Dear Ruth and Pilgrim,<br><br>I realize that my post was short and not very detailed, so just as a follow-up, I do not believe the head coverings tradition was a cultural phenomenon, rather a redemptive historical one. My argument is that the covering was employed when a woman "prophesied" or "prayed". Being a cessationist, I do not believe prophesy occurs today, and I would argue that the "prayer" mentioned here also belongs to the order of peculiar spiritual gifts (see 1 Corinthians 14:14 - 16). Though Scripture does not have a different word for leading in prayer versus praying along silently, there are places where the context leads us to understand public, corporate prayer in view (such as 1 Timothy 2:8), and I would say this is the case here.<br><br>Given that context, it is my opinion that this tradition of head coverings was instituted by the apostles in order to address the apparent tension of women not being permitted to speak in worship (1 Corinthians 14:34) while yet being given the extraordinary gifts of the spirit in which they did speak. It seems to me that the head coverings were a reminder of their submisiveness while performing an act that could easily appear unsubmissive. Hence, my reason for not seeing the need for head coverings today is not because of a cultural difference, but due to the cessation of these gifts during which the head covering was worn (similar to my response to a charismatic who would say "Do not forbid to speak with tongues"). I would argue that a head covering is appropriate in such places where a woman is perceived as leading the congregation in worship (such as in a choir perhaps), but I don't personally hold to any practices that would permit such a tension to occur.<br><br>I hope that makes more sense. Sincerely in Christ,<br><br>~Jason<br>