CHURCH
in
v.is
(cf.
le")
makes
against
this
interpretation.
And
the
assurance
of
Christ's
presence
in
v.™
can
have
reference
only
to
gatherings
of
disciples.
But
it
may
well
be
that
we
have
these
sayings
brought
together
by
Matthew
in
view
of
the
Christian
signifi-cance
of
ecdesia.
There
is
no
evidence
that
ecclesia,
like
'synagogue,'
was
transferred
from
the
congrega-tion
of
Israel
to
the
religious
assemblies
which
were
its
local
embodiment.
But,
though
not
the
technical
term,
there
would
be
no
difBcuIty
in
applying
it,
without
fear
of
misunderstanding,
to
the
synagogue.
And
this
would
be
the
more
natural
because
the
term
is
usually
applied
to
Israel
in
its
historical
rather
than
in
its
ideal
aspect
(see
Hort,
Christian
Ecclesia,
p.
12).
2.
Ecclesia
is
used
constantly
with
its
Christian
meaning
in
the
Pauline
Epistles.
Its
earliest
use
chronologically
is
probably
in
1
Th
1'.
But
the
growth
of
its
use
is
best
studied
by
beginning
with
Acts.
Here
the
term
first
occurs
in
5",
applied
to
the
Christians
of
Jerusalem
in
their
corporate
capacity.
In
1"
St.
Peter
is
represented
as
standing
up
'in
the
midst
of
the
brethren.'
Thus
from
the
first
Christians
are
a
brother-hood
or
family,
not
a
promiscuous
gathering.
That
this
family
is
considered
capable
of
an
ordered
extension
is
evident
(o)
from
the
steps
immediately
taken
to
fill
a
vacant
post
of
authority
(1^),
and
(&)
from
the
way
in
which
converts
on
receiving
baptism
are
spoken
of
as
added
to
a
fellowship
(2"
AV
'added
to
the
church,'
but
see
RV)
which
continues
in
the
Apostles'
teaching,
and
the
bond
of
a
common
table
and
united
prayer
(2"-
«').
This
community
is
now
called
'
the
assemblage
of
them
that
believed'
(4^2),
the
word
used,
as
compared
with
its
employment
elsewhere,
suggesting
not
a
throng
or
crowd
but
the
whole
body
of
the
disciples.
In
Ex
12"
we
have
the
phrase
'the
whole
assembly
of
the
con-gregation
(Gr.
synagSgi)
of
Israel.'
When,
therefore,
it
became
necessary
to
find
a
collective
name
for
'the
believers,'
ecclesia,
the
alternative
to
'synagogue,'
was
not
unnaturally
chosen.
For
the
disciples
meeting
in
Jerusalem
were,
as
a
matter
of
fact,
the
true
Israel
(Gal
6"),
the
little
flock
to
whom
was
to
be
given
the
Messianic
Kingdom
(Lk
12^2).
Moreover,
they
were
a
Christian
synagogue,
and,
but
for
the
risk
of
confusion,
might
have
been
so
called.
The
name,
therefore,
as
applied
to
the
primitive
community
of
Jesus,
is
on
the
one
hand
universal
and
ideal,
on
the
other
local
and
particular.
In
either
case
the
associations
are
Jewish,
and
by
these
the
subsequent
history
of
the
name
is
determined.
3.
As
Christianity
spread,
the
local
units
of
the
brotherhood
came
to
be
called
ecclesice
(Ac
9^'
13'
14^
15*'
20"
etc.),
the
original
community
being
now
distinguished
as
'the
ecclesia
in
Jerusalem'
(8').
Thus
we
reach
the
famiUar
use
of
the
Pauline
Epistles,
e.g.
the
ecclesia
of
the
Thessalonians
(1
Th
1'),
of
Laodicea
(Col
4'«),
of
Corinth
(1
Co
V);
cf.
1
P
5",
Rev
2'
etc.
"They
are
summed
up
in
the
expression
'
all
the
ecdesicc
of
Christ
'
(Ro
16").
This
language
has
doubtless
given
rise
to
the
modern
conception
of
'the
churches';
but
it
must
be
observed
that
the
Pauline
idea
is
territorial,
the
only
apparent
departure
from
this
usage
being
the
ap-plication
of
the
name
to
sections
of
a
local
ecclesia,
which
seem
in
some
instances
to
ha
ve
met
for
additional
worship
in
the
houses
of
prominent
disciples
(Ro
16',
1
Co
16"
etc.).
The
existence
of
independent
congregations
of
Christians
within
a
single
area,
like
the
Hellenistic
and
Hebrew
synagogues
(see
Ac
6'-'),
does
not
appear
to
be
contemplated
in
the
NT.
4.
The
conception
of
a
Catholic
Church
in
the
sense
of
a
constitutional
federation
of
local
Christian
organiza-tions
in
a
universal
community
is
post-Apostolic.
The
phrase
is
first
found
in
Ignatius
(c.
a.d.
115;
see
Light-
foot,
Apost.
Fathers,
Pt.
2.
ii.
p.
310).
But
in
the
1st
cent,
the
Church
of
Jerusalem,
as
the
seat
of
Apostolic
authority
(Ac
8'-
"),
still
exercises
an
influence
upon
the
other
communities,
which
continues
during
the
period
of
CHURCH
transition
to
the
world-wide
society.
At
.Jerusalem
Saul
receives
the
right
hand
of
fellowship
and
recognition
from
the
pillar
Apostles
(Gal
2»).
Thence
Apostles
go
forth
to
confirm
and
consolidate
the
work
of
evangeUsts
(Ac
8'*).
Thither
missionaries
return
with
reports
of
newly-founded
Gentile
societies
and
contributions
for
the
poor
saints
(Ac
15^
24",
1
Co
16'-3).
It
is
this
community
that
promulgates
decisions
on
problems
created
by
the
extension
of
Christianity
(Ac
15^-2»).
Till
after
the
destruction
of
the
city
in
a.d.
71
this
Church
continued,
under
the
presidency
of
James
the
Lord's
brother
(Gal
2'2,
Ac
12"
16'^
2118),
and
then
of
other
members
of
the
Christian
'royal
family'
(Eusebius,
HE
iii.
11,
19,
20),
to
be
the
typical
society
of
Jesus'
disciples.
5.
But
already
in
the
NT
that
ideal
element,
which
distinguished
the
primitive
fellowship
as
the
Kingdom
of
Messiah,
is
beginning
to
express
itself
in
a
conception
of
the
ecclesia
which,
while
it
never
loses
touch
with
the
actual
concrete
society
or
societies
of
Christians,
has
nevertheless
no
constitutional
value.
It
is
scarcely
possible
to
suppose
that
the
adoption
of
the
name
ecclesia
for
the
Christian
society
was
altogether
unrelated
to
the
celebrated
use
of
the
word
by
the
Lord
Himself
in
His
conversation
with
the
disciples
at
Csesarea
Philippl
(Mt
16"-2»||).
Two
suggestions
with
regard
to
this
passage
may
be
dismissed.
The
first
is
that
it
was
interpolated
to
support
the
growth
of
ecclesiastical
authority
in
the
2nd
cent.;
this
rests
solely
on
an
assumption
that
begs
the
question.
The
second
is
that
ecclesia
has
been
substituted
for
'
kingdom
*
in
our
Lord's
utterance
through
subsequent
identification
of
ideas.
But
the
occasion
was
one
that
Christ
evidently
intended
to
signalize
by
a
uruque
deliverance,
the
full
significance
of
which
would
not
become
apparent
till
interpreted
by
later
experience
(cf.
Mt
10*',
Jn
6'^).
The
metaphor
of
building
as
appUed
to
the
nation
of
Israel
is
found
in
the
OT
(Jer
33';
cf.
Am
9",
Ps
102'=).
There
is
therefore
little
doubt
that
Jesus
meant
His
disciples
to
understand
the
establishment
of
Messiah's
Kingdom;
and
that
the
use
of
the
less
common
word
ecclesia,
far
from
being
unintentional,
is
designed
to
connect
with
the
new
and
enlarged
Israel
only
the
spiritual
associations
of
Jehovah's
congregation,
and
to
discourage
the
temporal
aspirations
which
they
were
only
too
ready
to
derive
from
the
promised
Kingdom.
6.
The
Kingdom
of
God,
or
of
Heaven,
is
a
prominent
conception
in
the
Synoptic
Gospels.
It
is
rather
the
Kingdom
than
the
King
that
Christ
Himself
proclaims
(Mk
I'l-
IS,
cf.
Mt
4").
The
idea,
partially
understood
by
His
contemporaries,
was
broadened
and
spiritualized
by
Jesus.
It
had
been
outlined
by
prophets
and
apoc-alyptic
writers.
It
was
to
realize
the
hopes
of
that
congregation
of
Israel
which
had
been
purchased
and
redeemed
of
old
(Ps
74^),
and
of
which
the
Davidie
monarchy
had
been
the
pledge
(Mic
i^.
Is
55'
etc.).
Typical
passages
are
Dn
2"
7".
This
was
the
Kingdom
which
the
crowd
hailed
at
the
Triumphal
Entry
(Mt
21»||).
Christ
begins
from
the
point
of
Jewish
expectation,
but
the
Kingdom
which
He
proclaims,
though
not
less
actual,
surpasses
any
previous
conception
in
the
minds
of
His
followers.
It
is
already
present
(Lk
ll^"
17"
RVm)
in
His
own
Person
and
work.
It
is
revealed
as
a
historical
institution
in
the
parables
of
the
Tares
(Mt
13M)
and
the
Drag-net
(13"«-).
Other
parables
present
it
as
an
ideal
which
no
historical
institution
can
satisfy,
e.g.
Treasure
hid
in
a
field
(13«),
a
merchant-man
seeking
goodly
Pearls
(13«),
a
grain
of
Mustard
Seed
(IS"-
'^.
We
cannot
solve
the
problem
in-volved
in
Christ's
various
presentations
of
the
Kingdom
by
saying
that
He
uses
the
word
in
different
senses.
He
is
dealing
with
a
reality
too
vast
to
be
submitted
to
the
human
understanding
otherwise
than
in
aspects
and
partial
views
which
no
powers
of
combination
will
enable
us
adequately
to
adjust.
The
twofold
con-ception
of
the
Kingdom
as
at
once
a
reaUty
and
an
ideal
is
finally
brought
home
by
those
utterances
of
Jesus
