ART. II.-APOSTOLIC SUBGROUPS.

THERE is a sense in which any subdivision of the apostolic company is labor lost. No two of them are alike. So peculiar and individual are they that the best grouping of the twelve apostles— or of any other twelve men, for that matter-would be twelve groups of one each; which is no grouping at all and is a confession that all aids to knowledge of them in this way is impossible. They have had frequent divisions into subgroups. Some of these subdivisions are extremely fanciful, while others have such ground of reason as may be found in occupation, in family relationship, in the order in which their names appear in the apostolic catalogue or in the frequency or infrequency of their mention in the gospel narratives. By dividing the apostles into two companies of six each the well known and the comparatively unknown are brought together. Many lessons are thus disclosed for those who labor on unnoticed. A hint at another successful grouping is found where Christ sent them out on their first tour of evangelism through Galilee. They went two by two, an arrangement whereby each becomes the complement of his apostolic comrade, and the intensity, energy, and devotion of every apostle is multiplied fourfold because it is mated and matched. This permits them to be drawn together according to kinship. We thus naturally group together two pairs of brothers, if not three; a pair of friends, and perhaps a father and son. The weakness of such a division lies in the fact that members of the same family do not necessarily belong in the same group. Nature-which always reproduces herself—is never guilty of repetition, and there is no guaranty that Peter and Andrew, and James and John, and James the Less and Judas of James came from the same family because they are alike. Alexander Balmain Bruce, in his important work on The Training of the Twelve, after considering the arrangement of the names in the catalogue finds three groups of four each. The first group-Simon Peter, Andrew, James major, and John-includes those best known; the second group-Philip, Nathanael or Bartholomew, Thomas, and Matthew-are next best known; and the

third group-James the Less, Lebbæus (the three-named apostle), Simon, and Judas-are the least known of all, or in the case of the traitor known only too well. Henry Latham, the author of Pastor Pastorum, makes no attempt at divisions into subgroups, and writers on the lives of the apostles, like Cave and Greenwood, omit it as hedged about with insuperable difficulties.

The Dominican refectory at Milan affords an interesting basis. for arranging the apostles into smaller companies. It grows into almost absolute certainty that the Last Supper of Da Vinci constitutes a comment of remarkable clearness on Eph. iv, 11, 12, "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ." The distribution here of church offices corresponds closely to what we find in the other writings of St. Paul. At the moment of beginning the verse the great apostle had no intention of naming them. He was thinking of a great building with workmen carrying on the work of construction at different points. Some were laying the corner stone; at another place the substratum for the foundation was being laid; on still another section the pillars were being raised. The whole building, fitly framed, was growing into a holy temple. With the rapidity of thought he names these different officials in the Church as types of the various workmen engaged upon the edifice. In his haste, however, the apostle does not enumerate all grades of ministry. The deacons are wanting. We know that this office already existed in the Pauline churches. In the letter to the Philippians he makes special recognition of the deacons, probably because they had been instrumental with the bishops in collecting the money recently transmitted to St. Paul. Supplying, then, the deacons from Phil. i, 1, the full meaning of Da Vinci becomes apparent. He divides the apostles into four subgroups, putting emphasis upon the divisions of the Pauline ministry and making them types of those enduring forms of service whereby the Church maintains herself in and will ultimately triumph over the world. This grouping is sane, has philosophic soundness, and harmonizes completely with the history of the Christian Church and with the

present-day division of Christian effort. It is the work of a painter, and not of a theologian, but it is the subgrouping of easily the greatest painter and perhaps the greatest thinker of his age. The four groups are as follows:

EVANGELISTS.

Andrew.

James the Less.

Nathanael, or

Bartholomew.

ness.

The apostles and prophets are named in a single body. They are the founders of the Church, and in a certain sense have no successors. But in the breadth, farsightedness, and catholicity of St. Paul all are included whose inspired teaching and preaching supplemented the work of the apostles. Barnabas, Timothy, Titus, Mark, Luke, and the deeply inspired but unknown writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, were of that noble office and will ever remain in the glorious ranks of the progenitors of the faith. Their likenesses have been seen in every century, sometimes only reappearing at long intervals and rekindling by their extraordinary powers of genius and grace the expiring flames of truth and goodSometimes they are missionaries; again, evangelists and teachers. Sometimes they are iconoclasts, and topple over the stoutly built engineries of unjust power and privilege. But they excel in constructive energies. Apollos watered, for so St. Paul tells us. Planting was his own share in the enterprise. Occupancy establishing, founding and planting, was the work of this group of disciples. This is the field in which Peter, Paul, and John display their greatest aptitude. Judas is supplanted by St. Paul. Among all the great worthies of Christianity these three take the first place, shining like the three great stars that bedizen the belt of Orion. In their lives supremacy was accorded to them: to Peter and John by virtue of their intimate association with Jesus and their membership in the inner group of the twelve, and to Paul by a right of love and service which none will challenge. To Peter belongs the glory of the first great sermon at Pentecost. When Samaria had received the Gospel it was Peter who was sent to lay his bonds on the converts. He baptized Cornelius, and at

the first council of the Church gave his vote for the admission of the Gentiles without circumcision. Though his labors at Antioch are mentioned with reprehension, as to the fact of his apostolic commission to that city there can be no question. The wellestablished facts of his career earn him the title of founder of the Church. Paul goes unchallenged with the title of apostle-prophet. On his flight from Damascus we find him laboring with the church at Antioch. From that second capital of Christianity, made so by his ministry, the fiery vigor and splendid courage of Paul radiated to ennoble and evangelize the world. Missionary journey succeeds missionary journey, church after church rises, Crete and the cities of Derbe, Lystra, and Iconium hear the Gospel from his lips; called to Europe by a vision he establishes churches at Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, and Corinth. Then follows a long ministry at Ephesus. Meanwhile he reforms to the liberal bent of his own mind churches founded by others, becomes a financial agent for the poor at Jerusalem, and even in his death gives to the Church Timothy, Titus, and Clemens Romanus, who, undismayed by his fate, carried on his work. From Paul sprang a whole race of founders. John's place in this group rests upon equally sufficient though different facts. In the Acts of the Apostles his name does not occur as often as the other two, but the occasions on which he is mentioned show that he played an important part. Not elsewhere, however, is he overshadowed by Peter and effaced by Paul. From the peculiar appreciation he showed of the visit of certain Greeks to Christ in passion week we conclude that he was eminently successful in carrying the Gospel to men of the highest speculative thought. He is historically connected with the church at Ephesus and organized the seven churches addressed in the Apocalypse. He stands before us in the sunset of the apostolic age as the head of Christendom, and his evidence of the resurrection of Christ, passed on through Polycarp and Irenæus, reaches well into the third century. Christianity's three great capitals, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Ephesus, are made illustrious by Peter, Paul, and John. So long as John lived men looked to Ephesus, not to Rome, for the primate of Christianity.

Further considerations accentuate their claims as founders of the Church. Each contributed largely to the documentary history of Christianity. The Church would be poor indeed without their gospels and letters. Without them the New Testament would be reduced to the gospels by Matthew and the letters of James and Jude. The first section of the New Testament, small, and yet illustrative of his work, is associated with Peter. All of the traditions and much of the critical comment favor the opinion that the gospel by Mark owes its fullness and graphic narrative, if not its entire existence, to conversations with Peter. The gospel of Mark and the letters of Peter make up the first and oldest segment of the circle of Christian literature. The Pauline contribution is much more full and distinct. One of the quickest ways to gather the history of New Testament Christianity is to begin with the gospel of Luke, whose sponsor Paul was, and then continue with the Acts of the Apostles, inserting in that volume the side lights that can only be gained from the Pauline letters. It is natural also to group together the writings attached by long tradition to St. John's name. Here again we have a beginning gospel, a series of brief letters, and the Revelation of St. John.

Again, they were the founders of Christian institutions. Ecclesiastical organizations and many theological beliefs are traceable to them. We shall not discuss their theologies, but a brief estimate as to the ecclesiastical outcome of their ministries may be in order. At the beginning of the Church there was no organization. The founders of the Church were messengers with a message, but all of this great triumvirate tarried long enough to see the differentiation of function and office well advanced. As the Church grew in magnitude and complexity it took on several forms of administration, varying in different places and at different times in the same place. Three great systems were finally developed, according to the apostle who took the initiative and conformable to the people among whom he labored, and thus it happens that we have apostolic presbyterian, episcopalian, and congregational churches-each with equal authority because with no authority at all save the advantage of the work. Peter labored for the most part in Jewish communities, and on account