Paul proceeded with a second supporting argument to correct the Corinthians' perversion regarding women's head coverings.
11:7 Men should not cover their heads in Christian worship because they are the glory of God. Whereas Paul referred to man being the image and glory of God, his primary point was that man is the glory of God. His reference to man as the image of God clearly goes back to Genesis 1:26-28, but there "glory"does not appear. "Glory"is Paul's word, his reflection on the creation of man. This is the word that he proceeded to use to contrast man and woman.
Notice that Paul did not say that the woman is to cover her head because she is the glory of man. Instead he proceeded to describe what her being his glory means. A subordinate glorifies the one in authority over him or her just by being in a subordinate position.
". . . he [Paul] says that woman is the glory of man--not his image, for she too shares the image of God, and is not (as some commentators have thought) more remote from God than is man."244
11:8 Woman is the glory of man, first, because she came from him in creation. As Adam glorified God by being the product of His creation, so Eve glorified Adam because she came from him. The female sex did not produce the male sex, but the first woman came from the first man. God formed Eve out of a part of Adam whom He created first (Gen. 2:18, 20).
11:9 Furthermore woman is the glory of man because God created Eve to complete Adam. God did not create the man as a companion for the woman but the woman for man's sake (Gen. 2:21-22). When Adam saw Eve for the first time, he "gloried"in her (Gen. 2:23). Neither of these verses (vv. 8-9) refer to the subordination of woman under man, though many interpreters have read this into the text. Rather they refer to her origin as being in man.
11:10 Paul drew a conclusion from what he had already said (vv. 7-9) and gave a supporting reason for his conclusion.
Unfortunately the NASB translators have added "a symbol of"to the original text thus implying that the head covering is what women ought to wear on their heads. The Greek text simply says "the woman ought to have authority on her head."In the preceding verses the reason is that she is the man's glory. In light of verse 7, we might have expected Paul to say that because the woman is the glory of the man she should cover her head. Yet that is not what Paul said.
What is this "authority"that women ought to have on their heads? Some interpreters believe it refers to the man in her life who is in authority over her. The covering is the sign that she recognizes him in this role.245This view lacks support in the passive use of exousia("authority"). Furthermore the idiom "to have authority over"never refers to an external authority different from the subject of the sentence elsewhere.
Other interpreters view "authority"as a metonym for "veil."246This view is unlikely because "authority"is a strange word to use if Paul really meant "veil."It would have been more natural for him to say "veil"or "covering."
A third view is to take "to have authority"as meaning "a sign of authority, namely as a means of exercising authority."Advocates believe Paul meant that women were to have authority to do things in worship previously forbidden, such as praying and prophesying along with men. Her covering would serve as a sign of her new liberty in Christ.247There does not seem to be adequate basis of support for this view in the passage.
The fourth major view takes having "authority"in its usual meaning of having the freedom or right to choose. The meaning in this case would be that the woman has authority over her head (man) to do as she pleases.248Obviously this seems to run contrary to what Paul taught in the passage and elsewhere. I think perhaps Paul meant that women have freedom to decide how they will pray and prophesy within the constraint that Paul had imposed, namely with heads covered. The head covering, then, symbolized both the woman's subordinate position under the man and the authority that she had to pray and prophesy in public.249
The other major interpretive problem in this verse is "because of the angels."Why did Paul introduce angels into this discussion? Perhaps the Corinthian women needed to wear a head covering because angels view what is taking place among God's people (cf. 4:9; Eph. 3:10; 1 Tim. 5:21). Angels are the guardians of God's created order. For other people to see Christian women unveiled was bad enough because it was a sign of insubordination, but for angels to see it would be worse.250
There may also be something to the suggestion that these Corinthian women, and some of the men as well, may have been exalting themselves to the position of angels (cf. 7:1; 13:1).251Paul may have mentioned the angels to remind them that they were still under angelic scrutiny.
Other less acceptable interpretations of "because of the angels"are these. Women should cover their heads because evil angels lusted after women in the church (cf. Gen. 6:2). If this were the reason, should not all women wear veils at all times since angels apparently view humans in other than church meetings? They should do so because the word angels (lit. messengers) refers to pastors of the churches who might lust after them. They should wear head coverings because good angels learn to be submissive to authority from the women's example. They need to cover themselves because good angels are an example of subordination and would take offense if they viewed insubordinate women. Finally they should wear head coverings because a woman's insubordination would tempt good angels to be insubordinate.
Is observance by angels not a reason Christian women should cover their heads in church meetings today? Again I think not. In that culture a woman's appearance in public unveiled was a declaration of her rejection of her God-given place in creation. The angels would have recognized it as such, and it would have offended them. However today a woman's decision to appear unveiled does not usually make that statement. Consequently her unveiled condition does not offend the angels.
11:11 Even though the positions of man and woman differ in God's administrative order, this does not mean they can get along without each other. They are mutually dependent on each other. They complement one another. They are interdependent, even as the Son and the Father are. Paul's main point was that woman is not independent of man. This is further evidence that he was countering an illegitimate spirit of independence among some Corinthian women.
In a family, companionship should replace isolation and loneliness. There must be oneness in marriage for a husband and a wife to complete one another. Self-centered individuality destroys unity in marriage. If you are married, you need your husband or wife. Your spouse is necessary for you to be a well-rounded person.
11:12 Even though God created Eve from Adam, now every male comes from a female. This fact illustrates male female interdependence and balances Paul's emphasis in verse 11. Together verses 11 and 12 form a chiasm structurally. Husbands and wives have equal worth. Still God originates both of them, and both are subordinate to Him.
The apostle's emphasis in this section was on the authority that a woman has in her own right by virtue of creation. She must not leave her divinely appointed place in creation by seeking to function exactly as a man in church worship. Furthermore she should express her submission to this aspect of God's will in a culturally approved way. At the same time she must maintain a healthy appreciation for the opposite sex.
