When people ask why Christadelphian women wear hats of scarfs to meeting, do we know how to explain our reasons? If all we can say is “Paul says to, in I Cor. II.” they answer that Paul was advocating compliance with a local custom, and that his argument “must be applied today against the background of the different sociological situation. Otherwise we must revert to the clothes and slavery of those times.”
Too many of us, also, explain Paul’s argument as primarily advocating male supremacy as illustrated by the figure of the church as the Bride of Christ: which is putting it backwards, besides instantly, and unnecessarily, shutting some minds against us. Surely what Paul is arguing for is a public demonstration in symbol of the glorification of the risen Christ and the church’s betrothal to him, illustrated b a wife’s relationship to her husband.
Let us look at Paul’s argument verse by verse.
Verse 2: “the ordinances” (“traditions” in the A.V. and R.S.V. margins) i.e. not local traditions but the oral teaching of Paul and the other apostles. What we have in the New Testament is only the spirit-inspired writings God chose to preserve for us. There was a great deal more spoken than was written. Consider for instance 1 Cor 15:6,7 and 2 Thess, 2:15. If Paul had been advising a diplomatic compliance with local tradition he would have disposed of the matter as briefly as v.16 or Acts 15:20,21.
Verse 3: “the Head of every man is Christ, and the Head of the woman is the man and the Head of Christ is God.” Christ had end the Law of Moses and Christian women rejoiced that now they behind in the court of the women. Apparently they, or some of them also thought that “in Christ there is neither male nor female” meant they were also released from submission to their husbands. They had to learn that, like Isaiah and Ezekiel (Isa. 20:2, 3 and Ezek, 1:1-12) Christians are living symbols. The new system has its own symbols; baptism as the symbol of death and burial and resurrection to a new life; bread and wine as symbols of Christ’s sacrificial life and death; and the uncovered heads of the brethren as the symbol of Christ’s present glory with the Father.
Verse 4: “Every man praying or prophesying having his head covered dishonoreth his Head.” Covering on a man’s head, scriptually, signifies mourning and humiliation. 2 Sam. 15:30, Esther 6:12, Jer. 14:3, 1. In meeting, man represents Christ, who passed beyond the mourning and humiliation of earthly life. For man to wear a head-covering in meeting is to deny the glorification of Christ, to dishonor him by implying that he is still sinful flesh.
Verse 5: “Every woman that prayeth or prophesieth her Head . . . as if she were shaven.” Shaven here is “xurao” from “xuron” a razor, the same word used in Acts 21:21. “Shorn” in v.6 is “keiro.” most commonly used of sheep left naked by the total removal of their wool, so it’s not just bobbed hair Paul is talking about, but the public humiliation of a shaved head.
Verse 6: “if the women be not covered.” There may bee a double significance to “covered” here. For a man to cover a woman with his own clothing meant he accepted her as his betrothed wife. Ruth 3:9, Ezek. 16:8. The veil on a woman’s head was the sign that she was married and accepted her husband’s authority, (as in v.10). If, in symbol, the Bride of Christ, symbolized by the sisters, rejecting the bridegroom, and following in the steps of natural Israel, who became an adulterous wife to her Divine husband. Isa. 51:5, Hos. 2:1-13. The custom in many countries, then and since, was to publicly shave the head of the adulterous woman. So, “if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn.” Either the Bride of Christ accepts his authority or she is an adulterous wife spiritually.
Verse 7: “man . . . is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of the man,” in the sense of “this is my body … this is my blood,” as in verse 24 and 25. That is, in meeting, man represents the image and glory of God in Christ. (Jn. 1:11 and 11:9) and woman represents the glory of mankind. All the glory of mankind is not enough to make them acceptable of God. The only way the Bride can approach God is as part of Christ, in oneness with Christ.
Verse 10: “Because of the angels.” When we are at meeting surely our angels are there also (Ps. 31:7). Since there waw one particular angel (besides the angels of the true believers) with “the ecclesia in the wilderness” which was Israel, one angel who especially represented the presence of God, (Isa. 63:9) may there not be likewise at our meetings one angel, besides our individual angels, who represents the presence of Christ? These “Angels of the Presence” would surely be especially offended by the presence of bareheaded sisters and grieved by their lack of understanding.
Verse 13: “is it proper for a woman to pray uncovered.” In v.1, the word “prophecy” is, in Greek, “propheteus,” defined as “to tell forth the Divine counsel: to publicly expound,” so its a fair inference that the prayer referred to is public prayer. Certainly it is public worship, the conduct of the meetings, that Paul is considering here. So this should not be taken to mean that sisters must not pray in private with uncovered heads, any more than a brother at work in a cap (or safety hat, for instance) and with both hands busy should not offer a prayer because his head is covered.
Verse 15: “her hair is given her for a covering.” Some are disposed to argue from this that a sister with long hair is thereby sufficiently covered. By that argument, a brother with any hair is too much covered. And isn’t Paul saying that a woman’s long hair is (represents?) a human glory? No natural endowment can make us acceptable in the sight of God. No matter how magnificently endowed by nature we still cannot approach God without the sin-covering provided in Christ.
The head-covering on sisters at meeting symbolizes the church’s humble submission to Hgod in and through the Lord Jesus Christ.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One