Bible Commentaries
Ephesians 1

Verse 1

THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS By D. J. LEAHY Introduction

Place of Origin and Date— Eph is one of the four Captivity Epistles, all written whilst St Paul was a prisoner, as he mentions in each. According to Ac the Apostle was imprisoned for two years at Caesarea, and he was also imprisoned at Rome. For eighteen centuries nobody suggested that these epistles were written at any other place than Rome, but in modern times Caesarea and Ephesus have been suggested in its stead. Neither has more than a little support from internal evidence, and none at all from tradition. We can safely assume that the epistles were written in Rome. Tychicus ( 6:21) is the messenger who carries Eph to its destination. The same man, with Onesimus, is the bearer of Col and Phm (Colossians 4:7-9). Now in Phm (22) St Paul says that he expects to be released shortly, since he asks for a lodging to be prepared for him. Hence, we can place the Captivity Epistles towards the end of the Apostle’s first captivity in Rome, in a.d. 63. This is the opinion of practically all Catholics and of the majority of non-Catholic writers of note. There is no clear indication whether Col preceded Eph, but most writers think it did (cf. F. Prat, The Theology of St Paul, vol. I, 280). Eph and Col are companion epistles; on their relation, cf. Introduction to Col, § /par

Destination— On one point nearly all modern commentators are agreed, viz. that Eph was not written exclusively to the church at Ephesus, the only writer of note who maintains the contrary being Fr Cornely, S.J. The chief reason for this agreement is the impersonal character of the epistle. Paul had lived for nearly three years at Ephesus and had many friends and co-workers there (cf.Acts 20:17 ff.). In view of this fact the omission from the epistle of all allusion to his experiences there is disconcerting for anyone claiming that the epistle is addressed to the Ephesians alone. Phil, written about the same time, abounds in personal allusions. Moreover, Timothy is at the Apostle’s side, and he is well known to the Ephesians (cf.Acts 19:22), yet there is no mention of him in the greeting of this epistle, though he is mentioned in all the other Captivity epistles. Admittedly, this point decides nothing by itself: Rom abounds in salutations, although the Apostle had not visited Rome at the time of writing. Similarly, 1:15 is not relevant: the verse does not imply that Paul knew only from hearsay of his readers’ conversion; it refers to the spiritual progress which had been reported to him.

Nearly all commentators, then, are agreed that Eph was not written to Ephesus exclusively. Beyond this point agreement ends. There are two main opinions on the precise destination: (1) Eph is a circular (encyclical) epistle. This view, first suggested tentatively by *Theodore Beza ( 1598) and developed by *James Ussher ( 1722), is the more popular among commentators today, Catholic and Protestant. Among Catholics we may mention Fouard, Belser, Lagrange (cf, RB 38 [ 1929] 290-3), Prat, Merk, LusseauCollomb, J. Schmid (BS 22 [ 1928]), Hitchcock, Médebielle. This theory explains why the epistle is impersonal; it has still to explain why the title in Ephesus appears in the greeting according to most MSS. Here the supporters of the encyclical theory divide among themselves. Ussher and many others claim that the words in Ephesus are not authentic. They are absent from the important Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codices, from the Chester-Beatty papyrus (P 46) which dates from about 200, and from the important cursives codex 1739 of Mt Athos (10th or 11th cent.) and codex 424 of Vienna (11th cent.). Ussher suggested that in the autograph a blank space occurred at this point, to be filled in by the names of several churches in Asia Minor, as occasion offered itself. The difficulty against this theory is that no other names occur in the MSS. Indeed, the words in Ephesus are found in all the MSS (including the important codices A and D) other than those mentioned above.

M.-J. Lagrange (RB 38 [ 1929] 292) is more plausible in retaining the words in Ephesus. The epistle is an encyclical addressed first to the Ephesians, who were then to pass it on to the churches of Asia Minor. It is very probably the letter which Paul mentions, Colossians 4:16. The words in Ephesus could easily have disappeared from certain copies, either by design (as ’in Rome’, Romans 1:7, Romans 1:15, missing in codex G), or accidentally.

(2) Eph was written to the church at Laodicaea. This theory, too, explains the impersonal character of the epistle; for Paul had not personally evangelized Laodicaea. Moreover, it provides an answer to the question: Why, if Eph is an encyclical intended for several churches, did Paul not mention them (cf. 2 Corinthians 1:1; Galatians 1:1-2)? Thirdly, it regards Colossians 4:16 as a reference to this epistle. Lastly, there is the testimony of Marcion. We learn from Tertullian (Adv. Marcion. 5, 11, 17, PL 2, 532-4) that Marcion read ’in Laodicaea’ in place of in Ephesus. Since there is no doctrinal reason why Marcion should change in Ephesus for ’in Laodicaea’ many writers, Protestant and Catholic (among the latter are Knabenbauer, Delatte, Simon-Prado, Vosté, Huby) think the epistle was written to the Laodicaeans.

The great difficulty in this theory is to explain why the name Laodicaea disappeared from the MSS to give way to Ephesus. Most of the supporters suggest a reason drawn from Apoc 3:14-19, where the angel of Laodicaea severely reprimands the city. Copyists thought they ought to erase the name of a city which no longer merited the name of holy and faithful. But the reproach levelled at Laodicaea was the outcome of love (Apoc 3:18); the threats were conditional; and in fact the Laodicaeans repented later on. But by that time, says Vosté, it was too late: the name Laodicaea had already disappeared from the copies. But why had Ephesus been substituted? There is no extant MS with the title in Laodicaea; on the contrary, patristic tradition, beginning with St Irenaeus, is for an original in Ephesus.

Authenticity— The first doubts on the authenticity were expressed by De Wette (19th cent.). But the standard work against the authenticity was written by * H. Holtzmann ( Kritik der Epheser u. Kolosserbriefe, 1872). In England the common view among nonCatholic writers is to admit the authenticity (Lightfoot, Hort, Westcott, Salmond, Abbott, Robinson, Murray, Lock, etc.). There are still a few who follow Holtzmann’s lead, though they discard or modify several of his arguments. Thus * J. Moffat ( An Introduction to the Literature of the NT, Edinburgh, 1911); * E. J. Goodspeed ( The Meaning of Ephesians, Chicago, 1937), both of whom suggest that the epistle was the work of a disciple of St Paul’s. Goodspeed suggests that Paul’s letters were first collected when attention was drawn to his life by the publication of Acts. The collector of the letters wrote Eph (on the basis of Col and other letters) as a kind of covering letter, or summary, for the collection.

The arguments used by writers who deny the authenticity are exclusively internal. The chief argument of Holtzmann’s is the literary resemblance between Eph and Col. The latter is said to be genuine, but Eph is said to be merely a general doctrinal essay written later on the basis of the particular letter to the Colossians. Coppieters in 1912 and Benoit in 1917 dealt satisfactorily with this objection to the authenticity. They explained the undoubted literary resemblance on the basis of the traditional view that St Paul was the writer of both epistles. Other arguments used by those who deny the authenticity are based on the vocabulary and style of Eph. The hapax legomena in Eph, however, number only 43; they are roughly equal to the number found in the undoubtedly genuine Gal, and a dozen are found in the description of the Christian’s armour (6:10-17).

The argument based on different doctrines in the two epistles is no longer used. There is no contradiction, but a development easily explained by the traditional teaching that the two epistles were written by St Paul about the same time.

Contents— In captivity at Rome the Apostle’s thoughts turn to the empire founded by Christ, our Redeemer in Heaven. The epistle is a non-controversial exposition of how mankind is one in Christ, and of God’s purpose for the world through the Church. He sees the redeemed, Jews and Gentiles, bound together in one body ascending from earth to Heaven, to the body’s head, Christ. In short, the doctrinal part of the epistle is a theological treatise on the Church.

P. Benoit describes the horizon of Eph as a diptych. In one picture we see Christ triumphant in Heaven (1:20). From Heaven he, as-Head of the Church (1:22; 4:15; 5:23), distributes the vital force to the body which enables it to grow (4:16); he builds the house, of which he is the chief corner-stone (2:20). Moreover, he loves the Church, as a husband loves his wife (5:28), since at the time of the marriage he gave himself up for her (5:25) and saved her (5:23) by washing away all stain at baptism (5:26 f.).

In the other picture we see the Church saved and won by Christ, thanks to his atoning sacrifice, a new man (2:15), one body (2:16) subject to him, as wife is to husband (5:24); yet at the same time growing —developing as a body which keeps receiving nourishment from its head (4:16). The Church is like a building (2:20 ff.), the growth and construction of which are pointing to the goal of ’a perfect man (4:13); of ’a holy temple’; of ’a dwelling of God’ (2:21 f.). There at its goal the Church will have achieved its role of complement to Christ the Redeemer (1-23)—will have reached ’the full measure of maturity’ (4:13).

The Church— Three metaphors indicate the nature and the characteristics of the Church. It is one; for ’to one single head belongs one body; otherwise we have a monstrosity. As there is only one natural Christ, it is impossible that there should be more than one mystical Christ’ ( Prat, The Theology of St Paul, II, 279; cf. commentary on 4:3-6). It is holy: its members are in Christ (a characteristic expression of the epistle), and in him they are made holy (1:13-14, 23; 3:16, etc.) and are saved (1:4-5, 7, 15, 18, etc.). It is universal: the despised Gentiles without hope are now with the Jews ’fellow-citizens of the saints and the household of God’ (2:19; cf. Colossians 3:11). It is apostolic: to Christ the Apostles and Prophets are joined as the foundations on which the temple of the Holy Spirit, which is the Church, is raised up (2:20). Finally, the Church is a visible society. It was to a Church that must teach and rule that Christ gave Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Shepherds and Teachers (4:11). In this epistle, however, St Paul supposes, rather than diligently expounds, the visible nature of the Church, and this chiefly because his main theme here is the mystical union between Christ and the Faithful in the Church. (Cf. Prat, loc. cit., 275-83; Vosté, 42-58.)

In the Captivity epistles especially (and nowhere more deeply than in Eph) St Paul leads us into the inner nature and working of the Church. The Apostle sees the history of humanity under two heads, Adam and Christ. By Adam’s sin all men were lost; by the merits of Christ all members of his body, the Church, are saved (cf.Romans 5:12, Romans 5:19; 1 Corinthians 15:22). And the influence of Christ as head reaches deeper and wider than that of Adam’s sin (Romans 5:12-21). In the ’Great Epistles’ St Paul used the teaching of the ’Whole Christ’, the Mystical Body, mainly for exhortatory purposes; he was concerned with the union of members among themselves in Christ, rather than with their union with Christ himself. But in the Captivity epistles the theme of the Mystical Body is no longer incidental; it is the central teaching. More precisely, St Paul concentrates on the active role of the head, Christ. Pius XII wrote: ’Christ is in us through His Holy Spirit, Whom He imparts to us and through Whom He acts within us so that any divine effect operated in our souls by the Holy Spirit must be said to be operated in us also by Christ. . . . It is due also to this communication of the Spirit of Christ that all gifts, virtues and miraculous powers which are found so eminently, most abundantly and in their source in the Head, stream into all the members of the Church and in them are perfected daily according to the place of each in the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, and that, consequently, the Church becomes as it were the fulness and completion of the Redeemer, Christ in the Church being brought to a complete achievement . . . Christ, Head and Body, is the whole Christ’ (MCC, 76, CTS ed. 1944).

St Paul may well have learned his physiology from the ’beloved physician’, St Luke (Colossians 4:14). It is that of the Greek medical writers, and may now be out of date. No matter. It serves only as a vehicle to convey the teaching, an envelope to deliver the message that although Christ is in every respect superior to the whole organism, he is nevertheless present everywhere in the Church. All the life of the members, all the force, perfection and merit comes from the vital and continuous flow of grace from the head. Christ is the Head and Saviour of the Body (5:23). The Body is the Church, a living organism, growing in charity (4:16), the chief agent of its development, the bond uniting and consolidating the whole organism. Christ, then, is in the Christian; the Christian is in Christ. It is only in and by the Church that men can live in Christ. And without the Church Christ would be incomplete (1:23). In Eph we see that the Church is Christ, always living, always doing the work of Christ, adoring, thanking and praising the Blessed Trinity, leading men to God to save and sanctify them. ’It is not enough to represent the Church as a society endowed with legislative power, custodian of a sacred teaching and rite conveying holiness, like a wonderful bureaucracy in charge of a factory founded by God himself. That would be seeing only the external architecture, the Church from the outside. In its inner nature, and in its essence, it is Christ himself, always visible, always living, unfolding in her and by her all the riches and the magnificence of divine life’ (Médebielle, DBV(S) II 668).

Verses 2-23

Analysis—Introduction 1:1-14. /par/par 1. Greeting, 1:1-2.

2. Prologue, The Mystery of God’s will decreed in eternity, 1:3-14. Part I. Doctrine. 1:15-3:21. 1. God’s power shown in raising Christ to be Head of the Church, 1:15-23. 2. God’s power shown in raising us to salvation in Christ, whether we are Jews or Gentiles, 2:1-10. 3. Hence, Jews and Gentiles alike are fused into One New Unique Man. The ’Mystery’, then, fulfilled in the Church, 2:11-22. 4. How the ’Mystery’ was promulgated to the Gentiles, 3:1-21. Part II. Moral. The Christian Life. 4:1-6:20. 1. General Injunctions, 4:1-5:21. 2. Family Life, 5:22-6:9. 3. Epilogue, The Christian Warfare, 6:10-22. 4. Conclusion, 6:23-24. I 1-2 The words at Ephesus are absent from the most important MSS. This raises the interesting question of the destination of the epistle; on which see § 898c. 899a

3-14 Prologue— The Apostle is overwhelmed by feelings of gratitude as from his prison cell in the centre of the Roman Empire he contemplates God’s love for mankind. In this ’Magnificat’ (one unbroken sentence in the original) he is not content merely to praise God’s bounty; he qualifies the word with rich.

3-6 God’s eternal purpose— Paul contemplates God the Father’s loving plan in eternity to choose us out and to heap on us blessings that are both spiritual and supernatural by reason of our being in Christ. The goal of that eternal election is that we be holy

(4b), i.e. separated from the world and consecrated to God; unspotted in his sight: so that our charity can withstand the penetrating gaze of God.

5. How can such holiness be possible? It is made possible by God’s fore-ordaining us to be his adopted children in Christ. The notion of the adoption of children is frequent in St Paul (e.g. Romans 8:15-23; Galatians 4:5), and except for Romans 9:4 always denotes the interior dignity of those who are in Christ. At our rebirth (Baptism) God infuses into us his own nature, and at once our relation to God is that of child to father. In his beloved son (6c) God loves us and makes us lovable only in so far as we are one in and with Christ.

7-13a Realized in Christ—The Redemption and the Mystery—7-8. Paul descends to speak of the greatest proof of God’s love for us: our redemption in Christ. This means that we are loosed from the shackles of sin and from God’s anger, the price being the sacrifice of Christ’s blood (cf.Hebrews 9:22). Secondly, we are engulfed by the treasure of God’s grace. Equipped in this way we are able to understand things in the light of eternal truth—such is the meaning of wisdom (cf.1 Corinthians 2:7)—and to conduct our lives accordingly (prudence). 9. But if the benefits of the Redemption are to wield an influence in our lives, the Redemption itself must be made known to us. That is why the Apostle attaches the greatest importance to the revelation of what he calls ’the mystery of his (God’s) will’. The expression mystery is characteristic of Eph and Col. Its general meaning is an idea or work of God which is out of reach of man’s natural knowledge, and which having been held secret by God for a long time is at length revealed. In these two epistles, however, it has a particular sense; it refers to God’s redemptive plan for all mankind (cf. 10c), long a secret, now revealed in Christ (cf.Colossians 1:26).

Having mentioned the secret (9a) the Apostle describes its unfolding. First, it is centred in Christ (in him, 9c). Secondly (10 ), it is executed and revealed in the fullness of times (10a), i.e. in the Messianic age. Before the Incarnation there was a succession of periods; but they were incomplete, without harmony, unless they were seen as preparing the way for a period which would make them an harmonious whole (cf.Galatians 4:4). Hence the Divine secret was a ’dispensation’ (10a), i.e. a systematic arrangement.

10b The Contents of the Mystery: all things are gathered up into one under their head, Christ. DV ’re-establish’ and Vg ’instaurare’ express only part of what St Paul says. The verb ??a?eøa?a??sasTa? is derived not from ?eøa?? ’a head’ but from ?eøa????? ’a sum total’; a ’recapitulation’. And the preposition ??? means not repetition (as in Vg), but ’together’. It refers back to elements that had been scattered, and which now are together again. The etymological sense, then, of this compound verb is ’to present as one whole’ (cf. Vosté). St Paul uses the same verb in this sense (Romans 13:9), and many writers think that its meaning here is only what the etymology allows. But the same writers observe that in the sequel the Apostle shows that the work of unity is in fact brought about by Christ being the head of the body. It seems best to interpret the word in the context. The context is about the ’Head’ of the body. May we not see already in this word not only the bringing together of all things in Christ, but also the way in which he makes them all one in him, viz. by becoming the head of the body (cf. § 898k-l). E. Leen (’The True Vine and its Branches’, 34) writes: ’The idea . . . is not merely that Christ restored order in creation out of the chaos created by the Fall. Nor is it that Jesus summarizes or synthesizes all creation in Himself. His thought is much more profound. It is that God, in order to reward Christ for having laid down His life to expiate the sins of humanity, made Him to be a new Head for Humanity. Humanity supernaturally slain, or, to use a metaphor, decapitated by the disobedience of Adam, is "recapitated" or "re-headed" by the obedience of Christ’ (cf. E. Mersch-Kelly, The Whole Christ, Part II, ch 2, ’St Irenaeus and the "Recapitulation"’).

The Apostle goes on to say what things must be gathered under the head, Christ: ’all things . . . that are in heaven and on earth’. Under Christ as head, then, the whole universe must be gathered together and presented as one. Previously it had been scattered by sin, cf.Colossians 1:20.

11-13a. In the verses that follow the Apostle descends from the universal aspect of the Redemption to contemplate its effect on the two classes of humanity, the Jews converted to Christ (11-12) and the Gentile converts who are also in Christ.

13a-14 God’s eternal purpose perfected by the Holy Spirit— Two metaphors characterize the mission and function of the Holy Spirit. He is the seal stamped on our souls at Baptism as the mark of ownership; he is the pledge (the word denotes an actual portion of a whole) of the blessed life paid in full in Heaven. The refrain, unto the praise of his glory, sung for the third time brings the hymn to its conclusion, and shows that the whole expansion of the mystery of salvation, in time and in eternity, by the work of the Three Persons, reaches its final goal in exalting the glory of God.

15-23 Christ ascended to glory, head of the Church — From the hymn of triumph St Paul turns to the prayer which introduces the doctrinal part of the epistle (which ends at 3:21). 15-17. First, after thanking God for his readers’ faith and charity, the Apostle begs God, the source of all glory, to develop in them the gift of wisdom (i.e. a firm grasp of supernatural truths) and revelation (which lays bare truths once hidden); that thus equipped they may possess a deeper understanding of God, unto the full knowledge of himself.18-19a. In other words, he asks God to bestow the gift of burning faith and love enabling them to appreciate both the blessings which God has in store for the elect, and the mighty power of God at work in the lives of us who believe. 899f

19b-23. They can measure the working of God’s almighty power by the Resurrection and Exaltation of Christ.

20. The Apostle fixes his eyes on Christ, risen, ascended, glorified and made Head of the Church—no need then for them to be despondent when they reflect on their human frailty.

22. The sequence of the glory and exaltation conferred on Christ by God has a remarkable crescendo up to the climax, he is ’head over all the Church’. This, in the mind of St Paul, is a greater dignity than that of being sovereign over all the angels and all things. The Church is raised to the hypostatic order. ’Look again whither he hath raised the Church! As though he were lifting it up by some engine, he hath raised it up to a vast height, and set it on yonder throne; for where the Head is, there is the body also. There is no interval of separation between the Head and the body; for were there a separation, then were the one no longer a body, then were the other no longer a head’ (Chrysostom). Between the head and the body there is a common nature; hence Christ is bound more intimately with the faithful than with the Angels. Cf. § 898k-l.

23 The fullness of him— ’perhaps the most remarkable expression in the whole epistle’ (Robinson). A head without a body is incomplete. Every body gives completion, fullness, to its head, and it is clear that the Church, the body, is the fullness, or completion, of Christ, the head. But the Church is no ordinary group of persons, and Christ is no ordinary head. ’Comparing the Mystical Body with a moral body we must also notice between these a difference which is by no means slight. . . . But in the Mystical Body there is in addition to this common aspiration another internal principle, really existing and operative both in the whole structure and in each of its parts, and this principle is of such excellence that by itself it immeasurably transcends all bonds of unity by which any physical or moral body is knit together’ (Pius XII, MCC, 60). The Church continues Christ; it is united with him like an organism with the life that quickens it. The Church expresses Christ; without her Christ would be incomplete; with her he has completion, ’fulness’. Of course the body adds nothing new to Christ; for the body has all its growth, all its life from him, the head. ’It is from him that grace and strength descend upon the whole Church, and God sees us and blesses us only for His sake, in Him and through Him. But He had to have this supernatural expansion, in order that the eyes of all might contemplate the plenitude that was not manifest in His individual existence’ (Mersch-Kelly, 121).

At Colossians 1:24 St Paul uses this conception when speaking of his sufferings on behalf of the Colossians. He can rejoice in them; for the sufferings of the members of the Church and the sufferings of Christ are one. Christ goes on suffering in the sufferings of the Church. ’Just as Christ receives the complement, the pleroma, of His own life in their lives, so in their sufferings He receives the consummation and the pleroma of His Passion’ (Mersch-Kelly, 132). We give fullness, completion to Christ largely through our sufferings. Christ’s satisfaction works its effect in us inasmuch as we are incorporated with Him, as the members with their head. Now the members must be conformed to their head. Consequently, as Christ first had grace in His soul with bodily passibility, and through His Passion attained to the glory of immortality, so we likewise, who are His members are freed by His Passion from all debt of punishment, yet so that we first receive in our souls the "spirit of adoption of sons", whereby our names are written down for the inheritance of immortal glory, while we yet have a passible and mortal body: but afterwards "being made conformable" to the sufferings and death of Christ, we are brought into immortal glory, according to the saying of the Apostle (Romans 8:17), "And if sons, heirs also . . . yet so if we suffer with Him, that we may be also glorified with Him" ’ (Aquin., III, 49, 3 ad 3). ’The daily passion of the Christian, who is united to Christ by faith and charity, wears to God the aspect of the Passion of His only Begotten Son. This consoling thought sheds a new light on the baffling problem of human pain. The holy souls who recognize Christ suffering in, and through, themselves, learn to attach positive value to what human nature shrinks from as a great evil. The heroic souls who, rising above the patient endurance of pain, positively look for it, in order that their assimilation to Christ may be made more perfect, do more than sanctify themselves by their sufferings. They take an effective part in redeeming the human race. They co-operate subordinately to Christ, in the work of redemption’ (Leen, op. cit., 76). ’The Church is the fulness of Christ, because it completes and perfects him in the plan of redemption, the nourishment of grace being able to go from the Head to the members only through the medium of the body’ (Prat, op. cit., 1, 299). We have given an active sense to the word fullness. This is the common view, and it fits in well with the context and with St Paul’s thought (cf.Colossians 1:24). Nevertheless, certain writers regard the word as passive, the sense then being that the Church is the fullness of Christ, because it is the receptacle filled by him with all supernatural blessings. Among those sharing this view are Knabenbauer, Lightfoot, Schmid, Huby.

The expression, ’who is filled all in all’, is patient of two or three senses in the Greek. The main point to decide is whether the verb is in the middle (with active meaning) or passive voice. We follow Vg in regarding it as a passive (thus conforming to the passive sense found in 87 other instances in the NT). The Church, then, completes Christ, who is himself completed (filled) only by all his members.

In Eph St Paul speaks of the fullness of Christ, Christ being the centre of the perfection which he gives to and receives from the Church. In Col he speaks of the fullness in Christ, Christ being the centre of that perfection which he possesses in himself absolutely. Cf. VD 14 ( 1934) 49-55.