Important directions I. CORINTHIANS. to the church at Corinth. thing dishonours him when any ultimate end is pro- | given no portion of his word to any people or age posed beside his glory. It is an unchangeable prin- exclusively; the whole is given to the church uniciple of the Christian morality that all comes from God by his love, and all should be returned to him by ours. This rule we should keep inviolate. versal in all ages of the world. In reading this epistle let us seriously consider what parts of it apply to ourselves; and if we are disposed to appropriate its promises, let us act conscientiously, and inquire how many of its reprehensions we may fairly appro 7. Though many of the advices given in this chapter appear to respect the Corinthians alone, yet there is none of them that is not applicable to Chris-priate also. tians in general in certain circumstances. God has CHAPTER XI. The apostle reprehends the Corinthians for several irregularities in their manner of conducting public worship; the men praying or prophesying with their heads covered, and the women with their heads uncovered, contrary to custom, propriety, and decency, 1—6. Reasons why they should act differently, 7—16. They are also reproved for their divisions and heresies, 17-19. And for the irregular manner in which they celebrated the Lord's Supper, 20-22. The proper manner of celebrating this holy rite laid down by the apostle, 23-26. Directions for a profitable receiving of the Lord's Supper, and avoiding the dangerous consequences of communicating unworthily, 27—34. NOTES ON CHAP. XI. Verse 1. Be ye followers of me] This verse certainly belongs to the preceding chapter, and is here out of all proper place and connexion. Verse 2. That ye remember me in all things] It appears that the apostle had previously given them a variety of directions relative to the matters mentioned here; that some had paid strict attention to them, and that others had not; and that contentions and divisions were the consequences which he here reproves and endeavours to rectify. While Paul and Apollos had preached among them, they had undoubtedly prescribed every thing that was necessary to be observed in the Christian worship: but it is likely that those who joined in idol festivals wished also to introduce something relative to the mode of conducting the idol worship into the Christian assembly, which they might think was an improvement on the apostle's plan. Verse 3. The head of every man is Christ] The apostle is speaking particularly of Christianity and its ordinances: Christ is the Head or Author of this religion; and is the creator, preserver, and Lord of every man. The man also is the Lord or head of the woman; and the Head or Lord of Christ, as Mediator between God and man, is God the Father. Here praying or h prophesying, iii. 16. 1 Tim. ii. 11, 12. 28. Ch. iii. 23. xv. 27, 28. 28. xiv. 1, &c. 1 Pet. iii. 1, 5, 6.Phil. ii. 7, 8, 9. - John xiv. h Ch. xii. 10, is the order-God sends his Son Jesus Christ to redeem man; Christ comes and lays down his life for the world; every man who receives Christianity confesses that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father; and every believing woman will acknowledge, according to Genesis iii. 16, that God has placed her in a dependance on and subjection to the man. So far there is no difficulty in this passage. Verse 4. Praying or prophesying] Any person who engages in public acts in the worship of God, whether prayer, singing, or exhortation: for we learn, from the apostle himself, that popηrevεiv, to prophesy, signifies to speak unto men to edification, exhortation, and comfort, chap. xiv. 3. And this comprehends all that we understand by exhortation, or even preaching. Having his head covered] With his cap or turban on, dishonoureth his head; because the head being covered was a sign of subjection; and while he was employed in the public ministration of the word, he was to be considered as a representative of Christ, and on this account his being veiled or covered would be improper. This decision of the apostle was in point blank hostility to the canons of the Jews; for they would not suffer a man to pray unless he was veiled, for which they gave this reason: "He b one as if she were shaven. in the public assemblies. her also be shorn: but if it be c a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. A. M. 4060. A. D. 56. 7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his 6 For if the woman be not covered, let head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory a Acts xxi. 9. b Deut. xxi. 12.- c Numb. v. 18. Deut. xxii. 5.- d Gen. i. 26, 27. v. 1. ix. 6. apostle seems to have more especially in view. As a woman who dresses loosely or fantastically, even in the present day, is considered a disgrace to her hus morals; so in those ancient times, a woman appearing without a veil would be considered in the same light. Verse 6. For if the woman be not covered] If she will not wear a veil in the public assemblies, let her be shorn-let her carry a public badge of infamy: but if it be a shame-if to be shorn or shaven would appear, as it must, a badge of infamy, then let her be covered-let her by all means wear a veil. Even in mourning it was considered disgraceful to be obliged to shear off the hair; and lest they should lose this ornament of their heads, the women contrived to evade the custom, by cutting off the ends of it only. Euripides, in Orest., ver. 128, speaking of Helen, who should have shaved her head on account of the death of her sister Clytemnestra, says: dere Taρ' ακρας ώς απεθρισεν τριχας, σωζουσα καλλος, εστι δε ἡ madai yvvn: see how she cuts off only the very points of her hair, that she may preserve her beauty, and is just the same woman as before." See the note on the preceding verse. 66 should veil himself to show that he is ashamed before God, and unworthy with open face to behold him." See much in Lightfoot on this point. Verse 5. But every woman that prayeth, &c.] What-band, because suspected to be not very sound in her ever may be the meaning of praying and prophesying, in respect to the man, they have precisely the same meaning in respect to the woman. So that some women at least, as well as some men, might speak to others to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. And this kind of prophesying or teaching was predicted by Joel, ii. 28, and referred to by Peter, Acts 17. And had there not been such gifts bestowed on women, the prophecy could not have had its fulfilment. The only difference marked by the apostle was, the man had his head uncovered because he was the representative of Christ; the woman had her's entered, because she was placed by the order of God | in a state of subjection to the man, and because it was a custom, both among the Greeks and Romans, and among the Jews an express law, that no woman should be seen abroad without a veil. This was, and is, a common custom through all the east, and none but public prostitutes go without veils. And if a woman should appear in public without a veil, she would dishonour her head-her husband. And she must appear like to those women who had their hair shorn off as the punishment of whoredom, or adultery. Tacitus informs us, Germ. 19, that considering the greatness of the population, adulteries were very rare among the Germans; and when any woman was found guilty she was punished in the following way: accisis crinibus, nudatam coram propinquis expellit domo maritus: "having cut off her hair, and stripped her before her relatives, her husband turned her out of doors." And we know that the woman suspected of adultery was ordered by the law of Moses to be stripped of her veil, Numb. v. 18. Women reduced to a state of servitude, or slavery, had their hair cut off: so we learn from Achilles Tatius. Clitophon says, concerning Leucippe, who was reduced to a state of slavery: πεπραται, δεδουλευκεν, γην εσκαψεν, σεσυλήται της κεφαλης το καλλος, την κουραν δρας lib. viii. cap. 5, "she was sold for a slave, she dug in the ground, and her hair being shorn off, her head was deprived of its ornament," &c. It was also the Custom among the Greeks to cut off their hair in time of mourning. See Euripides in Alcest., ver. 426. Admetus, ordering a common mourning for his wife Alcestis, says: Tev0og yuvaikos Tηgde kolvovodai λɛyw, κουρα ξυρήσει και μελαμπέπλῳ στολη “I order a general mourning for this woman! let the hair be shorn off, and a black garment put on." Propriety and decency of conduct are the points which the In Hindostan a woman cuts off her hair at the death of her husband, as a token of widowhood; but this is never performed by a married woman, whose hair is considered an essential ornament. The veil of the Hindoo women is nothing more than the garment brought over the face, which is always very carefully done by the higher classes of women when they appear in the streets.-Ward's Customs. Verse 7. A man indeed ought not to cover his head] He should not wear his cap or turban in the public congregation, for this was a badge of servitude, or an indication that he had a conscience overwhelmed with guilt; and besides, it was contrary to the custom that prevailed, both among the Greeks and Romans. He is the image and glory of God] He is God's vicegerent in this lower world; and, by the authority which he has received from his Maker, he is his representative among the creatures, and exhibits, more than any other part of the creation, the glory and perfections of the Creator. But the woman is the glory of the man.] As the man is, among the creatures, the representative of the glory and perfections of God, so that the fear of him and the dread of him are on every beast of the field, &c. ; so the woman is, in the house and family, the representative of the power and authority of the man. I believe this to be the meaning of the apostle; and that he is speaking here principally concerning power and authority, and skill to use them. It is Man not created for woman, A. M. 4060. A. U. C. 809. Anno Imp. Neronis Cæs. 3 man. b of God: but the woman is the woman: but the woman for the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the 9 Neither was the man created for the certainly not the moral image of God, nor his celestial glory, of which he speaks in this verse. Verse 8. For the man is not of the woman] Bp. Pearce translates ου γαρ εστιν ανηρ εκ γυναικός, αλλά yuvn ε avopos, thus: "For the man doth not BELONG to the woman, but the woman to the man." And vindicates this sense of ex, by its use in chap. xii. 15. If the foot shall say, ουκ ειμι εκ του σώματος, I am not | of the body, i. e. I do not belong to the body. He observes that as the verb εστιν is in the present tense, and will not allow that we should understand this verse of something that is past, yap, for, in the following verse, which is unnoticed by our translators, will have its full propriety and meaning, because it introduces a reason why the woman belongs to the man and not the man to the woman. His meaning is that the man does not belong to the woman, as if she was the principal; but the woman belongs to the man in that view. Verse 9.. Neither was the man created, &c.] Kaı yap OUR EKTIGOŋ for the man was not created upon the woman's account. The reason is plain from what is mentioned above; and from the original creation of woman she was made for the man, to be his proper or suitable helper. Verse 10. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.] There are few portions in the sacred writings that have given rise to such a variety of conjectures and explanations, and are less understood, than this verse, and ver. 29 of chap. xv. Our translators were puzzled with it; and have inserted here one of the largest marginal readings found any where in their work; but this is only on the words power on her head, which they interpret thus: that is, a covering, in sign that she is under the power of her husband. But, admitting this marginal reading to be a satisfactory solution so far as it goes, it by no means removes all the difficulty. Mr. Locke ingenuously acknowledged that he did not understand the meaning of the words; and almost every critic and learned man has a different explanation. Some have endeavoured to force out a meaning by altering the text. The emendation of Mr. Toup, of Cornwall, is the most remarkable: he reads εžiovoa, going out, instead of ovoiav, power; wherefore the woman, when she goes out, should have a veil on her head. Whatever ingenuity there may appear in this emendation, the consideration that it is not acknowledged by any MS., or Version, or primitive writer, is sufficient proof against it. Dr. Lightfoot, Schoettgen, and Bishop Pearce, have written best on the subject, A. M. 4060. A. D. 56. A.U.C. 809. Anno Imp. Nero nis Cæs. 3. 11 Nevertheless 'neither is the man without d That is, a covering, in sign that she is under the power of her husband.- Le Eccles. v. 6.- -f Gal. iii. 28. in which they allow that there are many difficulties. The latter contends, 1. That the original should be read, Wherefore the woman ought to have a power upon her head, that is, the power of the husband over the wife; the word power standing for the sign or token of that power which was a covering or veil. Theophylact explains the word, To Tov ovoιašrodai ovμβολον, τουτεστι, το καλυμμα, “ the symbol of being under power, that is, a veil or covering." And Photius explains it thus: της ὑποταγης συμβολον το επι Tng kepaλŋg kaλvμμа pɛрeiv; to wear a veil on the head is a symbol of subjection. It is no unusual thing, in the Old and New Testament, for the signs and tokens of things to be called by the names of the things themselves, for thus circumcision is called the covenant, in Gen. xvii. 10, 13, though it was only the sign of it. 2. The word angels presents another difficulty. Some suppose that by these the apostle means the fallen angels, or devils; others, the governors of the church; and others, those who were deputed among the Jews to espouse a virgin in the name of a lover. All these senses the learned bishop rejects, and believes that the apostle uses the word angels, in its most obvious sense, for the heavenly angels; and that he speaks according to the notion which then prevailed among Jews, that the holy angels interested themselves in the affairs of men, and particularly were present in their religious assemblies, as the cherubim, their representation, were present in their temple. Thus we read in Eccles. v. 6: Neither say thou before the ANGEL, it was an error; and in 1 Tim. v. 21: I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect ANGELS, &c. Parallel to these is what Agrippa says in his oration to the Jews, Josephus, War, b. ii., chap. 16: I protest before God, your holy temple, and all the ANGELS of heaven, &c. All which passages suppose, or were spoken to those who supposed, that the angels know what passes here upon earth. The notion, whether just or not, prevailed among the Jews; and if so, St. Paul might speak according to the common opinion. 3. Another difficulty lies in the phrase dia roUTO, wherefore, which shows that this verse is a conclusion from what the apostle was arguing before; which we may understand thus: that his conclusion, from the foregoing argument, ought to have the more weight, upon account of the presence, real or supposed, of the holy angels, at their religious meetings. See Bp. Pearce, in loc. The learned bishop is not very willing to allow that the doctrine of the presence of angelic beings in religious assemblies is legitimate; but what difficulty can there be in this, if we take the words of the apostle in another place: Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? Heb. i. 14. And perhaps there is no time in which they can render more essential services to the followers of God than when they are engaged in divine ordinances. On the whole, the Bishop's sense of the passage and paraphrase stands thus: "And because of this superiority in the man, I conclude that the woman should have on her head a veil, the mark of her husband's power over her, especially in the religious assemblies, where the angels are supposed to be invisibly present." The ancient versions make little alteration in the common reading, and the MSS. leave the verse nearly as it stands in the common printed editions. The Armenian has a word that answers to umbram, a shade or covering. The Ethiopic, her head should be teiled. The common editions of the Vulgate have potestatem, power; but in an ancient edition of the Vulgate, perhaps one of the first, if not the first, ever printed, 2 vols. fol., sine ulla nota anni, &c.: the verse stands thus: Ideo debet mulier velamen habere super caput suum: et propter angelos. My old MS. translation seems to have been taken from a MS. which had the same reading: Wherfore the woman schal have a beyl on her heuyd; and for aungels. Some copies of the Itala have also velamen, a veil. In his view of this text, Kypke differs from all others; and nothing that so judicious a critic advances should be lightly regarded. 1. He contends that lovely occurs no where in the sense of veil, and yet he supposes that the word raλvμua, veil, is understood, and must in the translation of the passage be supplied. 2. He directs that a comma be placed after govolay, and that it be construed with opeλe, ought; after which he translates the verse thus: Propterea mulier potestati obnoxia est, ita ut velamen in capite | habeat propter angelos; On this account the woman is subject to power, so that she should have a veil on her head, because of the angels. 3. He contends that both the Latins and Greeks use debere and opɛλe elegantly to express that to which one is obnoxious or liable. So Horace : Tu, nisi ventis Debes ludibrium, cave. Carm., lib. i., Od. xiv., ver. 15. Take heed lest thou owe a laughing-stock to the winds; ie. lest thou become the sport of the winds; for to these thou art now exposing thyself. So Dionys. Hal. Ant., lib. iii., page 205 : Kaι on ODELROUTES ATXUVNY aπnλooν ex τns aɣopac They departed from the market, exposed to great dishonour. So Euripides, Opeλw ooi ẞλaßny I am exposed to thy injury. 4. He contends that the words taken in this sense agree perfectly with the context, and with dia Touro, wherefore, in this verse, "Because the man was not created for the woman, but the woman for the man, therefore she is subject to his authority, and should have a veil on her head as the token of that subjection; and particularly before the holy angels, who are present in the congregations of the saints.” For Dr. Lightfoot's opinion, that by angels we are to understand the paranymphs, or messengers, who came on the part of others, to look out for proper spouses for their friends, I must refer to his Works, vol. ii. fol., p. 772. The reader has now before him every thing that is likely to cast light on this difficult subject, and he must either adopt what he judges to be best, or else think for himself. After all, the custom of the Nazarite may cast some light upon this place. As Nazarite means one who has separated himself by vow to some religious austerity, wearing his own hair, &c.; so a married woman was considered a Nazarite for life, i. e. separated from all others, and joined to one husband, who is her lord: and hence the apostle, alluding to this circumstance, says, The woman ought to have power on her head, i. e. wear her hair and veil, for her hair is a proof of her being a Nazarite, and of her subjection to her husband, as the Nazarite was under subjection to the Lord, according to the rule or law of his order. See notes on Numb. vi. 5—7. Verse 11. Neither is the man without the woman] The apostle seems to say: I do not intimate any disparagement of the female sex, by insisting on the necessity of her being under the power or authority of the man; for they are both equally dependant on each other, in the Lord, ev Kupių: but instead of this reading, Theodoret has εv Ty Koopy, in the world. Probably the apostle means that the human race is continued by an especial providence of God. Others think that he means that men and women equally make a Christian society, and in it have equal rights and privileges. Verse 12. For as the woman is of the man] For as the woman was first formed out of the side of man, man has ever since been formed out of the womb of the woman; but they, as all other created things, are of God. Verse 13. Judge in yourselves] Consider the subit be decent for a woman to pray in public without a ject in your own common sense, and then say whether veil on her head? The heathen priestesses prayed or delivered their oracles bare-headed or with dishevelled hair, non compte mansere come, as in the case of the Cumaan Sibyl, Æn. vi., ver. 48, and other wise in great disorder: to be conformed to them would be very disgraceful to Christian women. And, in reference to such things as these, the apostle appeals to their sense of honour and decency. Verse 14. Doth not-nature-teach you, that, if a man have long hair] Nature certainly teaches us, by bestowing it, that it is proper for women to have long hair; and it is not so with men. The hair of the male rarely grows like that of the female, unless art is used, and even then it bears but a scanty proportion to the former. Hence it is truly womanish to have | long hair, and it is a shame to the man who affects it. In ancient times the people of Achaia, the province in which Corinth stood, and the Greeks in general, were noted for their long hair; and hence called by Homer, in a great variety of places, kарηкоpowvres Axaior, the long-haired Greeks, or Achæans. Soldiers, in different countries, have been distinguished for their long hair; but whether this can be said to their praise or blame, or whether Homer uses it always as a term of respect, when he applies it to the Greeks, I shall not wait here to inquire. Long hair was certainly not in repute among the Jews. The Nazarites let their hair grow, but it was as a token of humiliation; and it is possible that St. Paul had this in view. There were consequently two reasons why the apostle should condemn this practice-1. Because it was a sign of humiliation; 2. Because it was womanish. After all, it is possible that St. Paul may refer to dressed, frizzled, and curled hair, which shallow and effeminate men might have affected in that time, as they do in this. Perhaps there is not a sight more ridiculous in the eye of common sense than a high-dressed, curled, cued, and powdered head, with which the operator must have taken considerable pains, and the silly patient lost much time and comfort in submitting to what all but senseless custom must call an indignity and degradation. Hear Nature, common sense, and reason, and they will inform you, that if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him. Verse 15. But if a woman have long hair] The Author of their being has given a larger proportion of hair to the head of women than to that of men; and to them it is an especial ornament, and may in various cases serve as a veil. It is a certain fact that a man's long hair renders him contemptible, and a woman's long hair renders her more amiable. Nature and the apostle speak the same language; we may account for it as we please. to have long hair. de 17 Now in this that I worse. A. M. 4060. A. D. 56. 18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. d Ch. i. 10, 11, 12. iii. 3. -e Or, schisms. Verse 16. But if any man seem to be contentious] Ει δε τις δοκει φιλονεικος ειναι If any person sets himself up as a wrangler-puts himself forward as a defender of such points, that a woman may pray or teach with her head uncovered, and that a man may, without reproach, have long hair; let him know that we have no such custom as either, nor are they sanctioned by any of the churches of God, whether among the Jews or the Gentiles. We have already seen that the verb doktv, which we translate to seem, generally strengthens and increases the sense. From the attention that the apostle has paid to the subjects of veils and hair, it is evident that it must have occasioned considerable disturbance in the church of Corinth. They have produced evil effects in much later times. Verse 17. Now in this-I praise you not] In the beginning of this epistle the apostle did praise them for their attention in general to the rules he had laid down, see ver. 2; but here he is obliged to condemn certain irregularities which had crept in among them, particularly relative to the celebration of the Lord's supper. Through some false teaching which they had received, in the absence of the apostle, they appear to have celebrated it precisely in the same way the Jews did their passover. That, we know, was a regular meal, only accompanied with certain peculiar circumstances and ceremonies: two of these ceremonics were, eating bread, solemnly broken, and drinking a cup of wine called the Cup of Blessing. Now, it is certain that our Lord has taken these two things, and made them expressive of the crucifixion of his body, and the shedding of his blood, as an atonement for the sins of mankind. The teachers which had crept into the Corinthian church appear to have perverted the whole of this divine institution; for the celebration of the Lord's supper appears to have been made among them a part of an ordinary meal. The people came together, and it appears brought their provisions with them; some had much, others had less; some ate to excess, others had scarcely enough to suffice nature. One was hungry, and the other was drunken, μɛOvɛ, was filled to the full; this is the sense of the word in many places of scripture. At the conclusion of this irregular meal they appear to have done something in reference to our Lord's institution, but more resembling the Jewish passover. These irregularities, connected with so many indecencies, the apostle reproves; for, instead of being benefited by the divine ordinance, they were injured; they came together not for the better, but for the worse. |