When Paul says woman is the glory of man, he means that
since the woman completes the man, her conduct reflects on her husband; or
by virtue of creation, man is above woman.
To understand Paul we need to understand that in first-century Corinth, married women did not wear their heads uncovered in public. That is because a woman with an uncovered head signalled to other men that she was available. Since married women were not available, it was dishonourable to their husbands for them to pray or prophesy in public with their heads uncovered. Paul makes this point from 1 Corinthians 11:3-5 by explaining that the husband is the spiritual head of his wife. He then reinforces his point by reflecting on the creation account of Genesis 2. There we find that woman was created from man’s rib. Paul sees that this implies an intimate connection between men and women, even saying that the woman is the glory of man. His point is the same as it is in 1 Corinthians 11:3–5. Since a wife is the glory of her husband, her conduct can reflect on him either positively or negatively.
Paul was not the only writer to say that a woman is the glory of her husband. We find the authors of the Septuagint translate Proverbs 11:18 into Greek as a gracious wife brings glory to her husband.
We also know of a Jewish tomb in Rome with the inscription Lucilla, the blessed glory of Sophronius.
These reinforce Paul’s point that a woman was the crown of her husband, so her behaviour would reflect on him either honourably or dishonourably. Since it was dishonourable for a married woman to go in public with her head uncovered in first-century Corinth, Paul exhorts the women to cover their heads when they pray or prophesy.
Some authors argue that when Paul says woman is the glory of man, he means that man is above woman. The notion is that Paul uses the creation narrative in Genesis 2 to show that woman is the glory of man because woman was made from man. Therefore, a woman should wear a garment on her head as a sign of submission, because women are subordinate to men.
The problem with this view is that it is inconsistent with the broader context of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and Scripture as a whole. First, we know from the broader context that Paul anticipates and refutes the notion that men are superior to women. He does this in 1 Corinthians 11:11-12 where he points out that man is not independent of woman, because man now comes from woman through childbirth. Further, we know from Genesis 1:27 that God created male and female in his image. The fact that God created male and female in his image means that males and females have the same intrinsic value. Further, Paul himself makes this clear in Gal 3:28 where he writes that there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for we are all one in Christ.
Paul says that woman is the glory of man because he wants the Corinthian women to see that their behaviour will reflect positively or negatively on her husband.
Interpretation 1:
Since the woman completes the man, her conduct reflects on her husband.
Summary:
In first-century Corinth, if a woman went in public without covering her hair, this signalled that she was available. Since married women are not available, it is a dishonour to their husbands for a woman to pray or prophesy in public without covering her hair. Paul uses the creation narrative to explain that woman completes man, so she is responsible for her conduct which can either bring honour, or dishonour, to her husband.
God created men and women such that a married man is completed by his wife. This means that, as the conduct of a man can bring honour or dishonour to his Creator, so the conduct of a wife can reflect positively or negatively on her husband.
Advocates:
Raymond Collins
Gordon Fee
David Garland
Craig Keener
Anthony Thiselton
Minor differences:
Our authors agree that Paul is not trying to suggest that women are subordinate to men, but that a woman’s behaviour can bring honour or dishonour to the man. Still, there is one confusion. For David Garland, the woman is to cover her head because if she does not, she may bring unwanted glory to the man. He explains that this is a problem because public worship should be centred on bringing glory to God.1 This is a strange comment, since he clearly explains that in first-century Corinth it was a disgrace, not an honour, for a married woman to go in public with her head uncovered.2 Craig Keener sees the problem that Garland overlooks. He explains that Paul might be concerned with a wife bringing honour on a man because of her beautiful hair, when worship should be focused on God, or that Paul is worried about the woman bringing disgrace on the man.3
Arguments
Interpretation 2:
Paul means that by virtue of creation, man is above woman.
Summary:
Paul wants the women in Corinth to remember that according to the creation order, man is above the woman. This means that a husband has authority over his wife.
Advocates:
Frederik Grosheide
Pheme Perkins
Arguments
7 For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man.