Table of contents for Unveiling Paul’s Glory
In the first post in this series, I started to talk about the problems that modern day interpreters have no matter how they approach the 11th chapter of 1st Corinthians. Today, I want to highlight another few problems and start talking about the characteristics of a satisfactory interpretation.
In addition to my earlier points, Paul makes a seemingly bizarre reference to the necessity of veiled women “διὰ τοὺς ἀγγέλους” or “due to the angels” in verse 10. Paul does find angels to be seemingly wild beings; in Romans 8:38, angels are listed among the things that cannot separate the readers from the love of god – however, this does not tell us much about how Paul sees them operating in the world. The closest Pauline reference to dangerous angels is in 2 Corinthians where Paul says an “ἄγγελος σατανᾶ,” or angel of Satan was sent to torment him. See Because of the Angels: Unveiling Paul’s Anthropology in 1 Corinthians 11 by Jason BeDuhn for an excellent discussion on the topic. BeDuhn says that:
It is essential that we note Paul’s tight construction here using δια, and how that makes διὰ τοὺς αγγέλους an integral part of his argument, because all alternative interpretations of 1 Corinthians 11 assume that Paul provides no clue in the passage as to what he means by διὰ τοὺς ἀγγὲλους, and that we must provide meaning for this phrase from outside of the passage. In fact, most attempts to explain the “angels” treat them as only loosely connected to Paul’s main argument. This assumption has provided a license for speculation in support of the tendency of interpreters to gloss the text. In some way or other, the angels are seen to be a threat to the women that must be guarded against by the “authority” on a woman’s head. [1]
Thus, no matter what, an interpretation of the text must explain this curious insertion by the author. There have been a myriad of suggestions put forth as to what Paul is talking about here. Some have tied it to a specific cultic practice. Others have suggested that “on account of the angels” referred to the prophetic process since it was was thought that angels delivered the oracles of God. Still others thought that Paul was advising women in Corinth to protect themselves from the sexual advances of angels, ala Genesis 6:2.
The rest of the section does not fair any better. Paul finds it necessary to bolster the reasoning of verses 7-9, which argue from veiling upon hierarchal grounds, to appeal to nature in verse13-15. It is odd that Paul would reason directly from Genesis and then follow his conclusion up with an appeal to cultural norms. All of this is culminates in verse 16 which backs away from the force of the proceeding section as if Paul is throwing up his hands and saying “Look, this is the only way we have ever done things here.” Paul, throughout his letters, never resorts to such weak argumentation. [2]
A satisfactory interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 must harmonize the uniquely Pauline concepts concerning gender and worship issues, maintain a tight rhetorical form which matches Paul elsewhere, and explain διὰ τοὺς ἀγγέλους.
My next post will outline the ideological considerations that any interpreter must consider when approaching any text. Then we will begin exploring what I consider to be the best way to read the text.
- Because of the Angels: Unveiling Paul’s Anthropology in 1 Corinthians 11 by Jason BeDuhn. p. 304 [↩]
- See chapter 1 of Stanley K. Stowers, A Rereading of Romans: Justice, Jews, and Gentiles (Yale University Press, 1997) for a discussion of the rhetorical skill of Paul. [↩]
