Taught by
Stephen ArmstrongAccess all of our teaching materials through our smartphone apps conveniently and quickly.
Taught by
Stephen ArmstrongLast week we concluded our study of Paul’s explanation of Christian liberty
In three chapters, Paul addressed the Corinthians’ rights to consume meat sacrificed to idols
Paul addressed this topic in his letter because the Corinthians themselves had apparently asked about the practice
He began the section in Chapter 8 with the introduction, “Now concerning…” which is the indication that Paul has moved to a new topic
And then for the next three chapters, Paul worked his way through a series of points on the matter of eating meat
Paul has received other questions from Chloe and the delegation, and he will address each in turn in his letter
But Paul also introduces topics of his own along the way
For example, in answering the question on meat, Paul introduced his own topic of Christian liberty
We can see Paul wanted to make sure the church understood a larger context even as he addressed their particular concern
As we enter Chapter 11 today, we find Paul moving even farther away from the question he was asked, yet remaining on the general topic of liberty
This tells us Paul hasn’t yet moved on to a new question
Nevertheless, what follows is new subject matter
Instead, Paul is about to raise a couple of new topics because he’s heard of abuses of liberty taking place in the church
He introduces his concerns with a couple of statements
Paul starts with an exhortation that the church should follow Paul’s lead, imitating Paul’s self-restraint from Chapter 10
Remember at the end of Chapter 10 Paul says he became all things to all men, seeking to win them over to Christ
Paul was willing to set aside any personal privilege or freedom if necessary to be more effective in serving Christ
He did these things gladly, and he asks other Christians to see ministry and liberty in a similar way
Secondly, Paul offers the church a praise concerning their willingness to hold firmly to certain traditions Paul delivered to them during his visit
For us, the word “tradition” can carry a negative sense
Some religions rely on tradition to an unhealthy extent
Relying on tradition instead of following the Lord
But at other times, traditions can be good and useful if they are consistent with the word of God
They can teach godliness or guide our conduct in helpful ways
In this case, the word for traditions in Greek refers to something handed down as an honored practice
These are things worthy of respect and practice
And Paul says the Corinthians showed the appropriate respect for traditions Paul handed down to them
They observed them as taught and they stuck with them even after Paul left
Remember, the Corinthian church was the first Greek church in history
They had little prior exposure to Jewish thought and practice
They knew little or nothing of the promised Messiah
Meanwhile, they had a culture replete with pagan traditions and practices they needed to unlearn
We can’t underestimate how difficult this transition can be for any culture unfamiliar with the God of Israel or Christianity
Christians have traditions that God’s word calls us to observe and hand down
Practices like baptism, the Lord’s supper and gathering together
These things are called traditions in the sense that they are cherished rituals handed down from generation to generation
But they are not manmade traditions, so they are not optional or unimportant
They have been handed down because they teach important spiritual lessons or witness to our faith
We call these things tradition because they come with some degree of flexibility in the way the ritual is observed
For example, baptism requires immersion in water, but it makes no difference if it’s a pool, river, lake or bathtub
The Lord’s Supper requires the elements of bread and the pressing of grapes, but it makes no difference the form either takes
In all cases, our only priority should be whether the proper message is being delivered through the observance of the tradition
If the form of our observance distorts or changes the message, then we have ventured too far away and violated the tradition
Paul says the Corinthians have been good to adopt and hold to the Christian traditions he delivered
But in a couple of cases, the Corinthians were allowing their pursuit of liberty to interfere with their practice of these traditions and thereby distort the messages
Paul will address two such examples in this chapter
We’ll look at one example today and the other next week
In v. 3 Paul moves directly into a discussion of the first tradition
Paul says God is the Head of Christ, Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman
Paul is speaking concerning the administration of the family
Let’s look at each item on the list
I’ve reordered Paul’s list a little so it moves from top to bottom
First, the Father is the Head of the Son, Christ
This is an important principle of the Trinity
We know God to be Three Persons and yet One God, which is a mystery in our limited understanding
No One Person of the Godhead created any other member
All Three coexisted from before the beginning, we’re told in scripture
We can see all three present in the very opening verse of Genesis
Nevertheless, we also find a distinction of roles within the Godhead
For example, the Son obeys the Father, while the Father instructs the Son
The Father gives a Bride to His Son, while the Son presents the Bride to the Father spotless
The Son gives His Spirit to us, while the Spirit leads us to the Son
The Son prays to the Father, while the Father glorifies His Son
And so on…
These roles imply a certain hierarchy
So Paul reminds the church that even Christ respects and honors the authority of the Father as His Head
Moving down the chain of authority, Paul says Christ is the Head of every man
The word for man is aner, which is the word for husband
So we see Paul is talking about leadership in a family
He isn’t talking about society in general
This is a discussion about the leadership structure in a single household
So a husband answers to Christ for his decisions and his leadership in his home
Christ’s headship will be most clearly evident at the man’s judgment when the Lord will pass judgment on how he cared spiritually for his family
But Christ’s authority over a husband doesn’t wait for that moment
Everyday the Lord is working through His Spirit to guide Christian husbands to love and lead their wives and children
To be the teacher in the home
To model obedience to Christ and His word
To patiently guide and even discipline his family to ensure godliness reigns
Husbands bear this responsibility and they can’t avoid or delegate it
Finally, Paul says the man is the head of a woman
Once again, Paul uses the word for husband here
Also notice Paul doesn’t say a husband is the head of every woman
In other words, a husband has leadership authority over his wife (and children obviously)
But men in general are not automatically over all woman
Outside a family, men and women operate in equal terms
Within a single family, however, there is a hierarchy that God Himself has directed for good purposes
A husband has the responsibility, the privilege and burden for the spiritual welfare of his family
And the family, both wife and children, are commanded by scripture to honor and respect the man’s role as leader
We find plenty of other places where this truth is echoed
Regardless of how well a husband leads, a wife is commanded to do her best to respect his authority in the home
In fact, the Bible teaches that a wife can best encourage her husband to live up to his leadership responsibilities by remaining submitted to his authority despite his failings
The principle is similar to the one we apply to children and parents
No matter how fallible parents may be, a child is forever commanded to honor the parent and submit to their authority at least as long as they live in the home
Only in circumstances when the parent is abusive or dangerously neglectful do they forfeit their authority
Likewise, only in extreme circumstances when a husband crosses the line to become abusive or reckless should a wife consider challenging his authority
Interestingly, Paul doesn’t take a lot of time at this point to reinforce this truth
His statement in v.3 is given more as a reminder to the church of past teaching
Instead, Paul moves forward in the next verse to connect this spiritual truth to a tradition he wants to reinforce
In vs.4-5 Paul reminds the church of the tradition for wearing various head coverings, whether men or women
In Paul’s day, the Jewish and Christian cultural tradition was that men never wear head coverings in worship while women always wore a covering
Paul says for a man to go against this tradition disgraces his head
The Greek word for head is the same in every place we’ve seen it used in this chapter
It’s the same Greek word in v.3 as it is in v.4
The word head has two meanings in Greek
It can mean your skull of course
But it can also mean a person of authority, as in Christ is the head of every man
Paul uses the word in both senses in v.4
Paul says that any many who wears a covering on his physical head is disgracing Christ, Who is his authority
Likewise, a wife who arrives in church without a head covering is disgracing her head, that is her husband
In fact, Paul says a wife who would dare to appear in church without a head covering is as disgraceful to her husband as a wife who shaved her head entirely!
Why are these behaviors so problematic?
And is Paul expecting all Christians everywhere to observe these rules, including us today?
Before we can answer these questions, we must recognize the relationship between the tradition and the message they are communicating
Remember, we said that traditions, even those mandated by scripture, exist to edify, educate and witness concerning a central truth
They are not magic or hocus pocus, and they don’t exist for their own sake
We aren’t called to observe them in a mindless, ritualistic manner
We are supposed to follow a tradition with an appreciation of the underlying message it’s trying to communicate
And in some cases, we may need to modify the ritual observance to better reflect the message in a changing culture
In short, the message takes precedence over form in any tradition
So before we can determine what aspects of the tradition of head coverings would apply today, we first need to ask what message did a head covering send in Paul’s day
And in the next passage Paul explains the importance of these things in his day and culture
In Paul’s day, a woman’s choice of whether she wore a head covering or how she wore her hair carried a certain message
Specifically, failing to wear a head covering in the worship communicated she felt she was an equal in authority with her husband
The head covering was a symbol that declared, “I am submitted to someone else”
So if a married woman dispensed with her head covering, she was declaring loud and clear she was no longer submitted to her husband
She was saying that she lacked respect for her husband’s authority
That’s why Paul says in v.5 that such a woman disgraces her husband (her head)
Any woman who did such a thing knew full well what she was doing and how her choice would be interpreted
What would be communicated if you were on trial for a serious crime and you chose to show up in court wearing shorts and flip flops, while chewing gum loudly throughout the proceedings
Do you think the judge would understand you were showing the court contempt?
That’s what it meant for a woman to intentionally reject a head covering
Paul says if a woman was willing to defy the head covering tradition, she might as well shave her head
Paul is referring to another, similar tradition that expected a woman to grow her hair long
If a woman chose to shave her head, she was sending a not-so- subtle message that she wanted to be viewed as an equal to a man
Prostitutes usually cut their hair very short, as a way of advertising what kind of woman they were to their customers
Also, the Law required that a woman caught in the act of adultery was required to have her hair cut off
So Paul challenges any woman who wants to protest against submission by saying don’t make your protest in a subtle way…go all the way
Paul says just shave your head and make sure everyone knows your true heart
He says this to shame them for setting aside these traditions without giving a thought to the greater good of the body
Perhaps some women began to defy the tradition out of a misguided view of liberty
Whatever their purpose in it, their behavior ignored an important tradition engrained in the culture
So it sent an unavoidable message of defiance
And then Paul moves to explain the full message behind the tradition
The tradition of wearing head coverings was a testimony in Paul’s day to the order of Creation
In v.7 Paul says God created man from nothing and in His own image
This is a testimony to God’s power bringing Him glory
So a tradition arose for men to leave their head uncovered as they worship to symbolize there is nothing between them and the Lord
This tradition reflects the man as the chief authority in the home as God designed the family
But when God created Woman as a companion for Adam, He created her from Adam’s flesh
God says a wife finds her chief purpose in the family in desiring, supporting and helping her husband
Her creation from Adam’s body is a testimony of this intimate relationship with, spiritual dependence upon her husband
So Paul says in v.9 that a wife is to the glory of her husband in the sense that she brings honor to her husband by submitting to his authority
Therefore a tradition arose for a woman to wear a head covering in worship as a testimony that she is covered or protected by her husband
Therefore, Paul says a woman ought to have this symbol of the man’s authority on her head when worshipping
She was expected to keep this tradition because if she didn’t, she would communicate a defiant attitude
Think of it like table manners
We eat with forks and knives because it’s a tradition
And if we purposely defied the tradition, it would offend others unnecessarily
So we keep the tradition because we agree with the principle of showing concern and kindness for others
Of course this tradition says nothing about a woman’s access to the Lord or her relationship with the Lord
No woman is required to work through a man in reaching the Lord
And women are not lessor members of the body of Christ
Paul makes that clear that men and women are equals in spiritual terms
God has designed reproduction so that both man and woman are equally important to the process
Ensuring that no man can say he isn’t dependent on a woman and vice versa
Every man had a mother and every woman had a father
And in that way, Paul says we all trace our origins to God
But in the way God designed men and women, Paul says we can see clear, physical signs that God knowingly made men and women differently
Men have traditionally kept short hair and women have traditionally valued long hair
These traditions have existed from Adam and Eve until today
Paul says these differences were designed by God to reflect the differences in the family roles
A woman is glorified by having a covering of hair
While men are dishonored by having a covering of hair
These things are tradition based on the physical differences
And these things send a message about God’s design for spiritual authority in the family
So the big question for us…do we still share an obligation to observe this tradition?
The answer is it depends
If we find ourselves in a culture where head coverings still carry this meaning, then we should observe the tradition
There are some places in the world and some Christian communities even in this country where these traditions persist
If we are in these settings, then Paul’s instructions are fully appropriate for us
In many other places, though, the traditional meaning of head coverings has been forgotten
So that today if a woman were to wear a head covering, few would understand its meaning
More importantly, if a woman fails to wear a head covering, no one assumes she is defying her husband’s authority
Our customs have changed to the point that the tradition is no longer meaningful
Is it wrong for a church to maintain this custom?
No. A church body certainly has freedom to resurrect this tradition and asks women to observe head coverings out of respect for its meaning
On the other hand, other churches are equally free to pay no attention to head coverings
Because the Biblical message of submission isn’t being undermined in the process
Not every tradition can be set aside entirely, but I believe this is one that can be
The message of wives living in submission to husbands will never change
But how we choose to demonstrate that truth has and will change over time
If we are chained to the ritual rather than to the message, we are at risk of becoming slaves to legalistic rules divorced from any meaning
Instead, we want to remain focused on the teaching behind anything we practice