I was reading 1 Timothy 2:11-15, and it seems to state that women should not teach or hold authority in the church. Are women forbidden from being pastors? What are the different views on this issue, that seem to lead some churches to ordain women and others to exclude women from ministry? Do these views have something to say about the subordination of women in marriage?The question of whether the Bible allows women to serve in pastoral leadership roles in the local church has been a point of contention among evangelical Christians for many years. Paul uses the masculine pronoun ("he," "him") when referring to the qualifications for an elder in 1 Timothy, but this does not necessarily mean that the elder must be a man. In Greek (as in many modern languages) one always uses a masculine pronoun when referring generally to a person who could be either a man or a woman. The expression "husband of one wife" no more excludes women than it excludes single men. (See my writeup on divorce on the Practical Questions page for more on this.) But women have traditionally been excluded from holding leadership roles in the church for a different reason: Paul seems to forbid them from leadership in 1 Tim. 2:11-15.
On the basis of this discussion three positions have emerged. I will try to do my best to present each of the three positions fairly, without taking any particular side. (I have a bias, but I try to leave it out when I teach this material. All three positions are compatible with orthodoxy, and we should all agree to disagree on this in the body of Christ, in my opinion, without disrupting fellowship.)
This position holds that male and female were created by God in dignity, value, essence and human nature, but also distinct in role whereby the male was given the responsibility of authority over the female. Gen. 1:26-27 makes clear that male and female are equally created as God's image, and so are, by God's created design, equally and fully human. But, as Gen. 2 bears out (and as understood by Paul in 1 Cor. 11 and 1 Tim. 2), their humanity would find expression differently, with the female functioning in a subordinate role under the leadership and authority of the male.
Passages such as Eph. 5:22-33 and 1 Tim. 2:8-15 exhibit the fact that God's created intention of male authority should now, in Christ, be fully affirmed, both in the home and in the church. Wives are to submit to their husbands in the model of the Church's submission to Christ, and women are not to exercise authoritative roles of teaching in the Church in view of Eve's created relation to Adam.
1. The Bible gives evidence that God's design was for male/female role differentiation (Gen. 2; 3:1-7, 16; 1 Cor. 11:1-16; 1 Tim. 2:8-15; Eph. 5:22-23).
GENESIS 2
Three features of this chapter support male-headship (male God-given authority over female). (1) The order of creation. The man was created first, which gives him priority, as Paul observes in 1 Cor 11:8 and 1 Tim 2:13. (2) Eve was created to be Adam's "helper," a term which indicates subordination. (3) Adam named Eve, which (in an OT context) indicates an authority over the one named.
GENESIS 3:1-7
Even though Eve sinned first, it is Adam of whom God inquires as to why they are hiding. Paul indicates that the fall was because of Adam's sin (Rom 5:12ff., 1 Cor 15:22), though he realizes that Eve sinned first (1 Tim 2:14). Adam only can bear responsibility this way if he is viewed by God (and Paul) as having authority over the woman.
GENESIS 3:16
To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth, in pain you shall bring forth children; yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" (Gen 3:16; NASB).
Sin brought about a disruption of male headship, not its establishment. God had intended that the man would rule over the woman, and the fall occurred because the man did not exercise his authority, and instead followed the woman. The curse of the woman (mentioned in Gen. 3:16) is explained as "your desire shall be for your husband," and this is understood to be a wrongful desire to rule over her husband, and that in response, the man must exert rule over her as a re-establishment of his God-given authority.
1 CORINTHIANS. 11:1-16
But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. . . . 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. Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels (1 Cor. 11:3, 8-10; NASB).
As noted, Paul uses Gen. 2 to support his contention that women should display, in the church, their submission to male headship. A woman is required to have a symbol of authority on her head (v. 10) because she is the glory of man (v. 7), she originated from man (v. 8), and was created for man's sake (v. 9). The Genesis references make this a universal (not merely cultural) condition.
EPHESIANS 5:22-24
Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything (Eph. 5:22-24; NASB).
Women are to be subject to their husbands as to the lordship of Christ. The reason is that the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church. The headship of the husband is paralleled with the headship of Christ. Since Christ rules over the church, the husband rules over the wife.
2. The Bible gives many examples of male/female role differentiation (see Eph. 5:22-23; Col. 3:18-20; 1 Pet. 3:1-7)
There was male leadership in Israel, from Eden onward. Abraham, Joshua, Moses, Noah, the Patriarchs, the 12 sons of Jacob as heads of 12 tribes, male priestly order, etc. God purposely called out and intended male leadership in Israel. This is evidence that God always intended for males to rule over females.
In the New Testament, Jesus chose 12 men, even though He was not averse to challenging traditions which ran contrary to the values of the kingdom. If Jesus thought women were to be equal in authority to men, He would have included women among the 12.
3. 1 Tim. 2:8-15 offers a universal prohibition against women serving in authoritative positions in the church. Paul gives the basis for this in the order of creation: Adam was not only created first, but Eve was taken from him (v. 13).
Paul then argues that Eve's deception in the garden (Gen. 3) indicates that women are (or became, as a result of the fall) inherently vulnerable to deception (v. 14). Women are therefore created in a way that makes them unfit to teach or hold authority over a man. While teaching and holding authority are unnatural practices for women, there is another role for which women are naturally suited—motherhood (v. 15).
2:11 Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness.
2:12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.
2:13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.
2:14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression.
2:15 But women shall be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint. (1 Tim. 2:11-15; NASB)
Thus, this prohibition to teach is really about denying women the right to subordinate men to their leadership. Paul is saying that women are naturally subordinate to men; something about the way women are made precludes their holding authority over men. As a result of Eve's deception, women are unsuited for teaching (cf. Titus 1:9 where teaching is contingent on being able to refute unsound doctrine). Women are "redeemed" (even, in some views, eternally saved) as a result of this role.
1. Objection: The hierarchical understanding, with women subordinate to men, is intolerable and contrary to the freedom of the gospel. While it claims to uphold the essential equality of women with men, it in fact leads inevitably to seeing women as inferior, as people who are not as important to God and His purposes as are men.
Response: Would you feel the same way about a parent/child relationship? Or of the relationships between employees and their supervisors? Hierarchical relationships do not necessarily lead to the essential superiority of those in charge.
2. Objection: The interpretation of Gen. 2, by which is found 3 indicators of male authority, is wrong. What difference does it make whom God created first? Someone had to be first, and it just happened to be Adam. Second, Eve's role as "helper" is not a subordinate role. Finally, naming someone does not really designate authority; a mother can name a son, but once he leaves home, he is not under her authority any longer.
Response: But it is Paul who understands that the order of creation designates authority, and that Eve was created for Adam, and not vice-versa. If Paul understands Genesis this way, then we must understand it that way.
3. Objection: You have left out the many significant examples of female leadership in Israel, in the gospels, and in the early church.
Response: Yes, women do play significant religious, and at times leadership roles, in the Bible, but (1) most of the examples of female leadership are not at the highest levels (there are no women priests, no women as heads of the tribes of Israel, no women kings of Israel, no women apostles [Junia of Rom. 16:7 is highly disputed], and no women elders in the early church), and (2) the most notable exception to this was Deborah (Judg. 4-5), but it is difficult to accept the case of Deborah as normative in light of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It is possible that God is forced to use women in situations where there are no godly men, but this is not the norm.
4. Objection: The term male "headship," and reference to passages like 1 Cor. 11:3 and Eph. 5:23 where "head" is used, misconstrues the meaning of the term "head" in ancient near eastern literature. The term "head" refers to a position of source or origin, not a position of authority.
Response: The strongest lexical evidence suggests that "head" (kephale) is used predominantly as "authority over," not "source." In Paul's examples, it is difficult to see how Paul could mean anything other than "authority over." In Eph. 5:23, the husband is the "head" of the wife, and is followed in v. 24 with the statement that "as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives to their husbands in everything." The subjection of wives is linked to the husband being head of his wife.
Male and female were created by God in dignity, value, essence and human nature. Gen. 1:26-27 makes no distinction between woman and man insofar as both are equally made in God's image and both are given the responsibility to rule over His creation. They were also created to have distinct roles whereby the wife is to be the completer of her husband and the husband is to be her compassionate leader as seen in Gen. 2. In the church, proper role distinctions are to be restored. Both men and women are to be encouraged to minister, according to their gifts and qualifications, in all areas except for the office of elder which is reserved for males. (In other words, women are not inherently unable to teach or hold authority; they are completely equal to men. But God has determined, for his own purposes, to limit leadership in the church and in marriage to men.)
The Bible gives evidence that God's design was for equal male/female ministry with the office of elder restricted to men (Gen. 2; 3:16; 1 Cor. 11:3-16; 1 Cor. 14:26-38; 1 Tim. 2:8-15).
In this view, gender is not a factor in salvation, giftedness, etc. Men and women are equal in essence and gifts, but are not to occupy the same offices. (Many churches which follow the moderate model will place women in leadership positions, but will simply call them "directors" of women's ministry, or even a "children's minister," but will withhold the title "pastor" or "elder.")
GENESIS 2
This passage affirms both essential equality as well as proper role distinctions. The idea of woman being created from man denotes equal essence, not inferiority. They share the same flesh. But the order of creation and Adam's naming of Eve indicate God's design was for compassionate headship in marriage.
GENESIS 3:16
To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth, in pain you shall bring forth children; yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" (Gen 3:16; NASB).
Sin introduced a disruption from both parties in the relationship. Both attempts to rule—the woman's wrongful desire to rule over her husband, and the husband's tendency to lord his leadership over her—are a reflection of a fallen relationship. In Christ, we are restored to loving headship and respectful submission.
1 CORINTHIANS 11:3-16
In this passage, both men and women prophesy and pray in public worship—in other words, there is an equal exercise of key ministries in the church. But there is also a difference in role indicated by male headship. But this is only indicated in eldership in the church and in marriage. In other circumstances of life and ministry, men and women are equal.
1 TIMOTHY 2:8-3:13
But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being quite deceived, fell into transgression. (1 Tim. 2:12-14; NASB).
1 Timothy 2 expresses a hierarchy stemming from the Genesis account, which prevents women from a specific role in the church, not from serving altogether. Women are to be involved in ministry but not to fill the office of elder. What is forbidden in v. 12 is the mutually defining ministry of teaching and ruling with authority over a man. Paul is not preventing each of these, but both together. This is the job of elder, not a restriction from teaching or authority per se. The broader context of 1 Timothy 2 relates to qualifications for the office of elder, not to teaching or holding authority generally.
1. Objection: Women are in elder-type ministries in the Bible (i.e., Deborah having authority, Priscilla teaching Apollos). Women function in many ways similar to men and therefore should be elders as well.
Response: There is a distinction between ministry and office that is often not recognized. It is not the ministries themselves from which women are restricted, but the combination of them with the inherent authority and responsibility that makes up the office of elder that is the restriction. The way that office is expressed will vary from church to church.
2. Objection: If men and women are truly equal in nature, then they should be equal in function. In reality the moderate position is denying that men and women are equal in Christ by denying women the right to serve as elders.
Response: There are numerous examples in Scripture and in all of life where there is a difference of function, yet an essential equality. In the parent/child and employer/employee relationships there is certainly a difference of roles, yet one is no less valuable in the sight of God than the other.
3. Objection: The moderate position agrees that gifts are given without discrimination to both sexes. Ruling women out of an office, though, means that women are not permitted to exercise their gifts properly.
Response: The exercise of gifts is sometimes restricted. 1 Cor. 14 teaches that both the gift of tongues and prophecy are to be used orderly and properly under the control of the gifted one. Also, there is a difference between gifts, ministries, and offices. The possession of one does not necessitate the exercise of another. An office is not the only place a gift is exercised.
4. Objection: 1 Tim. 2:12 says women are not to teach or exercise authority over men. Those are two different ministries, both of which are restricted to men.
Response: Throughout the New Testament when it describes the function of an elder it uses the combined ministry of teaching and ruling, the two responsibilities in 1 Tim. 2:12. The connector word oude ("nor") regularly joins two ideas which mutually define each other. Also, in 1 Cor. 11 it is taken for granted that women will participate in prophecy during the gathering of the church which is a ministry very closely associated with teaching. Thus, the overall biblical context seems to indicate that women should be allowed to teach and hold authority in the church, but not to be an elder/pastor (which is a combination of teaching and hoilding authority).
Both male and female were created by God as equal in all respects. Gen. 1:26-27 makes no distinction between woman and man insofar as both are equally made in God's image, and both are given the responsibility to rule over creation (i.e., functional equality). One effect of redemption through Jesus Christ is the restoration of God's creational intent of full equality between men and women (Gal. 3:28). The task of the Church is to model that restored relationship to a sinful world. As a result, all Christians, male and female, should have equal access to all parts of the church's life and ministry.
1. God's creation design was male/female equality (Gen. 1:26-27; 2:18; 3:16).
GENESIS 1:26-27
Man and woman share the same nature, the same image of God, and both are given God's commission to rule the earth. They not only share the same essence, but also equality of role. Both are commanded to rule. No distinction is expressed by gender. Male and female share in authority even as they share in dignity. If God intended that women should be subordinate, it does not show up in his command for both of them to equally rule the earth.
GENESIS 2:18
Then the Lord God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him" (Gen. 2:18; NASB).
The word "helper" has no implication of subordination, since the same word is used of God in the OT in 15 of its 19 occurrences. Nothing here indicates a functional subordination. What is stressed is that man and woman need each other, that they are bound together in "one flesh" (2:24). This is mutual dependency. (Unlike parent-child, who are not mutually dependent. The other views incorrectly argue that parent-child or employer-employee subordination fit the husband-wife model; a wife is equal in authority to her husband because they are mutually dependent on one another, which is NOT the same as the other relationships. A child or employee is subordinate because they are dependent. This does not fit a marriage or the church's ministry, where people need one another equally.)
GENESIS 3:16; see Gal. 3:28
Sin predicates hierarchy, as in Gen 3:16. Women desire to rule over men, and men to rule over women, but neither is God's will. In Christ we are equals and are mutually dependent. We submit to one another. The other views are incorrect to see this disruption of relationship as the permanent will of God. Note that God cursed only the serpent and the ground, not the people. They only suffer, but are not cursed. Just as death ensued, which is overturned by life in Christ, so also is the hierarchy:
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus (Gal. 3:28; NASB).
Gal. 3:28 makes it clear that disctinctions between genders are NOT significant in the body of Christ. To say that women cannot fulfill certain roles in the church is akin to saying that Jewish Christians cannot fulfill certain roles. These are cultural (sinful) tendencies, not Christian ideals.
2. There are numerous biblical examples of women in ministry.
The other views argue that because women were not priests in the OT, they are not intended to be in leadership roles. But there were two spiritual ministries that existed in ancient Israel—priesthood and prophet. The latter DID include women. There were both male and female prophets (not female in the absence of a godly male; note that Huldah, a female prophet in 2 Kings 22, is a contemporary with Jeremiah and Zephaniah):
So Hilkiah the priest, Ahikam, Achbor, Shaphan, and Asaiah went to Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe (now she lived in Jerusalem in the Second Quarter); and they spoke to her. And she said to them, "Thus says the Lord God of Israel..." (2 Kings 22:14-15; NASB).
Deborah, a prophetess (Judges 4:4, 6, 9) and also a judge over all Israel, was its highest leader (Judges 4:4-5); see also the prophetess Miriam (Micah 6:4; Exod. 15:20-21).
Junia the Apostle (Rom. 16:7)
The name "Junia" was understood by the early church fathers to be a woman; the alternate spelling, Junias (a masculine name), was not understood in any manuscript of the New Testament until the 13th century. Junia is a common woman's name in Greek culture; the male name "Junias" is completely unknown. Thus, Paul states that Junia (a woman) was an outstanding Apostle, and an Apostle is definitely a leadership role in the early church. (Above the level of a pastor/elder, without question.)
Female prophets (Acts 21:9; 1 Cor. 11:5)
Paul places the role of prophet alongside teaching. In fact, a prophet is a teacher. A prophet communicates God's words even more directly than teachers do. It is a definite leadership role in the church. Any time someone gets up in front of a group of a believers and speaks to them concerning God's will for them, there is an understood leadership/teaching role which occurs. Women did this all the time in the early church, so it is incorrect to restrict them from the title or duties of authoritative teaching in the church.
Female teachers (Titus 2:3; 2 Tim. 1:5; Acts 18:26)
Female deacons (Rom. 16:1; cf. Rom. 15:8; 1 Cor. 3:5; 1 Tim. 4:6)
Female leaders (Rom. 16:2)
Phoebe called a "prostatis," which is one who governs (lit. one who stands before others). This is unquestionably a title of leadership.
Female "fellow workers" (Rom. 16:1-2; Phil. 4:3; cf. 1 Cor. 16:15)
Note 1 Cor 16:15, where the Corinthians are commanded to be subject to fellow workers. (In other words, Paul puts "fellow workers" in leadership positions, and calls women "fellow workers.")
Female elders? There is no specific mention of them in the NT, but there are only two male elders specifically identified in the New Testament (1 Pet. 5:1), which makes it unsurprising that no female elders would be mentioned.
3. The prohibition in 1 Tim. 2:11-15 is not universal.
The egalitarian view holds that Paul is addressing a specific problem in the Ephesian church when he writes 1 Timothy. He is telling Timothy how to deal with some women who are involved in false teaching. He is not giving rules which bar women from teaching in all the churches across time.
A. The Greek verb epitrepõ in v. 12 ("I do not permit...") usually is not used as part of a continuing command, particularly in the form it occurs in v. 12 (the present active indicative). When Paul wants to express a permanent command, he will usually use a completely different verb tense, or will use the passive form of the verb (e.g., "it is not permitted," 1 Cor. 14:34).
When Paul wants it understood that a command is for all the churches, he has no trouble making that clear (1 Cor. 11:16; 14:33, 34, 36). But he doesn't say anything along those lines in 1 Timothy 2.
B. The English translation "I do not permit a woman to teach" is deceptive, since it sounds like a universal prohibition. A more literal translation would be: "I am not permitting a woman to teach," and this sounds more like something Paul is applying to a particular situation than a universal command.
There are other ways Paul could have couched this prohibition in the Greek which would have left no room for doubt—but he used a construction that reads like a temporary injunction.
C. Paul was not prohibiting women in Ephesus from teaching because Eve was formed after Adam, or because she was deceived by Satan, but because some women were engaged in (or had been drawn into) false teaching (see 1 Tim. 5:13-15 in light of 1 Tim. 1:2-7).
Nothing from 1 Tim. 2:12-15 extrapolates from Eve's deception to the nature of women in general. In other words, Paul never says, "Eve was deceived, not Adam, and therefore all women are unable to discern doctrine and should not hold authority." 1 Tim. 2:14 is not used by Paul to draw any generalizations about women, but only as a specific example of what can happen when women are deceived—the same thing Paul is doing in 2 Cor. 11:3, which is a close parallel to 1 Tim. 2:14.
But I am afraid, lest as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds should be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ (2 Cor. 11:3; NASB).
D. The "childbearing" which saves women is not a general role of motherhood, but Mary's giving birth to Jesus. Women are saved through the childbearing.
Thus, Eve's disobedience is offset by Mary's obedience which brings salvation to humankind. Paul's concern is to highlight the role of women—both in the fall (v. 14) and in salvation (v. 15). This balancing of criticism and affirmation of women in the Ephesian church is evident in the whole section (vv. 9-15).
1. Objection: Gen. 2 teaches a pre-fall hierarchical structure for male/female relationships in four ways: (1) the woman was created after man and is therefore secondary to him (1 Cor. 11:8); (2) the woman was created as a helper for man, and is therefore subordinate to him; (3) the man named the woman, and she is therefore subordinate to him; (4) the woman was taken out of man and is, therefore, secondary to him.
Response: (1) Temporal priority of creation in itself does not imply superiority of either being or function, nor does anything in Genesis 2 assign any particular significance to this. (2) Inasmuch as the word "helper" is often used of God in the Old Testament (Ps. 121:2), it could conceivable signify superiority, not subordination. In Genesis, it indicates a being who is perfectly matched to Adam, not inferior to him. (3) Naming does not have this significance anywhere in the Bible. Even if it did, Adam doesn't name the woman until after the fall (Gen. 3:20). Thus, it does not express a subordination which continues in Christ. (4) God created human beings as male and female before Eve was ever taken from Adam. Eve isn't below Adam any more than Adam is subservient to the dust he was made out of.
2. Objection: Israel's political and religious structures exhibit an almost exclusively male leadership, and this by God's calling and command.
Response: The presence of even one woman exercising divinely-given authority, either spiritual or political, anywhere in the OT narratives forces us to consider whether women are barred by divine intent or whether patriarchal practices created a cultural supression of women in general. Deborah exercised a rule over Israel for 40 years. God tolerated male cultural domination the same way He tolerated polygamy—by showing His disapproval, which in the present case was by using women in significant leadership positions.
3. Objection: If Jesus really broke with cultural expectations and permited women to participate with Him in ministry, why didn't He choose some to be among His disciples? His choice of all male disciples suggests that He endorsed male leadership.
Response: It is questionable whether the fact that the Twelve were males is any more significant than the fact that the Twelve were Jewish. Jesus began a process of restoring women to their place of equality. A parallel case can be seen when Paul fails to denounce slavery, or when Jesus fails to denounce Rome's occupation and taxation of Israel. Paul and Jesus both work within sinful cultural structures to achieve the goals of the kingdom. This does not mean they support the structures.
4. Objection: When Paul says that the man in 1 Cor. 11:3 is the head of the woman, doesn't he mean that the man has a position of authority over the woman?
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 man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God (1 Cor. 11:11-12; NASB).
Response: The question turns on the translation of "head," which is widely used in Greek literature to mean "author" or "source," "origin," or "starting point." The passage in 1 Cor. 11 returns to the relationship of a man and a woman in vv. 8-12 in terms of source ("For man did not come from woman but woman from man") and concludes that "as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman, but everything comes from God." This indicates that men and women are interdependent, and both find their source in God. This goes contrary to an understanding of "head" as "authority over."
Further, the function of the head in rational processes was unknown before modern science. The ancients attributed psychical functions to other body parts, but never to the head. In ancient times, the term "head" couldn't mean authority, because the head was not known to command the body the way we think of it today. In ancient times, the head was thought of to be the source of life, not authority. When Jesus is called the head of the body, the only idea Paul develops is that Jesus gives life to the growth of the body. Paul never talks about Jesus being in charge of the body when he mentions the term "head." This is a purely modern use of the term.
But speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him, who is the head, even Christ, from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by that which every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love (Eph. 4:15-16).
Similarly, when the husband is called the head of the wife, the idea cannot be that the husband is in authority over the wife. The expressed idea is that the husband is the source of life to the wife, as Christ is the source of life to the church. Authority does not enter into Paul's discussion. Rather, the issue is love.
Note Ephesians 5:21-28, where the idea of subjection does occur in a discussion of the husband as head of the wife:
And be subject to one another in the fear of Christ. Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her; that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself (Eph. 5:21-28).
Paul begins by arguing that people in the church should be subject to one another. (This is often placed in a separate paragraph in modern translations, but it is clearly part of the context.) One specific example of this is that women should be subject to their husbands, and this is certainly because (like the women of 1 Cor. 11) some women were not being subject to their husbands in the early church. But the reason why women are to subject to their husbands is NOT because the husband is in charge. Rather, (1) women are to be subject because we are ALL to be subject to one another. Also, (2) women are to be subject because their husbands love them the way Christ does ("head" as a source of life). Clearly, the love of the husband for the wife is a greater submission than that of the wife for the husband, since it is modeled on the greatest act of submission of all—the servanthood of Jesus Christ. Paul is not saying that men have authority over women. He is saying that men and women need to submit to one another in marriage, and he expresses this in different terms which would be persuasive in ancient culture.
And in 1 Cor 11, one might add that the authority on the woman's head (v. 10) is not the husband's authority, but rather her authority to prophesy (in Jewish thought, angels were considered to be mediators of God's revelation to prophets). 1 Cor 11 excludes female autonomy, rather than establishing a hierarchy. Women are not to act independent of their husbands and so dishonor them. Paul merely argues that woman is not independent of man. But he does not fix this by saying that men are in charge.