This passage of Scripture is near-universally regarded as obsolete, the general view being: women in Greece wore veils in their daily life, and not to wear one was scandalous; therefore, Paul commanded the Christians at Corinth to wear the veil in order not to bring reproach upon Christ and the church, even though Christ does not command Christian women to wear the veil. Therefore, as today women of the world do not wear veils (excepting Islam), it is held that this passage no longer applies specifically (that is, women are not required to be veiled), but only in whatever general principles may be gleaned from it.
There are several immediate problems with this view, however:
- Paul is addressing the subject of approaching God in prayer – this is not cultural.
- The reasons he gives as the base of his argument are in no way culturally related.
- In Paul’s argument, he is speaking of a condition, not an object; that is, until vs. 15, when he gives the object he is speaking of.
- There is not agreement that Greek women wore veils, either in daily life or in worship.
- Vs. 16 makes it quite plain that this is applicable to all, in all ages.
From verses 14 & 15, we are able to see clearly what Paul is talking about; he is talking about hair length. God regards long hair to be a covering of the head, it’s purpose being to provide the woman with the cover he requires of her when she approaches him in prayer.
The Context
Peter wrote, “…knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers…,” 1Peter 1:18. We are redeemed out of the traditions we used to follow when we were in the world. Our citizenship is no longer with the land we live in, but instead is in the kingdom of Christ. We are merely strangers here, awaiting the return of our King, that we may go to our eternal land.
The context in which Paul is speaking is prayer to God, and prophesying. He is addressing, regulating, how the citizens of the kingdom of Christ approach their Creator when they pray to Him. This removes any possibility of this being a cultural issue.
The Reasons
Paul’s argument rests upon five pillars, none of which are culturally related:
- The relationship of God, Christ, man and woman to each other.
- The context of approaching God in prayer.
- The order of creation.
- Nature.
- The angels.
The Passage
Paul begins, “ Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you.” The traditions he is speaking of are the teachings of Christ which he had taught them during his first visit. His praise is that they keep them “just” as he delivered them, that is, they didn’t change anything, or leave anything out, but follow them as he told them.
But in verse 3, he begins with “But”, indicating that this is either an area in which they were falling short, or he is now giving them an additional teaching to what he had given them before. Either way, he is now giving them a teaching in an area where they were falling short of the law of Christ.
He then states, “But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.” This deals strictly with the interrelation between God, Christ, man and woman; as such, it cannot change, or be less true today than when it was written.
After stating this, he gives the context of his argument, “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved.” If a man prays or prophesies with his head covered, he dishonors Christ, who is his head. Conversely, if a woman prays or prophesies with her head uncovered, she dishonors man.
What is meant by being “covered” or “uncovered”? The Greek words being used do not indicate a physical object, like a hat or a veil, but denote a condition; literally, the word we render “cover” means “down from.” If a man prays with something down from his head, that is, with long hair, he dishonors Christ. But if a woman prays without something “down from” her head, she might as well shave her head; it’s already as if she had.
In vs. 6, he goes even further, “For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered.” If she won’t wear her hair so that it is “down from” her head, then she is to be shaved. “But if it is shameful…” This is his first appeal to nature, which he enlarges upon in vs. 13-15; it is taken for granted that all know that it is indeed shameful for a woman to be shaved, according to the natural state of things as created by God.
Vs. 7-8, “For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.”” This returns to and enlarges upon the first argument he made, that Christ is the head of man, and man the head of woman. He now says that we are the glory of our head; as Vine writes of it’s usage here, “of man as representing the authority of God, and of woman as rendering conspicuous the authority of man.” The relationship of the woman to the man is because of the creation order, namely, she was made of and for the man, not the other way around.
Vs. 9, “For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.” Of the angels it is written, “Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation?” Heb 1:14, and again, of the angel which went before Israel as they prepared to enter the land of Canaan, “Behold, I send an Angel before you to keep you in the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for He will not pardon your transgressions; for My name is in Him,” Exodus 23:20-22. Therefore, as the angels are ministering for us (though in a way we do not know), and as the woman is decreed by God to have a symbol of authority on her head, if she does not wear it, would this not be offensive to the angels, seeing as she is then being disobedient to the plan and purpose of God?
Vs. 11-12 are an aside, that even though the woman is under the authority of the man, nevertheless, we are not independent of each other, but both are necessary to the purpose of God. For woman originally came from the man, but now man is also born from the woman.
Vs. 13-15, “Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering.” We now get to the heart of the matter; all along Paul has been discussing hair length. He appeals to what we know by nature, that the natural, proper way is for man to have short hair, and the woman long hair, it even being a glory for her. And the reason is this: her long hair has been given to her to fulfill what is required of her, namely, that when she approaches God in prayer, she must have something “down from” her head.
Culture cannot enter into any of these preceding arguments; therefore, the argument that this is just a cultural regulation for Corinth has no merit.
Vs. 16, “But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.” The meaning of this verse is sometimes taken as, “what I have just said, is not applicable in the churches; this is a custom of the world, and we don’t subscribe.” But that really makes no sense. Why go through all the trouble of laying out a teaching, and then say it means nothing? Why then even mention it in the first place?
The meaning of the verse is, “Whatever contention someone may bring against this teaching, we do not recognize it. It is not open to debate. We have no other teaching in the churches of God, other than what I have just laid out.”
So, How Long is Long?
In answering this, it is important that we don’t go beyond what God has said. Basically, a woman’s hair must answer to “something down from.” Hair as short as a man’s doesn’t answer to this, even though there is hair on it. It is the same as the difference between a placemat and a tablecloth; the tablecloth hangs down from the table, while the placemat rests upon it. Only one fulfills the condition of “down from.” Therefore, a woman’s hair must be able to flow down and around. I observed a striking example of this, which I believe answers to God’s intention. There is a sister in Christ with whom I used to work, whose hair lay just beyond her shoulders. As she was bent over working, with her head bowed down, her hair literally covered her head, as it flowed down (which answers quite well to “peribolaion”, literally “that which is thrown round, a covering”). Now, obviously it didn’t completely cover her face, but I don’t believe it to be the intention for the woman to have her face completely covered.
The length of our hair is our own choice, but only to a certain point; it is possible to violate Scripture, at which point it becomes unacceptable to God. Short hair on women is fashionable among the world, as is longer hair on men; both are present in the church. But we have been called out from the world, to be a peculiar people unto God. Let us not turn from God in a desire to be like our neighbors.
For a discussion of the Greek underlying this passage, and of veils as it relates to this passage, click here.