NOTE: This is the 3rd
and final blog on this topic of women and head coverings. Please read the first
two first.
11:11 Nevertheless,
neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in
the Lord. 12 For as woman came from man, even so man
also comes through woman; but all things are from God.
13 Judge among
yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head
uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has
long hair, it is a dishonor to him? 15 But if a woman has long hair,
it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a
covering. 16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such
custom, nor do the churches of God.
Let me fully admit at this point that I struggle with some of
Paul's statements here. The most perplexing is his assertion that nature itself
proves long hair is for women but not for men. The only animal I can think of
that has a distinction between the genders are lions and in the case of lions
it is the male that has the extra hair. You can read the Bible commentaries and
you won't find an explanation. If you do please let me know. One person I
greatly respect described Paul as "grasping at straws" to support the
view that the women in Corinth ought to support the cultural norms.
The key principle to draw from this last section is verse 16:
Being contentious is not a Christian practice.
Now let's review.
1, Paul opens this section about head coverings by
commending the Corinthians for following all the traditions he taught them.
Clearly head coverings was not something he taught them. If it was there would
be no need to address it because they were already following everything he
taught them.
2, It is necessary to understand and appreciate the
radical divide between how women were seen by the culture and how they are seen
by God, or as Paul puts it "in the Lord". Women were property first
owned by their fathers and then sold to their husbands. They could not own
anything (even though God had already tried to teach them otherwise way back in
the time of Moses). It is often misunderstood to this day that the position of
women as inferior to men was a human construct that occurred as a result of
Eve's mistake, and was never God's design or intent. Paul's seeming arguments
in this chapter to subjugate women was a description of how women were seen by
society, not God's perspective as he made clear in verses 11 and 12.
3, We may know and understand our position "in the
Lord" but we live in the real world and we can't behave as though we
don't. A slave may know that in the eyes of God he is free and as equal and
valuable as his human master. However that does not give him the right to
revolt or run away. This is a hard teaching but true nonetheless. Satan's
rebellion began with his refusal to subject himself to God's authority even
though God never used or uses His authority to be authoritarian. As humans we
are all equal but at times we must all subject ourselves to the authority of
others. Children must be subject to their parents, students to their teachers,
employees to their boss, citizens to their government etc...
4, Now let's look at the wider issue. Earlier in the
letter Paul referred to believing women and their unbelieving husbands. He
counseled them to stay with their husbands and win them by their conduct. We
know the propensity of people to swing from one extreme to the other. Women who
were treated like cattle for millennia have found out that "in the
Lord" they are equal to men. Can you see the potential for a radical swing
of the pendulum? Paul is trying to mitigate this problem. He is asking the
women to not "burn their bras". It is not the custom for Christians
to be contentious. We don't solve problems by riots and demonstrations. We
don't demand our rights. We fight with the beauty of a Godly character. A
Christian slave wins the heart of his master by his conduct. A believing wife
wins her husband and by extension her cultural community by her winsome
character, not by flaunting her equal rights even though she is equal.
Jesus is our example. He is our example, our teacher, and our
Lord and Master. Did He fight for His rights? Did He hold demonstrations to
demand equality for women or for slaves or for gentiles or for Samaritans? No
He did not. He went about it an entirely different way. He touched the lepers.
He sat by a well with a Samaritan woman of ill repute and treated her with the
dignity and respect that was due her "in the Lord". Jesus lived the
truth. He crossed borders that Jews would never. He healed people that the
culture would pass right by. His life was a sermon words could never
match.
The lesson of 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 is not about whether or
not we should be carrying on a cultural tradition that is 2000 years behind us
and based on a view of women that is rooted in sin and brokenness. The lesson
is about submitting ourselves to the culture so we may have the opportunity to
speak the Truth to the way we live. If I were a woman today seeking to gain an
influence for Christ among Muslim women or Amish women or Hutterite women or
Mennonite women etc... I would live among them as one of them and part of that
would be covering my head, not because God commands it, but because it is
necessary if I am to be "all things to all people that I may win
some."
"In the Lord" "there is no longer Jew nor
Greek, slave nor free, male nor female..." but we aren't Home yet. We
still have to navigate a broken and complex world. Ask God for the wisdom to
live effectively in your community so that you can have a winning influence.
There is no better argument for Christianity than a loving and lovable
Christian. If we must subject ourselves to customs that shouldn't exist to do
so, did Jesus not subject Himself for us?
No comments:
Post a Comment