James Hastings.

Dictionary of the apostolic church (Volume 1) online

. (page 84 of 234)
Online LibraryJames HastingsDictionary of the apostolic church (Volume 1) → online text (page 84 of 234)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

command to repeat the rite, which is given twice,
after the institution of both bread and cup. He con-
nects it with the death of Christ, which is thus
proclaimed. He attaches great importance to due
preparation for reception ; and asserts that physical
evils have resulted from unworthy reception and
failure to discern the Body, which seems to mean
failure to differentiate the bread from ordinary
bread. It may be said here briefly that St. Paul s
teaching about the Eucharist is that it is sacrificial,
that it brings about a real communion between the
communicant and Christ, that the bread and the
wine are endowed with the character of the Body
and Blood of Christ, and must not therefore be re-
ceived as ordinary bread and wine. See further

(d) Eschatology. St. Paul's treatment of the
questions submitted to him is always coloured by
his belief in the imminence of the irapov<rla. Chris-
tians are ' waiting for the revelation of our Lord
Jesus Christ' (1 Co I 7 ). His language implies that
he expects some at any rate of those to whom he
is writing to be alive at the vapowrla, and he appears
to expect to be alive himself (15 51 '* 2 ). The chief
characteristic of the irapowla will be judgment
(2 Co 5 10 ). The work of the Christian minister
will then be tested (1 Co 3 13 ). The Parousia will
be the signal for the beginning of the mediatorial
reign of Christ. ' He must reign, till he hath put
all his enemies under his feet ' ( 1 Co 15 25 ). And then
finally comes the end of His reign, when God's rule
shall be unmediated (v. 28 ). It is important to
notice that St. Paul does not discuss in these
Epistles the future condition of those who are not
Christians. It is with the resurrection of Chris-
tians that he is here concerned. For them he
affirms the resurrection of the body. But it is to
be noticed that he differentiates the body from its
parts. ' Meats for the belly,' he says, ' and the
belly for meats: but God shall bring to nought
both it and them. Now the body is not for fornica-
tion, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body :
and God both raised the Lord and will raise us
also through his power ' (6 1S ~ 14 ). The new spiritual
body will differ from the old as the fruit differs
from the seed sown. This life is the time of sowing,
and the nature of the spiritual body will depend
upon the character of the seed. But it will not be
of flesh and blood, and it will have no element of
corruption (15 50 ). It will be a full and complete
means of self-expression for the 'spiritual' man,
just as the ' natural ' body is a suitable means of
self-expression for the ' natural ' man, but is already
found inadequate for Christians, who are even now
becoming ' spiritual.' Christians have received an
earnest of the spiritual body in the gift of the
Holy Spirit (2 Co 5 5 ). The metaphor of which he
is most fond is that of a garment. He is to be


clothed with this new spiritual body (1 Co 15 53 ,
2 Co 5 lff -).

10. St. Paul's attitude to practical questions.
(a) fldu\60vra. One of the problems which faced
the Corinthian Christians was the question of their
attitude to the eating of things sacrificed to idols.
This affected their social life very nearly. For
much of the meat sold in the market had been
offered to idols, and their heathen friends would
give banquets in idol-temples, using in the banquet
food that had been offered to the idols on domestic
and other anniversaries. Moreover, in the ordinary
entertainments given by heathen there was a possi-
bility that some of the food had been so offered.
It might have been supposed that the question
would be regarded as settled for St. Paul by the
Apostolic Decree (Ac 15). But, whatever be the
reason, no allusion at all is made to any decree of
the kind. St. Paul deals with the matter on first
principles. He enunciates the law of liberty, which
must, he says, be tempered by the law of love.
At first he makes a strong assertion of monotheism.
Idols, he says, are nothing (1 Co 8 4 ). But else-
where he seems to admit that there is, or may
be, the power of a daifji6viov behind the idolatrous
worship (10 20 ; see above, 9 (c)). Whatever that
power may be, there is no danger to the Christian
in the mere act of eating. But there is a danger
for a man who has only recently emancipated
himself from idolatrous belief and practice, lest he
may be acting against his own conscience if he
eats. There is also a danger lest by eating he may
offend the conscience of his weaker brethren. And
so St. Paul's conclusion is that Christians may eat
what is set before them without asking questions,
may accept invitations to dine with their heathen
neighbours, but may not go and dine in a heathen
temple, which would be a mere act of bravado.
This is a good illustration of St. Paul's method of
dealing with practical problems, and settling them
upon fundamental Christian principles. The whole
discussion of this question in the Epistle is rendered
much more intelligible if we suppose that the op-
ponents with whom he had to deal regarded them-
selves as Trvfv/jiaTiKot. This supposition accounts
for the protest which he makes against self-styled
yv&ffLs, on which men relied, and thus felt them-
selves justified in ignoring the scruples of their

(b) Marriage and the position of women. St.
Paul's teaching upon this question is conditioned
by the attitude to women common in the world in
which he lived, and also by his expectation of the
jrapovtrla. As the time is so short, it is best for
people to remain in the external circumstances in
which they were when they were converted ( 1 Co
7 18 ' 20 ). As to the desirability of marriage, he lays
stress upon the necessity of the avoidance of any-
thing that can distract the Christian from the
service of God. In most cases he thinks marriage
Avill constitute a distraction. Therefore for most
people celibacy is desirable. But if celibacy con-
stitutes a greater distraction than marriage, then
Christians should marry. There is no hint of any
view of conjugal relations as being in themselves
evil. The only consideration present to his mind
is as to whether marriage will help or hinder a
Christian in the service of God. His view that
celibacy from this point of view is the best state
is put forward on his own authority.

But for the indissolubility of Christian marriage
he claims the authority of Christ Himself (1 Co
7 10> u ). As to this he is quite explicit. A wife
must not separate from her husband ; if she do so,
she must not marry another ; and a husband must
not leave his wife. But where two non-Christians
have been married, and one of them is afterwards
converted, then, if the unbelieving partner is will-

ing, St. Paul thinks it is best that the marriage
should be regarded as binding ; yet he allows
divorce, apparently with liberty of re-marriage
(7 15 ). His principle is quite clear. A marriage
entered upon by two non-Christians is not a
Christian marriage at all, and was never intended
to be a permanent bond. It is not fair to the non-
Christian partner that it should be regarded as
necessarily permanent. Yet, if he is willing, it
had better be regarded as a Christian marriage.
For that will be better for the children.

His attitude to women is, as has been said,
affected by the current view of their position.
Women are not to take part in the assemblies, and
are not to be teachers. In one passage he speaks
as though women occupied an inferior spiritual
position to men (1 Co II 3 ). But his language else-
where is inconsistent with this. The fact is that
St. Paul had not in this matter worked out his
own principles, and he is therefore inconsistent.
In his discussion of marriage he gives to women
a position which is distinctly high The rights of
the wife are safeguarded no less than those of the

11. The character of St. Paul as revealed in the
two Epistles. There is no Epistle in which the
personal character of St. Paul is so fully revealed
as in 2 Corinthians. The ' severe letter ' brings
before us a man acutely sensitive, affectionate,
and at the same time determined. He is in a high
degree impulsive. He writes a ' severe letter," and
is sorry for having written it (7 8 ). An immense
load is lifted from his heart by the news of the
repentance of the Corinthians (7 6 - 7 ). He is intensely
affectionate, and yearns for the affection of his
converts (6 U ~ 13 ). He never spares himself. There
is no limit to the demands which are made upon
him by his converts. It is no affectation on his
part to crown the list of the sufferings which he
has endured for Christ by the words ' anxiety for
all the churches' (II 28 ). We see him as a true
pastor, combining great practical wisdom with
remarkable emotional intensity. He is a mystic,
and he gives us an account of one of his mystical
experiences (12 1 ' 8 ; there is no reason to doubt that
in this passage he is speaking of himself). But he
is fully alive to the danger of mysticism. No one
could lay more emphatic stress upon the duty of
letting religion bear fruit in good works. Indeed
he is sometimes self-assertive where self-assertion
is needed. He does not hesitate to tell the Cor-
inthians to imitate him (1 Co II 1 ). But every
missionary must speak so on occasions. And he
was in the presence of teachers who asserted their
own authority against his. Above everything else
he is possessed with an over-mastering devotion
to Christ; for His sake he is willing to endure
everything, even ridicule (2 Co 5 13> 14 ). Thus his
correspondence with the Corinthians is of immense
importance for the understanding of his character.
For we see him dealing with difficult practical
problems, and we see him when he is most deeply
moved by personal slights, and again by personal
reconciliation. It is absurd to look to sucn a man
for a systematic doctrinal system. He speaks as
he is moved. He makes experiments. He is often
tentative. He provides the material on which
doctrinal systems may be built. He is not himself
their builder.

12. Importance of the evidence of the Epistles.
The importance of the Epistles to the Corinthians
consists largely in the fact that they give us
examples of St. Paul's methods of dealing with
practical difficulties which actually arose in an
early Christian community. He does not set out
to give instruction to the Corinthians, but rather
to answer questions which they themselves have
raised, or to reform abuses which have actually




grown up. We thus get a picture, of quite unique
value, of the life of such a community ; and the
doctrines and practices referred to in the Epistles
are evidently not being advocated by St. Paul now
for the first time, but are actually existing in the
Corinthian Church, and apparently have so existed
for some time.

(a) Doctrine. It would seem that the doctrine
held by this Church was of a comparatively
advanced type. There is no hint of any difference
of opinion at Corinth about fundamental beliefs.
Differences do exist, but they are concerned with
disciplinary or ethical rather than with theological
questions. It is true that there are some at Cor-
inth who deny the resurrection from the dead.
But it would appear from St. Paul's argument that
they all accepted the doctrine of the Resurrection
of Jesus. For he argues from the Resurrection of
Jesus to the resurrection of Christians generally ;
and his argument seems to involve the supposition
that there was no difference of opinion about the
Resurrection of Jesus. Similarly there is no hint
of any difference about the position assigned to
Jesus Himself, or about the expectation of His
speedy return in judgment. No one in the Cor-
inthian Church seems to have thought that Jesus
was merely human. The danger was probably
rather the other way. There may have been a
tendency to regard Him as a Redeemer- God in the
same sense as other redeemer-gods,* and to have
paid inadequate attention to His human life, but
for this there is no direct evidence. It is clear that
to a Christian this life was in the main a preparation
for entrance into the Kingdom of God when that
Kingdom should come. This preparation consisted
in the reception of Christian Sacraments, by which
he was transformed into a ' spiritual man.' But
the necessity of moral reformation was never for-
gotten, at any rate by St. Paul, though there may
have been a tendency on the part of some of the
Christians to forget it (1 Co 6 9 ). All the evidence
of these Epistles goes to show that there was no
tendency to depreciate the importance and the
supernatural character of the change wrought for
Christians by the life and death of Christ. The
danger probably lay in the other direction lest
they should think that Baptism and the Eucharist
of themselves, without any effort on their own
part, were sufficient to ensure membership of the

(b) Organization and discipline. The chief piece
of evidence about the organization of the early
Christian Church is to be found in 1 Co 5. It
would seem from this chapter that for the decision
of a case of discipline there would be an assembly
of the Church, presided over by St. Paul in virtue
of his apostolic authority. St. Paul pronounces
sentence of excommunication, and it is ratified by
the assembly. It does not appear that the Apostle
recognized any right on the part of the assembly
to dispute his sentence. In the case specified St.
Paul is himself absent from Corinth, but he acts
as though he were present, being indeed present,
as he says, in spirit. These Epistles tend to con-
firm the view that the Apostle held an absolutely
predominant position. Apart from the Apostle
there is not much evidence about organization,
though the discussion of the Body and members
includes the names of many Church offices. It is
clear that on the principle of the specialization of
function, different duties were assigned to different
members of the Church, in accordance with the
Divine choice expressed by diverse spiritual gifts
(1 Co 12 28ff -) ; and there is a recognition of the fact
that some members are ISiurai, i.e. have no special
ministerial position in the Church (14 16 ). But

See, however, A. Schweitzer, Paid and his Interpreters,
Eng. tr., 1912, p. 193 f.

there is really no evidence as to the different
functions discharged by the different officers.

13. Christianity and Gnosticism : the Christian
wisdom. Christians have the mind of Christ (1 Co
2 16 ). This differentiates them at once from other
people, who are merely $vxiKol. The ^u%"cdj dvOpu-
TTOS is the man whose spirit has not been touched
by the Divine Spirit. At Baptism a man is made
potentially wevfMTi^s ; he becomes v^irios tv Xpurry.
His life in the Christian Church is a rendering
actual of the potentiality of spirituality which is
now within him, and which shows itself in moral
effects. Thus the Corinthians, although they
ought to be by this time full-grown Christians, are
still babes. This is shown by the fact that they
display party-spirit a sure sign of carnality. As
long as a man is merely ^vxucbs, the Christian
wisdom is not for him, for he will not be able to
understand it. He has first to be converted by the
mere preaching of the Gospel of the Cross. St.
Paul seems to mean by ' Christian wisdom ' some-
thing more than this, ra pa&ri rou 6eov, probably
the secret counsels of God, God's purpose towards
mankind. The purpose of the gift of the Spirit is
that we may know the things freely given to us by
God. Thus the greatness of the heritage of the
Christian appears to be the main content of the
' Christian wisdom.' There is no indication of an
esoteric doctrine, belonging to a privileged class
in the Christian Church. The ' Christian wisdom '
is, indeed, esoteric from the point of view of those
outside the Christian Church. And even for those
who are babes in Christ it is not suited, but only
for the r^Xetot. But all Christians may become
It is their own fault if they do not.

LITERATURE. In addition to the authorities cited throughout
the article, see A. P. Stanley, Epistles of St. Paul to the Cor-
inthians*, 1876; J. A. Beet, St. Paul's Epistles to the Cor-
inthians, 1885; G. G. Findlay, EGT, '1 Cor.,' 1900; J. H.
Bernard, EGT, '2 Cor.,* 1903; G. H. Rendall, Epistles of St.
Paul to the Corinthians, 1909 ; P. Bachmann, Der erste Brief
des Paulus an die Korinther, Leipzig, 1905, Der zweite Brief,
do. 1909 ; Commentaries on 1 Cor. : T. C. Edwards (21885),
C. J. Ellicott (1887), H. L. Goudge (Westminster Com., 1903),
Robertson- Plummet (ICC, 1911); on 2 Cor.: A. Plummer
(Camb. Gr. Test., 1903), A. Menzies (1912) ; artt. in HDB and


CORNELIUS (Kopj^Xios). Cornelius was a Roman
centurion stationed at Csesarea in the early years
of the history of the Church (Ac 10 1 ). His name
is of Roman origin, and he is described as belong-
ing to the Italian band or cohort. An inscription
recently discovered in Vienna proves that an
Italian cohort was stationed in Syria about A.D.
69, but Schiirer holds that this could not have
been the case under Agrippa in A.D. 40-44, which
is the date of Cornelius (cf. Schiirer, GJV* i. [1901]
463, also Expositor, 5th ser., iv. [1896] 469-472;
W. M. Ramsay, Expositor, 5th ser., iv. [1896]
194-201, v. [1897] 69). Leaving aside altogether the
question as to the presence in Csesarea at this date
of an Italian cohort recruited from Romans settled
in the district, there is no reason why Cornelius
even apart from his cohort may not have been
there on duty in the years referred to. Native
princes often received assistance from Roman
officers in training their home troops (cf. Knowling,
EGT, ' Acts,' 1900, p. 250). Cornelius enters into
the history of the Church through a series of
mutual visions received by him and the Apostle
Peter, who admitted him into the Church by
baptism. According to the narrative in Acts, St.
Peter, in the house of Simon the tanner of Joppa,
saw in a vision a cloth let down from heaven on
which were four-footed beasts, creeping things,
and fowls of the air, many of which in the eyes
of the Jews were regarded as unclean. When St.
Peter refers to their ceremonial uncleanness, the
message is given, ' What God hath cleansed make



not thou common ' (Ac 10 15 ). After the vision had
passed messengers arrived from Caesarea telling
St. Peter of Cornelius, who in a trance had received
a command to send to Joppa for him. The next
day the Apostle, accompanied by some of the
Christians or Joppa, went to Caesarea and preached
Jesus to Cornelius and his household, who gladly
accepted the message, received the Holy Ghost,
and were baptized. An important question arises
as to the exact significance of this act of St. Peter.
Luke evidently, from the space devoted to this in-
cident, regards it as of supreme importance and as
marking a decided step in the forward progress of
the Church. Cornelius is described as 'a devout
man and one that feared God.' The phrase 'a
devout man' might be used to denote goodness
characteristic of a Gentile, but, in connexion with
'one that feared God,' it implies that Cornelius
was a proselyte, although there is no reason to be-
lieve that he had been formally admitted to the
Jewish Church by the rites of circumcision and
baptism. He belonged to that large class who
found greater truth and satisfaction in the teach-
ing of Judaism than in their own heathen religions,
and who observed the Jewish law of the Sabbath
and the regulations of ceremonial cleanness (cf.
Schurer, GJV* iii. [1909] p. 177, where Bertholet's
view is combated that <j>opot/M-voi rbv Oe6v, ' fearers
of God,' is not in Acts a terminus technicus).
The distinction which was drawn by later Judaism
between ' proselytes of righteousness ' and ' prose-
lytes of the gate ' is not found till after NT times,
but there is little doubt that the circumstances
giving rise to this distinction did really exist, and
that ' the fearers of God ' of Acts are practically
identical with those who at a later date came to
be known as 'proselytes of the gate' (see art.
PROSELYTE). The significance of the incident
seems then to lie in the recognition that full mem-
bership in the Christian Church was open not only
to Jews but also to the Gentiles who ' feared God.'
St. Peter uses the incident as a true precedent in
Ac H ;iff> , and reasserts its determining importance
at the Council of Jerusalem (Ac 15). The ad-
mission of Cornelius was the first step towards the
recognition of the universality of the gospel of
Christ. A further step was taken when member-
ship in the Christian Church was offered to the
heathen who had no relation to the synagogue.

LTTBRATURK. R. J. Knowling, EGT, 'Acts,' 1900, p. 260;
C. v Weizsacker, Apostolic Age, Eng. tr., i. [1894] 103 f. ; A.
C. McGiffert, Apostolic Age, 1897, p. 101 note.


peoples a special sacredness was supposed to belong
to the corners of structures, and tnis probably lies
at the root of the metaphor. The Heb. n$,pinnah,
' corner-stone,' is the stone at the angle, which,
uniting the walls, holds the two sides together.
It was chosen for its solidity and beauty to occupy
an important place either in the foundation or
the battlement. In the OT pinndth denotes the
principal men in the community and the supports
of the State (e.g. Jg 20 2 , 1 S 14 SS ) ; cf. Meum
praesidium et dulce decus meum ' (Hor, i. 1), where
strength and beauty are united in one. NT
believers saw Christ everywhere in the OT, and
hence the word which originally referred to the
choice among the chosen people came to signify
Christ. The figure of the corner-stone is thus
taken over from the OT, and specially from Ps 118 M
and Is 28 18 , the passages which rule the apostolic

In the NT ' corner-stone ' was applied by Jesns
to Himself (Mt 21 42 ), and reaopears in St. Peter's
address to the Sanhedrin : ' He is the stone which
was set at nought of you the builders, which was
made the head of the corner' (Ac 4"

/ce^aXV ytavtas). Quoting, evidently from memory,
the Apostle uses QovOevtw ' despise and regard
as valueless,' a word expressing great contempt ;
but later (1 P 2 7 ) he uses the milder word airodoicifjuifa
of the LXX, which means ' test and reject after
actual trial.' Ramsay (Pauline Studies, London,
1906, p. 253) notes that ' at the Phrygian marble
quarries there have been found many blocks,
which had been cut, but not seat on to Rome . . .
some of them bear the letters REPR, i.e. repro-
batum, "rejected." These were considered as
imperfect and unworthy pieces, and rejected by
the inspector.' It might happen, however, that a
stone passed over by one builder was seen and
chosen by another and wiser architect ; cf. Michel-
Angelo carving his colossal statue of David out of
a block of marble which had been spoiled and
rejected by an inferior sculptor some years before.
So St. Peter's argument in his Epistle (1 P2 6 - 7 ).
In ignorance and self-will the leaders of the people
had rejected the corner-stone, but others, with
truer spiritual discernment, making it the ground
of faith and belief in God, had found in the rejected
stone 'preciousness' (RVm 'honour') and worth;
(tripos suggests both meanings.

In Eph 2 20 ' Christ Jesus himself being the chief
corner-stone ' (ivros dicpoyuvialov afrrov XpioroO'IijcroO),
the thought is of the unity of Jew and Gentile in
the Church ' the saints build up the fabric, and
the corner-stone is Christ.' They are drawn and
held together in Him, as the walls of a building
cohere in and are united by the corner-stone, which
determines the lines of ' each several building ' and
compacts it into one.

LITERATURE. C. Gore, Ephes., London, 1898, p. 118 ; W. M.
Ramsay, Expositor, 5th ser. ix. [1899] 36 f. ; A. Maclaren, Ex-
positions : ' Ephesians,' London, 1909, p. 118, may be consulted
for doctrinal and honiiletical uses. "W. M. GRANT.

COS (Kws, now Stanchio=t rbv Kw). Cos was an
island of Caria, at the entrance to the Ceramic
Gulf, between the two headlands on which stood
the cities of Cnidus and Halicarnassus. Its chief
city, lying at the sheltered eastern extremity of
the island, was ' not large, but beautifully built,
and a most pleasing sight to mariners sailing by
the coast ' (Strabo, XIV. ii. 19). Its position on the
maritime highway between the ./Egean and the

Online LibraryJames HastingsDictionary of the apostolic church (Volume 1) → online text (page 84 of 234)