Bible-Believing Episcopalians
5/7/2026
By the Rev. Kevin Laskowski
As my mother-in-law, also an Episcopal priest, once put it from the pulpit, "Episcopalians are Bible-believing people! Let me say that again: Episcopalians are Bible-believing people!" Refusing to cede Scripture to other, perhaps louder cultural voices, she insisted that Scripture was ours, too, that it belonged to us, and we, in keeping faith, belonged to it. I don't remember the rest of the sermon or the hot-button social topic at issue that day, but I remember her slogan and her resolve.
We believe in the Bible. We may not come to the same conclusions as other followers of Jesus, but we keep faith nonetheless. As I've encouraged folks in our Bible study: we follow the method of the Biblical authors, even if following Jesus leads us in new directions.
For example, this week, we tackled head coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. My family tells stories of growing up Roman Catholic and women being required to wear a veil and/or a hat in church. My mom and aunts told me about being provided with a tissue and a bobby pin at the door if they didn't have a veil or hat. Their heads had to be covered somehow! Why? Because 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 - that's why!
Many Christians still keep to this tradition. Women dressed in their Sunday best wear beautiful, elaborate hats to worship. Others are veiled, and that's one faithful way of interpreting the Scriptures: God inspired it, Paul said it, I believe it, that's the end of it. Men, keep your heads uncovered. Women, cover your heads, if not your faces.
Others try to contextualize the verse. It's not exactly clear what's eating at Paul here, what someone or some people are doing in Corinth that warrants his response. Paul seems to be making the argument that the Roman and Jewish custom of headcovering should continue be upheld in the new Christian community. That's what he himself tries to do and has done when establishing a Christian community (v. 2, 16). The author makes a biblical argument for continuity with the culture by interpreting Genesis 2 in light of the Christ event to establish a hierarchy that goes Christ, then Men, then Women (v. 3, 8-9). The Christian community should remain connected and faithful to a tradition of headcovering, then, because it represents that ordained hierarchy.
Context matters, too. If the argument is about that hierarchy, a faithful Christian could ask if belief in that hierarchy is truly required and decisive. Paul himself seems confused about this. He's unable to stop himself from pointing to a theology of interdependence (v. 11,12), which would say that there probably should be similar rules for men and women. Why should women be covered and not men in a community, in Christ in whom there is no male and female (Galatians 3:28, see also Colossians 3:11, 1 Corinthians 12:13, Romans 10:12 for similar verses)? And we shouldn't ignore what Paul doesn't say here. Far from subordinating women in the church, Paul fully expects women to be praying and prophesying in church (v. 5), maybe just with their heads covered, if you please. If the argument is about continuity with prevailing culture, then a Christian could faithfully ask if we are still bound to headcovering if today's culture (for good or for ill) has left that behind.
Contextualizing is actually what Paul is doing. Every culture or group has rules about social propriety. Paul's question is: what will be the rule for this new Christian community when it comes to headcovering (v. 13)? Paul offers advice to Corinth, justifying it on the basis of Scripture, particularly in light of Christ. He's drawn to habit and tradition but is also committed to a radical vision of new Christian community. I found my New Oxford Annotated Bible almost funny in its notes on v. 11-16: "Nevertheless indicates that Paul breaks off the preceding argument and moves on to emphasize what is important: in the Lord there is mutuality and reciprocity between woman and man... Paul's argument having collapsed, he hands over the decision to the Corinthians, invoking a Stoic argument from nature and finally appealing to custom" (italics in the original). So let's recap: Paul has an opinion. He grounds that opinion in Scripture in the light of Jesus Christ. He has his commitments, but those ideas are not decisive (at least not in this matter). The Corinthians must judge things for themselves (v. 13). In following Jesus Christ, there is no escaping engagement with Scripture and tradition, from reasoning with one another. For the Christian, there's no getting around examining text and context for ourselves. Doing what Paul did in his inspired epistles is just as faithful as following what he ended up saying.
Episcopalians are Bible-believing people because we're always striving to do the work that the biblical authors themselves were doing: following Jesus Christ, even and especially when it might lead us in new directions.
