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