Before 2015, covering my head for church was just a fond memory of my childhood back at St James Anglican Mission (a rural Anglican church of my birth). I met an American woman online who calls herself, "The Veiled Anglican". I was quite curious as to why a white woman would subject herself to such torture of head coverings. You see, as a black, African and married woman, I cannot visit my in-laws in pants and a bare head. I cannot go anywhere near an inlaws' gravesite in an "unworthy" manner. You can say that this created a rebellious spirit me, until I met April (a.k.a The Veiled Anglican"), that is. April ministered to me through her blog and taught me the virtue of accepting your womanhood with grace. For her, veiling was one of the many ways she felt called to be obedient to the Lord. She influenced me to a point that I can never attend the Evening Prayer service at our church without covering my head. It brings warm memories of how my grandmothers would pull any piece of cloth nearby and cover their heads during family prayer time. It has become my thing now and I thank God that he has done this work in me. I am a selfish person by nature and never do anything I deem unnecessary. I trust Him to continue his work in me like He has done with this "little matter". This excerpt from an EO blogger (feminist atheist-turned-Episcopalian- turned - EO) also opened my eyes.... "The Church taught that it mattered to the angels whether women cover their heads. But why? Was the covering “a sign of submission to her husband,” as some commentaries say, or “a cultural statement of inferiority,” as one woman told me in explaining why she would not wear a veil? A friend and former dean of a Lutheran seminary in Norway, Håkon Haus, pointed to another possible reason. He looked up I Corinthians 11:10 in Greek: “Therefore the woman shall have exousia [right, power, authority] on her head for the sake of the angels.” The word exousia, said Håkon, also occurs in John 1:12: “As many as received Him, to them He gave exousia to become children of God, to those who believe in His name.” I felt a light go on. Was St. Paul saying that the head-covering was an outward sign of my “authority, right, power” as a female child of God, recognized by the angels? It rang excitingly true! God asks voluntary submission and obedience of His children. I chose to wear the sign of my feminine—as distinguished from masculine—authority. But why should the angels care?" The above struck me as interesting in that, within the African culture, a head covering on a woman does indeed signal that the one who is covered is in a position of dignity and honor. I cringed once I gave this a second thought. I suspect that I will be veiling more from hereon, especially during Eucharist. Maybe this form of obedience is what God is whispering in my ears, in order that I move towards the fullness of my Christian calling. Thank you for reading all the way to the end. I had to share these thoughts for some reason I cannot understand at this point. Feel free to add your thoughts.
The following are Aryeh Yehudah's view I thought I should share with you, this is what Aryeh says; Shaul aka Paul...is writing a letter to the assembly(church) in Corinth trying to teach them what Yahshua aka Jesus taught him and what he knew from Torah....the congregation in Corinth was mostly gentile and was part of a cultural that idealized feminine sexuality...and were in practice very licensetious. So many of the new Corinthian converts had difficulty accepting and getting used to the modesty expected of the called out ones in the assembly of YHWH (God).... Paul is establishing the order as understood from Torah and enforced by Yahshua (jesus) i.e. YHWH is the Head of YHSHA, whom is the 'Head' of man, whom is the 'Head' of woman, though all are equal (not the same) in the eyes of YHWH....he is also explaining that because long hair on a woman is a source of pride, beauty(glory) and covers her in a way that makes her attractive to men, that it needs to be 'Veiled' (the word that 'covered' is translated from here is better decribed as veiled or hidden, which differs from the source of the word 'covered' previously mentioned, which basically a discription of the way her hair draps over her....). Women in the assembly are 'veiled' to prevent being a distraction and because it disgraces (show lack of respect) for her 'Head' (that is her husband if she is married, that is Yahshua if she is not) and the veil is the sign she is submitted to the authority over her...and will save her 'glory' for when it is appropriate to diplay, inside of their sacred union for the one whom earned the right to enjoy her sacred beauty through marriage.... of note is the phrase "...because of the angels (noble sons of Seth) this an allusion to the incident in the 'book of Henoch' as one source of the tradition....another important note is Shauls closing statement "...and for those that have contention [with this custom], know that there is no other tradition in any of the assemblies of YHWH (God)..." I think it is also important to note that in the early hebrew communities and in the Messianic communities started by Yahshua (jesus) it was customary for woman to 'veil' their hair (and veil meant every strand, so a hat dosnt count) always in public, because hebrew people do all things in prayer and prophecy could take place at anytime so you would not want to be caught without your covering when the Ruach Ha Kodesh (holy spirit) came upon you...but Shaul knew that he could not control what these gentile converts did outside assembly he could only enforce what happens inside the assembly.......there is actually nothing mysterious our difficult about this chapter..people make it confusing trying to find excuses why it "dosnt matter anymore..." ha...more difficult is the part about men uncovering...which is more complex in light of standard assembly practice prior to this...but I'll have to tackle that one in a latter discussion... The world may have changed but YHWH 'God' has not and there is nothing new under the sun....so this Halakhic (lifestyle principle) practice is as valid today as it ever was....the fact it is not taught or enforced by westernized 'churches' today is a testament to the fact that scriptural adherence means far less to todays 'Christians' then worldy and denominational obedience. ..people prefer mens laws to YHWH's (God's) Mitzvot (laws, principles, morals, etc...).....Thank Him for His endless mercy, kindness and forgiveness. ...and trust that He will straighten us all out when he comes again....but for those whom knew and yet didnt teach His word correctly or preferred to teach their own denominational perspective over His word will have the harshest judgement of all..."...woe to the shepherd whom lead MY people astray....", "....let your leaders be few...", "...you [false teachers] are vipers..." I hope this might add something on the topic
I like argument 5 in this blog. http://blog.adw.org/2010/05/should-women-cover-their-heads-in-church/
I also like that argument, but then I am not married. No women veil in the Lutheran church and when I veiled in the Roman Catholic church I felt it was so uncommon as to be a distraction from the worship of others so I stopped. When I was little, in the TEC in the late 50s and early 60s, all women covered tho' most in hats and I remember when I visited my grandmother that whenever I forgot to bring a hat that she would bobby-pin a Kleenex on my head. I think that wasn't what St. Paul had in mind.
In the Orthodox Churches most women do cover their heads and this creates an atmosphere of piety similar to the vesture of the male clergy. In contrast, a layman just gets a baptismal cross, and if in an Ethiopian church, a white shawl. The Anglican approach of using dignified hats also seems acceptable to me, provided these do not become stylized fashion accessories. One should ask oneself “Would Queen Elisabeth II wear this hat?”
Since 2001, after I studied 1 Corinthians 11, I have been wearing a headcovering during church services. Mostly a modest hat or beret, although I would prefer a veil. We have been in quite a few churches (my husband's job required frequent moves), and often I have been the only one. But noone has ever been negative about it. One of the reasons is 'because of the angels'. It is a witness to them that I want to submit to my Lord and Saviour, by covering my hair (my glory as Paul calls it). I have noticed that there is quite a renewed interest in veiling among younger women in the RC church.
There is also a huge website for evangelicals called the Head Covering Movement: https://www.headcoveringmovement.com/ Everyone is getting in this!
My dream is a voluntary union of most of Anglicanism, the world’s third largest Eucharistic communion, with the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, who represent the second and fourth largest respectively. And the piety you have regarding headcoverings directly makes this prospect possible. It would also make me feel entirely comfortable going to your parish or anyone like it, recommending that others do likewise, and indeed if I found myself in such a scenario, and conditions were right, joining such an Anglican parish on the basis of sufficient commonality of faith.