Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary 1 Corinthians 11

This verse belongs to the previous discussion. The command given has a continual relevance, “Follow my example” (lit., “Ever become imitators [GK 3629] of me”). Paul is calling the Corinthians to the unity that had been disrupted (ch. 1). He can do this because he himself is an imitator of Christ (Galatians 2:20)—the same Christ who had dealt gently with Paul in all his prejudices (Acts 26:12–18).

Since Paul does not begin this section the way he did 7:1, 25 and later 12:1 (see introductory comment on 7:1–14:40), he is likely taking up the subject on his own rather than answering another question that had come in their letter to him (7:1).

Verses 3–16 have evoked considerable difference of opinion about the nature of the head covering and about the place of women both in public worship and in their relationship to men. The head covering has been interpreted as either a veil or shawl, or else hair—either long or short.

As to the use of veils, women in the ancient Orient were veiled in public or among strangers, but otherwise they were unveiled. Rebecca, for example, was unveiled till she met Isaac (Genesis 24:65). Painting on ancient pottery, however, shows Greek women in public without head coverings. In Corinth the women may well have gone to public meetings without veils. But the question is whether Paul is talking about the use of veils in public worship or about women letting their long hair hang loose—a sign of mourning or of the shame of an accused adulteress—rather than having it “put up.”

Since Paul does not begin this section the way he did 7:1, 25 and later 12:1 (see introductory comment on 7:1–14:40), he is likely taking up the subject on his own rather than answering another question that had come in their letter to him (7:1).

Verses 3–16 have evoked considerable difference of opinion about the nature of the head covering and about the place of women both in public worship and in their relationship to men. The head covering has been interpreted as either a veil or shawl, or else hair—either long or short.

As to the use of veils, women in the ancient Orient were veiled in public or among strangers, but otherwise they were unveiled. Rebecca, for example, was unveiled till she met Isaac (Genesis 24:65). Painting on ancient pottery, however, shows Greek women in public without head coverings. In Corinth the women may well have gone to public meetings without veils. But the question is whether Paul is talking about the use of veils in public worship or about women letting their long hair hang loose—a sign of mourning or of the shame of an accused adulteress—rather than having it “put up.”

Whichever view is held as to the nature of the head covering, the same basic principles emerge from the passage. In vv.3–10 Paul emphasizes the order of authority and administration in the divine structure of things. As every man is to be under Christ’s authority and Christ is under God’s authority, so the woman is under her husband’s authority. (Paul does not mean by this analogy that subordination in each case is of the same completeness.) Therefore, the woman should not demonstrate her authority by having her head uncovered, as the man did when he was praying and prophesying. Evidently at Corinth women were coming to church with their heads improperly covered, thus causing disorder and disrespect in the services. Paul is not necessarily giving his opinion on the propriety of women praying or prophesying in the church, which he later observes was being done (cf. 14:34), though some feel that since he mentions women praying and prophesying here, he approves of the practice. Paul’s point is that if a woman is in the public worship with her head uncovered, it is as if she had her head shaved (v.5). He insists that if the woman in fact does have her head uncovered, she should have her hair cut; on the other hand, since it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut or her head shaved, then, of course, she should have her head properly covered (v.6).

Whichever view is held as to the nature of the head covering, the same basic principles emerge from the passage. In vv.3–10 Paul emphasizes the order of authority and administration in the divine structure of things. As every man is to be under Christ’s authority and Christ is under God’s authority, so the woman is under her husband’s authority. (Paul does not mean by this analogy that subordination in each case is of the same completeness.) Therefore, the woman should not demonstrate her authority by having her head uncovered, as the man did when he was praying and prophesying. Evidently at Corinth women were coming to church with their heads improperly covered, thus causing disorder and disrespect in the services. Paul is not necessarily giving his opinion on the propriety of women praying or prophesying in the church, which he later observes was being done (cf. 14:34), though some feel that since he mentions women praying and prophesying here, he approves of the practice. Paul’s point is that if a woman is in the public worship with her head uncovered, it is as if she had her head shaved (v.5). He insists that if the woman in fact does have her head uncovered, she should have her hair cut; on the other hand, since it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut or her head shaved, then, of course, she should have her head properly covered (v.6).