If wives are to voluntarily to subordinate themselves to their husbands, does this mean they are to still wear head-coverings? No! Why not? Because the head-covering doesn’t mean in our culture what it did then. The absence of it then identified a woman as immoral and disrupted the church. The absence of a head-covering doesn’t do either of these things today. In other words, we have to distinguish between what is culturally dated and what is eternally valid. The head-covering was culturally dated, but the principle of man’s headship is eternally valid.
Another example of this distinction is the kiss of greeting Paul told Christians to use (2 Cor. 13:12; 1 Thess. 5:26). The kiss was that culture’s way of expressing a warm welcome. In our day, a handshake suffices, but the principle of Christians showing warmth to each other remains the same!
This passage gives all Christians plenty to think about. Do we give the public worship services of our church the priority Paul gave them? Do we take care not to identify ourselves as immoral people? Are we willing to submit to the authority of Scripture? Or do we resist and resent when its teachings rub us up the wrong way?
Let’s make it our chief concern to honor and glorify God. When that becomes our grand pursuit, a lot of trivial concerns will melt away and the church will be molding society instead of society molding the church.
Let’s all submit to the headship of Jesus Christ and follow His commands!
- Bro. Dave