Why is it dishonouring for a woman to pray with her head uncovered?

Explanation:

We know from historical records that in first-century Corinth, a woman’s hair was considered a sign of sexual attraction.¹ This meant that single women would go out in public without covering their heads with a garment in order to indicate that they were available.² Married women, on the other hand, covered their heads with a garment in order to indicate that they were not available.³ Thus, it was dishonouring for a married woman to go in public without her head covered with a garment in the sense that it dishonoured her husband.

Counterargument:

This view assumes that the one who is dishonoured is the woman’s husband, but this is not clear from 1 Corinthians 11:5. Paul does not say that the woman dishonours her husband, but that she dishonours her head. The real question is why it would dishonour a woman’s head if she does not cover it. It could mean that she dishonours her head in the sense that God created men and women differently, and by dressing like a man, she dishonours herself.⁴

Response to counterargument:

It’s possible that when Paul says a woman dishonours her head by not covering it, he refers to her actual head and not her husband. Still, it is hard to make sense of Paul’s comments from 1 Corinthians 11:3 when he explains that Christ is the head of man, and man the head of the woman if he does not intend to connect 1 Corinthians 11:3 with 1 Corinthians 11:5 (see argument 2).⁵ Added to this, we know that women wore a garment on their heads because uncovered hair attracted sexual attention in first-century Corinth. Taken together, we can deduce that Paul addresses a commonsense issue in the church at Corinth. For some reason married women worship without their heads covered, and because of the cultural standards of first-century Corinth concerning sexuality, this dishonours their husbands.

Explanation:

We want to understand why it is dishonouring for a woman to leave her head uncovered in worship. To understand what Paul means, we must look at 1 Corinthians 11:5 in light of his comments in 1 Corinthians 11:3. In 1 Corinthians 11:3 Paul says that Christ is the head of man, and man is the head of woman. Now in 1 Corinthians 11:5 Paul says that if a woman does not cover her head, she dishonours her head. By reading 1 Corinthians 11:5 in light of 1 Corinthians 11:3, we can see that a woman dishonours her husband when she does not cover her head.⁶ Why would a woman’s uncovered head dishonour her husband?

We get further clues from 1 Corinthians 11:5–6 where Paul writes that if a woman shaves her head, this too is dishonourable. We know from historical contexts that prostitutes would sometimes go around with a shaved head.⁷ With this in mind, Paul seems to insinuate that if a married woman does not cover head her, she puts herself in the same sexual category as a prostitute. And of course, for a married woman to place herself in the same category as a prostitute by her dress would be dishonourable to her husband.

Counterargument:

The immediate context does not suggest that the woman dishonours her husband. Rather, it suggests that the woman somehow dishonours herself. The reason Paul mentions the fact that Christ is the head of man, and man the head of the woman, is not because he wants to show that a man is dishonoured when his wife wears her head uncovered. Rather, Paul uses the example of both men and women throughout 1 Corinthians 11:2–16 to show that men can dishonour themselves by their behaviour, just as women can. Why it dishonours a man to cover his head and a woman to leave her head uncovered is not clear. What is clear is that a woman’s own head is dishonoured when she does not cover it.

Response to counterargument:

The problem here is that Paul seems to clearly indicate that the reason a woman should wear a covering on her head, is not because she dishonours herself if she fails to, but because she dishonours her husband. First, we know from historical records that married women covered their heads for the sake of modesty. We also know that Paul has said that a man is the head of his wife, and that a wife dishonours her head when her head is uncovered. These clues lend to the notion that when the woman does not cover her head, this dishonours her husband. Another clue from the text that suggests a woman with an uncovered head dishonours her husband comes from 1 Corinthians 11:15. There Paul says that by nature, long hair is the glory of a woman. Of course, if long hair is the glory of a woman, then why would she dishonour herself by uncovering it? On the other hand, although long hair is the glory of the woman, because uncovered hair signalled a woman’s availability in first-century Corinth, she dishonours her husband when her head is not covered.

Possible weaknesses:

As long as the historical insights into first-century Corinth are accurate, it is hard to see the weakness of this view.

Explanation:

We want to understand why it is a dishonour for a woman to worship without covering her head. We get our answer when we reach 1 Corinthians 11:5. There Paul writes that it is dishonourable for a woman to shave her head. In other words, it is dishonourable if a woman looks like a man. Paul’s point is that God created men and women differently, so men and women should retain their gender distinctions.¹²

Counterargument:

There are two problems with this argument. First, we know from historical records that it was dishonourable for a woman to shave her head because this implied that she was involved in prostitution.¹³ If this is the case, then Paul says a woman should not shave her head because this categorizes her with prostitutes, not because it makes her look like a man. Second, Paul does not say that it is disgraceful for a woman to shave her head because it makes her look like a man. Rather, he says it’s dishonourable; therefore, she should cover her head with a garment. If all Paul was worried about was whether a woman looked like a man, his exhortation for her to cover her head seems out of place. Why not exhort the woman to keep her hair long? Instead, he exhorts her to cover her head, implying that he has more than the distinction between genders in mind.

Explanation:

Paul explains that a woman dishonours her head when she fails to cover it. The reason is because she dresses like a man and breaks down the distinction between men and women.¹⁴ This is confirmed by Paul when we reach 1 Corinthians 11:8. There he reflects back on 1 Corinthians 11:8 by explaining that woman came from man. His point here is that there is a distinction in the created order between men and women.¹⁵ Therefore, women should cover their heads and dress like women.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that when Paul references Genesis 2:1–25, he does so in order to establish that man is the spiritual head of woman, not to establish gender distinctions. If Paul wanted to establish gender distinctions from Genesis, he would turn to Genesis 1:27, where it says that God created male and female. Instead, he uses Genesis 2:1–25 to highlight the fact that woman came from man. If Paul wanted to highlight gender distinctions, it would be contrary to his motives to point out that woman comes from man, which implies that women and men are alike. Of course, in light of 1 Corinthians 11:3 and the fact that man is the spiritual head of his wife, it makes good sense why Paul emphasizes the fact that woman came from man. He wants to show that man is the spiritual head of his wife, so she should be careful not to dishonour her husband by her dress.

Possible weaknesses:

The problem with this view is that it’s only consistent with the text in a superficial way. Authors want to make sense of why Paul is worried about dress code, so they posit gender distinctions as a plausible explanation. Such an explanation seems consistent with the text until one takes a closer look at the details. The context of 1 Corinthians 11:2–16 and the cultural norms around sexuality and uncovered hair strongly suggest that Paul has something other than gender distinctions in mind.