On Account of the Angels: Why I Cover My Head
By Elisabet
At first reading of this verse I thought, "Good grief, that, at
least, can't have anything to do with women today." I was a new
convert to Christianity and making a valiant effort to read the
Bible "as if it were true." St. Paul was hard to swallow, and so
were angelsalong with fairies and trolls! My grudging
acceptance of Christianity was based on honest doubt rather than
conviction. No one had proved to me that it was true, but neither
could I prove it false. On that flimsy hope I chose to make what
Kierkegaard called "a leap of faith over the abyss of the absurd."
It was a desperate act. I was at the end of my rope, at a loss to
explain the painful contradiction between my good intentions and the
reality of my life. I was no longer able to pretend success as a
wife, mother of four, or writer (even though my book had been sold
on first submission to a leading publisher). In truth I didn't even
know who I was, although I loudly proclaimed my manifesto as
atheist, humanist, and feminist, with strong opinions on most
issues. I had spent most of my young life trying to define myself by
"proving" I could do anything a man could do, only better. (What man
could bear children!) But inside was a black hole and I was about to
fall in.
Somehow I "happened" across a Bible and read that God (whoever He
or It was) created "man in our image, male and female created He
them." I read of Moses encountering a burning bush which was not
consumedand a God who identified Himself as I AM. That caught my
attention. If there was a great I AM from whom all small "I
ams" received their identity, there was hope of discovering myself
and what it meant to be a woman. One night, under a canopy of stars
in the desert, I cried out: "God, if you are there, I want to find
You!" But my mind refused to accept the Bible stories of sacrificial
lambs and Christ crucified and resurrected. Descartes said, "I
think, therefore I am," and I agreed. My ability to reason was my
life! With a heavy heart I gave up on the "mindless" Christian
solution. But when all seemed lost, a quiet little thought lodged in
my head: "If it were truewould you accept it? And can you prove
that it is not?" The question would not let go. In fear and
trembling I chose to "sacrifice" my reason, accept the
incomprehensible in hopes it would prove true, and live the rest of
my life as if it were. It felt as if I were dying, but I saw no
other way.
The proof of the pudding, of course, was in the eating. The truth
of the Bible could only be tested through obedience. I determined to
do whatever "leapt at me" in the daily reading of Scripture. I
disagreed with St. Paul's view of women, but he did say, "there is
neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal.
3:28). Clearly we were equal in salvation and worthinessthen why
different rules? Were they only cultural, not applicable to us
today? Then one day I prayed, "God, You made me a woman; I want to
live the fullness of womanhood as you meant itspiritually,
emotionally, every way, even if it means doing as St. Paul says!"
Soon after that, during morning prayer, I Corinthians 11:10 leapt
at me. It seemed silly, but I got up from my knees, found a kerchief
to put over my head, and went on with prayers. Somehow it felt
right. One day I wore the scarf in my Southern Baptist church. There
were glances, but no comments. Gradually it became more of a habit,
both during prayers at home and in church. As the only woman with a
head-covering, I felt conspicuous at times, but could not bring
myself to take it off. I decided I would rather err on the side of
obedience than against it. And there were the angels to
consider. By now I believed in them, but why they should care about
my head was still a mystery.
After I had been a Christian for thirteen years, a desire for the
sacraments drew me to the Episcopal Church. It was 1979, and
three-fourths of the women in the congregation wore head-coverings.
I rejoiced. During the Eucharist the priest, standing before the
altar, chanted: "Therefore, with angels and archangels, and
with all the company of heaven, we laud and magnify Thy glorious
Name, evermore praising Thee, and saying, "Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord
God of hosts: heaven and earth are full of Thy glory' " The glory
hit me: We were worshipping God in the company of a heavenly host!
Was St. Paul alluding to that?
When I learned of the Jesus Prayer and adopted a rule of prayer,
it seemed appropriate to wear something on my head at all times. I
sewed matching dresses and scarves which my friends accepted as my
"style"artistic and a bit eccentric. That was fine with me (and I
hoped, with the angels!) I was saddened when other
women in our parish stopped wearing a head- covering. They though it
unnecessary and outdated, and some saw it as a sign of inferiority.
Women and men were equal, andaccording to current unisex fashions
in clothing, life and hairstylespractically alike and
interchangeable. For nearly two thousand years Christian women had
covered their heads in church, and usually elsewherebut now we
were "liberated" from that.
In 1995 I was chrismated Orthodox and was surprised to find
myself again the only woman wearing a head-covering in my parish. An
Orthodox sister told me, with a nod to my scarf, "We don't have to
wear that anymore." I smiled and said, "I know, but I want to." St.
Paul had said "ought," not "must."* It was my voluntary obedience,
even if I didn't understand the "why's." By now I had no intention
of giving up the benefits. I felt blessed and protected, feminine,
and, paradoxically, confident and freein the presence of guardian
and ministering angels.
In Orthodox worship the angels were even more in evidence.
The Divine Liturgy is full of references to the various ranks of
angels, emphasizing our participation with them in the joyous
worship of the Holy Trinity. St. John Chrysostom (d. A.D. 407), in a
sermon at the Feast of the Ascension, spoke both of angels
and the veiling of women: "The angels are present hereOpen
the eyes of faith and look upon this sight. For if the very air is
filled with angels, how much more so the Church! ...Hear the
Apostle teaching this, when he bids the women to cover their heads
with a veil because of the presence of the
angels." Origen, another early Church Father,
said, "There are angels in the midst of our assemblywe have
here a twofold Church, one of men, the other of angelsAnd
since there are angels presentwomen, when they pray, are
ordered to have a covering upon their heads because of those
angels. They assist the saints and rejoice in the
Church." Instructions for catechumens in The Apostolic
Tradition, probably written in the second century by St.
Hippolytus of Rome, include this: "Moreover, let all the women have
their heads veiled with a scarf" And St. Cyril of Alexandria,
commenting on I Corinthians, wrote: "The angels find it
extremely hard to bear if this law [that women cover their heads] is
disregarded."
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, Hkon 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 Hkon,
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 feminineas distinguished
from masculineauthority. But why should the angels care?
In her book, The Holy angels, Mother Alexandra
writes: "The Celestial hierarchies are thespiritual reality of
ordered creation, the stable patterns in which disruption is
unknown" Obedience is characteristic of the angelic realm.
Dionysius the Areopagite, influential since the fifth century, wrote
of nine orders or hierarchies of celestial beings, arranged in three
choirs. Seraphim and cherubim are in the first, archangels and
angels in the third choir, closest to us. Without obedience
there is chaos and disorder. St. John Chrysostom, in a sermon on I
Corinthians, speaks of how distinction in male and female dress
and particularly the veiling of women"ministers effectively to
good order among mankind." Taking off the veil was "no small error,"
said St. John; "it is disobedience." It "disturbs all things and
betrays the gifts of God, and casts to the ground the honor
bestowedFor to [the woman] it is the greatest of honor to preserve
her own rank." To some who argued that a woman, by taking off her
covering, "mounts up to the glory of man," Chrysostom answers: "She
doth not mount up, but rather falls from her own proper honorSince
not to abide within our own limits and the laws of God, but to go
beyond, is not an addition, but a diminution" Always
emphasizing the equality between man and woman, Chrysostom
admonishes the man "not to dishonor her who governs next to
thyself." The issue was order, not superiority or inferiority.
At Matins for Orthodoxy Sunday, we sing, "Come and let us celebrate
a day of joy: Now heaven makes glad! Earth with all the hosts of
angels and the companies of mortal men, each in their varied
order, keeps the feast."
The answer to my prayer nearly thirty years ago, that I might
know what it means to be a woman, and to live it as God wills for
me, is becoming clearer in obedienceoften in little things, like
putting on a scarf. The mystery of womanhood is still
incomprehensible, but now I think, so it must be. I don't have to
understand fully what it means to be a woman in order to know that I
am a woman and to live it. God knows the meaning and I trust
Him. I don't have to fight for my place or my right; it is given me
in the glorious ranks of angels and mortals.
Fr. Basil Rhodes wrote in his Master of Divinity thesis in 1977
on The veiling of women in I Cor. 11, "Man is the head of the
woman, according to Genesis and to St. Paul who compares the
relationship of man and woman with that of the Son to the Father:
'And the head of Christ is God' (I Cor. 2:3). It would be a grave
error to say that Christ is inferior to His Father. The veiling of
the woman, for St. Paul, is an outward sign of the acceptance of
God's order, and His divine purpose in creation. The veil is the
woman's 'yes' to God, a physical, visual 'Amen'." St.
John Chrysostom thought that Paul, in admonishing women to wear a
covering "because of the angels," meant it "not at the time
of prayer only, but also continually, she ought to be covered." Fr.
Rhodes agrees: "The veil can be the constant symbol of the true
woman of Goda way of lifea testimony of faith and of the salvation
of God, not only before men, but angels as well."
Timothy McFadden, who is working on his doctoral thesis at Oxford on
the subject of "man/womanGod/Christgod," writes: "Members of the
Godheadand His imageare not interchangeable. As God Father and
Son are equal and One in nature, so also they are unique and not
interchangeable. Similarly, though equal in nature, man is not
woman, woman is not man. They are distinguishable."
In my pre-Christian days, when I sought to understand myself in
light of the doctrines of feminism, I believed that men and women
shared male and female characteristics, which made us pretty much
interchangeable. (And if we were interchangeable, we didn't really
need each other except to conceive babies!) Today some say we have
both a masculine and a feminine self that must be lived out. But how
do women live out their "masculine self," and men their "feminine
self"? That presents an identity problem (another modern notion) for
both men and women (not to mention adolescent boys and girls!). No
doubt it also adds to the chaos and gender confusion of our
times. I no longer believe we are a mixture of masculine and
feminine characteristics and selves. As God in Trinity is One in
essence and three Persons in function, so man and woman, created in
God's image, share a human nature, yet are distinct personal selves
with different functions. As Christians we both have
exousiapower, right, and authorityas children of God,
but woman's authority is distinctly feminine, as man's is distinctly
masculine. Hers does not contradict or usurp his, but complements
it. And as the Trinity would not be complete with one of the Three
missing, so man and woman are both essential to each other and to
the whole. Being in the holy order of God's creation as lived
in Orthodoxy calms the troubled waters of my soul. I don't
understand the mystery of Trinitynor the mystery of man and woman
but I know I am woman, and I both want and love to live
it. St. Paul wrote, "woman is the glory of man" (I Cor.
11:7), a hard verse to take for some of us. McFadden suggests that
"all women may somehow participate in the glory of the Theotokos."
Woman's unique and God-given capacity to give birth made the
Incarnation possible. The woman Theotokos is indeed the glory of all
mankind, "our solitary boast," as one writer called her. Eve, our
first mother, contributed to the fall of man by choosing to disobey.
Mary, the mother of our Lordand of the Church which is His Body
made our salvation possible by obeying God's will. If she whom we
hymn as "more honorable than the cherubim and more glorious beyond
compare than the seraphim" is always seen in icons wearing her
head-covering, it certainly cannot be a sign of "inferiority to
men"! McFadden calls the veil a "badge of authority" between
equals, perceived by the angels who maintain order among
themselves. Why head-coverings matter to the angels
may be unclear, but that they matter seems evident. Fr.
Rhodes says, "The angels watch what we do and rejoice when we
obey." A scarf may be a small matter, but obedience often hinges on
small things, small choices. My scarf is seen by men, but to me it
signifies obedience to God, a way of living my womanhood. It is my
feminine "I am" reflected outwardly. In putting on my head-covering
I mean to say to God, "Behold your handmaiden, be it unto me
according to Your wordYour will, not mine." For twelve
years I have worn a scarf at all times. I now perceive that it has
beenand continues to beessential for the pilgrim journey and
salvation of my soul. The bottom line for meand a growing number
of my sistersremains obedience. And with it comes a sense of
being in our rightful place in God's ordered universe, rejoicing
with the angels. Now I gratefully say, "I am!" in the
presence of the great I AMat prayer and in church, surrounded by
the angelic host, worshipping our Lord and King. To God, Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit, be the glory, now and ever and unto ages of
ages. Amen!
Endnotes
* Angelo Babudro of New Glasgow, NS (Canada) had some insightful comments about this passage:
In her article Elisabet wrote, "St. Paul had said 'ought,' not 'must.'" (referring to 1 Cor 11:10). Actually this is both a superfluous and erroneous distinction.
St. Paul said neither word, but rather used the Greek word "opheilo" (Strong's number 3784). In addition to Strong's definition, if we look at the use of this word in the New Testament we see it is translated as owing a debt, should, duty, ought, need, bound, behoved, and also "must" (in 1 Cor 5:10).
I checked Noah Webster's dictionary (who often quoted the Bible and gave us a revision of the KJV in 1833), and saw that the word "ought" is defined as an obligation, a duty, or something that is necessary. So even without the Greek, the distinction she drew is extremely fuzzy.
I conclude, then, that St. Paul actually did say that a woman must/ought/should/is duty bound/owes a debt to wear a head covering. Judging from the rest of the article I would say our sister Elisabet has arrived at this conclusion as well, but I thought it was worth pointing out what seems to me quite an important error in her teaching to other women, in the hopes that she may choose to rephrase, remove, or clarify that small part of her article.
From the Spring 1997 issue of The Handmaiden, Conciliar Press
|