« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
By all which we are led to conclude, that James, several times mentioned in the Acts, and St. Paul's epistles, is the same who in the catalogues of the apostles, is called “James the son of Alpheus.” For James, mentioned by St. Paul, is called “the Lord's brother,” and plainly appears to be an apostle. Consequently, he is “James the son of Alpheus,” mentioned in all the catalogues of the apostles of Christ. Wall, in his notes upon John vii. at the beginning, says, “These brethren and kinsfolk of our Lord, as they were ‘ but mean persons, so also they were some of the backward‘est to believe in him. They that are most usually called ‘ his brethren were James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas. 6 Two of these, James and Judas, some learned men “think to have been two of the apostles. And there were “two apostles of those names that were brethren. But this “ place, if they be of those that are meant in it, is a strong “argument against that opinion. For these brethren did “hardly yet believe in him; but the apostles did. This was ‘ but half a year before he suffered.’ Upon which I would observe : when St. John says, ch. vii. 5, “For neither did his brethren believe in him : he does not intend to say that they had not faith in him. Grotius's comment appears to me very right. “The " meaning “is not that they did not believe at all; but that they did * not believe as they should.” Learned men are certainly in the right, when they say that some of our Lord's brethren were apostles. And it seems to me, that all those, who in the gospels are called our Lord’s brethren, had early and always an affection and esteem for him. This may be perceived from several places in the gospels, as Matt. xii. 46; Mark iii. 31 ; Luke viii. 19; See also John ii. 12. And in time they all believed in him, and that rightly, as the Messiah. St. Luke, in the history of things after our Lord’s ascension, Acts i. 13, 14, having mentioned the names of the apostles, adds, “These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.” And St. Paul, I Cor. ix. 5, speaks of “brethren of the Lord,” not apostles, who laboured in spreading the gospel in the world. They of whom St. John speaks, had worldly views and expectations. They were desirous, that Jesus, if he were indeed the Messiah, should go to Jerusalem, and set up his Kingdom in a glorious manner. Even after this, several who " Non omnino, non utoportebat, Grot, in loc.
certainly were apostles, betrayed great ignorance, or weak faith, or wrong apprehensions, by their discourses, and questions put to our Saviour. Of Thomas, see John xiv. 5. Of Philip, see ver. 8–11, and of Judas, ver. 22, 23. Those brethren of our Lord proposed that he should hasten to Jerusalem, to the feast of tabernacles, nigh at hand. “Jesus said to them, my time is not yet come. But your time is always ready. The world cannot hate you. But me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil. Go ye up unto this feast. I go not up yet unto this feast : for my time is not yet full come,” ch. vii. 6, 7, 8. It is manifest, that he taxeth their carnality and worldly-mindedness. As if he had said: ‘It ‘ is “ not proper for me to go up to this feast, as yet, nor till “after it is begun. But you may go up at any time, since “you have done little or nothing to make the Jews un“friendly to you, as I have done: who by the strictness of “my doctrine, and the freedom of my reproofs, have pro‘ voked many to a great degree.” It follows in ver. 9, 10, “When he had said these things unto them, he abode still in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.” These words may afford, in the opinion of some, another objection to the supposition, that these brethren of our Lord were apostles. But to me the objection appears not of much moment. Some of these brethren might nevertheless be among the apostles, and go up to the feast before him. For our Lord seems not to have been attended by all his apostles in that journey. So much is implied in the manner in which it was performed. “He went not openly, but as it were in private:” in a more private manner than he had usually done, and attended by a small number of his apostles only, several of them having gone up to Jerusalem before him, upon occasion of the approaching solemnity. Chrysostom seems not to have doubted, that some of the brethren of our Lord here spoken of were apostles, or at least among his disciples. For discoursing on John vii. 3, 4, 5, he says: ‘Observe y with me the power of Christ. “Of them who uttered these words, one was the first bishop
hom. 48. T. VIII. p. 284. D.
‘ of Jerusalem, even the blessed James, of whom Paul says: * “Other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's “brother.” And Judas also is said to have been a wonder“ful man.’ So says Chrysostom, who did not receive the epistle of St. Jude, so far as we can perceive, though he did that of St. James. IX. This James is called by St Mark, “the less,” ch. xv. 40. “There were also women looking on afar off. Among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the Less, and Joses, and Salome.” That hereby is meant James, the Lord’s brother, and the son of Alpheus, is generally supposed, and I think reasonably. He can be no other, because Joses is presently afterwards mentioned as his brother, agreeably to other places of the evangelists, where our Lord’s brethren are named, Matt. xiii. 55; Mark vi. 3. But interpreters are not agreed why he was so called. It has been thought, that * herein is a reference to James the son of Zebedee, and brother of John, who had been beheaded by Herod in the year of Christ 44. And Lightfoot says, “that" James, or Jacob, is commonly called James ‘the great, in distinction from James the son of Alpheus, “who is called the Less, not for any dignity, or superiority of ‘ apostleship that he had above the other, but either because “this James was the elder, or because of the singular privacy ‘ that Christ admitted him to with himself, as he also did * Peter and John.” Here are several reasons of this denomination, but though Lightfoot says James the son of Zebedee was commonly called James the great, there is no instance of it in the New Testament. It may be observed, that the less, in the original, is not a comparative, but a positive, the little, ts purps. And so Beza has translated. Maria Jacobi parvi et Jose mater. However in the Latin Vulgate it is Jacobi minoris. And it is evident that " Jerom so understood the word. Gregory Nyssen ‘ thought he was called the Less, as not
* Puto ita dictum inter Apostolos ad discrimen Jacobi Zebedaidae. Grot. ad Marc. xv. 40. * The third part of the Harmony of the four Evangelists, Vol. I. p. 634.
* Simon est Apostolus, sed nescio quis Jacobus, quomodo est frater Domini putandus? Et quomodo tertius ad distinctionem majoris appellabitur minor quum major et minor non inter tres, sed inter duos soleant praebere distantiam. Adv. Helvid. p. 138. in. * ‘O 6s Mapkog Iakoğs rs pukpa kat Iwon pumrépa avrmy stirév, streitsp my aX\og Iakw80c & re AXqate, Öua Tero Heyag, Ört towe arrosokoic touc dwóeka ovvapt0pmro" & Yap purpoc sk
mu avroic evapoulog. Greg. Nyss. de Christ. Res. Or. 2. T. III. p. 413.
being one of the twelve apostles. Which reason I cannot admit, because I am persuaded he was an apostle, if he was the Lord’s brother. Nor do I perceive in the New Testament more than two of this name. Some say, he was so called, because he was the younger of the two apostles of this name. But of this there is no proof nor probability. For James, the son of Alpheus, must have been his father's first-born, and may have been as old, or older than James the son of Zebedee. Some have conjectured that " he might be so called on account of his stature. Which conjecture is favoured by the literal sense of the word in the positive degree, James the Little. And some may be apt to think, that this was one reason why the Jews at the temple, according to Hegesippus, o him on an eminence, that he might be heard by all the people, when assembled in great numbers. So Zaccheus, being little of stature, and there being a great crowd, climbed up into a sycamore tree, to see Jesus as he passed by, Luke xix. Perhaps this is as likely a conjecture as any. Nevertheless I shall mention one more. He might be so called on account of his inferiority, in comparison of the other James. It is manifest, that during the time of our Lord’s abode on this earth, Peter, and James and John, the two sons of Zebedee, were the most eminent and considerable of the disciples. They were the most favoured, and were admitted by our Lord to some special measure of confidence and freedom. And it is observable, that in all the catalogues of the apostles, James the son of Alpheus, and Simon the Canaanite, or Zelotes, and Judas, are the last mentioned, except Judas Iscariot. Possibly these three, whom I suppose to have been our Lord's brethren, were the latest called to be apostles, and for a while were defective in faith and understanding, or not so considerable and emiment as some of the other apostles, particularly James the son of Zebedee. The question put to our Lord by Judas, one of them, recorded in John xiv. 22, seems a remarkable instance of the slowness of his understanding in the things of religion, under all the advantages which he had enioved. J †es therefore might be called “the Less,” by way of distinction from another of the same name, who had been called to be an apostle before him, and was more eminent.
a Potuit etiam Jacobus parvus appellari ad corporis molem ratione habitā; quomodo apud Romanos ob corporis affectiones Pauli, Magni, Longi, Crassi, Claudii, Pulchri nuncupabantur. Basnag. ann. ante Dom. 6. num. xxxi.
VO Le VI. O
And yet the appellation carried not in it any reflection. This coincides with some things said by Lightfoot above. However, it is mentioned only as a conjecture, to be considered by those who are disposed to do it. For I am not able to say with assurance, what was the ground and reason of this appellation. X. We have seen divers proofs of the respect shown to this person, which any one is able to recollect, and therefore they need not to be repeated. However, I shall here take notice of a few such things. 1. He is never called Justus, or the Just, in the New Testament; but he seems to have been so called by many, even in his life-time, as well as afterwards. Eusebius says, that * he was called the Just by the ancients on account of the eminence of his virtue. He is several times so called in the passages of Clement of Alexandria, quoted from Eusebius' some while ago. Hegesippus says, he 8 had been called the Just by all from our Saviour's time to his own: and afterwards, that " on account of his eminent virtue he was called the Just, and Oblias. He likewise says, that the Jews at the temple called him the Just, as may be seen in the account of his death, transcribed above. Jerom * in the beginning of his article of this person says, “that James “ the Lord’s brother was surnamed the Just.’ 2. In his commentary upon the epistle to the Galatians, at ch. i. 19, he says, “that' James, there spoken of, was in ‘such esteem for his sanctity, that it was no uncommon thing ‘ for people to crowd about him, and strive to touch the hem ‘ of his garment.’ 3. Eusebius says, that" the episcopal chair in which James was used to sit, was preserved to his time, and was had in veneration by the church at Jerusalem. XI. I have not been able to write the history of
* Tetov Šm 8v avrov Iakoğov čv kav ćukaway strucAmv oi traXav 6t' aperng Eka)\8v trporepmuara. Eus. H. E. l. 2. c. 1. p. 38. B. f P. 169, 170.
* 'O ovopagógig iro Tavrov Čukatoc atro Twy re kvpus Xpovov usXpi kat juww. Ap. Euseb. l. 2. c. 23. p. 63. D.
" Ata Yerot rmv intrepôoomy rug ducatoovyng avra ska)\etro èukawc cat Q3\tag. Ib. p. 64. A. Kat Ekpašav avrw, kat sutrov" Aucas, to Tavréc ret0800at opeikousy. Ib. T. Vid. et p. 65. A. et B.
* Jacobus, qui appellatur frater Domini, cognomento Justus. De V.I. cap.2.
| Hic autem. Jacobus episcopus Jerosolymorum primus fuit, cognomento Justus; virtantae sanctitatis et rumoris in populo, ut fimbriam vestimentiejus certatim cuperent attingere. In Gal. T. IV. p. 237. in.
* Tov Yap Iakw8e 6povov re Trpora rmg 'IspocoMupwy skk\matag £ug Ösupo repvXayutvov of thos kara övačoxmy tropistovreg ačexpot, K. A. H. E. l. 7. c. 19.