1 Cor. 11:2-16, “Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven. For if a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short. But since it is disgraceful for a wife to cut off her hair or shave her head, let her cover her head. For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God. Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering. If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.”
Why is this a tough text? This passage is included in the tough text series because this passage raises the question of head coverings. To cover or not to cover, that is the question. While this is certainly the main question in view, other questions and important topics arise in this passage as well. For example, here we see the headship of Christ over all mankind, the headship of a husband over his wife, and the headship of God the Father over God the Son during the incarnation. In addition to these we find Paul covering the appropriate actions of men and women in worship, the appropriate (proper, natural) length of hair for men and women, and generally speaking how all this impacts our worship. And let’s not forget v16 either, the call and command for brothers and sisters in Christ to not be contentious about their views on head coverings in worship.
So what I’d like to do tonight is work through this passage, verse by verse, comment on it, give my thoughts on the two prominent views of this passage, and conclude with a variety of what I think are helpful principles to glean from this passage.
Introduction (v2)
“Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.”
Here Paul commends the church in Corinth, for what? For remembering Paul in all their actions and for maintaining the traditions Paul taught them. Many Protestants believe traditions are negative things, and there is truth to that. Elsewhere Paul speaks of the traditions of men that ignore Christ (Col. 2). But here in v2 he is not referring to negative or sinful traditions of men, but traditions that he himself taught the Church. This could refer simply to Paul’s preaching and all he taught them, but I think it rather refers to certain practices Paul believed were good and useful for the Corinthians to adopt. Here he commends them for heeding his counsel.
The Foundation (v3)
“But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.’
Paul truly commended these Christians for following him on many points, that’s what v2 means. But here in v3 Paul isn’t commending them, he’s correcting them. What is he correcting them about? Here in v3 he speaks on headship. He explains headship in three ways. First Paul speaks of Christ being the head of every man, meaning Christ is the Lord over all, not only as the head of His body the Church, but the Lord before whom every knee will bow. Second Paul speaks of the husband being the head of his wife, not meaning to say the husband is greater while the wife is inferior, but that when it comes to authority in a marriage it is the husband who carries the authoritative role while the wife embraces a submissive role. Third Paul speaks of God the Father being the head of Christ the Son, not meaning that the Father is greater or more important than the Son who is inferior, but that during the incarnation the role of the Son truly was to submit Himself to the will of the Father in all things.
Paul says these things in v3 because of what he is about to say in the rest of the passage. So here Paul’s laying a foundation of understanding the difference between authority and submission.
The Main Argument (v4-5a)
“Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head…”
Here Paul makes his main argument, and it’s all about head coverings. One note on coverings first. It’s helpful to know how head coverings were used in the culture in and around Corinth at this time. Three quick things. a) in pagan religious ceremonies prominent and wealthy men would pull their togas up over their heads to cover them. b) in this time a woman who covered her head in social or religious settings did so to indicate that she was married. In this she was seen as honoring her husband. So too a married woman who refused to cover her head would be seen as dishonoring her husband. c) a married woman who refused to cover her head in social or religious settings was automatically identified as being rebellious or promiscuous. Because of this many men and women in Corinth did not know what was proper and improper in worship regarding head coverings. Enter Paul.
His main argument in v4-5 is a simple one. A husband who covered his head in worship was acting like the prominent pagan men of the time, so in worship Paul says a man should not cover his head, so as to not dishonor Christ. So too, a wife who uncovered her head in worship was acting like the rebellious women of the time, so in worship Paul says a woman should cover her head, so as to not dishonor her husband.
Reason #1 (v5b-6)
“…since it is the same as if her head were shaven. For if a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short. But since it is disgraceful for a wife to cut off her hair or shave her head, let her cover her head.”
Paul gives his first reason here for why he said what he did in v4-5a. Simply put, a wife with an uncovered head in worship is culturally shameful. Paul’s logic is clear. Step one, Paul says a wife’s uncovered head is the same as having a shaved head. In this time the penalty for a woman who was arrested for adultery would be the shaving of her head, which would publicly shame her for having a hair that looked like a man’s. Step two, Paul says a wife with s shaved head is disgraceful, which implies again that a wife with an uncovered head is disgraceful. Step three, therefore, a wife should cover her head.
Reason #2 (v7-9)
“For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.”
Now Paul adds another argument, one from the original design of men and women. In v7 he affirms what he already has said, that a man should not cover his head. But now he adds more reason to it. The reason a man should not cover his head is because man is the image and glory of God. Contrasting that is woman, who Paul says is the glory of man. This doesn’t mean women are not made the image of God, not at all. The issue here on one hand is how a man may honor or shame Christ, while on the other hand how a woman may honor or shame her husband. In v8-9 Paul adds more. Men and women are not interchangeable. God made woman from the man and for the man, thus woman is the glory of man, while man is not the glory of woman. This how we were made. Paul uses this argument from creation that transcends culture and applies it to the Corinthian context, specifically about head coverings.
Reason #3 (v10-12)
“That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God.”
In v10-12 Paul gives us another reason for his main argument by saying, because of all these things it is right for a woman to have a symbol of authority on her head because it demonstrates that she is indeed gladly under authority. He adds women should do this “…because of the angels…” I’m honestly a bit puzzled why he would say this. It either refers to actual angels who watch over the Church with great interest, observing all we do…or the word angel means messenger (original Greek), implying that those who witness men and women acting disgracefully in worship will give a bad report to others in the community. v11-12 is Paul’s brief reminder that men and women need each other. We are not interchangeable, yes. But we’re also interdependent beings, needing one another.
Final Reason (v13-15)
“Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.”
Paul’s final argument is an appeal to what is natural or proper for men and women. In v13 he asks a rhetorical question, in which we’re meant to see that it is indeed improper for a wife to pray with an uncovered head. v14 adds to this saying it is proper or natural for man to have shorter hair, and for a woman to have longer hair. This implies that it is improper and unnatural for men to have longer hair and for women to have shorter hair.
This argument is a creation principle. Paul is teaching the Corinthians that God made men and thus men should live like and look like men. So too God made women and thus women should live like and look like women. As a general rule and a principle from nature, Paul is saying it is proper for men to have shorter hair and women to have longer hair. Nature teaches us this. As woman is the glory of man, now we read in v15 that long hair is the glory of a woman. Paul even then states that her long hair is given to her by God as a covering.
Now, this would’ve stood out in Corinth because Corinth was a place that blurred the distinction of men and women. God desires these gender lines to not be blurred in His Church. Hence, we find all this discussion about hair length, head coverings, and how men and women were made so that the Christian men and women in Corinth would live like how God intended them to.
Word of Caution (v16)
“If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.”
This final verse is important because Paul doesn’t want the Christians in Corinth to be combative over this issue. Rather, the Church is to characterized by faith, hope, and love. Why would anyone be contentious about this issue? Because it gets at the heart of what it means to be men and women. Another reason people get contentious about this issue is because they differ on how to interpret this passage. It’s clear that men should uncover their heads in worship, and it’s clear that women should cover their heads in worship, but what constitutes that covering? Is it an actual covering? Or is it a woman’s hair? I think it’s her hair, some believe otherwise. Should we get combative about this? Paul says no.
In summary, I do not think this passage teaches a definitive argument for literal head coverings for women in worship that stands as a timeless requirement for the whole Church. In some circles there has been a bit of a resurgence of head coverings in worship…but I'm not persuaded. I understand the feminist movement in the 60’s changed things in our culture, but it is impossible to pin the lack of head coverings entirely on that movement! Most of the head covering movement seems like an overreaction to the feminist movement…just like Christian nationalism overreacts to the modern woke movement.
I think this passage is all about headship, honor and shame, and proper behavior in worship. I think Paul is primarily concerned with maintaining, respecting, and celebrating gender distinctions in worship rather than a specific custom that is binding on all generations.
Two quick principles to takeaway from this passage:
First, Honoring Marriage and Authority
The head covering in Corinth indicated that a woman was married. No such parallel exists today with modern fashionable head coverings. So, I think we can honor the head covering principle today by encouraging married women to wear whatever symbolizes being married in their own cultures.
Second, Honoring God in our Design
God made us male and female in the beginning. We should honor such a design by maintaining the two gender distinction in our daily living and in the Church. We affirm that both male and female were made in the beginning in the image of God, different and complementary of one another, not interchangeable. So too anything we do to blur this gender line in life and worship is unbiblical.
For men: it is improper for a man to act like a woman, or to dress like a woman, or to have long hair. Men are to be men.
For women: it is improper for a woman to act like a man, or to dress like a man, or to shave her head. Women are to be women.
