It was the very simplicity and directness of the expression ' apostle ' which won for it the favour of our Lord. The Twelve were simply to be His messengers or envoys. The analogy between His o^vn case and that of the men He had selected was always present to His mind. He had been sent by the Father : they were to be sent by Himself. A technical term could only have served to bewilder the Twelve and lead them to misconceive the object of their mission. What was necessary for our Lord's purpose was a word wliich set forth simply and aptly the relations of the Twelve to Himself, and for this there was no more suitable terra than 'messenger,' 'envoy.' The term 'apostle' then was not suggested to our I,ord by its currency as a technical expression. He chose a common word and adapted it to His own purpose. He wished to give the most expressive title to the men whom He had chosen, and none seemed to Him .so suit- able as the word 'sent.' It reminded them per- petually that they were men with a mission.
It is generally held that the name ' apostles ' was p\en to the Twelve on the occasion of their call. The language of St. Luke (613) docs not compel us to adopt Ithis conclusion, nor is that 'of St. Mark (3") decisive on the point.* The state- ments in both Gospels are consistent alike with the view that the Apostles were so named when they were first called, and with the view that this title was bestowed on them at a Inter d.-ite. The other considerations to which appeal may be made tell in opposite directions. It may be urgred that the im- pression left on the mind of an ordinary reader is that the Apostles received their name at the time of their call, but it does not follow that this impression is correct. For it is said in the same context that our Lord gave to Simon the name Peter, and we know that this name was given to him long before he became an Apostle. This proves that the statements made in connexion with the appointment of the Twelve must not be pressed as if they referred to that event exclusively. Again, it may be con- tended with much propriety that there was a special fitness in our Lord assigning a new name to the men whom He had set apart for a new task. The new relation might well be desig- nated by a new name. But it may be pointed out in reply that an interval elapsed between the choice of the Twelve and their being sent forth. Is it not probable that the new designation was given only when the new vocation was actually begun? Would the new title be understood apart from the experience by which it was illuminated? This argument is strengthened by the circumstance that St Mark appears to employ the term ' apostle ' only in connexion with the missionary journey of the Twelve. With him it is not so much a title belonging to them, as a term descriptive of the functions assigned to tnera on a special occasion. To decide between these conflicting opinions is not easy, but on the whole the suggestion that the disciples were not called * apostles' till they were first sent out appears the more probable.
The Sermon on the Mount is regarded by many as an address delivered by our Lord when He chose the Twelve. The note of time in the Gospel of St. Luke ascribes it to this occasion, and there is no reason to reject this testimony. Besides, it has the greatest internal probability in its favour. The appointment of the Apostles formed an epoch in the ministry of our Lord ; what more natural or suitable than that He should avail Him- self of the occasion to explain and enforce His convictions as to the true life of man ? The time was most opportune for such a deliverance. The hearts of the disciples were deeply moved ; their whole natures were quickened and alert ; why not sow seed which might afterwards bear abundant fruit? The char- acter of the Sermon itself is another argument confirming this conclusion. It is didactic rather than hortatory. It expounds truth rather than proclaims the mercy of God. Finally, there is nothing in the Sermon which conflicts with this opinion. It may then be assumed with some confidence that the Sermon on the Mount was spoken in connexion with the call of the Twelve. >Iany writers go further and contend that it was spoken to them principally or exclusively. But this opi' the statements of the Gospels of St. Ma is not required by the
announces were riot intended for the Twelve alone ; why then should they not have been heard by all the disciples? This result is in no way inconsistent with the opinion that the Sermon on the Mount formed, as it were, a special charge to the Twelve in view of the new position which they were hence- forward to occupy. It is not necessary for our purpose to dis- cuss the limits of the Sermon or do more than turnish a brief account of its teaching. Our Lord wished His followers to understand the meaning of righteousness ; to know what the will of God really was ; the true nature of the demands He made on them ; how to frame their conduct if they were to obtain His approval. The subject of the address then is the true life of man. The charmterislii- features of that life are set forth in a series of blessings prouounceU on those who possess