Yes, it is a careful reading, considering every word and meaning.The confusion existed, not in the language, but in the empowerment of the ekklesia. Greek tradition and culture was that the ekklesia held supreme power, not unlike the Temple priests in Jerusalem, however, like Jerusalem, Ephesis was under Roman control rendering the ekklesia powerless. That is why there were the references to officials, courts and even a proconsul (Acts 19:38) the same rank as Pilate.
I invite your comments on why the author of Acts chose to use the work ekklesia and not homilos as was used with the crowd of Jews who demanded that Jesus be crucified and that Barabbas be freed.
Peace be with you
My FRiend...your bias is palpable. Read the text. The point of the post was that right here in Acts was an ekklasia that was an ordinary, public, argumentative, chaotic, meeting where unbelievers contemplated killing Paul. Now, that I re-read this, it does sound like the RCC. Grace to you.