(NRSV, 1989)
Thank you for listening to First Day. I am Patrick Cooley. Please like, subscribe, and share on Apple, Google, and Amazon Podcasts.
Of all the scripture that I have studied and taught in my ministry as well as in these series on the New Testament, thus far this is the most difficult I have encountered to wrap my mind and heart around: 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. If we take scripture seriously, we cannot quickly ignore the practical implications of Paul’s teaching by saying something like, “We just don’t understand it,” and then continue to argue that the bible contains the only truth that a person needs for living his or her life and that we MUST follow it. So I want to apologize up-front for this journey down the rabbit hole that we find while journeying down the rabbit hole.
Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions just as I delivered them to you. But I want you to know that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of the woman, and God is the head of Christ. Every man who prays or prophesies with something on his head dishonors his head. Every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since that is one and the same as having her head shaved. For if a woman doesn’t cover her head, she should have her hair cut off. But if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her head be covered.
It’s disingenuous to command other people to get their lives in line with the words of scripture and then explain away why some passage we find hard to accept—or command hard to fulfill—doesn’t apply to us. Nor can we relegate scripture’s application to context only. In doing so, we rob scripture of its spiritual authority, and we limit its power to transform our lives, since the same arguments used to explain away the things we don’t like can also be used to remove the soapboxes upon which we ourselves stand. So, what do we make of this passage (11:2-16); how are we to understand it and to respond to it? The difficulty arises when we compare what is said here with what the apostle has already spoken to both the Galatians and, even, to the Corinthians themselves.
In Galatians
3:27-29 the apostle writes, “For those of you who were baptized into Christ have been clothed with Christ. There is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male and female; since you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ then you are Abraham’s seed, heirs according to the promise.” Through this baptism the Christian’s very being is fundamentally changed: a person’s current cultural, legal, and even biological identities become irrelevant in comparison to whom that person becomes in Christ Jesus. In other words, the divisions that separate us—that we ourselves or others have imposed—dissolve away when we are joined with Christ Jesus. So why would Paul draw such a distinction between men and women here in 11:2-16? The befuddlement is further compounded by Paul’s own teaching earlier in this very letter!
In 1 Corinthians 7 Paul discusses with the church his principles of marriage. While arguing the need for husbands and wives to engage in sexual intercourse with one another to prevent Satan’s temptation he writes, “A wife does not have the right to her own body, but her husband does. In the same way, a husband does not have the right to his own body, but his wife does.” (4) Neither party in the marriage contract owns their own bodies; they belong to the other.
At face value I find it difficult to reconcile Paul’s edict that “the man is the head of the woman” (11:3) with his teaching in 1 Corinthians 7 states that neither husband nor wife have authority over their own bodies; nor does this subordination align with his earlier teaching to the Galatians that in Christ even the distinction between male and female doesn’t exist. So, what gives: Does this prove that the bible contradicts itself—and is thusly only a book like any other—or that Paul cannot be trusted? The short answer to both questions is, “No,” but a single, absolute, certain answer isn’t easily possible either.
A man should not cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God. So too, woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman came from man. Neither was man created for the sake of woman, but woman for the sake of man. This is why a woman should have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, and man is not independent of woman. For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman, and all things come from God.
Historically, Methodist Christians read scripture through four lenses—a few of those lenses might make Christians from other traditions uncomfortable, but that’s their burden and not the Methodists’. This METHOD of reading, engaging, and applying scripture is often called the Quadrilateral. Forgive me but, although I am an Elder in Full Connection in a Methodist denomination—meaning I am ordained clergy—I did not graduate a Methodist seminary; mine was Episcopalian, the University of the South, Sewanee, “Down with the heathen, up with Church. Yea, Sewanee’s right!” So, every historical detail about the origin of the Quadrilateral I cannot provide. But what I can identify for you are the four lenses that help a person read, understand, and apply scriptural truth in the search for a closer walk with Jesus. These are: the text itself—what do the words themselves say, tradition—what has the Church historically understood the text to mean, reason—does the meaning make any sense—is it logical, and experience—what is the subjective meaning of the text based on the reader’s own life. What this means, of course, is that there are no quick not identical answers.
Applying Paul’s words in 11:2-6 literally is fraught with danger when we remember Jesus’ declaration that the standard by which we judge another is the same standard by which we will be judged. Therefore, all scripture must be applied literally in all circumstances for all people: including us. Likewise if we demand grace for ourselves, we must also demand it for others; remember Jesus’ parable of the unforgiving servant. Thankfully, the apostle is not concerned with establishing a dogmatic practice here, I don’t think.
As I have stated before, I believe that scripture is Spirit filled and as such maintains internal consistency—after all, God is the same today, yesterday, and tomorrow. This consistency is present but may not be obvious, hence the usefulness of the Quadrilateral. To hopefully discover this consistent truth or message here in 11:2-16, we must ask what would prompt Paul to write what he does and then consider why he would write it.
What does Paul say in 11:2-16? Firstly, God is the head of Christ, and secondly, Christ is the head of man, and thirdly, man is the head of woman—each in successive subordination. This makes God—the Father—head over all and everything subordinate to Him. Paul states that men must pray and prophecy with their heads uncovered, contrary to generally accepted Jewish custom. A man covering his head in these circumstances brings dishonor upon it.
On the other hand, women must pray and prophecy with theirs covered—or their faces veiled, there is much disagreement on this—in keeping with Jewish custom. A woman would bring dishonor “to her head” if she performs these aforementioned acts—prophecy and prayer—with her head uncovered.
If to dishonor one’s head means to bring disgrace to it, the man who prays with his head covered disgraces his head—and who does Paul say is a man’s head? “Christ is the head of man.” And who is defined here as the head of woman? And who is the head overall? My point is that it seems clear that when Paul speaks about the head he is speaking about something far greater than that thing the little kid from Jerry Maguiresays “weighs eight pounds”. These verses are about so much more than a dress code, and, in the end, are about something much grander than any run-of-the-mill superior/ subordinate relationship (i.e., “The woman must do what the man says.”). I am reminded of the movie My Big Fat Greek Wedding. “The man may be the head, but the woman is the neck, and she can turn the head any way she wants.”
God may be over Christ, but Christ is the glory of God manifest in the world; He is the proof and power of God’s presence, and according to verse seven so is the man the image and glory of Christ. This is why the Corinthian man is told not to cover his head—not to cover Christ. This teaching is best understood as a metaphor that is being used by Paul to address real problems in the Corinthian church. As such, if Christ isn’t why the men of Corinth pray and prophecy, if they are doing these for any other reason—like trying to cause division and distinguish themselves one from the other—they dishonor Christ by not showing Him to the world. And would not this be consistent with every issue Paul has been addressing with the Corinthians thus far in his letter? Sadly, we already know that the congregation was not living fully into this.
When considering what he tells the men to do—keep their “head” uncovered—they are obviously covering “It”. They are praying and prophesying for their sakes and not Christ’s. Likewise, the church’s women are praying and prophesying—just like the men—in a way that is contrary to how Paul had instructed them when he was with them. The men were doing their thing not for Christ—as His glory—but for themselves, and the women were doing their thing for their own glory and for their own purposes, too. In other words, there is no free agency in the Church. Everything that they do should be for the purpose of being and showing God’s glory. Perhaps since the church is failing at this, Paul believes that a reminder is in order.
Verses 2-10 serve as a reminder that there are divine expectations—purposes—for every part. “If you are going to try to distinguish yourselves one from the other, remember that you are not your own head.” These verses are Paul’s attempt to make a purse out of a sow’s ear—or to make lemonade from lemons—or maybe bluff a pair of twos into a royal flush. But beginning in verse 11, we realize what Paul is really getting on about.
In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, and man is not independent of woman. For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman, and all things come from God.
So before verse 11, men don’t cover; women cover; who’s under or over whom…This was before. In the Lord, it is no longer the case. Remember chapter seven, neither husband nor wife own their own bodies but belong to each other. Recall from Galatians that in Christ there is no longer male and female. Paul is telling the Corinthians that their efforts to keep or even to create distinctions is not what God desires. Now if they insist on having them, they must keep the proper perspective—but these are not more desirable. In fact, even in the first part of this section, before the apostle flips the script, he sets up verses eleven and twelve. In verse six he writes: “For if a woman doesn’t cover her head, she should have her hair cut off.” If a woman doesn’t cover her head, than she needs to “cut her hair off [like a man]” and so be reminded that Christ is her head, too, just like any man would.
In the final section of this passage, Paul writes:
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 disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her as a covering. If anyone wants to argue about this, we have no other custom, nor do the churches of God.
Firstly, the Corinthians are to make their own decision concerning the matter of women “praying with their head(s) uncovered”. In other words, this is not a heaven-or-hell issue. In fact, Paul believes, as previously mentioned in verse six, that any woman who wants to pray with her head uncovered should continue to do so—to pray and to prophecy—like a man: remembering that she is Christ’s glory and does so for God’s sake. And in verse sixteen, he closes this passage by reminding the Corinthians that the ball is in their court—or better, the scissors are in their hands.
What is interesting is the range of commentary on verses 14 and 15. Because these verses abound with words and phrases found nowhere else in the New Testament—apart from one shared with Hebrews
1:12 (itself a reference to Psalm 102 concerned God’s provision of a a covering to protect the faithful), I am hesitant to speak too much on these for fear of coming over as authoritative and certain. Truth is, no one can be either. Perhaps Paul is expressing his opinion as he did earlier in the letter: “This is not the Lord but I who say this.” Maybe he is giving the church his input to help them decide on the matter (13). Maybe he’s saying men and women need keep in their places. Maybe he's a fuddy-duddy who just doesn’t like long hair on men. Maybe he’s saying that the men and women in the Corinthian church have unique roles to play, and that they aren’t the same, but that they aren’t different either.