Nay, this still held good when one whom they had at first regarded with fear and suspicion (Ac 9'^") was added to their company. Greatly as Saul of Tarsus differed from the Twelve in some things, he was entirely at one with them respecting funda- mental facts. He, like them, had seen and heard the risen Christ (1 Co 9^ l.jS-H; Latham, Pastor Pastorum, 1890, pp. 228-230).
It was probably owing to St. Paul's persistent claim to be an apostle, equal in rank with the Twelve (Gal 1', 1 Co 9'), that it became customary from very early times to restrict the appellation of 'apostle ' to the Twelve and the Apostle of the Gentiles ; but there is no such restriction in the NT. It is certainly given to Barnabas, but perhaps primarily as being an envoy from the Church of Antioch (Ac 13'- 2- li"*- "), rather than as having a direct mission from Christ. St. Paul seems to speak of him as a colleague, recognized by Peter and John as equal to himself in the mission to the Gentiles (Gal 2"), and as one who, like himself, used the apostolic privilege of working for nothing, although he had a right to maintenance (1 Co 9*^). We need not doubt that Barnabas continued to be called an apostle in a general sense after the mission from Antioch was over.
Perhaps the simplest and most natural way of understanding Gal 1'^ is that James, the Lord's brother, had the title of 'apostle' in the wider sense. It may be regarded as certain that this James was not one of the Twelve. But 1 Co 15^ ougiit not to be quoted as implying either that there was a company of apostles larger than the Twelve or that James was a member of this larger company. ' Next he appeared to James ; then to the whole body of the apostles.' There is no emphasis on 'all,' implying an antithesis between 'to one, then to all.' Such an antithesis, as well as the idea that James was in .some sense an apostle, is foreign to the context. The ' all ' prob- ably looks back to ' the twelve' in v.i", which is an official and not a numerical designation, for only ten were there, Thomas and Judas being absent. ' Then to all the ajiostles ' probably means that on that occasion the apostolic company was complete (for Thomas was present) rather than that some were there who were called apostles although they were not of the original Twelve. It is highly probable tiiat James, the Lord's brother, Avas such a person, but 1 Co 15^ ought not to be quoted as evidence of this. It is after the murder of James the son of Zebedee that James the Lord's brother comes on the scene. He may have taken the place of his namesake in the number of the Twelve.
That Silvanus and Timothy were regarded as apostles in the wider sense is not improbable. In b(jth 1 and 2 Thess. they are associated with St. Paul in the address, and in both letters the first person plural is used with a regularity which is not found in any other group of the Pauline Epistles : 'our gospel,' i.e. 'the gospel which we apostles preach,' is specially remarkable (1 Th 1', 2 Th -2^*). Still more remarkable is the casual addition, ' when we might have been burdensome as apostles of Christ' (1 Th2«).
Ko 16" probably means that Andronicus and Junias were distinguished as apostles ; but there are two elements of doubt : iwia-qixoL iv tols clttoittoXols might mean 'well known to the apostles,' but it more probably means that among the apostles they were illustrious persons ; and' low iav may be masc. or fem., Junias or Junia. If Jitnia is ri.uht, the probability that Andronicus and Junia (?man and wife) were distinguished members of the apostolic body is lessened. But Chrysostom does not shrink from the thought that a woman maybe an apo.stle. He says that to be an apostle at all is a great thing, and therefore to be illustrious amongst such persons
84
APOSTLE
APOSTOLIC COA^STITUTIONS
is very high praise ; and * how great is the devotion of this woman, that slie should be even counted worthy of the appellation of apostle ! ' (Sanday- Headlam, ad loc. ).
The fact that there were people who claimed, without any right, the title of 'apostle' (2 Co IP^ Rev 2'-) amounts to proof that in the Apostolic Church there were ' apostles ' outside the Twelve with the addition of St. Paul. It is incredible that there were people who claimed to belong to a body so well known as the Twelve, or any who tried to. personate St. Paul ; and 'it would be unprofitable to waste words on the strange theory that St. Paul is meant by these false apostles' (Hort, Judaistic Christianity, 1894, p. 163). Very soon, though not in the NT, tlie title of ' apostle ' was given to the Seventy. It is not likely that Joseph Barsabbas and Matthias were the only persons among the 120 gathered together after the Ascension (Ac 1^^) who had the apostolic qualification of having seen the Lord ; probably most of them had been His personal disciples. All of those who took to missionary work would be likely to be styled ' apostles' ; and it is not impossible that the ' false apostles ' who op- posed St. Paul had this qualification, and therefore claimed to have a better right to the title than he had.