Vv. 11,12. πλὴν κ.τ.λ. modifies and guards the foregoing; this conj. lies.
τοι ΠΡΟΣ ΚΟΡΙΝΘΙΟΥΣ Α 875 Θεοῦ. - nse dv) s ὑμῖν Sadtois! * κρίνατε: “apémov ἐστὶ γυναῖκα - κ αρ " ἁκατακάλυπτον τῷ Θεῷ προσεύχεσθαι; 14. 4? οὐδὲ αὐτὴ 5 ἡ θὰ
* duos ὃ διδάσκει ὑμᾶς ὅτι 15. γυνὴ δὲ ἐὰν *
κομᾷ,
xii. 11. (πει, Eph. v. 3; 1 Tim. ii. 10; Tit. ii. 1; Heb. ii, 1ο, vii. 26; Ps. Ixiv. x. f H.l. in Bib. Gr. Ἡ Ν.Τ. A.
14, 27, xi. 24; Gal. ii. τς, iv. 8; Eph. ii. 3. seé iv. 10. -αζω, see Rom. i. 24, etc.
δόξα αὐτῇ ἐστιν; ὅτι ἡ
” , ~ + ἀνὴρ μὲν ἐὰν *xopd, © ἀτιμία αὐτῷ ἐστι: Acts iv.
i υ ; . 19; Jo. , > 41 KO ἁνγτι ο 25- ψη d Mt. iii. 15 1 Macc.
e Rom. i. 26, ii. g xv. 43; Rom. i. 26, εἰς. -μος
1.: Numb. vi. 5. i Lk; xi. rr; Jas. iv. 15.
1D latt. vg., Ambrst., Pelag. (Western) read vpets αντοι for εν υμιν αντοις.
7 Om. η all unce. but DeKL.
Σηφυσις αυτη (in this order): pre-Syrian uncc.
between δὲ and ἀλλὰ in its force—out besides, howbeit. What has been said in vy. 3-10 must not be overpressed : woman is subordinate, not inferior; the sexes are alike, and inseparably neces- sary to the Christian order (11); and if man is the fountain, woman is the channel of the race’s life (12). οὔτε γννὴ .. « οὔτε ἀνὴρ κ.τ.λ.: “Neither is there woman apart from man, nor man apart from woman in the Lord.” Here Tenny- son is the best commentator: ‘ Either sex alone is half itself . . . each fulfils defect in each, and always thought in thought, purpose in purpose, will in will, they grow. . . the two-celled heart beat- ing, with one full stroke, life”. ἐν Kupto (cf. vii. 39, etc.), i.e. under the rule of Christ, where woman’s rights are realised as nowhere in heathenism (cf. Gal. iii. 28, Eph. v. 28; also the wording of vii. 3 f. above). For the contrast of ἐκ and διά, see viii. 6; “the woman has an equivalent in the Divine order of nature, that as man is the initial cause of being to the woman, so woman is the instru- mental cause of being to the man”’ (Ev.). But the avip is only a relative source ; God is absolute Ἐαίπετ-- τὰ δὲ πάντα ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ (cf. viii. 6, i. 30 and note, Rom. xi, 36). To Him man and woman owe one reverence.
Ver. 13. There is a constitutional feel- ing which supports the above inference in favour of the woman’s veil; it was implied already in the καταισχύνει and αἰσχρὸν of vv. 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 en- gaged in prayer (pr. inf.) to God? ”’—an appeal to social sentiment (cf. Rom. ii. 15, μεταξὺ ἀλλήλωγ), recalling the κρίνατε ἡμεῖς of x. 15. πρέπον (neut. ptp.: see
arls.), as distinguished from ὀφείλω or δει (7, 19), denotes befittingness, suita-
bility to nature or character. τῷ Θεῷ lends solemnity to προσεύχεσθαι.
Vv. 14, 15. The question οὐδὲ ἢ φύσις αὐτὴ κ.τ.λ.; summons personal instinct to the aid of social sentiment: ‘* Does not even nature of herself teach you that, etc. ?” For ἡ φύσις,σεε Rom. ii. 14; in this connexion it points to man’s moral constitution rather than to external regulations ; Hf. and El. however, taking φύσις in the latter sense, reverse the order of thought in vv. 13 f., seeing in the former ver. individual instinct (they render ἐν ἑαυτοῖς within yourselves), and in this ver. social ru#@.—Hf. and Hn., by a strained constr. of διδάσκει, render ὅτι “‘ because,” and draw the obj. of “‘teach”’ from ver. 13, seeing in ὅτι κ.τ.λ. the ground of the affirmative answer tacitly given to both questions : “ Does not nature of herself teach (this) ? (Yes), for if a man have long hair, etc.” The common rendering is preferable; the teaching of nature is expressed in a double sentence, which gathers the con sensus gentium on the subject: ‘‘ that in a man’s case, if he wear long hair (vir quidem si comam nutriat, Vg.), it is a dishonour to him; but in a woman’s, if she wear long hair, it is a glory to πετ”. ἀνήρ, γυνὴ stand in conspicuous anti- thesis preceding the conj.: what is dis- creditable in the one is delightful in the other. Homer’s warriors, it is true, wore long hair (καρηκομοῶντες ᾿Αχαιοί), a fashion retained at Sparta; but the Athenian youth cropped his head at 18, and it was a mark of foppery or effemi- nacy (a legal ἀτιμία), except for the aristocratic Knights, to let the hair after- wards grow long. This feeling prevailed in ancient as it does in modern manners (cf. the case of Absalom). In the rule of the Nazirites natural instinct was set aside by an exceptional religious voca- tion. The woman’s κόµη is not merely