# Head covering for Christian women

Part of a series on :
Christianity :
JesusChrist
Nativity
Baptism
Ministry
Crucifixion
Resurrection
Ascension :
BibleFoundations
Old Testament
New Testament
Gospel
Canon
Church
Creed
New Covenant :
Theology
God
Trinity
Father
Son
Holy Spirit
Apologetics
Baptism
Christology
History of theology
Mission
Salvation
Universalism :
HistoryTradition
Apostles
Peter
Paul
Mary
Early Christianity
Church Fathers
Constantine
Councils
Augustine
Ignatius
East–West Schism
Crusades
Aquinas
Reformation
Luther :
Denominations(full list)
Nicene
Catholic
Latin
Eastern
Old Catholic
Palmarian Catholic
Independent Catholic
Sedevacantism
Eastern Orthodox
Oriental Orthodox
Church of the East
Protestant
Adventist
Anabaptist
Anglican
Baptist
Free Evangelical
Lutheran
Methodist
Moravian [Hussite]
Pentecostal
Plymouth Brethren
Quaker
Reformed
United Protestant
Waldensian
Nondenominational Christianity
Restorationist
Christadelphians
Iglesia ni Cristo
Irvingians
Jehovah's Witnesses
Latter Day Saints
Members Church of God International
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
The New Church (Swedenborgian)
Unitarians and Universalists :
Related topics
Civilization
Criticism
Culture
Ecumenism
Glossary
Index
Liturgy
Other religions
Prayer
Sermon
Symbolism
Worship :
Glossary
Index
Outline
 Christianity portal :
vte :
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 (esp. Conservative Anabaptists) believe women should wear head coverings at all times. Among Oriental and Eastern Orthodox Churches, certain theologians 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 Saint Paul commanded women to be veiled in 1 Corinthians, the surrounding pagan Greek women did not wear headcoverings; 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. Denominations that teach that women should wear head coverings at all times additionally base this doctrine on Saint Paul's dictum that Christians are to "pray without ceasing" (1 Thessalonians 5:17), Saint Paul's teaching that women being unveiled is dishonourable, and as a reflection of the created order. Many 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
### Bible and the Early Church

During the time of Moses, the Bible records that it was normative for women to wear a head covering (cf. Numbers 5:18). 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 headcovering worn during biblical times was a veil or headscarf.
In the Old Testament's Book of Daniel, Susanna wore a headcovering and wicked men demanded that it be removed so that they might lust after her (cf. Susanna 13:31–33). Genesis 24:64–65 records that Rebecca, while traveling to meet Isaac, "did not flaunt her physical beauty" but "veiled herself, increasing her allure through an outward display of modesty." The removal of a woman's veil in the passage of Isaiah 47:1–3 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.
Multiple Church Fathers taught that the hair of a woman has sexual potency, therefore it should only be for her husband to see and covered the rest of the time. 1 Corinthians 11:2–6, teaches: "... keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered." In his explication of Saint Paul's command in 1 Corinthians 11:10, the Church Father Irenaeus (c. 130 – c. 202), the last living connection to the Apostles who penned Against Heresies, explained that the "power" or "authority" on a woman's head when praying and prophesying was a cloth veil (κάλυμμα kalumma). The Church Father Hippolytus of Rome (c. 170 – c. 235) while giving instructions for church gatherings said "... let all the women have their heads covered with an opaque cloth, not with a veil of thin linen, for this is not a true covering." The early Christian apologist Tertullian (c. 155 – c. 220) likewise held that the covering should be a substantial one (cf. headscarf):
   Because you can't avoid wearing a veil, you should not find some other way to nullify it. That is, by going about neither covered nor bare. For some women do not veil their heads, but rather bind them up with turbans and woollen bands. It's true that they are protected in front. But where the head properly lies, they are bare. Others cover only the area of the brain with small linen coifs that do not even quite reach the ears. ... They should know that the entire head constitutes the woman. Its limits and boundaries reach as far as the place where the robe begins. The region of the veil is co-extensive with the space covered by the hair when it is unbound. In this way, the neck too is encircled. The pagan women of Arabia will be your judges. For they cover not only the head, but the face also. ... But how severe a chastisement will they likewise deserve, who remain uncovered even during the recital of the Psalms and at any mention of the name of God? For even when they are about to spend time in prayer itself, they only place a fringe, tuft [of cloth], or any thread whatever on the crown of their heads. And they think that they are covered!
In addition to praying and worshipping, the ancient Christian Didascalia Apostolorum directed that Christian women should wear headcoverings in public: "Thou therefore who art a Christian [woman] ... if thou wishest to be faithful, please thy husband only, and when thou walkest in the market-place, cover thy head with thy garment, that by thy veil the greatness of thy beauty may be covered; do not adorn the face of thine eyes, but look down and walk veiled; be watchful, not to wash in the baths with men." In the same vein, Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 – c. 215), an early Christian theologian, instructed in Paedagogus that "Woman and man are to go to church decently attired ... Let the woman observe this, further. Let her be entirely covered, unless she happen to be at home. For that style of dress is grave, and protects from being gazed at. And she will never fall, who puts before her eyes modesty, and her shawl; nor will she invite another to fall into sin by uncovering her face. For this is the wish of the Word, since it is becoming for her to pray veiled." Clement of Alexandria says: "Because of the angels". By the angels he means righteous and virtuous men. Let her be veiled then, that she may not lead them to stumble into fornication. For the real angels in heaven see her though veiled. Clement of Alexandria explicated this: "It has also been commanded that the head should be veiled and the face covered, for it is a wicked thing for beauty to be a snare to men. Nor is it appropriate for a woman to desire to make herself conspicuous by using a purple veil." Tertullian explains that in his days, the women of the Corinthian church from the age of puberty onwards (unmarried and married) were practicing Christian headcovering despite the fact that non-Christians in the region did not observe this ordinance; as such, the practice of Christians was countercultural. In his deliberative treatise De virginibus velandis ("On the Veiling of Virgins") Tertullian argumented from scripture, natural law and Christian disclipline that from puberty virgins ought to be veiled when in public. The custom of some Carthaginian consecrated virgins not being veiled when the church gathered was sharply criticised as being contrary to the truth. This is only 150 years after the Apostle Paul wrote 1 Corinthians. He said, "So, too, did the Corinthians themselves understand [Paul]. In fact, at this day the Corinthians do veil their virgins [and married women]. What the apostles taught, their disciples approve." "Early church history bears witness that in Rome, Antioch, and Africa the custom [of wearing the head covering] became the norm [for the Church]." Author Cory Anderson stated that the reason for this is because early Christians understood Saint Paul's instruction to apply to the whole church. Origen of Alexandria (c. 185 – c. 253) wrote, "There are angels in the midst of our assembly ... we have here a twofold Church, one of men, the other of angels ... And since there are angels present ... women, 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." In the second half of the third century, women praying with their heads covered is mentioned as church practice by St. Victorinus in his commentary of the Apocalypse of John. The early Christian Acts of Thomas, written in Syriac Aramaic, assigns Hell as the fate of women who did not wear a headcovering, stating:
   And he took me unto another pit, and I stooped and looked and saw mire and worms welling up, and souls wallowing there, and a great gnashing of teeth was heard thence from them. And that man said unto me: These are the souls of women which forsook their husbands and committed adultery with others, and are brought into this torment. Another pit he showed me whereinto I stooped and looked and saw souls hanging, some by the tongue, some by the hair, some by the hands, and some head downward by the feet, and tormented (smoked) with smoke and brimstone; concerning whom that man that was with me answered me: The souls which are hanged by the tongue are slanderers, that uttered lying and shameful words, and were not ashamed, and they that are hanged by the hair are unblushing ones which had no modesty and went about in the world bareheaded.
"The Apostolic Constitutions [4th century AD] ... expressly commanded that the women should have their heads covered in the Church." In the same era, the Early Church Father John Chrysostom (c. 347 – 407) delineated Saint Paul's teaching, explaining that Christian women should wear a cloth headcovering when in public in view of Saint Paul's comparison of a woman not wearing a veil to being shaven, which he states is "always dishonourable":
   Well then: the man he compelleth not to be always uncovered, but only when he prays. "For every man," saith he, "praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head." But the woman he commands to be at all times covered. Wherefore also having said, "Every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head unveiled, dishonoureth her head," he stayed not at this point only, but also proceeded to say, "for it is one and the same thing as if she were shaven." But if to be shaven is always dishonourable, it is plain too that being uncovered is always a reproach. And not even with this only was he content, but he added again, saying, "The woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels". He signifies that not at the time of prayer only but also continually, she ought to be covered. But with regard to the man, it is no longer about covering but about wearing long hair, that he so forms his discourse. To be covered he then only forbids, when a man is praying; but the wearing of long hair he discourages at all times.
John Chrysostom held that to be disobedient to the Christian teaching on veiling was harmful and sinful: "... the business of whether to cover one's head was legislated by nature (see 1 Cor 11:14–15). When I say 'nature', I mean 'God'. For he is the one who created nature. Take note, therefore, what great harm comes from overturning these boundaries! And don't tell me that this is a small sin." While at home, John Chrysostom taught that before picking up a copy of the Bible, in addition to washing one's hands, women (if not already veiled) should wear a headcovering "displaying a token of her inner piety". Jerome (c. 342 – c. 347 – 420) noted that the hair cap and the prayer veil is worn by Christian women in Egypt and Syria, who "do not go about with heads uncovered in defiance of the apostle's command, for they wear a close-fitting cap and a veil". Augustine of Hippo (354–430) writes about the head covering, "It is not becoming, even in married women, to uncover their hair, since the apostle commands women to keep their heads covered." Early Christian art also confirms that women wore headcoverings during this time period.

### Middle Ages and Modern Era

Until at least the 19th century and still extant in certain regions, the wearing of a head covering, both in the public and while attending church, was regarded as customary for Christian women, in line with the injunction to do so in 1 Corinthians 11, in the Mediterranean, European, Indian, Middle Eastern, and African societies. With the custom of Christian headcovering being practiced for centuries, in the Middle Ages, a woman who did not wear a head covering was interpreted to be "a prostitute or adulteress", though this was not the case in the preceding Ante-Nicene period during which pagan Greek women went about in public and prayed bareheaded (in contrast to the Christian women who veiled themselves).
Christian literature, with respect to demonology, has documented that during exorcisms, possessed women have attempted to tear off their headcovering, as with the case of Frances Bruchmüllerin in Sulzbach.
The practice of headcovering continues to be the ordinary practice among Christian women in many parts of the world, such as Romania, Russia, Ukraine, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Egypt, India and Pakistan. In the West, "up until World War I, a woman slipped on a white cap immediately upon arising...and some type of hat or bonnet was worn every time she left the house." The custom has declined in America and Western Europe, though certain Christian denominations (such as those of Conservative Anabaptism) continue to require it and many Christian women continue to observe the ancient practice. David Bercot, a scholar on early Christianity, noted that relatively recent interpretations in the Western World that do not necessitate the wearing of headcoverings by women, in contrast to the historic practice of female Christian veiling, are linked with the rise of feminism in the 20th century. In 1968, American feminist group – the National Organization for Women – released a "Resolution on Head Coverings":
   WHEREAS, the wearing of a head covering by women at religious services is a custom in many churches and whereas it is a symbol of subjection within these churches, NOW recommends that all chapters undertake an effort to have all women participate in a "national unveiling" by sending their head coverings to the task force chairman immediately. At the Spring meeting of the Task force on Women in Religion, these veils will then publicly be burned to protest the second class status of women in all churches."
In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in 1969, fifteen women from the Milwaukee chapter of the National Organization for Women protested in St. John de Nepomuc Catholic Church; after taking their place at the communion rail, the women removed their hats and placed them on the communion rail. The following week, the Milwaukee Sentinel published a letter to the editor from "Mrs. M. E., Milwaukee," who felt that the protest was "immature exhibitionism." A text printed after the close of the 20th century reflects a general Western Christian attitude towards the practice of head covering for women, with American authors Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis, and Gordon D. Fee opining in the book "Discovering Biblical Equality":
   First Corinthians 11:3–16 deals with the significance of a "head covering" for women while they are praying and prophesying in the gathered church. The significance of a head covering appears to be a cultural factor that is quite diverse in various times and places. Indeed, because of the diverse nature Corinth itself – a Roman colony situated at the center of the Greek world – it is nearly impossible to know for certain what would have been normal for Corinthian culture as such. In the contemporary world, such head coverings (whatever they were in fact) have little to no social significance. Thus this is rightly understood to be a cultural issue and a matter of personal choice for a believer today.
Nevertheless, in the 21st century, the practice of headcovering is being revived in the Western World among some women belonging to various Christian congregations where the practice lapsed, though other denominations have practiced the biblical ordinance perpetually, as with Dunkard Brethren or Conservative Mennonites, the latter of which count headcovering among the seven ordinances of the Church. In particular, Catholics have seen a growing revival of veiling, especially among younger, women. The sociologist Cory Anderson stated that for those Christian women who continually wear it, such as Conservative Anabaptists, the headcovering serves as an outward testimony that often allows for evangelism.

## Styles

With respect to the early Church, Tom Shank concluded that there were a variety of headcoverings worn by the early Christians, ranging from shawls to kapps: "William McGrath (1991) found that etchings in the Catacomb of Domitila in Rome – dating as far back as A.D. 95 – show 'modestly dressed sisters wearing the cap style veiling.' Warren Henderson, writing about the catacombs, also observed that women covered their heads, but emphasized the cloth styles." In the present-day, various styles of headcoverings are worn by Christian women:
| Region | Headcovering |
| Eastern Europe | headscarf |
| Latin America, Spain | mantilla |
| Middle East, Indian subcontinent, Russia | shawl |
| West Africa, Caribbean, North America | head tie |
| India, Pakistan | dupatta |
| Romania | maramă |
| Romania | batic |
| Ethiopia, Eritrea | netela |
| North America | kapp, sometimes with a bonnet (among many Amish, Mennonites, Schwarzenau Brethren, River Brethren, and Conservative Quakers) |
| North America | hanging veil (among many Mennonites, Hutterites and Charity Christians) |
| North America | church crown (in the Southern United States) |
| Iraq, Syria, Iran, Turkey | yalekhta |

## Denominational practices

Many women of various Christian denominations around the world continue to practice head covering during worship and while praying at home, as well as when going out in public. This is true especially in parts of the Middle East, the Indian subcontinent, and Eastern Europe (such as Western Moldavia).

### Western Christianity

At the start of the 20th century, it was commonplace for women in mainstream Christian denominations of Western Christianity around the world to wear head coverings during church services. These included Anabaptist, Anglican, Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist, Moravian, Plymouth Brethren, Quaker, and Reformed. Those women who belong to Anabaptist traditions are especially known for wearing them throughout the day.
Western women formerly wore bonnets as their headcoverings, and later, hats became predominant. This practice has generally declined in the Western world, though headcoverings for women are common during formal services such as weddings, in the United Kingdom. Among many adherents of Western Christian denominations in the Eastern Hemisphere (such as in the Indian subcontinent), head covering remains normative.

#### Anabaptist

Many Anabaptist women, especially those of the Conservative Anabaptist and Old Order Anabaptist branches, wear headcoverings, often in conjunction with plain dress. This includes Mennonites (e.g., Old Order Mennonites and Conservative Mennonites), River Brethren (Old Order River Brethren and Calvary Holiness Church), Hutterites, Bruderhof, Schwarzenau Brethren (Old Order Schwarzenau Brethren and Dunkard Brethren Church), Amish, Apostolic Christians and Charity Christians. Headcovering is among the seven ordinances of Conservative Mennonites, as with the Dunkard Brethren.

#### Catholic

Headcovering for women was unanimously held by the Latin Church until the 1983 Code of Canon Law came into effect. A headcovering in the Catholic tradition carries the status of a sacramental. Historically, women were required to veil their heads when receiving the Eucharist following the Councils of Autun and Angers. Similarly, in 585, the Synod of Auxerre (France) stated that women should wear a head-covering during the Holy Mass. The Synod of Rome in 743 declared that "A woman praying in church without her head covered brings shame upon her head, according to the word of the Apostle", a position later supported by Pope Nicholas I in 866, for church services." In the Middle Ages, Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) said that "the man existing under God should not have a covering over his head to show that he is immediately subject to God; but the woman should wear a covering to show that besides God she is naturally subject to another." In the 1917 Code of Canon Law it was a requirement that women cover their heads in church. It said, "women, however, shall have a covered head and be modestly dressed, especially when they approach the table of the Lord." Veiling was not specifically addressed in the 1983 revision of the Code, which declared the 1917 Code abrogated. According to the new Code, former law only has interpretive weight in norms that are repeated in the 1983 Code; all other norms are simply abrogated. This effectively eliminated the former requirement for a headcovering for Catholic women, by silently dropping it in the new Code of Canon. In some countries, like India, the wearing of a headscarf by Catholic women remains the norm. The Eucharist has been refused to ladies who present themselves without a headcovering.
Traditional Catholic and Plain Catholic women continue to practice headcovering, even while most Catholic women in western society no longer do so.

#### Lutheran

Martin Luther, the father of the Lutheran tradition, encouraged wives to wear a veil in public worship. The General Rubrics of the Evangelical Lutheran Synodical Conference of North America, as contained in "The Lutheran Liturgy", state in a section titled "Headgear for Women": "It is laudable custom, based upon a Scriptural injunction (1 Cor. 11:3–15), for women to wear an appropriate head covering in Church, especially at the time of divine service."
Some Lutheran women wear the headcovering during the celebration of the Divine Service and in private prayer.

#### Moravian/Hussite

The haube is a Christian headovering that has historically been worn by women who belong to the Moravian Church, at least since the 1730s. Nicolaus Zinzendorf, a Moravian divine, "likened the Haube to a 'visible diadem' representative of Jesus' burial cloth." In 1815, Moravian women in the United States switched to wearing the English bonnet of their neighbors. Certain Moravian women continue to wear a headcovering during worship, in keeping with 1 Corinthians 11:5–6. Additionally, in the present-day, Moravian ladies wear a lace headcovering called a haube when serving as dieners in the celebration of lovefeasts.

#### Reformed

In the Reformed tradition, both John Calvin, the founder of the Continental Reformed Churches, and John Knox, the founder of the Presbyterian Churches, both called for women to wear head coverings. Calvin taught that headcovering was the cornerstone of modesty for Christian women and held that those who removed their veils from their hair would soon come to remove the clothing covering their breasts and that covering their midriffs, leading to societal indecency:
   So if women are thus permitted to have their heads uncovered and to show their hair, they will eventually be allowed to expose their entire breasts, and they will come to make their exhibitions as if it were a tavern show; they will become so brazen that modesty and shame will be no more; in short they will forget the duty of nature...Further, we know that the world takes everything to its own advantage. So, if one has liberty in lesser things, why not do the same with this the same way as with that? And in making such comparisons they will make such a mess that there will be utter chaos. So, when it is permissible for the women to uncover their heads, one will say, 'Well, what harm in uncovering the stomach also?' And then after that one will plead for something else; 'Now if the women go bareheaded, why not also bare this and bare that?' Then the men, for their part, will break loose too. In short, there will be no decency left, unless people contain themselves and respect what is proper and fitting, so as not to go headlong overboard.
Furthermore, Calvin stated "Should any one now object, that her hair is enough, as being a natural covering, Paul says that it is not, for it is such a covering as requires another thing to be made use of for covering it." Other Reformed supporters of headcovering include: William Greenhill, William Gouge, John Lightfoot, Thomas Manton, Christopher Love, John Bunyan, John Cotton, Ezekiel Hopkins, David Dickson, and James Durham.
Other Reformed figures of the 16th and 17th centuries held that head covering was a cultural institution, including William Perkins, Walter Travers, William Ames, Nicholas Byfield, Arthur Hildersham, Giles Firmin, Theodore Beza, William Whitaker, Daniel Cawdry, and Herbert Palmer, Matthew Poole, and Francis Turretin. The commentary within the Geneva Bible implies that Paul's admonition is cultural rather than perpetual.
Women cover their heads in some conservative Reformed and Presbyterian churches, such as the Heritage Reformed Congregations, Netherlands Reformed Congregations, Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, Free Church of Scotland (Continuing), Free Presbyterian Church of North America and Presbyterian Reformed Church.

#### Methodist

John Wesley, a principal father of Methodism, held that a woman, "especially in a religious assembly", should "keep on her veil". The Methodist divines Thomas Coke, Adam Clarke, Joseph Sutcliffe, Joseph Benson and Walter Ashbel Sellew, reflected the same position – that veils are enjoined for women, while caps are forbidden to men while praying.
Conservative Methodist women, like those belonging to the Fellowship of Independent Methodist Churches, wear headcoverings. The presence of headcovering in the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church and Christian Methodist Episcopal Church remains stable among women (additionally, those women commissioned as deaconesses wear a deaconness cap).

#### Quaker

The Central Yearly Meeting of Friends, part of the Gurneyite-Orthodox branch of Quakerism, teaches that in 1 Corinthians 11 Saint Paul instituted the veiling of women as "a Christian woman's way of properly honoring the headship of men in the church and of making a statement of submission to their authority (vs. 3, 5)." The wearing of a veil is thus "the statement of genuine Christian piety and submission." The same passage, in the view of the Central Yearly Meeting, teaches that in addition to a head covering, verses 14 and 15 teach that "nature has endowed women with a natural covering which is their long hair". Given this, the Central Yearly Meeting holds that:
   While there are groups of Christians today who make their statement of submission by wearing coverings in keeping with this passage of Scripture, there are others who feel that in the present culture their long hair is sufficient to make such a statement. While we believe it is for those who wish to wear a covering to do so as a fine and becoming statement of submission, we urge them also to have their long and uncut. We believe regarding those Christian women who do not wear a covering that while it is proper for them to have their hair long, their long hair may not necessarily be a statement of piety since others in the world may have the same. For this reason, we believe that a Christian woman [who does not wear a head covering] makes her best statement of piety and submission by wearing her hair done up in a manner that is both feminine and unassuming.
Conservative Friends (Quaker) women, including some from the Ohio Yearly Meeting (Conservative), wear headcoverings usually in the form of a "scarf, bonnet, or cap."

#### Plymouth Brethren

Plymouth Brethren women wear a headscarf during worship, in addition to wearing some form of headcovering in public.

#### Baptist

Roger Williams, the founder of the first Baptist movement in North America, taught that women should veil themselves during worship as this was the practice of the early Church.

#### Pentecostal

The wearing of a head covering during Pentecostal worship was the normative practice from its inception; in the 1960s, "head coverings stopped being obligatory" in many Pentecostal denominations of Western Europe, when, "with little debate", many Pentecostals "had absorbed elements of popular culture".
Certain Pentecostal Churches, such as the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ of the Apostolic Faith, Ukrainian Pentecostal Church, and the Christian Congregation continue to observe the veiling of women.

#### Restorationist

Among certain congregations of the Church of Christ, it is customary for women to wear headcoverings.
The Davidian Seventh-day Adventist Church, in its official organ The Symbolic Code, teaches that women are to wear a head covering anytime when worshipping, both at church and at home, in view of 1 Corinthians 11.
Female members of Jehovah's Witnesses may only lead prayer and teaching when no baptized male is available to, and must do so wearing a head covering.

#### Shakers

In the United Society of Believers in Christ's Second Appearing, Shaker girls and women wear a headcovering as a part of their daily wear. These are in the form of a white cap. Historically, these were sewn by Shaker women themselves, though in the middle of the 20th century, the rise of ready-made clothing allowed for the purchase of the same.

### Eastern Christianity

Among the churches of Eastern Christianity (including the Eastern Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Lutheran traditions), it has been traditionally customary for women to cover their heads with a headscarf while in church (and oftentimes in the public too); an example of this practice occurs among the Orthodox Christians in the region of Western Moldavia, among other areas. In Albania, Christian women traditionally have worn white veils.

#### Eastern Orthodox

An ancient Orthodox Christian prayer titled the "Prayer for binding up the head of a woman" has been used liturgically for the blessing of a woman's headcovering(s), which was historically worn by an Orthodox Christian woman at all times with the exception of sleeping:
   O God, you who have spoken through the prophets and proclaimed that in the final generations the light of your knowledge will be for all nations, you who desire that no human created by your hands remain devoid of salvation, you who through the apostle Paul, your elected instrument, ordered us to do everything for your glory, and through him you instituted laws for men and women who live in the faith, namely that men offer praise and glory to your holy name with an uncovered head, while women, fully armed in your faith, covering the head, adorn themselves in good works and bring hymns and prayers to your glory with modesty and sobriety; you, O master of all things, bless this your servant and adorn her head with an ornament that is acceptable and pleasing to you, with gracefulness, as well as honour and decorum, so that conducting herself according to your commandments and educating the members (of her body) toward self-control, she may attain your eternal benefits together with the one who binds her (head) up. In Jesus Christ our Lord, with whom to you belongs glory together with the most holy, good and life-giving Spirit, now and ever (and unto the ages of ages).
Alexei Trader, the Eastern Orthodox bishop of the Diocese of Sitka and Alaska, delineated the teaching of the Church on a Christian woman's headcovering:
   In the Orthodox Church, the act of placing something under or behind a veil sets it apart as special, as something to be revered and respected, similar to the role played by the temple veil of the Holy of Holies in Jerusalem. Thus, there is a connection between a woman's veil with covering and revering that which is precious, such as the chalice that contains the wine that will become the Most-pure blood of Christ. And those coverings themselves also become holy. We can see this in the account of the Byzantine Empress Eudokia who donated her personal veil/head-covering to a monastery for use as an altar cloth. Of all articles of clothing, only a woman's head-covering could become a vestment for the holy altar, for it is already a kind of vestment.
Bishop Alexei further stated that "Every Orthodox woman who wears a veil or head-covering is also blessed by that veil of the Mother of God, which miraculously and repeatedly protected the faithful from so much harm."
Women belonging to the community of Old Believers wear opaque Christian headcoverings, with those who are married keeping a knitted bonnet known as a povoinik underneath.
However, in parishes of the Orthodox Church in America, the wearing of the headscarf is less common and is a matter of Christian liberty.
Eastern Orthodox nuns wear a head covering called an apostolnik, which is worn at all times, and is the only part of the monastic habit which distinguishes them from Eastern Orthodox monks.

#### Oriental Orthodox

In Oriental Orthodox Christianity, Coptic women historically covered their head and face in public and in the presence of men. During the 19th century, upper-class urban Christian and Muslim women in Egypt wore a garment which included a head cover and a burqa (muslin cloth that covered the lower nose and the mouth). The name of this garment, harabah, derives from early Christian and Judaic religious vocabulary, which may indicate the origins of the garment itself. Unmarried women generally wore white veils while married women wore black. The practice began to decline by the early 20th century.
The Standing Conference of Oriental Orthodox Churches (SCOOCH), which represents the Armenian, Coptic, Syrian, Indian, Ethiopian and Eritrean traditions of Oriental Orthodox Christianity, enjoins the wearing of a headcovering for a woman as being "Proper Attire in Church".

#### Oriental Protestant

Women in the Believers Eastern Church, an Oriental Protestant denomination, wear head coverings. Its former Metropolitan Bishop, K. P. Yohannan teaches that "When a woman wears the symbol of God's government, a head covering, she is essentially a rebuke to all the fallen angels. Her actions say to them, 'You have rebelled against the Holy God, but I submit to Him and His headship. I choose not to follow your example of rebellion and pride.'"

## Scriptural basis
### Old Testament and Apocrypha/Deuterocanon

Passages such as Genesis 24:65, Numbers 5:18, Song of Solomon 5:7, Susanna 1:31–32, and Isaiah 47:2 indicate that believing women wore a head covering during the Old Testament era. Song of Songs 4:1 records that hair is sensual in nature, with Solomon praising its beauty. The removal of a woman's veil in the passage of Isaiah 47:1–3 is linked with nakedness and shame.

### New Testament

1 Corinthians 11 contains a key passage to the use of headcoverings for women (and the uncovering of the heads of men). Much of the interpretive discussion revolves around this passage.

#### Exegesis

Paul introduces this passage by praising the Corinthian Christians for remembering the "ordinances" (also translated as "traditions" or "teachings") that he had passed on to them (verse 2). Included in these apostolic ordinances that Paul is discussing in 1 Corinthians 11 are the headcovering and the Eucharist.
Paul then explains the Christian use of head coverings using the subjects of headship, glory, angels, natural hair lengths, and the practice of the churches. This led to the universal practice of headcovering in Christianity. Theologians David Lipscomb and J. W. Shepherd in their Commentary on 1st Corinthians explicate the theology behind the traditional Christian interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11, writing that Paul taught that "Every man, therefore, who in praying or prophesying covers his head, thereby acknowledges himself dependent on some earthly head other than his heavenly head, and thereby takes from the latter the honor which is due to him as the head of man." In the Old Testament, priests (who were all male) wore turbans and caps as Jesus was not known in that era, establishing "the reason why there was no command to honour Him by praying or prophesying with heads uncovered." With the revelation of Jesus to humanity, "Any man who prays or prophesies with something on his head dishonours his head (Christ)." In light of 1 Corinthians 11:4, Christian men throughout church history have thus removed their caps when praying and worshipping, as well as when entering a church. As the biblical passage progresses, Paul teaches that:
   God's order for the woman is the opposite from His order for the man. When she prays or prophesies she must cover her head. If she does not, she disgraces her head (man). This means that she must show her subjection to God's arrangement of headship by covering her head while praying or prophesying. Her action in refusing to cover her head is a statement that she is equal in authority to man. In that case, she is the same as a woman who shaves her head like a man might do. Paul does not say that the woman disgraces her husband. The teaching applies to all women, whether married or not, for it is God's law that woman in general be subject to man in general. She shows this by covering her head when praying or prophesying.
Ezra Palmer Gould, a professor at the Episcopal Divinity School, noted that "The long hair and the veil were both intended as a covering of the head, and as a sign of true womanliness, and of the right relation of woman to man; and hence the absence of one had the same significance as that of the other." This is reflected in the patristic teaching of the Early Church Father John Chrysostom, who explained the two coverings discussed by Saint Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:
   For he said not merely covered, but covered over, meaning that she be with all care sheltered from view on every side. And by reducing it to an absurdity, he appeals to their shame, saying by way of severe reprimand, but if she be not covered, let her also be shorn. As if he had said, "If thou cast away the covering appointed by the law of God, cast away likewise that appointed by nature."
John William McGarvey, in delineating verse 10 of 1 Corinthians 11, suggested that "To abandon this justifiable and well established symbol of subordination would be a shock to the submissive and obedient spirit of the ministering angels (Isaiah 6:2) who, though unseen, are always present with you in your places of worship (Matthew 18:10–31; Psalm 138:1; 1 Timothy 5:21; ch. 4:9; Ecclesiastes 5:6)". Furthermore, verse 10 refers to the cloth veil as a sign of power or authority that highlights the unique God-given role of a Christian woman and grants her the ability to then "pray and prophesy with the spiritual gifts she has been given" (cf. complementarianism). This was taught by Early Church Father Irenaeus (120–202 A.D.), the last living connection to the Apostles, who in his explication of Saint Paul's command in 1 Corinthians 11:10, delineated in Against Heresies that the "authority" or "power" on a woman's head was a cloth veil (κάλυμμα kalumma). Irenaeus' explanation constitutes an early Christian commentary on this biblical verse. Related to this is the fact that Verse 10, in many early copies of the Bible (such as certain vg, cop$^{bo}$, and arm), is rendered with the word "veil" (κάλυμμα kalumma) rather than the word "authority" (ἐξουσία exousia); the Revised Standard Version reflects this, displaying the verse as follows: "That is why a woman ought to have a veil on her head, because of the angels". Similarly, a scholarly footnote in the New American Bible notes that presence of the word "authority (exousia) may possibly be due to mistranslation of an Aramaic word for veil". This mistranslation may be due to "the fact that in Aramaic the roots of the word power and veil are spelled the same." Ronald Knox adds that certain biblical scholars hold that "Paul is attempting, by means of this Greek word, to render a Hebrew word that signifies the veil traditionally worn by a married Jewish woman." Nevertheless, the "word exousia had come at Corinth, or in the Corinthian Church, to be used for 'a veil,' or 'covering'...just as the word 'kingdom' in Greek may be used for 'a crown' (compare regno as the name of the pope's tiara), so authority may mean a sign of authority (Revised Version), or 'a covering, in sign that she is under the power of her husband' (Authorized Version, margin)." Jean Chardin's scholarship on the Near East thus notes that women "wear a veil, in sign that they are under subjection." In addition to Irenaeus, Church Fathers, including Hippolytus, Origen, Chrysostom, Epiphanius, Jerome, Augustine, and Bede write verse 10 using the word "veil" (κάλυμμα kalumma).
Certain denominations of Christianity, such as traditional Anabaptists (e.g. Conservative Mennonites), combine this with 1 Thessalonians 5 ("Rejoice always; pray without ceasing; in everything give thanks; for this is God's will for you in Christ Jesus. Do not quench the Spirit; do not despise prophetic utterances") and hold that Christian women are commanded to wear a headcovering without ceasing. Anabaptist expositors, such as Daniel Willis, have cited the Early Church Father John Chrysostom, who provided additional reasons from Scripture for the practice of a Christian woman wearing her headcovering all the time – that "if to be shaven is always dishonourable, it is plain too that being uncovered is always a reproach" and that "because of the angels...signifies that not at the time of prayer only but also continually, she ought to be covered." A Conservative Anabaptist publication titled The Significance of the Christian Woman's Veiling, authored by Merle Ruth, teaches with regard to the continual wearing of the headcovering by believing women, that it is:
   ... worn to show that the wearer is in God's order. A sister should wear the veiling primarily because she is a woman, not because she periodically prays of teaches. It is true that verses 4 and 5 speak of the practice in relation to times of praying and prophesying. But very likely it was for such occasions that the Corinthians had begun to feel they might omit the practice in the name of Christian liberty. The correction would naturally be applied first to the point of violation. Greek scholars have pointed out that the clause "Let her be covered" is the present, active, imperative form, which gives the meaning, "Let her continue to be veiled."
The biblical passage has been interpreted by Anabaptist Christians and Orthodox Christians, among others, in conjunction with modesty in clothing (1 Timothy 2:9–10 "I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God"). Genesis 24:65 records the veil as a feminine emblem of modesty. The wearing of headcoverings in public by Christian women was commanded in early Christian texts, such as the Didascalia Apostolorum and the Pædagogus, for the purpose of modesty.
Verse four of 1 Corinthians 11 uses the Greek words kata kephalēs (κατάIn κεφαλῆς) for "head covered", the same Greek words used in Esther 6:12 (Septuagint) where "because he [Haman] had been humiliated, he headed home, draping an external covering over his head" (additionally certain manuscripts of the Septuagint in Esther 6:12 use the Greek words κατακεκαλυμμένος κεφαλήν, which is the "perfect passive participle of the key verb used in 1 Corinthians 11:6 and 7 for both a man's and a woman's covering his or her head [κατακαλύπτω]") – facts that New Testament scholar Rajesh Gandhi states makes it clear that the passage enjoins the wearing of a cloth veil by Christian women. Biblical scholar Christopher R. Hutson contextualizes the verse citing Greek texts of the same era, such as Moralia:
   Plutarch's phrase, "covering his head" is literally "having down from the head" (kata tes kephales echon). This is the same phrase Paul uses in 1 Corinthians 11:4. It refers to the Roman practice of pulling one's toga up over the head like a hood. ... Romans also wore their togas "down from the head" when they offered sacrifices. This is the practice to which Paul refers.
Verses five through seven, as well as verse thirteen, of 1 Corinthians 11 use a form of the Greek word for "veiled", κατακαλύπτω katakalupto; this is contrasted with the Greek word περιβόλαιον peribolaion, which is mentioned in verse 15 of the same chapter, in reference to "something cast around" as with the "hair of a woman ... like a mantle cast around". These separate Greek words indicate that there are thus two headcoverings that Paul states are compulsory for Christian women to wear, a cloth veil and her natural hair. The words Paul uses in 1 Corinthians 11:5 are employed by contemporary Hellenistic philosophers, such as Philo (30 BC–45 AD) in Special Laws 3:60, who uses "head uncovered" (akatakalyptō tē kephalē) [ἀκατακαλύπτῳ τῇ κεφαλῇ] and "it is clear that Philo is speaking of a head covering being removed because the priest had just removed her kerchief"; additionally, akatakalyptos [ἀκατακάλυπτος] likewise "means 'uncovered' in Philo, Allegorical Interpretation II,29, and in Polybius 15,27.2 (second century BC)." 1 Corinthians 11:16 concludes the passage Paul wrote about Christian veiling: "But if anyone wants to argue about this, I simply say that we have no other custom than this, and neither do God's other churches." Michael Marlowe, a scholar of biblical languages, explains that Saint Paul's inclusion of this statement was to affirm that the "headcovering practice is a matter of apostolic authority and tradition, and not open to debate", evidenced by repeating a similar sentence with which he starts the passage: "maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you".

#### Interpretive issues

There are several key sections of 1 Corinthians 11:2–16 that Bible commentators and Christian congregations, since the 1960s, have held differing opinions about, which have resulted in either churches continuing the practice of wearing headcoverings, or not practicing the ordinance.
* Gender-based headship: Paul connects the use (or non-use) of headcoverings with the biblical distinctions between each gender. In 1 Corinthians 11:3, Paul wrote, "Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman." He immediately continues with a gender-based teaching on the use of headcoverings: "Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head. But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head."
* Glory and worship: Paul next explains that the use (or non-use) of headcoverings is related to God's glory during times of prayer and prophesy. In 1 Corinthians 11:7, he states that man is the "glory of God" and that for this reason "a man ought not to have his head covered." In the same verse, Paul also states that the woman is the "glory of man." He explains that statement in the subsequent two verses by referring to the woman's creation in Genesis 2:18, and then concludes, "Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head" (verse 10). In other words, the "glory of God" (man) is to be uncovered during times of worship, while the "glory of man" (woman) is to be covered.
* Angels: In 1 Corinthians 11:10, Paul says "Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels" (NASB), also rendered "That is why a woman ought to have a veil on her head, because of the angels" (RSV). Many interpreters admit that Paul does not provide much explanation for the role of angels in this context. Some popular interpretations of this passage are:An appeal not to offend the angels by disobedience to Paul's instructions of women wearing a veil (and men praying with their heads uncovered) as the angels take part in spiritual exercises (Tobit 12:12–15, Revelation 8:2–4)a command to accurately show angels a picture of the created order (Ephesians 3:10, 1 Peter 1:12),a warning for mankind to obey as a means of accountability, since the angels are watching (1 Timothy 5:21),to be like the angels who cover themselves in the presence of God (Isaiah 6:2), andto protect against the fallen angels who lust after mortal women and did not stay in the role that God created for them (Jude 1:6).
According to Dale Martin, Paul is concerned that angels may look lustfully at beautiful women, as the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 apparently did. Noting the similarity between the Greek word translated "veil" and the Greek word for a seal or cork of a wine jug, Martin theorizes that the veil acted not only to conceal the beauty of a woman's hair, but also as a symbolic protective barrier that "sealed" the woman against the influence of fallen angels. Other scholars, such as Joseph Fitzmyer, believe the angels spoken of here are not fallen angels looking lustfully at women, but good angels who watch over church services. Notably, the author of Hebrews mentions "entertaining angels" and evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls suggests some Second Temple era Jews believed angels attended synagogue services. According to this view, Paul's concern is not that an angel looks lustfully, but simply that the appearance of an inappropriately dressed women might offend the heavenly guardians. A third interpretation comes from Bruce Winter, who theorizes that the "angels" spoken of are not heavenly beings at all, but simply human visitors. Winter notes that the Greek word translated "angels" literally means "messengers" and could refer to a visitor carrying a letter from afar, possibly even the epistle itself. In this view, Paul is concerned that if a visitor to a church service sees a married woman with her head uncovered, he may judge that woman to be promiscuous. Thus, Paul seeks to protect the church community's honour by ensuring that all members appear above reproach.
* Nature and hair lengths: In 1 Corinthians 11:13–15, Paul asks a rhetorical question about the propriety of headcoverings, and then answers it himself with a lesson from nature: "Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering." The historic interpretation of this passage, for example seen in Homilies of John Chrysostom, an Early Church Father, reiterates Paul's teaching that since a woman naturally "covers" her head with her natural hair, she likewise ought to cover it with a cloth headcovering while praying or prophesying (cf. conditional sentence).
   Thus, in the beginning he simply requires that the head be not bare: but as he proceeds he intimates both the continuance of the rule, saying, "for it is one and the same thing as if she were shaven," and the keeping of it with all care and diligence. For he said not merely covered, but "covered over," meaning that she be carefully wrapped up on every side. And by reducing it to an absurdity, he appeals to their shame, saying by way of severe reprimand, "but if she be not covered, let her also be shorn." As if he had said, "If thou cast away the covering appointed by the law of God, cast away likewise that appointed by nature." — John Chrysostom
Michael Marlowe, a scholar of biblical languages, explicates the reductio ad absurdum that Paul the Apostle used in the passage:
   In the appeal to "nature" (φύσις) here Paul makes contact with another philosophy of ancient times, known as Stoicism. The Stoics believed that intelligent men could discern what is best in life by examining the laws of nature, without relying on the changeable customs and divers laws made by human rulers. If we consult Nature, we find that it constantly puts visible differences between the male and the female of every species, and it also gives us certain natural inclinations when judging what is proper to each sex. So Paul uses an analogy, comparing the woman's headcovering to her long hair, which is thought to be more natural for a woman. Though long hair on men is possible, and in some cultures it has been customary for men to have long hair, it is justly regarded as effeminate. It requires much grooming, it interferes with vigorous physical work, and a man with long hair is likely to be seized by it in a fight. It is therefore unmanly by nature. But a woman's long hair is her glory. Here again is the word δόξα, used opposite ἀτιμία "disgrace," in the sense of "something bringing honor." Long and well-kept hair brings praise to a woman because it contributes to her feminine beauty. The headcovering, which covers the head like a woman's hair, may be seen in the same way. Our natural sense of propriety regarding the hair may therefore be carried over to the headcovering.
Paul's discussion of hair lengths was not to command any specific hair measurement, but rather, a discussion of "male and female differentiation" as women generally had longer hair than men; while the males of Sparta wore shoulder-length hair, the hair of Spartan women was significantly longer.
* Church practice: In 1 Corinthians 11:16, Paul responded to any readers who may disagree with his teaching about the use of headcoverings: "But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God." This may indicate that headcoverings were considered a standard, universal Christian symbolic practice (rather than a local cultural custom). In other words, while churches were spread out geographically and contained a diversity of cultures, they all practiced headcovering for female members.

#### Contemporary conclusions

Beginning in the 20th century, due to aforementioned issues, Bible commentators and Christian congregations have either advocated for the continued practice of wearing headcoverings, or have discarded the observance of this ordinance as understood in its historic sense. While many Christian congregations, such as those of the Conservative Anabaptists, continue to enjoin the wearing of headcoverings for female members, others do not.
* Some Christian denominations, such as Anabaptist Churches and Orthodox Churches, view Christian headcovering as a practice that Paul intended for all Christians, in all locations, during all time periods and so they continue the practice within their congregations. This view was taught by the early Church Fathers and held universally by undivided Christianity for several centuries afterward. This historic interpretation is linked with the God-ordained order of headship. Conservative Anabaptists and Old Order Anabaptists hold that because "the testimony of headship and the angels apply to all times of the believer's life, not only church services", in addition to biblical injunctions to "pray often, even continually (Acts 6:3–4, 6; 12:5; Romans 1:8–10; Ephesians 1:15–19; 6:18–20; Colossians 1:3–4; 5:17; 2 Timothy 1:3–6)", women are called to wear the headcovering throughout the day. Sociologist Cory Anderson stated that for those Christian women who continually wear it, the headcovering serves as an outward testimony that often allows for evangelism.
* A modern interpretation is that Paul's commands regarding headcovering were a cultural mandate that was only for the 1st-century Corinthian church. This view states that Paul was simply trying to create a distinction between uncovered Corinthian prostitutes and godly Corinthian Christian women, and that in the modern era, headcoverings are not necessary within a church. Church historian David Bercot criticizes this view as early Church writings do not evidence this reasoning.
* A recent interpretation, first formulated in 1965 by the Scandinavian theologian Abel Isaakson, purports that Paul stated that the "hair" (specifically "long hair") is the sole covering mentioned in the entire passage; 1 Corinthians 11:15 (NRSV) reads "but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering." However, some have taken issue with the fact that the Greek word used for covering in verse 15 (περιβόλαιον) is a different word than the form of the word used for veiling/covering in verses 5–7 and 13 (κατακαλύπτω), the latter of which means "to cover wholly" or "to veil". Moderator of the General Assembly of the Free Church of Scotland (Continuing) John W. Keddie contended that if hair was the covering Paul was talking about, then verse 6 would read "For if the women have no hair on her head, let her also be shorn", rendering the passage to be nonsensical.

## Legal issues

In the United States, an Alabama resident Yvonne Allen, in 2016, filed a complaint with the federal court after being forced to remove her headscarf for her driver's license photograph. Allen characterized herself as a "devout Christian woman whose faith compels her to cover her hair in public." In Allen v. English, et al., Lee County was accused of violating the Establishment Clause and a settlement was negotiated that gave "Allen a new driver’s license with her head covering".
In 2017, after a prison warden associated with the United States Penitentiary of Atlanta forced Christian prison visitor Audra Ragland to remove her headscarf, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sent a letter to the Federal Bureau of Prisons that asked for an action plan to ensure that the same would not occur again and that otherwise, the Federal Bureau of Prisons would be exposed to legal liability. Audra Ragland cited 1 Corinthians 11 as the reason behind the practice of Christian covering and noted that she felt "exposed and embarrassed as she had to walk in front of so many men whom she did not know" and that she was "sickened that she had to potentially compromise her faith" in order to visit her brother. The ACLU noted that the prison warden's coercion constituted "religious discrimination in violation of the First Amendment, the U.S. Bureau of Prisons' policy governing visitors' religious head wear and the U.S. Penitentiary of Atlanta's policies."