Theologically, there is nothing wrong with the usage of the term ‘Apostle’ to recognise the apostolic function. This was stated by the NECF Research Commission, which however, expressed concern at the manner the word has been used and understood by the Christian community at large. The commission raised the following points at their recent meeting in August:
The authority The church has not thought through the biblical teaching on authority, which is in the office. The act of conferring the title, though it is meant to recognise the contribution or function of a leader, has mistakenly placed the authority on the person rather than the office. This disturbs lay leaders and may confuse young Christians.
The commission also questions who has the authority to confer the ‘title’.
The perception How the term is generally being understood by believers today is a major concern. The word ‘apostle’, which literally means ‘the sent out one,’ can also mean envoy, delegate, or messenger in the New Testament.
It is, however, used predominantly for those who were commissioned by Jesus Christ Himself for a particular task and has therefore taken on a technical or specific meaning, different from the usage of the term ‘pastor,’ which refers generally to any person who is shepherding a flock.
If a title is conferred upon a leader, would the leader be perceived as someone whose writing would be as weighty as John’s, James’ and Paul’s, whose writings are the canon of the Bible?
The Epistles pointed out the succession of an apostolic ministry, which emphasises the function rather the office. Further,
postles still existed at the time when Ephesians was written. Interestingly, in Matt. 19:28, Jesus told the disciples that they would “sit upon 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel”. This is confirmed in Rev. 21:14 which mentions “there were 12 names of the 12 apostles of the Lamb.”
|
