I don’t think it was viewed by “the Church” in only one way. The Church is made up of many, and, just like today, to some it meant one thing, to others another. We can know this because when it came time to have a formal canon of Scripture, there was (and had been) differing opinions on whether it was inspired text or not.
Overall though, I think they took it for what it was, a prophecy that used a lot of “code” terms for current things yet told of the fulfillment of God’s plan in time. Certainly it spoke of fulfillment in Jewish terms, with the Ark being in the heavenly temple. Surely those early Christians didn’t miss all the symbology of the Mass (robed priests, incense, prayers with angels and saints, chanting Holy Holy Holy, the altar, the Lamb, etc.). I would think to a 1st Century Jewish convert to Christianity, knowing their Temple, the only place of Jewish sacrifice was destroyed and the priestly line along with it, this would be a book full of hope much like if someone had their car stolen and read in the newspaper that it was at the police station.
