Christian head covering, also known as Christian veiling, is the traditional practice of women covering their head in a variety of Christian denominations. Some Christian women wear the head covering in public worship and during private prayer at home, while others (particularly Conservative Anabaptists) believe women should wear head coverings at all times. Many theologians of the Oriental and Eastern Orthodox Churches likewise teach that it is "expected of all women to be covered not only during liturgical periods of prayer, but at all times, for this was their honor and sign of authority given by our Lord", while others have held that headcovering should at least be done during prayer and worship. Genesis 24:65 records the veil as a feminine emblem of modesty.
Manuals of early Christianity, including the Didascalia Apostolorum and Pædagogus, instructed that a headcovering must be worn by women during prayer and worship as well as when outside the home. When Paul the Apostle commanded women to be veiled in 1 Corinthians, the surrounding pagan Greek women did not wear head coverings; as such, the practice of Christian headcovering was countercultural in the Apostolic Era, being a biblical ordinance rather than a cultural tradition. The style of headcovering varies by region, though Apostolic Tradition specifies an "opaque cloth, not with a veil of thin linen".
Those enjoining the practice of head covering for Christian women while "praying and prophesying" ground their argument in 1 Corinthians 11:2–16. Denominations that teach that women should wear head coverings at all times additionally base this doctrine on Paul's dictum that Christians are to "pray without ceasing" (1 Thessalonians 5:17), Paul's teaching that women being unveiled is dishonourable, and as a reflection of the created order. The consensus of Biblical scholars conclude that in 1 Corinthians 11 "verses 4–7 refer to a literal veil or covering of cloth" for "praying and prophesying" and hold verse 15 to refer to the hair of a woman given to her by nature. Christian headcovering with a cloth veil was the practice of the early Church, being universally taught by the Church Fathers and practiced by Christian women throughout history, continuing to be the ordinary practice among Christians in many parts of the world, such as Romania, Russia, Ukraine, Egypt, Ethiopia, India and Pakistan; additionally, among Conservative Anabaptists such as the Conservative Mennonite churches and the Dunkard Brethren Church, headcovering is counted as an ordinance of the Church, being worn throughout the day by women. However, in much of the Western world the practice of head covering declined during the 20th century and in churches where it is not practiced, veiling as described in 1 Corinthians 11 is usually taught as being a societal practice for the age in which the passage was written.
History Scriptural and Second Temple background
During the time of Moses, the Bible records that it was normative for women to wear a head covering (compare with: ). In Numbers 5:18, the sotah (meaning "one who goes astray") ritual, in which the head of a woman accused of adultery is uncovered (made parua), is explicated, implying that normally a woman's head is covered; the Talmud thus teaches that the Torah (Pentateuch) commands women to go out in public with their heads covered. This head covering worn during biblical times was a veil or headscarf.
In the Old Testament's Book of Daniel, Susanna wore a head covering and wicked men demanded that it be removed so that they might lust after her (cf. ). records that Rebecca, while traveling to meet Isaac, covered her head for modesty, demonstrating "her sense of propriety on meeting her betrothed." The removal of a woman's veil in the passage of is linked with nakedness and shame. The biblical book Song of Songs records "the erotic nature of hair from the verse, 'Your hair is as a flock of goats' (Song of Songs, 4:1), i.e., from a verse praising her beauty." Jewish law around the time of Jesus stipulated that a married woman who uncovered her hair in public evidenced her infidelity.
Apostolic period (1st century) Paul first established the Christian community in Corinth around 51–52 AD after arriving from Athens. The church was culturally mixed, composed mostly of Gentiles with some Jewish presence.Schreiner, T. R. (2018). 1 Corinthians: An introduction and commentary (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, p. 4). IVP Academic. During his extended stay in Ephesus (ca. 53–55 AD), Paul received reports of divisions and disorder in the Corinthian church. In response he wrote 1 Corinthians, probably in the spring before Pentecost,Hays, R. B. (2011). First Corinthians (p. 5). Westminster John Knox Press. and sent it from Ephesus by trusted messengers in the late winter or early spring of 56 AD.Constable, T. L. (2025). Notes on 1 Corinthians (2025 ed., pp. 5-3). Sonic Light.
In his greeting Paul calls them "the church of God" in Corinth but also includes "all who in every place call on the name of Jesus Christ," indicating the following directives were framed for the wider Christian audience (cf. Christendom).Taylor, M., & Taylor, M. E. (2014). 1 Corinthians: An exegetical and theological exposition of Holy Scripture (p. 24). B&H Publishing Group. "Paul's collective address of the church in Corinth as "the church of God" stresses their unity and identity as an assembly belonging solely to God, and his reminder that they are only one such assembly among many others..."Phillips, J. (2001). Exploring 1 Corinthians: An expository commentary (p. 17). Kregel Academic. "The local church, whether at Corinth, Colossae, Cleveland, or Cologne, is only part of the larger church (1 Cor. 1:2d-f). This church is the church universal in its breadth. It is rooted in eternity and spread out through all time and space (1:2d). Most of its members are already in heaven. This larger church is the subject of his epistle to the Ephesians. Paul keeps it in mind, here, even though he is writing to a local church. For while he specifically addresses the church at Corinth, his letter is also for "all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ." This letter, then, is as much for us, who dwell in lands of which Paul never dreamed and at a time as far from his age as was that of Abraham, as it was for those dear Christians in nearby Corinth in A.D. 55."
In chapter 11, verses 2–16 (1 Cor 11:2–16), Paul first praises the Corinthians for remembering him in everything and for holding fast to the traditions just as he handed them on (v. 2).Reasoner, M. (2025). 1 Corinthians (Brill exegetical commentary; Vol. 3). Brill. p. 434 "2 Ἐπαινῶ δὲ ὑμᾶς ὅτι πάντα μου μέμνησθε καὶ καθὼς παρέδωκα ὑμῖν, τὰς παραδόσεις κατέχετε. The transition from the aorist παρέδωκα (“I handed on”) to the present κατέχετε (“you hold”) marks ongoing adherence to what Paul transmitted. The pronoun μου within the object phrase of μέμνησθε is in the genitive to signal relationship, but its precise force is ambiguous: μου could modify πάντα (“all my [things/teachings]”), or function as the genitive of the person remembered (“you remember me in everything”). Paul expects that the Corinthian church is still holding to the traditions he passed on to them."
He then states a hierarchy in which Christ is the head of every man, the man is the head of the woman, and God is the head of Christ (v. 3).Reasoner, 2025, p. 343 "v. 3 Θέλω δὲ ὑμᾶς εἰδέναι ὅτι παντὸς ἀνδρὸς ἡ κεφαλὴ ὁ Χριστός, κεφαλὴ δὲ γυναικός ὁ ἀνήρ, κεφαλὴ δὲ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὁ Θεός.The “I want you to know” disclosure formula prepares the audience to receive instruction, as in Rom 1:13–15 and Col 2:1–5. The first clause fronts the genitive παντὸς ἀνδρός (“of every man”). Since the next clause begins with κεφαλὴ δὲ γυναικός, there is grammatical evidence that Paul is focusing on men and women in the hierarchy he offers. The genitives may be classified under “possession, ownership, origin or source” (Porter, Idioms 93). The underlying idea of restriction that the genitive carries here locates the terms in the genitive between the axes of possession … and authority....The clauses are grammatically identical, since Paul’s purpose is to present hierarchy and order, not to differentiate interhuman and intra-Trinitarian relationships"
Next he addresses men who pray or prophesy with covered heads and women who do so with uncovered heads, behaviour he describes as dishonouring the "head," and he instructs men to remain bareheaded while such women should be veiled (vv. 4–6).Barclay, J. M. G. (2001). 1 Corinthians. In J. Barton & J. Muddiman (Eds.), The Oxford Bible commentary (pp. 1125–1126). Oxford University Press. To support this, he sets out the chain of heads (God–Christ–man–woman, v. 3), distinguishes between man as image and glory of God and woman as glory of man (v. 7).Reasoner, 2025, p. 444 "Paul here in 1 Cor 11 is not restricting his claims regarding man and woman to husbands and wives (Prov 18:22; 31:10–31; Sir 26:1–4). 8 Paul states that the woman comes from the man in support of his assertion in 11:7 that the woman is the glory of the man, and in preparation for his ruling that a woman should have her head covered (11:10, 13, 15). 9 The assertions that woman was created from the man in 11:8..." Then appeals to the woman's creation "from" and "for" the man and to her having "authority" on her head "because of the angels" (vv. 8–10), and then balances this with an affirmation of the mutual dependence of man and woman "in the Lord" (vv. 11–12).
Paul assumes the Corinthians know what is proper, and his "nature" appeal functions as part of a battery of arguments from theology, Scripture, custom, and reason. Aware that his complicated arguments may not convince everyone, he concludes what he insists is the universal Christian custom, the practice of the churches of God. (v. 16).Barclay, 2001, p. 1126 "What ever the cause, the practice brings to the surface deep anxieties in Paul concerning gender distinction, and he employs a battery of arguments from theology, Scripture, custom, and 'reason' to reimpose what he insists is the universal Christian custom (v. 16)."Fitzmyer, J. A. (2008). First Corinthians A new translation with introduction and commentary. Yale University Press. p. 421 "Paul is aware that his complicated arguments about this problem may not be convincing to everyone. So, in effect, he appeals to Christian church discipline or custom (or what would later be called canon law); and Schüssler Fiorenza rightly calls it “an authoritarian appeal” (In Memory, 229). On “church of God,” see Note on 1:2."
Between 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians, Paul made what is known as the "painful" visit to Corinth, which left both sides distressed, and then sent a severe letter now lost.Lambrecht, J. (1999). Second Corinthians. Liturgical Press. pp. 30–31. "2:1. For I made up my mind not to come to you again in sorrow: The textual variant de("but"), instead of gar ("for"), although also well attested, is not to be pre-ferred in this context. Paul's intention was not to go back to Corinth "in sor-row." The last expression probably not only refers to Paul's own sadness butalso to the sorrow a new visit may cause to the Corinthians. From "not ...Paul's Reliability (1:12-2:13)again" we can conclude that such a sorrowful visit has already taken place:the so-called painful (short) visit, the second (for the third, cf. 12:14 and 13:1)." According to 2 Corinthians, Titus later reported that Paul's rebuke produced "godly sorrow," leading the Corinthians to repent and show renewed zeal and loyalty.