What Does Paul's Argument About Head Coverings in 1 Corinthians 11 Say About Women's Role in Church?
An Ongoing Series Through Craig S. Keener's "Paul, Women and Wives" AKA The Theological Foundation for Why I Believe Women Can Serve as Pastors, Elders and Leaders in the Church
In Paul, Women & Wives, Dr. Craig S. Keener presents a substantive, Scripture-based defense for egalitarian theology, principles and practices. Join me as we explore the writings of Paul in a way that liberates women, not subjugates them.
We’re finally starting with the crux of the book: exegeting Paul’s letters and diving into Scripture. Keener has divided his book into two parts. Part 1 is about the Roles of Women in the Church (Chapters 1-3). Part 2 is about Women’s Role in the Family (Chapters 4-6).
Part 1: The Roles of Women in the Church
“There is in the entirety of the New Testament no evidence for the subordination of women that is practiced in many of our churches today, and certainly not sufficient evidence for men to rule out the validity of women’s calls to minister the word of God.”1
If there were a thesis for the book, this is it. All of Dr. Keener’s research and hermeneutical analysis in the remainder of this work is built to prove this statement. And he does an amazing job of presenting a scholarly reflection on Paul’s letters that demonstrate the subordination of women was never intended.
Here’s the problem: the subordination of women IS a common practice in most American churches today. There are many different statistics presented, some quite dubious, but all seem to reflect that less than 20% of leadership roles in the church are occupied by women, despite being half of the population. If our sisters aren’t allowed to fully share their gift, we’re missing out on so many blessings God is trying to give us. And this can’t measure the pain, shame and abuse that women are made to endure to take part in the body of Christ. Inferiority is not a fruit of the Spirit, nor is it Jesus’s design for His Church.
As a man, it’s really easy to treat gender roles in church like it doesn’t affect us. But I assure you: the subordination of women, even if we play a passive role as an “innocent bystander” in our congregations, is bad for our souls.
Chapter 1
Head Coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16
Interpretations of 1 Cor 11:2-16
Keener presents several potential interpretations of the passage that are quite provocative, frankly. However, my takeaway was pretty simple:
Paul’s argument about head coverings isn’t about “IF” women can pray or prophecy in the church (prophecy likely isn’t too different from preaching in the modern context), but “HOW” they should do so.
Women’s Head Coverings in Antiquity
Seclusion of Women in Classical Antiquity
Prostitutes or Pagan Prophetesses
Mourning or Shame?
Veiling Customs and Geography
Head Coverings in Religious Contexts
Hair, Beauty and Lust
“Jesus did not accept the traditional male excuse that a man’s lust was a woman’s fault (Matt. 5:28), but many other people in his day did; that excuse was used even more commonly in antiquity than it is today. Indeed, in our culture, saturated with the commercializing of the human body, we might have little sympathy for our ancient counterparts, who could be moved to lust at the sight of bare arms.”2
Like Jesus, Paul is putting ultimate responsibility for lust on men, while appealing to women to exercise their authority to help their brothers. However, the women are not required to do so. With full authority and autonomy over their own body and choices, Paul urges women to help their brothers out.
Class Conflict in Corinth?
A big part of Paul’s reason for writing about this could’ve been class conflict. The rich and the poor actually came together for church in the 1st Century and it created much conflict. Head coverings may be part of that.
“Today many churches avoid social conflicts by keeping people from different backgrounds in different churches.”3
Paul’s Four Arguments: Family, Creation, Nature and Custom
“In 11:3–16 Paul sets forth four main arguments. In this context, he could have simply said, “Do not cause your brother or sister to stumble,” but as in the case of food offered to idols, he instead presents a variety of supporting arguments to make a convincing case for all his readers.”4
The Husband as the Head: 1 Cor 11:3-16
What does “Head” mean? It might not mean what we think it means in our modern context. This definition and interpretation are a huge reason we may misunderstand this. I had never considered that “head” my not mean what I’ve always assumed it to mean.
Women not covering their heads could be dishonoring to their family. But we are all called to give up personal rights so we don’t dishonor those we love.
Not just intended for women, although women are the example.
Creation Order: 1 Cor 11:7-12
Paul is not ordering women, but attempting to persuade them. Give up your own rights.
While Paul cites creation order for the sake of the argument, he understood that we are derived from one another and that God is the ultimate source.
Because of Angels: 1 Cor 11:10
1 Cor 6:3 = we will judge angels. Referring back to that.
Context = they didn’t do chapter and verse. This whole letter would’ve been read at one time. So of course Paul will reference other “chapters” with subtle allusions and not footnotes.
An Appeal to Natural Order: 1 Cor 11:14
A common kind of argument in the ancient world.
Paul’s Appeal to Custom: 1 Cor 11:16
Conclusion
Paul’s arguments aren’t necessarily the reason behind his position. He is not necessarily asking women to cover their heads BECAUSE OF creation order or nature or customs, but using those as evidence for his appeal to all people to exercise their authority to help their brothers and sisters.
“Finally, and most significantly for this book, we should note that nothing in this passage suggests wives’ subordination.”5
Keener, Craig S.. Paul, Women, and Wives: Marriage and Women's Ministry in the Letters of Paul (p. 73). (Function). Kindle Edition.
Keener, Craig S.. Paul, Women, and Wives: Marriage and Women's Ministry in the Letters of Paul (p. 90). (Function). Kindle Edition. VIA Test. Jos. 9:5; Chariton Chaer. 6.4.5, imagining Callirhöe dressed as a huntress, like Artemis.
Keener, Craig S.. Paul, Women, and Wives: Marriage and Women's Ministry in the Letters of Paul (p. 93). (Function). Kindle Edition.
Keener, Craig S.. Paul, Women, and Wives: Marriage and Women's Ministry in the Letters of Paul (p. 95). (Function). Kindle Edition.
Keener, Craig S.. Paul, Women, and Wives: Marriage and Women's Ministry in the Letters of Paul (p. 120). (Function). Kindle Edition.
My personal belief is that Paul is quoting a faction of men from Corinth who wrote him in 1 Corinthians 11:4-6. I believe that it is a faction of men who want women to be veiled while praying or prophesying. The men are making a "literal" head argument saying:
4"Every man who has [anything] down over his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his [own] head. 5But every woman who has her head unveiled while praying or prophesying disgraces her [own] head, for it is one and the same thing as having been shaved. 6For if a woman is not veiled, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or to be shaved, let her be veiled."
Because the men made a "literal" head argument, Paul gives his model (v.3) with the "figurative" meaning of "head/kephale" which means "source/origin/first/beginning."
Then, in verses 7-16, Paul gives his rebuttal where he refers back to his model. He starts off by saying, 7"For a man indeed ought not to veil his [figurative] head, since He [Christ] is the image and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of man." Here, Paul is using Jesus Christ as a correlation as to why women should not be veiled. "Hyparchon" (V-PPA-NMS) is not referring to "aner" (N-NMS) in verse 7; it is referring to "Christos" (N-NMS) in verse 3. Indeed, it is Jesus Christ (not man) who is the image and glory of God. (Please see 2 Cor. 4:4, Col. 1:15, John 1:14, Heb. 1:3, Phil. 2:5-6, Rev. 21:23 for confirmation of this.) Male and female are created IN the image of God, but only Jesus Christ IS the image of God because He is the Word made flesh. He is the [visible] image of the invisible God.
So, Paul is saying that just as a man ought not to veil his head, Christ, since He is the image and glory of God, so also the man ought not to veil the woman since she is his glory. Then, in verses 8-10, Paul goes on to give the reasons as to why a woman is a man's glory. Also, verses 13-15 should be translated as statements, not questions. Paul is continuing to refute their argument by saying:
13"Judge for yourselves that it is proper for a woman to pray to God unveiled. 14For not even nature itself teaches you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, 15but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her because the long hair has been given [to us all] instead of a covering."
In verse 15, the pronoun "aute" (to her) is omitted by Papyrus 46, D, F, G, and also by the majority of later Greek manuscripts. Therefore, I do not believe it was original to Paul. Paul is saying that nature (which God has created) does not teach us that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him. God had commanded that men such as Samson and Samuel have long hair. If God did not want men to have long hair, then He would have disallowed it through nature just as He had disallowed women from growing mustaches or beards through nature. Also, Paul is saying that nature does not teach us that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory (as many women have undesirable hair). God did not give long hair to men to shame them, nor did He give long hair to women for vain beauty purposes. He gave (the option of) long hair to both men and women for protection (as a covering) from weather extremes so that they do not have to wear an additional covering every time they step outside. Both men and women can grow their hair long if they wish or cut it short if they so choose.
Paul ends the debate by saying, 16"But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice [of requiring women to veil their heads], nor have the people of God." Anyway, this is just what I believe from my study of Scripture. Thank you for allowing me to share.