headcovering - taking another look
Post on 11-Mar-2016
219 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
1
Taking another look at
1 Corinthians 11
2
Introduction
Have you ever made a ‘right dog’s dinner’ of something? As a church, we were
making our way, chapter by chapter, through 1 Corinthians. When we got to
Chapter 11, it was my turn to take the study. I did a lot of study and thinking
about it.
Speaking is an interesting experience. Sometimes it is a real encouragement,
sometimes extra revelation comes as you speak. Occasionally, you get half
way through and you have that awful thought ‘ actually, I don’t know what I
am talking about at this point in the passage’. It was a conversational Bible
study and as people made comments and jumped around the text, I had a
distinct sinking feeling.
The good thing is that you can go back home and take stock. I realized that
this is one of those subjects that does not really lend itself to conversational
study because there is a lot in it that needs explaining and there are things
that need referring to in other parts of the bible.
I have been really glad to have had the opportunity to look afresh at this
subject. The reason I have decided to commit to writing, is that I find it helps
me to get things clearer in my own mind. So I have set out to write a short
booklet with the aim of trying to keep things as simple as possible. This
booklet is the result of reading and re-reading the passage, chatting with
people and dipping into web sites discussions about this subject.
Many years ago, I co-wrote a pamphlet on this subject. At the time it was
written I belonged to a group of House Fellowships which were sometimes
referred to as ‘The North Fellowships’, after G W North, a man who was
instrumental in their beginnings. The majority of the women in most of the
groups covered their heads at that time.
Over the years it is no longer practiced by a significant number of people. My
wife and I moved amongst different groups for a four year period and we
decided we didn’t want to ‘look different’ and we wanted to fit in with the
local church situation, so my wife stopped wearing any head covering. I never
3
properly re-examined the scriptures about it at that time, as I had
started to feel it was an over-emphasised tradition. I had also heard people
say it was primarily related to the culture of the time it was written in,
especially as regards women’s dress. Things had changed and it was not really
relevant.
But coming back to the text again and having to study it for myself afresh, I
started to question things again.
An approach
I want to say first of all, that I think this is one of most difficult portions of the
New Testament to get to grips with. The fact that there has been so much
discussion and debate over it, indicates that there are parts of it that are not
easy to understand. What style of writing appeals to you? When I was
younger, I used to read a lot of Martyn Lloyd Jones. He trained to be a doctor
and then went into the preaching ministry. He had a wonderfully clear mind
and he could take a bible text apart and clearly explain it, verse by verse.
But this particular part is not easy to dissect in a verse by verse manner.
Probably, like me, you wish that Paul had added a bit more explanation than
he has done. The apostle Peter said of Paul, that in his letters there are: some
things hard to understand,1. I don’t think we would argue with that
statement!
Secondly I really believe that I cannot prove or disprove a particular line of
thought on Headcovering. BUT, I do believe that it is good to take fresh looks
at the scripture from time to time. To me, the scriptures are to be our primary
guide and it’s important that we don’t just say ‘This is difficult to understand,
I think I’ll just follow what I think the Lord is saying to me’.
So how am I approaching it? I have realized that any approach to this subject
will depend on how much emphasis you place on the concept that certain
bible passages were penned for the particular time they were written in. And
1 2Pet 3:16
4
additionally, to what degree you feel they were ‘shaped’ by the culture which
was in force at the time.
We are also influenced a lot by people we respect and what they may believe
about something or what they practise. One of the things I have had to learn
is that just because someone knows a lot more of the bible than I do, it
doesn’t automatically follow that everything they say is absolutely and
infallibly true.
I have realized that I feel safest following the old maxim that the bible is its
own best interpreter. So as I am approaching this, I want to look at its
immediate context, the letter to the Corinthians and see what the main
themes are in the book. I want to look at some of the words in 1 Corinthians
11 and look at their use elsewhere in the scriptures. I also want to look at
other associated ideas in the bible, especially in connection with the reference
to ‘angels’.
So for me cultural things are not the driving factor in interpreting this passage.
I like this from RC Sproul :
It is one thing to seek a more lucid understanding of the biblical content by
investigating the cultural situation of the first century; it is quite another to
interpret the New Testament as if it were merely an echo of the first-century
culture. To do so would be to fail to account for the serious conflict the church
experienced as it confronted the first-century world. Christians were not
thrown to the lions for their penchant for conformity. Some very subtle means
of relativizing the text occur when we read into the text cultural considerations
that ought not to be there.
Making a start
One of the things that we must keep in mind is the fact that this is a letter. Or
to put it the other way round, it is not a carefully structured thesis, moving
from point A to point B etc. and gathering it all up in a mega-clear logical
conclusion. So sometimes in Paul’s presentation there is that sense of his on-
going thought as he writes or dictates his advice.
5
This means that at times he can seem to move between two subjects or lines
of thought within a piece of writing. In 1 Corinthians 11, he uses the word
head to mean the literal thing on top of your neck and also to refer to your
head figuratively, the person above you that you submit to, as Jesus did to his
Father. Paul does a similar thing in his letter to the Ephesians, where he writes
about the husband and wife relationship and speaks of it in terms of the
relationship between Christ and the church. As you read the passage, you are
aware of Paul moving between the two subjects and realize what a close
connection there is between the Husband/wife/Christ/Church relationships.
I struggled at first with 1 Corinthians 11 because there are points in this
passage where I would be saying ‘but WHY have you said that Paul’? I found it
a great help when I realized that you have to read and re-read this passage to
get the gist of it. So when I read a particular verse, I don’t stop, I keep reading
and find that other verses shed a little more light on things.
Additionally, we need to keep all of the verses in this part of the chapter in
mind as we read the individual verses.
A clear beginning
The good thing is that not all of it is difficult. In fact the opening verses are
fairly clear.
Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the
traditions just as I delivered them to you.
The first thing to note here is that he commends them for keeping traditions.
Now, I became a Christian in the 70s and at that time there was a fresh move
of the Spirit of God at work in the UK which manifested itself in the
Charismatic movement. It also saw a move towards meeting in homes. People
were leaving the ‘Traditional’ churches as they experienced the life of God in a
new way. So at that time we very much felt that ‘tradition’ was a BAD word, it
had definite negative connotations!
6
Indeed, on a number of occasions Jesus uses the same Greek word for
traditions which Paul uses here. Talking to the Pharisees he says you make
the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed
down.2 . This is obviously a negative use of the word.
Yet here in 1 Corinthians Paul is using the word positively. You may have
noticed as you read through this letter, phrases like: 'I have sent Timothy to
you ... who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways in Christ.' 3 'And so I
arrange/prescribe in all churches' 4' As in all the churches of God'5
I think all this points strongly to the fact that this letter was written for the
protection of the churches and was not written solely for the Corinthians. In
those days letters were passed around between churches6 Even today, it
would be hard to find a church that had been going for some years that had
not studied this letter for all the valuable truth it contains.
Twice in 2 Thessalonians Paul uses the word traditions in a positive sense:
'Therefore brethren stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught
whether by word or by letter from us'7 and 'withdraw from every brother who
walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us' 8.
One thing that stands out in these verses is the force of the language used by
the apostle: Stand fast - Hold - Withdraw from. These are strong words. Paul is
described as the ‘Apostle to the Gentiles’9, he was their father figure, he is
obviously anxious to hand down things which he believes were needful for
the well-being of God's church.
2 Mark 7:13
3 4:17
4 7:17
5 11:16, 14:33
6 When this letter is read among you, have it also read in the church of the Laodiceans; and you, for your part read my letter
that is coming from Laodicea. Col 4:16 7 2 Thess.2:1
8 2 Thess.3:6
9 Romans 11:13
7
In a sense, he is also still our Apostle, by virtue of the things he has written,
which we believe have been included in our bible by God’s sovereign
direction. So I don’t believe we can easily pass over these verses as if they are
‘an outdated tradition’.
But I want you to know
But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of
woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
I think this is probably the most important point in this passage. In fact, I think
it is probably one of the most important verses in the whole letter. As you
read through this letter you are struck by the fact that they are a church that
‘had a lot’. Paul says ‘you come short in no gift, eagerly waiting for the
revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ’10
In their meetings when they gathered together ‘each of you has a psalm, has a
teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation’. They have had
good teaching from Paul and Apolos11 They also knew a ‘liberty’ in their
lives12
But the other thing that strikes you is the sense that they were a people who
were ‘out of order’. They were divided into groups supporting certain
teachers, they allowed immorality in the church, they were taking each other
to court and they held their own liberty to be more important than caring for
their brethren. At the Lord’s Supper Paul says ‘Therefore when you come
together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper. For in eating, each
one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is
drunk. 13
When Paul has finished speaking of Headcovering, The Lord’s supper and their
general behaviour when they gather to worship, he finishes with these words
10
1 Cor 1:7 11
1 Cor 14:26 12
1 Cor 6:9 13
1 Cor 11:21
8
and sums it all up with ‘let all things be done decently and in order’14 So
‘order’ is very much in Paul’s mind as he writes this part.
But I want you to know. It’s as if he is saying ‘Listen you guys, this is the
important bit, this is what you really need to know. Get this in your mind, this
is what is foundational. This is my subject for the next few verses’. Paul uses
these little markers in his writing, to gain attention or to change subjects or
signal the start of something new.
It’s very important to see this and to see what he doesn’t say. He doesn’t say
‘now concerning how you dress as you gather’ or ‘concerning modesty in your
dress’.
What he does is to make a clear doctrinal statement. In it’s very clarity, in the
three clear statements, Paul is saying ‘Look there is order – and it even exists
between the members of the Godhead, it is not just some local relational
thing that you need to sort out in the church at Corinth.
Order in the Creation account
In verse 9 Paul refers to the creation and in this verse we can see this
statement worked out at creation. The head of Christ is God. In Genesis we
see an earth that was without form and was void and then God (the Father)
speaks and there is a division of things and things are ordered, Day and night
for instance. So the Father is directing and ordering, but we know the Spirit
was also hovering over the face of the earth and was involved in the action of
creation.
When we go to John’s gospel we read this: In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning
with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was
made that was made.15 . So we see that the Son was there also, following his
Father’s commands.
14
1 Cor 14:40 15
John 1: 1-3
9
Later in John’s gospel Jesus says: “I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I
judge; and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but
the will of the Father who sent Me.16. Towards the end of Corinthians Paul
talks of the Last days and says ‘Now when all things are made subject to Him,
then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him,
that God may be all in all.’17
So there is a clear submission of the Son to the will of the Father. This servant
approach is seen in other places, particularly Philippians18
Likewise in creation The head of every man is Christ. In the garden, God gave
the instructions to the man: The Lord God commanded the man19 Yes, God
knew a helper would be coming along, he knew man would have a need. But
he chose to instruct the man and give him the responsibility. So when sin
occurs, it says ‘the Lord God called to Adam and said to him “where are you”.
With so many things in the scriptures it is important to see things the way that
God sees them. We may not fully understand the reason for some things.
Clearly they both did wrong. In the New Testament, Eve is described as being
deceived and falling into transgression20 (crossing a line or boundary) But
equally clear is the fact that God spoke to the man and at the end of chapter 3
we have the description of the expulsion of both of them from the garden.
The text says: so he drove out the man. God held the man responsible.
The head of woman is the man. Genesis makes clear that the woman was
created as a helper for the man. Eve had obviously heard from Adam about
what they could and could not eat. She tells the serpent what she has heard
from Adam. She has happily submitted to him as head until this point and
they both enjoy a life without any shame in the garden.
16
John 5:30 17
1 Cor 15:28 18
Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Phil 2:5 19
Gen 2:16 20
1 Tim 2:14
10
So Paul sets this order right at the beginning of this chapter. What we need to
be clear on is that it is not setting an order of superiority, in the sense of one
being better than the other. It is in no way saying that Jesus is inferior to the
Father and later in the chapter Paul clarifies this when he says: Nevertheless,
neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in
the Lord. For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through
woman; but all things are from God.21
People tend to get hung up on certain words and probably in the society we
live in, with an emphasis on being ‘politically correct’, it has got worse. My
boss at work used to be referred to as ‘my superior’. But I recognised that this
was his role and at times he gave the orders and I got on with it. Sometimes I
didn’t agree – sometimes he was wrong! But I never thought of myself as ‘the
inferior’; in certain things, I knew more than he did.
There has been some debate about the word head and also with the word
helper. Because of the acknowledged exploitation of women by men over the
centuries, it seems that we find ourselves almost bending over backwards to
be as correct as possible and always promoting equality. So some have felt
that head ought to be translated as source and that helper has nothing to do
with difference in role or authority.
I wonder if people are over-concerned about the use of the word head in
connection with authority because of the abuse of authority and power?
Looking at the verses above makes it clear that the Father did have authority
and the Son followed it.
If we consider the larger picture, we see that the bible has Salvation as one of
its major themes. Jesus is described as the head of the church and saviour of
the body. One of the real keys to appreciating headship is to understand that
it is the place of safety. I obey the Lord and discover that he does indeed
‘know best’.
21
1 Cor 11:12
11
I wonder how much importance we place on having a submissive heart?
During the 80s and 90s I was involved in a church with an elder called Dave
Wetherly, who was one of the most godly, prayerful and loving men that I
have ever met. He had a great knowledge of the scriptures as he was an avid
reader of the Bible and he walked in a close walk with the Lord. In some ways
you could say ‘did he need other people’ ? Yet I remember him saying to me
one day ‘Andy, I submit myself to my fellow elders, it’s the place of safety’.
The other word which has been questioned is the word ‘helper’, because it is
seen as somehow demeaning. After looking at all the Hebrew instances of the
word helper’ David Clines concluded that in all the instances the person
helping was assisting in a task that was someone else’s responsibility. I
sometimes help people with their decorating or a household task. It’s their
home and the fact that I am the helper doesn’t make me inferior. But the task
overall is their responsibility, not mine.
Now these things have to be worked out in individual situations in marriages
and home life, at work and in the church. There is clear teaching in Ephesians
5 and 6 about working these things out in home life and at work. Elsewhere in
the bible there is instruction about church life22
At this point in this letter, Paul does not go into precise details of the
individual responsibilities and limitations of each member of the Godhead or
how these things work out in home, work and church. What he does is
emphasise that there is an order, there are boundaries, there are
differences. He is setting the clear principle.
There is a huge emphasis on equality at all costs in the world today. I think
there is a danger of the church being influenced by the world’s thinking in
regard to these things.
22
Heb 13:7 & 17 1 Peter 5:1-4
12
Boundaries
My wife is a teacher and in some of her posts she has held specific
responsibility for dealing with children who have behavioural problems,
beyond the normal ones that children have! As she unwinds from the day
over evening meal, the conversation has often been around the fact that one
of the greatest problems these children have is a lack of boundaries. Their
parents have never set out the clear limits of acceptable behaviour. Or they
have set some boundaries but have failed to reward the children for staying
within these boundaries or to punish them for stepping over the line.
There was a clear boundary within the garden of Eden: “Of every tree of the
garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” Sin is
sometimes defined as ‘missing the mark’, but it is also stepping over the
boundaries - transgressing.
Going further back
It would be good to look at the subject of Angels at this point, because in this
passage Paul uses the phrase ‘because of the angels’.
Angels were created, they are part of the host of heaven; they have not
always existed. In Colossians, just prior to Paul saying that Jesus is the head of
the body, he says this: by Him all things were created that are in heaven and
that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or
principalities or powers.23 And Ezra says: You alone are the LORD; You have
made heaven, The heaven of heavens, with all their host24
So in the beginning of things, in the creation account, we read that at the end
of the sixth day: God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was
very good…..Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were
23
Col 1:16 24
Neh 9:6
13
finished.25 So God was very happy with the created world, with man and the
woman and with the host of Heaven, it was very good.
The passage of time is not clear in these opening chapters. All we know is that
at some point between the time of Genesis 2:1 and Genesis 3:1, something
went drastically wrong amongst some members of the host of heaven. For at
the beginning of chapter 3 we meet the serpent, who John refers to as: that
serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan.26. So what went wrong?
Jude summarises it in a short statement: And I remind you of the angels who
did not stay within the limits of authority God gave them but left the place
where they belonged27 . Further light is thrown on this by a couple of
references in two of the prophetic books of the Old Testament. 28
Isaiah 14 is a chapter which starts off by talking about the king of Babylon. It
seems however, that by the time we get to verse 12 we have a section which
is speaking of the fall of Satan “How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer,
son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground, You who weakened
the nations! For you have said in your heart: ‘I will ascend into heaven, I will
exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the
congregation On the farthest sides of the north;”29 . Jesus said , “I saw Satan
fall like lightning from heaven.”30 There is that common word fall in both
passages which strongly suggests that there was rebellion amongst the
heavenly host.
A very similar situation occurs in Ezekiel. What looks like a passage about the
king of Tyre, moves onto a deeper meaning when we read: “You were the
anointed cherub who covers; I established you;……..“Your heart was lifted up
25
Gen 1:31 & 2:1 26
Rev 12:9 27
Jude 1:6 (NLT) 28
One of the difficulties of this is that we move into an area which is open to interpretation. We can have two extremes in regard to prophesy in the Old Testament: those who see a spiritual outworking in many scriptures and believe they are all pointing to the last days or other times, and those who dismiss that approach and say the majority of the prophecy was for the time and place where it was spoken. Personally, I think there are places in the scripture which embrace both, i.e. they seem at first to be speaking of people and kingdoms on earth, but, as we read on we realize they are also talking about something related to another time and realm. 29
Is 14:13 30
Luke 10:18
14
because of your beauty; You corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your
splendour; I cast you to the ground”31
It is interesting that the cherub knew about ‘covering’. The Hebrew word
(which is translated Guardian in some versions) is associated with screening
and covering. There is something about ‘covering’ which angels understand
the significance of.
Boundaries again…
I cannot fully understand these sections of scripture (who can?), but what is
clear is that they all speak of beings who fit Jude’s words: they did not stay
within the limits of authority God gave them. They sought to establish their
own thrones, their own independent authority. They became lifted up with
pride.
When you come together
Local church life can be quite busy! Sundays tend to be our main gatherings of
the week and we often get caught up in our involvement with what is going
on, the things that we see with our eyes and hear with our ears. We talk
about who was at the meeting, what was said and we are encouraged when
we have visitors and new people.
If we are not careful we can lose our focus. We can also think that what WE
see and experience is all that counts. (Our opinion of someone’s preaching,
the way someone behaved…). This was one of the problems in Corinth, they
were interested in debating who was the greatest preacher and putting their
own opinions and liberty before everything else. We could summarise it by
saying that what really mattered to them was the things of man rather than
God; they were more interested in the glory of man, than the glory of God.
If we are to understand this passage we need to properly focus and say
“Lord, what are YOU seeing as we gather together as a local church”. As Paul
31
Ezekiel 28:12
15
says later, is God seeing The first man …. of the earth, made of dust; or is he
seeing the second Man… the Lord from heaven?32
But it is not just the Lord who looks on as we gather. Paul makes an
interesting statement in Ephesians 3:10 when he says: now the manifold
wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and
powers in the heavenly places.33 It seems that the behaviour of the church is
watched and witnessed by Angels in the heavenly places, there is a revelation
to them of the fellowship of the mystery. What was hidden previously is now
to be shown by the church.34
Two things at once
Being human, we are more limited than God in our abilities; we tend to see
one thing at a time. God is able to see on varying levels at the same time.
So, when the church gathers God sees individual men and women who have
equal access into his presence, who can all pray to Him, worship Him and call
Him their personal Lord. We could summarise it in a verse from
Galatians: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there
is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.35
But additionally, reading this passage in 1 Corinthians, we recognise that God
sees the men and the women separately as representing truth which we have
looked at in the creation account. This is summarised by Paul in these phrases
from chapter 11:
32
1 Cor 15:47 33
Eph 3:10 34
Paul also refers to the angels in connection with his apostleship: we have been made a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men. 35
Gal 3:28
16
For men:
the head of every man is Christ, ….he is the image and glory of God;…. For man
is not from woman,….Nor was man created for the woman,
For women:
the head of woman is man36,….. woman is the glory of man…..woman is from
man…..woman is for the man.
This passage has to be interpreted as each representing a larger truth and not
their own individual relationship with God. Otherwise we could end up
thinking that women do not have direct access to God or have some second
rate experience or are just to do what men tell them to do. This is so obviously
wrong, though I acknowledge that men in church situations have at times
used these types of scriptures to justify chauvinistic behaviour that I have
cringed at.
Uncover - cover
How often have we heard people say, ‘this passage is about women’s
Headcovering’? We lose sight of the very first thing that Paul says.
The first instruction that Paul gives is to the men, a man must not cover his
physical head. This is how God sees things – he sees the men as representing
the New man, the second Adam, Christ. Christ is The Head and as such, in the
church gathering, the man’s uncovered head represents the fact that the
glory of the Christ is to be displayed and exposed in the church. As God sees
things, the man is saying that all of us, (men and women) want to show the
uncovered glory of the Lord and allow him to transform us into the same
image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.37
36
One or two translations have translated the word man, as husband which is a possibility in the Hebrew. Obviously this does link clearly with the subject of the wife’s submission to the husband as taught in Ephesians for example. The problem is that it does not make consistent sense in the passage. Following that line of thought you would have to say that a shorn wife is a disgrace, whereas ALL shorn women were a disgrace. 37
2 Cor 3:18
17
Hence Paul says that if a man puts a hat or prayer cap on (as the Jews did and
do to this day) it will bring shame to Jesus. As representing Christ, the man
must not put something on his physical head which speaks of covering up
Jesus.
Likewise, this is how God sees the women as representative of mankind. Even
as the church we are not fully redeemed. As Paul says in Romans: even we
ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the
redemption of our body. So as the passage says, the woman is from the man
and for the man’, she therefore speaks representatively of the glory of man
(mankind). She needs to cover her physical head as primarily church
gatherings are to exhibit that which is of Christ and not of man.
If she does not wear a covering on her head, as far as God is concerned, she is
symbolically saying the church is happy to openly display the glory of man. 38
Paul then goes on to conclude by saying For this reason the woman ought to
have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. I believe this
ties in with the fact that the Angels look on as we gather and they need to see
that the truth of the headship of Christ is upheld and represented in the
church by the men uncovering their heads and the women covering their
heads. Paul opened with that statement of truth and that is what is being
taught here. It also speaks of the fact that there is a godly order in the church,
people moving within boundaries and spheres that God has given them.
Because Paul writes a fair amount about women’s dress and covering and hair
in these verses, some people have felt that is his main subject. But as I have
looked at the structure of this passage and it’s context, it becomes evident
that his main subject is The Head. If we wanted instruction on basic principles
related to dress, we would look at 1 Peter 3
If we now go back and look at some of Paul’s quite strong statements in
verses 4-6, we see that he is seeking to say that it really is seriously shameful
for a woman not to cover her head. The reason is that it makes the statement
38
For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. V7
18
that it is alright for the glory of man to be exposed in the church alongside the
glory of God. He is seeking to emphasise to the Corinthians that their
behaviour is like the carefree attitude of a woman who has no sense of shame
and is quite happy to be like a shaved woman.
Until recent times in society, very short hair on a woman was a sign of shame.
These verses are a further exposition of the truth of Headship and
Headcovering, glory and shame. Read in the context of what preceded it, we
see that he is not saying that the main reason a woman needs to cover her
head is so she doesn’t look like an immoral woman. In fact Paul emphasises
this when he sums these verses up by saying For this reason the woman ought
to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. He always
brings it back to the head, not the bodily dress.
The final section – 4 things
The final section raises some questions because at a cursory reading it could
look as if Paul then changes his mind or contradicts himself.
1
Verses 11 & 12: Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor
woman independent of man, in the Lord. For as woman came from man, even
so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God.
These verses are Paul’s way of bringing a balance to the things he is saying
and drawing attention to the fact that both men and women were created by
God and have a need of each other and as such should honour one another.
2
Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a
dishonour to him. But, if a woman has long hair it is a glory to her; for her hair
is given her for a covering.
This verse states that it is a shame for a man to have long hair. Yet even in
Scripture there were men who had long hair with no stigma attached to them.
19
Indeed the Nazarite vow involved a man abstaining from cutting his hair, as in
the case of Samson.
When Paul says Does not even nature itself teach you. Who is the ‘you’ he is
referring to? I think it’s important that we realize that it is to renewed men
and women, not to men and women in the world. Paul describes the normal
life of those times and then says to them ‘such were some of you. They are
now a changed people.
Society is constantly changing and whereas at one time, it was usually women
who were mainly concerned with their hair and looks, things have changed
quite radically in the last 30 years. I read recently that the male grooming
market is now worth over 7.7 billion dollars globally.
The actual Greek word for long hair in this verse, primarily suggests the idea
of an ornament or of tended hair (the notion of length is secondary). Thus
Paul is saying 'Doesn't nature teach you redeemed people that it is effeminate
and not natural for a man to be preoccupied with his hair.'
3
if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a
covering.
Is this verse saying that her hair is a covering and she doesn’t need to wear
anything over it?
Unfortunately our translation hides two different Greek words for 'covering.'
In the opening verses and in verse 13 the Greek word which is used means to
cover or to veil. In this verse 15, however, the apostle uses a different Greek
word (pariballo) which means 'to clothe or to cast around' and is usually
associated with adornment.
We can gather three strands of thought together from this particular passage
of Scripture to see that:
20
Woman is the glory of man…. and her tended hair is a glory to her…. as an
adorning covering. Quite clearly her hair is a covering, but it is not the
covering which Paul is laying down as the apostolic tradition which he refers
to in his opening verses. As a woman's hair is representative of man’s glory,
this adornment must be covered in the gathering of the church.
Hair is a permanent covering. The 'covering/veil' is a temporary covering
which is worn when the church gathers. The women in the church are
covering themselves on behalf of all the congregation, to show that the
church recognises the need for both men and women to be under headship.
And verse 16 says: But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such
custom, nor do the churches of God.
Reading through Paul’s life and his writings we see how convinced he was. It
simply does not fit to think that he would spend all this time explaining a
truth and then say at the end “oh by the way, we don’t practice this
custom/tradition!”
The clearest way of understanding this verse is to read the portion from verse
13. In verse 13 Paul asks a question which is concerned with an alternative
custom “a woman praying to God with her head uncovered”, In verses 14 &
15 he answers the question and in this final verse 16 he says “If anyone is
inclined to be argumentative about this we have no such custom (of praying
uncovered) and neither do the churches of God”
Cultural things
Personally, I haven’t found looking at cultural issues as being of any real help!
. Corinth had mixed nationalities. Jewish men covered their head to pray: Paul
says a man must not cover his head, so he goes against Jewish culture.
The Greeks seem to have been indifferent as to covering their head in
worship, both men and women. There is a famous statue of the Roman
emperor Augustus, as Pontifex Maximus (Great-Bridge or Chief Priest) . It
shows him with his head covered.
21
But doesn’t it look odd?
Yes it will look odd to some people. I have noticed quite a lot of people talking
about making the church more accessible and not putting people off by our
‘own church culture’. But this passage majors on what God and the angels
think.
In this same letter, Paul said that he did indeed have a great desire to speak
to be understood39; he also said he wanted to be all things to all men in order
to win them40. But he felt very happy to write about this practice. One does
not replace the other. We can’t dismiss this because WE think that it may put
people off.
Conclusion
But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of
woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
The threefold use of the word head sets the theme and hence this passage for
me is about Headship and the obvious link is the physical head – not bodily
dress. Hence this is about the need for men to have uncovered heads and the
women to have covered heads. Society may change, but Paul says we do it for
the angels, who understand the significance of covering.
So having read this, why not take a fresh look at the passage. The Lord
encourages us to be good workers in our studies of the scriptures.41
Andy Jones. November 2012
39
1 Cor 14:19 40
1 Cor 9:20 41
2 Tim 2:15
top related