صور الصفحة
النشر الإلكتروني


opinion that these “ brethren” were actually the sons of Joseplı by a former wife.// It has appeared to me that the other opinion is the most likely to be the true one, and I have therefore called James the cousin of Jesus. One of the strongest arguments for this view of the relationship is, that the father of James is called Alpheus, and not Joseph, and that Mary the wife of Cleophas is mentioned in the Gospel of John as a person entirely distinct from the mother of Jesus, and further appears to be the same who is called by Mark the mother of James the Less and of Joses. Now Alpheus and Cleophas being the name, the chain of testimony is complete, - s0 complete, that I wonder any question should ever have been raised on the subject. //It may be added, that Lardner inclines to the opinion that James was cousin to our Lord.

No particulars are related of James in the Gospels; but honorable mention is made of him in the Book of Acts and the Epistles of Paul. Perhaps his youth and his modesty, together with his near relationship to Jesus, operated upon him to be silent and inactive during the life of the Saviour, though afterwards his talents and worth made him conspicuous. He appears to have resided constantly at Jerusalem, and to have been president or bishop of the church there. All antiquity affirms this, and Scripture gives it good countenance. Thus we are told in the twelfth chapter of Acts, that when Peter had been miraculously delivered from the prison into which he had been thrown by Herod, who had just slain the other James, he went to the house of a believ ing family, and said to those who were there,

Go, show these things unto James, and the brethren." James is evidently spoken of here as having a precedence among the brethren. Again, in the fifteenth chapter of the same book, he appears to have been the presiding member of the Council of Jerusalem, of which I have before had occasion to speak, and which decided that the Gentiles were to be received, on their conversion, into the full privileges of the Christian Church, without being obliged to undergo the ceremony of circumcision. It has been observed, that, though Peter spoke first on this occasion, James spoke last, and gave his opinion or “sentence" with regard to the most proper course to be pursued, and that the letter or result of the council was chiefly modelled upon his words. From these circumstances it has been concluded that he was the moderator or president of this first Christian council, and that this rank was probably conceded to him on account of his being the presiding apostle or bishop of Jerusalem, in which place the council was convened. Peter, as it may be remembered, agreed with James entirely in this case; but, though in some sense chief of the apostles, it is evident that when the Church came to be enlarged and settled, he did not possess any general supreme authority, but, as in the present council, was regarded, and regarded himself, as in subordination to the local authorities. The speech of James is replete with good sense, dignity, and a spirit of charity and forbearance, and sufficiently indicates the wisdom of his brethren in making him bishop or overseer of the Christian Church at Jerusalem.

In the twenty-first chapter of Acts there is also a particular mention of James, which corroborates the preceding proofs of his consequence in the Church. In an account there given of the journey of Paul and his company to Jerusalem, with the collections for the saints in Judæa, the writer says: 66 And when we come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. And the day following, Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.” James could hardly have been singled out by name in this passage, for any other reason than because he was the chief person at this convocation of the elders.

To all this evidence of the standing of James and the high consideration in which he was held, the testimony of Paul himself is to be added. Ono passage has already been adduced from the first chapter of his Epistle to the Galatians. In


the second chapter, Paul says: “And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.” Here it is to be noted that James is not only called one of the pillars of the Church, but is placed at the head of the three; even before Cephas, or Peter. At the same time we ought to observe that ecclesiastical rank was by no means, in those primitive times, that thing of name and pomp and prerogative that it has since been made in most of the churches of Christendom; for if James had been the bishop of Jerusalem in the same sense in which the title is now applied, Paul would never have said of him and the others, that they “ seemed to be pillars," – an expression which plainly signifies, that they appeared, as far as he could judge, to be the first men in the Church. In truth, a bishop in those days was only a moderator among brethren and equals, appointed to the office by them, and appointed to it for his superior gifts and attainments.

Once more, and in this same chapter, is James mentioned. Paul, in relating the vacillating conduct of Peter, with regard to eating with the Gentiles, says, in the words which I have already quoted in Peter's life: “ Before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles ; but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself.” Here again is James spoken of as a person of consideration and authority.

Thus far do the Scriptures inform us of the life and character of James the Less. Ancient ecclesiastical writers have much to say of his virtues and wisdom, and of the respect which they procured for him, both among the faithful and the unbelieving. The Jews, we are told, were unbounded in their admiration of him; insomuch that, as Jerome affirms, they used to strive to touch the hem of his garment. On account of his remarkable integrity, he obtained another surname beside that which is given to him in the Scriptures, and was called James the Just. Some go so far as to say, that he was allowed to enter into the Holy of Holies of the Jewish temple; but this must be a fiction. It is a fiction, however, which, together with other similar ones, shows that there must have been a foundation for them in the high character and reputation of this apostle.

The circumstances of his death are differently stated. Josephus, the Jewish historian, is supposed to relate it in the following passage from the twentieth book of his Antiquities, which I give in the translation of L'Estrange. “ The Ananus we are now speaking of [who had recently been

« السابقةمتابعة »