1 Corinthians 11:3Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Yet tell me, how do you prove your idea from this? As the woman, you say, is subject to the man, so Christ is subject to the Father. Therefore, just as Christ is the head of the man, in exactly the same way the Father is the head of the Son? "The head of every man is Christ," says the Apostle. But who could ever admit this?

If we admit that the Father's superiority over the Son is the same as the Son's superiority over us, then consider to what degree you abase Him. Therefore we must not take in the same sense everything said about us and about God, even when it is said in the same words.

We must ascribe to God a certain special superiority, such as is proper to God. Otherwise many absurdities will result.

Look: God is the head of Christ, Christ is the head of the man, and the man is the head of the woman. If throughout this whole discourse we take the word "head" in one and the same sense, the Son will be lower than the Father as much as we are lower than Him. The woman will be lower than us as much as we are lower than God the Word. Thus, as the Son stands in relation to the Father, so we stand in relation to the Son, and the woman to the man.

But who could admit this? You take the word "head" in one sense with regard to the woman, and in another with regard to the man. Why, then, do you not take it in another sense with regard to Christ? It must be taken in another sense also with regard to the Son and the Father.

How, then, you say, should it be understood otherwise? In the sense of source. If Paul had wished to express the authority of one and the subordination of the other, as you say, he would more likely have taken a slave and master as his example, not a woman. For although the woman is subject to us, she is subject as free and equal in honor.

So also the Son, although He obeys the Father, obeys as Son of God, as God. As the Son's obedience to the Father is greater than the obedience of children to parents among men, so also His lack of servile subjection is greater.

If the Son's relations to the Father are greater and more perfect than similar relations among men, then the Father's relations to the Son are no less. If we marvel at the Son because He was "obedient unto death, even death on a cross" (Phil 2:8), and reckon this to Him as a great merit, then we must also marvel at the Father. He begot such a Son, Who is not subject to Him as a slave, but obeys as free and as counselor.

A counselor is not a slave. Again, when you hear the word "counselor," do not take it as though the Father were in need of anything. Take it to mean that the Son is equal in honor to the Father.

Likewise, do not apply the example of husband and wife in every respect. Among them the woman is rightly subject to the man, because equality of honor could have produced enmity. It is also because deception came from the woman in the beginning.

She was not subject immediately after creation. When God brought her to the man, she heard nothing of the kind from God. The man said nothing similar to her. He said that she was bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh, but he said nothing to her about authority and subjection.

But when she misused her authority, becoming a deceiver instead of a helper and ruining everything, then she rightly heard the words: "Your desire shall be for your husband" (Gen 3:16).

This sin could have stirred up enmity in our race. After such an event, the fact that the woman came from the man would not have served peace. On the contrary, the very fact that, having come from him, she did not spare her own member would have provoked the man still more.

God, seeing the malice of the devil, enclosed them by this word as by a wall. By this decree He destroyed the enmity that was to arise after the deception. He set up, as it were, a barrier against the natural passion, the resentment that came from sin.

But in God, this incorruptible Being, nothing of the kind can be supposed. Therefore apply the examples to Him not in every respect. Otherwise in other places also you will fall into many serious errors.

So also at the beginning of the epistle the Apostle said, "All things are yours; and you are Christ's, and Christ is God's" (1 Cor 3:22-23). What then? Are all things ours, and are we Christ's, and is Christ God's, in one and the same sense? No. On the contrary, the difference is obvious even to the most foolish, though one and the same expression is used concerning God, Christ, and us.

In another place, after calling the husband the head of the wife, he adds that Christ also is the head, Savior, and protector of the Church, and that the husband should be such toward his wife (Eph 5:23-27). Can we take all these expressions in one sense, both here and in what is said later in Ephesians on this subject? No. This is impossible.

The same expressions are used of God and man, but some must be understood in one way and others in another. Yet not everything is different. Otherwise they would have been used without reason and in vain, if we made no application from them.

Just as not everything must be understood in one sense, so not everything must be considered inapplicable. For clearer understanding, I shall try to explain this by an example.

Christ is called the head of the Church. If I make no application from this expression, which is borrowed from man, then why was it said to me? On the other hand, if I apply its entire literal meaning, absurdity results, because the head shares the body's passions and is subject to the same weaknesses.

What, then, must be rejected, and what accepted? We must reject what I have said, and accept the perfect union of Christ with the Church, and the fact that He is her Cause and supreme Ruler. Moreover, this must be understood not simply, but in the highest degree and in a manner worthy of God. His union is most firm, and His rule most perfect.

Again, Christ is called Son. Here also do not accept everything, but do not reject everything either. Accept what befits God, that He is consubstantial with the Father and is begotten from Him. Do not apply what is unbefitting and belongs to human weakness.

Likewise God is called light. Can everything proper to visible light be applied to Him? No. Visible light is limited by darkness and place, is moved by another power, and is obscured. Nothing of the kind can even be imagined in the divine essence.

Therefore let us not reject everything, but draw some benefit from the likeness. Let us understand the illumination given to us by God and deliverance from darkness.

This is against the heretics. Now we must speak about the whole passage under explanation. Perhaps someone will be perplexed and ask himself: what fault would there be if women uncovered themselves and men covered themselves?

You can see what the fault is from the following. Many different signs have been given to man and woman, to one of authority and to the other of subjection. Among them is this, that the woman be covered and the man have his head uncovered.

If these are signs, then both sin when they violate good order and the commandment of God. They transgress their own limits, the man falling down to the woman's abasement, and the woman rising by her outward appearance above the man.

If they are not permitted to change their clothing, that is, for the woman to dress in male clothing, and the man to put on a woman's garment and veil, then much more is it not permitted to exchange these garments. For Scripture says, "A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman's garment" (Deut 22:5).

The former custom was established by men, though afterward confirmed by God. But the latter comes from nature itself, that the one be covered and the other not covered. By "nature" I mean God, because He is the Creator of nature.

Therefore, if you transgress these boundaries, see how much harm will result. Do not tell me that this transgression is insignificant. It is great in itself, because it is disobedience. Even if it were insignificant in itself, it would be great because it concerns the sign of great matters.

That this sign is great is clear from the fact that it produces good order in the human race, presenting the ruler and the subject in their proper form. The one who acts against this brings everything into confusion, deprives himself of the gifts of God, and dishonors the honor given to him from above. This applies not only to the man, but also to the woman.

For it is a great honor for her also to keep her own place. On the contrary, it is shameful to go beyond the limits. Therefore the Apostle says concerning both: "Every man praying or prophesying with his head covered dishonors his head. And every woman praying or prophesying with her head uncovered dishonors her head" (1 Cor 11:4-5).

What is said about headship must not be understood in the same sense also concerning Christ. Christ is head to us both because He is our Creator and because we are His body. The Father is head of Christ as His cause.

If you understand the Father's being called head of Christ also according to His humanity, in the same sense in which Christ Himself is called head to us, there will be nothing impious in this. For the Father is also called the God of Christ according to His humanity (Jn 20:17).

Since He willed to become like us and was called both our brother and our head, there is nothing new if He accepts humbled names as well. According to His humanity, He has His Father according to divinity as His head, as His King and His God.

The divine Apostle's statement that Christ is the head of every man clearly speaks of believers. Christ is our head not according to divinity, but according to humanity, for we are called His body. The head must be of one nature with the body.

Therefore according to humanity He is our head. Consequently, according to humanity, His head also is God.

If they wish to assert that this is said also according to divinity, let them know this. With respect to us, who have human nature and believe in Him, He is called head according to humanity, because according to humanity He is consubstantial with us.

In the same way, when the Father is called His head, He shows His consubstantiality with Him. One and the Same is consubstantial with the Father according to divinity, and with us according to humanity. The Father is called His head as Father and Cause.

Answer. It is necessary to know that when the divine Apostle said that Christ is the head of every man, he showed that Christ is the head of the faithful man, zealous in the practice of the divine commandments and in contemplation of pious dogmas. Therefore the universal force of this word does not include unbelieving men. Indeed, how could Christ be the head of unbelievers?

Thus, at the first understanding of this passage, as we approach the meaning of spiritual interpretation, we say that the man is the practical intellect. It has as its head the word of faith. Looking to this as to Christ, the intellect contemplates its own life, having raised it through spiritual practice from the gracious gifts of the commandments.

In this it does not shame its head, that is, faith, by any external and material coverings. It places nothing from things temporal and subject to dissolution above faith.

By the "woman" of this intellect we mean the very habit of spiritual practice. It is grown over and covered, as with long hair, by many varied ascetical thoughts and manners. More than this, it has the intellect itself as its own head, covered by the fullness and decorum of these thoughts and manners.

Christ, as we understand it, is enhypostatic faith. God clearly appears as His head. To Him Christ also raises the word of faith, manifesting God according to nature to the intellect that is being raised.

Again, the "man" is the intellect concerned with natural contemplation in the Spirit. It has as its head the Word, the Producer of all things, manifested according to faith from the ordered structure of visible things. The intellect does not dishonor Him by concealing and hiding Him under anything visible, for it sets nothing else above this Word.

The "woman" of this intellect is the sense that lives together with it. Through sense the intellect sails over the sea of perceptible nature and gathers the divine logoi within it. It does not allow sense, stripped of rational coverings, to become the servant of irrationality and sin. Nor does it allow sense, by casting away the divine logoi as coverings, to receive as its head the passion of irrationality instead of the intellect.

The head of Christ, that is, of the creative Word proportionately manifested in beings when they are naturally contemplated according to faith, is the Intellect that ineffably begets Him according to essence. To this Intellect the Word, through Himself, brings the intellect that is being raised through pious contemplation of beings. He supplies it with contemplative reflections of divine things, proportionate to the knowledge of visible things.

On the other hand, the "man" is the intellect found within mystical theology. It has as its head the uncovered Christ, apprehended by the intellect in an unknown manner through indemonstrable initiations. Or, more precisely, it has the Word of faith known beyond intellect. Nothing among beings is placed above Him: neither sense, nor reason, nor intellect, nor thought, nor knowledge, nor what is known, nor what is thought by intellect or reason, nor what is perceived by sense or sensed.

In other words, this is the intellect struggling in the praiseworthy renunciation of all things. This renunciation utterly surpasses both itself and beings, and is supremely deifying.

The "woman" of this intellect is thought, pure from every sensory fantasy. It has as its head the intellect, wrapped in beginningless contemplations of ineffable and unknown dogmas that surpass thought.

The head of Christ, that is, of the Word mystically manifested according to His own greatness, is the Intellect absolutely and in every respect boundlessly removed from all things. The intelligible Christ makes Him known to the worthy, being by nature the Word of the Intellect.

For Holy Scripture says: "He who has seen Me has seen the Father" (Jn 14:9). Indeed, the contemplation of the Word becomes clear knowledge of the Intellect that begot Him. The Word manifests the Intellect existing in Him according to essence.

To this Intellect He raises the human intellect, which hastens toward identity with God by grace. In contemplation it is freed from the distinction and multiple quantity of beings, and is united with the Godlike Unity in the identity and simplicity of a steadfast ever-moving motion around God.

Therefore every practical intellect that prays or prophesies, that is, either asks for the understanding of the meanings of the virtues, for this is how "praying" should be understood. Or asks for the gift of the modes by which these virtues are realized in deeds, for this is how "prophesying" should be taken, must see only the one uncovered word of faith.

It must not grasp or perform with attachment anything that covers the head. It must not place anything else above this Word.

And every woman, that is, the habit of virtue belonging to the practical intellect, when she prays and prophesies, or is secretly moved according to her inner disposition and forms virtue in outward manners, dishonors her head without rational discernment. She pursues the good for the sake of passion and is deprived of reason, which adorns her like a veil.

Every intellect striving in natural contemplation, when it prays and prophesies with covered head, that is, when it contemplatively investigates the logoi of beings or communicates them to others as a teacher, while there appears in it some inclination toward anything else without a pious aim, dishonors its head. It places some passing thing above right and pious knowledge.

And every woman, that is, sense, which naturally receives sensible things but does not have on its head the intelligible logoi of visible things that wrap it about, dishonors her head. Through natural attachment to what is visible, she brings contemplation near to passion.

Every intellect that has become beloved of mystical theology, when it prays and prophesies with covered head, that is, when it enters in an unknown way into the contemplations commanded and teaches and introduces others into the mystery of theology. Dishonors its head if its contemplation possesses any form while it is initiated, or initiates others, into the mysteries of the Word Who surpasses thought. It dishonors its head by placing Him Who is simple and beyond every contemplation below something among beings and things known.

It must see without seeing the true God the Word Himself, naked of every covering of thought and knowledge. It must know clearly how the negative statements about God, spoken because of His transcendence, correspond to reality, and how far they reveal the positive affirmation of Divine Being through complete detachment from existing things.

And every woman, that is, the thought of such an intellect, when she prays or prophesies with uncovered head, or has been freed from the intellectual power that covers her with the dense veil of many mystical visions, dishonors her head. She rejects divine and ineffable knowledge as the intellect that covers the head.

Therefore every man, whether the practical, natural, or theological intellect, when he prays or prophesies, that is, when he is taught and when he teaches, should have his head uncovered, that is, Christ. The practical intellect should prefer nothing to faith or virtue. The natural intellect should place nothing above the first Word. The theological intellect should not form Him Who surpasses contemplation and knowledge according to the image of beings accessible to contemplation.

And every woman, that is, the habit of the practical intellect, the sense of the natural intellect, or the wise thought of the theological intellect, should cover her head. The practical habit does so by bearing rational discernment of what builds up and what does not build up. Sense does so by bearing the knowing power of reason directed toward visible things. Thought does so by bearing entirely indemonstrable knowledge that surpasses thought.

Every habit, sense, or thought not covered in the stated way differs in no way from one shorn. That is, it possesses no word of virtue, piety, mystical knowledge, or divine love.

Therefore every woman should naturally have the authority of reason upon her head. By this I mean rational governance. This should be especially because of the Angels, who observe the manifest and hidden movements of our soul and record our every thought and every deed, either to praise or to convict us on the dread day of Judgment.

It should also be because of the reflections of conscience concerning what we have done. Under these, the same Angels are figuratively understood, who condemn or justify us even now and will do so later, on the day of Judgment.

It should also be because of the evil angels, who watch our habit, sense, and thought. As soon as they see them stripped of rational and intellectual discernment, piety, and knowledge, they at once strive to make an assault and create the opposite for us. I mean lack of rational discernment, impiety, and ignorance. Through these, wicked demons characteristically set vice, error, and godlessness in motion.

God is called the head of Christ as the Intellect of the Word by nature, and as His Beginning by cause.

"The head of every man is Christ." Christ is the head of all, the Head of the whole Church. In the body, the head is not the head only of the chest, hands, or feet, but of the whole body.

Consequently, Christ is also the head of women. Yet in the body some members are related directly to the head, while others are related through the mediation of other members.

So also in the Church, the holy Apostles and their successors, the presidents of the Churches, and in general the priesthood, are more directly related to Christ as Head.

Other members of the Church, though they are in union with Christ as Head, often have need of their mediation.

In a similar way, there is something according to which the man is presented as more directly related to Christ as Head. The woman, though she has Christ as Head together with the man, is related to Him in some manner through the man.

In precisely what sense? Not at all in the sense that she is saved in the Lord. In this respect, everything comes to her from the Lord, just as to the man.

Faith is from the Lord, grace is from the Lord, and every help is likewise from the Lord. None of this is communicated to the woman from the man, insofar as he is man.

All this proceeds according to its own God-established order. What, then, is meant? The Apostle does not explain this, and it is very difficult to introduce a reliable conjecture from ourselves.

One thought presents itself: in Christ Jesus, the customary subordination of the wife to the husband is not destroyed. Though the wife also stands in union with the Lord, she is not torn away from subordination to her husband.

She too is in the Lord, but she stands under her husband. As children and parents, masters and servants, subjects and authorities remain in the Lord what they were according to the order of life, so also husband and wife remain.

Here the husband is taken as head and representative of the household. "The head of the woman is the man." Did the women in Corinth claim equality with men in every respect?

Perhaps they did so knowing that in Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female, and that free access to Him is opened to women as well as to men. By this word the Apostle sets them in their proper rank.

You have been baptized alike. You have received the gift of the Spirit in chrismation alike. You partake of the Body and Blood of Christ alike. The inheritance of the Kingdom has been promised to you alike.

Yet in all this, do not forget that the head of the woman is the man. "Wishing to subject wives to husbands, and teaching that God from of old commanded them to be under the authority of husbands, the Apostle used this form of expression" (Theodoret).

"The head of Christ is God." God is the head of Christ as the God-man, according to the divine economy of salvation.

The incarnate Son of God is God, in no way less than God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. Yet, having taken upon Himself, in the counsel of the Godhead, the fulfillment of the divine economy of salvation, He, as God also, carries out what was determined in the counsel of the Godhead.

For this reason He says that He came down from heaven not to do His own will, but the will of Him who sent Him. In this respect God is the head of Christ.

Theodoret holds: "The Apostle arranged the discourse in this way not because he was setting forth divine dogmas or expounding theology." What, then, did he intend?

Only to lead the mind to the subordination of the wife to the husband from the Christian point of view.

On the basis of these words, one must by no means suppose that, as the woman is subject to the man and the man to Christ, so Christ is subject to God.

If the man stands immeasurably far from Christ, and his subjection to Christ is measured accordingly, then, measuring the woman's subjection to the man by this same measure, where shall we find a measure for it?

Chrysostom says: "If in this whole discourse we take the word 'head' in one and the same sense, then the woman will be lower than the man as much as the man is lower than God the Word. Who could allow this?"

By setting forth this ladder of the wife's subordination to the husband, the husband's to Christ, and Christ's to God, the Apostle does not define the exact measure of subordination.

He only leads the mind to it, having chiefly in view the subordinate position of the wife in relation to the husband. Even if we do not understand this text exactly, the Apostle's chief thought is clear. For us, that is sufficient.