St. Philip the Apostle
The Gospels of Sts. Matthew, Mark and Luke tell us nothing of Philip except our Lord's choice of him as an Apostle. St. John, however, in youth his fellow townsman at Bethsaida, and in old age his neighbor in Asia Minor, tells us more of him. It was he of whom Jesus asked how sufficient bread could be provided to feed the five thousand, and who replied that 'two hundred silver pieces could not buy enough.' The Greeks who wished to see Jesus approached Philip, and, at the Last Supper, it was he who asked to be shown the Father.
St. James the Less
The only direct information which the New Testament provides about the second apostle who bore the name James is that he was the 'son of Alphaeus' (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). In these circumstances, it is not surprising that attempts have been made to identify him with one, or more, of the several people so named elsewhere in the New Testament. The most outstanding of these is James, 'the brother of the Lord,' who is thus described by St. Paul (Galatians 1:19; cf. also 2:9 and 12). He is probably to be identified with the recipient of a vision of the Risen Christ (1 Corinthians 15:7), and is, doubtless, the same James who is depicted as the leading Christian of the Church of Jerusalem (Acts 12:17; 15:13; 21:18). Finally, it seems natural to identify him with the Lord's brother of that name mentioned in the Gospels (Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3). It was the opinion of St. Jerome--an opinion for a long time generally accepted--that James, son of Alphaeus, and James, the Lord's brother, are the same person; but the tendency among biblical scholars nowadays is to distinguish between the two, and to be content with regard to this apostle, as we have to be content in the case of others of the Twelve, with the bare mention of his name.
The term 'brethren of the Lord' is used by New Testament writers to designate a group of persons distinct from the Twelve (cf. 1 Corinthians 9:5; Acts 1:13 and 14). In their few appearances in the Gospels, they are shown as incredulous with regard to Christ's preaching, even positively opposed to him; and this at a time when the Apostolic College was already constituted (e.g. John 7:3-5; Mark 3:21 and 31-36). While no completely convincing argument can be found, it would appear more probable that neither James nor any other of the brethren was a member of the Twelve.
Similarly, if one keeps in mind the pre-eminent position occupied by James, the Lord's brother, among the Jewish converts at Jerusalem, he would appear the most likely author of the Epistle of James, a letter addressed primarily to the convert Jews of the Dispersion.
Early Christian tradition agrees with Josephus in stating that James, the Lord's brother, was put to death by the Jewish authorities (probably in the year 62). Hegesippus, writing in the second century, describes James as an ascetic--'wine and strong drink he drank not, nor did he meat; he neither shaved his head, nor anointed himself with oil ... and the skin of his knees was hardened like a camel's through his much praying.' He was held in high repute for his sanctity, but gradually incurred the envy and enmity of the scribes and pharisees because of his sway over the people, and this culminated in their stoning him to death within the temple precincts, while he was addressing the crowd.
The very large and involved question of the relationship between Christ and 'his brethren' can only be touched on here. In the first place there can be no doubt that the Greek word in the original texts means 'brother; at the same time one should remember that, as used in the New Testament, viz to designate a well-defined group of people (e.g. 1 Corinthians 9:5), the term must have taken its rise among the Aramaic-speaking first Christians; that, therefore, our Greek term is merely a translation of the current Aramaic word. Consequently, it is permissible to argue that, as in several verifiable instances in the Old Testament, so here, 'brother' does not necessarily mean full-brother, nor even half-brother, but may be used to designate remoter degrees of kinship, including cousins, since neither Hebrew nor Aramaic had a word for 'cousin.' If, then, Christ did have cousins, the only suitable word in Aramaic to describe them would have been 'brethren.' Catholic belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary, while resting largely on the basis of a firm tradition, still finds some support in the nuances of Scripture: Mary's implied vow of virginity (Luke 1:34); the family life of Mary and Joseph, as told by Luke, makes no mention of other children; Christ alone is 'son of Mary'; the otherwise hardly comprehensible action of Christ in confiding his mother to St. John's care. The theory which would make the 'brethren' sons of Joseph by a previous marriage, likewise, has no Scriptural foundation. Conversely, the view which holds them to be Christ's cousins by being the children either of a sister of his mother, or of a brother of St. Joseph, has only conjectural value.
No comments:
Post a Comment