VII. It still remains, that we confider, on what account he was called the Lord's brother, and whether he be the fame as James the fon of Alpheus.

James, as we have feen, is called by St. Paul the Lord's brother. Gal. i. 19. All Chriftian writers in general speak of him in the like manner. The question is, in what fenfe

he was fo.

t

That James was not the fon of Mary, or our Lord's brother by nature, has been well argued by Chriftians in former times, both Latins, and " Greeks, from our Lord's words upon the cross, recorded John xix. 26, 27. where he recommends the care of his mother to John: requiring her to confider him, as her fon, and him to take care of her, as his mother.

And indeed it has been the opinion of all Chriftians in general, that Mary was always a virgin, and that she never had any children by Jofeph. We must therefore inquire, in what respect this James was our Lord's brother, and fome others his brothers, or fifters.

Eufebius, in a chapter quoted fome while ago, the first of the fecond book of his ecclefiaftical hiftory, without hesitation fays, that James was faid to be the Lord's 'brother, because he alfo was called the fon of Jofeph. And Jofeph was reckoned his father, because the virgin Mary was efpoufed to him.'

Origen in a paffage alfo cited above, fays, that the brethren of Jefus were the fons of Jofeph by a former wife, who had cohabited with him before Mary. And he men

t Verum homines praviffimi hinc præfumunt opinions fuæ auctoritatem, quod plures Dominum noftrum fratres habuiffe fi traditum. Qui fi Mariæ flii fuiffent, et non potius Jofephi ex priore canjugio fufcepti, nunquam in tempore paffionis Joanni Apoftolo tranfcripta effet in matrem, Domino ad utrumque dicente, Mulier ecce filius tuus, et

Joanni, Ecce mater tua: nifi quod defolatæ folatium caritatem filii in difcipulo relinquebat. Hilar. Piat. Comm. in Matt. cap. i. p. 612. Ed. Bened.

- Ει ησαν δε τεκνα τη μαρια, και ει υπήρχεν αυτή ανήρ, τινι λόγῳ παρεδίδε την μαρίαν τῷ ιωάννη, και τον Ιωάννην

Tapia; Epih. Hær. 78. num. x. p. 1042. C.

Ει γαρ εγνω αυτήν, και εν ταξει yuvamos eixe, πως ως απροςατεύτον αυτήν, και αδενα εχεσαν, τῳ μαθητη παρατίθεται, και κελεύει αυτώ εις τα dia autny nabei; Chryfoft. in Matt. hom. 5. T. VII. p. 77.

* Τοτε δη και ιακωβον, τον τ8 κυριε λεγομενον αδελφον, οτι δη και ουτος ιωσηφ ωνόματο παις· το δε χρισε πατηρ ο ιωσηφ, ω μνηςευθείσα η παρθενος, κ. λα L. 2. c. 1. p. 38 B.

y In Matt. T. X. p. 462, 463. T. III. Bened. P. 223. tom. I. Huet. 2 See before, p. 478. tions

tions it as fupported by an ancient tradition. This was the opinion of Epiphanius, and of many ancient writers, both Greeks and Latins.

Jerom, in his article of this person, in his catalogue of ecclefiaftical writers, fays: James who is called the Lord's 'brother, furnamed the Juft, was, as some think, the fon of Jofeph by another wife, but, as feems to me, the fon of Mary, fifter to our Lord's mother, mentioned by John, in his gofpel, John xix. 25.' And in his book against Helvidius he delivers it as his opinion, that thofe called our Lord's brethren in the gofpels, were fo named, as they were cousins, or relations. He fpeaks to the like purpofe alfo in his commentary upon Matth. xii. 49, 50.

This opinion was at length embraced by Auguftine. In his expofition of the epiftle to the Galatians, written about the year 394, he speaks dubiously, faying, that' James

was the Lord's brother, as he was the fon of Jofeph by a former wife, or else as he was related to his mother Mary.' But in works, written afterwards, he continually fays, that: our Lord's brethren were relations of his mother Mary.

2

Epiph. Hær. 29. n. iii. et iv. Hær. 51. num x. Hær. 78. num. viii. et ix. Ancorat. num. lx. P. 62. b Greg. Nyffen. de Chrifti Refur. Or. 2. tom. III. p. 412, 413. Chryfoft. in Matt. hom. 5. tom. VII. P. 77. C. Theophyl. in Gal. i. 19. P. 448. Niceph. Call. 1. 2. cap. 3. in. Hilar. Pictav. Comm. in Matt. i. p. 612. ed. Bened. Ambrof. de Inftit. Virg. cap. vi. T. II. p. 260. Bened. Ambrofiaftri Comment. in Gal. i. 19. ap. Ambrof. in App. T. II. p. 213. • Jacobus qui

cap.

appellatur frater Domini, cognomento Juftus, ut nonnulli exiftimant, Jofeph ex alia uxore, ut mi. hi videtur, Mariæ fororis matris Domini,, cujus Joannes in libro fuo meminit, filius. De V. I. cap. 2. Reftat igitur, ut juxta fuperiorem expofitionem fratres cos intelligas appellatos, cognatione, non affectu, non gentis privilegio, non naturâ: quomodo Lot Abrahæ, quomodo Jacob Laban eft appellatus

The

frater, &c. Adv. Helvid. T. IV. P. 2. p. 140. • Quidam fratres Domini de aliâ uxore Jofeph filios fufpicantur, fequentes deliramenta cham vel Efcham mulierculam conapocryphorum, et quandam Meffingentes. Nos autem, ficut in libro, quem contra Helvidium fcripfimus, continetur, non filios Jofeph, fed confobrinos Salvatoris, Mariz liberos, intelligimus, materterz Domini: quæ effe dicitur mater Jacobi minoris, et Jofeph, et Judz: quos in alio Evangelii loco fratres Domini legimus appellatos. Fratres autem confobrinos dici, omnis fcriptura demonftrat. In Matt.cap. xii. T. IV. p. 53. f Jacobus Domini frater, vel ex filiis Jofeph de alia uxore, vel ex cognatione Mariæ matris ejus debet intelligi. Aug. Expof. ep. ad Gal. cap. ii. num. viii. tom. II. P. 2.

i. et

noftis. Non enim novum est quod Fratres ejus fic accipite, ficut auditis. Confanguinei virginis Maia fratres Domini dicebantur. Scriptura

riæ

The former, as appears from the authors just cited, was the more ancient opinion. Nor does Jerom allege any before him who held the opinion mentioned as his own. Indeed he seems to have been the first, who faid, that our Lord's brethren were the fons of Mary, his mother's fifter, and therefore only coufins or relations. But when he advanced this notion, he was inclined to think Joseph also a virgin. As has been well obferved by G. J. Voffius. However Jerom's opinion has prevailed very much of late. I fuppofe, it may be that of the Romanifts in general. It was alfo the opinion of Lightfoot. It is likewise embraced by Witfius, and Lampe, and many other proteftants. But Valefius, among the Romanifts, in his annotations upon the above cited chapter of Eufebius, fays, he thinks, that James was the fon of Jofeph by a former wife. The fame opinion has been afferted by several among

Scriptura tamen hujufmodi cognationes fratres appellat. Nam Abraham et Lot fratres funt dicti, cum effet Abraham patruus Lot: et Laban et Jacob fratres funt dicti, cum effet Laban avunculus Jacob, &c. In Joan. Tract. 28. num. iii. tom. III. P. 2. Vid. ibid. in Matt. Qu. xvii. et in Joan. Tr. x.

Et Loth frater Abrahæ dicitur, cum patruus ejus effet Abraham. Ex quâ vocabuli confuetudine etiam fratres Domini vocantur in Evangelio, non utique quos Maria virgo pepererat, fed ejus confanguinitate omnes propinqui Contr. Fauft 1. 22. cap. 35. T. VIII.

Tu dicis, Mariam virginem non permanfiffe. Ego mihi plus vindico, etiam ipfum Jofeph virginem fuiffe per Mariam, ut ex virginitatis conjugio virgo filius nafceretur. Adv. Helvid. tom. IV. p. 142. in. i Et fane, qui Jofephum putaret non habuiffe uxorem, antequam B. Mariam duceret, ante B. Hieronymum arbitror fuiffe neminem: ut

cumque pofterioribus temporibus, in virginitate extollenda immodicis, avide multi eam fuerint fententiam

amplexi. Voff. de Gen. Chrifti. * Vid. Baron. in Apcap. vi.

k

the

paratu num. Ixi. &c. Eft. ad Gal. cap. i. 19. et alibi. Tillem. S. Jacque le Mineur. Art. i. et ii.

1 See Lightfoot's Works, vol. I. 660. m At quamP. 270, 541, vis Eufebius, Epiphanius, Gregorius Nyffenus, plurimique veterum, in eandem concefferint fententiam, non videtur mihi ea probabilibus niti argumentis. Rectius Hieronymo accedemus, arbitranti eos qui Domini fratres dicuntur, fuiffe ejus confobrinos, loquendi genere, etiam Witf. Græcis et Romanis noto. Comm. in ep. Jud. § 4. p. 454.

n Erat hic frater Jacobi minoris.

-Quare fuit confobrinus Chrifti fecundum carnem, natus ex Maria, uxore Cleophæ, feu Alphæi, que foror erat Maria Matris Domini. Lampe in Evang. Joan. cap. xiv. • Fabr. 22. T. III. p. 167. Bib. Gr. 1. 4. cap. 5. n. xi. T. III. And fee Lenfant et Beaup. 165. fobre fur Gal. i. 19. et la preface fur l'epiftre de S. Jacques. Dr. Benfon in his preface to the epiftle of St. James, fect. ii. Doddridge in his preface to the fame epiftle.

P Ait igitur Eufebius, Jacobum, qui in Evangelio, et epiftola Pauli frater Domini dicitur, filium fuifle

Jofephi

г

the protestants, G. J. Voffius, and Bafnage, and Cave, in his Lives of the Apoftles written in English. Nor does it appear, that he had abandoned his first judgment, when he wrote his Hiftoria Literaria.

I likewife have for a long time been much inclined to the fame opinion; and have compofed an argument upon the question. But I have laid it afide, fuppofing it to be rather too prolix, and too intricate, to be inferted in this place. And after all, perhaps fome might think, that the argument does not afford a complete folution of all difficulties and objections. I therefore enter not at present into any dispute about it, but leave every one to judge as he fees good.

VIII. Whether James was the son of Joseph by a former wife, or the son of Mary, wife of Cleophas, fifter to Mary, our Lord's mother, or otherwife nearly related to her, he was an

Jofephi ex aliá conjuge, quam Jofe-the cuftom of the Hebrew lanphus ante Mariam fibi fociaverat.guage, fifter to the virgin Mary. Cum Eufebio confentit Epiphanius But Eufebius, Epiphanius, and -Gregorius Nyffenus fed Hieronymus in libro de Scriptoribus Ecclefiafticis Jacobum hunc idcirco fratrem Domini appellatum effe exiftimat, quod filius effet Mariæ, fororis fratris Domini. — Multa quidem de hoc argumento differuit Baronius in Annalibus. Mihi tamen verior videtur opinio eorum, qui Jacobum, et reliquos Domini fratres, Jofephi ex priore matrimonio filios effe dicunt. enim fententia magis convenit verbis Evangelii. Valef. Annot. ad Eufeb. 1. z. cap. 1.

Hæc

Fuit enim Jacobus filius Jofephi,

the far greater part of the ancients (from whom, especially in matters ' of fact, we are not rafhly to depart) make them the children of Jofeph by a former wife. And this feems moft genuine and natural, the evangelifts feeming very exprefs and accurate in the account which they give of them. Is not this the carpenter's fon? Is not bis mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Jofes, and Simon, and Jude ?Matt. xiii. 55, 56. By which it is plain, that the Jews understood these perfons not to be Chrift's kinfmen only, but his

ac proinde oriundus ex ftirpe David.brothers, the fame carpenter's

Id. in Annot. ad 1. 2. cap. 23. p. 40.

q Voff. de Gen J. C. cap. vi.

г

Bafnag. ann. ante Chrift. 6. num. xxviii. et xxix.

He

was the fon (as we may probably conjecture) of Jofeph, afterwards hufband to the bleffed virgin, and his firt wife. Hence reputed our Lord's brother, in the fame fenfe, that he was reputed the fon of Jofeph.- -Jerom, and fome others, will have Chrift's brethren fo called, becaufe fons of Mary, coufin-german, or, according to

fons, having the fame relation to him that Chrift himself had: though they indeed had more. Chrift being but his reputed, they his natural fons.' And what follows. The Life of James the Lefs, num 2. S. Jacobus apoftolus minor dictus, cognomento Juftus, frater Domini, Jofephi utpote ex priori conjuge, feu at Hieronymo placet, Mariæ fororis matris Domini filius. Hift. Lit. tom. I. p. 14.

apostle.

apostle. I think, it was clearly proved at the beginning of this chapter from the New Teftament, that James, called the Lord's brother, was an apoftle in the highest acceptation. of the word. Confequently, he must be James the fon of Alpheus, or Cleophas. For thofe names feem to be one differently written.

But how he was fo is made out differently. They who fay that thofe called our Lord's brethren were fons of Cleophas, husband of Mary, related to our Lord's mother, feem to have here no difficulty. But they who fuppofe our Lord's brethren to have been fons of Jofeph by a former wife, are fomewhat embarraffed. However, I juft obferve, that the account, given by "Epiphanius, is this. Cleophas and Jofeph were brothers. The former died without iffue, and Jofeph raised up feed to his brother. Accordingly, James being the first-born of Jofeph, was called the fon of Cleophas. In like manner fpeaks Theophilact. But, as before faid, I do not now form any debate about this.

X

That James, called our Lord's brother, is the fame as he, who in the catalogues of the apoftles is called the son of Alpheus, or Cleophas, is allowed by Epiphanius, Chryfoftom, and Theophilact. Epiphanius fays, that James, by nature the fon of Jofeph, who was called the Lord's brother, and was an apoftle, was appointed the first bishop of Jerufalem. Chryfoftom in his comment upon Gal. i. 19. fays, that Paul calls James the Lord's brother, giving him that 'honourable appellation, when he might have faid the son of 'Cleopbas, as he is called in the gofpels.' Theophilact likewife fays, that Paul calls him the Lord's brother, by the way of an honourable diftinction when he might have 'called him the fon of Cleophas. Nor was he the Lord's

6

a

* Ει γαρ σημαναι ον ελεγεν ηθελεν, ενην και εξ ετερα γνωρίσματος τετο ποιησαι δηλον, και είπειν τον τε κλώπα, όπερ και ευαγγελισης ελεγεν. Chr. in Gal. cap. i. Τ. Χ. p. 678. Ε.

2 Ειδε δε και ιακωβον. Μετα τιμης δε και τότε μεμνηται, τον αδελφον το κύριε είπων, ετω και βασκανίας απηλ λακτο· καίτοι ει ηθέλετο σημαναι, είπεν αν, τον τ8 κλοπα· εδε γαρ κατα σαρκα αδελφος ην το κυριό, αλλ' ενομίζεται Theoph. in Gal. i, 19.

• brother