>>8
Both 'body' and 'standard' have many shades of meaning in english, too. And you're right, it can be interpreted in different contexts. A standard in the military context in english would refer to a form of identification/representation (heraldic/flags/whatever). So it is pretty much the same. And similarly outdated/only used in very specific situations.
Possibly they mean here 'representative of the body/flesh, ie the people'. Or it could be 'representative of the organisation'.
Often these sorts of terms don't actually have an intended meaning, or the meaning isn't meant to be so important as it is a label. So basically
>>1, don't look into it too much. It's just a name.