“For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake … However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as the woman originates from the man, so also the manhas his birththrough the woman; and all things originate from God.”

Notice the first two arguments are supra-cultural, in that they are above or beyond any cultural considerations. The concept of headship and the glory of God are not defined by the contemporary thinking of the secular world in which Christians find themselves. The same is true of the third argument, which is based on the created order. That means what is said here is not culturally conditioned—Paul ties head coverings to a universal truth.

Interpreters minimize the created order as told in Genesis 1 and 2: man being created first, formed from the dust, and “God-breathed,” with the woman being created second, and that from Adam. However, Paul, the inspired interpreter, makes a great case out of the created order as he applies it to the Corinthian reduction of the gender differences in the church. There is an order in the church; it is based on the created order, which God sees as universal; and it is to be symbolized with the head coverings.

Now it is true that some, although believing in the importance of the created order, misuse that teaching to justify oppression of women. But we cannot allow misapplication to color our interpretation. While Adam was created first, and that established a certain order, Paul reminds us of the obvious: that every man is born from a woman, and thus is not independent of women. The church needs women; a husband needs his wife. Because of our culture and abuses, we must assert that, therefore, a man cannot treat his wife as a possession, but as a needed human partner, given by God.

This is not a matter of intrinsic worth or dignity (when applied correctly), but rather about living “in the Lord” with faith that “all things originate from God.” In other words, these countercultural teachings are from God, and despite the interpretative difficulties, they are God’s will for us.

With such great emphasis on these theological arguments in sacred Scripture, one wonders why Jesus followers who love God would object to using the simple symbol of a head covering to convey a wonderful truth about how God designed the sexes to interrelate. We do many countercultural things that the world thinks strange. Surely the uncertainty of application should not prohibit us from any application at all.

Lord, help me not fear what others may think about how I live out this passage.