on 1 Corinthians 11:10

Photo by Nashua Volquez-Young from Pexels

on 1 Corinthians 11:10

It was my second pastorate. I had taken a few years off to get some age and maturity, and now I was back as the only pastor of a small church. What I thought I needed desperately was a mentor – an older man who could teach me about life and ministry in the “real world” to complement all the head knowledge I had gained in Bible college.

I thought I had located the target. He was older, and appeared to have a great deal of biblical knowledge and also a zeal for the things of God. So, I asked him to spend some time with me, and he appeared eager to do so.

At first, I was overjoyed. I finally had a chance to complete my ministry education under the tutelage of someone who didn’t just know – he understood.

But after I had spent a few sessions with my new mentor, he hit me with something I did not expect. He said that he had come to the conclusion that the reason the church was ineffective is that we were in direct disobedience to 1 Corinthians 11:10.

• “Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels” (NASB).

My mentor had come to the conclusion that the New Testament taught a clear hierarchy in the Bible, where all males were under the headship of Christ, and all females were under the headship of males. He further suggested that the head covering was God’s prescribed symbol of that submissive relationship.

I struggled with the thought. Had I missed out on God’s blessing by not demanding that females in my congregation – including my wife – acknowledge my authority over them as a male?

This was years before my seminary experiences, but it was at this time that I was forced to grapple with the meaning of this text and its implications for gender relations in marriage and ministry.

My own library was too meager to deal with the exegetical and theological issues involved in studying that text. Consequently, I left to stay with a friend of mine in a larger city who had much better resources.

One of those resources Gordon Fee’s commentary on 1 Corinthians.

_______________________

Here is the bibliographical citation of a recent version of the commentary:

Fee, Gordon D. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Grand Rapids, Mich: William B. Eerdmans, 2014.

_______________________

Fee struggled with the text of this verse because he could not see exactly why the text said what it said it in this context. He pointed out that the words “a symbol of” (in italics in the NASB above) are not in the actual Greek text. They are included for clarity as an interpretation. If one read the Greek text without those words, they would naturally read “the woman ought to have the right to decide (ἐξουσία) over her head.” Fee understood that most are interpreting the text to say the opposite. It was assumed that in Corinth there were some rebellious wives who had refused to wear head coverings in worship. Paul was cracking down on that rebellion by demanding that wives wear head coverings, to show their submission.

Fee did not offer a solution to the problem in that commentary. He merely noted the unexpected wording of the text.

I knew that Corinth was famous for its divisions. I can imagine that one of those factions within the Corinthian church prided itself on its freedom in Christ. I surmised a possible solution to the wording of 1 Corinthians 11:10.

My assumption is that some husbands (members of the assumed freedom faction) in Corinth are insisting that their wives go uncovered during worship, to prove that they are free to do so. The wives are horrified to do such an embarrassing thing in that culture, so they appealed to Paul. That is why Paul says something that seems so out of place if you think he is arguing for submission. He says that the wives should have the right to decide (ἐξουσία) what to do with their own heads.

He gives three reasons for this instruction: First, he says that what wives do reflects back (εἰκών) to their husbands’ reputation (δόξα), so they should not be forced to do something that would shame their husbands (even if it might be their husbands who want them to do it).

Secondly, he points back to creation, reminding the husbands that — like Eve — their wives were lovingly created on account of them. When they worship, they reflect that fact by wearing the head covering.

Thirdly, when he said “because of the angels” Paul is reminding the Corinthians of what he said earlier in this letter about angels. “Do you not know that we are going to decide the fate of angels? So, why not questions of normal life?” (6:3). In that context, Paul was desperately trying to get the Corinthians to stop taking each other to secular court. He said that believers should be able to resolve their own conflicts because someday they will be deciding the fate of angels. He was teaching the principle of personal judgment. He’s doing the same thing in here chapter 11. He’s arguing that the wives of Corinth have the wisdom to decide for themselves whether or not to wear a head-covering when they worship.

I studied this text in its context that day, for so long I got a headache. But I concluded that this text is being misused when people use it as a proof-text for male superiority.

When I shared the results of my study with my “mentor” he concluded that I was apostate and soon thereafter left the church.

My translation of 1 Corinthians 11:10

• 1 Corinthians 11:10 For this reason, the wife ought to have the right to decide about her head – because of the angels.

This text is quoted and referred to copiously by proponents of complementarianism. Interestingly, complementarians do not usually argue that Christian women should wear head coverings in worship. But they do argue that God has prescribed certain roles for males, and certain for females.

This text does not establish preordained roles for people on the basis of their gender. It teaches human freedom and human responsibility. In its context, the apostle is trying to undo damage done by a group of men who are sure that they know best how to treat the women in their congregation. Their usurping their authority over the women was a denial of what Paul taught in Galatians 3:28. Consequently, Paul called a stop to it.

Sadly, bad translations of this text continue to foster the same kind of thinking that Paul saw necessary to refute.