THE CHURCH: THE RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY The English word "church" represents the Greek iKKArlcia (naturalized in Latin as Ecclesia) in its specifically Christian use. Other uses of the Greek word shed no light on this, and may prove misleading if brought into comparison. As so used, its earliest appearance that we can date is in the Epistles of St. Paul, where it is evidently a familiar term. In the earliest of them the apostle writes, "ye have heard of my manner of life in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the Church of God, and make havock of it." This phrase, the Church of God (Tip roI) Owl)), has a history behind it, which will show exactly in what sense it was here used.
In the Old Testament are two Hebrew words 'edah, and kahal, which in the LXX. are indiscriminately rendered avvaywy) or EKKAf o La. In the Pentateuch both alike signify the general as sembly of the people of Israel during the Wanderings. The word itcancria, which is so far confined to Deuteronomy is in this con nection a natural Hellenism. Elsewhere they mean the people itself, especially in its relation to God, with little or no reference to assembling. Striking examples are Nehemiah xiii. i where the phrase is EKKXfla is Oeov, and Ps. lxxiv. 2, Tis avvaywy7s vov. The word vvvaywyi is the more frequent, and this alone survived in current use among Hellenistic Jews in the sense of a local con gregation, the familiar synagogue. What has to be considered is the reason why the other word was revived in Christian use. The origin and the essential character of the Church are involved in this enquiry.
As historical sources there is nothing else, except in some sec tions of the Acts, so entirely contemporary as St. Paul's Epistles; but in the Gospels and in the rest of the Acts, though the language may be coloured by later thought or experience, valuable mate rial can be found. It is clear that the gospel began as a proclama tion of the Kingdom of God (or of Heaven) having close affinity both with older Messianic prophecy referring to the lineage of David, and with more recent apocalyptic dreams. The procla mation was renewed in both aspects by the Apostles on the basis of belief in the resurrection and ascension of Jesus as the Christ. They gathered at Jerusalem a considerable number of disciples, forming a close community which was entered by the rite of bap tism. There is reason to think that it was organized as a syna gogue, one of the many in Jerusalem. In Aramaic "synagogue" is knishta. The Church is still so called by the Aramaic Christians of Palestine. Hence, perhaps, the word synagogue in James ii. 2. In the 4th century Epiphanius writes clumsily of the Ebionites, Qvvavywyiv KaXoDat. EQUTwv EKK noiav Kai OvXL EKKXf c1Lav (Adv. Haeres, i. ii. i8). We hear of it later (Acts xv.) as governed by James with a bench of Presbyters, the usual equipment of a synagogue. Some Pharisees and some priests joined, and the disciples regularly took part in the worship of the Temple ; but the high priest and the Sanhedrim were hostile, making intermit tent attempts to suppress the movement.
The episode of Stephen was a turning point. It is evident that this Hellenistic Jew was out of sympathy with the dominant reli gious sentiments of Jerusalem, probably shared by the Apostles and most of their disciples. He seems to have anticipated revolu tionary changes, involving the suppression of the Mosaic ordi nances and even of the Temple. His defence before the San hedrim was a rapid survey of Old Testament history. That history is a record of repeated relapses and ruin of God's chosen people, followed by the recovery of a small remnant, the common subject of prophecy. Stephen is just approaching a prophetic warning when he is silenced. It is probable that this worked in the mind of St. Paul, as preparation for his conversion. It be came a prominent element in his teaching that the prophetic doctrine of the Remnant was being fulfilled. The Jewish people as a whole had fallen away by their rejection of Jesus as Messiah; those who accepted him were the faithful remnant which was to be the beginning of a reconstitution of God's people. He develops the argument in Romans ix., xi., but the conclusion is condensed into one remarkable sentence, Philip iii. 3, "We are the circum cision, who worship by the spirit of God, and glory in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh." In current speech "the circumcision" meant the Jewish people regarded as bound in covenant to God. The actual rite of circumcision was being aban doned by Christians, and the sentence may be paraphrased : "Not those who practise the circumcision of the flesh, but the believers in Jesus as the Christ, are all that circumcision signifies, the cove nanted People of God." It is the proper conclusion of Stephen's interrupted argument. St. Paul himself. having heard the areu ment and taken an active part in the persecution that followed, was soon afterwards convinced of its truth. So he said that he had persecuted "the ecclesia of God." Why that Greek word? It occurs in Stephen's defence, but we do not know that he spoke in Greek. It would be familiar to any diligent reader of the LXX. and peculiarly appropriate, as it appears in Nehemiah xiii. z, where e€ov means the returning exiles, the Remnant on which the people of God was to be reconstructed. Its use appears to be a deliberate archaism ; the exact equivalent vvvaywyyi being current, but unsuitable because of its immediate associations. In the Aramaic of the Christians of northern Syria 'edta, a variant of the Hebrew 'edah, is a precisely similar archaism. A common place of origin is, perhaps, to be found at Antioch. Hort's hesitating suggestion that it may have been derived from the saying of our Lord recorded in Matt. xvi. 18 is unacceptable in view of the improbability that Greek was the language used on that occasion. If not, the use of EKKAnlrLa there will be due to later coloration.
The use of the word thus indicates the definite application of the prophetic teaching about the Remnant to the new Christian community. This application was not peculiar to St. Paul ; it is found also in the words quoted by James in Acts xv. 16, "I will build again the tabernacle of David which is fallen, and I will build again the ruins thereof." The rest of his quotation marks a second crisis : "That the residue of men may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called." It was not long after the episode of Stephen that St. Peter startled the community at Jerusalem by baptizing Cornelius the centurion at Caesarea, an example which appears to have been soon followed at Antioch. The Jewish Commonwealth had always been open to proselytes who received circumcision and undertook to observe the Mosaic law, but these new entrants did not conform to either condition. When the community at Jerusalem consented, perhaps reluctantly, to the innovation, a complete break with Judaism was bound to come. St. Paul was inclined to press it, arguing (rather inconsistently with the doctrine of the Remnant) that Jews and Gentiles had to enter equally into the new covenant (Gal. iii.), but he afterwards spoke of the Gentiles as engrafted into the stock of Israel (Rom. xi. 17).
The Church now became a Diaspora, like that of Judaism, ex tended in all directions by the work of the Apostles and their helpers, but retaining its headquarters at Jerusalem. Conse quently, the word ecclesia speedily went the same way that the word synagogue had gone; from being the designation of the whole People of God, it became the designation also of local groups. This development was already complete when St. Paul addressed his first extant epistle to "the Churches of Galatia." Of the organization of these Churches we know very little, for our only informants had no occasion to describe what was familiar to those for whom they were writing. Two opinions on the sub ject stand in sharp contrast. The one is linked with Luther's con ception of an "invisible" Church, the members of which are known only to God. Rudolph Sohm is the ablest recent expo nent of this idea. According to him, believers in Jesus as Christ were at first united only by a spiritual nexus; but before long there was an inevitable attempt to bind together all putative believers in an external organization, which eventually claimed to be the true Church of God, thus corrupting the pure spiritu ality of the Gospel. The other opinion postulates a completely organized society, existing from the beginning and continuing, not indeed without changes, but in consistent development through subsequent ages. In reply to Sohm, Harnack stated this with much exaggeration, asserting that the Church began with an "abundant and elaborate equipment," and even with a "legal code" of complicated structure.
The truth seems to lie in a synthesis of the ideal and the actual contained in these extremes. Lightfoot constructed such a syn thesis in his essay on The Christian Ministry. What discipleship meant was a spiritual union with the risen Christ, but this union was held to be mediated by the rite of baptism. According to St. Paul, to be baptized was to "put on Christ," (Gal. iii. 27). Those who thus "live by the Spirit" must also "walk by the Spirit"(Gal. v. 25). But this spiritual walking was strictly controlled by the Apostles, who ruled the several Churches in a most per emptory manner, "So ordain I in all the Churches" (I. Cor. vii. 17) says St. Paul about the conduct of marriage. Their control se cured some measure of uniformity; "We have no such custom, neither the Churches of God" (I. Cor. xi. 16) was sufficient reason for repressing an innovation. To keep things in order they visited the Churches, personally or by delegates, and in case of need wrote directive letters. In a striking metaphor they are to the Church as the foundation to a house (Eph. ii. 20), and this can not refer only to the original preaching of the Twelve, for St. Paul certainly included Barnabas and himself. Thus the Aposto late extended as the Church extended, and was in the way of becoming a permanent institution. Of the interior order of the local Churches we know at least the existence of Presbyters, some of whom were called or overseers. Details must be treated elsewhere. The Church of the first age, therefore, cer tainly had an official equipment and some rules of conduct, but probably nothing so elaborate as Harnack supposed. Nor was this equipment alien to the spiritual character of the Church, for every function depended on a special gift of the Spirit, however mediated (I. Cor. xii.; Eph. iv.). (See MINISTRY, THE CHRIS