Respecting God’s Order of Things 1 Corinthians 11:2-34 Adapted from a David Owens sermon http://www.sermoncentral.com/print_friendly.asp?SermonID=124396

2. You know, funny things happen in church from
time to time.
How about Gayla snoring & I’m the only one
not hearing it because I’m talking.
The look of panic Dewy has when he notices
nobody is coming to the front to give a
Communion Meditation then he realizes it was
his turn.

3. There’s a story of one beloved lady who
always fell asleep during church, but had the
curious ability to almost fall over, yet not fall
over.
She would lean to one side, then the other,
and then forward.
She entertained many a child over the years.
Most everything that happens at church is not
funny.

4. Paul has already mentioned a number of very
serious issues facing the church at Corinth.
As we move into , we see that Paul
is addressing several problems concerning the
worship practices of the Corinthian community.
In the first section, , Paul
discusses the issue of head coverings, which
apparently was triggered by something the
Corinthians had written him about.

5. In the second section, , Paul
reacts to a report he had received about
divisions occurring in their celebration of the
Lord’s Supper.
Throughout this chapter, and the rest of the
section that goes through , Paul’s
purpose is to encourage the Corinthians to
conduct themselves in worship in a manner
that respects God’s order of things, is
motivated by love, and conducive to the
common good.

6. As accustomed as most of us are to worship
that is sober and orderly, it is hard for us to
even visualize what was happening at Corinth.
So, let’s work hard to try to understand exactly
what was happening in Corinth, and then see
what we can learn from their mistakes.

7. ESV

11. From what Paul writes to the Corinthians, it
seems that they have appealed to Paul’s own
teaching in order to argue for certain practices
that seek to erase the distinctions between
men and women in worship- practices of which
Paul now expresses disapproval.
Paul’s reply no doubt came as a surprise to
some of the Corinthians.

12. Rather than endorsing the freedom of the
women to pray and prophesy without a head
covering, he instructs them instead to maintain
the discipline symbolized by head coverings.
Paul’s arguments about this subject are very
difficult to understand for three reasons. First,
his line of argument is – by any standard –
labored and convoluted. Second, we are not
sure how to interpret some of the key terms in
his argument.

13. And third, we have to admit that there is a
great deal we do not know about head
coverings at Corinth and in the Greco-Roman
world at large in the first century.
We know that heavy veils were worn by
women at Jerusalem and throughout the East
generally.
But there is good evidence to the effect that
Greek and Roman women did not always
follow the same custom.

14. Paul begins by praising the Corinthians for
their general fidelity to “the traditions” he had
delivered them.
Paul then called attention to the order of
authority and submission which heaven has
established and insisted that the Christians at
Corinth respect that order.

15. Christ is God’s equal in nature and essence,
but He became subordinate to the Godhead
for the sake of a particular function.
In the same way, woman is man’s equal in
nature and essence, but she is subordinate to
him for the sake of a particular function.
Women are to be subject to men and are to
respect the leadership God has given them in
the affairs of the church.

16. The appropriate signs of their acceptance of
God’s order of authority at Corinth would be for
the man to keep his head uncovered ( )
and for the woman to keep her head covered
in worship settings ( ).
So what was the cover?
Was it a traditional veil?
Or was it just a way of wearing her hair?

17. In light of , in which Paul is clearly
discussing hair, and in which he affirms that a
woman’s long hair is “
,” some have suggested that the
whole passage deals not with wearing a veil,
but with having the hair bound or unbound.
They would explain that to have the head
‘covered” would mean to have the hair tied up
on top of the head rather than hanging loose.

18. For women to have loose hair in public, was
conventionally seen as shameful, a sign
associated either with prostitution, or with
women caught up in the ecstatic worship
practices of the cults associated with pagan
worship.

19. Therefore, for men to renounce their authority
in relation to women by adopting the head
covering would have been wrong, just as it
would be wrong for women to challenge male
leadership by refusing to have their head
covered.

20. I do not want to address the issue of women
leading in prayer or prophesy, because that
doesn’t appear to be the issue that Paul is
addressing in these verses.
He will have something more to say about that
in .
Obviously, there were women praying and
prophesying one way or another, but the focus
was on the fact that they were doing so with
their head uncovered.
That is a given.

21. So the issue here in seems to be
the issue of clear role distinctions and clear
lines of authority and submission.
Regardless of the particular application at
Corinth, the trans-cultural principle about male
leadership and women’s submission to men in
the church must be taught and respected in all
times and places.

22. A woman’s submission to her husband and to
the male leaders in the church is not a
denigration of her status before God.
To the contrary, by respecting those
relationships she is demonstrating her
obedience to God.
The respect both men and women have for
God’s order of things on this point is not a tool
for suppressing women, rather it is a humble
acknowledgement of the context God has
designated for her as man’s complement and
helper in all things.

23. Complementary roles of leadership and
submission are necessary both for maintaining
marriages and building churches.
As women look to Christ, they find a perfect
model of willing submission.
Jesus’ absolute submission to the Father in no
way diminished His personhood, worth, or
dignity.

24. Paul argues that man was prior to woman in
creation and is “ ”;
thus he honors God by being in submission to
Him.
Woman was created from and for man and is
“ ”; thus she honors her
relationship with him by being in submission to
his leadership.

25. I’m sure some would be very disappointed if I
didn’t say anything about the phrase “
” in .
Among the many guesses about Paul’s
meaning by commentators, perhaps two are
worthy of mention.
Some have suggested that Paul regards
uncovered heads of woman as sexual
provocation to evil angels, but surely, if Paul
had intended to express this rather bizarre
idea, he would have offered a somewhat fuller
explanation.

26. More likely is the hypothesis that Paul thinks of
angels as being present with the worshiping
community and therefore the community ought
to behave in a manner worthy of the presence
of these heavenly “dignitaries.”
This view also leaves me curious because The
Lord who it far greater is in attendance.
ESV

27. Now, lest anything said to this point be taken
as being negative toward woman, Paul
immediately affirms her worth and mutual
dependence with man on God.

28. There is to be a genuine partnership between
the sexes with a mutual respect and mutual
submission in spite of their very different roles.
ESV

31. Paul’s final argument against the rejection of
the head covering for women is essentially a
sociological one.
Paul appeals to their own sense of propriety in
light of the community practice and in light of
nature.

32. Paul’s point here seems to be that “nature”
recognizes a distinction between the sexes.
The point is not to prescribe precise hair
lengths or clothing styles but to uphold the
necessity of clear role distinctions between the
sexes.

33. Paul concludes the section with a statement
for anyone who would object to what he has
said.

39. Having commended them earlier in the
chapter for their general regard for his
instructions to them, Paul now has little to
commend about their behavior with regard to
their practice of the Lord’s Supper.

40. The divisions he mentions here do not seem to
be the same as were mentioned earlier in the
letter that had to do with philosophical,
personality, or doctrinal differences, rather
these appear to be purely social.
In any case, the meal that should be the
symbol and seal of their oneness has in fact
become an occasion for division and an
occasion for some of them to shame others.

41. What we have to keep in mind is that the
Lord’s Supper in the early church was not
some kind of spiritual, liturgical ritual
celebrated in a church building.
At this early date in the church, there were no
separate buildings for Christian worship.
The Lord’s Supper was an actual meal eaten
by the Christian community in a private home.
Therefore, the sharing of the symbolic bread
and cup of the Lord’s Supper occurred as a
part of a common meal.

42. It may be hard for us to imagine the wealthier
Corinthian Christians acting in such an overt
snubbing of the poor, but in the context of their
first-century Greco-Roman culture, they saw
their actions as completely normal.
Archaeological study of Roman houses from
this period has shown that the dining room of a
typical villa would generally have three
couches & could accommodate only 9
persons, who would recline at the table for the
meal.

43. Other guests would have to sit or stand in the
atrium, which might have provided space for
another 30 to 40 people.
The host of such a gathering would, of course,
be one of the wealthier members of the
community.
It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that the
host’s higher-status friends would be invited to
dine in the dining room, while the lower-status
members of the church (such as freedmen and
slaves) would be placed in the larger space
outside.

44. Under such conditions, it was not at all
unusual for the guests in the dining room to be
served better and more abundant food and
wine than the other guests – just like first-class
passengers on an airplane receive much
better food and service than others on the
same plane.
The wealthier ones may also have been able
to arrive sooner than the poorer ones who
couldn’t get away from their jobs, and by the
time the poor showed up the food was gone
and the wealthy ones were gorged and drunk.

45. The main point Paul is making is that the
church’s common meal should symbolize unity
through an equitable sharing of the food and
drink.
Paul’s remedy for the problem is to focus their
attention back on Christ and the meaning of
the Supper.
Paul is not giving the Corinthians new
information; rather, he is recalling to mind the
story told them about Jesus’ redemptive event,
a story that they themselves should repeat
every time they gather at the Lord’s table.

46. The most striking feature of Paul’s re-narration
of the tradition is the emphasis that he places
upon memory – twice he instructs them to “
.”
The Passover meal for the Jews was instituted
by God to be a “day of remembrance for you,”
in which Israel recalls God’s
deliverance of His people from bondage.

47. ESV
In the same way, the Lord’s Supper is to be an
occasion for the people of God to remember
God’s action of deliverance through Jesus’
death.

48. Paul then calls them to “ ” and
not take the supper in an unworthy manner.
As we take the supper we ought to think of the
literal body and blood of Jesus that was given
on our behalf.
Certainly those who have not given their lives
to Christ in baptism should not partake of the
Supper.
Certainly it should be a time when we examine
ourselves and our lives in light of God’s call.

49. All of these are true but are not the kind of
things that Paul had in mind as he wrote to the
Corinthians.
The unworthy manner that they were taking
the Supper had nothing to do with personal
sin, or an irreverence for the elements, and
had everything to do with their mistreatment of
fellow Christians.
For Paul, “ ,” means
recognizing the community of believers for
what it really is – the one body of Christ –
without divisions and without social
distinctions.

50. What lessons from do we need to
work to apply to our lives?
Let me offer a few.
First, we need to understand that there is no
place in the church for unisex.
There is a difference between males and
females – God the creator made it that way.
We are not the same, and we are not
supposed to be the same.
Men are supposed to look like men and
women like women.

51. God has also created us for different roles.
These God created distinctions between men
and women should be honored in the church.
To blur these distinctions is to bring chaos and
needless shame upon the church.

52. Second, at the same time, we need to
understand the mutual interdependence of the
sexes.
Both sexes are equally special and valuable in
God’s sight.
Both sexes need each other.

53. We complement each other. Just because
God has granted the leadership role to males
in no way makes them better, nor gives them
permission to dominate.
The greatest male leaders in the home and in
the church are the greatest servants who put
the needs of their followers ahead of their own
– Jesus is our prime example.

54. Third, we learn that this passage rebukes the
person who is contentious.
There must be order if the Christian
community is going to function healthfully. But
that doesn’t mean that everyone has to agree
on everything.
If your conviction on a particular matter is not
your highest priority, then adapt to the will of
the majority.

55. If your conviction on a matter is of the highest
priority and does not agree with the majority,
then you have to, after lovingly and graciously
stating your case, peacefully remove yourself
from that community.
If your conviction is strong enough, don’t
compromise it but hold it in a way that doesn’t
destroy the body.

56. Fourth, we learn the importance of the Lord’s
Supper for our unity and focus. Strangely, we
are indebted to the Corinthians for messing up
their celebration of the Supper.
If they had not messed things up, then Paul
would not have had to correct them, and we
wouldn’t have this marvelous insight into the
Supper.
We must be sure that our observance of the
supper expresses the church’s unity as God’s
people.

57. All people must be treasured and treated
equally as brothers and sisters.
Our focus must be on the memory of what
Jesus has done for us and we must remember
that He did it willingly – what a marvelous gift.
We must never forget our desperate need as
sinners and Jesus’ graceful gift.
We are a people called to live in a way that
responds appropriately to such divine
generosity.

58. Finally, the Lord’s Supper also becomes an
occasion for us to ponder God’s judgment.
Sinless perfection is not a prerequisite for
eating the bread and drinking the cup, if so,
then none of us could ever come to the table.
Nevertheless, we should never approach the
Supper in a casual manner, rather we should
soberly consider our life, Christ’s sacrifice and
our treatment of our brothers and sisters in
Christ.

59. God does take sin seriously and sometimes
acts to discipline those who defy His will.
So as we bring this lesson to a close, let’s be
asking God to help us understand and respect
His order of things.
Let’s be asking God to help us love and
appreciate Christ and the people who make up
the body of Christ.