TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers 1 Corinthians 11:1–16. His two-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
Paul, having answered the cases put to him, proceeds in this chapter to the redress of grievances. The first verse of the chapter is put, by those who divided the epistle into chapters, as a preface to the rest of the epistle, but seems to have been a more proper close to the last, in which he had enforced the cautions he had given against the abuse of liberty, by his own example: Be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ (Co1 11:1), fitly closes his argument; and the way of speaking in the next verse looks like a transition to another. But, whether it more properly belong to this or the last chapter, it is plain from it that Paul not only preached such doctrine as they ought to believe, but led such a life as they ought to imitate. "Be ye followers of me," that is, "Be imitators of me; live as you see me live." Note, Ministers are likely to preach most to the purpose when they can press their hearers to follow their example. Yet would not Paul be followed blindly neither. He encourages neither implicit faith nor obedience. He would be followed himself no further than he followed Christ. Christ's pattern is a copy without a blot; so is no man's else. Note, We should follow no leader further than he follows Christ. Apostles should be left by us when they deviate from the example of their Master. He passes next to reprehend and reform an indecency among them, of which the women were more especially guilty, concerning which observe,
I.How he prefaces it.
He begins with a commendation of what was praiseworthy in them (Co1 11:2): I praise you, that you remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances as I delivered them to you. Many of them, it is probable, did this in the strictest sense of the expression: and he takes occasion thence to address the body of the church under this good character; and the body might, in the main, have continued to observe the ordinances and institutions of Christ, though in some things they deviated fRom. and corrupted, them. Note, When we reprove what is amiss in any, it is very prudent and fit to commend what is good in them; it will show that the reproof is not from ill-will, and a humour of censuring and finding fault; and it will therefore procure the more regard to it.
II.How he lays the foundation for his reprehension by asserting the superiority of the man over the woman:
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. Christ, in his mediatorial character and glorified humanity, is at the head of mankind. He is not only first of the kind, but Lord and Sovereign. He has a name above every name: though in this high office and authority he has a superior, God being his head. And as God is the head of Christ, and Christ the head of the whole human kind, so the man is the head of the tow sexes: not indeed with such dominion as Christ has over the kind or God has over the man Christ Jesus; but a superiority and headship he has, and the woman should be in subjection and not assume or usurp the man's place. This is the situation in which God has placed her; and for that reason she should have a mind suited to her rank, and not do any thing that looks like an affectation of changing places. Something like this the women of the church of Corinth seem to have been guilty of, who were under inspiration, and prayed and prophesied even in their assemblies, Co1 11:5. It is indeed an apostolical canon, that the women should keep silence in the churches (Co1 14:34; Ti1 2:12), which some understand without limitation, as if a woman under inspiration also must keep silence, which seems very well to agree with the connection of the apostle's discourse, ch. 14. Others with a limitation: though a woman might not from her own abilities pretend to teach, or so much as question and debate any thing in the church yet when under inspiration the case was altered, she had liberty to speak. Or, though she might not preach even by inspiration (because teaching is the business of a superior), yet she might pray or utter hymns by inspiration, even in the public assembly. She did not show any affectation of superiority over the man by such acts of public worship. It is plain the apostle does not in this place prohibit the thing, but reprehend the manner of doing it. And yet he might utterly disallow the thing and lay an unlimited restraint on the woman in another part of the epistle. These things are not contradictory. It is to his present purpose to reprehend the manner wherein the women prayed and prophesied in the church, without determining in this place whether they did well or ill in praying or prophesying. Note, The manner of doing a thing enters into the morality of it. We must not only be concerned to do good, but that the good we do be well done.
III.The thing he reprehends is the woman's praying or prophesying uncovered, or the man's doing either covered, Co1 11:4, Co1 11:5.
To understand this, it must be observed that it was a signification either of shame or subjection for persons to be veiled, or covered, in the eastern countries, contrary to the custom of ours, where the being bare-headed betokens subjection, and being covered superiority and dominion. And this will help us the better to understand,
IV.The reasons on which he grounds his reprehension.
1.The man that prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonoureth his head, namely, Christ, the head of every man (Co1 11:3), by appearing in a habit unsuitable to the rank in which God has placed him. Note, We should, even in our dress and habits, avoid every thing that may dishonour Christ. The woman, on the other hand, who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head, namely, the man, Co1 11:3. She appears in the dress of her superior, and throws off the token of her subjection. She might, with equal decency, cut her hair short, or cut it close, which was the custom of the man in that age. This would be in a manner to declare that she was desirous of changing sexes, a manifest affectation of that superiority which God had conferred on the other sex. And this was probably the fault of these prophetesses in the church of Corinth. It was doing a thing which, in that age of the world, betokened superiority, and therefore a tacit claim of what did not belong to them but the other sex. Note, The sexes should not affect to change places. The order in which divine wisdom has placed persons and things is best and fittest: to endeavour to amend it is to destroy all order, and introduce confusion. The woman should keep to the rank God has chosen for her, and not dishonour her head; for this, in the result, is to dishonour God. If she was made out of the man, and for the man, and made to be the glory of the man, she should do nothing, especially in public, that looks like a wish of having this order inverted.
2.Another reason against this conduct is that the man is the image and glory of God, the representative of that glorious dominion and headship which God has over the world. It is the man who is set at the head of this lower creation, and therein he bears the resemblance of God. The woman, on the other hand, is the glory of the man (Co1 11:7): she is his representative. Not but she has dominion over the inferior creatures, as she is a partaker of human nature, and so far is God's representative too, but it is at second-hand. She is the image of God, inasmuch as she is the image of the man: For the man was not made out of the woman, but the woman out of the man, Co1 11:8. The man was first made, and made head of the creation here below, and therein the image of the divine dominion; and the woman was made out of the man, and shone with a reflection of his glory, being made superior to the other creatures here below, but in subjection to her husband, and deriving that honour from him out of whom she was made.
3.The woman was made for the man, to be his help-meet, and not the man for the woman. She was naturally, therefore, made subject to him, because made for him, for his use, and help, and comfort. And she who was intended to be always in subjection to the man should do nothing, in Christian assemblies, that looks like an affectation of equality.
4.She ought to have power on her head, because of the angels. Power, that is, a veil, the token, not of her having the power or superiority, but being under the power of her husband, subjected to him, and inferior to the other sex. Rebekah, when she met Isaac, and was delivering herself into his possession, put on her veil, in token of her subjection, Gen 24:65. Thus would the apostle have the women appear In Christian assemblies, even though they spoke there by inspiration, because of the angels, that is, say some, because of the evil angels. The woman was first in the transgression, being deceived by the devil (Ti1 2:14), which increased her subjection to man, Gen 3:16. Now, believe evil angels will be sure to mix in all Christian assemblies, therefore should women wear the token of their shamefacedness and subjection, which in that age and country, was a veil. Others say because of the good angels. Jews and Christians have had an opinion that these ministering spirits are many of them present in their assemblies. Their presence should restrain Christians from all indecencies in the worship of God. Note, We should learn from all to behave in the public assemblies of divine worship so as to express a reverence for God, and a content and satisfaction with that rank in which he has placed us.
V.He thinks fit to guard his argument with a caution lest the inference be carried too far (Co1 11:11, Co1 11:12):
Nevertheless, neither is the man without the woman, nor the woman without the man in the Lord. They were made for one another. It is not good for him to be alone (Gen 2:18), and therefore was a woman made, and made for the man; and the man was intended to be a comfort, and help, and defence, to the woman, though not so directly and immediately made for her. They were made to be a mutual comfort and blessing, not one a slave and the other a tyrant. Both were to be one flesh (Gen 2:24), and this for the propagation of a race of mankind. They are reciprocal instruments of each other's production. As the woman was first formed out of the man, the man is ever since propagated by the woman (Co1 11:12), all by the divine wisdom and power of the First Cause so ordaining it. The authority and subjection should be no greater than are suitable to two in such near relation and close union to each other. Note, As it is the will of God that the woman know her place, so it is his will also that the man abuse not his power.
VI.He enforces his argument from the natural covering provided for the woman (Co1 11:13-15):
"Judge in yourselves - consult your own reason, hearken to what nature suggests - is it comely for a woman to pray to God uncovered? Should there not be a distinction kept up between the sexes in wearing their hair, since nature has made one? Is it not a distinction which nature has kept up among all civilized nations? The woman's hair is a natural covering; to wear it long is a glory to her; but for a man to have long hair, or cherish it, is a token of softness and effeminacy." Note, It should be our concern, especially in Christian and religious assemblies, to make no breach upon the rules of natural decency.
VII.He sums up all by referring those who were contentious to the usages and customs of the churches, Co1 11:16.
Custom is in a great measure the rule of decency. And the common practice of the churches is what would have them govern themselves by. He does not silence the contentious by mere authority, but lets them know that they would appear to the world as very odd and singular in their humour if they would quarrel for a custom to which all the churches of Christ were at that time utter strangers, or against a custom in which they all concurred, and that upon the ground of natural decency. It was the common usage of the churches for women to appear in public assemblies, and join in public worship, veiled; and it was manifestly decent that they should do so. Those must be very contentious indeed who would quarrel with this, or lay it aside.
Historical interpretation
Four Centuries of Reception
21 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
Whom does he bless? Not the woman decked out, but another's hair, and through them another head. And if "the man is head of the woman, and God of the man".
"For I would have you know "says the apostle, "that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man: for the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man. For neither is the woman without the man, nor the man without the woman, in the Lord."
And if "the Lord is head of the man, and the man is head of the woman" the man, "being the image and glory of God, is lord of the woman."
The head is, then, a sign of most princely rule; and otherwise we have heard it said, "The Head of Christ is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."
The contraries, at all events, of all these (considerations) effect that a man is not to cover his head: to wit, because he has not by nature been gifted with excess of hair; because to be shaven or shorn is not shameful to him; because it was not on his account that the angels transgressed; because his Head is Christ. Accordingly, since the apostle is treating of man and woman-why the latter ought to be veiled, but the former not-it is apparent why he has been silent as to the virgin; allowing, to wit, the virgin to be understood in the woman by the self-same reason by which he forbore to name the boy as implied in the man; embracing the whole order of either sex in the names proper (to each) of woman and man.
"The head of every man is Christ." What Christ, if He is not the author of man? The head he has here put for authority; now "authority" will accrue to none else than the "author.
To what kind of a crown, I ask, did Christ Jesus submit for the salvation of both sexes? What crown has he who is the head of man and the glory of the woman and the husband of the church? It was made from thorns and thistles.
If "the man is bead of the woman," of course (he is) of the virgin too, from whom comes the woman who has married; unless the virgin is a third generic class, some monstrosity with a head of its own. If" it is shameful for a woman to be shaven or shorn," of course it is so for a virgin. (Hence let the world, the rival of God, see to it, if it asserts that close-cut hair is graceful to a virgin in like manner as that flowing hair is to a boy.) To her, then, to whom it is equally unbecoming to be shaven or shorn, it is equally becoming to be covered.
, it is the custom of some to make prayer with cloaks doffed, for so do the nations approach their idols; which practice, of course, were its observance becoming, the apostles, who teach concerning the garb of prayer. would have comprehended in their instructions, unless any think that is was in prayer that Paul had left his cloak with Carpus! God, forsooth, would not hear cloaked suppliants, who plainly heard the three saints in the Babylonian king's furnace praying in their trousers and turbans.
Now this, to be sure, is an astonishing thing, that the Father can be taken to be the face of the Son, when He is His head; for "the head of Christ is God."
Scripture states: “And the two shall be but one flesh,” so that what was once one may become one again.… The head matches its own limbs and the limbs their own head, a natural bond uniting both in complete harmony, lest the closeness of the divine covenant be shattered by some sort of discord arising from the division of members.… Husbands are to love their wives even as Christ loved the church, and wives are to love their husbands as the church loves Christ.
"And His head and His hairs were white as it were white wool, and as it were snow." On the head the whiteness is shown; "but the head of Christ is God." in the white hairs is the multitude of abbots like to wool, in respect of simple sheep; to snow, in respect of the innumerable crowd of candidates taught from heaven.
"His eyes were as a flame of fire." God's precepts are those which minister light to believers, but to unbelievers burning.
We do not permit our "women to teach in the Church," [1 Corinthians 14:34] but only to pray and hear those that teach; for our Master and Lord, Jesus Himself, when He sent us the twelve to make disciples of the people and of the nations, did nowhere send out women to preach, although He did not want such. For there were with us the mother of our Lord and His sisters; also Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Martha and Mary the sisters of Lazarus; Salome, and certain others. For, had it been necessary for women to teach, He Himself had first commanded these also to instruct the people with us. For "if the head of the wife be the man," [1 Corinthians 11:3] it is not reasonable that the rest of the body should govern the head.
Let the wife be obedient to her own proper husband, because "the husband is the head of the wife." [1 Corinthians 11:3] But Christ is the head of that husband who walks in the way of righteousness; and "the head of Christ is God," even His Father. Therefore, O wife, next after the Almighty, our God and Father, the Lord of the present world and of the world to come, the Maker of everything that breathes, and of every power; and after His beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom glory be to God, you fear your husband, and reverence him, pleasing him alone, rendering yourself acceptable to him in the several affairs of life, that so on your account your husband may be called blessed, according to the Wisdom of Solomon, which thus speaks: "Who can find a virtuous woman? For such a one is more precious than costly stones. The heart of her husband does safely trust in her..."
Now, as to women's baptizing, we let you know that there is no small peril to those that undertake it. Therefore we do not advise you to it; for it is dangerous, or rather wicked and impious. For if the "man be the head of the woman," [1 Corinthians 11:3] and he be originally ordained for the priesthood, it is not just to abrogate the order of the creation, and leave the principal to come to the extreme part of the body. For the woman is the body of the man, taken from his side, and subject to him, from whom she was separated for the procreation of children. For says He, "He shall rule over you." [Genesis 3:16] For the principal part of the woman is the man, as being her head. But if in the foregoing constitutions we have not permitted them to teach, how will any one allow them, contrary to nature, to perform the office of a priest? For this is one of the ignorant practices of the Gentile atheism, to ordain women priests to the female deities, not one of the constitutions of Christ. For if baptism were to be administered by women, certainly our Lord would have been baptized by His own mother, and not by John; or when He sent us to baptize, He would have sent along with us women also for this purpose. But now He has nowhere, either by constitution or by writing, delivered to us any such thing; as knowing the order of nature, and the decency of the action; as being the Creator of nature, and the Legislator of the constitution.
God is the head of Christ because he begat him; Christ is the head of the man because he created him, and the man is the head of the woman because she was taken from his side. Thus one expression has different meanings, according to the difference of person and substantive relationship.
The Head suffered in the “place of the skull.” O great and prophetic appellation! The very name all but reminds you to think not of the crucified as a mere man. He is the head of every principality and power. The Head which was crucified is the Head of all power.
This is a warning that no one ought to rely on oneself. She who was made as a helper needs the protection of the stronger. In this sense “the head of the woman is the man.” Yet while he believed that he would have the assistance of his wife, he fell because of her. Hence no one ought to entrust himself lightly to another unless he has first put that person’s virtue to the test. Neither should he claim for himself in the role of protector one whom he believes is lesser to his strength. Rather, each one should share his special grace with the other. Especially is this true of the man, who is in the position of greater strength, who plays the part of protector.
"But I would have ye know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of every woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God."
This is his account of the reason of the thing, and he states it to make the weaker more attentive. He indeed that is faithful, as he ought to be, and steadfast, doth not require any reason or cause of those things which are commanded him, but is content with the ordinance alone. But he that is weaker, when he also learns the cause, then both retains what is said with more care and obeys with much readiness.
Wherefore neither did he state the cause until he saw the commandment transgressed. What then is the cause? "The head of every man is Christ." Is He then Head of the Gentile also? In no wise. For if "we are the Body of Christ, and severally members thereof," and in this way He is our head, He cannot be the head of them who are not in the Body and rank not among the members. So that when he says, "of every man," one must understand it of the believer. Perceivest thou how every where he appeals to the hearer's shame by arguing from on high? Thus both when he was discoursing on love, and when on humility, and when on alms-giving, it was from thence that he drew his examples.
"But the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." Here the heretics rush upon us with a certain declaration of inferiority, which out of these words they contrive against the Son. But they stumble against themselves. For if "the man be the head of the woman," and the head be of the same substance with the body, and "the head of Christ is God," the Son is of the same substance with the Father. "Nay," say they, "it is not His being of another substance which we intend to show from hence, but that He is under subjection." What then are we to say to this? In the first place, when any thing lowly is said of him conjoined as He is with the Flesh, there is no disparagement of the Godhead in what is said, the Economy admitting the expression. However, tell me how thou intendest to prove this from the passage? "Why, as the man governs the wife, saith he, "so also the Father, Christ." Therefore also as Christ governs the man, so likewise the Father, the Son. "For the head of every man," we read, "is Christ." And who could ever admit this? For if the superiority of the Son compared with us, be the measure of the Fathers' compared with the Son, consider to what meanness thou wilt bring Him. So that we must not try all things by like measure in respect of ourselves and of God, though the language used concerning them be similar; but we must assign to God a certain appropriate excellency, and so great as belongs to God. For should they not grant this, many absurdities will follow. As thus; "the head of Christ is God:" and, "Christ is the head of the man, and he of the woman." Therefore if we choose to take the term, "head," in the like sense in all the clauses, the Son will be as far removed from the Father as we are from Him. Nay, and the woman will be as far removed from us as we are from the Word of God. And what the Son is to the Father, this both we are to the Son and the woman again to the man. And who will endure this?
But dost thou understand the term "head" differently in the case of the man and the woman, from what thou dost in the case of Christ? Therefore in the case of the Father and the Son, must we understand it differently also. "How understand it differently?" saith the objector. According to the occasion. For had Paul meant to speak of rule and subjection, as thou sayest, he would not have brought forward the instance of a wife, but rather of a slave and a master. For what if the wife be under subjection to us? it is as a wife, as free, as equal in honor. And the Son also, though He did become obedient to the Father, it was as the Son of God, it was as God. For as the obedience of the Son to the Father is greater than we find in men towards the authors of their being, so also His liberty is greater. Since it will not of course be said that the circumstances of the Son's relation to the Father are greater and more intimate than among men, and of the Father's to the Son, less. For if we admire the Son that He was obedient so as to come even unto death, and the death of the cross, and reckon this the great wonder concerning Him; we ought to admire the Father also, that He begat such a son, not as a slave under command, but as free, yielding obedience and giving counsel. For the counsellor is no slave. But again, when thou hearest of a counsellor, do not understand it as though the Father were in need, but that the Son hath the same honor with Him that begat Him. Do not therefore strain the example of the man and the woman to all particulars.
For with us indeed the woman is reasonably subjected to the man: since equality of honor causeth contention. And not for this cause only, but by reason also of the deceit which happened in the beginning. Wherefore you see, she was not subjected as soon as she was made; nor, when He brought her to the man, did either she hear any such thing from God, nor did the man say any such word to her: he said indeed that she was "bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh:" but of rule or subjection he no where made mention unto her. But when she made an ill use of her privilege and she who had been made a helper was found to be an ensnarer and ruined all, then she is justly told for the future, "thy turning shall be to thy husband."
The man is head of the woman in the natural order but not in Christ, in whom there is neither male nor female. Nevertheless, Paul wanted women to be subject to their husbands. God is the head of Christ’s humanity, because the divinity which was in the human Jesus controlled his doings.
Since man did not make woman, the question here does not concern the origin of woman. Rather it concerns only [the relation of] submission. The nature of God and Christ is the same. Similarly the nature of man and woman is the same.
For the man is the head of the woman in perfect order when Christ who is the Wisdom of God is the head of the man.
"You did not anoint my head with oil." If we understand the feet of the Lord as the mystery of his incarnation, fittingly his divinity is designated by his head. Hence also through Paul it is said: "The head of Christ is God." For the Jewish people professed to believe in God, and not in him as if in a man. But it is said to the Pharisee, "You did not anoint my head with oil," because he neglected to proclaim with worthy praise even that very power of his divinity, in which the Jewish people pledged to believe.
He saw the linen cloths lying there, and the cloth that had been over his head, not lying with the linen cloths but rolled up separately in one place. What do we believe it means, brothers, that the cloth from the Lord's head is not found with the linen cloths in the tomb, except that, as Paul attests, God is the head of Christ, and the incomprehensible mysteries of his divinity are separated from the knowledge of our weakness, and his power transcends the nature of creation?
Continue studying 1 Corinthians 11:3 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
First Corinthians 11:3 serves as a foundational theological statement within Paul's broader discussion on order and roles in the Corinthian church, particularly concerning public worship. It articulates a divinely established hierarchy of headship: God is the ultimate head of Christ, Christ is the head of every man, and man is the head of woman. This verse provides the theological underpinning for Paul's subsequent instructions regarding conduct, emphasizing a principle of functional authority and accountability that reflects the harmonious relationships within the Godhead.
Context
Literary Context
This verse initiates Paul's instructions regarding head coverings and conduct in public worship, a significant portion of 1 Corinthians 11. Paul has just concluded his discussion on Christian liberty and the importance of acting for the glory of God and the good of others (1 Corinthians 10:31-33). He begins chapter 11 by commending the Corinthians for remembering his teachings and holding to the traditions he passed on (1 Corinthians 11:2). Verse 3 then immediately establishes the theological framework for the specific practices he is about to address, linking the practical outworking of Christian life to a cosmic, divine order. This foundational principle of headship is crucial for understanding the subsequent verses concerning gender roles in prayer and prophecy.
Historical & Cultural Context
The city of Corinth was a bustling, cosmopolitan center in the Roman Empire, known for its diverse population, wealth, and moral laxity. Greco-Roman society, while varied, generally upheld patriarchal structures, and public displays often reflected social status and honor. Women in Corinth, particularly those associated with pagan cults, sometimes held prominent public roles or expressed themselves in ways that challenged conventional norms. The early Christian community in Corinth, composed of both Jews and Gentiles, was navigating how to live out their new faith in Christ within this complex cultural milieu. Paul's instructions in 1 Corinthians often address the tension between Christian freedom and cultural expectations, aiming to preserve the church's witness and internal order. The concept of "headship" would have resonated with their understanding of social hierarchies, but Paul redefines it through a theological lens rooted in creation and the nature of God.
Key Themes
The central theme introduced here is divine order and headship. Paul establishes a structured relationship that reflects God's design for authority and submission, not based on inherent worth but on functional roles. This concept of headship is a recurring theme in Paul's epistles, where Christ is consistently presented as the head of the Church and of all creation (Colossians 1:18). Furthermore, the verse subtly introduces the theme of Trinitarian relations, affirming the ultimate authority of God the Father even as it acknowledges the co-equality and divine nature of Christ. The statement "the head of Christ is God" points to a functional subordination within the Godhead, which Christ willingly embraced in His earthly ministry, demonstrating humility and obedience (Philippians 2:5-8). This divine pattern provides the ultimate model for all human relationships within the church.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
While literally referring to the physical head, in this context, kephalḗ carries a significant metaphorical meaning. Scholars generally agree that it primarily denotes "authority," "leader," or "ruler," as seen in Paul's consistent use of the term to describe Christ's leadership over the Church (Ephesians 1:22). However, it can also carry the nuance of "source" or "origin," particularly in the man-woman relationship, alluding to the creation account where Eve was taken from Adam (Genesis 2:21-23). Paul's usage here likely encompasses both aspects, emphasizing both authority and ontological origin.
This term specifically refers to an adult male, as opposed to anthrōpos, which is the generic term for human being (male or female). In this verse, anḗr is used consistently to denote the male individual, distinguishing him from "woman" (gynḗ) and establishing his specific role in the headship structure. It can also mean "husband" in marital contexts, which is relevant to the broader discussion of relationships.
This word refers to an adult female, or specifically a wife. Its pairing with anḗr in the second clause of the verse highlights the specific relationship between male and female within the established order. The use of these specific terms for "man" and "woman" rather than generic "humanity" underscores that Paul is addressing gender-specific roles within the church and potentially within marriage, as part of the divine order.
Verse Breakdown
"But I would have you know"
The Greek particle dé (G1161) introduces a new, important point, often translated as "but" or "now." The phrase "I would have you know" (from thélō G2309 and eídō G1492) indicates Paul's strong desire for the Corinthians to grasp this fundamental truth. It signals that what follows is not merely a suggestion but a crucial theological premise upon which his subsequent instructions are built. It emphasizes the authoritative nature of his teaching.
"that the head of every man is Christ"
This clause establishes Christ's universal Lordship and authority over all humanity, specifically every male individual. It asserts that Christ is the ultimate authority and source of life and direction for every man, reflecting His position as Lord of all creation and the Head of the Church (Ephesians 1:22-23). This foundational statement grounds the subsequent points in Christ's supreme authority.
"and the head of the woman is the man"
This statement extends the principle of headship to the relationship between man and woman. Building on the preceding clause, it indicates a functional order where the man serves as the "head" (authority/source) for the woman. This concept is often understood in light of the creation narrative (Genesis 2:18-24), where the woman was created from and for the man, and is not to be interpreted as a statement of inherent superiority or inferiority in worth, but rather a divinely ordained functional relationship.
"and the head of Christ is God"
This final clause completes the hierarchical structure, placing God the Father as the ultimate head of Christ. This profound theological statement affirms the Father's ultimate authority within the Godhead, even while upholding the co-equality and full divinity of the Son. It speaks to the functional subordination of the Son to the Father's will, a relationship of perfect unity and obedience that Christ perfectly demonstrated during His earthly ministry (John 5:19). This divine pattern serves as the ultimate model for all other headship relationships.
Literary Devices
Paul employs several literary devices to convey his message with clarity and emphasis. The most prominent is Metaphor, specifically the use of "head" (kephalḗ). While literally referring to a physical body part, Paul consistently uses it metaphorically to signify authority, leadership, and sometimes origin. This metaphor is central to establishing the hierarchical relationships he describes. Additionally, the verse exhibits strong Parallelism through its tripartite structure: "the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." This repetitive grammatical structure highlights the three distinct yet interconnected levels of headship, creating a clear and memorable chain of authority. The use of this parallel structure lends a sense of divine order and universality to the principles being laid out. The overall argument also functions as an Argument from Analogy, drawing a parallel between the relationships within the Godhead and the relationships between men and women, thereby grounding human order in divine reality.
Theological and Thematic Connections
This verse is profoundly significant for Christian theology, establishing a framework for understanding divine order and authority that permeates creation and redemption. It highlights that all authority ultimately derives from God the Father, who is the supreme head. Christ, though fully God, willingly submits to the Father's will, providing the ultimate example of perfect obedience and functional subordination within the Godhead. This divine pattern then serves as the blueprint for human relationships, particularly between men and women, emphasizing that functional roles do not diminish inherent worth or spiritual equality. Instead, they are designed for harmonious operation and the flourishing of God's creation, mirroring the perfect unity and order found in the Trinity. Understanding this verse is crucial for grasping Paul's broader theology of roles, submission, and the church's structure, all of which are ultimately designed to bring glory to God.
Reflection and Application
First Corinthians 11:3 invites believers to contemplate the profound order woven into the fabric of existence, from the divine relations within the Godhead to human relationships. It challenges us to embrace a posture of humility and submission to rightful authority, recognizing that such submission is not a sign of weakness but a reflection of the divine pattern. For individuals, it underscores Christ's ultimate headship over every aspect of our lives, calling us to live in obedience and surrender to His Lordship. For the church, it provides a theological basis for understanding complementary roles and responsibilities, fostering an environment where all members can contribute harmoniously under Christ's supreme authority. This verse reminds us that true freedom and flourishing are found not in rejecting order, but in aligning ourselves with God's wise and loving design, always remembering the equal dignity and spiritual value of all people in Christ (Galatians 3:28).
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Does this verse imply that men are superior to women?
No, this verse does not imply that men are inherently superior to women in value, intelligence, or spiritual standing. The concept of "headship" here refers to a functional role or a relationship of authority and accountability, not a statement of ontological superiority. Paul consistently teaches the equal spiritual value and dignity of all believers in Christ, regardless of gender (Galatians 3:28). The analogy to Christ's headship under God the Father is crucial: Christ is fully God and equal in essence to the Father, yet He willingly submits to the Father's will in terms of role and mission (John 14:28). Similarly, the man's headship over the woman is a functional ordering for harmonious operation, reflecting a divine pattern, not a declaration of one gender's inherent worth over another.
How does "the head of Christ is God" relate to the doctrine of the Trinity?
This statement is a profound Trinitarian truth. It affirms the ultimate authority of God the Father within the Godhead, while simultaneously upholding the co-equality and full divinity of Jesus Christ. It points to a functional subordination of the Son to the Father, not an ontological inferiority. The Son, in His incarnate state and even in His eternal relationship with the Father, perfectly exemplifies obedience and submission to the Father's will for the sake of the divine plan of redemption (John 5:19). This demonstrates the perfect unity, love, and order within the Trinity, where distinct persons have distinct roles yet share one divine essence. This divine pattern of harmonious relationship and ordered authority serves as the ultimate model for all other relationships described in the verse.
Is Paul's teaching on headship culturally bound, or is it a timeless principle?
This is a complex question with various interpretations among scholars. While Paul certainly addresses the Corinthian church within their specific historical and cultural context, the theological foundation he lays in 1 Corinthians 11:3 is rooted in the very nature of God and the creation order (Genesis 2). This suggests that the principle of headship, as a reflection of divine order, transcends mere cultural norms. However, the specific expressions or applications of this principle (such as head coverings, as discussed later in the chapter) may have been more culturally specific. Many theologians argue that the underlying principle of complementary roles and ordered relationships, modeled after the Trinity, is timeless, even if its outward manifestations may vary across different cultural contexts, always guided by biblical wisdom and the leading of the Holy Spirit.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
First Corinthians 11:3, while establishing a divine order of headship, finds its ultimate fulfillment and most profound meaning in Jesus Christ. He is the preeminent "head of every man," not merely as a figure of authority, but as the one who perfectly embodies and reveals God's redemptive plan. Christ's willing submission to the Father's headship, even to the point of death on a cross (Philippians 2:8), demonstrates the true nature of divine authority: it is characterized by self-sacrificial love, humble service, and perfect obedience, not domination. As the Head of the Church, His body (Colossians 1:18), Christ leads His people not through coercion, but through grace, empowering them for service and unity. The order established in this verse ultimately points to the new creation in Christ, where all relationships are to be redeemed and reordered according to His perfect example, culminating in the Father receiving all glory through the Son (1 Corinthians 15:28). Thus, the principles of headship and submission, when viewed through the lens of Christ, become a pathway to flourishing, reflecting the very life and love of the Triune God.