Appendix 2

 

 

 

Rex Banks

 

 

Context continued

 

In Context I pointed out that although differing in their conclusions, the majority of students of scripture throughout the ages have taken the position that Paul is discussing corporate worship in 1 Cor.11:2-16, the worship assembly at which the Lord's Supper is observed (11:17-34) and the same assembly as that of l Cor 14. Consider the following.

 

 

Thomas Aquinas (13th cen) a very influential philosopher and theologian:

 

“Then when he says, But I want you to understand, brethren, he proceeds to his intention of instructing believers in the sacrament of the Eucharist. In regard to this he does three things: first, he reproves their errors regarding the rite of this sacrament ... In regard to the first he does three things: first, he refutes their error, by which they erred in clothing, namely, because the women gathered for the sacred mysteries with heads uncovered; secondly, he corrects them in their gathering, because, when they came together for the sacred mysteries, they indulged in quarrels; thirdly, as to food, because they approach to take the sacred mysteries, after they had just eaten" (Commentary On the First Epistle to the Corinthians p. 586).

 

 

The Geneva Annotations

 

Bruce Metzger says that  “it was chiefly owing to the dissemination of copies of the Geneva version of 1560 that a sturdy and articulate Protestantism was created in Britain, a Protestantism which made a permanent impact upon Anglo-American culture” (The Geneva Bible of 1560). Over 200 different editions of this enormously popular Bible were printed from 1560 to 1644.   “From 1642 on at least 9 editions of the KJV were published with the Geneva Annotations” (A Textual History of the King James - Bible David Norton p 99). At 1 Cor 11:2 Geneva Annotations have:

 

“The fifth treatise of this epistle concerning the right ordering of public assemblies, containing three points,  that is of the comely apparel of men and women, of the order of the Lord's supper, and of the right use of spiritual gifts.  But going about to reprehend certain things, he begins nonetheless with a general praise of them, calling those particular laws of comeliness and honesty, which belong to the ecclesiastical policy, traditions: which afterward they called cannons.”

 

Scottish theologian George Gillespie (1613 – 1648) opined:

 

“So that the Geneva annotation upon ver. 5, gives a good sense of that text, 'That women which show themselves in public and ecclesiastical assemblies, without the sign and token of their subjection, that is to say, uncovered, shame themselves'" (George Gillespie A Treatise of Miscellany Questions p. 75)

 

 In 16th century the Geneva Bible was the main one in use among Protestants.  

 

John Calvin (1509 - 1564)  says that in 1 Cor 11:2 Paul “passes on now to another subject-to instruct the Corinthians, what decorum ought to be observed in the sacred assemblies” (Commentary on Corinthians).

 

John Wesley (1703 – 1791) commenting on 1 Cor 11:10 says “For this cause also a woman ought to be veiled in the public assemblies” (Explanatory Notes).

 

Adam Clarke (c 1760 - 1832) on v 2:  “(Some) wished also to introduce something relative to the mode of conducting the idol worship into the Christian assembly” (Commentary on the Bible).

 

Albert Barnes, (1798 –1870) on v 4 has “in the public assemblies” (Barnes Notes).

 

Joseph Beet  (b. 1840) has on 1 Cor 11:2:  “It refers probably to church-meetings only: for only of these does 1 Corinthians 11 treat“   (Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament).

 

 

The following quotes are from scholars closer to our own time:

 

 

Simon J. Kistemaker:

 

“In the next four chapters (chaps. 11-14), Paul instructs the Corinthians in the matter of worship. He begins with worshippers, both male and female, who pray or prophesy, and then explains proper conduct at the Lord's table. Between a lengthy discussion on the gifts of the Spirit and speaking in tongues, he places his letter of love. He concludes with an exhortation to prophesy, a command not to forbid tongue speaking, and a rule to maintain order” (Bakers Bible Commentary).

 

 

Gordon Fee:

 

“After prohibiting the Corinthians from becoming involved in pagan worship, Paul now turns to address three items of abuse in their own assemblies: a concern related to women’s head covering or hairstyles when praying or prophesying (11:2-16) ; the abuse of the poor at the Lords Table (11:17-34) and the abuse of speaking in tongues in the assembly (chapters 12-14)” (p 491).

 

 

Walter L. Liefield:

 

“There can be little doubt that this was a church meeting, since Paul has already spoken of the Lord's table in chapter 10. Also he connects this section with the following one on the lord's supper by means of the phrase 'praise/praise not' structure, and he mentions angels who were thought, by some Jews at least to be present when God's people gathered for worship” (Women Submission and Ministry in 1 Corinthians Women Authority and the Bible ed. Alvera Mickelson p 137).

 

 

Kenneth M. Gardosk (Assistant Professor Of Systematic Theology Baptist Bible Seminary, Clarks Summit, PA):

 

“In chapters 11–14 Paul turns from the false worship just covered in the previous discussion (chaps. 8–10) to three matters of appropriate Christian worship: the conduct of women (11:2–16), observation of the Lord’s Supper (11:17–34), and exercising of spiritual gifts (12:1–14:40) in their gatherings for corporate worship.

 

“In verse 2 Paul refers to the traditions, or the content of Christian instruction, which he had delivered to them when planting their church. In verse 16 he speaks of the practice, or custom, of God’s churches. Together these verses seem to indicate that the behavior here is a corporate church matter. Furthermore, the next section (vv. 17–34), which is parallel to this one, is clearly a corporate matter (the Lord’s Supper).” (Women in the Church—the Matter of Public Speaking: 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 and 14:34-35 Journal of Ministry and Theology Spring 2008).

 

 

Noel K Weeks  (Westminster Theological Journal):

 

“The impression is that 11:2 begins a new section which deals with public worship. Certainly 11:17ff is concerned with public worship and there is the strongest connection between vv. 2 and 17. There is no indication in the text itself that some special sort of private gathering of believers is in view. It is most natural to take the man’s praying and prophesying to refer to the context in which that would normally take place. And that is the meetings of the congregation" (Of Silence and Head Covering 35:1 Fall 1972).

 

Leon Morris “Disorders in Public Worship 11:2–14:40” (The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: An Introduction and Commentary).

 

W. Harold Mare (The Expositors Bible Commentary vol 10 p 254):

 

"This section (11:2-14:40) deals with problems connected with church worship - matters concerning the veiling of women (11:2-16), observing the Lord's Supper (11:17-34) and the granting and use of spiritual gifts (12:1-14:40).”

 

 

Jewish Bible Commentary:

 

“1Co. 11:2-1Co. 14:40 A new section begins, dealing with public worship. There are three topics: (1) veiling of women in public worship (1Co_11:3-16), (2) disorder at the Lord's Supper (1Co_11:17-34), (3) charismatic gifts from the Holy Spirit and their use in public (1Co. 12:1-1Co. 14:40); this section also includes the famous "love chapter" (1Co. 12:31-1Co. 14:1). Tactful Sha'ul commences with a compliment, as at 1:4-5.”

 

See too:

 

Nave’s Topical Bible, NIV Holy Bible, (Heading Propriety in Worship) Greek New Testament, Calvin, Henry Alford, Jamieson Fausset and Brown, James MacKnight, Robertson and Plummer,  Frédéric  Godet,  Matthew Henry, Charles Hodge,  W E Vine,  G. G. Finlay (Expositors Greek Testament) Leon Morris (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries).

 

 

Now look at a few representative comments from within our brotherhood.

 

J. W. McGarvey and Philip Y. Pendleton:

 

“Paul has been discussing the disorderly conduct of individual Christians. He now proceeds to discuss more general disorders; i. e., those which took place in the meetings of the congregation, and in which the whole church participated" (Thessalonians, Corinthians, Galatians and Romans).

 

 

Guy N Woods. In his Questions and Answers  (Open Forum Freed-Hardeman College Lectures) brother Guy N. Woods discusses a question relating to 1 Cor 11:2-16 and uses expressions like “the public meeting of the church” and speaks of men and women   “engaged in public worship” or “in worship”

 

 

Dave Miller:

 

"Chapters eleven and fourteen of First Corinthians constitute a context dealing with disorders in the worship assembly” adding that  " The  entire pericope of 11:2-14:40 concerns the worship assembly …” (Piloting the Strait pp  247, 256). 

 

 

H.A. (Buster) Dobbs:

 

“In his first letter to the church at Corinth, Paul has a section on worship.  It begins with the eleventh chapter and ends with the fourteenth chapter” (1990 Bellview Lectures What Does God Authorize in Worship ed. Bobby Liddell, p 132).

 

John Mark Hicks and Bruce I. Morton:

 

“There is no distinction made between the assemblies of (chapters) 11 and 14, and in fact the whole section covers the same topic: disorders in public worship.  The close connection between 11:2 and 11:17, 18 indicates that the assembly where the Lord's Supper is taken is the assembly under consideration in 11:3-16" (Woman's Role in the Church p 64 [emphasis mine]).

 

 James Meadows:

 

 “First the context of these verses is found in the larger context of 1 Corinthian 11:2 – 14:40.  Paul is concerned with some disorders that had arisen in the worship at Corinth. There were problems concerning the head covering of women (11:2-16), the Lord's Supper (11:17-34) and spiritual gifts (12:1-14:40)” (Some Thoughts on Women's Role in the Church p. 8).

 

I do not record these comments because commentators are inspired.  I record them to point out that, although throughout history there have been different positions on the head covering, the great majority of commentators have usually disagreed on areas other than context.