I wish I had a picture. I just got my 1997 CD from my mom. Bold mine
There is one Witchtower Questions From Readers:
*** w51 9/1 543-4 Questions from Readers *** Is it necessary for a woman to cover her head when conducting a home Bible study?When such a covering is or is not required is causing much discussion in our company.P.W., .
She would not need her head covered for the conducting of a home Bible study, as it is not a congregational meeting, but one that she has arranged herself. It is not a case of her being appointed to conduct a congregational meeting. However, if her husband were to attend this home meeting, she would cover her head if she prayed at the opening or close of the study. This would harmonize with the instruction: Every woman that prays or prophesies with her head unveiled shames the one who is her head.1 Cor. 11:3-16, NW.
We view a head-covering necessary under two conditions: (1) when a sister receives an appointment through the congregation or theocratic organization to keep order and conduct congregational meetings, and (2) when she is married and must show submission to the one God has made head of the family, the husband. These two principles enable one to decide for herself the requirement of varying situations.
A few examples may aid in grasping these principles. In a company composed entirely of sisters, the Society appoints sisters to positions ordinarily held by brothers. When such sisters serve from the platform at congregational meetings, they will show recognition of the theocratic headship of the man and that they are serving in the mans place only because circumstances require it. This recognition they show by wearing a head-covering, such as a hat or scarf or other suitable covering. Any sister conducting or presiding over a part of a congregational meeting should do likewise, whether she is a servant in the company or not.
While sisters presiding at the service meeting or Watchtower study or company book study wear head-coverings, other sisters who merely read the paragraphs in sum-up at such meetings, or who participate in demonstrations, or relate experiences, or answer questions from the audience, do not need to wear such a covering.
Sisters leading in prayer at congregational meetings should have their head covered. The womans hair is not sufficient as a covering. If it were, the question would never have been raised.
But when a sister finds interest in the field, follows it up and establishes a home Bible study of her own, she does not thereby become a conductor of a congregational meeting. Only if her husband is present must she wear a covering when she prays, for his presence brings into the matter the second principle, that of showing subjection to her family head. Of course, if the husband is in the truth he should do the praying, and if this is done then the sister, his wife, may conduct the meeting without head-covering.
In the case of prayer at mealtime, the man of the house should do the praying. If he will not do this for one reason or another, and calls on his wife, her head should be covered to show recognition of the theocratic principle of mans headship in the family relationship. If her husband is not present, she may pray with uncovered head, just as she does in her individual prayers privately uttered. If the sister praying at mealtime is unmarried, having no husband as her head, she need wear no head-covering, whether she is in her own home or a friends home or a missionary home. Of course, in all instances if a brother is present he should pray.
So the matter resolves itself to this: Is it a congregational meeting where the sister is presiding or praying? If so she should have her head covered. If not a congregational meeting, does a husband-and-wife relationship exist for her to show recognition to his headship, if he is present? If yes, then she should have her head covered. She would not show this sign of subjection to another womans husband. Nor would a single sister or widow show this sign of subjection to another womans husband. Such unmarried sisters have no male head as does a married woman. The only time the single sister would concern herself about a head-covering is when she comes under congregational conditions calling for it.
This has been answered at some length, since it comes up often in the . It is no question in many lands, where women customarily go with heads covered or with veils. In view of all that has been said on this subject, we suggest that each sister henceforth decide for herself when the covering is required, doing what she conscientiously believes right in situations not specifically covered herein, but which can be determined on the basis of the principles herein set forth. If she is in doubt and unsettled in conscience over a particular situation, she should wear the covering to be safe and at ease in mind and in conscience.
Knowing now the principles involved, let us show Christian maturity and apply these for ourselves, conscientiously, and not have to ask others on every imaginable situation. The Society would soon be compiling a set of regulations as voluminous as the Talmud if it endeavored to prescribe specific rules for all the varying cases. In fallen man under Satans influence there is always the tendency to substitute rules for principles. It is so much easier to conform the conduct to a rule than to make a principle inform the whole life. Moses prescribed rules; Christ inculcated principles. Rules are for children; principles for men and women mature in Christian growth. So now show maturity in applying the principles herein given regarding head-covering, making your decisions conscientiously, and you will not properly be criticized by others.
Me---I guess this is one of the reasons I hate them. I like the Talmud reference. And the one about a veil. Do they get that only Muslims are wearing veils?!
What fools.
Edited to add: Rutherford must have been a hater of women. What a turd.
Edited by - puffsrule on 25 June 2002 17:55:55
Edited by - puffsrule on 25 June 2002 18:10:3
