The original text of
1 Corinthians had no chapter or verse divisions and certainly no chapter
headings like, “The Christian Assembly” or “The Behavior of Women in Public
Worship.” What is recognized today as chapter 11 could just as easily have been
started at 10:14, 10:23, 11:2, or 11:17, but it is almost unanimously agreed
that it was a mistake to mark the beginning of the chapter at 11:1.
Since a Christian
assembly is not specifically mentioned until 11:17-18, there is no legitimate
reason to reverse this context to incorporate the previous discussion. The
contrasting statements of commendation in v. 2 and of rebuke in v. 17 clearly
demonstrate that a new section begins at v. 17.
The Setting:
One of the more
prevalent assumptions among commentators and other interpreters is that the
corporate worship assembly is the setting under consideration in 11:2-16. While the acts of “praying” (communicating
to God) and “prophesying” (proclaiming divine revelation) were part of the
early first-century church services, they were by no means restricted to them.
Praying was done individually in private (Matthew 6:6) as well as in public
(Luke 18:10-13), collectively in small groups (Acts 12:12; 20:36), and in the
presence of both believers (Luke 11:1; 22:39-41) and unbelievers (Acts 27:35).
Prophesying took place at special gatherings (Acts 15:30-32), at informal
settings (Acts 21:10-11), and in the presence of individuals (Acts 24:25),
small groups (Acts 19:6), crowds (Luke 2:3 ff.), believers (1 Corinthians
14:22), and unbelievers (1 Corinthians 14:24; Revelation 10:11).
Since prophesying
was not done individually in private, the praying in 1 Corinthians 11 probably does
refer to group prayer. Nevertheless, whatever men are said to be doing in v. 4,
the same is attributed to women in v. 5. And Paul goes on in 14:34-35 to forbid women from leading
in these activities in the public assembly. Instead of specifying a
particular environment, Paul merely identifies the act of
praying or prophesying in 11:2-16.
In the first-century
church, women as well as men were endowed with the miraculous gift of prophecy
(Acts 2:17; 21:9). Women were expected to be teachers (Titus 2:3-4) and workers
in the Christian community (Romans 16:1; Philippians 4:2-3). At the same time, there were restrictions placed upon Christian women. They were not
permitted to teach or have authority over men (1 Timothy 2:11-12), nor were
they allowed to speak as to lead the public assembly (1 Corinthians 14:34-35).
Since the women in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 are
said to be praying or prophesying the same as men, and only men are authorized
to lead in the public meetings of the church, and assuming Paul is consistent
in his teachings, the sensible conclusion is that the apostle is not pointing his directives here to the
corporate assembly. His observations would therefore apply to any situation
where praying or prophesying was done, such as all female gatherings (cf.
Acts 2:17; 16:13; 21:9; Titus 2:3-4).
In context, Paul has
been discussing a Christian’s influence “in all things” – social and religious,
toward both believers and unbelievers (8:1–11:1). In 11:2-16 he does not employ
the church-assembly phraseology that is repeatedly emphasized later on (11:17,
18, 20; 14:23, 26). One should not presume that it was inconsequential to
discard the emblems of modesty and decorum in gatherings restricted to women,
especially in the context of spiritual activity.1
The Nature of the
Covering:
The expression akatakaluptō
(“uncovered”) in v. 5 does not inherently reveal that which covered the head
before it became uncovered. Accordingly some have argued that the covering
under consideration is the natural covering of hair (cf. v. 15),2 and to be “uncovered” means to
have the hair removed. This interpretation, however, is improbable considering
Paul’s argument in v. 6. It would be senseless for him to have said that if a
woman’s head is not covered with hair, let her “also” (kai) have her hair cut off.
Seeing that there is no object in the
phrase kata kephalēs echōn (lit.
“having down upon the head”) in v. 4, could this be referring to long hair?
There is no known precedent for this phrase being used in relation to hair, but
there are examples of an artificial covering depicted this way. In the LXX
version of Esther 6:12, Haman is described as mourning with his “head covered”
(kata kephalēs). In Plutarch’s Moralia
200.13, Scipio the Younger is said to have “his toga covering his head,” and
the phrase kata kephalēs echōn is
identical to the wording of 1 Corinthians 11:4.
The noun peribolaion (“a [wrap-around] covering”)
in v. 15 does not correspond to the verb katakaluptō (to “cover”) used
five times in vv. 5-13. Paul did not use kalumma
(the noun form of katakaluptō) in v.
15, neither did he use periballō (the
verb form of peribolaion) in vv. 5-13. It
stands to reason that the covering mentioned in v. 15 is different from the
covering alluded to in vv. 5-13. The apostle affirms that a woman’s long hair
is a peribolaion, whereas there is
something else that serves to katakaluptō
her head. Moreover, an artificial headdress in addition to the woman’s
hair is consistent with what is known about the societal norms of the time.
Some will argue that the statement in 1
Timothy 2:9, which discourages a particular hair style, shows that there were women who did not wear garments covering their hair. Despite the fact that
Ephesus is in view here rather than Corinth, this conclusion is still not
definitive. While Jewish women typically concealed all of their hair, other
women, particularly among the Greeks and Romans, generally wore loose-fitting
headdresses exposing at least some of the hair (see, e.g., vol. 11 of E. R.
Goodenough’s Jewish Symbols in the
Greco-Roman Period).
Different types of head-coverings were
worn in ancient times. Some concealed the head and face, others covered the hair
but not the face, while others were loosely worn, exposing the face and part of
the hair. Taking into account the cultural diversity of Corinth’s population, a
variety of fashions would be expected. It is interesting that Paul’s language
in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 is somewhat ambiguous with reference to the type of
covering. His ambiguity suggests that he is dealing with the head-covering in
general without regard for any particular style.
--Kevin L. Moore
Endnotes:
1 The present imperative in v.
6, “let her continue to have her head covered,” indicates further that the
limited setting of a corporate worship assembly is not the exclusive focus. At
whatever times it was considered indecorous for a Corinthian woman to have short hair or
to be shaved, a respectable Corinthian woman was to have her head covered as often.
2 The NIV marginal note offers
the following alternative version of vv. 4-7: “Every man who prays or prophesies with long hair dishonors his head.
And every woman who prays or prophesies with no covering (of hair) on her head
dishonors her head – she is just like one of the ‘shorn women.’ If a woman has
no covering, let her be for now with short hair, but since it is a disgrace for
a woman to have her hair shorn or shaved, she should grow it again. A man ought
not to have long hair.” Gordon Fee responds to this unconventional
rendering: “How this option made the NIV margin is a great puzzle. It does
disservice to the Greek at too many places to be viable. One might allow any
one of these, but their cumulative effect requires the acceptance of too many
contingent improbabilities” (First
Corinthians 499 n. 28).
Related Posts: Female Head-coverings Part 1, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5
Image credit: http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/130013547 rpp=20&pg=8&rndkey=20130530&ft=*&what=Figures%7cMarble&pos=148
Related Posts: Female Head-coverings Part 1, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5
Image credit: http://www.metmuseum.org/Collections/search-the-collections/130013547 rpp=20&pg=8&rndkey=20130530&ft=*&what=Figures%7cMarble&pos=148
No comments:
Post a Comment