from physical features (see p. 417 and note3) and strengthens the claim of Egypt to be the place of its origin. Still the Egyptian Church, as it got the canons of Hippolytus from Rome, may have got the Didache from Syria. M DR. HORT'S VIEW OF THE APOSTOLATE. (See p. 202.) DR. HORT speaks of himself' as 'led to the conclusion that in its original sense the term Apostle was not intended to describe the habitual relation of the Twelve to our Lord during the days of His ministry, but strictly speaking only the mission among the villages,' of which the beginning is described in St. Mark vi. 12, and the end in St. Mark vi. 30. He admits that in St. Luke's Gospel 'the term is not throughout confined to this limited usage.' . In fact the word is used six times in St. Luke, and only once in connection with this special mission. St. John does not use the word at all as a designation for the Twelve. St. Matthew uses it once in the list of the Twelve (x. 2) in such a way as to suggest that it was an habitual name for them (now the names of the twelve apostles are these '), and not as connected with any particular mission. Finally, in St. Mark the word is used (for certain) only once (vi. 30), and as it were accidentally, of the Twelve when they returned from the special mission alluded to. And its appearance of exclusive reference to that mission in St. Mark's narrative depends (1) on the doubtful reading of iii. 14, And He appointed twelve [whom also He named apostles] that they might be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach and to have authority to cast out devils'; and (2) also on the limitation of the words in italics to the mission subsequently described in similar terms in vi. 12, 13. But just before (ver. 7) the words occur, 'He began to send them forth.' This first mission was only a type of much that was to come. It was not the entire scope of their apostolate, but the first example of it. On the whole, I think it must be admitted that Dr. Hort's proposed limitation of the original meaning of the term 'apostle' is very weakly supported by the evidence. But it is a more important matter that he denies (on the whole) that the apostolate was even finally an office of government constituted by our Lord in His Church. He does indeed use the word 'office' (p. 19) 1 The Christian Ecclesia (Macmillan 1897), p. 28. 2 P. 26. 3 On the reading see Swete in loc. The words in brackets are in the margin of the R.V. There is a great deal to be said for attributing them to assimilation to St. Luke vi. 13. of the Twelve,1 and speaks of a 'distinctive function reserved for them throughout, over and above their function as the chiefest disciples' (p. 29). But he says (p. 84), there is indeed, as we have seen, no trace in Scripture of a formal commission of authority for government from Christ Himself. Their commission was to be witnesses for Himself, and to bear that witness by preaching and by healing.' He thinks that the actual authority in matter of government and administration which in the Acts they are found exercising was due to the 'spontaneous homage' of the Christians of Judaea, and was a result of the moral authority involved in their personal qualification. He thinks it very doubtful how far their authority 'is likely to have been felt and acknowledged beyond the limits of the Holy Land.' In other words (p. 230), their definite function was simply to be witnesses and to make their witness known. 'Round this, their definite function, grew up in process of time an indefinite authority, the natural and right and necessary consequence of their unique position,' but it came to the apostles by the ordinary action of divine providence, not (as far as we can see) by any formal divine command.' The apostles were not in any proper sense officers of the ecclesia.' Now this is (for the argument of this book) an exceedingly important matter (see Preface, p. vii), and I would endeavour here to show how contrary to the evidence as a whole, in my judgment, Dr. Hort's theory is. I have in Chap. IV collected the evidence for saying that the Twelve were really (as has been almost universally supposed) trained and appointed to be officers of the Christian Church for the purposes of government. Of that evidence only a part is noticed by Dr. Hort. Thus he does not notice our Lord's answer to Peter about the 'stewardship' in the 'household of servants' (Luke xii. 41-43, see above p. 203). He does indeed very briefly discuss St. Matt. xvi. 19 ('I will give unto thee the keys,' etc.), but it is only for the purpose of determining the relation of 'the Church' to 'the kingdom of heaven,' and even so the words are exceedingly disappointing and ambiguous.2 'The simplest inference from the language used would be that the office committed to St. Peter and the rest with respect to the ecclesia, would enable him and them to fulfil the office here described as committed to him with respect to the kingdom of heaven.' An office to be intrusted by Christ Himself to the apostles in relation to the Church (and surely a tremendous office-to open and shut the kingdom of heaven) is here apparently incidentally admitted, but no further 1 See also p. 160: The apostolate of the Twelve and St. Paul was in an important sense a definite and permanent office.' (But by appointment from the ecclesia?) 2 P. 19. We must remember the work is posthumous. Dr. Hort could hardly have left the sentence as it stands. consideration is given to this (I cannot but think) really luminous and central passage (see above p. 204), and the admission for what it is worth is not alluded to further.1 Once more, I have, like many others, argued that the commissions after the Resurrection (1) appear to be given distinctively to the Twelve, and (2) that they are commissions to an abiding apostolate. On point (1) Dr. Hort only says that 'doubt is possible' (p. 33), and 'granting that it was probably to the eleven that our Lord directly and principally spoke on both these occasions (and even to them alone when He spoke the words at the end of St. Matthew's Gospel), yet it still has to be considered in what capacity they were addressed by Him.' I say that the words of the commissions themselves bear witness that they were addressed to them as envoys, apostles representatives no doubt of the missionary and judicial functions of the whole Church, but representatives because they were divinely commissioned officers (' apostles,'' stewards,' ' pastors') in the society. Once more, I have argued that 'if the Acts is accepted as historical, undoubtedly the apostles must have received a commission distinct from the Church as a whole to account for their position' (p. 210 n.o). Dr. Hort surely greatly minimizes the position of the apostolate in the Acts. He does not notice that St. Peter at once alludes to the apostolate of Judas, as an office of administration which is vacant and should be filled up. He alludes to the words diakoviά and dwoσTOλń as used by St. Peter (i. 25), but not to the phrase quoted from the Psalm, 'his office (TOKоT) let another take' (i. 20). Moreover it appears to most of us that it is plainly in virtue of their apostolate that the Twelve stand forth from the first as having authority in the community. There is no trace of their position growing from spontaneous homage. They assume the right to appoint' the seven, whom the Church as a whole are to choose (vi. 3). In fact, if certain men have authority to impart the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying-on of their hands, whether for living or for governing (and only of apostles is such a phrase used 2), this gift of the Holy Ghost being the essential constituent of the Christian life, such men are rendered by this very power necessary and central authorities in the community. Again, Dr. Hort thinks Barnabas was sent to Antioch (xi. 22) in place of one of the Twelve to avoid 'putting forth even the semblance 1 Dr. Sanday similarly deals to my mind very inadequately with this passage (The Conception of Priesthood p. 48). He says, 'a similar promise' is given to the whole body, i.e. in xviii. 18. But without the distinctive and definite words for stewardship, 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven.' These words connect themselves with the stewardship of St. Luke xii. 41. The legislative authority ('binding' or 'loosing') belongs in some sense to the Church as a whole. The stewardship is an office in the Church committed to the apostle. of apostolic authority there' (p. 60); but there is not a word in the narrative to suggest this: and when the great question was raised at Antioch about circumcising the Gentiles, certainly the Church there appears to recognise an authority at Jerusalem. That authority, after being appealed to and deliberating, sends them a decision by letter and messengers (xv. 2-31)-'it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you' such and such necessary 'burdens' and requirements and no more. And it is implied in the course of this letter that though they had in fact given no authorisation-'no commandment '—to those who had gone to Antioch previously and stirred up dissension, yet they might have done so. They had authority to 'give commandment.' The letter goes out in the name of the apostles and elder brethren ' at Jerusalem. I have spoken of it as 'representing substantially' the authority of the apostles. Dr. Sanday complains this is not 'strict exegesis.' Does this mean that it does not inhere in the particular words (xv. 23) taken by themselves? It certainly does not. But what gave the Church at Jerusalem authority to send a mission of this kind to another Church? The whole Acts would assure us it was because the Church at Jerusalem contained the apostles and the apostles were the Church's authoritative teachers and centre of unity. Further, Dr. Hort, in restricting the authority of the apostles to Jerusalem, has not considered all the language which St. Paul uses (see above p. 215 ff.) to describe the authority which he conceives to belong to him 'in all the Churches' equally, 'for edification not destruction' but with 'destructive' powers attached, simply because he is an apostle. He only notices where St. Paul does not (he says) assert it— viz., in his letter to the Romans. The total absence (in this epistle) of any claim to authority illustrates how large a part of the authority which he exercised towards other ecclesiae was not official (so to speak) but personal'-the authority of a founder (pp. 133, 197). Now no doubt it is in accordance with St. Paul's tact that he would not speak of authority to those who did not know him. But even here he justifies his 'boldness' in addressing them by the fact of the universal and quasipriestly mission divinely given him towards the whole Gentile world (xv. 15-17). Here is the ground of an authority which he must exercise according to his judgment of fitness whether at Rome or elsewhere. On the whole, Dr. Hort's argument against the existence of an apostolic office of government ordained by Christ Himself is singularly unconvincing. He does not deal at all satisfactorily either with the language of the Gospels, or with the position assigned to the apostles in the Acts, or with the claim which St. Paul plainly attached to the apostolic office or stewardship, and which he delegates to his representatives, Timothy and Titus, as, according to Dr. Hort's own phrase, ' a paramount authority' (p. 197) at Ephesus and Crete. AARON: see Levitical Priesthood. Absolutism 88. Achatius, Acts of bp. 194 n. INDEX. Achelis (Dr.) 132 n., 133 n., 137 n. Addaeus 119 n. Aerius 126 n., 147-8, 197. Africa 149. Age of ordinands 277 n. Apollos 240. Apost. Canons 174 n., 175 n., 176 n.; 373- in 137, 351-2, 354, 373, 377 n.; on the Albinus Flaccus 82 n.; (pseudo-) 167 n., Apostolic commission 209 f., 242 f. 260 n., 325, 337 n., 347, 351. Alexander Severus 92. Alexandria, Church of 93, 131, 135 n., Apostolic delegates 225. Apostolic functions 63 n., 213 f. Apostolic succession 63 f., 104, 160, 290-1, Amalarius 260 n., 325, 336 n., 348. Ambrosiaster: on orig. identity of bishop Ammia 357, 361. Ammonius (abbot) 341. Andrew (St.) in Asia Minor 264. Angels (in Apocalypse) 128 n., 232.3. Antioch 118, 279. Apocalypse, angels of the 232-3. Arethas 233 n. Asia, Church of 106, 112, 119, 263-4. Augustin (St.): on the Church 12 n., |