« 前へ次へ »
commenced his active labours? 'Immediately,' he says, 'instead of conferring with flesh and blood, I went into Arabia.' The silence of the historian is best accounted for on the supposition that the sojourn there was short; but as St Luke's companionship with the Apostle commenced at a much later date, no great stress must be laid on the omission. Yet on the other hand there is no reason for supposing it of long duratiop. It was probably brief-brief enough not to occupy any considerable space in the Apostle's history, and yet not too brief to serve the purpose it was intended to serve.
For can we doubt that by this journey he sought seclusion from the outer world, that his desire was to commune with God and his own soul amid these hallowed scenes, and thus to gather strength in solitude for his active labours ? His own language implies this; 'I conferred not with flesh and blood, but departed into Arabia.' The fathers for the most part take a different view of this incident. They imagine the Apostle hurrying forth into the wilds of Arabia, burning to impart to others the glad tidings which had so suddenly burst upon himself. 'See how fervent was his soul, exclaims Chrysostom, 'he was eager to occupy lands yet untilled; he forthwith attacked a barbarous and savage people, choosing a life of conflict and much toil: This comment strikes a false note. Far different at such a crisis must have been the spirit of him, whose life henceforth was at least as conspicuous for patient wisdom and large sympathies, as for intense self-devotion. He retired for a while, we may suppose, that
“Separate from the world, his breast
Might duly take and strongly keep
The print of Heaven?!
*Where all around, on mountain, sand, and sky,
1 It must in this case be placed before the notice of his active preaching, ix. 20 και ευθέως, κ.τ.λ. Some have put it later and seen an indirect allusion to it in the expression μάλλον ενεδυvapoūTO, ver, 22 ; but there is no trace of & chronological notice in these words, and such an allusion is scarcely natural.
2 Similarly also Victorinus, Hilary, Theodore Mops., Theodoret, Primasius, and the Ecumenian commentator. Some of the Latin fathers might have been helped to this view by a curious blunder arising out of the Latin trans. lation ‘non acquievi carni et sanguini,' •I did not rest in flesh and blood, 'which Victorinus explains, 'Omnino laboravi carnaliter,' adding 'Caro enim et san. guis homo exterior totusest.' Tertullian however, de Resurr. Carn. e. 50, quotes the passage, ‘Statim non retuleritad car
nem et sanguinem,'explaining it, id est ad circumcisionem, id est ad Judais. mum. Jerome supposes that St Paul preached in Arabia, but that his preach. ing was unsuccessful. His comment is curious. Why, he asks, is this visit to Arabia, of which we know nothing, which seems to have ended in nothing, record. ed at all? It is an allegory from which wemust extract a deep meaning. Arabia is the Old Testament. In the law and the prophets St Paul sought Christ, and having found Him there, he returned to Damascus, 'hoc est ad sanguinem et passionem Christi.' So fortified, he went to Jerusalem, 'locum visionis et pacis.' This interpretation is doubtless bor. rowed from Origen.
3 Christian Year, 13th Sunday after Trinity, said of Moses.
* Christian Year, 9th Sunday after Trinity, said of Elijah.
St Paul's first visit to Jerusalem.
The visit to Jerusalem mentioned at the close of the first chapter of The same this epistle is doubtless the same with that recorded in the ninth chapter event nar. of the Acts?. Whatever difficulties seem to stand in the way of our iden- rated by St tifying them, the fact that in each narrative this is stated to have been St Luke St Paul's first appearance in Jerusalem since his conversion and to have followed after a sojourn in Damascus, must be considered conclusive. Nor indeed is there any inconsistency in the two narratives. Though they contain but few incidents in common, they for the most part run parallel with each other; and even in particulars in which there is no coincidence, there is at least no direct contradiction. On the other hand the aspect of events but under presented in the two accounts is confessedly different. And this will different almost always be the case in two independent narratives. In the case of
owing to St Paul and St Luke this divergence is due to two causes:
First. The different position of the two writers, the one deriving his (1) Their information at second-hand, the other an eyewitness and an actor in the respective scenes which he describes. In such cases the one narrator will present
positions. rather the external view of events, while the other dwells on their inner history, on those relations especially which have influenced his own character and subsequent actions: the former will frequently give broad and general statements of facts, where the latter is precise and definite.
Secondly. The different objects of the two writers. The one sets (2) Their himself to give a continuous historical account; the other introduces inci- difference
of aim. dents by way of allusion rather than of narrative, singling out those especially which bear on the subject in hand. In the particular instance before us, it is important to observe this divergence of purpose. St Luke dwells on the change which had come over Saul, transforming the persecutor of the Gospel into the champion of the Gospel. St Paul asserts his own independence, maintaining that his intercourse with the leaders and the Church of the Circumcision had been slight. The standing-point of the historian is determined by the progress of events, that of the Apostle by the features of the controversy. Thus occupying different positions, they naturally lay stress each on a different class of facts, for the most part opposite to, though not inconsistent with, each other.
The narratives may best be compared by considering the incidents under two heads;
1. St Paul's intercourse with the Apostles. The narrative of the Acts St Paul's relates that when St Paul visited Jerusalem he was regarded with suspicion
relations by the disciples; that Barnabas introduced him to “the Apostles,' relating Twelve,
(1) with the the circumstances of his conversion and his zeal for the Gospel when converted; and that after this he moved about freely in their company. These are just the incidents which would strike the external observer as important. On the other hand St Paul says nothing of Barnabas. His relations with Barnabas had no bearing on the subject in hand, his obligations to
1 ix. 26–30. Coinpare St Paul's later reference to this residence at Jeru.
salem, Acts xxii. 17–21.
the Apostles of the Circumcision. In all that relates to that subject he is precise and definite, where the author of the Acts is vague and general. He states the exact time of his sojourn, fifteen days. He mentions by name the members of the apostolate whom alone he saw-Peter in whose house he resided, and James to whom as head of the Church of Jerusalem he would naturally pay a visit. This is sufficient to explain the account of his going in and out' with the Apostles in the Acts, though the language of the historian is not what would have been used by one so accurately informed as the Apostle himself. is probable that the other Apostles were absent on some mission, similar to that of Peter to Lydda and Joppa which is recorded just after (ix. 32—43); for there were at this time numberless churches scattered throughout ‘Judæa and Galilee and Samaria'
(ix. 31), which needed supervision. (2) with
2. St Paul's intercourse with the Jewish Church at large. At first the Jewish sight there appears to be a wide difference between the two accounts. St Chris.
Luke tells of his attempting to join himself to the disciples,' of his going tians.
in and out, of his 'speaking boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus and
The name and office of an Apostle.
Meaning of the term in classical writers.
The word dmootolos in the first instance is an adjective signifying 'despatched' or 'sent forth.' Applied to a person, it denotes more than ayyelos. The 'Apostle' is not only the messenger, but the delegate of the person who sends him. He is entrusted with a mission, has powers conferred upon hims. Beyond this, the classical usage of the term gives no
1 ix. 28. The restrictions év (or els] Ιερουσαλήμ and προς τους Ελληνιστάς are the more noticeable, in that they interfere with the leading feature of St Luke's narrative, the publicity of Saul's conversion.
? ix. 29. Compare Acts xxii. 18, •Make haste and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem.'
8 It occurs of a person in Herod. i. 21, v. 38. With this exception, no instances are given in the Lexicons of its use by classical authors even of a late date with any other but the Attic meaning; nor have I succeeded in finding any myself, though Hesychius explains åtó. στολος" στρατηγός κατά πλούν πεμπόMevos. This is probably an instance where
aid towards understanding the meaning of the Christian apostolate. Its special sense denoting “a naval expedition, a fleet despatched on foreign service, seems to have entirely superseded every other meaning in the Attic dialect; and in the classical Greek of a later period also, except in this sense, the word appears to be of very rare occurrence.
A little more light, and yet not much more, is thrown on the subject by Its use the use of the term among the Jews. It occurs but once in the exx, in among the
Jews. 1 Kings xiv. 6, as a translation of nuse, where it has the general sense of a messenger, though with reference to a commission from God! With the later Jews however, and it would appear also with the Jews of the Christian era, the word was in common use. It was the title borne by those who were despatched from the mother city by the rulers of the race on any foreign mission', especially such as were charged with collecting the tribute paid to the temple services. After the destruction of Jerusalem the 'Apo-' stles' formed a sort of council about the Jewish patriarch, assisting him in his deliberations at home, and executing his orders abroad. Thus in
the Attic asage has ruled the literary Ούαι...ο αποστέλλων έν θαλάσση όμηρα language, the word having meanwhile και επιστολάς βιβλίνας επάνω του ύδατος, , preserved in the common dialect the and in which for õunpa Symmachus sonse which it has in Herodotus and
had arootólovs, was interpreted to refer which reappears in the Lxx and New to these “apostles' of the Jews who Testament and in the official language instigated the people against the Chrisof the Jews. See the notes on katn. tians; and some even thought that in χεϊν, vi. 6; πτύρεσθαι, Phil. i. 28 ;γου- the words following, πορεύσονται γαρ quouós, Phil. ii. 14.
άγγελοι κούφοι πρός έθνος κ.τ.λ., the 1 It was also used by Symmachus to true Apostles were referred to in contranslate 7'y in Is. xviii. 2: see below. trast with the false. See Procopius in The word 'n ooTO!), occurs in a few pas. Esaiam, 1.c. and Eusebius, 1.c. The Lxx Bages in the Ixx, and αποστέλλω is version is entirely wrong and the comthe common translation of sw. Justin ment worthless in itself, but it affords therefore (Dial.c. Tryph. c. 75, p. 300 D)
a valuable illustration of St Paul's refer. is so far justified in saying that the pro- ences to the 'false apostles,' and espephets are called apostles, και άγγελοι και cially to the commendatory letters, a απόστολοι του θεου λέγονται οι αγγέλ. Cor. iii. 1. See also Jerome, Comm. ad λειν τα παρ' αυτού αποστελλόμενοι προ
Gal. i. 1, Usque hodie a patriarchis φήται...λέγει γαρ εκεί ο Ησαΐας απο- Judæorum apostolos mitti etc.' στειλόν με. The Syriac renders από- 8 See Cod. Theodos. xvi. Tit. viii. 14, στολος by the word corresponding to • Superstitionis indignae est, ut archi. the Hebrew.
synagogi sive presbyteri Judaeorum vel 2 Such for instance as the bearers of quos ipsi apostolos vocant, qui ad exi. the instructions contemplated in Acts gendum aurum atque argentum a paΧxviii. 21, ούτε γράμματα περί σου triarcha certo tempore diriguntur etc.,' έδεξάμεθα από της Ιουδαίας ούτε παρα- with the learned comment of J. Gothoγενόμενος τις των αδελφών απήγγειλεν. . fred. The collection of this tribute Eusebius (Montf. Coll. Nov. II. 425), was called ámootoNÝ, Julian Epist. 25 evidently thinking o
την λεγομένην παρ' υμίν αποστολής κωsays: αποστόλους δε εισέτι νύν έθος λυθήναι. . έστιν Ιουδαίοις ονομάζειν τους εγκύκλια
• See the important passage in Epi. γράμματα παρά των αρχόντων αυτών phanius, Haer. XXX. p. 128, tw rap επικομιζομένους. The passage in Isaiah αυτοίς αξιωματικών ανδρών έναρίθμιος ην. xviii, 1, 2, which is read in the Lxx, εισι δε ούτοι μετά τον πατριάρχην από
designating His immediate and most favoured disciples 'Apostles,' our Lord was not introducing a new term? but adopting one which from its current usage would suggest to His hearers the idea of a highly responsible
mission Mistake of At the first institution of the office the Apostles were twelve in number. restricting According to the prevailing view this limit was strictly observed, an excepthe title
tion however being made in the case of St Paul. Nay so far has the idea to the Twelve.
of this restriction of number been carried by some, that they hold the election of Matthias to have been a hasty and ill-advised act, and to have been subsequently reversed by an interposition of God, St Paul being substituted in his place. It is needless to say that the narrative of St Luke does not betray the faintest trace of such a reversal. And with regard to the general question, it will I think appear, that neither the Canonical Scriptures nor the early Christian writings afford sufficient ground for any such limitation
of the apostolate. Its use In the Gospels the word 'Apostle'is of comparatively rare occurrence. in the Those, whom it is customary with us to designate especially the Apostles,' Gospels does not
are most often entitled either generally “the disciples' or more definitely favour
'the Twelve.' Where the word does occur, it is not so used as to lend any this. countenance to the idea that it is in any way restricted to the Twelve.
In St Matthew it is found once only, and there it is carefully defined, the twelde Apostles' (X. 2). In St Mark again it occurs in one passage alone, where it has a special reference to the act of sending them forth (vi. 30, οι απόστολοι, compare αποστέλλειν, ver. 7). In St John likewise it appears once only, and there in its general sense of a messenger, a delegate, without any direct reference to the Twelve (xiii. 16). St Luke uses the word more frequently, and indeed states explicitly that our Lord gave this name to the Twelve", and in his Gospel it is a common designation for them. But, if we are disposed to infer from this that the title was in any way restricted to them, we are checked by remembering that the same evangelist elsewhere extends it to others—not to Paul only, but to Barnabas also
στολοι καλούμενοι, προσεδρεύουσι δε το
of our profession'; the best comment on which expression is Joh. xvii. 18; *As thou hast sent (åréotellas) me into the world, even so have I also sent (år. Éotella) them into the world. Comp. Justin Apol. 1. c. 63, pp. 95 D, 96 C.
1 There is no direct evidence indeed that the term was in use ainong the Jews before the destruction of Jeru. salem : but it is highly improbable that they should have adopted it from the Christians, if it had not been current among them before; and moreover Christian writers speak of this Jewish apostolate, as an old institution which still lingered on.
? Our Lord Himself is so styled Hebr. üi. , The apostle and high priest
3 See Schaff History of the Apostolic Church, II. P. 194.
* Luke vi. 13 ¢keçáuevos an' aŭ. των δώδεκα ους και αποστόλους ώνόμα- .
5 Acts xiv. 4, 14. The word dróotolos occurs 79 times in the New Tes. tament, and of these 68 instances are in St Luke and St Paul. αποστολή occurs four times only, thrice in St Paul and once in St Luke.