Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Corinthians 11:13
Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
13 15. Judge in yourselves ] Return to the argument in 1Co 11:10. An appeal is now made to our natural feeling of what is proper and becoming. Man, as his sphere is the world, and as he is the highest of God’s creatures in it, needs no covering to hide him from the gaze of others. Woman, as being, whether married or unmarried, under the dominion of man, receives of God’s providence the covering of her long hair, whereby she may veil herself from the gaze of those who are not her natural protectors.
is it comely ] Decet, Vulgate. Bisemeth it? Wiclif. Our version follows Tyndale here, and is equivalent in our modern language to Is it proper? Is it becoming? “It is impossible,” remarks Robertson, “to decide how much of our public morality and private purity is owing to the spirit which refuses to overstep the smallest bound of ordinary decorum.” And again, “Whatever contradicts feelings which are universally received,” that is “in questions of morality, propriety, and decency,” “is questionable to say the least.”
uncovered ] Not hilid (veiled) on the heed, Wiclif. Bare hedded, Tyndale.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Judge in yourselves – Or, Judge among yourselves. I appeal to you. I appeal to your natural sense of what is proper and right. Paul had used various arguments to show them the impropriety of their females speaking unveiled in public. He now appeals to their natural sense of what was decent and right, according to established and acknowledged customs and habits.
Is it comely … – Is it decent, or becoming? The Grecian women, except their priestesses, were accustomed to appear in public with a veil – Doddridge. Paul alludes to that established and proper habit, and asks whether it does not accord with their own views of propriety that women in Christian assemblies should also wear the same symbol of modesty.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 13. Judge in yourselves] Consider the subject in your own common sense, and then say whether it be decent for a woman to pray in public without a veil on her head? The heathen priestesses prayed or delivered their oracles bare-headed or with dishevelled hair, non comptae mansere comae, as in the case of the Cumaean Sibyl, AEn. vi., ver. 48, and otherwise 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.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
No man is truly and thoroughly convinced of an error, till he be convicted by his own conscience. It is therefore very usual in holy writ for God, by his sacred penmen, to make appeals unto mens own consciences, and put them to judge within themselves, to examine a thing by their own reason, and according to the dictates of that to give sentence for or against themselves. The thing as to which he would have them judge within themselves, and accordingly pronounce sentence, was, whether it were a decent thing for women to pray to God with their hair all hanging loose about their shoulders, or without any veil, or covering for their head and face.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
13. Appeal to their own sense ofdecorum.
a woman . . . unto GodByrejecting the emblem of subjection (the head-covering), she passes atone leap in praying publicly beyond both the man and angels[BENGEL].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Judge in yourselves,…. The apostle having gone through a variety of reasoning and arguments, showing the superiority of the man to the woman, by which he would prove, that the one should be covered, and the other uncovered, returns to his subject again, and appeals to the common sense and understanding of the Corinthians, and makes them themselves judges of the matter; suggesting that the thing was so clear, and he so certain of what he had advanced being right, that he leaves it with them, not doubting but that they would, upon a little reflection within themselves, join with him in this point:
is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? in you judgment you can never think so, however pleasing and gratifying such a sight may be, to the lust of the flesh, and to the lust of the eye; he does not mention prophesying, only instances in praying; but it is to be understood of one, as of another; and his meaning is, that it is an uncomely thing in a woman to appear in public service with her head uncovered, whether it be in joining in the public prayers, or in singing of psalms, or in hearing the word expounded; and though the apostle does not put the case of the man’s praying to God, or prophesying in his name with his head covered, yet his sense is the same of that, as of the woman’s.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Is it seemly? ( ;). Periphrastic present indicative rather than . See on Mt 3:15. Paul appeals to the sense of propriety among the Corinthians.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “Judge in yourselves.” (en humin autois krinate) “Judge ye among yourselves.” Draw conclusions of your own.
2) “Is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?” (prepon estin gunaika akatakalupton to theo proseuchesthai) “is it becoming or fitting (for) a woman to pray to God (of her own accord) unveiled?” Is it proper for a woman to approach God, as a prostitute approaches a man for sexual favors, or as a slave-woman offers herself shorn or shaven to her worldly master for sexual favors? (The rhetorical conclusion is – – – NO.)
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(13) Judge in yourselves.In this and the two following verses the Apostle reasons with themappeals to their own common sense, and to the indications of Nature, as to the evident truth of what he has taught them on this question. Surely you would not think it seemly for a woman (setting aside the question of men and angels altogether) to speak face to face with God in prayer?
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
13. In yourselves Look into your own breasts and hearken to the dictates of your intuitive feelings. Man’s true nature affirms the truths of God.
Comely Accordant with an inborn sense of propriety.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Judge you in yourselves. Is it seemly that a woman pray to God unveiled? Does not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a dishonour to him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her. For her hair is given her for a covering.’
Paul then seeks to confirm his argument with reference to the hair of both men and women. Even the length of their hair confirms that the one should be covered and the other not. Let them judge for themselves from nature. Does not nature naturally give a woman long hair? (Some Africans might disagree, but it is true in general). It is for them a natural covering and indication of their positions as helpmeets. Indeed do not women glory in their hair? But men do not glory in long hair (there are always exceptions to every generalisation, such as the Spartans). It is seen as a dishonour for it makes them seem effeminate. Men express themselves by trimming, or even shaving, their hair, women by letting it grow long. We may assume that this was certainly so among the Corinthians, and their neighbours. So does nature indicate that man should be uncovered and woman covered.
This is neither an instruction on how long the hair should be grown, nor stating that the hair is the covering Paul has been speaking about. It is rather drawing out significance from a natural illustration, suggesting that it is naturally intended to illustrate the situation between men and women. It should neither be analysed too deeply nor denied on the basis of exceptions. But there is certainly the suggestion there that nature intends to differentiate between men and women. Unisex is not pleasing to God. It is God’s pleasure that men and women are clearly distinguished.
‘If a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her.’ Paul finishes the section by indicating that a woman’s hair is her glory. We have already seen that man is God’s glory (1Co 11:7), and woman is man’s glory (1Co 11:7), now the woman’s hair is her glory, for it indicates her special place in the scheme of things as woman. It is her treasure and her status symbol. She is the life-giver (1Co 11:12), and co-partner with man as lord of creation, in his service of his Creator. She is there to give him pleasure (as he is there to give her pleasure – 1Co 7:4-5). But she should not be flaunting her glory in church. In church all concentration should be on giving glory, not receiving it.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The natural sense of propriety supports the apostle:
v. 13. Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
v. 14. Doth not even nature itself teach you that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
v. 15. But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given her for a covering.
v. 16. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God. Aside from all external authorities, the apostle here appeals to the natural feeling of his readers; they should decide for themselves whether the innate sense of decency and modesty did not seem to require, did not think it befitting or suitable for a woman to join in public prayer properly veiled. Or does not nature itself teach you that, if a man wears his hair long, it is a disgrace to him, but if a woman wears her hair long, it is a glory to her? It is a significant thing that practically all nations in the world agree in having the men wear the hair short while that of the women is worn long; long hair in a man is considered a sign of effeminacy, while long hair in a woman is looked upon as her crowning beauty. And although the sinful vanity of women, abetted by the foolish admiration of men, has placed the hair into the service of sin, 1Pe 3:3; 1Ti 2:9, it remains true nevertheless: It is given her to serve as a covering, in the nature of a hood. Nature itself has insisted upon woman’s veiling her head, and therefore it is proper for her to express this intention in keeping her head covered.
Since some of the Corinthians might feel inclined to take exception to these statements of Paul, he closes the discussion with a sharp word of warning: But if anyone thinks, presumes, is getting ready to be contentious, (he may know that) we have not that custom, neither the churches of God. Paul was acquainted with the quarrelsome disposition of some of the Corinthians; he knew that he might expect to be attacked for his position in this matter. And so he simply declares that he and his fellow-ministers did not have a custom of that kind. Paul neither believed in extending Christian liberty beyond the boundaries of common decency nor in the specific practice of having the women take part in public worship unveiled. He thus cuts off all further disputation about the matter by appealing to universal Christian usage. Note: The principle stated by the apostle holds to this day, and if propriety and decency in a certain matter require a degree of accommodation from Christians, they will be willing to concede the point for the sake of the Gospel.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
1Co 11:13-15 . By way of appendix to the discussion, the apostle refers his readers as regards especially the praying of the women, which had given rise to debate to the voice of nature herself . He asks them: Is it seemly, judge within yourselves concerning it, is it seemly that a woman should offer up prayers uncovered? Does not nature herself even ( ) teach you the opposite?
] without any influence from without; comp 1Co 10:15 .
] superfluous in itself, but added for the sake of emphasis , in order to impress upon them the more deeply the unseemliness of the uncovered state in which the woman comes forward to deal with the Most High in prayer.
Regarding the different constructions with , see Buttmann, neut. Gr. p. 239 [E. T. 278].
The is the natural relation of the judgment and feeling to the matter in question, the native, inborn sense and perception of what is seemly. This instinctive consciousness of propriety had been, as respected the point in hand, established by custom and had become . Comp Chrysostom. The manifold discussions, to little purpose, by the old commentators regarding the meaning of , may be seen in Poole’s Synopsis , and in Wolf. It is here, as often in Greek writers (comp also Rom 2:14 ), the contrast to education, law, art, and the like. It cannot in this passage mean, as Hofmann would have it, the arrangement of things in conformity with their creation that is to say, the arrangement of nature in the objective sense (so, frequently in the classics), for the assertion that this teaches all that is expressed by the . . [1797] would go much too far and be unwarranted. Were we, again, to assume that does not depend at all on , but gives the ground for the question, so that would require its contents to be supplied out of the first half of the verse, how awkwardly would Paul have expressed himself, and how liable must he have been to misapprehension, in putting instead of conveying his meaning with clearness and precision by ! And even apart from this objection as to the form of expression, we cannot surely suppose that the apostle would find in a fact of aesthetic custom (1Co 11:14-15 ) that is to say, a something in its own nature accidental, and subsisting as an actual fact only for the man accustomed to it the confirmation of what the order of things in conformity with their creation teaches.
] independently of all other instruction.
Upon the matter itself ( , Eustath. a [1798] Il. iii. p. 288), see Perizonius, a [1799] Ael. V. H. ix. 4; Wetstein in loc [1800] In ancient times, among the Hellenes, the luxuriant, carefully-tended hair of the head was the mark of a free man (see generally, Hermann, Privatalterth. xxiii. 13 ff.). Comp also 2Sa 14:25 f. In the church, both by councils and popes, the was repeatedly and strictly forbidden to the clergy. [1802] See Decretal. lib. iii. tit. i. cap. 4. 5. 7.
. .] Ground for long hair being an ornament to a woman: because it is given to her instead of a veil , to take its place, to be, as it were, a natural veil. This again implies that to wear a veil, as in the case in hand, is a decorous thing. For if the is an honour for a woman because it is given to her in place of a veil , then the veil itself too must be an honour to her, and to lay it aside in prayer a disgrace. “ Naturae debet respondere voluntas ,” Bengel. , something thrown round one , a covering in general (see the Lexicons, and Schleusner, Thes. IV. p. 289), has here a special reference to the veil ( , ) spoken of in the context.
[1797] . . . .
[1798] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
[1799] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
[1800] n loc. refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
[1802] If we are to look upon the tonsure, however, as a symbol of the spiritual life in contradistinction to the vanities of this world (see Walter, Kirchenr. 212), then this by no means corresponds to the view held by the apostle in our text. Long hair on the head is a disgrace to a man in his eyes; because he regards it as a sign of human subjection.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
Ver. 13. Judge in yourselves ] All Christ’s sheep are rational, able to discern the things that differ, having their senses thereunto exercised, Heb 5:14 . But some sins are condemned by common sense, as here; and religion is founded upon so good reason, that though God had not commanded it, yet it had been our wisest way to have chosen it. But lust doth often so blear the understanding, that a man shall think he hath reason to be mad, and that there is great sense in sinning.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
13. ] Appeal to their own sense of propriety : cf. ch. 1Co 10:15 .
.] Each man within himself, in his own judgment.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Co 11:13 . There is a constitutional feeling which supports the above inference in favour of the woman’s veil; it was implied already in the and of 1Co 11:5 f., and is now explicitly stated: “Amongst yourselves ( inter rather than intra vos ipsos ) judge ye; is it seemly for a woman unveiled to be engaged in prayer (pr [1651] inf [1652] ) to God?” an appeal to social sentiment ( cf. Rom 2:15 , ), recalling the of 1Co 10:15 . (neut. ptp [1653] : see parls.), as distinguished from or (1Co 11:7 ; 1Co 11:19 ), denotes befittingness , suitability to nature or character. lends solemnity to .
[1651] present tense.
[1652] infinitive mood.
[1653] participle
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Judge. App-122. Figure of speech Anacoenosis. App-6.
is it comely = is it becoming. Greek. prepei. Elsewhere, Mat 3:15. Eph 5:3. 1Ti 2:10. Tit 2:1. Heb 2:10; Heb 7:26.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
13.] Appeal to their own sense of propriety: cf. ch. 1Co 10:15.
.] Each man within himself, in his own judgment.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Co 11:13. , in yourselves) without a long explanation.-, is it?) a direct interrogation, as 1Co 6:5.– , a woman-to God) Paul describes the leap, which the woman uncovered takes, passing beyond both the man and angels. An excellent hypotyposis,[93] though short.
[93] A vivid picture in words of some action. Appendix.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Co 11:13
1Co 11:13
Judge ye in yourselves: is it seemly that a woman pray unto God unveiled?-The impropriety of it he takes for granted as apparent to all. How should she approach God is the question. Man should do it with uncovered head, woman with covered head; and all distinction between public or private prayer is mans imagination. It is as wrong for a man to approach God with covered head in the closet as it is to do it in the public assembly. So also of woman, God makes no difference as to how he shall be approached in public or in private.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
1Co 10:15, Luk 12:57, Joh 7:24
Reciprocal: Rom 14:13 – but 1Co 13:5 – behave
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Co 11:13. Judge in yourselves has about the same force as “nature” in the next verse. Comely is from PREPO, which Thayer defines, “to be becoming, seemly, fit.”
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Co 11:13. Judge ye in yourselves: is it seemly that a woman pray unto God (in public) unveiled?
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe here, 1. How our apostle closes his discourse, in which he had reproved the Corinthians, the men for covering, the women for uncovering, their heads, and laying aside their veils in time of religious worship: by an appeal to themselves and their own judgment concerning the matter he is speaking of, and reproving them for; namely, men’s praying with their heads covered, and women with their heads uncovered.
Observe, 2. How the apostle proceeds to blame both sexes for another disorder; namely, that men wore their hair like women, and that women appeared in the guise of men as to their hair.
Here he lets them know that both these kinds of disorders are repugnant to the institution of God, and the dictates of natural reason; Doth not nature itself teach you?
That is, (1.) The general dictates of natural reason.
(2.) The particular law of nature, concerning the distinction of sexes.
(3.) Usage and common custom, which is a second nature.
All these suggest, that for men to wear their hair at full length like the woman, is uncomely and unnatural in the manly sex, but so to do is comely and natural in the female.
Learn hence, That God disallows,and even nature itself condemns, every thing that tends to the confounding of the sexes, which it is his will and pleasure should be visibly distinguished.
It is a great offence to God, and contrary to one end for which apparel was given, when either the man or the woman wears apparel contrary to their sex; and what is said of apparel, their artificial covering, may be affirmed of the hair, that is their natural covering.
“It is a shame for either sex to wear their hair in an uncomely and indecent manner, disagreeable to the natural modesty of either sex.”
Observe, 3. How the apostle appeals to the custom and practice of the churches of God in the cases before us. The custom of all the churches is against women’s being uncovered, as an unseemly thing.
It is a known rule, Ubi nihil certi statuit Scriptura, mos populi Dei, et instituta majorum, pro lege tenenda sunt: We ought not to dissent and differ from the custom and practice of the church of Christ in matters not positively determined: but the custom and practice of the church of Christ in matters not positively determined: but the custom of the church must sway with us, with whose practice it is our duty to be as concordant as we can. If any man will by contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
Learn thence, That in things only respecting decency, and in compliance with which there is no violation of the command of Christ, the custom of the church of Christ should determine us, and be as a standing rule unto us.
Learn, 2. That it argues a contentious spirit, and savours very much of pride, in matters of little moment to be singular in our practice, and to create disturbance to the church of God. If any man seem to be contentious, &c.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Long Hair
Paul asked the brethren to use their own judgment to determine whether or not it was proper for a woman to pray with her head uncovered. As McGarvey wrote, “Instinct should teach us that the head of a woman is more properly covered than that of a man, for nature grants it a greater abundance of hair.” He also went on to note men of Paul’s day cut their hair short, unless they were under some vow like that of the Nazarite. “Long hair in a man betokened base and lewd effeminancy,” according to McGarvey. The apostle’s words suggest to us that a man should not want to wear hair so long he looks womanly, nor a woman hair so short, she looks manly ( 1Co 11:13-14 ).
A woman’s long hair was given to her by God as a beautiful covering. To end all discussion Paul says this was the practice in the churches of Christ, apparently indicating other apostles had in some way confirmed what he was saying and it was universally accepted. The churches should strive to be in agreement in practice ( 1Co 11:15-16 ). While today a veil would not indicate anything to the general populace, Christian women still need to show their subjection to their husbands. A proper spirit is a necessary part of a woman’s spiritual attire ( 1Ti 2:9-10 )!
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
1Co 11:13-16. Judge in yourselves For what need of more arguments in so plain a case? Is it comely Decent, suitable to female modesty; that a woman pray unto God The Most High, with that bold and undaunted air which she must have if, contrary to universal custom, she appears in public with her head uncovered? Doth not even nature The light of nature, or natural reason; teach you Previous to any arguments on the subject; that if a man have long hair Carefully adjusted, it is a mark of such effeminacy as is a disgrace to him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory An ornament; to her Which does not incommode her, being suitable to her domestic state: for her hair was given her Originally, and before the arts of dress were invented or needed; for , instead of; a covering Or veil. What a value the eastern ladies put on their hair may be known from this, that when Ptolemy Euergetes, king of Egypt, was about to march against Seleucus Callinicus, his queen, Berenice, who loved him tenderly, vowed, as the most precious sacrifice she could offer, to cut off and consecrate her hair, if he returned in safety. But if any man seem to be contentious And will dispute this matter, on his own different views of what is naturally decent, I shall not controvert it further, but content myself with saying, that we have here no such custom For women to appear with their heads uncovered; neither the churches of God In any other place, whether planted by me or any of my brethren. The several churches that were in the apostles time, had different customs in things that were not essential; and that under one and the same apostle, as circumstances in different places made it convenient. And in all things merely indifferent the custom of each place was of sufficient weight to determine prudent and peaceable men. Yet even this cannot overrule a scrupulous conscience, which really doubts whether the thing be indifferent or not. But those who are referred to here by the apostle were contentious, not conscientious persons.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Co 11:13-16.
The apostle concludes by appealing to the natural impression which ought to follow from a particular feature in the physical conformation of the man and the woman. This last argument is strictly connected with the last words of 1Co 11:12.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Judge ye in yourselves [he appealed to their own sense of propriety, as governed by the light of nature]: is it seemly that a woman pray unto God unveiled?
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
11:13 {12} Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
(12) He urges the argument taken from the common sense of nature.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
3. The argument from propriety 11:13-16
Paul returned to the main argument (1Co 11:4-6), but now he appealed to the Corinthians’ own judgment and sense of propriety. He raised two more rhetorical questions. The first (1Co 11:13 b) expects a negative answer and the second (1Co 11:14-15) a positive one. The apostle appealed to the nature of things. His points were that "nature" itself distinguishes between the sexes, and that a woman’s naturally longer hair reinforces the propriety of covering her head in worship (in that culture).
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
In Paul’s culture it was not proper for a woman to act as a spokesman for people with God by praying publicly with her head uncovered. To do so would be tantamount to claiming the position of a man in God’s order. The apostle did not think it wise for Christian women to exercise their liberty in a way that would go against socially accepted behavior even though they were personally submissive. Today what is socially accepted is different, but her attitude is still crucial. Notice the similarity of what Paul advocated here with what he advocated in 1Co 8:1 to 1Co 11:1, namely, doing what is generally perceived as appropriate (as well as what is morally correct).