The Head of Every Man

Sharing Options

“At thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore” (Ps. 16: 11)

The Basket Case Chronicles #123

“But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God” (1 Cor. 11:3).

However devoutly some people might wish it, Scripture cannot be made to fit with the dogmas of modern feminism. At some point in the attempts at reconciliation, the thought should come to mind that we ought not to waver between two opinions. If Baal is God, follow Him. If Yahweh is God, follow Him.

This is one of the passages that moderns deem an embarrassment. But it says what it says regardless, and if we are Christians, our task is to understand what it is saying, and to conform our lives to it.

Paul begins by saying “I would have you know.” He does not say that this is a topic that would be best left unsaid. This is something worth knowing, and it is something that we can know. He tells us that in the ordinances of the church (which he delivered to the Corinthians, v. 2), there is an ascending hierarchy. Paul goes in the order of man and Christ, then woman and man, and then Christ and God. God is the head of Christ, Christ is the head of every man, and each man is the head of each woman.

It is worth noting here several things that it does not say. It does not say that the head of every woman is every man. The head of the woman is the man, presupposing here the marriage relationship. Neither is it talking about (in this place) about the headship of Christ over the corporate church. He does teach that in another place (Eph. 5:23), but not here.

The language is quite striking. He says that Christ is the head of every man. If we didn’t know better, we might be tempted to say that this sounds a bit individualistic. But the Pauline doctrine is not simply that Christ is the head of the corporate bride, the Church, but that He is also the head of every man. This might be enough to make a theologian’s head explode, but our task here is simply to repeat what the apostle says. If we look ahead, we see that this ascending hierarchy of headship is the foundation for the instructions that Paul is about to give—on public prayer and prophesy, on head coverings, and on appropriate demeanor in the Lord’s Supper.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
14 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Steve Perry
Steve Perry
10 years ago

Doug, if our job is to understand what Paul is teaching in 1 Corinthians 11, why has the modern church abandoned 1900 years of teaching and practice on this subject? Acknowledging the symbolism without the symbol seems to be a new gnosticism.

Steve Perry
Steve Perry
10 years ago

DW -“The head of the woman is the man, presupposing here the marriage relationship.” Paul speaks to a creational relationship and who was created for who. Paul is not primarily addressing the marriage relationship. Adam and Eve were not created married. The Lord brought Eve (down the aisle) to Adam.

Valerie (Kyriosity)
10 years ago

Steve, I think that Paul is addressing the marriage relationship here is made clear by the fact that he says elsewhere that a wife is to submit to her own husband. Otherwise, I’d have billions of heads, and while the lack of one has not been my favorite thing, the presence of many would be waaaaaaaaay worse. ;^)

Steve Perry
Steve Perry
10 years ago

Paul is not praising the “married” Corinthian christians when they come together for worship. He is praising them for following this tradition which all the churches of God practice. This is about creational headship in the sanctuary.

Valerie (Kyriosity)
10 years ago

Sorry…I don’t see how we’re contradicting one another. Try again?

Steve Perry
Steve Perry
10 years ago

It’s about “Why Ministers Must be Men” not “Her Hand in Marriage.”

Carmon Friedrich
Carmon Friedrich
10 years ago

Hi, Valerie! Hi, Steve! I’m commenting hoping that I will get an email if there are any more responses on this :-). But I think Steve is saying that this passage refers to God’s creation order as it applies to the necessity of male leaders in the church, just as elsewhere Paul speaks regarding the necessity of male headship in the family. And Steve is very interested in the topic of women covering their heads in worship (his view comports with that of our friend RC, I believe). Bye, Valerie! Bye, Steve! Blessings to you both.

Valerie (Kyriosity)
10 years ago

Hi back, Carmon! Yeah, from Steve’s last comment I think I get where he’s coming from now. Steve, I agree that the passage is about male leadership following creational order. I just don’t agree that the phrase “and the head of the woman is the man” is about the relationship of all men to all women.

henrybish
henrybish
10 years ago

A question for all those who believe there is no kind of authority between men and women unless they are married:

Why can’t single women be elders? Or why can’t a woman have authority over men as long as she is not married to him?

Valerie (Kyriosity)
10 years ago

Hi, Henry. I’ll take a brief stab at answers, and then ask you a question:

Single women may not be elders because the Bible says that an elder must be a man. There are contexts where a woman may have authority over a man (not, of course, in the church).

Let’s get specific: What authority do you believe you have over me?

henrybish
henrybish
10 years ago

Hi Valerie, It seems you have conceded my point – that actually, other authority relationships do exist on the basis of sex even between those who are not married – a single woman not being an elder being one such example. So can I take it that we agree that husband-wife authority is not the only kind of authority between men and women unless they are married? I’m not sure why you write as though you disagree with me? As to you question, it would normally be unseemly for you to exercise authority over me, whether within the church or… Read more »

Valerie (Kyriosity)
10 years ago

Hi, Henry. Thanks for popping back into the convo. I think I misunderstood part of your question, and therefore, by answering it, may have unintentionally given the impression that I believed that male authority existed only in marriage. But I think we’re on the same page now. So…let me go back and expand a bit on my brief answers above. My basic thesis is this: Being a woman is an automatic disqualification from certain offices. Being a man is not, however, an automatic qualification for certain offices. And authority is a factor of one’s office, not of one’s sex. In… Read more »

henrybish
henrybish
10 years ago

Hi Valerie, Thanks for your response. Some brief points that respond to some things you said, as well as some further links to read: 1) As a man, even though not an elder, I am permitted by God to lead the women of the church in prayer, or preach a sermon whereas Paul calls upon the women to be silent. So any man can offer prayer, praise or a tongue or prophecy publicly to the congregation (1Cor14:26), regardless of whether he is an elder or not. It is appropriate for him to do so but not for the woman to… Read more »

Valerie (Kyriosity)
10 years ago

Just to remind us of the original question…Does “the head of woman is man” refer to one woman and her husband, or womankind and mankind? In the comments on another post, katecho got to the meaning of headship: Headship is about identity and protection for the one being represented. The reason that the Church submits to Christ as Her Head is not because Christ is masculine, but in order to be free from submission to would-be representatives. Similarly, when a wife submits to her own husband, she is free from having to submit to every other man. Her transition from… Read more »