Since the veil communicated acknowledgment of this truth in their culture, Paul defends the legitimacy of this custom on theological grounds in vs 7-10 (read). As in other passages, Paul explains why God has made the husband the head in the marriage relationship.
In my opinion, this authority structure within marriage became necessary only after the fall (see
Gen. 3:16b). Prior to the fall, there was no need for delegated authority because both parties were in perfect communion with God. But in a fallen world, roles of authority are necessary in order to preserve order and prevent anarchy (WORK PLACE; CIVIL GOVERNMENT). Thus, God instituted the man as head in the marriage relationship. What was the basis for this choice? As
Genesis 2 narrates, Adam was created first, and God made Eve from Adam and for him (to be his unique counterpart unlike the animals).
Paul's obscure reference to the angels (vs 10b) probably means that angels, who are present at Christian meetings, are acutely conscious of delegated authority in God's universe. They exist as his servants and show respect for his authority structure. We should imitate this attitude instead of rebelling against it.
Of course, this truth is very unpopular in our culture. There are two very different reasons for this.
MALE CHAUVINISM: One reason is the undeniable historical abuse of male headship in human society and in the church. Christians should acknowledge this, condemn it, and distinguish biblical headship from its abuse. Consider the following important biblical qualifications, which also help to define biblical male headship:
Difference in role does not mean superiority or inferiority as people (vs 11-12). The fact that you submit to a POLICEMAN does not mean you are intrinsically inferior to him; it means that you acknowledge he plays a legitimate role of authority. By the same token, male headship does not imply intrinsic female inferiority in any way. Paul evidently adds vs 11-12 to prevent us from concluding that role equals essence. Both men and women were created in God's image and therefore have equal value in God's eyes. Woman's origination from man in creation is tempered by men's subsequent origination from women. In
Gal. 3:28, Paul states that both are equally heirs of salvation through Christ. Obviously, as Christians we should communicate this same attitude toward all people regardless of gender. How different this is from Roman and Greek moral philosophers, who described women as "worthless," "silly," and "innately inferior to men" who should "serve as slaves" to their husbands. [2]
Husbands should be subject to Christ's authority (vs 3). Paul's point in v. 3 ("the head of a man is Christ") is that husbands are not a law unto themselves; they are under Christ's authority. Husbands should lead the way in their marriages in obeying Christ, not act like little Hitler's. This has two important implications.
Husbands should be submissive to Christ's authority not only when it is expressed directly through the Bible, but also when it is expressed indirectly through other Christians—including their wives. This is the importance of
Eph. 5:21. No Christian husband has a basis for saying "It's not your place to correct me." If needed, his wife should correct him with biblical absolutes and he should submit to this correction.
Any Christian man who uses his authority to rebel against God's moral will is wrong and should not be obeyed. In cases where he calls on his wife to disobey Christ, he should be respectfully disobeyed (SPOUSE-SWAPPING; NO FELLOWSHIP), as with all delegated authorities.
Male headship is limited to certain relationships (
Eph. 5:22). The wife is to be subject to "her own husband," not to all men in general. Any teaching that men are automatically in authority over women (e.g., work-place) is a caricature of the biblical position.
The husband should use their authority in love and to serve their wives (
Eph. 5:25-29). Jesus is very authoritative, and he sometimes calls on us to do what is costly and painful, but he always leads us out of love and for our good. The proof of this is the cross. Christian husbands should not use their God-given authority to selfishly take from their wives (KING IN CASTLE); they should use it to help their wives grow spiritually (as good parents use it for their children's good). They should be modeling Christ-like character, initiating sacrificial love, and creatively fostering their wives' spiritual development. For the wife who wants to mature in Christ, this is a wonderful provision, even though it may still be scary or difficult at times.
HUSBANDS: LEAD THIS WAY!!! WIVES: BE WILLING TO SUBMIT TO THIS KIND OF LEADERSHIP!!
MODERN SELFISM: The other reason is the view that defines submission to another person is an admission of inferiority and therefore a betrayal of one's personhood. This is the predominant secular view, which undergirds so much of feminist thinking. It rejects all authority as abusive (including God's) and makes the assertion of my rights and will the number one priority in life. This view has deeply influenced many of us, and is taught as dogma to our youth. We should reject this view because:
Biblical submission is an affirmation of true personhood because we are created by God to follow his wise & loving leadership. God's authority is legitimate because he created you and knows better than you do how you should live. Submission to his authority is the essence of what it means to be a human being—not a negation of it. Insistence on your will is rebellion against God, which is the essence of sin >> GOSPEL HERE.
It promotes the same relationally destructive error that it properly condemns in male chauvinism—demanding personal rights & power at the other person’s expense. Unless there is the willingness of both people to submit to God, and to sacrifice many of our desires for the good of the other person, and to respect God's authority structure for the home, we are left with marriage as a battle ground and the children as casualties!! We are witnessing the foul fruit of this view (DIVORCE EFFECTS ON SPOUSES & CHILDREN), and it is every bit as ugly as male chauvinism!!
CHALLENGE THE CHRISTIANS NOT TO BE CONFORMED HERE, BUT TO BE LIGHTS IN THE MIDST OF A CROOKED & PERVERSE GENERATION . . .
Footnotes
[1] Sir William Ramsay states: "In Oriental lands the veil is the . . . dignity of the woman. With the veil on her head she can go anywhere (in public) in security and respect . . . But without the veil the woman is a thing of nought, whom anyone may insult . . . A woman's . . . dignity vanish(es) along with the all-covering veil that she discards." (Cited in Leon Morris, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958], p. 154). "No respectable woman in an eastern village or city goes out without it, and, if she does, she is in danger of being misjudges." (T. W. Davies, cited in Leon Morris, The Letters to the Corinthians[Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977], p. 97).
[2] Richard Longenecker, New Testament Social Ethics, pp. 71-73..
Linear Mode
