Charles Hodge on Ephesians 1:23

V. 23. Which is his body. This is the radical, orI formative idea of the church. From this idea are to be developed its nature, its attributes, and its prerogatives. It is the indwelling of the Spirit of Christ, that constitutes the church his body. And, therefore, those only in whom the Spirit dwells are constituent members of the true church. But the Spirit does not dwell in church officers, nor especially in prelates, as such; nor in the baptized, as such; nor in the mere external professors of the true religion; but in true believers, who therefore constitute that church which is the body of Christ, and to which its attributes and prerogatives belong.

The main question which this verse presents for consideration is: In what sense is the church the fulness of Christ? There are, however, two other points which must be previously determined. In the first place, it is the church, and not Christ to whom the word fulness here refers. Some commentators adopt the following interpretation of the passage: ‘Christ, the supreme head to the church (which is his body), the fulness, i. e. Christ is the fulness, of him that filleth all in all.’ But 1. This interpretation violates the grammatical construction of the passage. 2. It rends the clauses very unnaturally asunder. 3. It assumes that the last clause of the verse, viz. ‘who fills all in all,’ refers to God, whereas it refers to Christ. 4. The sense thus obtained is unscriptural. The fulness of the Godhead is said to be in Christ; but Christ is never said to be the fulness of God.

In the second place, the church is here declared to be the fulness of Christ, and not the fulness of God.—Some commentators understand the passage thus: ‘The church, which is the body of Christ, is the fulness of him who fills all in all, i. e. of God.’ But to this it is objected, 1. That the construction of the passage requires that the last clause in the verse be referred to Christ; and 2. This interpretation supposes the word πλήρωμα fulness, to mean multitude.’The multitude belonging to him who fills all in all.’ But this is a signification which the word never has in itself, but only in virtue of the word with which it is at times connected. The expression πλήρωμα τῆς πόλεως may be freely rendered, the multitude of the city, because that which fills a city is a multitude. But this does not prove that the word πλήρωμα itself signifies a multitude. There is no good reason then for departing from the ordinary interpretation, according to which, the church is declared to be the fulness of Christ.

There are two opinions as to the meaning of this phrase, between which commentators are principally divided. First, the church may be called the fulness of Christ, because it is filled by him. As the body is filled, or pervaded by the soul, so the church is filled by the Spirit of Christ. Or, as God of old dwelt in the temple, and filled it with his glory, so Christ now dwells in his church and fills it with his presence. The sense is then good and scriptural. ‘The church is filled by him, who fills all in all.’ Or secondly, the church is the fulness of Christ, because it fills him, i. e. completes his mystical person. He is the head, the church is the body. It is the complement, or that which completes, or renders whole. As both these interpretations give a sense that is scriptural and consistent with the context, the choice between them must be decided principally by the New Testament usage of the word πλήρωμα. The former interpretation supposes the word to have a passive signification—that which is filled. But in every other case in which it occurs in the New Testament, it is used actively—that which does fill. Matt. 9, 16, The piece put into an old garment is called its fulness, i. e. ‘that which is put in to fill it up.’ Mark 6, 43, The fragments which filled the baskets, are called their fulness. John 1, 16, ‘Of his fulness,’ means the plenitude of grace and truth that is in him. Gal. 4, 4, The fulness of the time, is that which renders full the specified time. Col. 2, 9, The fulness of the Godhead, is all that is in the Godhead. Eph. 3, 19, The fulness of God, is that of which God is full—the plenitude of divine perfections. 1 Cor. 10, 26, The fulness of the earth, is that which fills the earth. The common usage of the word in the New Testament is therefore clearly in favour of its being taken in an active sense here. The church is the fulness of Christ—in that it is the complement of his mystic person. He is the head, the church is his body.

In favour of the other interpretation it may be urged,—1. That πλήρωμα has in the Classics, in Philo, in the writings of the Gnostics, at times, a passive sense. 2. The meaning thus afforded is preferable. It is a more scriptural and more intelligible statement, to say that Christ fills his church, as the soul pervades the body—or as the glory of the Lord filled the temple, than to say that the church in any sense fills Christ. 3. Πλήρωμα must be taken in a sense which suits the participle πληρουμένου; ‘the church is filled by him who fills all things.’ The second and third of these reasons are so strong as to give this interpretation the preference in the minds of those to whom the usus loquendi of the New Testament is not an insuperable objection.

That filleth all in all, τοῦ τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσι πληρουμένου. This clause, as before remarked, refers to Christ, as the construction obviously demands. The participle πληρουμένου is by almost all commentators assumed to have in this case an active signification. This assumption is justified by the exigency of the place, and by the fact that in common Greek the passive forms of this verb are at times used in an active sense. That there is no such case in the New Testament, is not therefore a sufficient reason for departing from the ordinary interpretation.

The expression, τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσι, all in all, or, all with all, does not mean all the church in all its members, or with all grace, but the universe in all its parts. There is nothing in the context to restrict or limit τὰ πάντα. The words must have the latitude here which belongs to them in the preceding verses. The analogy of Scripture is in favour of this interpretation. God’s relation to the world, or totality of things external to himself, is elsewhere expressed in the same terms. Jer. 23, 24, " Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord." Comp. 1 Kings 8, 27. Ps. 139, 7. In the New Testament Christ is set forth as creating, sustaining, and pervading the universe. Col. 1, 16. 17. Heb. 1, 3. Eph. 4, 10. This, therefore, determines the sense in which he is here said to fill all things. It is not that he replenishes all his people with his grace; but that he fills heaven and earth with his presence. There is no place where he is not. There is no creature from which he is absent. By him all things consist; they are upheld by his presence in them and with them. The union, therefore, which the church sustains, and which is the source of its life and blessedness, is not with a mere creature, but with Christ, God manifested in the flesh, who pervades and governs all things by his omnipresent power. The source of life, therefore, to the church is inexhaustible and immortal.