It is urged that it is new in St. Paul to find the unity of the Church traced back to Christ's cosmic position (Moffatt, op. cit. p. 393). But this is really rather a question of Christology than of the doctrine of the Church. Solidarity in Christ is the most characteristic part of St. Paul's teaching. The thought of the early chapters of Romans is simply its application to anthropology, the problem of sin. In Eph., with a wider purpose in view, it is applied to the problems of humanity regarded as a Avhole in its relation to God. The cosmological form which the argument takes is doubtless due in part to the situation at Colossre. But Ro 8^*- 2' is a hint that there were similar elements in St. Paul's thought at an earlier date.
The fact that in Eph. the writer seems to pose as the defender of Jewish against Gentile Chris- tians has been regarded as proof that he is not the St. Paul of the Galatian controversy. But it may well have been that by A.D. 60 there was danger that the Gentile Christians in the churches of Asia might outnumber and tend to despise their Jewish brethren. St. Paul's concern was always to secure the position of both Jew and Gentile in the Church. His argument in Eph. is really exactly like that in Romans. Both Jew and Gentile are brought down to one level by sin (Ro S^-^", Eph 2'-" ; cf. Gal S-'^), and are therefore joined in one redemption (Ro 101-1132, Eph 2'8-'8). In Ro 11 we find the same attitude of apology for the Jews as in Eph 2 (cf. also Ro V 9"^-). Gal S^^^-^s also gives an argument practically identical in substance with that of Ephesians.
Some have thought that the interest in church
organization is un-PauIine, and that the details mentioned involve a later date. It would be possible to argue that the very reverse is tlie case. The mention of ' apostles and prophets ' as fore- most in the ministry of the Church (4") is exactly paralleled by 1 Co 12-^ Thus there is nothing un- natural in the special position given to them in 2'" 3*. From the earliest days the ministry of prophets had existed in the Church, and it is very doubtful whether by the end of St. Paul's life the beginnings of the organization which superseded them were not beginning to appear. By the time the Didache was written the position of the prophet was becoming equivocal, and the allusions in Eph. could hardly have been written. The mention of ' evangelists ' (4") is no mark of a later date, since no such ofifice became definitely established. The general interest in church order shown in Eph. is no greater than in 1 Cor. (especially 1 Co 12).
It has been noted as curious, in the light of 1 Co 10^^, that the Eucharist is not mentioned in con- nexion with church unity. The reference to 1 Cor., however, is not quite in point, since the passage is concerned not with unity but with the dangers of idolatry. And there is no other hint either in St. Paul or in Acts that the Eucharist was regarded as a bond of union among the churches.
[b) God the Father. — This doctrine receives no peculiar expansion in Eph., though it is certainly emphasized, the title ' Father ' occurring eight times as against four in Romans. It is brought into direct connexion with the ideal unity of the Church (4''), which springs from the eternal purpose of the Father acting through and in the Son (l"*- ^ -^-^ 2i«.n). The unique Fatherhood of God is the principle underlying all human or angelic solidarity (3'^), and it is for this reason that St. Paul treats the family, in which this solidarity is exhibited on a small scale, as an exemplar of the Church itself. There is no real inconsistency, as has been alleged, between the view of family life in 5--- "* and the personal preference for celibacy expressed in 1 Co 78.
The emphasis on God's eternal purpose is also found in Romans. Its effect in the ultimate re- storation of all creation appears in Ro 8'^*', its efiect in uniting Jew and Gentile in Ro 9-11.
(c) Christology. — The Christology of Eph. isclosely akin to that of Colossians. In both Christ is pre- sented as being, in the eternal purpose of God, the bond of union for a divided creation, including within His unity heaven and earth alike, which were created not only in Christ but also for Him (P", Col P^i''). This consummation and restora- tion of all things, including the angelic world, in Christ is to come about through the restoration of man in the Church, which is His Body, His fullness (14.21-23 39-11^ Col 118-10), The emphasis on Christ's pre-existence is much more clearly marked in Col. (Ii5(?). 16. 17)^ though in Eph. it is perhaps implied in God's purpose 'in him' (1*- ^^ 3^' ; cf. also 2}'^ 49W), and in the title 'Beloved' (18). In this, however, there is nothing really new, except that the Pauline angelology, of which traces appear in the earlier Epistles, is here clearly coiTeiated to the doctrine of Christ. It was at Colossse that the angels were being exalted almost to the position of Christ Himself, and it is in Col. that the state- ments of Christ's eternal supremacy take their highest form. But the restoration in Christ of the dislocated creation appears in Ro 8^®^. The share of the angels in this is alluded to in 1 Co Q^-* 15^*. The pre-existence of Christ finds expression in Ro 8^ 9» (probably), 1 Co 10^ 15^^ (and context), 2 Co 8^, and is clearly connected with His relation to the Creation in 1 Co 8", where the emphasis on unity closely resembles the thought of Ephesians. At a slightly later date, almost every point in