile is "warm/bright/medium" and that can be difficult to find -- this company has several that fit my colors.

I found that the cotton bandanas wrinkle a bit easier than the silky scarves and I need to experiment more with the placement, as this one slid off my head halfway through Bible Study.

The fabric is medium-weave and easy to tie.

I like 

Why We Need Head-Covering Resources by Women, for Women

 

I recently posted an informal poll in a Christian head-covering group. I asked married members who became convinced first that head covering applies today: the husband, the wife, or both at about the same time.

The results were striking.

• 21 percent said the wife became convinced first and the husband later agreed.
• 35 percent said the wife is convinced and her husband is supportive, but not personally convinced.
• 5 percent said the wife is convinced while her husband disagrees or opposes the practice.

Altogether, 61 percent described the wife as the first—or only—spouse personally convinced.

By comparison, only 3 percent reported that the husband became convinced first or remained convinced while his wife did not. Another 29 percent said they reached the conclusion at about the same time.

This was not a scientific survey. It was a voluntary poll in a group already interested in head covering. Still, the difference is difficult to overlook: in many marriages, the woman is the one studying the passage, wrestling with its meaning, and deciding whether she can obey it with a clear conscience.

That is one reason I believe resources written by women, for women, are vital.

The Woman Is the One Who Wears It

Men have written many valuable theological treatments of 1 Corinthians 11, and I am grateful for them. Biblical truth does not change according to the sex of the person explaining it.

But the woman is the one who must place the covering on her head and walk into church wearing it.

She is the one who wonders whether everyone will stare. She must decide whether to wear a hat, scarf, veil, or wide headband. She asks whether all her hair must be concealed, whether a covering must look “religious,” and what to do if she is the only woman in her congregation who covers.

She may also need to approach a husband who has never considered the subject and explain why the passage has begun to trouble her conscience. As the poll shows, many husbands will support their wives without becoming personally persuaded by the interpretation.

These are not merely fashion questions. They involve conscience, marriage, worship, church relationships, and the quiet vulnerability of becoming visibly different.

A woman who has faced those questions can often recognize them before another woman even knows how to express them.

Theology and Lived Obedience

A resource by women, for women should not replace careful exegesis with feelings or personal experience. Scripture remains the authority. Our experiences must be interpreted by the Word—not the other way around.

But sound theology should eventually answer the question, “What does faithfulness look like in real life?”

Women need resources that take Paul’s reasoning seriously while also addressing the practical questions that follow. We need room to discuss fear, hesitation, beauty, femininity, marriage, church culture, and liberty of conscience without treating those concerns as shallow or irrelevant.

Titus 2 recognizes the value of women teaching and encouraging other women. There is something deeply helpful about hearing, “I have wrestled with this too. Here is what Scripture says, here is where it stops, and here is how I learned to walk it out.”

Resources by women, for women are not needed because women require a different Bible. They are needed because women often encounter a different set of questions while seeking to obey the same Bible.

That is why I wrote Recovering Covering: Scripture, Conscience, and the Beauty of Biblical Head Covering: to offer women a thoughtful place to begin—one that takes Scripture seriously, respects Christian conscience, and does not leave the practical “what if?” questions unanswered.

 

What Is a Hedge Law?

A hedge law is an extra rule placed around a biblical command to help keep a person from getting too close to disobedience.

The idea is simple: if God’s command marks the boundary, another rule is placed several steps away from it. In theory, a person who never crosses the additional boundary will never cross the biblical one.

Sometimes personal boundaries are wise. One woman may choose a larger covering because a small one does not feel meaningful to her. Another may avoid certain clothing, cosmetics, or situations because she knows her own temptations. There is nothing wrong with making thoughtful choices for ourselves.

The problem begins when we confuse our protective boundary with God’s command—and then require everyone else to observe it.

In head-covering communities, the reasoning can go something like this:

If a woman covers because she accepts biblical distinctions between men and women, she should also stop wearing pants, makeup, jewelry, or fashionable clothing.

But 1 Corinthians 11 does not make those connections. It gives instructions concerning men’s and women’s heads during prayer and prophecy. It does not establish an entire dress code.

A woman may reach separate convictions about pants, makeup, jewelry, or how much hair her covering should conceal. Those questions deserve their own biblical examination. They should not be smuggled into the head-covering instruction as though accepting one necessarily requires accepting all the others.

Hedge laws often begin with good intentions. We want to obey carefully and avoid compromise. But when we present our applications as God’s commands, we risk binding consciences where Scripture has left them free.

We must distinguish among three things:

• What Scripture commands
• How we personally apply that command
• What we merely prefer

Personal safeguards may be wise. They are not automatically universal laws.

Recovering the biblical practice of head covering should mean returning to what Scripture actually says—not surrounding it with so many additional rules that women can no longer see the command itself.