“And for Aaron’s sons thou shalt make coats, and thou shalt make for them girdles, and bonnets shalt thou make for them, for glory and for beauty.”

Ex. 28:40

“Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.    But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.  For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn…“

1 Cor. 11:4-6

“And David went up by the ascent of mount Olivet, and wept as he went up, and had his head covered…  And David said, ‘O Lord, I pray thee, turn the counsel of Ahithophel into foolishness.’…  when David was come to the top of the mount, where he worshipped God…”

2 Sam. 15:30-32

.

.

Subsections

History of Head Coverings
Gillespie & Rutherford on Head Coverings
Natural Gestures, Signs & Customs about Worship, & of Reverence &
.      Veneration vs. Adoration

.

.

Order of Contents

Intro
Bible Verses  90

Early & Medieval Church  15+
Post-Reformation  32+
1700’s & 1800’s  20+

Cultural Veiling  35+
Hair-Buns  18+
Long Hair  7+
Perpetual Veiling  12

Men’s Head Coverings?  v. 4  7+
Men’s Long Hair?  6
‘Head’: Authority, Not Source  v. 3  4
Historical Theology  2
Latin  100+
Biblio

.

.

Intro

In light of 1 Cor. 11:2-16, ought women to wear head-coverings in the public worship of God as a religious principle?  While there is much benefit in this passage of Scripture for Christians, the two most basic questions which guide the understanding of the rest of the text are: (1) Whether Corinthian head-coverings are perpetual, and (2) What were they?  Veils, hair-buns with or without cloth material, or simply neat, let-down long hair (in contrast to wild, long hair or short hair)?

The far-and-away dominant view of the Reformation and puritan era concerning (1), whether head-coverings are perpetual, was that Corinthian head-coverings were relative to their culture (see Head Coverings in the Post-Reformation), for the sake of decency, order and the other arguments Paul gives in the passage.  The Westminster Confession, in ch. 1, section 6, states:

“there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God…  common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word…”

For proof-texts it cites head-coverings (1 Cor. 11:13, 14) and that worship is to be done decently and in order (1 Cor. 14:26, 40).  The Confession does not place the issue in ch. 21 regarding instituted worship, to which the Regulative Principle of Worship most directly applies.

Regarding (2), what the head-coverings were, this cannot be derived from Scripture alone, but is dependent on historical knowledge.  This question is less important to answer than the first.  Concise arguments will be given answering both questions.

.

(1) Argument for Circumstantiality

Travis Fentiman (MDiv, the webmaster) has written one of the most in-depth treatments of head-coverings available, in a scholarly but readable book:

1 Corinthians – Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual & they were Hair-Buns, with or without Material: Proven  (RBO, 2022)  283 pp.

The following is the book’s main, logical argument for the circumstantiality of head-coverings.  Each proposition is thoroughly proved in detail in the book:

1.  All positive, instituted worship must be “expressly set down in Scripture” or “by good and necessary consequence…  deduced” therefrom (WCF 1.6).  This is known as the Regulative Principle of Worship.

2.  In Scripture head-coverings, or the lack thereof, bore a variety of contrary meanings and acceptability, or not, in worship.  See the Bible Verses below.  Hence they were clearly cultural.

3.  Head-coverings cannot be taught by pure-nature and have no intrinsic value for worshipping God.

4.  Paul only uses the language of “dishonor,” “becometh,” “glory” and “custom” about head-coverings, which are all things of social decency, but do not reflect inherent sins.  As with head-coverings, Paul uses imperatives in 1 Cor. 7 about things not intrinsically sinful.

5.  Some apostolic ordinances were circumstantially conditioned and mutable.

6.  Universal moral reasons given for a practice, such as head-coverings, not eating creeping things (Lev. 11:41, 44), the holy kiss, foot-washing, etc. does not necessarily make it perpetual.  A context is assumed and generals can only bind generally.

7.  There is nothing in 1 Cor. 11 necessitating head-coverings to have a different meaning or use in worship than in society.

8.  There is no necessary warrant Corinthian head-coverings were geographically or temporally universal in the apostolic churches; but if they were, this does not itself make an ordinance to be of positive religion, especially as the Greco-Roman culture (which head-coverings were appropriate to) was vast.

9.  Part I’s survey of all the relevant Scriptural head-covering data (consider it for yourself) shows there is no express or good and necessary consequence from these texts that Corinthian head-coverings were a positive, perpetual rite of religion (WCF 21.1) beyond circumstances common to human society, ordered by the light of nature, Christian prudence and the general rules of the Word (WCF 1.6), which things may be culturally relative.

10.  These things being the case, Paul’s statement that improper head-covering “dishonoreth her head,” (v. 5) must be, not prescriptive, but descriptive, as the case was in that society (which it was).  Hence Paul’s natural and spiritual arguments are contingent on this de facto premise.  A change of the premise in a different culture where not covering is not dishonoring, changes the conclusion.

11.  Hence, as there is no express, necessary or valid consequence from Scripture Corinthian head-coverings were a matter of perpetual religion, this cannot be established as doctrine or a religiously binding practice.

12.  To give a use or meaning to head-coverings for worship which nature or society does not bear and God’s Word has not given, is to worship God with a device of men, which God has prohibited by his Word (Mt. 15:9; WCF 21.1).

.

(2) Argument that Paul did Not Require Veiling

The structure of the book’s argument regarding what the Corinthian women were to cover their heads with, is:

1.  The Lexical section shows it is possible, and there is a significant foundation, that “covered” may refer to hair-buns with or without cloth material and “uncovered” to let-down long hair.

2.  This understanding makes the details of 1 Cor. 11 to read seamlessly, with more explanatory power than any other view.

3.  Footnotes 351–52 and the History section (with many pictures) show the
considerable evidence that honorable women in first-century Greece nearly
universally publicly wore bound-up hair, with or without cloth material and that universal veiling was not required.  Bound-up hair without material in it or over it cannot be demonstrated to have been dishonorable by the current data, and a large amount of evidence manifests its honorableness.

4.  Universal female veiling was not required or practiced for pagan religious rites.

5.  Certain exegetical interpretations in 1 Cor. 11 upholding female, unveiled hair-buns cannot be ruled out.

6.  As there is no necessary (and hence valid) consequence from Scripture that Corinthian coverings were formally religious (proved in Part I), so Paul’s ordinance could not have been above and beyond appropriate societal custom, but rather must have been in consistency with it.

7.  Hence, according to the preponderance of historical evidence, Paul did not require of women veiling, but decent, bound-up hair (with or without cloth material).

.

The conclusion to this part of the book summarizes the above succinctly:

That head-coverings are not perpetual, Part I has demonstrated to be by divine law, jure divino.

That being the case, that Paul was not instituting a positive rite above culture, and the Corinthian culture did not practice universal, female veiling (for public decorum or for praying or religious rites), as is historically clear, universal, female veiling in the Corinthian assemblies is historically disproven.

.

Resources

To further familiarize yourself with this subject, we recommend starting with the Word.  Read the listed-out Bible Verses immediately below.

For a fuller understanding of 1 Cor. 11:2-16, be encouraged to invest the time to read Fentiman’s book; you will learn a lot and will reap many rewards.  Paul’s main concern in the passage is to uphold natural decorum, economy and authority.  This has been the majority interpretation throughout Church history as it derives from the reasons Paul himself gives, in contrast to many (especially modern) interpreters who interpret Paul nearly wholly through tangential historical associations not mentioned in or derivable from the text.  Some Modern Applications are given throughout and at the end of the book.

The massive collection of resources throughout Church history on this topic below (including commentaries, treatises, articles, dissertations, etc.) is intentional.  You can benefit from nearly all of them.  Asterisks (**) mark some of the more important treatments.  As Paul did not require veiling alone, and there were likely multiple deviant practices, more than one view (and what it combats) can shed helpful light on the truth.

See what writers in the early Church had to say, the Medieval Church also, the Reformation, and from centuries following up through the latest decades.  The reformed tradition does not have a monopoly of truth on this subject (though it is in the mainline thereof), and reformed divines often recommended writings from other traditions.

Anything that enlightens God’s Word is precious and ought to be sought after.  “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good…  And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly.” (1 Thess. 5:21, 23)

.

.

More Bible Verses

On Men’s Long Hair

Positive

2 Samuel 14:25-26  “But in all Israel there was none to be so much praised as Absalom for his beauty: from the sole of his foot even to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him.  And when he polled [trimmed] his head, (for it was at every year’s end that he polled it: because the hair was heavy on him, therefore he polled it), he weighed the hair of his head at two hundred shekels after the king’s weight.”

Song 5:2  “Open to me, my sister, my love, my dove, my undefiled: for my head is filled with dew, and my locks with the drops of the night.”

Song 5:11  “His head is as the most fine gold, his locks are bushy, and black as a raven.”

Eze. 44:18-21  “Neither shall they [the priests of the eschatological temple] shave their heads, nor suffer their locks to grow long; they shall only poll [trim] their heads.”

[This may suggest that other Israelites often did, and were allowed to, let their hair grow longer.]

.

Negative

Rev. 9:7-8  “…and their faces were as the faces of men.  And they had hair as the hair of women, and their teeth were as the teeth of lions.”

.

Men Prophesying & Praying with Long Hair

1 Sam. 1:11  “And she [Hannah] vowed a vow, and said, ‘O Lord of hosts…  give unto thine handmaid a man child, then I will give him unto the Lord all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his head.'”

1 Sam. 3:15-18  “And Samuel feared to shew Eli the vision…  And Samuel told him every whit, and hid nothing from him.”

1 Sam. 8:10  “And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people that asked of him a king.”

1 Sam. 12:23  “God forbid that I should sin against the Lord in ceasing to pray for you: but I will teach you the good and the right way…”

.

On Long Hair for Men in Taking Vows to the Lord

Num. 6:2-5, 13-18  “When either man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite, to separate themselves unto the Lord…  All the days of the vow of his separation there shall no razor come upon his head: until the days be fulfilled, in the which he separateth himself unto the Lord, he shall be holy, and shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow…

And this is the law of the Nazarite, when the days of his separation are fulfilled: he shall be brought unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation: and he shall offer his offering unto the Lord…  And the Nazarite shall shave the head of his separation at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall take the hair of the head of his separation, and put it in the fire which is under the sacrifice of the peace offerings.”

Judges 16:17-22  “There hath not come a razor upon mine [Samson’s] head; for I have been a Nazarite unto God from my mother’s womb: if I be shaven, then my strength will go from me, and I shall become weak…  Howbeit the hair of his head began to grow again after he was shaven.”

1 Sam. 1:11  “And she [Hannah] vowed a vow, and said, ‘O Lord of hosts, if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thine handmaid…  give unto thine handmaid a man child, then I will give him unto the Lord all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his head.'”

Acts 18:18  “And Paul…  having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.”

Acts 21:23-24  “We have four men which have a vow on them; Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads…”

.

On Men without Head Coverings

1 Sam. 10:1  “Then Samuel took a vial of oil, and poured it upon his head, and kissed him…”

2 Kings 9:6  “…and he poured the oil on his head, and said unto him, ‘Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I have anointed thee king over the people of the Lord…'”

Song 5:2  “…for my head is filled with dew, and my locks with the drops of the night.”

Eze. 8:3  “And He [God] put forth the form of an hand, and took me by a lock of mine head; and the spirit lifted me up between the earth and the heaven, and brought me in the visions of God to Jerusalem…”

Jonah 4:8  “…and the sun beat upon the head of Jonah, that he fainted, and wished in himself to die…”

Mt. 26:7  “There came unto Him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as He sat at meat.”

Mk. 15:17  “And they clothed Him with purple, and platted a crown of thorns, and put it about his head…”

Rev. 1:14  “His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;”

.

Head Coverings on People Generally

Isa. 28:5  “In that day shall the Lord of hosts be for a crown of glory, and for a diadem [tsaniph, turban] of beauty, unto the residue of his people…”

Isa 62:3-4  “Thou shalt also be a crown of glory in the hand of the Lord, and a royal diadem [tsaniph, turban] in the hand of thy God.  Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken…”

Eze. 13:16-22  “…the prophets of Israel which prophesy concerning Jerusalem, and which see visions of peace for her, and there is no peace, saith the Lord God.  Likewise…  the daughters of thy people, which prophesy out of their own heart…

…Thus saith the Lord God; Woe to the women that sew pillows to all armholes [to the elbows and wrists], and make kerchiefs upon the head of every stature [of person] to hunt souls!  Will ye hunt the souls of my people, and will ye save the souls alive that come unto you?

And will ye pollute me among my people for handfuls of barley and for pieces of bread, to slay the souls that should not die, and to save the souls alive that should not live, by your lying to my people that hear your lies?

Wherefore thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against your pillows, wherewith ye there hunt the souls to make them fly, and I will tear them from your arms…  Your kerchiefs also will I tear, and deliver my people out of your hand…  Because with lies ye have made the heart of the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life:”

[See commentators on these verses.  It appears that men and women set themselves up as prophets (or were already recognized as prophets) and had people pay to come to them to hear their prophecies of peace and security to Israel (and of threats to the righteous) when the Lord was against Israel.  Thus women sewed pads of ease to cloaks which the false prophets adorned themselves and their inquirers with as a symbol of their security and comfort.  They also adorned them with some sort of head covering as a testament to their prosperity.]

.

On Male Head Coverings & Turbans

Eze. 23:14-15  “…men portrayed upon the wall, the images of the Chaldeans pourtrayed with vermilion, girded with girdles upon their loins, exceeding in dyed attire upon their heads, all of them princes to look to, after the manner of the Babylonians of Chaldea…”

Dan. 3:21  “Then these men were bound in their coats, their hosen, and their hats, and their other garments, and were cast into the midst of the burning fiery furnace.”

Zech. 3:4-5  “I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment.  And I said, ‘Let them set a fair mitre upon his head.’  So they set a fair mitre upon his head, and clothed him with garments.”

.

Men Metaphorically Wearing Head Coverings

Job 29:14  “I [Job] put on righteousness, and it clothed me: my judgment was as a robe and a diadem [tsaniph, turban].”

Prov. 1:8-9  “My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother:  For they shall be an ornament of grace unto thy head, and chains about thy neck.”

Prov. 4:9-10  “She [Wisdom] shall give to thine head an ornament of grace: a crown of glory shall she deliver to thee.  Hear, O my son, and receive my sayings…”

.

Men Praying & Prophesying with a Metaphorical Helmet on

Ps. 140:7-8  “O God the Lord, the strength of my salvation, thou hast covered my head in the day of battle.  Grant not, O Lord, the desires of the wicked…”

1 Thess. 5:8, 17  “But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation…  Pray without ceasing.”

.

God with a Metaphorical Helmet, Prophesying

Isa. 59:17, 21  “For He put on righteousness as a breastplate, and an helmet of salvation upon his head; and he put on the garments of vengeance for clothing…  As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed…”

.

A Man Praying with Covered Head, Extraordinary

Jonah 2:1-5  “Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord his God out of the fish’s belly, and said…  ‘I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and He heard me…  The waters compassed me about, even to the soul…  the weeds were wrapped about my head…”

.

On the Head Coverings & Hair of Male Priests, who Prayed by Office

Ex. 28:40  “And for Aaron’s sons thou shalt make coats, and thou shalt make for them girdles, and bonnets shalt thou make for them, for glory and for beauty.”

Lev. 10:6  [After Nadab & Abihu were killed:]  “And Moses said unto Aaron, and unto Eleazar and unto Ithamar, his sons, ‘Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes; lest ye die, and lest wrath come upon all the people: but let your brethren, the whole house of Israel, bewail the burning which the Lord hath kindled.'”

Lev. 21:10-12  “And he that is the high priest among his brethren, upon whose head the anointing oil was poured, and that is consecrated to put on the garments, shall not uncover his head, nor rend his clothes; Neither shall he go in to any dead body, nor defile himself for his father, or for his mother; Neither shall he go out of the sanctuary, nor profane the sanctuary of his God; for the crown of the anointing oil of his God is upon him…”

Eze. 44:18-21  “They [the priests] shall have linen bonnets upon their heads…  they shall not gird themselves with any thing that causeth sweat.  And when they go forth into the utter court…  they shall put off their garments wherein they ministered, and lay them in the holy chambers, and they shall put on other garments…  Neither shall they shave their heads, nor suffer their locks to grow long; they shall only poll [trim] their heads.”

.

On Veils Covering the Face of Men

Ex. 34:29-35  “And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai…  that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him…  behold, the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him…  And till Moses had done speaking with them, he put a vail on his face.

But when Moses went in before the Lord to speak with him, he took the vail off, until he came out…  And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses’ face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him.”

2 Cor. 3:13-15  “And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:  But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.  But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.”

.

Apparently Unveiled Women

Gen. 12:14  “And it came to pass, that, when Abram was come into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman [Sarah] that she was very fair.”

Gen. 20:15-16  “And Abimelech said…  unto Sarah…  ‘…behold, he [Abraham] is to thee a covering [veil] of the eyes, unto all that are with thee, and with all other: thus she was reproved.”

[The royal Egyptian women here likely wore headcoverings and/or veils, whereas the common egyptian women did not normally.  Women in or from rural areas, such as Sarah, may have been less likely to cover as well.  This was a rebuff to Sarah to be more modest, at least in concentrated public, given her beauty.]

Gen. 24:16  “And the damsel [Rachel] was very fair to look upon, a virgin, neither had any man known her: and she went down to the well, and filled her pitcher, and came up.”

Gen. 29:10  “And it came to pass, when Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother’s brother, and the sheep of Laban…  that Jacob went near…”

Lk. 7:37-38  “And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house…  began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head…”

.

Women Covering on Special Occasions: Weddings, Feasts, Ornamentation, Prostitution, etc.

At Weddings

Gen. 24:64-67  “And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she lighted off the camel.  For she had said unto the servant, ‘What man is this that walketh in the field to meet us?’  And the servant had said, ‘It is my master’: therefore she took a vail, and covered herself…  And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife;”

[This verse shows that Rebekah was not covering herself at all times.  Besides the modesty issue here for the special occasion, Rebekah putting on a veil may have had a reference to a bride veiling herself at a wedding, as the custom was.]

Gen. 29:23-25  “…in the evening, that he [Laban] took Leah his daughter, and brought her to him [Jacob]; and he went in unto her…  And it came to pass, that in the morning, behold, it was Leah: and he said to Laban, What is this thou hast done unto me? did not I serve with thee for Rachel? wherefore then hast thou beguiled me?”

.

At Celebrations, Feasts & Special Occasions

Ruth 3:14-15  “And she [Ruth] lay at his [Boaz’s] feet until the morning: and she rose up before one could know another…  he said, ‘Bring the vail that thou hast upon thee, and hold it.’  And when she held it, he measured six measures of barley, and laid it on her: and she went into the city.”

[This was at a harvest celebration.]

1 Sam. 1:12; 2:1  “And it came to pass, as she [Hannah] continued praying before the Lord, that Eli marked her mouth [Her face was not veiled]…  And Hannah prayed, and said, ‘My heart rejoiceth in the Lord, mine horn [tantura, head-dress] is exalted in the Lord…'”

[Note that this was at a festal ocassion, 1 Sam. 1:3-5.]

.

For Ornamentation

2 Kings 9:30-31  “…Jezebel heard of it; and she painted her face, and [at]tired her head, and looked out at a window.  And as Jehu entered in at the gate, she said…”

Song 4:1,3  “Behold, thou art fair, my love…  thou hast doves’ eyes within thy locks [tsammah, veil]: thy hair is as a flock of goats that appear from mount Gilead…  thy temples are like a piece of a pomegranate within thy locks [veil].”

Song 6:7  “As a piece of a pomegranate are thy temples within thy locks [tsammah, veil].”

Isa. 3:16-24  “Moreover the Lord saith, Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet… 

In that day the Lord will take away the bravery of their tinkling ornaments about their feet, and their cauls [head-dresses, head-bands or head-scarves], and their round tires like the moon, the chains, and the bracelets, and the mufflers [or veils], the bonnets [or head-dresses], and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the tablets, and the earrings, the rings, and nose jewels, the changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping pins, the glasses, and the fine linen, and the hoods [tsaniph], and the vails.  

And it shall come to pass, that instead of sweet smell there shall be stink; and instead of a girdle a rent; and instead of well set hair baldness…”

Eze. 16:10-11  “I clothed thee also with broidered work, and shod thee with badgers’ skin, and I girded thee about with fine linen [respecting a turban], and I covered thee with silk.  I decked thee also with ornaments…”

[This may also have reference to a wedding, Eze. 16:8.]

.

For Prostitution

Gen. 38:14-15  “And she put her widow’s garments off from her, and covered her with a vail, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way to Timnath…  When Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot; because she had covered her face.”

Gen. 38:18-19, 22  “And he…  came in unto her [for the act of prostitution], and she conceived by him.  And she arose, and went away, and laid by her vail from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood…  And he returned to Judah, and said, ‘I cannot find her’;”

.

On Womens’ Hair in Public & Church Assemblies

1 Tim. 2:9-12  “In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.  Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”

1 Pet. 3:3  “Likewise, ye wives…  whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;”

.

On Mourning, Shame & Humbling Oneself or Another Person

Lev. 13:45  “And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent, and his head bare, and he shall put a covering upon his upper lip, and shall cry, Unclean, unclean.”

[Going bare headed here was likely a sign of mourning, here used by the leper, whether male or female, meaning that men also commonly covered their heads.  Yet this extraordinary practice is exactly the opposite as the custom for mourning in David’s time, as seen in 2 Sam. 15:30-32, and that of Haman in Ezra 6:12.]

Num. 5:18  “And the priest shall set the woman before the Lord, and uncover the woman’s head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering…”

[The phrase may be translated “unloose”, that is her covering, turban or hair.]

Dt. 21:11-13  “And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife;  Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails;  And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.”

1 Sam. 4:12  “And there ran a man of Benjamin out of the army, and came to Shiloh the same day with his clothes rent, and with earth upon his head.”

2 Sam. 13:19  “And Tamar put ashes on her head, and rent her garment of diverse colors that was on her, and laid her hand on her head, and went on crying.”

2 Sam. 15:30-32  “And David went up by the ascent of mount Olivet, and wept as he went up, and had his head covered, and he went barefoot: and all the people that was with him covered every man his head, and they went up, weeping as they went up.

…And David said, ‘O Lord, I pray thee, turn the counsel of Ahithophel into foolishness.’

…when David was come to the top of the mount, where he worshipped God, behold, Hushai the Archite came to meet him with his coat rent, and earth upon his head:”

1 Kings 20:30-32  “And Benhadad [king of Aram-Damascus] fled, and came into the city, into an inner chamber.  And his servants said unto him, ‘…let us, I pray thee, put sackcloth on our loins, and ropes upon our heads, and go out to the king of Israel: peradventure he will save thy life.  So they girded sackcloth on their loins, and put ropes on their heads, and came to the king of Israel…”

Esther 6:12  “But Haman hasted to his house mourning, and having his head covered.”

Job 19:9  “He hath stripped me of my glory, and taken the crown from my head.”

Song 5:7  “The watchmen that went about the city found me, they smote me, they wounded me; the keepers of the walls took away my veil from me.”

Isa. 47:1-3  “Come down, and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon, sit on the ground: there is no throne…  for thou shalt no more be called tender and delicate.  Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers.  Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen:”

Jer. 14:3-4  “…they were ashamed and confounded, and covered their heads.  Because the ground is chapt, for there was no rain in the earth, the plowmen were ashamed, they covered their heads.”

.

On Shaving the Head & making Bald

Ezra 9:3  “And when I heard this thing, I rent my garment and my mantle, and plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, and sat down astonied.”

Neh. 13:25  “And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, ‘Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons…'”

Job 1:20  “Then Job arose, and rent his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell down upon the ground, and worshipped…”

Isa. 3:24  “And it shall come to pass…  instead of a girdle a rent; and instead of well set hair baldness; and instead of a stomacher a girding of sackcloth…”

Isa. 7:20  “In the same day shall the Lord shave [the kingdom of Judah] with a razor that is hired, namely…  by the king of Assyria, the head, and the hair of the feet: and it shall also consume the beard.”

Isa. 50:6  “I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting.”

Jer. 7:29  “Cut off thine hair, O Jerusalem, and cast it away, and take up a lamentation on high places; for the Lord hath rejected and forsaken the generation of his wrath.”

Jer. 48:37-38  “For every head shall be bald, and every beard clipped: upon all the hands shall be cuttings, and upon the loins sackcloth.  There shall be lamentation generally upon all the housetops of Moab…”

Eze. 5:1-2  “And thou, son of man, take thee a sharp knife, take thee a barber’s razor, and cause it to pass upon thine head and upon thy beard: then take thee balances to weigh, and divide the hair.  Thou shalt burn with fire a third part in the midst of the city, when the days of the siege are fulfilled…”

Eze. 7:18  “They shall also gird themselves with sackcloth, and horror shall cover them; and shame shall be upon all faces, and baldness upon all their heads.”

Amos 8:10  “And I will turn your feasts into mourning, and all your songs into lamentation; and I will bring up sackcloth upon all loins, and baldness upon every head; and I will make it as the mourning of an only son, and the end thereof as a bitter day.”

.

On Heavenly Creatures Covering, or Not, in Worship, & with Respect to Feet

Ex. 3:5  “And He said, ‘Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.'”

Ex. 25:20  “And the cherubims shall stretch forth their wings on high, covering the mercy seat with their wings, and their faces shall look one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubims be.”

Isa. 6:1-2  “…I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne…  and his train filled the temple.  Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly.”

Isa. 7:20  “In the same day shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired, namely, by them beyond the river, by the king of Assyria, the head, and the hair of the feet: and it shall also consume the beard.”

Rev. 10:1, 5-6  “And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun…  And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever and ever…”

.

On that which is Contrary to Nature

Dt. 22:5  “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.”

Rom. 1:26-27  “For this cause God gave them up unto vile [atimia] affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature [physis]:  And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly [aschemosunen], and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

[Compare this with 1 Cor. 11:4, ‘dishonors’, aschemosunen, and verse 14, ‘Does not even nature, physis, itself teach you, that if a man have long hair, it is a shame [atimia] unto him?’]

1 Cor. 6:9-11  “Be not deceived: neither fornicators…  nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind…  shall inherit the kingdom of God.  And such were some of you: but ye are washed…”

.

.

Early Church

Collections of Fathers

E-Catena – 1 Cor. 11

Catena Bible – 1 Cor. 11  Click on the verses for excerpts

.

100’s

Irenaeus – Against Heresies, bk. 1, ch. 8, section 2, mid  in ANF 1.327

Irenaeus (c. 130 – c. 202)

Clement of Alexandria – The Instructor  in ANF 2.286-90

bk. 3, ch. 11, ‘The Hair’, p. 286, rt col, top

‘Painting the Face’, p. 288, lt col, bot’

‘Going to Church’, p. 290

Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 – c.215).  These selections mainly show the style of headdress and customs popular in Clement’s day and locale.

.

200’s

** Tertullian

‘On the Veiling of Virgins’  in ANF 4.27-38

On the background to this work, see Mary Fellman, ‘The Social Context Of Tertullian’s ‘On The Veiling Of Virgins”  MA thesis  (Cornell Univ., 2009), especially ch. 2, pp. 13-21 as well as the first part of Everett Ferguson, ‘Of Veils & Virgins: Greek, Roman, Jewish & Early Christian Practice’  Restoration Quarterly, 56, no. 4 (2014), pp. 223-43.

‘On the Apparel of Women’  in ANF 4.21-22, 24-25

ch. 6, ‘Of Dying the Hair’
ch. 7, ‘Of Elaborate Dressing of the Hair in Other Ways…’
ch. 11, ‘Christian women, further, have not the same causes for appearing in public, and hence for dressing in fine array, as gentiles…’
ch. 12, ‘Such outward adornments meretricious, and therefore unsuitable to modest women’

‘On Prayer’  in ANF 3.685-86, 687-89

ch. 15, ‘Of Putting Off Cloaks’
ch. 20, ‘Of Women’s Dress’
ch. 21, ‘Of Virgins’
ch. 22, ‘Answers to the Foregoing Arguments’

.

300’s

Ambrose – NPNF2, vol. 10

ch. 46, section 232  in Duties of the Clergy, bk. 1, pp. 37-8

ch. 14, section 69  in Concerning Repentance, bk. 1, p. 340

Ambrose (c. 339-397)

Chrysostom – Homily 26, on 1 Cor. 11:2 ff.  in The Homilies of S. John Chrysostom…  on the First Epistle of St. Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, Part I, Homilies I-XXIV  (Oxford, 1839), pp. 348-68

Chrysostom (347-407)

The following shows that Chrysostom understood the veil to be on par with other regular garments, taught by the light of nature, it not being a religiously appointed rite:

“For if exchange of garments be not lawful, so that neither she should be clad with a cloak, nor he with a mantle or a veil (‘for the woman,’ says He, ‘shall not wear that which pertains to a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment,’ Dt. 22:5) much more is it unseemly for these things to be interchanged.  For the former indeed were ordained by men, even although God afterwards ratified them: but this by nature, I mean the being covered or uncovered.  But when I say nature, I mean God.  For He it is who created Nature.  When therefore thou overturns these boundaries, see how great injuries ensue.” – p. 355

“He signifies [by v. 10] that not at the time of prayer only, but also continually she ought to be covered.” – p. 356

“And he said not, ‘let her have long hair,’ but, ‘let her be covered,’ [v. 6] ordaining both these to be one [v. 5], and establishing them both ways, from what was customary…” – p. 357

“For if one ought not to have the head bare, but everywhere to carry about the token of subjection, much more is it becoming to exhibit the same in our deeds.” – p. 361

Chrysostom on the man’s head-covering:

“Their women used both to pray and prophesy unveiled, and with their head bare, (for even women also used to prophesy) but the men went so far to wear long hair, as having spent their time in philosophy and covered their heads when praying and prophesying, each[?] of which was a Grecian custom.” – p. 349

“He said not ‘covered’ [in v. 4], but ‘having anything on his head.’” – p. 356

Chrysostom understands the man’s head-covering to include men having long hair (pp. 349, 355), men using a female mantle or veil covering (p. 355), and implicitly of using a male, cloak covering (p. 356, compare p. 355).  Some scholars have interpreted his use of kome (hair) for men (e.g. p. 356) as a coiffure.

Macarius – Spiritual Homilies, Homily 12, sections 15 & 17  in Fifty Spiritual Homilies of St. Macarius the Egyptian  ed. A.J. Mason  (SPCK, 1921), pp. 96-98

Macarius (c. 300–391) understands the woman’s covering as her natural long hair.

.

400’s

Jerome – Epistle 147, section 5  in NPNF2, vol. 6

Jerome (c. 342 – c. 347,– 420)

.

Augustine

Epistle 245, section 1  in NPNF1, vol. 1

Of the Work of Monks, sections 39-40  in NPNF1 3.522-23

.

.

Medieval Church

1200’s

Aquinas, Thomas – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentary on 1 Corinthians

on vv. 4-7:

“For this is true in the majority of cases that women take more pains with their hair than men.  Therefore, it seems to be a condition suitable to women that they use an artificial covering for the head more than men.”

“…to show that the glory of God should not be concealed but revealed; but man’s glory is to be concealed.”

.

on v. 16:

“By ‘nature’ he means the ‘natural inclination’ in women to take care of their hair, which is a natural covering, but not in men.”

“Hence Augustine says: ‘In all cases in which sacred Scripture has defined nothing definite, the customs of the people of God and the edicts of superiors must be regarded as the law.’”

.

.

Post-Reformation

1500’s

Colet, John – 1 Cor. 11  (d. 1511)

Colet (1467–1519) was a reforming, English, humanist, Roman Catholic Priest who was critical of the Church and was a friend of Erasmus.

Erasmus, Desiderius – 1 Cor. 11  in The Second Tome or Volume of the Paraphrase of Erasmus upon the New Testament…  (London, 1549), pp. xxx-xxxi

Erasmus (1466 –1536)

** Vermigli, Peter Martyr – pt. 1, ch. 3, ‘Concerning Prophesy, out of 1 Sam. 19:33’  in The Common Places  (d. 1562; [London, 1583]), pp. 17-24

** Calvin, John

1 Cor. 11  in Commentary

Men, Women & Order in the Church: Three Sermons by John Calvin, trans. Seth Skolnitsky (Dallas, TX: Presbyterian Heritage Publications, 1992)  63 pp.

These three sermons on the passage translated from the French are different from his commentary.  In both sources he takes the cultural, customary view.  See especially pp. 7-10 & 24 of this work for that.

Geneva Bible – 1 Corinthians

Beza, Theodore – 1 Cor. 11

Willet, Andrew – ‘An Appendix concerning the Name of Jesus’  in Synopsis Papismi…  (London, 1592), 9th Controversy, Saints Departed, 2nd part, 5th Question, 2nd Part on the Sign of the Cross, pp. 361-2

Willet critiques the Papal (and Anglican) practice of bowing and removing one’s hat at the name of Jesus (but not of Christ, God, etc.).  In the era, when declarations of the king were read, and the king’s name was mentioned, the people, out of showing honor, would remove their caps and then put them back on.  This societal custom was apparently the foundation for the religious practice.

.

1600’s

Mayer, John – 1 Cor. 11  (1631)

Mayer was a reformed Bible commentator.

** Ames, William

ch. 3, section 28, ‘The Covering & Uncovering of the Head at Divine Service’  in A Reply to Dr. Morton’s General Defence of Three Nocent [Noxious] Ceremonies….  ([Amsterdam] 1622), pp. 48-54

Ames (d. 1633) was an English, congregationalist puritan who wrote foundational works for reformed worship.

“… it was a civil or­der of decency, used as well out of God’s worship, as in it…

…there is in man’s superiority a kind of resem­blance of God’s sovereignty: and so there is also, as Calvin obser­ves, in omni principatu, in all superior power: so that this makes covering and uncovering, no more a religious significant ceremo­ny than the upper seat of a heathen magistrate sitting in judge­ment: for by that seat is signified a superiority, in which there is some image of God’s sovereignty…  And the apostle does show plainly that the vail he speaks of was of the same nature with long hair.  So that, by the Defence’s reason, men’s short, and women’s long hair, must be accounted religious mystical ceremonies.

…it was required that they should be observed in holy assemblies.  But 1. it was not only required in God’s pub­lic worship, but also as Calvin upon the place grants…  ‘in any grave meeting of men and women.’  And Institutes, bk. 4, ch. 10, section 29…  ‘whensoever they go into pub­lic places.’  2. It was not instituted primarily and principally for God’s worship.  If it were, I ask, when and by whom?  Paul surely did not institute a new ceremony in this place: for v. 14, he grounds his admonition upon nature, as Calvin well expoun­ds it, upon a received use and ancient custom in those parts: which some through lightness began unseemly to transgress.

…it is indifferent in the general na­ture of it; yet at that time, and in that place, they sinned that did otherwise, even before Paul or any of their overseers gave them charge about it.

Lastly (says he), it is worthy our inquiry to learn how far other Churches may be directed by this example?  I answer, so far just as the apostle’s rule stretches, 1 Cor. 14:40, ‘Let all things be done comely.'”

‘Concerning Women’s Veils, 1 Cor. 11’  being ch. 3, section 28 of A Fresh Suit Against Human Ceremonies in Worship  (1633), pp. 345-50  GB

The flow of this piece by Ames is complex as he is summarizing the back and forth polemics of numerous publications that went before him.  He concludes at the very end that the veil in no way justifies the prelate’s appointment of human ceremonies to God’s worship.

Through the article Ames in general is approving of the Replier, and is against the Defense and the Rejoinder.  Ames appears to be approving of these statements:

“…the vail was neither apostolical, nor merely of human institution, nor of instituted signification, nor yet appropriated unto God’s worship: but a civil order of decency, used as well out of God’s worship as in it.”, p. 345

“The Replier said it was a civil order of decency, expressing the immediate end, which it had as well in, as out of worship, which will well bear this conclusion: that it was no more religious than women’s proper apparel, long garments, etc. (to which Chrysostom upon 1 Cor. 11) compares the vail, as one part to another, or their shoes, or slippers are.”, p. 345

“…it [the veil] did declare, or argue a good thing, as indeed all civil apparrel of modest fashion does.”, p. 346

“…yet I never heard all modest apparel called a mystical religious ceremony.”, p. 346

” this indeed was required in every grave meeting of men and women: but not primarily and principally instituted for God’s worship.  Paul surely did not institute them for new ceremonies, but only urged the Corinthians not to neglect them, as being natural.”, p. 349

“I may well again repeat (as justified) the Replier’s conclusion: Seeing the Defense could find but three examples of human ceremonies in all the New Testament, and none of those there can be showed to be of mystical signification, or appropriated only to God’s worship, or of human institution, the Prelates may be ashamed…”

** Gillespie, George – Part 3, ch. 9, ‘That the lawfulness of the [English-Popish] ceremonies, cannot be warranted by the Law of Nature’  in A Dispute Against the English-Popish Ceremonies…  (1637), pp. 197-202  See especially pp. 200-202

a Lapide, Cornelius – 1 Cor. 11

a Lapide (d. 1637) was a Romanist.  This work was recommended by Voet (Exercitia, p. 521).

Dutch Annotations – 1 Cor. 11  (1637 / 1657)

Mede, Joseph – Sermon on 1 Cor. 11:5  in Diatribae Discourses on Diverse Texts of Scripture  (London, 1642-1648), Discourses on Diverse Texts of Scripture  (London, 1642-1648), pp. 173-83

Diodati, John – 1 Cor. 11  (1643)

English Annotations, Daniel Featley – 1 Cor. 11  (1645)

Featley was an episcopalian Westminster divine.

** Rutherford, Samuel – pp. 89-90  of Introduction, section 6  in The Divine Right of Church Government…  (London, 1646)

This is Rutherford’s main section on the topic, though he addresses it in other places.  See Gillespie & Rutherford on Head Coverings.

Leigh, Edward – 1 Cor. 11  (1650)

Firmin, Giles – p. 22 in Stablishing against Shaking: or a Discovery of the…  Deluded People called, Quakers…  (London, 1656)

Firmin was an English clergyman with Independent, puritan leanings.

Dickson, David – 1 Cor. 11  in An Exposition of all St. Paul’s Epistles, together with an Explanation of those other Epistles of the Apostles, St. James, Peter, John & Jude  (1659), ch. 16

Dickson was a leading Scottish covenanter.

Hammond, Henry – 1 Cor. 11  (1659)

Hammond (1605–1660) was an Anglican, royalist, Arminian.

** Hall, Joseph – The Women’s Vail, or a Discourse concerning the Necessity or Expedience of the Close-Covering of the Heads of Women…  Occasioned by an offence unjustly taken at a Modest Dress  on 1 Cor. 11:10  in The Shaking of the Olive-Tree, the Remaining Works of that Incomparable Prelate Joseph Hall…  (London, 1660), pp. 236-52

Hall (1574-1656) was a godly Anglican bishop who here argues that hair length and coverings are variable cultural customs, against persons in his day and vicinity that held to an absolute head-covering position, that all of the woman’s hair under it ought not to be seen.

** Durel, John – The Liturgy of the Church of England Asserted in a Sermon…  on 1 Cor. 11:16  Ref  (1662)  362 pp.

Durel (1625–1683) was an Anglican cleric known for his apologetical writing on behalf of the Church of England. He was Dean of Windsor since 1677.

This gives a survey of head-covering practices in the Post-Reformation era (according to his Anglican bias).  He is not altogether accurate.  See Henry Hickman’s (an English puritan) response and corrections on the page, Head Coverings in the Post-Reformation.

Lightfoot, John – 1 Cor. 11

Lightfoot (1602–1675).  Lightfoot’s interpretative paradigm is overly dependent on Jewish, rabbinic sources, not all of which may be confidently reflective of practice in the 1st century.

Trapp, John – 1 Cor. 11

Baxter, Richard – 1 Cor. 11

Walker, Obadiah – 1 Cor. 11  in A Paraphrase and Annotations upon the Epistles of St. Paul written to the Romans, Corinthians, and Hebrews  (Oxford, 1675)

Walker was an Anglican.

** Poole, Matthew – 1 Cor. 11

Poole was an English, presbyterian puritan.  This is one of the most important treatments.

Stoddon, Samuel – An Essay on a Question Relating to Divine Worship viz. Whether it be Contrary to the Apostolical Laws of Decency & Reverence for a Man to have his Head Covered in the Time & Place of God’s Solemn Public Worship?: Affirmative.  (London: Maxwell, 1682)  56 pp.  ToC

Stoddon was an English, congregationalist minister.  He puts the issue in his day under cultural decency, not something prescribed as universal by the apostle.  The presbyterian practice was for men to wear hats in the service, but take them off for prayer and singing, as they did in regular society to show subservience and honor to others.  Stoddon argues for having them off for the whole service, inline with the Anglican practice.  As he is trying to persuade the rest of his non-conformist brethren (see ch. 5), so much of their practice, it seems, was for men to wear hats in parts of the service.

“The evangelical ceremonies [in the NT] are either natural or instituted.  The natural either common or proper.  The common natural ceremonies of religion, are such as are equally used in civil and in religious matters, as bowing the knee, uncovering the head, and some other things which respect that civil order, reverence, and decency, which ought to be observed in the external (and especially in the public) worship of God.  The proper are such as are not used but in the matters of religion.  The instituted ceremonies of the Gospel strictly and properly taken in contradistinction to natural, and which are designed to be of perpetual use, are only the two Sacraments…

yet in a large sense even natural ceremonies, and matters of real decency and order, that is such things as are ex natura rei, pro hic et nunc [from the nature of the thing, here and now], necessary hereunto, and acceptable in the worship of God, are instituted too, i.e. commanded either implicitly or explicitly; for nothing offered by man, especially in worship, which is not in obedience to God, by virtue of some command, is honorable or acceptable to God; but what God has commanded, He has thereby instituted.

So then, the matter in hand will fall under the notion of a common, natural ceremony of religion, pertaining to the decency or reverence of God’s worship in the public assemblies of his saints.” – pp. 3-4

Thomas, Samuel – section 8  in Animadversions upon a Late Treatise, entitled, The Protestant Reconciler…  (London, 1683), pp. 109-28

Thomas (1627–1693) was an Anglican clergyman, and quotes numerous reformed commentators (including L. Cappel, whose Latin work is in Critici Sacri, vol. 7).  He uses Corinthian head-coverings to justify human, significant ceremonies.

Witsius, Herman – pp. 84-90  of Dissertation 4, ‘On Gestures in Prayer’  in Sacred Dissertations on the Lord’s Prayer  (1689; Edinburgh: Thomas Clark, 1708)

“Paul, when writing to the Corinthians who were Greeks, gives the preference to that [Greek] custom [of men having an uncovered head in worship].  In doing so, he did not intend to lay down a universal law which should be everywhere observed.  He merely accommodated himself to a custom of civil life observed, at that time, by those to whom he was writing.  This is admirably, I think, explained by [Johann H.] Altingius in a discourse already quoted…

It must not be supposed that the same rule which he had given to the Corinthians from a regard to their customs would have been invariably given to Jews dwelling in their own country, or to Egyptians or Arabians, who followed a different custom.  The usages of civil life are endlessly varied by place and time.  Consequently what, at one place and time, is sufficiently becoming, would be, at anotlier place and time highly unbecoming.

Yet the apostolic rule has been in force, since that time, among almost all Christians.  Is it because keeping the head uncovered is universally regarded by them as a token of reverence?  I hardly think so.  It has spread widely in the north, through the nations of France and Germany.  But among the Jews, the Greeks, ancient Italy, and the whole of the East, the custom is wholly unknown.  It appears, therefore, to belong to the liberty of the New Testament.  ‘With uncovered head,’ says Tertullian, ‘because we are not ashamed.'”

** Edwards, John – The 2nd Text Inquired into, 1 Cor. 11:14  in An Enquiry into Four Remarkable Texts of the New Testament which Contain Some Difficulty in Them…  (Cambridge, 1692), pp. 27-136

“He lets them know that both these kinds of disorders are repugnant to the institution of God and the dictates of reason.  But especially the latter of these practises is confuted here by an appeal to nature, which is a comprehensive topic, and you may understand by it the general dictate of natural reason, and the particular law of nature concerning distinction of sexes, as also usage and custom, which is a second nature…

In a word, a man must not be like a woman either as to her veil and covering or as to her long and dressed hair, because he is taught
otherwise by the law of reason, and by that of the sex, and even by the practice and custom of the soberest part of the world, which are all comprised in the large extent of the word ‘nature’ in this place of the apostle.” – pp. 135-36

Le Clerc, Jean – 1 Cor. 11  in A Supplement to Dr. Hammond’s Paraphrase & Annotations on the New Testament...  (London, 1699), pp. 338-44

Le Clerc (1657-36) was a Christian skeptic, but nonetheless his treatment is useful, and he provides a great quote by Augustine (top of p. 341).

.

.

1700’s Commentaries

Burkitt, William – 1 Cor. 11  in Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament...  4th ed.  (1709)

Burkitt was an Anglican.

** Matthew Henry’s Commentary, Simon Browne – 1 Cor. 11

Henry died part way through Romans; Browne filled out Henry’s outline notes on 1 Corinthians.

** Mather, Cotton – 1 Cor. 11  in Biblica Americana, America’s First Bible Commentary, vol. 9 (†; Tubingen: Siebeck, 2018), pp. 262-80

Mather (1663-1728) was a New England puritan.  A full treatment, especially on historical details.

Gough, Strickland – A Critical Dissertation on 1 Cor. 11:10  (1742)  in Sermons on the Following Subject…  to which is added A Critical Dissertation on 1 Cor. 11:10  (London, 1751), pp. 420-72

Gough (d. 1752) was from a dissenting, presbyterian background, but criticized the dissenting movement and eventually conformed, becoming an Anglican minister.  He held that the Corinthian coverings were local and temporal (p. 469).

Pearce, Zachary – 1 Cor. 11  in A Commentary, with Notes, on the Four Evangelists, and the Acts of the Apostles: together with a New Translation of St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians, with a Paraphrase & Notes  (1777), vol. 2

Pearce (1690–1774) was an Anglican bishop.

Gill, John – 1 Cor. 11

Gill was calvinistic baptist.  He majors on Jewish traditions, following in Lightfoot’s path.

Brown of Haddington, John – 1 Cor. 11  (d. 1787)

Brown was a minister and professor in the Scottish Secession Church.

Leland, Thomas – Sermon 26, ‘On Female Attire’  on 1 Cor. 11:5  in Sermons on Various Subjects, vol. 2 of 3  (Dublin, 1788), pp. 297-322

Wesley, John – 1 Cor. 11  (1791)

A sane commentary on the passage.

.

.

1800’s

Conservative or Middle of the Road

Clarke, Adam – 1 Cor. 11  (d. 1832)

Clarke was a British Wesleyan.

Chalmers, Thomas – 1 Cor. 11 in Sabbath Scripture Readings

Chalmers (1780–1847) was a minister and professor of the Free Church of Scotland.  It is clear though Chalmers describes a practice in his own day and locale similar to that of Paul’s, yet he did not see their own practice as deriving from Paul, but rather was customary.

“I am taught by the…  passage to give no unnecessary outrage to the customs, whether of my age or neighborhood — such customs as, however ephemeral or however local, cannot be violated without a moral hardihood and defiance on the part of the transgressor, and without scandalizing the observers of the offensive exhibition.

To estimate the force of this remark, let us but think of how much and what evil would be implied and wrought if the men of our day were to commence the practice of sitting in Church with their hats on, and the women with their bonnets off.  Our existing habit, which is a second nature, would cause us to feel that it were a shameful thing in the reckless few who dared such an innovation, and so as to warrant the interference of the Church authorities on the subject.

There is enough of analogy between the hats and the long hair to make the apostle’s earnestness on the subject of that liberty which he here reproves to be not altogether unintelligible:” – p. 232

Brown, David

1 Cor. 11  in A Popular Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Philip Schaff

“To those who, in a narrow spirit, insist on having divine prescription for the most insignificant details of religious life and public worship, this appeal to ‘nature itself,’ [v. 14] as a great guide in relation to the decencies of public worship, should read a wholesome lesson.  Nature, though uniform in its essential features, varies in all that is subordinate in different regions and at different periods.  In matters of feeling, taste, and decorum, as to the way in which the relation of the sexes should be expressed, eastern and western ideas notoriously and widely differ, and they should be allowed their natural and proper development.” – p. 203

1 Cor. 11  in Jamieson, Fausset, Brown’s Commentary

Brown was a professor of the Free Church of Scotland.

Hodge, Charles – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentary on 1 Corinthians  

Hodge was an American, Northern presbyterian.  He takes a cultural veil view.

His comments on v. 7 (p. 210 top) support Fentiman’s interpretation of that verse (Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual, pp. 174-79), that the verse is not speaking of physically covering the glory of God physically revealed from man’s natural head per se, but the verse speaks to man’s authority as the image and glory of God in a special way differentiated from the woman (for which reason it ought not to be diminished by a social-covering conveying the opposite), insofar as women are the image and glory of God in the former sense, but not in the specific latter sense (which v. 3 speaks to).

Lange, Johann Peter – 1 Cor. 11

Ellicott, C.J. – 1 Cor. 11  (1887)

Ellicott (1819–1905) was a distinguished Anglican Bible scholar, academic and churchman.  His treatment is scholarly and on the Greek, as usual.  He has helpful grammatical points and historical references.

Edwards, Thomas C. – 1 Cor. 11  (1885)

Edwards (1837–1900) was a Welsh, presbyterian minister, writer and academic.

Vincent, Marvin – 1 Cor. 11

Vincent has some helpful lexical and historical notes.

Godet, Frederick – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentary on St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians  (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1889-1890), vol. 2, pp. 103-33

Godet takes a cultural veil view.

** McClintock & Strong Biblical Cyclopedia – ‘Veil’

“Long hair, perhaps similarly done up, certainly, often plaited, was used by the Greek females; thus very commonly they appeared in public.  Hence, also, Paul contends, in Church meetings they should have a head-covering, formed either of a mantle or shawl (peplumt) drawn somewhat over the countenance, or a veil in the stricter sense (κατακαλύπτω, 1 Cor. 11:5-6).

Such a partial covering seemed to become females in public assemblies; and for Christian women to have departed in such a matter from the general practice of the countries where they resided would inevitably have brought reproach upon the Christian name. The attempt of some, therefore, at Corinth to do so, was wisely discountenanced by the apostle as implying an assumption of equality with the other sex; and he enforces the covering of the head, as a sign of subordination to the authority of the men (verses 5-15).

…the apostle, putting, a hypothetical case, states that every man having anything on his head dishonors his head, i.e. Christ; inasmuch as the use of the veil would imply subjection to his fellow-men rather than to the Lord (ver. 4).”

Beet, Joseph Agar – 1 Cor. 11  in A Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles to the Corinthians  (London: Hodder, 1895), pp. 179-88

Beet (1840-1924) was a Wesleyan / Methodist.

.

Liberal

Billroth, Gustav – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentary on the Epistles of Paul to the Corinthians  (1836), pp. 265-81

Billroth (1808–1836) was a liberal German who sought to provide “pure exegesis.”  He emphasizes the Greek, grammar and has some historical quotes.

** Meyer, H.A.W. – 1 Cor. 11  Liberal

Meyer takes a cultural veil view.  This is very helpful scholarly treatment surveying the views of various commentators, old and current to Meyer.

.

.

That Paul Enjoined Women to Wear Cultural Veils

This view is not recommended.  See the necessity-of-veiling view argued against in Fentiman, Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual, Part II, pp. 110-231.

.

1900’s

Ramsay, W.M. – pp. 202-5  in pt. 2, Tarsus, ch. 17, ‘The Oriental Spirit in Tarsus’  of The Cities of St. Paul  (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1907)

Ramsay, a noted scholar of first-century Greek culture and of Paul in his day, argues that the city Tarsus had a certain Oriental characteristic to it where women wore full vails, including over the face, and that the city was little influenced by Greek culture.

He interprets 1 Cor. 11 as speaking of material veils, and that the authority on the head of the woman in verse 10, or her veil, contra much interpretation, refers to her carrying dignity and a right.  Ramsay’s express justification for this interpretation is lacking, deriving it simply from the custom in that locale from his own day, yet the interpretation has historical weight for first century Greece; see Fentiman, Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual, p. 82, fn. 216 & p. 208.

Grosheide, F.W. – 1  Cor. 11  in New International Commentary on the New Testament  (1960)

“…a veil or a ribbon for the hair belonged to the ordinary headgear of women.”  – p. 253, fn. 2

Grosheide takes the view that through most of the passage Paul is talking about veiling, but then at the end (v, 15) he allows that the woman’s long hair may take the place of a veil, similar to Matthew Poole (on v. 5).  For a fuller defense of this interpretation, see Fentiman, Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual, pp. 171-73.

Humann, Roger J. – ‘1 Corinthians 11:2-16: Exegesis Case Study’  Consensus, vol. 7, issue 1, article 2  (1981)

Humann references numerous conservative commentators and reference works.  He cites differing evidence regarding what the female covering was, but ends up taking the material covering interpretation.

Morris, Leon – 1 Cor. 11  in Tyndale New Testament Commentary  (1985)

** Fee, Gordon – 1 Cor. 11  in New International Commentary on the New Testament  (1987)

This is very detailed.  Fee was a Charismatic scholar.  Fee gives three objections to the hair-bun view on pp. 528–29, which have been answered by Fentiman in what goes before p. 173, fn. 542 of Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual.  Thomas Schreiner largely follows Fee.

Witherington III, Ben

B. ‘An unveiled threat? 1 Cor. 11.2-16’  in Women in the Earliest Churches  (Cambridge University Press, 1988), pp. 78-90

This is a fuller treatment than his social commentary on Corinthians below.  He is one of the stronger advocates for the veiling-only view, from a heavily historical perspective.

‘Argument V: 11:2-16’  in Conflict & Community in Corinth: a Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 & 2 Corinthians  (Eerdmans, 1995), pp. 231-41

The volume has a lot of helpful background information on Corinth.

** Gill, David W. J. – ‘The Importance of Roman Portraiture for Head-Coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16’  Tyndale Bulletin 41 (2) (1990), pp. 245–60

Gill does interpret Paul as speaking of material head-coverings for women, but the range of alternative evidence he cites could easily be interpreted for a different conclusion.

“If we are to understand the background or cultural context of these letters we need to read them against the backdrop of a Roman colony, not a Greek city.  Institutions, legal procedures, social customs, architecture, public images and to some extent language owed more to Rome than to the Greek world.” – p. 245

Schreiner, Thomas – ‘Head Coverings, Prophecies & the Trinity, 1 Corinthians 11:2-16’  in eds. Piper & Grudem, Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood: a Response to Evangelical Feminism  (Crossway, 1991), pp. 124-39

Schreiner takes the cultural veil view, largely following Fee.

“Am I suggesting that women return to wearing coverings or veils?  No.  We must distinguish between the fundamental principle that underlies a text and the application of that principle in a specific culture…  Now, in the first century, failure to wear a covering sent a signal to the congregation that a woman was rejecting the authority of male leadership.  Paul was concerned about head coverings only because of the message they sent to people in that culture…

Lack of head coverings sends no message at all in our culture.  Nevertheless, that does not mean that this text does not apply to our culture.  The principle still stands that women should pray and prophesies will be one indication of whether she is humble and submissive.  The principle enunciated here should be applied in a variety of ways given the diversity of the human situation.” – p. 138

Cotterell, Peter – ‘Congregational Worship: 1 Cor. 11:2-16’  in Linguistics & Biblical Interpretation  (InterVarsity Press, 1989), pp. 316-28

See his summary from this linguistical analysis on pp. 327-28.

David BeDuhn, Jason – ”Because of the Angels’: Unveiling Paul’s
Anthropology in 1 Corinthians 11′  Journal of Biblical Literature 118 (1999), pp. 295-320

.

2000’s

Thiselton, Anthony – 1 Cor. 11  Pre  in The First Epistle to the Corinthians  in The New International Greek Testament Commentary  (Eerdmans, 2000), pp. 800-48

This is a very scholarly treatment.  Thiselton gives very detailed and lengthy surveys of many issues in the text, and yet altogether too little attention to other significant points.  Fentiman answers an objection of his to the hair-bun view in the surrounding context to p. 151, fn. 472 of Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual.

Watson, Francis – ‘The Authority of the Voice: A Theological Reading of 1 Cor 11.2-16’  New Testament Studies 46 (2000), pp. 520-36

Watson is a professor at the University of Aberdeen.

Pratt, Richard L. with Ra McLaughlin – ‘Hair & Headship, 1 Corinthians 11:2-16’  IIIM Magazine Online, vol. 3, no. 50  (Dec. 2001)

This has a lot of relevant information in it.

Reformed Presbytery in North America – The Practice Of Headcoverings In Public Worship  (2001)  75 paragraphs

The RPNA is associated with Still Waters Revival and is highly not recommended as they have extreme views on covenanting and have had cultic characteristics in the past.  This is a reversal of their position on veiling.  They were previously for perpetuity, as argued in Greg Price, Headcoverings in Scripture (1996), which is no longer available online, except for ch. 5.

The argument here against perpetuity and for the cultural view is not strong, as their main motivation for changing, it appears in the paper, was in finding out that Gillespie, Rutherford and the historic Church of Scotland held to the cultural view.

The outline is: Intro, Preliminary Considerations, The Subordinate Standards, European Reformed Testimony, Scriptural Observations on 1 Cor. 11, Conclusion.

They quote for the cultural view: Gillespie, Rutherford, Church of Scotland sessions, Calvin, Geneva Bible Notes, Turretin, Augsburg Confession, Discipline of the French Reformed Churches, Dutch Annotations and David H. Fleming on the Scottish Church.

See also Price’s 2011 book below further defending the cultural view.

Welty, William P. – ‘Rethinking the Veil: Another Approach to I Corinthians 11:2-16’  (2002)  10 pp.

Welty, who may have a Messianic-Jewish influence, did his homework.  He provides in-depth bibliographies on p. 2, fn. 2-3.  He provides a lot of scholarly references, but comes to the view that, though the head-coverings in the passage are veils, yet the end of the passage does away with the need for them because a woman’s hair replaces such a covering.

DesMarais, Patricia – Husbands, Wives & Status in Roman Corinth: A Discussion of Headcoverings in 1 Corinthians 11.2–16  M.A. thesis  (California State University, 2005)  82 pp.

Ritchie, Daniel – ‘Head Coverings – Not a Regulative Principle of Worship’  in ch. 4, ‘The Circumstances of Worship’  in The Regulative Principle of Worship: Explained & Applied  (Xulon Press, 2007), pp. 90-104

Richie gives some arguments for the cultural view and quotes Calvin, the Geneva Bible and the Westminster Confession.

Beale, G.K. & D.A. Carson – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament  (2007), pp. 730-35

Massey, Preston T.

‘The Meaning of κατακαλυπτω [covered] and κατα κεϕαλης εχων [hanging down from the head] in 1 Corinthians 11.2–16’   Ref  New Testament Studies, vol. 53, issue 4  (Oct. 2007), pp. 502-23

Massey is one of the most stringent, scholarly defenders of the veiling-only view.  He appears to hold head-coverings to be perpetual (in his article on 1 Cor. 11:15 below).  This is his most important article.  Fentiman argues against Massey in Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual, pp. 157-59, 217-29, 238-39 and throughout the footnotes.

“For the past forty years NT scholars have been divided over the text of 1 Cor 11.2–16.  Some see this pericope as addressing the issue of head coverings, while others see the issue as one of hairstyles.  Although Stefan Lösch was the first to advocate the case for long flowing hairstyles, credit for starting this enduring controversy must be given to Abel Isaksson.  This article investigates Isaksson’s claim for the hairstyle thesis and concludes that a study of the verb κατακαλυπτω will permit a translation only of textile head coverings.”

This article was responded to by Payne, who shows, “Each of P. T. Massey’s five conclusions attempting to exclude reference to hair are refuted by evidence he cites.”

“Bruce Winter has developed a case that elite Roman ‘new women’ brought into the church at Corinth a style of dress that was offensive and disruptive to church unity, as well as an affront to Rome itself.  As a response to this avantgarde feminine independence, Winter situates the άγγέλοι of 1 Cor. 11.10 and the ίδιώται of 1 Cor. 14.23-24 as agents of the State who are sent to investigate the behavior of such Christian women at worship. This study considers Winter’s novel claim and concludes that the evidence does not justify such an interpretation.”

Massey provides a fair amount of valuable historical information, in addition to what Winter provides, on the topic of Roman civil regulation of women’s dress.  Winter is very much worth reading.

‘Long Hair as a Glory & as a Covering: Removing an Ambiguity from 1 Cor 11:15’  Novum Testamentum, vol. 53, Fasc. 1 (2011), pp. 52-72

“This study addresses the issue of v. 15 in 1 Cor 11:2-16 from the perspective of a veiling custom.  If veiling is in view (the position adopted here), then how does one confront the difficulty of reconciling the overall context with the exceptional statement in v. 15 that long hair for a woman is a glory.  If, as the text argues, long hair is to be taken as a ‘glory,’ by what logic could a woman understand that she should place a veil upon her head?  This article provides a way out of the dilemma by showing how a veil can serve the double function of reflecting the hair’s beauty while at the same time preserving a symbol of female modesty.” – Abstract

“Massey…  argues at article length for an apparently unique view of v. 15 which assumes the hair ‘as’ a ‘corresponding counterpart’ to a covering (veil), is in the public, church context. For him the long hair and veil function together;” – Fentiman

‘Gender Versus Marital Concerns: Does 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 Address the Issues of Male/Female or Husband/Wife?’  Tyndale Bulletin 64 (2), pp. 239-56

Massey argues that the passage addresses the husband / wife relationship.  The view that it addresses all the adult women is recommended; see Fentiman, Head-coverings are Not Perpetual, pp. 203-5.

‘Veiling among Men in Roman Corinth: 1 Corinthians 11:4 & the Potential Problem of East Meeting West’  Pre  Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 137, no. 2 (Summer, 2018), pp. 501-17

Brown (below) had previously argued against Massey and another scholar on whether the key greek syntax in 1 Cor. 11:4 could mean, or primarily does mean, that it was a shame for men to have long hair while praying (Brown), or that it was a shame for a man to pray with a material head-covering on (Massey).  This article of Massey follows that of Brown but never appears to address Brown’s article directly.  This work of Massey “is based on the foundational work of Oster, Gill, and Finney.”

Abstract:  “Close attention to the original meaning of the words κατακαλύπτω [covered] (1 Cor 11:6) and κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων [having down the head] (1 Cor 11:4) permits a translation only of a material head covering.  These words do not describe the process of letting hair hang down loosely.  These words are consistently used in Classical and Hellenistic Greek to describe the action of covering the head with a textile covering of some kind.  In spite of sustained efforts by advocates, the long-hair theory still has not succeeded in gaining an entry into standard reference works.  The original edition of BAGD in 1957, the revised edition in 1979, and the more recent edition of BDAG in 2000 all support the view that the text of 1 Cor 11:2–16 describes an artificial textile head covering of some kind.”

“I will address the following three questions: (1) To what extent would male head-covering ideology in Greek and Roman cultures be at loggerheads with the text of 1 Cor 11:4? (2) To what extent would wearing a veil for a man create tensions of shame and conflict in the church in Roman Corinth? And (3) what is the specific issue regarding male sartorial practice?  I will first address the controversial and long-standing issue of whether the verse refers to veils, long hair, or both.” – p. 503

In response to Massey’s arguments in this article, see Fentiman, Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual, pp. 238-39.

Finney, Mark – ‘Honour, Head-Coverings & Headship: 1 Corinthians 11.2-16 in Its Social Context’  JSNT 33 (2010), pp. 31-58

“Finney provides scholarly documentation and references to ancient sources that make it difficult to discredit the thesis that some Roman men did, in fact, have the serious obligation of appearing before a deity with their heads covered…  He takes exception to the works of Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, Richard Hays, and Gordon Fee, who all argued that the text is discussing long hair, not veiling.” – Massey (2018)

Abstract:  “A significant yet missing dimension of scholarly engagement with 1 Cor. 11:2-16 is the consideration of honour-shame and its critical importance in ancient cultures.  As this section of Paul’s letter abounds in honour-shame terminology, analysis of the text within such a framework will allow a profitable exploration of the reasons why the Corinthians are changing their attire (for purposes of this paper, their headcoverings), in a way that appears to be contrary to what may be considered the Pauline norm.  The argument offered here is that notions of honour come to the fore and higher-status male Corinthians are employing modes of head attire to maintain distinctions of status.  At the same time, Paul insists upon female head-coverings to safeguard the honour of the community within a context of the potential presence of non-believers in a communal service of worship.”

Price, Greg – The Customary Practice of Headcoverings: an Exegetical / Historical Study of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 Presented in a Series of [9] Letters  (2011)  145 pp.

Price is a minister in the Reformed Presbytery of North America (associated with Still Waters Revival), which is highly not recommended, as they have extreme views on covenanting and have had cultic characteristics in the past.  Price had previously advocated for the perpetual veiling position in a work entitled, Headcoverings in Scripture (1996), which is no longer available online, except for ch. 5.  In 2001 he and the RPNA published a reversal paper (above).

This book is not in an ideal format or length.  Price is prolix and emphasizes his misguided, erroneous historiography of the Scottish covenanters.  While the book does have some arguments worth considering, he does not use the historic categories of the reformed in the Post-Reformation (hence they are often anachronistic, idiosyncratic and not wholly reliable).

He quotes in the book: (pp. 10-19) Westminster, Gillespie, Rutherford, (pp. 121-24) A.R. Fausset, F.L. Godet, C. Hodge, G.C. Findlay, H. Alford, G. Fee, (pp. 130-44) Calvin, Beza, Diodatti, Dutch Annotations, Ames, Rutherford, Dickson, Gillespie, Durham, Turretin, Poole, S. Browne, Haddington, C. Hodge, A.R. Fausset, A.T. Robertson, F.W. Grosheide, G. Fee.

Hoelke, April M. – Exposed Heads & Exposed Motives: Coverings as a Means to Unity at Corinth  MA thesis  (Gardner-Webb Univ., 2014)  125 pp.

“This thesis argues that in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 Paul asserts most centrally that women should wear head coverings while praying and prophesying in the Corinthian Christian assembly.  I examine the honor and shame value system of the Greco-Roman world, both generally and in specific reference to head adornment, since head coverings and hairstyles were connected to honor and status. Then I look at Paul’s treatment of honor and shame throughout 1 Corinthians, which denounces the worldly value system of status seeking in favor of the value system of the cross.  Paul’s stance leads him to subject cultural norms to gospel values…”

Montier, Curtis E. – Let Her Be Shorn: 1 Corinthians 11 & Female Head Shaving in Antiquity  MA thesis  (Univ. of North Texas, 2015)  67 pp.  Images (involving orgies) are on pp. 13-21.

“In 1 Corinthians 11:3-15, Paul writes that if a woman is to be so immodest as to wear her hair uncovered while praying or prophesying in a Christian assembly she might as well shave her head.  Paul instructs the Corinthians that it is “one and the same” for a woman to have her head shaved and for her to unveil her hair.  There is a large body of works cataloging the modesty standards in Hellenistic Greece but Paul’s reference to head-shaving remains obscure.  This thesis looks to find the best explanation of Paul’s instructions.

…a popular modern view…  that women in ancient Greece with their head shaved were prostitutes…  probably temple prostitutes.  The evidence does not bear this out as there is no artwork depicting prostitutes, or indeed any women, with their heads shaved.  Instead prostitutes are shown in Greek erotic art with both long and short hair, some with and some without head coverings.

Literary sources do offer several different examples of women who had their hair cut off…  the most probable impetus behind Paul’s writing [that the uncovered woman be shaved] relates to punishments for adultery.”

Hester, David W. – ‘The Nature of the Head Covering in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16’  (2017) with a bibliography of 42 sources

This appears to be a graduate school paper.  Hester takes the view of a material covering, which was cultural.

Wu, Rongxi – The Veil in Classical Antiquity: A Sociocultural & Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16  PhD thesis  (University of Sheffield, 2020)  280 pp.

“This thesis will examine the literary evidence of the cultural significance of head-coverings, particularly with reference to the Corinthian congregation addressed by Paul in 1 Cor. 11:2-16.  There are two main objectives of the thesis: to produce a coherent interpretation of 1 Cor. 11:2-16 and to establish Paul’s view of gender in the text.

…The first part investigates the significance of ‘the veil’ for the ancient Greeks and Romans respectively and compares certain aspects of gender in Greco-Roman culture and the letters of Paul…  Paul’s view of gender in the text shows a degree of consistency with the culture…”

Wedgeworth, Steven – ‘Going on a Bear Hunt: Head Coverings, Custom, & Proper Decorum: Revisiting 1 Corinthians 11:2–16’  (2021)  26 paragraphs

“I don’t believe that churches have to resurrect the custom of head coverings.  Were the custom still dominant, it would be pious to respect and retain it, but a lost custom is somewhat different.  When a custom is lost, the public meaning of that custom changes, and enforcing it anew can send a new and different (and, yes, mistaken) meaning…

Yet 1 Corinthians 11:2–16 teaches us that godly customs in practice should be retained, and it teaches us to investigate our customs to see what message they are sending.  Intelligible customs that signify male headship or the glory of godly femininity should be respected and promoted.”

Anonymous – ‘Understanding 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 in Light of Culture & Veiling in the Cult of Dionysius’  (n.d.)  11 pp.

Despite this article being anonymous, it is very good and provides extended quotes and references from scholarship that is not always easy to get a hold of.  The article is available at multiple places on the net.  The writer makes references against the perpetual head-covering view and women not cutting their hair in Pentecostalism.

The thesis that Paul’s passage and concern ought to primarily be viewed through the lens of combatting the Dionysius cult is argued against by Fentiman, Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual, pp. 205-6, 209-14.

.

Liberals

1900’s

Robertson, Archibald & Alfred Plummer – 1 Cor. 11  in International Critical Commentary

This is a commentary on the Greek text.  This has very helpful documentation on the meaning of v. 10.

Moffatt, James – 1 Cor. 11

Barrett, Charles K. – 1 Cor. 11  in Black’s New Testament Commentaries  (1993)

Conzelmann, Hans – 1 Cor. 11  in 1 Corinthians: a Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians in Hermenia  (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), pp. 181-91

Lots of citations to primary historical sources.

.

2000’s

Fitzmeyer, Joseph A. – 1 Cor. 11  in Anchor Yale Bible  (2008)

Argues against the hair-bun trajectory of evidence from Leviticus, the Septuagint to Philo, though it is not wholly satisfactory.

Perkins, Pheme – 1 Cor. 11  in Paideia  (Baker Academic, 2012)

Perkins presents a fair amount of helpful, summary information of varying practices, but has a deficient view of Paul’s integrity (p. 138, vv. 6-9).

.

.

That Paul was Enjoining Bound-Up Hair-Buns or Coiffures for Women

This view is recommended; see especially Fentiman’s book.

.

1900’s

Isaksson, Abel – pt. 2, chs. 7-8  in Marriage & Ministry in the New Temple. A Study with Special Reference to Mt. 19:3-12 & 1 Cor. 11:3-16  (Lund: C.W.K. Gleerup, 1965), pp. 155-88

Isaksson and Hurley’s works were seminal for laying out the trajectory of evidence for the hair-bun view from Leviticus, the Septuagint to Philo, which many scholars after them built upon.

Reynolds, Stephen – ‘Colloquium’  Westminster Theological Journal 36 (1973), pp. 90-91

Hurley, James B.

Man & Woman in 1 Corinthians: Some Exegetical Studies in Pauline Theology & Ethics  PhD diss. (Cambridge, 1973)

Hurley is conservative and careful.

** ‘Did Paul Require Veils or the Silence of Women?  A Consideration of 1 Cor 11:2-16 & 1 Cor 14:33b-36’  Ref  Westminster Theological Journal, 35:2  (Winter 1973)

This is still one of the best articles for the hair-bun view.

** Man & Woman in Biblical Perspective  (Zondervan, 1981)  ToC

ch. 7, ‘Women & Men in Worship’, pp. 162-85

Hurley takes ‘head’ in v. 3 in the traditional way, as ‘head over’ with regards to authority, rather than ‘source.’

Appendix: ‘Veiling Practices in Judaism & Graeco-Roman Culture of the First Century’

This is an excellent summary of that era and those cultures by an expert; note especially his ten conclusions at the end.

Evans, Mary J. – 1 Corinthians 11:2-16  in Woman in the Bible (Paternoster, 1983), pp. 82-95

Evans follows Hurley.

Padgett, Alan

‘Paul On Women in the Church: The Contradictions of Coiffure in 1 Corinthians 11.2-16’  Pre  in JSNT 20 (1984), pp. 69-86

Padgett is a United Methodist pastor.

Section III, pp. 126-28  of ‘Feminism in First Corinthians: A Dialogue with Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza’  (1986)

Fiorenza is a feminist scholar who has written on the topic.  Padgett critiques her treatment and has numerous helpful things to say.

’The Significance of anti, in 1 Corinthians 11:15’  Download  Tyndale Bulletin 45 (1994), pp. 181-87

Padgett argues with regard to v. 15, “in their natural state, women do not need a ‘covering,’ since nature has given them hair as the equivalent of a covering.”  In doing so his arguments are made to support a radical view of the passage, that in vv. 3-7 Paul is paraphrasing, not his own, but the argument of a faction at Corinth seeking to impose head-coverings, then Paul answers that argument with the arguments in v. 7 ff., which begin, “but on the other hand…”  Padgett’s conclusion is not recommended.

** Thompson, Cynthia L. – ‘Hairstyles, Head-Coverings & St. Paul: Portraits from Roman Corinth’  in The Biblical Archaeologist, vol. 51, no. 2 (Jun., 1988), pp. 99-115  with many pictures

Abstract:  “In the many discussions of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16, very little note has been taken of the relevant archaeological evidence that is available.  Such evidence [from Corinth], unearthed over the last ninety years, can be helpful in clarifying the historical context in which Paul and his congregation lived.”

“Thus, it would seem that concerning men’s short hair, Paul was in harmony with general Greco-Roman customs as observed in iconography.” – p. 104

“The artifacts from Corinth that portray women suggest that Paul’s advice that women wear their hair long was in harmony with Greco-Roman customs…  Paul also represented Greco-Roman conventions when he suggested that women’s long hair be a ‘wrapping’ (peribolaion; 1 Corinthians 11:15)–that is, fastened up, as contrasted to being allowed to flow unimpeded around the shoulders.  Such flowing hair is sometimes suggested by the word koman [1 Cor. 11:14-15], which, however, predominantly means to wear long hair, whether up or down.  Greco-Roman women seem to have let down their hair publicly only on special ocassions, such as mourning, some Greek wedding ceremonies, or religious rites…

The evidence reviewed suggests that the Christian women of Corinth who felt that they could choose whether or not to cover their heads may well typify Greco-Roman women of the first century C.E.  These are the women Paul thought needed his advice.  This choice of hairstyle, then, would have extended beyond ornamental decorations such as a stephane or fillet to the type of vail seen on the coin portrait identified with Livia [p. 107], which is the type of covering Paul probably recommended.” – p. 112

“Paul and Christian converts at Corinth are too often considered as theological abstractions.  Portraits from the time of Christian beginnings may show how people made choices influenced by custom in dressing to please themselves and be accepted by others.” – p. 113

Dunn, J. D. G. – pp. 588-93  in The Theology of Paul the Apostle  (Eerdmans, 1998)

Dunn is a liberal but has some helpful information.

Horsley, Richard A. – 1 Cor. 11  in 1 Corinthians  in Abingdon New Testament Commentary  (Abingdon, 1998)

Raymond Collins – 1 Cor. 11  in First Corinthians in Sacra Pagina Series, 7  (The Liturgical Press, 1999)

Collins is liberal, but provides a lot of good information.  There is a full bibliography at the end.

.

2000’s

Johnson, Alan F. – 1 Corinthians  ed. Grant R. Osborne, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series  (InterVarsity, 2004)

** Payne, Philip B.

‘Wild Hair & Gender Equality in 1 Corinthians 11:2–16’  Priscilla Papers  (2006)

Payne received a doctorate from Cambridge and has taught New Testament studies there, as well as at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, etc.  He is a Christian-egalitarian (not recommended).

This is a very important and documented study.  Payne argues that the shame for men in 1 Cor. 11:4 was not in wearing a material headcovering, but in having long hair, which, he says, was associated with homosexuality.  The woman’s ‘headcovering’ was not a material covering, but having her hair done up.  Hence, not having her hair done up in public was regarded as provacative, sensual or sexual, associated with pagan religious practices and possibly dissheveled.

Payne is an egalitarian, which is a serious error, which especially affects the middle verses of the passage.  He interprets ‘head’ in 1 Cor. 11:3 as only ‘source’, and not ‘authority’ (which makes it so that the husband is not necessarily an authority over his wife).  Grudem in a section below on this webpage conclusively shows that ‘authority over’ is the only viable meaning of kephale.

Other than some of these critiques, Payne’s article is a model of exegetical argument.  See Fentiman argue against his main thesis: Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual, pp. 205-6, 209-14.

“What head covering would have been disgraceful for men in Corinth, a Greek city and a Roman colony?  The pulling of a toga over one’s head in Roman religious contexts was a sign of piety, not disgrace.  Jewish priests wore turbans in obedience to the Law with no disgrace.  There is, however, abundant evidence in the Greek, Roman, and Jewish literature of Paul’s day that it was disgraceful for men to wear long effeminate hair, whether hanging down or done up like a woman’s hair.  Long hair fits Paul’s expression in verse 4, literally “hanging down from the head,” and Paul confirms in verse 14, “If a man has long hair, it is degrading to him.”

The extent of moral indignation over effeminate hairstyles by men is abundantly documented with more than one hundred references to effeminate hair in classical antiquity cited by Herter, the greatest number of these coming from around Paul’s time…

…many other such references near the time of Paul show that long effeminate hair on men was considered degrading, disgraceful, and contrary to the norms of Greek, Roman, and Jewish culture.  The most common word to describe long effeminate hair is the very word Paul used in 1 Corinthians 11:14: “degrading” (atimia)…  Since the evidence is overwhelming that Greek and Roman men in Paul’s day typically wore short hair, long hair stood out in its association with effeminate homosexuality.
…

Virtually all depictions of Greek women, not only in formal portraits and busts, but also in the vase paintings and other depictions of daily life, show respectable women with their hair done up on their heads, not hanging loose.  There is virtually no evidence that veiling was a custom or that the lack of a shawl in daily life or in worship was generally regarded as disgraceful.  The interpretation that Paul was requiring a veil or shawl to avoid disgrace does not fit what we know of Greek culture.  Women in Greek culture typically participated in worship without a veil or shawl.

In light of this, it seems highly improbable that Paul would expect the Corinthians to judge for themselves (v. 13) that it is disgraceful for a woman to pray without a veil or shawl.  There is, however, abundant evidence that it was disgraceful for women in that culture to let their hair down loose.  This symbolized undisciplined sexuality.  In the Dionysiac cult, whose influence was pervasive in Corinth, including the presence of a prominent temple, it was customary for women to let down their hair to ‘prophesy’ and engage in all sorts of sexual debauchery.  Understood in light of this background, the argument of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 flows smoothly.”

pt. 1, chs. 6-13  in Man & Woman, One in Christ: An Exegetical & Theological Study of Paul’s Letters  Pre  (Zondervan, 2009), pp. 109-215

** ‘A Critique of P. T. Massey’s ‘The Meaning of κατακαλ˜πτω [covered] and κατÏ κεφαλῆς ἔχων [hanging down from the head] in 1 Corinthians 11.2-16’  NTS 53 (2007 / 2009), pp. 502-23

This article is excellent, though very scholarly and dense, and not easy to read for the non-specialist.  Payne, in respond’s to Massey’s main article: “Each of P. T. Massey’s five conclusions attempting to exclude reference to hair are refuted by evidence he cites.”

Gardner, Paul – 1 Cor. 11  in 1 Corinthians in Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Zondervan, 2018)

This is a good and helpful intermediate level commentary.  Gardner defends Grudem on kephale, “head”, that it means “authority over” and tentatively understands the covering as hairstyle.

Mowczko, Margaret – Articles on 1 Cor. 11:2-16

Mowczko is a New Testament scholar and a published author on this subject.  She is a Christian egalitarian (not recommended).  Her articles are generally informative.

** Fentiman, Travis – Part II  of 1 Corinthians – Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual & they were Hair-Buns, with or without Material: Proven  (2022), pp. 110-231

This scholarly but readable book demonstrates from the preponderance of historical evidence that women being “covered” referred to women covering their heads with hair-buns, with or without cloth material.  See the many pictures and links to collections of pictures from Corinth and the Greco-Roman world on pp. 188-98.

The structure of this book’s argument against the necessity of veiling is:

1. The Lexical section shows it is possible, and there is a significant foundation, that “covered” may refer to hair-buns with or without cloth material and “uncovered” to let-down long hair.

2. This understanding makes the details of 1 Cor. 11 to read seamlessly, with more explanatory power than any other view.

3. Footnotes 351–52 and the History section (with many pictures) show the considerable evidence that honorable women in first-century Greece nearly universally publicly wore bound-up hair, with or without cloth material and that universal veiling was not required. Bound-up hair without material in it or over it cannot be demonstrated to have been dishonorable by the current data, and a large amount of evidence manifests its honorableness.

4. Universal female veiling was not required or practiced for pagan religious rites.

5. Certain exegetical interpretations in 1 Cor. 11 upholding female, unveiled hair-buns cannot be ruled out.

6. As there is no necessary (and hence valid) consequence from Scripture that Corinthian coverings were formally religious (proved in Part I), so Paul’s ordinance could not have been above and beyond appropriate societal custom, but rather must have been in consistency with it.

7. Hence, according to the preponderance of historical evidence, Paul did not require of women veiling, but decent, bound-up hair.

The Summary Conclusions on pp. 265-71 set forth the main points, arguments and interpretations of the book in Part II about hair-buns.

.

.

That the Issue for Both Men & Women was Long Hair, or Not

Intro

This position is not recommended, though much can be learned from the resources below.  As writers in this view often overlap their understanding of long hair as a covering with hair-buns, so much of the material in the resources is supportive of the hair-bun view.  See summary arguments against the covering as long hair let-down in Fentiman, Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual, pp. 216-17.

.

1900’s

Martin, William J. – “1 Corinthians 11:2-16: An Interpretation”  in ed. Gasque-Martin, Apostolic History & the Gospel  (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1970), pp. 231-41

For Martin’s arguments that the woman’s covering throughout 1 Cor. 11 is only her long hair, see specifically p. 233.

North, Gary – ‘The Covering for the Woman’s Head’  Banner of Truth Magazine  (Oct. 1971), reprinted by Geoff Thomas (Oct. 2010).

North sees the relative length of men and women’s hair as still binding.

“As I understand it, Paul was making one of two distinctions: (1) women in general are to remain silent in church, with only a special group of them permitted to prophesy (being marked as a special group by a peculiar kind of covering for their heads); or (2) there was a distinct kind of prophesying practised by Christian women outside of the actual worship service.  It is my opinion that the latter interpretation is preferable…

Women who possessed this [non-continuing] gift [of prophecy] were to demonstrate their femininity either by putting on a special kind of covering, or by wearing their hair in a particular way…  they were not to exercise the gift during the corporate worship of the church (14:34)…

A woman has her long hair instead of a veil to serve as her proper covering. A man is to wear his hair shorter than women do, because he is to have his head uncovered. The passage is quite specific: long hair is the equivalent of covering, while short hair is the same as an uncovered head…

In conclusion, the eleventh chapter of First Corinthians has absolutely nothing to do with hats.  Men may wear hats if they so desire; they may not wear long hair…  What is relevant is the respective length of men and women’s hair.  That is the focus of Paul’s argumentation.”

Murphy-O’Connor, Jerome

** ch. 10, ‘Sex & Logic in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16’  Abstract  Pre  in Keys to First Corinthians: Revisiting the Major Issues  (Oxford Univ. Press, 2009)   also in Catholic Biblical Quarterly 42 (1980), p. 482 ff.

Abstract:  “This chapter argues that 1 Cor 11: 2–16 has nothing to do with the veiling of women.  The man is criticized for letting his hair grow long, because it was the overt sign of the active male homosexual.  The woman, on the contrary, is blamed simply for not dressing her hair in the conventional manner.  If she will not be feminine, she might as well go the whole way and appear ‘manish’ by cutting off her hair.  Lesbians were known by their short hair.”

‘1 Corinthians 11:2-16 Once Again’  Pre  Abstract  in The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, vol. 50, no. 2 (April, 1988), pp. 265-74

“This chapter responds to J. Delobel’s critique of the thesis developed in ch. 10.  His objections and positive observations prompted the clarification and simplification of a number of important points.  He showed convincingly that v. 10 can only be translated ‘a woman must exercise control over her head’, i.e. must dress her hair properly.  Given the subjectivity of the interpretations of ‘because of the angels’ based on the assumption that they are heavenly beings, it is suggested that Paul has in mind human ‘messengers’ from other churches.  The Postscript devotes particular attention to the pros and cons of the proposed meanings of kephale, ‘head,’ ‘ruler,’ ‘source,’ and ‘person’ in various contexts in this passage, while also dealing in detail with the archaeological and literary evidence for sartorial customs in Corinth.”

Clark, Gordon – 1 Cor. 11  in First Corinthians: a Contemporary Commentary  (Jefferson, MD: Trinity Foundation, 1991)

This commentary is for laymen.

Hays, Richard B. – 1 Cor.  in Interpretation  (John Knox Press, 1997)

Hays is a liberal and scholarly.

Brown II, A Philip

‘Eikon kai doxa Theou: An Interpretive Key to 1 Cor. 11:2-16′  (Bible Faculty Leadership Summit, 2003)  12 pp.  with bibliography

Brown closely examines v. 7 as a key to the larger passage.

“…men and women fulfill their respective roles…  when they pray and prophesy appropriately covered: cut hair on men and uncut hair on women.” – p.12

** ‘Chrysostom & Epiphanius: Long Hair Prohibited as Covering in 1 Corinthians 11:4, 7’  Pre  in Bulletin for Biblical Research, vol. 23, no. 3 (2013), pp. 365-76

The first footnote gives an extensive bibliography of commentators and scholars who take the covering in 1 Cor. 11 to be hair (whether a hairstyle or simply long, let loose hair) and not a veil.  This article

Abstract:  “Recent surveys of extrabiblical Hellenistic literature by Ben Witherington III and Preston Massey claim that κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων [‘having his head covered’] in 1 Cor. 11:4 necessarily refers to the wearing of a material head covering.

This essay argues (1) that these surveys misread the extrabiblical data, (2) that examples of κóμη [long hair] as the object of ἔχω highlight the viability of taking κóμη as the implied object of ἔχων [having] in 1 Cor. 11:4, (3) that two significant church fathers understood the covering to which Paul refers to be or include κóμη [long hair], and (4) that data in the context of 1 Cor. 11:2-16 better supports understanding κóμη [long hair] as the covering Paul has in mind.”

.

.

That Women’s Head-Coverings for Worship is a Perpetual, Regular Obligation

This position is not recommended.  See Fentiman, Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual, pp. 7-109 and/or the Summary Conclusions of this part of the book on pp. 258-65.

.

Articles

1900’s

Pink, A.W. – Studies in the Scriptures, August, 1930, p. 191

Pink teaches that ladies are to cover their heads in private prayer also.

Weeks, Noel – ‘Of Silence & Head Covering’  in Westminster Theological Journal, no. 35:1 (Fall 1972), p. 21 ff.

Weeks’s conclusions are not as explicit as one would desire, but he appears to infer the conclusion that women wearing material headcoverings for public worship is an obligatory, universal practice, though his main interest is in arguing that women ought to be silent in the churches and not in leadership roles.

** Murray, John – ‘Headcoverings, a Letter’  (1973)  12 paragraphs

“My interpretation has been proposed by Noel Weeks and I acknowledge my debt to him. But the argument as developed is my own.”

Waltke, Bruce – ‘1 Corinthians 11:2-16: an Interpretation’  Bibliotheca Sacra 135 (1978), pp. 46-57

** Isbell, Sherman – ‘Headship & Worship: Notes on 1 Corinthians 11:2-16’  no date  33 paragraphs

Isbell is careful and is one of the few of these writers to directly critique the hair-bun view.  A number of his arguments are countered in the footnotes of Fentiman, Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual (search his name) and see especially p. 142, footnote 427 and the surrounding discussion.

Silversides, David – ‘Is Head Covering Biblical?’  (no date, after 2001)  71 paragraphs

This paper was primarily intended as a rebuttal to the position paper of the Reformed Presbytery of North America (associated with Still Waters Revival), in their reversal on the head covering issue.

Bacon, Richard – ‘Paul’s Discourse on the Use of Head Coverings in Public Worship: An Exposition of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16’, pt. 1, 2  (First Presbyterian Church of Rowlett, TX: 1997)  in The Blue Banner, vol. 7, issues 5-6  (May-June, 1998)

Schwertley, Brian – ‘Head Coverings in Public Worship’  (n.d.)  27 pp.

Some of Schwertley’s arguments are refuted in Fentiman, Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual, pp. 29-30 fn. 53 & pp. 62-63.

.

2000’s

** Kayser, Phillip – Glory & Coverings: a Study of 1 Corinthians 11:1-16  (2003)  52 pp.

Marlowe, Michael D. – ‘Headcoverings, 1 Corinthians 11:2-16’  (2008)

This is a collection of eight articles by Marlowe on the topic.  His articles on the subject are generally historically accurate, calm, nuanced, and helpful.  He is the most historically oriented and informed of this group of writers.

Garriott, Aaron L. – ‘The Abiding Apostolic Ordinance of Rules for Decorum in 1 Corinthians 11:  An Exegetical & Theological Case for a Normative Principle of Head Coverings in Public Worship’  (2018)  21 pp.  a seminary paper for Reformed Theological Seminary

.

Website

** The Head Covering Movement

Jeremy Gardiner started this website in 2010.  He lives in Canada, wrote a popular-level book on this topic and has available articles on his site addressing most issues on the topic.

.

.

What were Men’s Head-Coverings?  (1 Cor. 11:4, 14)  Veils, having their Hair Bound-Up, having Long Hair Simply, or whether the Case is Purely Hypothetical?

“Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.”

1 Cor. 11:4

.

Recommended

Fentiman, Travis –  Part III  of 1 Corinthians – Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual & they were Hair-Buns, with or without Material: Proven  (RBO, 2022), pp. 232-57

“Part III will find the exact ‘covering’ prohibited to men while ‘praying or prophesying’ (11:4) is less certain [compared to the woman’s covering], though it seems Paul proscribed Corinthian men from wearing any dishonoring covering in the assemblies, namely which hung down from their heads, whether material, a hair–bun or long hair, yet not wreaths, helmets, hats or turbans.” – p. 9

.

Men Wearing Material Head Coverings

Oster, Richard – ‘When Men Wore Veils to Worship: the Historical Context of 1 Corinthians 11.4’  Pre  New Testament Studies, vol. 34, issue 4  (Oct. 1988), pp. 481-505

Extract:  “…exegetes have tended to neglect the ‘male issue’ in this text and the Corinthian context underlying it.  The purpose of this article is to reconstruct the most plausible matrix of the practices addressed by Paul in 1 Cor 11:4 when he refers to [Greek, ‘Every man praying’].”

Oster’s “purpose was to establish the fact that it was obligatory for elite Roman men in certain ritual settings to wear a head covering.  His article did not focus on the element of shame.” – Massey (2018)

Gill, David W. J. – ‘The Importance of Roman Portraiture for Head-Coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16’  Tyndale Bulletin 41 (2) (1990), pp. 245–60

“If we are to understand the background or cultural context of these letters we need to read them against the backdrop of a Roman colony, not a Greek city.  Institutions, legal procedures, social customs, architecture, public images and to some extent language owed more to Rome than to the Greek world.” – p. 245

Massey, Preston T.

‘The Meaning of κατακαλυπτω [covered] and κατα κεϕαλης εχων [hanging down from the head] in 1 Corinthians 11.2–16’   Ref  New Testament Studies, vol. 53, issue 4  (Oct. 2007), pp. 502-23

“For the past forty years NT scholars have been divided over the text of 1 Cor 11.2–16.  Some see this pericope as addressing the issue of head coverings, while others see the issue as one of hairstyles.  Although Stefan Lösch was the first to advocate the case for long flowing hairstyles, credit for starting this enduring controversy must be given to Abel Isaksson.  This article investigates Isaksson’s claim for the hairstyle thesis and concludes that a study of the verb κατακαλυπτω will permit a translation only of textile head coverings.”

The footnotes in the opening pages of this article give significant bibliographies on the history of the development of views amongst scholars on this issue from the previous half-century.

This article was responded to by Payne, who says, “Each of P. T. Massey’s five conclusions attempting to exclude reference to hair are refuted by evidence he cites.”

‘Veiling among Men in Roman Corinth: 1 Corinthians 11:4 & the Potential Problem of East Meeting West’  Pre  Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 137, no. 2 (Summer, 2018), pp. 501-17

Brown had previously argued against Massey and another scholar on whether the key greek syntax in 1 Cor. 11:4 could mean, or primarily does mean, that it was a shame for men to have long hair while praying (Brown), or that it was a shame for a man to pray with a material head-covering on (Massey).  This article of Massey follows that of Brown but never appears to address Brown’s article directly.  This work of Massey “is based on the foundational work of Oster, Gill, and Finney.”

Abstract:  “Close attention to the original meaning of the words κατακαλύπτω [covered] (1 Cor 11:6) and κατὰ κεφαλῆς ἔχων [having down the head] (1 Cor 11:4) permits a translation only of a material head covering.  These words do not describe the process of letting hair hang down loosely.  These words are consistently used in Classical and Hellenistic Greek to describe the action of covering the head with a textile covering of some kind.  In spite of sustained efforts by advocates, the long-hair theory still has not succeeded in gaining an entry into standard reference works.  The original edition of BAGD in 1957, the revised edition in 1979, and the more recent edition of BDAG in 2000 all support the view that the text of 1 Cor 11:2–16 describes an artificial textile head covering of some kind.”

“I will address the following three questions: (1) To what extent would male head-covering ideology in Greek and Roman cultures be at loggerheads with the text of 1 Cor 11:4? (2) To what extent would wearing a veil for a man create tensions of shame and conflict in the church in Roman Corinth? And (3) what is the specific issue regarding male sartorial practice?  I will first address the controversial and long-standing issue of whether the verse refers to veils, long hair, or both.” – p. 503

Finney, Mark – ‘Honour, Head-Coverings & Headship: 1 Corinthians 11.2-16 in Its Social Context’  JSNT 33 (2010), pp. 31-58

“Finney provides scholarly documentation and references to ancient sources that make it difficult to discredit the thesis that some Roman men did, in fact, have the serious obligation of appearing before a deity with their heads covered…  He takes exception to the works of Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, Richard Hays, and Gordon Fee, who all argued that the text is discussing long hair, not veiling.” – Massey (2018)

Abstract:  “A significant yet missing dimension of scholarly engagement with 1 Cor. 11:2-16 is the consideration of honour-shame and its critical importance in ancient cultures.  As this section of Paul’s letter abounds in honour-shame terminology, analysis of the text within such a framework will allow a profitable exploration of the reasons why the Corinthians are changing their attire (for purposes of this paper, their headcoverings), in a way that appears to be contrary to what may be considered the Pauline norm.  The argument offered here is that notions of honour come to the fore and higher-status male Corinthians are employing modes of head attire to maintain distinctions of status.  At the same time, Paul insists upon female head-coverings to safeguard the honour of the community within a context of the potential presence of non-believers in a communal service of worship.”

.

The Case is Only Hypothetical

Quotes

McClintock & Strong

Archibald Robertson & Alfred Plummer, on 1 Cor. 11:4  in International Critical Commentary

“There is no reason for supposing that men at Corinth had been making this mistake in the congregation [in 1 Cor. 11:4].  The conduct which would be improper for men is mentioned in order to give point to the censure on women, who in this matter had been acting as men.”

Fitzmeyer, p. 413 top

Gordon Fee

.

.

May Men have Long Hair?

That Men having Long Hair is Not Intrinsically & Always Wrong  (Recommended)

Latin

1600’s

Salmasius, Claudius – Epistola ad Andream Colvium: super cap. XI. primae ad Corinth. epist. de caesarie virorum et mulierum coma  (Leiden: Elzevirs, 1644)  748 pp.  no ToC

Revius, Jacob – Libertas Christiana circa usum capillitia defensa  (Leiden: Wyngaerden, 1647)  255 pp.

The disputations defended in this book were approved by the theological faculty of Leiden: J. Polyander, J. Trigland & F. Spanheim, as seen in their judgment on pp. 255-56.

.

2000’s

Fentiman, Travis – pp. 25-30, 170, 242-46 & pp. 275-76 with footnote 807  in 1 Corinthians – Head-Coverings are Not Perpetual & they were Hair-Buns, with or without Material: Proven  (RBO, 2022)

.

Works Against Men having Long Hair

Books

1600’s

Prynne, William

The Unloveliness of Love-Locks; or, a Summary Discourse Proving the Wearing & Nourishing of a Lock or Love-lock to be altogether unseemly & unlawful unto Christians…  (London, 1628)  63 pp.

‘A Gag for Long Haired Rattle-heads who Revile all Civil Round-Heads’  [in verse]  Ref  (1646)  4 pp.

Hall, Thomas – Comarum Akosmia the Loathsomeness of Long Hair, or a Treatise wherein you have the Question Stated, Many Arguments against it Produced & the Most Material Arguments for it Refelled & Answered: with the concurrent Judgment of Divines, both Old & New Against it: with an Appendix against Painting, Spots, Naked Breasts, etc.  (London, 1654)  125 pp.

Hall (1610–1665)

Wall, Thomas – Spiritual Armour To Defend the Head From the Superfluity of Naughtiness…  (1688)  44 pp.

.

Latin

Diatriba Theologica de Capillis, constans Disputatione Textuali, ad 1 Corinthians 11:14-15  cited by John Trapp and Edward Leigh

.

Historical

On the 1600’s

Article

Poppy, Pat – ‘Love Locks & Round Heads’  (2020)  6 paragraphs  at Costume Historian

.

.

That ‘Head’, and the Concept of Headship, in 1 Cor. 11:3 means Authority, Not Source

“But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

1 Cor. 11:3

.

Intro

The traditional view in Church history has been that ‘head’ in 1 Cor. 11:3 (kephale in Greek) refers to one having authority over another.  ‘Evangelical’ egalitarians, in the last several decades of the 1900’s, began to promote and defend the novel notion that ‘head’ in this verse means source, exclusively, without any connotation of authority.

The articles below by Wayne Grudem show conclusively that this novel opinion is groundless (it always has been) and is contrary to both the Scriptural and extra-Scriptural data.

.

Articles

Grudem, Wayne

‘Does Kefale (‘Head’) Mean ‘Source’ Or ‘Authority Over’ in Greek Literature?: a Survey of 2,336 Examples’  Trinity Journal, no. 6.1 (Spring 1985), pp. 38-59

For a very helpful, concise summary of this article and the evidence, see pp. 425-26 of Grudem’s article in eds. Piper & Grudem, Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood…  (Crossway, 1991).

“’source’ is not listed as a possible meaning for κεφαλή in the standard lexicon for New Testament Greek by Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker.  Nor do the older New Testament lexicons by Thayer or Cremer list such a sense; nor does the lexicon to the papyri by Moulton and Milligan.” – p. 40

“…the actual hard data adduced to support the meaning ‘source’ turn out to consist of just two texts [in Herodotus].” – p. 41

“I will quote thirty-two examples of κεφαλή used to mean “authority over” or “ruler” in Greek writings outside the New Testament (seventeen are from Greek translations of the Old Testament and fifteen are from other literature).” – p. 41

“Plato (5th-4th cent. B.C.), describing the parts of the human body, wrote of ‘the head which is the most divine part and which reigns (δεσποτέω) over all the parts within us’ (Timaeus 44.D).  Plutarch (A.D. 46-120), one of the most prominent Greek authors from the New Testament period (and one who reflected secular thinking independent of Jewish or Christian influence), explained why the words soul (ψυχη) and head (κεφαλή) can be used to speak of the whole person: ‘We affectionately call a person ‘soul’ or ‘head’ from his ruling parts…’ (Table-Talk 692.D.11).  Philo (Jewish philosopher, c. 30 B.C.—c. A.D. 45), representing one aspect of first century Judaism, had a similar understanding: ‘As the head in the living body is the ruling place…  so Ptolemy became head among kings’ (Life of Moses 2.30).  ‘The mind is the head and ruler… of the sense-perception in us’ (Life of Moses 2.82); ‘’Head’ we interpret allegorically to be the ruling… mind of the soul’ (On Dreams 2.207).” – p. 42

“the reader will search Bedale’s article in vain for any examples showing that κεφαλή ever meant ‘source’ in the Septuagint.” – p. 43

“Herodotus (5th cent. B.C.) says, ‘From the heads (κεφαλαί, plural) of the Tearus River flows water most pleasant and good’ (4.91)…  these examples from Herodotus and elsewhere…  provide specific examples of a well-established and long recognized sense, ‘top, furthest extension, end point, beginning point.’  Indeed, that is exactly what the editors of [the] Liddell-Scott [lexicon] intended, for they placed the river examples as a subcategory under general category II, ‘of things, extremity.’” – 44

“Regarding the entry in the Liddell-Scott lexion, which quotes Orphic Fragments 21a [pre-4th century BC, which has textual variant] as the only evidence for the general meaning ‘source, origin,’ it would be more accurate if the entry were classified under the category ‘starting-point.’  Indeed, that would allow the entry to fit more easily under the general category in which the editors have placed it, ‘of things, extremity,’ for in this case the thing referred to is a period of time.” – p. 46

“Those who claim that κεφαλή could mean ‘source’…  the claim has so far been supported by not one clear instance in all of Greek literature…” – p. 46

“the standard lexicons and dictionaries for New Testament Greek do list the meaning ‘authority over’ for κεφαλή, ‘head.'” – p. 47

“no instances [out of 2,336] were discovered in which κεφαλή had the meaning ‘source, origin.'” – p. 52

‘The Meaning of Kephale (‘Head’): a Response to Recent Studies’  being appendix 1 in eds. Piper & Grudem, Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood: a Response to Evangelical Feminism  (Crossway, 1991), pp. 425-68

Richard Cervin in 1989 published a critique of Grudem’s first article on this subject (1985) and argues that ‘head’ in Paul’s epistles means ‘preeminent’.  Grudem responds to Cervin and evaluates ten other articles and lexicons on the topic since Grudem’s first article.

“The problem with this definition [of ‘preeminent’ for ‘head’] is that it is simply not found in Liddell-Scott as Cervin claims…  so far as I know, the meaning “preeminent” is not found in any specialty lexicons for any period of the Greek language either…

…it would not be surprising if, when first-century people referred to someone as ‘the head,’ there would be nuances not only of authority but perhaps also of prominence or ‘preeminence’ as well…  there are few if any examples where a person is called kephale and the context shows preeminence without rule or authority.  In the examples we have looked at, those who are called ‘head’ are those with utmost authority in the situation in question — the general of an army, the king of Egypt, the Roman emperor, the father in a family, the bishop in a church…  the heads of the tribes of Israel, the king of Israel…” – 447

“…to argue that head means  ‘pre-eminent one’ without any nuance of leadership or authority seems clearly to fly in the face of an abundance of evidence from both the New Testament and numerous other ancient texts.” – p. 448

‘The meaning ‘source’ ‘does not exist’: Liddell-Scott editor rejects egalitarian interpretation of ‘head’ (kephale)’  in CBMW News, vol. 2, no. 5  (Dec. 1997), pp. 1, 7-8

“A recent letter from one of the world’s leading Greek lexicographers, P.G.W. Glare, has undermined a foundational building block in the egalitarian view of marriage.  Glare denies that the word ‘head’ ever had the meaning ‘source’ in ancient Greek literature.”

‘The Meaning of Kefale (‘Head’): an Evaluation Of New Evidence, Real & Alleged’  Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44:1 (March 2001) pp. 25-65

.

.

Historical Theology

Thompson, John L. – ch. 6, ‘Silent Prophetesses?  Unraveling Theory & Practice in 1 Corinthians 11’  in Reading the Bible with the Dead  (Eerdmans, 2007), pp. 113-35

Brown – ‘Hair Down to There:  Nature, Culture & Gender in Cotton Mather’s Social Theology’  in Smolinski, Cotton Mather & Biblica Americana, pp. 495-514

.

.

Latin

300’s

Ambrosiaster (Pseudo-Ambrose) – 1 Cor. 11  in PL 17.239-41

Ambrosiaster (fl. 366-384)

.

400’s

Cyril of Alexandria – on 1 Cor. 11:3-4  in PG 74.879-83

Cyril of Alexandria (c. 376 – 444)

Jerome – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentarii in I et II Corinthios  in Opera (Supposititia), 11.901  per James Darling

Theodoret of Cyrus – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentary on All of Paul’s Epistles  in Migne, Patrologiae Graeca, vol. 82, cols. 309-14

Theodoret (c. 393 – c. 458/466) was an influential theologian of the school of Antioch, biblical commentator, and Christian bishop of Cyrrhus (423–457).

“He is amongst the ancients one of the best, and usually comes nearest the literal sense.” – Thomas Barlow

“…he combined Origen’s exegesis with the historical analysis privileged at Antioch.” – Historical Handbook of Major Biblical Interpreters, p. 15

.

500’s

Primasius – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentaries on the Epistles of Blessed Paul  in PL 68, cols. 532-33

Primasius (d. c. 560) was bishop of Hadrumetum, primate of Byzacena, in Africa and a participant in the Three Chapters Controversy.

Cassiodorus, Magnus Arelius – 1 Cor. 11:1-16  in Narrations on the Epistles of the Apostles  in PL 70, col. 1336

Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus Senator (c. 485 – c. 585) was a Roman statesman, renowned scholar of antiquity, and writer serving in the administration of Theodoric the Great, king of the Ostrogoths.

.

600’s

Oecumenius – 1 Cor. 11, pp. 522-27

Oecumenius, once believed to be a Bishop of Trikka (now Trikala) in Thessaly writing about A.D. 990, was reputed to be the author of several commentaries on books of the New Testament.  However, more recently scholars have redated Oecumenius’ Commentary on the Apocalypse to the early seventh century, or the late sixth century, and have located Oecumenius as writing in Asia Minor.

“His commentary is indeed a catena taken out of about 121 ancient authors (for so many he cites) and amongst them he often cites Photius; whence ’tis evident he lived after Photius‘s time, who flourished after the middle of the ninth century.” – Thomas Barlow

.

700’s

John of Damascus – 1 Cor. 11  in Select Places in the Epistles of St. Paul out of the Universal Interpretation of St. Chrysostom  in ed. Migne, Patrologiae Graeca, vol. 95, cols. 653-58

John of Damascus (c. 675 or 676-749) was a Syrian monk, priest, polymath and father of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

.

800’s

Strabo, Walafridus – 1 Cor. 11  in The Sacred Bible with the Ordinary Gloss  (†849)

Sedulius – 1 Cor. 11  in Collections on All the Epistles of Blessed Paul  in PL 103, cols. 149-51

Sedulius Scotus (fl. 840–860) was an Irish teacher, Latin grammarian, and scriptural commentator who lived in the 9th century.

Haymo – 1 Cor. 11  in Enarration on the Epistles of Paul the Divine  in PL 117, cols. 567-69

Haymo of Halberstadt (d. 853) was a German Benedictine monk who served as bishop of Halberstadt, and was a noted author.

Maurus, Rabanus – 1 Cor. 11  in A Narration on the Epistles of Blessed Paul  in PL 112, cols. 99-102

Rabanus Maurus Magnentius (c. 780–856) was a Frankish Benedictine monk, theologian, poet, encyclopedist and military writer who became archbishop of Mainz in East Francia.

.

1000’s

Lanfranc – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentaries on All of Paul’s Epistles with Glosses Interjected  in ed. Migne, Patrologiae Latina, vol. 150, cols. 191-93

Lanfranc (1005 to 1010 –1089) was a celebrated Italian jurist who renounced his career to become a Benedictine monk at Bec in Normandy.  He served for a time as the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Bruno – 1 Cor. 11  in Exposition on All the Epistles of Paul  in PL 153, cols. 178-83

Bruno of Cologne (c. 1030–1101) was the founder of the Carthusian Order.  He was a celebrated teacher at Reims, and a close advisor of his former pupil, Pope Urban II.

Theophylact – 1 Cor. 11  in Ennarations on All the Divine Epistles of the Apostle Paul

Theophylact of Ohrid (1055-1107) was a Byzantine archbishop of Ohrid and commentator on the Bible.

Anselm – 1 Cor. 11  in Ennarations on the Epistles of Paul

Anselm of Canterbury (c. 1033 – 1109)

.

1100’s

Hugo – Questions 108-9  on 1 Cor. 11:7, 11  in Questions & Judgments on the Epistles of Paul the Divine  in PL 175, col. 533

Hugo of St. Victor (c. 1096–1141)

Alulfus of Tournai – on 1 Cor. 11:16  in Exposition of the New Testament  in ed. Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 79, col. 1323

Alulfus (d. 1140’s) was a Benedictine monk of St. Martin of Tournay.  As he had collected a number of literary pieces from Gregory the Great, Alulfus’ work was placed as an appendix to Gregory the Great’s works (6th century) in Patrologia Latina.

.

1200’s

Hugo of Saint Caro – 1 Cor. 11  in  All the Homilies of Hugo from St. Caro, in which are Delineated All the Senses: Literal, Allegorical, Tropological & Analogical  (c. 1244; 1487/1703):

Hugo (d. 1263) was a French Dominican friar who became a cardinal and noted biblical commentator.

“He writ about the year 1244, in which he was created cardinal by Pope Innocent the IV, in a time of great ignorance, when popery was not formed; whence it is that he, and others of that age, have many things, which they at Rome like not.” – Thomas Barlow

“The most influential type of comprehensive commentary, the postilla, was developed in the Dominican school at the University of Paris in the early thirteenth century, under the influence of Hugh of Saint-Cher (d. 1263).  The postilla, a running commentary composed originally as classroom lectures, became the typical Bible commentary of scholasticism.  The postilla was intended to supplement the Ordinary Gloss with newer interpretations and theological outlooks.  These supplements were often digressions on theological subjects suggested by the passage being interpreted, and focused essentially on the literal sense of the passage.” – History of Biblical Interpretation, vol. 2, p. 38

Gorranus, Nicolaus – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentary on All the Epistles of Paul, vol. 1 (Rom-Col),

Gorranus (1232-1295) was a Dominican.  The work on the catholic epistles has sometimes been attributed to Thomas Aquinas, but it is Gorran’s.

.

1300’s

De Lyra, Nicholas – 1 Cor. 11  in The Sacred Bible Set in Order & Interlined with Glosses and the Postils & Moral Teachings of Nicholas de Lyra  (d. 1349)

.

1400’s

Vallo, Laurentius – 1 Cor. 11  in Collated Annotations on the New Testament  (published by Erasmus in 1505; Basil, 1526)

Laurentius (c. 1407–1457) was an Italian humanist, rhetorician, educator and Roman Catholic priest.  He is best known for his textual analysis that proved that the Donation of Constantine was a forgery.

“Valla held a distinguished rank among the revivers of literature, and was one of the first who considered the sense of the New Testament as a critic rather than as a divine; whence he was led to make many corrections in the Latin Vulgate translation.  His annotations were first edited by Erasmus: they are also to be found in the Critici Sacri.” – Thomas Hartwell Horne

“One of the most influential humanist scholars of the fifteenth century was Lorenzo Valla (1405-57), who had an appointment in the papal court in Rome.  He was a very early, gifted text critic, who understood the need to collate the readings of extant manuscripts as a means of determining the original reading of biblical texts.  He collated Greek and Latin manuscripts of the Gospels, annotating the differences that he found.” – ed. Hauser & Watson, History of Biblical Interpretation: Medieval, p. 43

Denis the Carthusian – 1 Cor. 11  in Enarrationes in All the Epistles of Blessed Paul  in All the Works (1896), vol. 13

Denis (1402-1471).

“Without much secular learning or much criticism, Dionysius the Carthusian has great discernment, knowledge and piety, with an easy style.  There were various editions of the different volumes of his commentaries printed in the sixteenth century.” – James Darling

.

An Greek Anthology of the Early & Medieval Church

Cramer, J.A. – on 1 Cor. 11  in Catenae [Chains] of the Greek Fathers on the New Testament, vol. 5  (Oxford, 1844), pp. 202-13

.

1500’s

Zwingli, Urich – on 1 Cor. 11, ‘Every man prophesying’, p. 473 (bot)  in Annotations on the Evanglical History of our Lord Jesus Christ...  (Zurich, 1529)

“Surely he prescribes not laws perpetual and immutable, but teaches mores and honor.”

Erasmus – on 1 Cor. 11  in Critici Sacri, vol. 7 (d. 1536; London, 1660), cols. 3003-4

Erasmus (1466–1536) was a Dutch philosopher and Romanist textual critic who is considered one of the greatest scholars of the northern Renaissance.

Pellican, Conrad – 1 Cor. 11  (Zurich, 1539)

Gagnaeus, Johannes – 1 Cor. 11  in Most Brief & Easy Scholia on All the Epistles of Paul the Divine, beyond prior editions, out of the most ancient authors of the Greeks...  (1543 / 1563)

Gagnaeus (1500-1549) is not listed with a theological tradition at PRDL, but was a Paris theologian and Laurentius calls him a papist.

Meyer, Sebastian – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentaries on each of the Epistles of Paul to the Corinthians  (Frankfurt, 1546), pp. 79.b-82.B

Sampson, Richard – 1 Cor. 11  in In D. Pauli epistolam ad Romanos atq[ue] in priorem ad Corinthios breuissima explanatio  (London, 1546)

Sampson (d. 1554) was an Anglican bishop.

Vatable, Francis – on 1 Cor. 11  in Critici Sacri, vol. 7 (London, 1660), col. 3008

Vatable (late 15th century–1547) was a French, Romanist, humanist scholar, a hellenist and hebraist.

Melanchthon, Philipp – 1 Cor. 11  (1551), cols. 1116-21

Chiari, Isidoro – on 1 Cor. 11  in Critici Sacri, vol. 7 (London, 1660), cols. 3009-10

Clarius (1495-1555) was a Romanist founding father of the Council of Trent and an editor of an edition of the Vulgate.

Zegers, Nicholas – on 1 Cor. 11  in Critici Sacri, vol. 7 (London, 1660), cols. 3010

Zegers (c.1495–1559) was a Romanist, Flemish, Franciscan biblical exegete.

Musculus, Wolfgang – On 1 Cor. 11  in Commentaries on the Two Epistles of Paul to the Corinthians  (Basil, 1559), pp. 373-99

Vermigli, Peter Martyr – 1 Cor. 11  in Most Learned Commentaries on Select Portions of the Apostle Paul, the Divine’s First Epistle to the Corinthians  (d. 1562; Zurich, 1579)

This was recommended by Voet (Exercitia, 522).

Castellio, Sebastian – on 1 Cor. 11  in Critici Sacri, vol. 7 (London, 1660), col. 3009

Castellio (1515–1563) was a French preacher and theologian and had conflicts with Calvin and Beza.

Strigel, Victor – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentary [Hypomnemata] on All the Epistles of Paul…  (Leipzig, 1565), pp. 126-27

Strigel (1524-1569) was initially a Lutheran professor of philosophy who came to accept the reformed teaching on the Eucharist and became a professor of ethics and history at Heidelberg.  Vatable is in Beza’s Icons.

Marlorat, Augustine – On 1 Cor. 11  in A Catholic, Ecclesiastical Exposition of the New Testament… or a Library of Exposition  (Geneva, 1570), pp.

Marlorat (1506-1562) was a French / Swiss reformer.  This is mostly an anthology of quotes from other commentators, signified by letters before their quotes.  See the key to the abbreviations.

Gwalther, Rudolph – 1 Cor. 11  (1569)  (Heidelberg, 1601)  Homilies 86-90, pp. 205-17

Gwalther (1519-1586) was a Reformed pastor and Protestant reformer who succeeded Heinrich Bullinger as Antistes of the Zurich church.

Hyperius, Andreas – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul, the Divine, to the Romans and to the Corinthians Both  (1583), pp. 275-78

Aretius, Benedict – 1 Cor. 11  (Lausanne, 1589), pp. 324-36

Aretius (1505–1574) was a Swiss Protestant theologian, Protestant reformer and natural philosopher.

Bullinger, Henry – 1 Cor. 11

Bullinger (1504-1575) was a Swiss reformer, the successor of Huldrych Zwingli as head of the Zürich church and pastor at Grossmünster.

Junius, Hadrianus – A Commentary on Hair  in Animadversions of the Same & a Commentary on Hair  (d. 1575; Rotterdam: Hofhout, 1708), pp. 421-598

Junius (1511-1575).  This is cited by Voet.

Morton, Thomas – 1 Cor. 11  in Prioris Corinthiacæ epistola expositio quædam  (London, 1596)

Morton was a Calvinistic Anglican bishop.

Beza, Theodore – 1 Cor. 11  (1598)  This is much fuller than what is translated into English.

Rollock, Robert – In utramque ad Corinthios, cum notis Jo. Piscatoris  (d. 1599; Herborn, 1600; Jena, 1602)  per George Walch, James Darling & H.A.W. Meyer

.

1600’s

Tossanus, Daniel – 1 Cor. 11  (Hanau, 1604), pp. 90-93

Tossanus (1541-1602) was a French Reformed theologian.

Herlin, Johann Henrich – 1 Cor. 11  in Instruction on the Reading of all the Books of the New Testament, by an Primary or General Analysis of them, by a Summary Series of the Things & Arguments…  (Bern, 1605)

Herlin (d. 1611) was a reformed professor of Greek, ethics and theology at Bern, Switzerland.

Estius, Guilielmus – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentaries on All the Epistles of Paul, the same on the Catholic Epistles  (d. 1613; 1842), vol. 2, pp. 404-24

Estius (1542-1613) was a Romanist professor of divinity at Douai, France.  Estius takes the ordinance as temporal (p. 409 bot).

“Especially Estius.” – Voet (Exercitia, 521)

“Estius in Epistolas; one of the best Popish writers on that subject.” – Thomas Barlow

“A papal work of great merit.” – Howard Malcom

Polanus, Amandus – bk. 10, ch. 26, ‘Of Honor’  in A System of Theology, vol. 2  (Hanau, 1609; 1615)

Drusius, Johann – on 1 Cor. 11  in Critic Sacri, vol. 7 (London, 1660), col. 3011

Drusius (1550-1616) was a reformed, Flemish professor of Hebrew at Franeker, distinguished specially as an Orientalist, Christian Hebraist and exegete.

Pareus, David – On 1 Cor. 11  (d. 1622) in Theological Works, vol. 2, pp. 542 ff.

This was recommended by Voet (Exercitia, 522).

Calderwood, David – pp. 392-95  of ch. 9, ‘Of Indifferent Things & Ceremonies’  in The Altar of Damascus…  (1623; Leiden: Boutesteyn, 1708)

Calderwood takes the woman’s head-covering in 1 Cor. 11 to have been cultural and civil.

Piscator, Johannes – On 1 Cor. 11  in Commentaries on All the Books of the New Testament  (d. 1625; Herborne, 1638), pp. 533-37

Balduin, Friedrich – 1 Cor. 11  in A Commentary on All the Epistles of the Blessed Apostle Paul  (d. 1627; Frankfurt, 1664)

Balduin was a Lutheran.

“He sets in order that bad custom of the Corinthians… coming to the church…  men yet covered the head, contra the more of that nation…” – p. 437

“Out of all which it is manifestly gathered, if men indeed nourish [their] hair, it is not simply contrary to nature, but whatever Paul here [v. 14] wrote of nature, it is necessary to be received of the custom of that time and people.” – p. 440 rt col, mid

Sclater I, William – Vtriusque epistolæ ad Corinthios explicatio analytica: Una cum scholiis  Ref  (Oxford, 1633)

Sclater, I (1575-1626) was an English puritan clergyman.

Cameron, John

on 1 Cor. 11  in Beza, & Cameron, Annotations on the New Testament by Theodore Beza…  to which is Appended a New Covenant Commentary by John Cameron  (Cambridge, 1642), appendix, p. 63

on 1  Cor. 11:10  in Cameron & Morus – The Evangelical Ointment-Box: Here are Many Places of the New Testament aptly and skillfully Illustrated, Explicated and Vindicated from it with many labors, to which are Appended The Notes on the New Covenant by Alexander Morus…  (Salmur, 1677), p. 182

Cameron (c. 1579 – 1625) was a Scottish theologian and a professor of theology in Saumur, France.

Heinsius, Daniel – ch. 8 on 1 Cor. 11  in Sacred Exercitations upon the New Testament  (Cambridge, 1640)

Heinsius (1580-1655) was one of the most famous scholars of the Dutch Renaissance.  He was a reviser of the Statenvertaling, was a student of Scaliger and Grotius and was Secretary of the States General at the Synod of Dordt.

Laurentius, Jacob – St. Apostle Paul, Dusnoetos, that is, an Explication of Difficult Places in the Pauline Epistles  (Amsterdam, 1642), pp. 408-29

Locus 27, on 1 Cor. 11:7
Locus 28, on 1 Cor. 11:10

Salmasius, Claudius – Epistle to Andreas Colvius on Ch. 11 of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, on the Hair of Men & the Nourished Hair of Women  (Leiden, 1644)  748 pp.  no subsections

Salmasius (1588-1653) was Dutch reformed.

This letter was written on occasion of Pastor Colvius asking Salmasius for counsel on his church situation, where some men were attending with long, ornate hair and some women with very ornate curls.  Some persons demanded that every hair of the woman be covered, upon divine authority, nor a single hair of the man reach down past his head.

“All Europeans today cover, and, indeed, the Asians and Orientals. In the New World, because the greater part go nude, they also go about with a nude head.” – p. 13

Salmasius notes that long hair is just as natural for men as women if it is not artificially cut; pp. 17-18.

“…the women of the Corinthians, and thus, of the rest of the Greeks, were viewed with uncovered [unveiled] head in the streets, and the same style, moreover, they presented in sacred temples to God…” – p. 684, mid

“The mind of Paul then, is that it is not necessary, other than by the time, for the hair of women to be covered by a veil while they are praying.” – p. 687 mid.

Grotius, Hugo – On 1 Cor. 11  in Annotations on the New Testament  (Paris, 1646), vol. 2

Grotius (1583–1645)

Revius, Jacob – Christian Liberty about the Wearing of Hair Defended  (Leiden, 1647)  255 pp.  no ToC  This was approved by the theological faculty of Leiden.

Leiden Faculty: “We judge that…  there is nothing put forth [in Revius’s disputations], in the sum of the thing, that is not in agreement with the Word of God, we think.” – Polyander, Trigland, Spanheim

Start with Revius’s six disputations on the topic appended at the end of the book, which are concise and clear.  They were in response to a Dr. Poimenander and a few others who held that it was inherently sinful for a man to have long hair.  Poimenander responded in writing to these disputations.  Revius’s book is in response to that response of Poimenander, following the outline of the disputations.  This work is exceedingly good on the subject.

Table of Contents

Dedicatory Epistle

1. State of the question…  Whether it is lawful to fix an end where God has not fixed it?…  What of itself is intrinsically evil?  1 Cor. 11:14-15  1

2. First, the taking of the term ‘nature’ for the law of nature, and arguments for this, examined.  Long hair is not against nature… Rom. 1:26…  The definition of natural law is defended.  Adam in paradise did not have metal tools by which to clip hair…  To violate the law of nature due to a corporal necessity is not allowed…  The amputation of an infected member, in what way it is not against the law of nature.  23

3. The second receiving of the word ‘nature’ for the law of nations is refuted…  in what way theologians and in what way Poimenander understand the law of nations.  The third receiving of ‘nature,’ for a divine statute by ordination…  Paul does not refer the Corinthians to books of philosophers…  The fourth receiving of ‘natura’ for the natural inclination of women more than men; it is put forth but not proved.  A poem of Johann Casa  75

4. The fifth acceptation of “nature” for custom, rejected.  Whether and how far a firm argument is able to be made from custom…  The disharmony of the sixth acceptation of “nature” for natural honor and decency.  Cornelius a Lapide is cited for this transgression.  The seventh acceptation of “nature” is threefold, for nativity, essence, qualities, refuted.  The eighth acceptation for the certain judgment of right reason by sense, admitted…  97

5. The ninth acceptation of “nature” for sex, dug up from the author of the Dialogue and Borstius, by me illustrated and defended by testimonies of good authors…  Nor false because rare, nor because it does not occur in the Septuagint.  It is especially repeated in the New Testament and also in Josephus, Philo, Diodorus.  In what way sex may teach the Corinthians.  Amongst them the uncovered free head was a symbol of a lord.  A common more amongst all the greeks was not to shear, nor the wearing of hats, but to be elegant and sumptuous.  Priests or others in sacred things, in what way and why they covered the head.  Boys and wanton dancers to be removed from this question.  The saying of Paul on the covering of the head, etc. does not contain a universal law, but the rite accommodated that time, place and nation.  Nor is this my comment, but the common doctrine of our theologians.  116

6. Of the word coman [hair]…  147

7. Of the term atimias, “dishonor” [vv. 4-5]. Not always does it signify sin [Ps. 35:26; 69:19; Prov. 6:33; Rom. 9:21; 1 Cor. 15:43; 2 Cor. 6:8; 2 Tim. 2:20].  Decorum is rightly made opposite [to it] by the Doctor…  No necessity excuses the neglect of a divine law.  Honor, moreover, is involved around things indifferent…  On inconvenience and unlawfulness.  On the uncovering of the head in ecclesiastical assemblies.  Of precepts and counsels.  What “judgment” is, 1 Cor. 7:25…  Whether he sins against honor…?  A precept properly or improperly spoken.  Divine and human right, the confusion of them extinguishes Christian liberty.  On dishonor, the sentence of Borstius proved.  On contempt and detriment.  The throwing away of dignity is one thing, the neglect of its symbol another…  Abjection formal and interpretive, by a natural sign and judgment, of itself and by accident…  The covered head a free sign amongst the Corinthians of lordship.  The solution of the opposite reasons.  165

8. Epilogue  213-14

Our disputations on hair follow, which in the above tract we vindicated from the exceptions of a doctor.

Disputation 1  215
Disputation 2  222
Disputation 3  228
Disputation 4  236
Disputation 5  243
Disputation 6  249

Judgment of the Theological Faculty of Leiden on the Disputations on Hair by Jacob Revius  255-56

Maetz, Carolus – A Forest of Eminent Questions: Philological, about Antiquity, Philosophical, a True & Most Able View of Theology (Utrecht, 1650), ch. 24

Of the use of headcoverings amongst the Corinthians, and the practice of prostitutes and young men and women among them, pp. 244 bot -253.  See the whole chapter also.

Maetz (1597-1651) was of Flemish lineage and a professor of theology at Utrecht.  Voet says that Maetz is a most accurate theologian, and does not see how he may add to this discussion or firm up any interpretation against it.

Of headcoverings and calotis [Dutch head-caps] of ministers, pp. 258-62

Maetz appears to take the customs as cultural and not universally binding or necessary.  He argues against Dr. Poimenander, Borstius and the Dialoguist, the same opponents that Revius argued against.  Quotes from the opponents are in italics, Maetz’s responses are in plain text.

Gothofredus, Jacob – On Covered Women & the Stripping of the Head, on the Place of Paul the Divine, 1 Cor. 11  Ref  (Geneva, 1645)  41 pp.

Gothofredus (1587-1652) was a Genevan legal historian, jurist, politician and publisher.

Cartwright, Christopher – on 1 Cor. 11:6 & 11  in The Honey of the Hebrews, or Diverse Observations out of the Hebrews, Especially of Antiquities and Monuments, with Many Place in the Old & New Testament Explained, Illustrated and Other Many Notes…  in Critici Sacri (1660), vol. 9, cols. 3018-19

Cartwright (1602–1658) was an English clergyman, known as a Hebraist and for his use of targums in Biblical exegesis, following the lead of Henry Ainsworth with John Weemes.

Cappel, Louis – on 1 Cor. 11  in Critic Sacri, vol. 7 (London, 1660), col. 3014-18

Cappel (1585–1658) was a French Huguenot churchman and scholar.

Morus, Alexander – on 1 Cor. 11:10  in Notes on Some Places in the New Covenant  (Paris, 1668), pp. 164-65

Morus (1616-1670) was born in Scotland, spent time in France and became a professor of Greek and theology at Geneva.  Being forced to leave Geneva due to his Amyraldianism, he settled in Amsterdam.

Coccejus, Johannes – On 1 Cor. 11  in Commentary on the Epistles of Paul in All the Works, Tome 5  3rd ed.  (d. 1669; Amsterdam, 1701), pp. 293-97

Solerius, Anselm – Of the Hat & Other Coverings of the Head, both Sacred & Profane  (Amsterdam, 1672)  379 pp.  no ToC  Indices: Subject, Authors  with pictures scattered throughout

This is recommended by Voet.  Solerius appears to have been a Romanist as the book is dedicated to Balthasar I Moretus, a Romanist.

Table of Contents

Dedicatory Epistle
The Argument
To the Reader – Frisius

1.  The dignity of the head on the human body  1
2.  On honor  13
3.  On the natural hat, to each sex equally common  [hair]  47
4.  On the first artificial covering of the head amidst Christians, equally common to each sex  [baptism]  59
5.  On the universal covering of the female head  [artificial covering]  70
6.  Sealing of the profane uses of the female head by coverings  101
7.  Sealing of the covering of the head of women devoted to God & of sacred virgins  122
8.  Profane coverings of the male head in common use amidst varied various persons  156
9.  Coverings of the head of the Mundanorum Fastigiorum  177
10.  The hat of doctors  203
11.  Coverings of the head of sacred men amongst the ethnics  235

To the Benevolent Reader  245
Bk. 2, ch. 25 of Philip Rubenius Electorum, Of sacred apex hats, and of their matter and form, Galerus, Albogalerus, a little apex hat (picture on 251), the reading of Varro defended  246

12.  Coverings of the head of sacred men amongst the Hebrews  255
13.  The Coverings of the head of our papists, cardinals and bishops  266
14.  The hat of the priests and clerics  294
15.  Of the Camelite and monastic cowl  313
16.  Of the papal galerus [helmet like head-covering] in the sacred benediction  343
17.  Of the handkerchief covering the heads of the dead  344
18.  Of the covering of the head of the saints  357

Roth, Eberhard Rudolph – A Dissertation on the Covering of the Male Head in 1 Cor. 11  (Jena, 1674)  in A Theological-Philology Thesaurus, or a Collection of Elegant Dissertations on Select & Illustrious Places of the New Testament by Protestant Divines in Germany, separated in diverse times, conscriptarum, digested according to the order of the books of the New Testament  (Amsterdam, 1702), pp. 545-58  5 chapters

Roth was Lutheran.

Doughtie, John – Excurses 78 (1 Cor. 11:4-5) & 79 (1 Cor. 11:14-15)  in Sacred Analecta, or Brief Philological Excursus on Diverse Places of the Old and New Testaments…  (d. 1672; 1694), pp. 115-18

Doughtie (1598–1672) was a reformed Anglican.

Voet, Gisbert

Select Theological Disputations  (1667), vol. 4

pp. 449-53  of 30. ‘On the Decoration of the Face & Hair’, pt. 2
31. pt. 3  453-93

See especially p. 459, problem 6, where Voet says to see Calderwood and Maets, who took the female covering in 1 Cor. 11 as cultural and civil.

Section 3, 6th Problem, ‘What of the Covering of Women in the Churches (1 Cor. 11)?’, pp. 475 bot. – 476  in ch. 8. ‘Questions on Some Rituals in Particular…’  in Ecclesiastical Politics, vol. 1  (Amsterdam, 1663-1676), Pt 1, Bk. 2, ‘Of Ecclesiastical Things, or Acts & Exercises’, Tract 1, ‘Of Formularies, or Liturgies & Rituals’, ch. 1, ‘Of Formularies, or Liturgies’

Voet speaks of the 1 Cor. 11 covering as being a veil or the woman’s regular hair, the apostle giving the commandment for natural honor (in contrast to a divine ceremony), and that nature teaches (vv. 14-15) that women everywhere and ordinarily ought to wear such a covering in public, whether natural or additional.

“It is not a rite indifferent, nor sacred ecclesiastical, but common, which out of natural decorum ought to obtain everywhere and ordinarily, where and however often women may appear in some assembly or go out in public.  That being, moreover, a veiling or covering of the head, whether natural, that is, the hair, or something additional.  Of this v.14 sets forth, ‘Doth not nature teach…’  And this commandment from the apostle about men and women, the same is referred by Polanus, Syntagma, bk. 10, ch. 26 as having been given for moral and natural honor.”, pp. 475-76

Poole, Matthew – On 1 Cor. 11  in The Synopsis of Critics…  (Utrecht, 1686), vol. 5, pp. 461-75

Braun, Johannes – Bagdi Cohaneem, that is, the Clothing of the Hebrew Priests, or a most full Commentary on Ex. 28-29 & Lev. 16 & many other Places of Sacred Scripture, One Book  (Amsterdam, 1680)  ToC 1, 2  bk. 1 indices: Scripture, Authors.  bk. 2 indices: Subject, Foreign Words  with illustrative pictures interspersed

Table of Contents

Dedicatory Epistle
To the Reader

Book 1

1. On the Origin of Sacred Vestments  1
2. On the Genera & Number of the Sacred Vestments
3. On the Defect of the Sacred Vestments
4. On the Material of the First Particular Vestments
5. On the Material of the Sacred Vestments, First on Wool
6. On the Linen of the Sacred Vestments
7. On the White Vestments of the High Priest
8. On the Barbarisms[?] of the Ancients
9. On Wool & its Various Kinds
10. On Gold in Sacred Vestments
11. On the Colors of the Sacred Vestments
12. On the Color of Gold in the Sacred Vestments
13. On the Color Blue
14. On the Purple of Tyre
15. On Scarlet
16. On the Weaving of the Ancients
17. On the Various Threads in the Sacred Clothing

Book 2

1. On the forearms of the priests  431
2. On the tunic
3. On the girdle
4. On the hat of the whole group of the priests  500
5. On the upper garment of the high priest  543
6. On the ephod
7. On the breastplate
8. On the precious stones in general & on the sardius
9. On the topaz
10. On the emerald
11. On the carbuncle
12. On the saphire
13. On the diamond
14. On the jacinth
15. On the agate
16. On the amethyst
17. On the topaz
18. On the sardius
19. On the jasper
20. On the breastplate of judgment & the urim & thummim
21. On the tiara [of the high priests]  793
22. On the golden plate or crown
23. On the way of dressing the sacred garments
24. On the preciousness of the sacred garments
25. On the use of the sacred garments  839
26. On the significance of the sacred garments, or of the mystical sense  867
.     For the meaning of the priests’ hat and on 1 Cor. 11: 927-29

Heidegger, Johann Heinrich

1 Cor. 11  in A Biblical Manual: Sacred Reading, a General Analysis of each of the Books of the Old & New Testament…  (Amsterdam, 1688), p. 751

Heidegger (1633-1698) was a Swiss theologian and the principal author of the Formula Consensus Helvetica (1675).

1 Cor. 11  (1699)  in Exegetical Labors in Joshua, Matthew, the Epistles of Paul to the Romans, Corinthians and the Hebrews…  (Zurich, 1700), vol. 4, pp. 97-103

Beveridge, William – Sermon to the Synod…  on 1 Cor. 11:16  (London, 1689)  32 pp.

Beveridge (1637-1708) was an Anglican bishop.

Witsius, Herman – sections 10-14  in Four Books of Sacred Miscellanies  2nd ed.  (1695), vol. 1, bk. 1, On Prophets & Prophecy, ch. 1, On the Hebrew Names of the Prophets, p. 7-9

.

1700’s

Michaelis, Johann David – 1 Cor. 11  in Critical & Exegetical Notes on the New Testament, Especially from Greek Hellenism  (Rostock, Germany & Leipzig, 1706)

Michaelis (1717–1791) was a profane and scoffing Prussian rationalist who did more to undermine Scripture than nearly anyone of that era.

Bos, Lambert – 1 Cor. 11:4, 14  in Philological Exercitations, in which Some Places of the New Covenant are Illustrated & Expounded out of Greek Authors, & Other Versions & Interpretations are Examined  2nd ed.  (Franeker, 1713)

Bos (1670-1717) was a Dutch scholar and critic in the reformed tradition.

Elsner, Jakob – on 1 Cor. 11:6, 10  in Sacred Observations on the New Covenant Books, in which Many Places in those Books are Expounded and Illustrated out of the Ablest Greek Authors & Antiquity, vol. 2  (Utrecht, 1720/28), pp. 113-14

Elsner (1692-1750) is listed as reformed by PRDL, but is labeled Lutheran by Wikipedia.

Alberti, Johannes – on 1 Cor. 11:3, 13  in Philological Observations on the Sacred Books of the New Covenant  (Leiden, 1725), pp. 349-50

Alberti (1698-1762) was a reformed, Dutch theologian and professor of theology at Leiden.

“Illustrates the style and meaning of New Testament writers, from the Greek classics.” – Howard Malcom

Van Til, Salomon – 1 Cor. 11  in Commentaries on the Four Epistles of Paul...  (Amsterdam, 1726), pp. 70-73

Van Til (1643-1713)

Venema – pp. 197 (v. 10) & 572-75 (vv. 3-15) of Three Books of Sacred Dissertations…  (Harlingen, 1731)

Zeltner, Gustavus – On the Defence of the Woman’s Head Before the Angels  in ed. Conrad Iken, A New Theological-Philological Thesaurus, or a Syllabus of Exegetical Dissertations on Select & Significant Places of the Old & New Instruments, vol. 2  (1732), pp. 820-28

Zeltner (1672-1738) was a Lutheran professor of theology at Altdorf, Germany.  Iken (1689-1753) was a reformed professor of theology at Bremen, Germany.

Schöttgen, Johann Christian – 1 Cor. 11  in Hebraic & Talmudic Hours in the Whole New Testament which Supplements the Hours of John Lightfoot…  vol. 1  (1733), pp. 634-38

Schottgen (1687-1751) was a German.

Meuschen, Johann Gerhard – on 1 Cor. 11:5, 6, 10  in The New Testament Illustrated out of the Talmud & Hebrew Antiquities…  (Leipzig, 1736)

Honert, Johann vanden – A Philological-Theological Dissertation on, A Woman is to Veil because of the Angels, on the place 1 Cor. 11:10  (Leiden, 1738)  14 pp.

Honert (1693-1758) was a Dutch reformed professor of theology at Utrecht and Leiden.

Otti, Johann Baptist – on 1 Cor. 11:4-5  in Gleaning, or Excerpts out of Flavius Josephus Illustrating the New Testament  (Leiden, 1741), pp. 368-69

Wolf, Johann Christoff – on 1 Cor. 11  in Curae Philologicae et Criticae in Novum Testamentum, vol. 3  (1741)

Wolf (1683-1739) was a German, enlightenment theologian, following in the Lutheran tradition.  He gives many helpful references to standard, Post-Reformation works on nearly every verse.

van Alphen, Hieronymus Simons –  1 Cor. 11  (Utrecht, 1742)

van Alphen (1665-1742) was born in Germany, but became a Dutch Reformed professor of theology in the Netherlands.

Raphel, Brandan Ludolph – on 1 Cor. 11:5, 10, 14  in Annotations on Sacred Scripture out of Xenophon, Polybius, Arrian, Herodotus… (Leiden, 1750)

Palairet, Elias – on 1 Cor. 11:7 & 10  in Philological & Critical Observations on the Sacred Books of the New Covenant  (Leiden, 1752), pp. 398-400

Palairet (1713-65) was a Dutch minister and classical scholar, who spent his later life in England.

Wettstein, Johann J. – 1 Cor. 11  in The Greek New Testament, the Received Edition with Variant Readings… and a Full Commentary out of the Old Hebrew Scriptures, Greek & Latin History and Illustrated by the Force of Words, vol. 2  (Rotterdam, 1831), pp. 144-47

Wettstein (1693-1754) was a Swiss Arminian and was best known as a New Testament critic.

“As a merely critical comment, this of Wetstein is unquestionably one of the most valuable: ‘almost every peculiar form of speech in the sacred text he has illustrated by quotations from Jewish, Greek, and Roman Writers.’ (Dr. A. Clark.)  Almost every modern commentator of note has largely availed himself of the previous labors of Wetstein.” – Thomas Hartwell Horne

Kypke, Georg David – on 1 Cor. 11:5, 10  in Sacred Observations in the Books of the New Covenant out of the Best Greek Authors & Antiquities, vol. 2  (Breslau, 1755), pp. 219-20

Kypke (1724-1779) was a Lutheran orientalist.

Bonnet, Gijsbert – A Philological-Critical Dissertation on the Pauline Precept of a Woman Covering, on 1 Cor. 11:10  (1761)

Loesner, Christopher Frederick – on 1 Cor. 11:13  in Observations on the New Testament out of Philo of Alexandria  (Leipzig, 1777), p. 288

Kuttner, Christian Gottfried – Commentary on the New Testament in which its Greek is Explained and Illustrated by Comments out of the Recent Writings of Some of the Great Named Philologists, especially Johann August Ernesti  (Leipzig, 1780)

Ernesti (1707-1781) was a German, rationalist theologian and philologist.  Ernesti was the first who formally separated the hermeneutics of the Old Testament from those of the New.

Vitringa, Campegius – Exercitationes in difficiliora loca prioris epistolae Pauli ad Corinthios  (Franeker, 1784-1789)  per H.A.W. Meyer and James Darling

.

1800’s

Rosenmuller, Johann Georg – 1 Cor. 11  in Scholia on the New Testament, vol. 4  (Nuremberg, Germany, 1808-1830)

Rosenmuller (1736–1815) was the father of Ernst Friedrich Karl Rosenmüller (1768-1835) who has a massive commentary in the same vein on the Old Testament.

Valckenaer, Lodewijk Caspar – 1 Cor. 11  in Selections out of the Comments of Lodewijk Caspar Valckenaer on Certain of the Books of the New Testament, vol. 2  (Amsterdam, 1815/17)

Valckenaer (1715-85) was a Dutch, classical scholar at Leiden.

“Valckenaer was one of the most distinguished critics of the last century.  These extracts from his Scholia are wholly philological.” – Thomas Hartwell Horne

Vater, Johann Severin – 1 Cor. 11  in The New Testament: the Greek Text of Greisbach & Knapp…  Annnotated with Critical & Exegetical Remarks & Indices  (Halle an der Saale, 1824), pp. 518-19

Vater (1771-1826) was a German theologian, biblical scholar, and linguist.

.

.

Bibliography

On the Post-Reformation

Latin

Voet, Gisbert – p. 457  of 31. ‘On the Decoration of the Face & Hair’, pt. 3  in Select Theological Disputations  (1667), vol. 4

.

.

.

“And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she lighted off the camel…  therefore she took a vail, and covered herself.”

Gen. 24:64-65

“And the priest shall set the woman before the Lord, and uncover the woman’s head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering…”

Num. 5:18

“…I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne…  and his train filled the temple.  Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly.”

Isa. 6:1-2

.

.

.

Related Pages

On Natural Gestures, Signs & Customs about Worship

On the Ordinances, Order & Policy of the Church

On Customs, the Holy Kiss, Foot Washing, Anointing with Oil, Love Feasts, etc.

Worship

The Regulative Principle of Worship

On Eating & Drinking Blood, & Marital Relations During Menstruation

Natural Law

On Ceremonies

Whether Ladies have the Right to Vote for Church Officers

Saying Amen at the End of Prayers

Ladies

Ladies in the Church

On Posture & Gestures in Worship