Head Coverings Are Not Biblical (1 Corinthians 11:2-16) Series

Today, we have the privilege of wrestling with 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. This passage has been called the most complicated, difficult passage in the NT (N.T Wright). Some of the most brilliant minds in NT studies have said that the key to the passage has not yet been unlocked (G. B. Caird). Almost every key word and phrase can mean multiple things, and is debated. The passage can only be understood, as a whole, through trying to reconstruct the historical situation that Paul is addressing. The problem is, that any reconstruction we make involves a little bit more imagination than is ideal.

And the amusing thing about all of this, is that the more time you spend studying the passage, and the more in-depth you get, the more problems you see.

If I wanted to try to work through every issue, and explain everything to the best of my ability, it would take a month, maybe. I'd have to write a little book, basically. And I'm not feeling any particular urge to do that. Instead, I'm going to simplify things, and pass over things. You aren't going to get a perfect explanation of every detail. But I think I can point you in the right direction in a single week, and give you the solution, and offer an application.

Our passage breaks up nicely into three sections: verses 2-3, 4-10, and 11-16. What we're going to see is that verses 2-3 are ambiguous, by themselves. Verses 4-10, if we're honest, are going to really bother us (Or they should!). And in verses 11-16, everything makes sense-- but it makes sense in a way that contradicts verses 4-10.

I'm going to read off my translation, partly just because it doesn't try to answer all the ambiguities of the Greek. Verses 2-3:

(2) Now, I commend you,

because all the things of mine [=all I taught] you remember,

and just as I handed over to you the traditions, you adhere firmly.

(3) Now, I wish you to have known that of every man/husband, the head/source is the Christ. ["of every man/husband" is focused, I think. Also, possibly, "the Christ."].

Now, the man/husband is the head/source of the woman/wife.

Now, the head/source of the Christ [is] the God.

When we read these verses, we should find ourselves asking some questions. Is Paul talking about men, or husbands? And what does the word "head" mean? Does head have to do with power, and authority, and hierarchy? Or does head mean something more like "source"? Like we'd talk about the head of the Mississippi, is Lake Itasca. But the most important question we can ask ourselves, is this: Why does Paul start by talking about the men, and their relationship to Christ? Why is it that the only place Paul puts focus, in the Greek, has do with men? People tend to read this passage, focused on women, thinking that women are the problem (h/t Lucy Peppiatt). But Paul starts with the men.

The other thing I want you to see, is that Paul doesn't unpack verses 2-3 really at all. He starts by praising the Corinthians for their adherence to what he taught them. And verse 3, presumably, is part of that teaching. So this is shared territory for Paul and the Corinthians.

At the same time, as we keep reading, we will get the impression that there is something about the way they've interpreted Paul's teaching, or applied it, that's wrong. They've twisted it, accidentally or not. Verse 3 is ambiguous, or open to misunderstanding, and the Corinthians have messed up Paul's teaching. And this whole section is basically designed to fix that misunderstanding.

With this, we come to verses 4-10. You'll notice in your translation handout that I've italicized these verses. And I'll explain why, a little later.

(4) Every man/husband praying or prophesying, having something on his head, shames/ disgraces/dishonors his head.

(5) Now, every woman/wife praying or prophesying with an uncovered/revealed head, shames/ disgraces/dishonors her head.

For one and the same, she is, with the one having been shaved.

(6) For if a woman/wife doesn't cover herself, her hair should also be shorn off.

Now, if it is shameful to be shorn or shaved, she should cover herself.

(7) For, on the one hand, a man must not cover his head,

the image and glory of God being.

Now. on the other hand, the woman, the glory of the man/husband, she is ["the glory of the man" is focused].

(8) For man isn't from woman, but woman from man.

(9) For indeed/also, a man wasn't created for the sake of the woman, but woman for the sake of the man.

(10) For this reason, the woman must have [a symbol of] authority upon her head, because of the angels/messengers.

Let's pause here for just a minute, and try to grab the argument of verses 4-10 as a whole. Verse 4 says that men should pray with head uncovered, so they don't disgrace their head. Presumably, this means that if men pray head uncovered, they dishonor Christ. Christ is their head.