“There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.”
- Galatians 3:28 NRSB
In Part one: We asked these questions:
1. Are there other passages that align with Paul's teaching here?
2. If not, are there passages that indicate this is a teaching or practice that many other churches obeyed?
In part two, we went through some of the local cultural challenges and influences in Corinth surrounding pagan temple worship. This was a response to this logical statement we made after answering no to questions one and two:
3. If one and two above are both no...or if there are contradictory passages where clearly there were women who did not have their heads covered while praying...then this passage must have a local implication which requires more study.
Today, we will grapple with the biblical text itself! Once again, we need some upfront notes...
There are many interpretations of this text, I have grappled with several interpretations even recently. I’ve read commentaries by Scholars and Theologians like Gordon D Fee, Douglas Stuart, Marion L Saurds, Winn Grifin, Lucy Peppiat, Verlyn D. Verbrugre, Murray J. Harris and finally Leon Morris. Each of these qualified theologians have compelling cases for their interpretations. Notably, each of these interpretations leaves unanswered challenges and questions. What I am looking for in terms of interpretation of scriptures is affirmation in other parts of scripture and alignment specifically to the teachings of Christ.
This is one of the most difficult texts in the New Testament to understand and or to try to explain. We know from parts one and two that the scriptures always supports itself in truth claims. The covering - a command for all ages and all cultures just does not hold water as it is so contrary to books like Galatians, Romans and the gospels. Whatever the case, we know that a literal reading where Paul is telling the Corinthian church to move back towards legalism does not hold water Biblically so we need to dig deeper to make sense of the text.
We need to realize that this passage is not a "salvation" centric passage. It is connected to specific Corinthian issues surrounding order of worship services and unity in the Church. As we proceed, keep in mind the previous parts detailing the "melting pot" of cultures. These influences would have created significant challenges in these smaller house churches or in secretive gatherings. The congregation was less than 5 years old as well. There would have been many dissenting opinions on propriety and culture - all centered around the one unifying purpose of worshiping Jesus Christ.
We won't settle the debate here. If you disagree... that’s okay! Even as I have released this article I am still studying the whole topic of women in ministry, complimentarianism and egalitarianism. I’ve landed in a place where I do not fit into either evangelical camp, much like a growing number of biblical scholars. There may be more coming in this subject on future posts.
Let's dig in!
1 Corinthians 11:2-3 NRSV
"I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions just as I handed them on to you. But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the husband is the head of his wife, and God is the head of Christ."
The Apostle Paul begins with a compliment in this section. Keep in mind the chapter headings were added later. That means this whole book of Corinthians was not necessarily broken up this way. This was likely a "subject change" or transition paragraph.
After complimenting the Church faithful, he starts with a "but" about headship. A lot of men and women get stuck in the weeds here, trying to establish a hierarchy that looks like this:
The challenge with this is that it is not entirely biblical! Let me ask a question:
Is Christ equal with God?
The answer is yes! The doctrine of the Trinity establishes that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one. They are three distinct parts of one being that make up YHWH. We would not draw a chart like this for the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We understand that the Trinity is not hierarchical; headship appears to be symbiotic...even equal. If they are equal...then Christ cannot be less than God! Further to this, since Paul is referring to the sequence of creation events in verses 8-9 his use of the Greek word “kephalé” (head) does not mean ruler. This word is often referred to in scripture as “the source”. This of course would be backed up by Paul’s reference to the creation sequence for Adam and Eve in verses 8-9. God was the source for Adam’s beginning, Adam was the source for Eves beginning. This is a relational observation or statement and not a statement of authority sequence.
If Paul is not establishing a new ruling hierarchy that would contradict his other letters or Bible texts, as such we need to find out what he's saying here! Further to that, biblical leadership and authority would invert this “triangle” - God would support man, man would support woman. This passage from Philippians speaks to Jesus' equality with God in regards to this biblically based headship. Jesus was God incarnate, yet he became man. He became obedient to himself in a sense. Paul used language like this to make a point in counter to the culture that was consumed with hierarchy.
"If then there is any encouragement in Christ, any consolation from love, any sharing in the Spirit, any compassion and sympathy, make my joy complete: be of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility regard others as better than yourselves. Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the interests of others. Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death—even death on a cross."
Philippians 2:1-8 NRSV
Going back to the head covering passage, we can see that Paul is indicating here that while there is equality, there is not "sameness". This pertains to Christ and God...who are two parts of a three-part triune God. These are equal parts but also different in function and purpose. Similarly, Man and Woman are equals but function differently as part of one unit in marriage. They were created in Genesis - Adam first, and then Eve was created "from" Adam.
What is this saying then? Getting back to this word "head", translated from the Greek as "kephalé,"… it can also be translated as "cornerstone." It is the "topmost" part of the body, the source of life! Now, when you read the passage...you see God is the source for Christ in his incarnation, Christ is the source for man (referring to the Genesis account "let us make man in our image"), man is the source for woman (also referring to the Genesis account).
This is clearly not a corporate hierarchy but a servant worship of Christ mutually supported by the head of all. The husband sacrificing himself for the wife and the wife responding to this so they are mutually serving the Lord together (the head).
Now things get interesting... if you are someone who’s studied the Bible extensively you are hearing a whole bunch of other passages rattling around in your brain. Jesus teaching on servant leadership, Paul’s teaching on men loving their wives as Christ loved the Church “giving himself up for her”, honouring his wife, lifting her up… the list goes on!
When we read from here on, we can easily get lost in translation. When we covered the cultural context of the Corinthian Church in the last two articles we learned of the pagan history of Corinth and the cultural influences of Greek, Roman, Asian, and Jewish cultures all mixing together in this city. We also learned of the head covering traditions of the Roman men as well as some of the cultural influences on women's head coverings as it pertains to Roman, Greek, and Jewish customs.
One of the peculiar things about Paul's writings is the way he often presents the hearers' beliefs back to themselves in his letters. He does this several times in the previous chapters of this letter. Let's go through these.
1 Corinthians 6:12 NRSV
Paul's quote of Corinthians:
"All things are lawful for me," but not all things are beneficial."
Paul's Response:
"All things are lawful for me," but I will not be dominated by anything."
1 Corinthians 6:13-20 NRSV
Paul's quote of Corinthians:
"Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food, and God will destroy both one and the other."
Paul's response:
"The body is meant not for fornication but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. And God raised the Lord and will also raise us by his power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Should I therefore take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that whoever is united to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For it is said, "The two shall be one flesh." But anyone united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Shun fornication! Every sin that a person commits is outside the body; but the fornicator sins against the body itself. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you were bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body."
In the above passage, we covered last time we see Paul referring to the Corinthians' separation of body and spirit...a Gnostic belief that grew and is still active today in the modern Church. This belief took on all kinds of forms. I've covered Gnostic beliefs several times, and let's continue...
One more here:
1 Corinthians 8:8-13 NRSV
Paul's quote of Corinthians:
"Food will not bring us close to God." We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do."
Paul's response:
"But take care that this liberty of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. For if others see you, who possess knowledge, eating in the temple of an idol, might they not, since their conscience is weak, be encouraged to the point of eating food sacrificed to idols? So by your knowledge, those weak believers for whom Christ died are destroyed. But when you thus sin against members of your family, and wound their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if food is a cause of their falling, I will never eat meat, so that I may not cause one of them to fall."
We see the pattern. Further to that...it continues after the "covering" passage in 1 Corinthians 11 in chapter 14 starting in verse 34:
Paul's quote of Corinthians:
"women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law also says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church."
Paul's response:
"Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only ones it has reached?) Anyone who claims to be a prophet, or to have spiritual powers, must acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command of the Lord. Anyone who does not recognize this is not to be recognized. So, my friends, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues; but all things should be done decently and in order."
Not sure about that?
Why would Paul say here that women should stay silent in church but in chapter 11 say they can speak with a covering on? Also, why would Paul negate Joel 2, which the apostles quote in Acts 2 again as follows:
"'In the last days it will be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams."
Acts 2:17 NRSV
How does 1 Corinthians 11 look if we read it with the assumption that Paul may be quoting the beliefs of the local church back to them?
Paul: (quoting their belief)
"Any man who prays or prophesies with something on his head disgraces his head, but any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled disgraces her head—it is one and the same thing as having her head shaved. For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or to be shaved, she should wear a veil. For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or to be shaved, she should wear a veil. For a man ought not to have his head veiled, since he is the image and reflection of God; but woman is the reflection of man. For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or to be shaved, she should wear a veil. For a man ought not to have his head veiled, since he is the image and reflection of God; but woman is the reflection of man. Indeed, man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for the sake of woman, but woman for the sake of man. For this reason, a woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels."
Due to the local pagan, Greek and Jewish influence, there were significant issues in the orderliness of the service in Corinth. Like Ephesus, pagan influences were certainly a part of the issue, but combined with that, Greek women were likely more relaxed with their hair and coverings while Roman and Jewish women were likely more traditional and, as evidenced above, trying to differentiate from the pagan practices. There was very likely dissention amoung the faithful. This is evident at the beginning of Paul’s letter when he called out various factions in the Church. Paul has been focusing on three things in the letter to the church at Corinth:
The issue of sin in the church, in particular sexual sin
The orderliness of the service.
Divisions or factions
Now… after Paul states the Corinthian position, he changes his tactic; we see the word "nevertheless" in the NRSV. The Greek word "plén," from which this word comes, does not translate well into English. It can also be translated "except that".
Paul says (in reply)
"Nevertheless (except that), in the Lord, woman is not independent of man or man independent of woman. For just as woman came from man, so man comes through woman; but all things come from God."
Paul rebuts the Corinthians position of hierarchy by saying yes man was created first but that also man is now born from a woman. So our “headship” or source… in fact all authority comes from God.
Paul asks a rhetorical question with his classic sarcasm:
"Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head unveiled? Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair, it is degrading to him"
Why would Paul say that long hair for men is wrong? Paul himself grew out his hair and cut it off as mentioned in Acts 18:18.
"At Cenchreae, he had his hair cut, for he was under a vow." NRSV
This vow is referred to as the Nazarite vow...referred to a season where men would not cut their hair found in Numbers 6. In this season, men would avoid alcohol, let their hair grow long, and avoid dead bodies.
Clearly, Paul did not have an issue with a man having long hair if he had taken a nazarite vow. Let's continue in the text at hand now:
Paul continues his rebuttal:
"But, if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering."
The word "but" here is translated from the Greek word "de," which means "on the other hand". Now this verse is read:
"(On the other hand), if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering."
Paul concludes the covering segment of his letter:
"if anyone is disposed to be contentious—we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God"
This last part is so telling of Paul's true intent. He wants an orderly service, less distractions, but he wants to see freedom. He says previously (somewhat sarcastically) that the woman's hair is given for a covering... thus freeing the Corinthian women from trying to keep up an image, but then he says that no other churches have contentions about this head covering topic. They have freedom in Christ! The covering or not covering is a non-issue in Paul's travels, which is probably why this passage is the only reference in scripture.
This interpretation would be consistent with how Paul teaches in Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, and Philippians. Paul HATED legalism and additional rules that bogged down the life of faith. Why would he teach differently here?
This is an important question to answer!
If we approach the text from a standpoint of unity and an orderly service it pieces together much more effectively throughout the Corinthian letter. In chapter one verse 11 Paul says “For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there are quarrels among you, my brothers and sisters.”. This is further backed up in chapter 11 verse 18 where he says “to begin with, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you; and to some extent I believe it”.
Paul wants to see “freedom within a framework here”. You can see his passionate drive for a Church that rises above it’s cultural influences! The clashes and cultural divisions combined with the sexually charged culture outside of the Church made for significant challenges to unity and morality inside the Church!
“And all of us, with unveiled faces, seeing the glory of the Lord as though reflected in a mirror, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord, the Spirit.” 2 Corinthians 3 18 NRSB
“If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the universe, why do you live as if you still belonged to the world? Why do you submit to regulations, “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch”? All these regulations refer to things that perish with use; they are simply human commands and teachings. These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-imposed piety, humility, and severe treatment of the body, but they are of no value in checking self-indulgence.”
Colossians 2:20-23 NRSV
I pray this helps someone to walk a bit freer in regards to this topic. Even if my current interpretation is wrong… I know based on the other scriptures I am familiar with that this passage is not instructive to todays church EXCEPT that today as well we should strive for sexual purity and orderliness of service in our gatherings . I pray you find what freedom in Christ is and to walk in deep relationship with him that focuses not on the external… rather the inward working of the heart that will transform your life to reflect Christ in every place you go!
Here is a video on issues related to this head covering issue, -and women in ministry.
Comments