B. McCausland
from Northern Ireland Oct 13, 2014
Clear and convincing teaching!
It is lamentable that this is a take-it-or-leave-it issue nowadays in the church. If we sustain that we follow a Biblical ethos, why do we segregate this as none important, when what it stands for is foundational?
By dismissing it, we miss the opportunity to declare to the world that we accept, submit and take on God’s order, say the different Scriptural roles defined for man and woman. When we refuse to take on this visual token, we signalise instead we identify with the unbiblical unisex philosophy of the world. This is precisely the case also when women follow the unisex dress code of our present age.
The Lord’s Supper, Baptism, and Head Covering are external tokens representing biblical realities. Yes, the three are counter-cultural in Western society if you think about it. We dare to practice the first two as marks of our Christian identity, yet why is the third too much? Some biblical churches might condition membership to baptism. Very few to Head covering, and yet both stand on biblical ground. Conveniently the issue is left to personal conscience instead of holding it as a commendable collective standard.