صور الصفحة
النشر الإلكتروني

TEXT. 7 For a man, indeed, ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is

the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman: but the woman for the


10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head, because

of the angels. 11 Nevertheless, neither is the man without the woman, neither the

woman without the man, in the Lord. 12 For, as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the

woman: but all things of God. 13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely, that a woman pray unto God un

covered ?

PARAPHRASE. A man, indeed, ought not to be veiled ; because he is the

image and representative of God, in his dominion over the rest 8 of the world, which is one part of the glory of God: But the

woman, who was made out of the man, made for him, and 9 in subjection to him, is matter of glory to the man. But the

man not being made out of the woman, nor for her, but the 10 woman made out of, and for the man, She ought, for this rea

son, to have a veil on her head, in token of her subjection, be11 cause of the angels b. Nevertheless, the sexes have not a being,

one without the other; neither the man without the woman, 12 nor the woman without the man, the Lord so ordering it. For,

as the first woman was made out of the man, so the race of men, ever since, is continued and propagated by the female sex:

but they, and all other things, had their being and original 13 from God. Be you yourselves judges, whether it be decent for

a woman to make a prayer to God, in the church, uncovered ?

NOTES. not be forgotten, but owned and preserved, by their being covered. The Christian religion was ilot to give offence, by any appearance, or suspicion, that it took away the subordination of the sexes, and set the women at liberty from their natural subjection to the map. And, therefore, we see, that in both these cases, the aim was to maintain and secure the confessed superiority and dominion of the man, and not permit it to be invaded, so much as in appearance. Hence the arguments, in the one case, for covering, and in the other, for silence, are all drawn from the patural superiority of the man, and the subjection of the woman. In the one, the woman, without an extraordinary call, was to keep silent, as a mark of her subjection : in the other, where she was to speak, by an extraordinary call and comunission from God, she was yet to continue the profession of her subjection, in keeping herself covered. Here, by the way, it is to be observed, that there was an extraordinary praying to God, by the impulse of the Spirit, as well as speaking unto men for their edification, exhortation, and comfort: vid. chap. xiv. 15. Rom. viii, 26. Jude ver. 20. These things being

premised, let us follow the thread of St. Paul's discourse. 10 5 What the meaning of these words is, I confess, I do not understand.

TEXT. 14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that if a man have long hair,

it is a shame unto him ? 15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is

given her for a covering. 16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom,

neither the churches of God.

PARAPHRASE. 14 Does not even nature, that has made, and would have the

distinction of sexes preserved, teach you, that if a man wear his hair long, and dressed up

after the manner of women, it is 15 misbecoming and dishonourable to him? But to a woman, if

she be curious about her hair, in having it long, and dressing

herself with it, it is a grace and commendation; since her hair 16 is given her for a covering. But if any show himself to be a lover of contention“, we, the apostles, have no such custom,

of the churches of God.

nor any

NOTE. 16 «Why may not this, " any one," be understood of the false apostle, here

glauced at ?


CHAPTER XI. 17-34.


One may observe, from several passages in this epistle, that several Judaical customs were crept into the Corinthian church. This church being of St. Paul's own planting, who spent two years at Corinth, in forming it; it is evident these abuses had their rise from some other teachers, who came to them after his leaving them, which was about five years before his writing this epistle. These disorders therefore may with reason be ascribed to the head of the faction, that opposed St. Paul, who, as has been remarked, was a Jew, and probably Judaized. And that, it is like, was the foundation of the great opposition between him and St. Paul, and the reason why St. Paul labours so earnestly to destroy his credit among the Corinthians ; this sort of men being very busy, very troublesome, and very dangerous to the Gospel, as may be seen in other of St. Paul's epistles, particularly that to the Galatians.

The celebrating the passover amongst the Jews was plainly the eating of a meal distinguished from other ordinary meals, by several peculiar ceremonies. Two of these ceremonies were eating of bread solemnly broken, and drinking a cup of wine, called the cup of blessing. These two our Saviour transferred into the Christian church, to be used in their assemblies, for a commemoration of his death and sufferings. In celebrating this institution of our Saviour, the Judaizing Corinthians followed the Jewish custom of eating their passover; they eat the Lord's supper as a part of their meal, bringing their provisions into the assembly, where they eat divided into distinct companies, some feasting to excess, whilst others, ill provided, were in want. This eating thus in the public assembly, and mixing the Lord's supper with their ordinary meal, as a part of it, with other disorders and indecencies accompanying it, is the matter of this section. These innovations, he tells them here, he as much blames, as, in the beginning of this chapter, he recommends them for keeping to his directions in some other things.

TEXT. 17 Now in this, that I declare unto you, I praise you not, that ye come

together, not for the better, but for the worse. 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. 19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they, which are ap

proved, may be made manifest among you. 20 When ye come together, therefore, into one place, this is not to eat

the Lord's supper. 21 For, in eating, every one taketh before other his own supper : and

one is hungry, and another is drunken.

PARAPHRASE. 17 Though what I said to you, concerning women's behaviour

in the church, was not without commendation of you; yet this, that I am now going to speak to you of is without

praising you, because you so order your meetings in your as18 semblies, that they are not to your advantage, but harm. For

first I hear, that, when you come together in the church, you 19 fall into parties, and I partly believe it; Because there must

be divisions and factions amongst you, that those who stand 20 firm upon trial may be made manifest among you. You come

together, it is true, in one place, and there you eat; but yet A this makes it not to be the eating of the Lord's supper. For,

in eating, you eat not together, but every one takes his own

TEXT. 22 What! have ye not houses to eat and drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I

say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. 23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto

you, That the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed,

took bread: 24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, “ Take, eat;

this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.”


22 supper one before another a. Have ye not houses to eat and

drink in, at home, for satisfying your hunger and thirst? Or have ye a contempt for the church of God, and take a pleasure to put those out of countenance, who have not wherewithal to feast there, as you do? What is it I said to you,

that I praise you for retaining what I delivered to you? On 23 this occasion, indeed, I praise you not for it. For what I re

ceived, concerning this institution, from the Lord himself, that I delivered unto you, when I was with you; and it was this,

viz. That the Lord Jesus, in the night wherein he was be24 trayed, took bread: And, having given thanks, brake it, and

NOTES. 21 a To understand this, we must observe,

(1.) That they had sometimes meetings, on purpose only for eating the Lord's supper, ver. 33. (2.) That to those meetings they brought their own supper, ver. 21.

(3.) That though every one's supper were brought into the common assembly, yet it was not to eat in common, but every one fell to his own supper apart, as soon as he and his supper were there ready for one another, without staying for the rest of the company, or communicating with them in eating, ver. 21, 33.

In this St. Paul blames three things especially.

Ist, That they eat their common food in the assembly, which was to be eaten at home, in their houses, ver. 22, 34.

2dly, That though they eat in the common meeting-place, yet they eat separately, every one his own supper apart. So that the plenty and excess of some shamed the want and penury of others, ver. 22. Hereby also the divisions amongst them were kept up, ver: 18, they being as so many separated and divided societies, not as one united body of Christians, commemorating their common head, as they should have been in celebrating the Lord's supper, chap. x. 16, 17.

3dly, That they mixed the Lord's supper with their own, eating it as a part of their ordinary meal, where they made not that discrimination between it and

their common food, as they should have done, ver. 29. 22 He here plainly refers to what he had said to them, ver. 2, where he praised

them for remembering him in all things, and for retaining tas naçadóceis xaows napigwxoi, what he had delivered to them. This commendation he here retracts; for, in the matter of eating the Lord's supper, they did not retain ô nde@wxo, ver. 23, what he had delivered to them, which, therefore, in the immediately following words, he repeats to them again.


TEXT. 25 After the same manner also, he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, “ This

cup is the new testament in my blood : this do ye, as oft

ye drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the

Lord's death till he come. 27 Wherefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the

Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and

drink of that cup.


said, “ Take, eat; this is my body which is broken for you: 25 this do in remembrance of me.” So, likewise, he took the

cup also, when he had supped, saying, “ This cup is the new

testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as ye do it, in 26 remembrance of me.”. So that the eating of this bread,

and the drinking of this cup of the Lord's supper, is not to

satisfy hunger and thirst, but to show forth the Lord's death, 27 till he comes. Insomuch that he, who eats this bread, and

drinks this cup of the Lord, in an unworthy manner, not

suitable to that end, shall be guilty of a misuse of the body, 28 and blood of the Lord. By this institution, therefore, of

Christ, let a man examine himself"; and, according to

NOTES. 27 c 'Ayağlws, “ unworthily.” Our Saviour, in the institution of the Lord's sup.

per, tells the apostles, that the bread and the cup were sacramentally his body and blood, and that they were to be eaten and drunk in remembrance of him; which, as St. Paul interprets it, ver. 26, was to show forth his death till he came. Whoever, therefore, eat and drank them, so as not solemnly to show forth his death, followed not Christ's institution, but used them unworthily, i. e. not to the end to which they were instituted. This makes St. Paul tell them, ver. 20, that their coming together to eat it, as they did, viz. the sacramental bread and wine promiscuously with their other food, as a part of their meal, and that though in the same place, yet not all together, at one time, and in one com. pany, was not eating of the Lord's supper.

"Evoxos ësai, shall be liable to the punishment due to one, who makes a wrong use of the sacramental body and blood of Christ in the Lord's supper. What

that punishment was, vid. ver. 30. 28 e St. Paul, as we have observed, tells the Corinthians, ver. 20, That to eat it

after the manner they did was not to eat the Lord's supper. He tells them also, ver. 29, That to eat it, without a due and direct imitating regard had to the Lord's body, (for so he calls the sacramental bread and wine, as our Saviour did, in the institution) by separating the bread and wine from the common use of eating and drinking, for hunger and thirst, was to eat uuworthily. To remedy their disorders herein, he sets before them Christ's own institution of this sacrament; that in it they might see the manner and end of its institution ; and, by that, every one might examine his own comportment herein, whether it were conformable to that institution, and suited to that eud. In the account he gives, of Christ's institution, we may observe, that he parti

« السابقةمتابعة »