6. Conclusion

A total consideration of the Christology of the Letter to the Ephesians would examine, not only Christ in himself and in his relations to the Father and the Spirit, but also Christ in his twofold relation to humanity, the collective relation to the Church and the personal relation to the individual Christian.

An examination of the relation of Christ to the Church would deal with the question of the relation of cosmic to ecclesial 182 visions in Ephesians, the question of the relation of the concept of corporeity to that of individuality 183 and the meaning of a larger range of concepts: new creation, new humanity, the relationship between Israel and the Gentiles, Christ the peace of the Church, the peace of unity in Christ. 184

An examination of the relation of Christ to the individual Christian would involve the examination of the meaning of the συν-compounds 185 and their relation to the phrase εν Χριστω or its equivalent; the depth of meaning in this phrase, εν Χριστω, specifically in relation to baptism. 186

All this, however, would still only be an elaboration of the systematic component. On the basis of such an examination, the relation of Ephesians to the rest of the Pauline corpus could be decided by a genetic method. This method would include an examination of the incidental components, revealing what is systematically new in relation both to other works in the corpus and to the greater background including Qumran and Gnosticism, and revealing what is only incidentally different. The question, raised several times, whether what is new and different constitutes a distinction, a change or a contradiction, could then be answered. When all the questions are answered we may have come a little closer to understanding "the breadth and the length, the height and the depth" (3:18) in all wisdom and insight (1:8).

182. Cf. Allan, art. cit., p. 58; Benoit, L'Horizon, art. cit., pp. 346, 351, 355; Benoit, L'Unit? art. cit., pp. 66, 75; Hammer, art. cit., p. 270, note 17.

183. Cf. Allan, art. cit., pp. 55, 56. 60f, 61, 62; Benoit, L'Horizon, art. cit., p. 356; idem, L'Unit? art. cit., p. 70; Gnilka, J., Paraenetische Traditionen im Eph. M?anges Beda Rigaux (1970) p. 406f.; Grassi, JBC 56:14; Stanley, Christ's Resurrection, op. cit., p. 250; Turner C., Chosen in Him before the Foundation of the World. Scripture 13 (1961) p. 112; Koester, W., Die Messiasidee des Apostels Paulus. Stud.Paul. Cong.Int. Cath., II, p. 117.

184. On these various points, cf. Balthasar, op. cit. pp. 11-12, 133, 137f; Barth, Conversion, art. cit. p. 7; idem, AB 34, pp. 262, and Comments II, IV, V; Benoit, L'Horizon, art. cit., p. 356; idem, L'Unit? art. cit., p. 77; Bruce, art. cit., p. 312 and note 1 on the same page; Grassi, JBC 56:23; Hammer, art. cit., p. 269, note 15; Mussner, art. cit., p. 60; Stanley, Christ's Resurrection, op. cit., p. 78; idem, Paul's Interest in the Early Chapters of Genesis. Stud.Paul.Cong.Int.Cath., II, p. 250.

185. Cf. Barth, Conversion, art. cit., p. 7; Fitzmyer, JBC 79:137, NJBC 82:120.

186. Allan, art. cit.; Stanley, Christ's Resurrection, op. cit.; Trinidad, art. cit., pp. 8-9; Dacquino, art. cit., pp. 345-346.