The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Corinthians — Section 375

•should not usurp a higher position than Goel has appointed for us; we should not take a lower. Our best place is where God places us. :.:. That woman should have her head covered. The veil was a recognition of subordination and an indication of modesty. To discard it was to claim man's position and thus to dishonour man, her bead-or to dishonour her own head by depriving it of a mark of propriety and even of chastity. For by discarding the head-covering a woman put herself in the class of the disreputable. It was but a carrying out of the principle involved for a woman to have her head sbave,l (vers. 5, 6), which was sometimes done in the case of those who had forfeited their honour, and became thus a brand of infamy. Thus a woman snatching at the position of man would descend far below her own. An apparent rise is sometimes a very real fall. The apostle enforces his argument by : (1) An appeal to nature (vers. 14, 15). Paul evidently thinks that there is accord between the kingdom of naturo and of grace. Both are from one hand and one mind, and conflicts between the two may be very apparent, but can never be real. Nature gives the man short hair and the woman long; here i6 a natural distinction which should be observed, and which indi- cates that woman specially needs the bead-covering. Or by nature the apostle may mean "what obtains among men who are not instructed by revelation. Among many . of the heathen the wearing of the hair long by men was ridiculed, but long hair for women was generally recognized as appropriate. (2) The presence of angels in Christian assemblies (ver.16). Earth looks on, but heaven also. Woman should have the symbcl of power, of subjection to man, upon her head, because any usurpatiQn of improper position or flaunting boldness would be offensive to these heavenly visitors. (3) Apos- tolic authority (ver. 10). Where reasoning fails, authority must utter her voice. Paul always preferred to convince rather than to compel. But he possessed the right to determine when the contentious persevered in contention. The regulation was accord- ing to the mind of an inspired apostle, and was observed by Churches founded by him- self or other like-minded leaders. In estimating the teaching of the passage, we must discriminate between the necessary and the accidental. 'l'he principle is that women should be so attired as to indicate, or at all events so as not to conflict with, their right- ful position. Amongst those to whom the apostle wrote, the veil was the symbol of modesty and subordination. Because women in Western Churches are not so nttired, it does not follow that they are acting antagonistically to the apostle's precept, though it will be admitted by most that the preposterous head-genr of many female worshippers, in our own land calls loudly for reform, and is frequently an outrage upon all propriety and a sarcasm upon womanly modesty. I do not understand that the apostle has here specially in view the praying and preaching of women in public assemblies-this he deals with further on in the Eµistle (eh. xiv. 34, etc.); but he is now insisting upon what is approi:riate in the attire of woman (and incidentally of man) on public occasions. His primary reference is to public worship, and surely when we come to "appear before God," we ought to be most specially anxious that everything about us shall be decent and in order. Whilst nothing that is outward can compensate for absence of the inward, that which is external is often an index of the internal, and has its influence upo11 tho interno.1.-H . . Vers. 17-22.-Some hindrances to the right observance of the Lord's Supper. Holy institutions may become unholy by perversion. That which is bestowed upon us as a peculiar blessing may prove a very renl curse by misuse. The ordinance of the Lord's Supper is for our spiritual help and joy, but we may "come together not fur the better, but for the worse." This was so with many of the Corinthians. 'fhey had conjoined to the Lord's Supper the love-feast. To this feast each brought his provision, the rich bringing more, so ns to supply the deficiencies of the poor. From. this supply the bread and wine required for the Lord's Supper were taken. These feasts were the occasions at which the evils reprobated by the apostle occurred. Tho poor were despised and neglected, the congregation became divided into cliques, somo communicants were hungry, and others had drunk to excess. The apostle insists that, under such circumstances, it was impossible to observe aright the sacred feast .of the Lord's Supper. Noto some hindrances to right observance thus suggested. I. PnmE. At the Lord's table all are equal. Conventional distinctions disappear. There is one Lord, and "all ye arc brethren." Arrogance and conceit, always out of  880 'l'HE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. [en. xr. 1-34-