INTRODUCTION

TO

THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE

EPHESIANS.

I. The Date and Place of Epistle must be placed late in the Writing. - This Epistle, for captivity-not earlier than A.D. 63.

EPHESUS.-Of St. Paul's preaching at Ephesus we have a detailed account in the Acts of the Apostles. At the close of his second missionary circuit he had touched at Ephesus, and "entered the_synagogue" to "reason with the Jews." In spite of their entreaty, he could not then remain with them, but left Aquila and Priscilla there. From them, probably, with the aid of their convert Apollos, the Christianity of Ephesus began its actual rise.

reasons hereafter to be considered, has few detailed indications, either II. The Church to which of the personal condition of the it is addressed.-The Epistle writer or of the circumstances of has borne from time immemorial those to whom it is addressed. But the name of the "Epistle to the one point is made perfectly clear, Ephesians." To the Church at that it was written by St. Paul Ephesus most certainly, whether when he was the "prisoner of solely cr among others, it is adJesus Christ" (chaps. iii. 1; iv. 1), dressed. suffering some special "tribulations for them," which he bade them consider as "their glory" (chap. iii. 13), and being an "ambassador for Christ in a chain " (chap. vi. 20)-the word here used being the same as in Acts xxviii. 20, and being a word almost technically describing the imprisonment "with a soldier that kept him" (Acts zxviii. 16). All these things point unmistakably to what we have spoken of in the General Introduction as the first Roman captivity. That captivity began about A.D. 61, and lasted, without change, for at least "two full years." In the Letter to Philemon, sent by Onesimus, who is associated with Tychicus, the bearer of this Epistle, in Col. iv. 7-9, St. Paul prays him to "prepare him a lodging" against the speedy arrival, which he then confidently expected. Hence our

It is not, indeed, impossible that there may have been some previous preparation through the disciples of St. John the Baptist. The emphatic allusion to him and to the simply preparatory character of his work in St. Paul's sermon at Antioch in Pisidia (Acts xiii. 24, 25), seems to point to knowledge of him in Asia Minor. We know that afterwards St. Paul

found some disciples at Ephesus, scenes in St. Paul's Apostolic baptised only with St. John's bap-history. tism (Acts xix. 3); and we note Another-not less striking and that Apollos, while "knowing only infinitely pathetic-is drawn in the baptism of John," yet still Acts xx. 16-38, in the farewell "teaching the things of the Lord," visit and address of St. Paul to the found a ready acceptance at Ephesian presbyters at Miletus, Ephesus (Acts xviii. 24, 25). But indicating, alike by its testimony however this may be, the full de- and by its warnings, a fullyvelopment of the Christianity of organised and widely-spread ChrisEphesus was made under St. Paul's tianity-the fruit of his three charge in his third missionary cir-years' labour. What had been the cuit. His first circuit had been an extent of the sphere of that labour extension of that Asiatic Gentile we know not. We gather, with Christianity which began from some surprise (Col. ii. 1), that Antioch; his second was notable the Churches of the valley of as the first planting of European the Lycus-Laodicea, Hierapolis, Christianity, having its chief centre Colossa-had not been visited by at Corinth; now his headquarters him personally. Yet, whether by for the evangelisation of the Roman his own presence, or through such province of Asia were fixed for three delegates as Epaphras (Col. i. 7), years at Ephesus, a city specially" all which dwelt in Asia had heard fit for the welding together of the word of the Lord, both Jews Asiatic and European Christianity and Greeks" (Acts xix. 10). They -for there Greek civilisation met might well " " and "weep face to face with Oriental supersti- sore" at the thought that they tion and magical pretensions, in should "see his face no more.' that which was made by Rome the Now, in his captivity, certainly official metropolis of pro-consular to Ephesus, and (as we shall see Asia; and the strange union is hereafter) probably to the other curiously symbolised by the en- Churches of Asia, he writes this shrining in a temple which was the Epistle. itself a representative world-famed masterpiece of Greek Epistle, almost a treatise, bearing art of an idol-probably, some to the doctrine of the Holy half-shapeless meteoric stone- Catholic Church a relation not "which fell down from Jupiter." unlike that which the Epistle to The summary of his work there- the Romans bears to the fundahis re-baptism with the miraculous mental truths of personal Christigifts of the disciples of St. John anity. Baptist: the "special miracles " wrought by his hands; the utter confusion both of Jewish exorcists and of the professors of those "curious arts" for which Ephesus was notorious; the sudden tumult, so skilfully appeased by the "town clerk," who must surely have been half a Christian make up (in Acts xix.) one of the most vivid

sorrow

After this, in the interval between the first and second captivity, we find (see 1 Tim. i. 1; 2 Tim. i. 18) that St. Paul did revisit Ephesus at least once; that, in his deep anxiety for its welfare, he placed it under the quasi-episcopal charge of his "own son Timothy ;" and that, in his last captivity, he sent Tychicus, the

bearer of this Epistle, to Ephesus again (2 Tim. iv. 12), perhaps in view of the coming absence of Timothy in obedience to the Apostle's summons.

From that time Ephesus passed into the charge of St. John, as the first of the seven churches of Asia (Rev. ii. 1), commended for its steadfastness, but yet rebuked as "having fallen from its first love." Of this phase of its Christianity, and its subsequent importance in the future history of the Church, especially as the scene of the Third great Council and the previous Latrocinium, it would be out of place here to dwell.

Ephesian Epistle alone there was the "singular inscription," "to the saints who are, being also faithful.” Basil of Cæsarea (A.D. 329-379) expressly says (in his treatise against Eunomius, Book ii., c. 19), "this reading was handed down by those who have gone before us, and we ourselves have found it in the ancient MSS."

Now (2) the effect of this omission is to make the passage obscure, if not unintelligible; for the only simple rendering of the Greek would be to "the saints who are also faithful," and this would give an impossible vagueness and generality to the address. Accordingly, ancient criticism (perhaps derived from Origen in the first instance) actually faced the difficulty by giving a mystic sense to the passage. St. Basil, in the passage above

THE CHURCHES OF ASIA.-But while there is no doubt that the Epistle was addressed to Ephesus, there seems very strong reason for the opinion, now held by many commentators, that it was an ency-quoted, explains it thus:-" But, clical letter to the churches of Asia, of which Ephesus was the natural head.

The evidence of this opinion may be thus summarised ::

moreover, writing to the Ephesians as to those truly united by full knowledge to HIM WHO IS, he gives them the peculiar title of the' saints who are."" To this interpretation, Direct Evidence.-Taking first the also, St. Jerome refers thus (in his direct evidence, we observe (1) that Commentary on Ephesians i. 1):in the opening salutation, which in "Some, with more subtlety than is the ordinary reading is addrsesed necessary, hold that, according to to "the saints which are at Ephe- the saying to Moses, Thus_shalt sus, being also faithful in Christ thou say to the children of Israel, Jesus," the words "at Ephesus "HE WHO IS hath sent me unto you, are omitted in our two oldest MSS. those who at Ephesus are holy and (the Vatican and the Sinaitic), and faithful are designated by the name in both supplied by a later hand. of essential being, so that from HIM This omission is exceptional, all WHO IS these are called They who other MSS. and versions inserting are;" and adds, with his usual the words. But it agrees with two strong critical good sense, "others remarkable ancient testimonies. more simply hold that the address Origen, the first great Biblical is not to Those who are, but to critic in the early Church (A.D. Those who are at Ephesus." Cer186-254), (as appears from a frag-tainly, nothing could show a firmer ment quoted in Cramer's "Catena in Pauli Epistolæ," p. 102, Oxford edition, 1842), noticed that in the

conviction that the omission of the words "at Ephesus" was necessitated by MS. authority, than the

desperate attempt to meet the diffi- | achievement of Marcion. Marcion, culty of rendering by this marvel- no doubt, was led to it by a conlous interpretation.

sideration of the well-known passage in the Colossian Epistle (chap. iv. 16) speaking of the "letter from Laodicea," which he (it would seem, correctly) identified with our Epistle.

But (3) we also find that Marcion the heretic, by Tertullian's twicerepeated testimony (in his work against Marcion, Book v., cc. 11, 16), entitled this Epistle, "The Epistle to the Laodiceans." "I (4) Now, all these things lead omit," he says, "here notice of plainly to one conclusion-that, another Epistle, which we hold to while an unvarying tradition dehave been written to the Ephesians, clared that the Letter was "to the but the heretics to the Laodiceans;" Ephesians," yet there was a blank and he then proceeds to refer to our in the oldest MSS. after the words Epistle. In another place:-"In "which are," generally filled up the true view of the Church, we (as in most of our later MSS.) with hold that Letter to have been sent the words "in Ephesus; " but by to the Ephesians, not to the Laodi- Marcion, with no MS. authority, ceans; but Marcion has made it his simply on grounds of critical inferbusiness to interpolate an address ence, with the words "in Laodicea." in it, to show that on this point That this insertion of Marcion, if also he is a most painstaking critic." intended to infer that the Letter Now (as Tertullian adds) the ques- was addressed specially to the Laotion of the address was of no doctri- dicean Church, was unwarrantable, nal importance; accordingly, Mar- appears obvious, from the whole cion could not have been tempted stream of ancient tradition assignin this respect to falsify or invent. ing the Letter to the Ephesians, He gave the address on critical and the absence of any vestige of grounds; and Tertullian says that such a reading in the existing MSS. he "interpolated" it, presumably But if the Epistle were a circular where there was a blank. Epipha- letter, of which many copies were nius, also (320 ?-402), in his notice sent at one time, it would be at of Marcion, (adv. Hær., Lib. I., least probable that blanks might be Tom. III., xii.), after quoting "one left, to be filled up in each case Lord, one faith, one baptism," &c., with the proper name of the Church; adds:"For the miserable Marcion and this supposition, which has was pleased to quote this testimony, been adopted by many, would furnot from the Epistle to the Ephe- nish a very simple explanationsians, but from the Epistle to the indeed, the only simple explanation Laodiceans, which is not in the of this perplexing MS. pheApostle's writings." He appar-nomenon.

ently refers to an apocryphal letter, Indirect Evidence. This being of which he says elsewhere that the state of the case in relation to "Marcion received fragments; "direct evidence, we naturally pass and such a letter is noticed in the on to consider what may be gaMuratorian Canon. But looking to thered indirectly, either to confirm Tertullian's clear declaration, we or to confute this supposition, from may, perhaps, see here a confused the Epistle itself. reminiscence of this same critical

Now, the study of the Epistle, as

a whole, must surely convey to the | speak) philosophical in treatment; mind the impression of a certain while in the parallel passages the generality and abstractness of char- other Epistle is particular and acter. It approaches closely-at practical. Now it so happens that least as closely as the Epistle to in the Epistles of this period we the Romans-to the character of a have the Philippian, written to a treatise, dealing, with a singular Church personally known and loved, completeness, accuracy, and sym- while the Colossian is addressed to metry of handling, with a grand a Church known perhaps well, but spiritual truth-the doctrine of the indirectly, and not by personal Holy Catholic Church. The very intercourse. The former Epistle is opening-strongly reminding us in pervaded from beginning to end form, though not in substance, of with the personality of the writer, the opening of the General Epistle as fully as the Corinthian or Galaof St. Peter to these churches and tian Epistles themselves. The latother churches of Asia Minor ter is more distant and more general, (1 Pet. i. 3-7)—is a complete and introducing the special warnings of exhaustive statement of the mys- the second chapter with a halfterious truth of the election of the apologetic reference to the deep whole Church, as gathered up in anxiety felt "for them, and for the Christ and redeemed by Him, in Laodiceans, and for those who had the eternal counsels of God. The not seen his face in the flesh." The celebrated passage (chap. iv. 4-6) Church of Ephesus must have been on the unity of the Church, while even more intimately known and it is full of an almost poetic beauty, bound to St. Paul than the Church has all the fulness and precision of at Philippi. How near it lay to a creed. The practical exhortations his heart we know by the pathetic of the Epistle are drawn, with a beauty and yearning tenderness of philosophic generality, from the his address to the elders at Miletus. fundamental conception of religious An Epistle written to this Church unity. Nor can we fail to notice should surely have had all the that the Epistle is entirely destitute strong personality of the Philippian of any reference-such as is invari- Epistle; yet our Epistle, on the able in St. Paul's other Epistles- contrary, is infinitely less direct, to the particular condition, bless- personal, special, than the Epistle ings, trials, graces, or defects, of to the Colossians. The inference, those to whom it is addressed. They even from these general consideraare simply spoken of as "you Gen- tions, seems unmistakable-that it tiles," in contradistinction to the was not addressed to any special children of the old covenant. The Church, but least of all to such a sins against which they are warned Church as Ephesus. are the typical sins forbidden in the Second Table, or the sins specially rife in the heathen society of that time in general.

The comparison in this respect with the Colossian Epistle is most instructive. Everywhere the Ephesian Epistle is general and (so to

But there are also some indications in detail, looking in the same direction, which are referred to in the Notes on the various passages. Such, for example, is the vagueness which has been noticed in the two passages (chaps. i. 15; iii. 2)," after I heard of your faith in the Lord