Head coverings in 1 Corinthians 11

I really appreciated Adam McIntosh’s article on headcoverings here.  

He isn’t dogmatic and lays out a lot of interesting options and ideas to consider.
 
Here is a bit of interaction with him.  We end up with the same conclusion, coverings are not now required, but disagree on how to get there.
 

McIntosh argues the covering is fabric, not hair, because Paul tells men in 1 Cor. 11:4 and 7 to uncover.  Do they have to be bald, he asks?  But it is a woman’s hair that is given for a covering in 1 Cor. 11:15, not the man’s also.  Verse 15 does not assert universally that human hair is a covering, but that a woman’s longer, feminine hair is her covering.  So there is not a parallel between 1 Cor. 11:4/7, and 15.  Paul is not requiring men to be bald, but to have hair that is culturally masculine, not feminine.  And to not cover their heads in worship.
 
 
“If headcovering was a creation ordinance, it would have to be recorded in God’s law.”
When nature itself teaches something, it may not be an explicit law in the Torah, but it’s still part of God’s design.  My view is that since the headcovering God requires of a woman is her longer hair, that the context of Deuteronomy 22:5 fits nicely:  women, don’t dress (your hair) like a man.  In 1 Cor. 11 Paul says, “Especially not in worship!”
 

McIntosh’s theory that women should cover because of their pastors, the angels (vs 10), is intriguing and possible.  The point would be that we do this for church order, part of which is women not acting out of place in the service.  I agree, but McIntosh goes on then to assert that covering has nothing to do with submission to her husband, when that is clearly implied in the text.  (The ESV translates the Greek “gyne” in vss. 5-6 as not “woman” but “wife.”)  Also, he inconsistently agrees with Doug Wilson’s rule of thumb, as I do, that a husband’s hair should be shorter than his wife’s, so the marital context is clearly in play.
 

McIntosh rejects that “ ‘praying and prophesying’ is code for corporate worship.”  Acts 3:1 and Luke 18:10 disagree.  Scripture speaks in shorthand often like this, of a corporate worship service as simply prayer.  1 Cor. 11:4-5 are very clear that the times Paul is thinking of are when “praying OR prophesying.”  McIntosh wants to say that this means only when she exercises a charismatic gift like speaking in tongues.  But Paul doesn’t say “speaking in tongues” which is a very different phrase from the standard word here for “praying.”  I take "praying or prophesying" to mean, "anytime she goes to church, and especially if she speaks in tongues or as a prophetess."
 

The article’s treatment of hair length is very good.  “It would be sinful if a man was trying to look like a woman, or if a woman was trying to look like a man. Otherwise, there are longer hairstyles for men that don’t look feminine and shorter hairstyles for women that don’t look masculine.”
 

In the conclusion, McIntosh dismisses cultural traditions of the Corinthians, but this is a rejection of the long-accepted, and rightly insisted upon, historico-grammatical interpretation of Scripture.  The exegete must take into account what the text meant to the original audience based on their cultural context.  To dismiss that and focus only on what other Scripture says blinds you in one eye, when there is more to see in the text.  This is probably James Jordan’s often-critiqued “biblicism” coming out.
 
 
In that vein, something I’ve never seen considered on this issue:
In the Jewish synagogue, both men and women would cover their heads with prayer shawls/veils in worship, as I understand it.  I think it likely Paul got a question from Jewish Corinthian Christians, asking if they shouldn’t continue this, and Paul responded with this passage.  The man wore it in conjunction with the prayer robe with tassels on it, commanded by Numbers 15:37-39, to show that he was under the law.  But we are no longer under the law, so the man should uncover his head – he is the redeemed glory of God.  The woman need not cover according to synagogue custom with a veil, but she should wear her hair according to cultural custom that shows her to be a woman, and a modest one.

Steven Wedgeworth also has a good article on this topic here.