Women's Head Coverings

If a women does not cover her head, let her also have her hair sheered

1 Corinthians 11:2–16 NASB95

Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head. But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved. For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head. For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God. Judge for 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. But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.

This is a commonly misunderstood passage.

First let’s look at this section of scripture as a whole, then we’ll look at it section by section, and finally word by word.

Verse 2

Verse 2 begins with the Apostle Paul stating his authority as an apostle to deliver The Lord’s commands to the church.

In verse 2 the Apostle Paul says that head covering was a tradition delivered with apostolic authority.

1 Corinthians 11:2 “Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you.”

Verse 3

1 Corinthians 11:3 “But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.”

Verse 4

1 Corinthians 11:4 “Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head.”

Verse 4 is where we see the introduction of the head covering command. The Lord, through the Apostle Paul, begins the section by pointing to “every man.” This is important to understand, because we’re going to break up the #__ sections in these verses using this measure.

Verse 5

1 Corinthians 11:5 “But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved.”

Verse 5 is juxtaposed and stands in contrast to verse 4.

As a man is to have his head uncovered, the women is to have hear head covered.

Verse 6

1 Corinthians 11:6 “For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head.”

The Lord, through the Apostle Paul then graciously explains the reasoning for this command in verse 6.

Verse 7

1 Corinthians 11:7 “For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.”

Here is come back to the man, which makes verses 4 and 7 act like bookends to the command for women to have their head covered.

Verse 8

1 Corinthians 11:8 “For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man;”

Verse 8 reinforces verse 7 as authoritative and not merely opinion or culture, by pointing us back to the creation of man and not merely a custom of the ages.

Verse 9

1 Corinthians 11:9 “for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake.”

Verse 9 mentions man again, and begins a new bookend for the position.

Verse 10

1 Corinthians 11:10 “Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.”

Verse 10 restates the position, already stated in verse 5, but emphasizes the head covering as not only being shameful but a matter of spiritual importance or “because of the angels.”

Verse 11

1 Corinthians 11:11 “However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman.”

Verse 12

1 Corinthians 11:12 “For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God.”

Verse 13

1 Corinthians 11:13 “Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?”

Verse 14

1 Corinthians 11:14 “Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him,”

Verse 14 is yet another, and final bookend to verse 9.

Verse 15

1 Corinthians 11: 15 “but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.”

Verse 15 restates verses 5 and 10, but in a positive light; describing the glory of women.

Verse 16

Finally, we get to verse 16.

The conclusion, of this section and the final word on the matter.

Verse 16 is quite often misunderstood to be a “get out of jail free card,” instead of the warning to believers that it actually is, so let’s go through this verse and clear-up the confusion.

1 Corinthians 11:16 NASB95

But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.

Right out the gate, we see that the Apostle Pauls is calling out the believer for challenging this command.

“But if one is inclined to be contentious”

This is meant to grab your attention Christian, to shake you from your comfort zone, and to make a final plea for reason. By using the word “contentious,” the Apostle Paul isn’t leaving any room for an alternate opinion on the issue of head covering. Instead, the start of this verse shows us that disagreeing with the Apostle Paul now that he has explained the command to us is “being contentious,” which is a sin.

Next is the word “other”

The word “Other” here is τοιοῦτος (Toioutos) and is most accurately translated as the word “such” and not “other,” The NAS actually makes a footnote of this, and clarifies that the word is actually “such” and not “other.” A pretty big difference.

So the ESV actually takes the more literal and clearer translation hear and reads:

English Standard Version (Chapter 11)

16 If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.

Next up is the word “practice.”

The word “practice,” refers to women not having their head covered in verse 13; the last time the subject was mentioned.

We know this because the closest antecedent for “practice” is not “head covering” but rather verse 13 and women praying with her head uncovered.

Verse 13 reads: 1 Corinthians 11:13 “Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?” The antecedent here being “head uncovered” is the closest to verse 16. And not “symbol of authority on her head” from verse 10.

So if we were to rewrite the verse to include the antecedent for the word “practice”, the verse would read:

But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice as to women’s head being uncovered, nor have the churches of God.

That’s the only practice being discussed in this section, and that’s the practice that the rest of the churches didn’t have.

So The Lord is saying that in all of the churches, none of them have the practice of having women praying uncovered.

As we already mentioned, verse 2 reminds us that the Apostle Paul says that head covering was a tradition delivered with apostolic authority.

1 Corinthians 11:2 “Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you.”

Since in verse 2 Paul is saying that head coverings is a tradition he delivered to the church, to “hold firmly,” he couldn’t have said in verse 16 that it was something “we have no practice of.” Since that would be a contradiction.

Furthermore

Verse 4 and 5 Paul writes that to not practice head covering would be “dishonoring” and “disgraceful.”

1 Corinthians 11:4-5 “Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head. But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved.”

The Apostle Paul continues the thought of a women’s shame, and In verse 6 Paul says that if a women wont wear a head covering she should have her hair cut off.

1 Corinthians 11:6 “For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head.”

The King James Version uses the literal translation of the word that’s used for “cut off” which does a better job showing the nuances of this verse. The Apostle Paul actually uses the word κείρω or “sheer,” as in to sheer the wool off a sheep. Or for us city slickers, to cut it very, very short.

The other word the Apostle paul uses is ξυράω or “shaved,” which the NAS translates literally.

So in verse 6 we see an escalation of the shamefulness of a women to have her head uncovered, by first starting with very short hair and then ending with a shaved head.

κείρω or “sheer”

ξυράω or “shaved”

So if we were to use “city slicker” words here, the verse would read:

For if a women does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut very, very short, but if it is disgraceful for a women to have her hair cut very, very short, or her head shaved, let her cover her head.

One more commonly misunderstood word here is the word “if.” The misunderstanding comes from the idea that “if” presents an option for us to choose from. However, the Apostle Paul noting the importance of the head covering tradition in verse 2 coupled with the difficult rhetoric used in this verse, shows us that the word “if” is not intended to present us with two equal options, but instead to contrast the two positions.

Finally, the idea that the entire subject is completely up to the Christian to decide for themselves as a matter of conscience, is absolutely ludicrous given both the amount of time spent emphasizing the issue and the strong stance taken in these verses. To then turn around and say that the issue of head covering is not only without consequence, but that it is also entirely up to the believer, would be a contradiction.

Consequence, yes consequences. To allow someone to not practice a doctrine just because they’re being contentious, would be overlooking the contentious person’s sin. Much like giving into a child when they’re throwing a tantrum. This would be contradictory as well. Therefore verse 16 cannot be read as a permissive or permission granting verse, but rather the warning to the believer that it so clearly is.

1 Corinthians 11:16 “But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.”