following, as said to be of the number of the seventy: Barnabas, Sosthenes, who joins with Paul in writing the first epistle to the Corinthians, Cephas, whom Paul resisted at Antioch, of the same name with the apostle Peter, but different from him, Matthias, chosen in the room of Judas, and he who was put up with Matthias, and James, to whom Christ showed himself after his resurrection, as related by St. Paul, 1 Cor. xv. 7. He likewise,' says Eusebius, was one of those called our Saviour's disciples, and one of his brethren.'

2

Upon this it is easy to observe, that beside the loose and inaccurate manner in which this chapter is written by our historian, here are, probably, several mistakes. Some things will be readily assented to, as not unlikely; that Matthias, and the other disciple put up with him, were of the seventy. But omitting some other things, there is no good reason to say that Cephas was different from Peter, or that Sosthenes was one of the seventy. If those things are wrong, there is the less reason to rely upon that account which places James, the Lord's brother, in the number only of his disciples, or of the seventy.

However, we here seem to discern the opinion of our Ecclesiastical Historian, that James, the Lord's brother, so often mentioned in the Acts, and St. Paul's epistles, was not one of Christ's apostles. And there we have also his interpretation of these words. 1 Cor. xv. 7. " then he was seen of all the apostles." By which he understands others, beside the twelve. And to the like purpose Origen. And it was formerly shown at large in the chapter of Eusebius, that he did not esteem this James an apostle in the highest acceptation of the word. It may be observed likewise, in the large account formerly given of Jerom's opinion concerning this James, that he seems not to be quite free from hesitation. Sometimes he speaks of him as one of the twelve apostles, and sometimes not so. We have also seen reason to think, that Cyril of Jerusalem did not reckon James, called bishop of Jerusalem, to have been one of the twelve apostles. Gregory Nyssen likewise distinguishes James, the son of Alpheus, one of the twelve apostles, from James the Less, who was not of that number. The same opinion appears in the Apostolical Constitutions.

с

ទ

f

h

Tillemont says: The Greek Christians of our time distinguished James the son of Alpheus, one of the twelve apostles, and James the Lord's brother, and bishop of Jerusalem, as two • different persons: so making us entirely ignorant of the history of James, the son of Alpheus, and excluding the Lord's brother from the number of apostles. But the opinion of the Latins, who believe that they are one and the same person, and the apostle, appears more conformable to the scripture, and is supported by the authority of St. Paul in particular, who gives to James the Lord's brother the title of apostle in the same manner that he gives it to Peter.' Gal. i. 19.

k

III. Eusebius has another chapter, entitled, Of things constituted by the apostles after our Saviour's ascension.' Which is to this purpose. The first is the choice of Matthias, one of Christ's disciples, into the apostleship in the room of Judas. Then the appointment of the 'seven deacons, one of whom was Stephen, who soon after his being ordained was stoned by 'those who had killed the Lord, and was the first martyr for Christ. Then James, called the Lord's brother, because he was the son of Joseph-to whom the virgin Mary was espoused. This James, called by the ancients the Just, on account of his eminent virtue, is said to have 'been appointed the first bishop of Jerusalem. And Clement, in his sixth book of his Institu'tions, writes after this manner: That after our Lord's ascension, Peter, and James, and John, though they had been favoured by the Lord above the rest, did not contend for honour, but chose James the Just to be bishop of Jerusalem. And in the seventh book of the same work, he says, that after his resurrection, the Lord gave to James the Just, and John and Peter the gift of knowledge. And they gave it to the other apostles. And the other apostles gave it to the 'seventy, one of whom was Barnabas. For there were two named James: one the Just, who ' was thrown down from the battlement of the temple, and killed by a fuller's staff. The other

is he who was beheaded. Of him that was called the Just, Paul also makes mention, saying: • other of the apostles saw I none, save James, the Lord's brother.'

Upon what has been thus transcribed a few remarks may be properly made. In the former part of it Eusebius seems to declare it as his own opinion, that James, called the Lord's brother, was the son of Joseph, that is, by a former wife.

For clearing up this passage, I would farther observe: I suppose the whole of this quotation to be taken from Clement. Some may indeed at first be apt to think that the second passage of Clement concludes with the word Barnabas. But I rather think that all which follows in this quotation is Clement's, and nothing of Eusebius. One reason of my thinking so is, that in the twenty-third chapter of the same book, where our Ecclesiastical Historian gives an account of the death of James from Hegesippus, who relates, that James was thrown down from the temple, and killed by a fuller's staff, he twice says, that is, at the entering upon that account, and at finishing it, that this was agreeable to what had been before alleged from Clement. The other reason is, that Eusebius seems not to have been so clear that there were no more than two of this name, as is implied in this passage, particularly in the conclusion of it.

a

Upon these two passages cited by Eusebius from Clement, one from the sixth, the other from the seventh book of his Institutions, we are led to observe, first, that James, called the Just, is here supposed to be an apostle. Nor did Clement know of any more of the name James, in the New Testament, beside James the son of Zebedee, and him called James the Just. Secondly, I observe, that James, called the Just, is supposed to have been appointed bishop of Jerusalem, by three apostles especially, Peter, and the two sons of Zebedee, and not by our Lord. And the order and coherence of things in this chapter of Eusebius seems to imply that this was done soon after the martyrdom of Stephen.

Which appears to me agreeable to the history in the Acts, and the passages alleged thence at the beginning of this chapter. Peter always speaks first, as president among the apostles, until after the choice of the seven deacons. Every thing said of St. James after that implies his presiding in the church of Jerusalem. And when St. Paul mentions the three chiefs, who were pillars, Gal. ii. 9, with whom he conferred at Jerusalem, he names James first. The reason of his doing so, I take to be, that James then presided in the church of Jerusalem.

C

Tillemont thinks, That Christ himself may have appointed James to be bishop in that church: but the apostles deferred the declaring it solemnly, till the time of the persecution, which broke out after the death of St. Stephen. Then they thought of providing more particularly for the church of Jerusalem, whence, perhaps, they feared they should be constrained 6 to remove. This obliged them to appoint a proper pastor, who should be obliged to stay there ⚫ till his death, and should charge himself with every thing necessary for their welfare.'

d

To me it appears evident, that the apostles did not now leave Jerusalem, nor till a good while afterwards. But they were obliged to liye privately. And the circumstances of things made it prudent to appoint one of their number, who should preside in that church, and act in their name. Though they could not at all appear in public, it was fit there should be one at least, to whom the faithful might apply at any time, in case of need. This choice, or appointment, is ascribed by Clement to three of the apostles. But it might be done with the consent and approbation of all.

As this episcopate, or superintendence of James has been thus mentioned, I shall here observe what notice is taken of it by other ancient Christian writers.

e

Eusebius, in one place, says, that James was appointed bishop of Jerusalem by the apostles': in another by Christ and the apostles. So likewise in the Apostolical Constitutions. Jerom in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers, says, that " James surnamed the Just, was ordained

h

b

bishop of Jerusalem by the apostles, soon after the Lord's passion.' In his Commentary upon the epistle to the Galatians he speaks as if the Lord himself had given him this high trust:. meaning, perhaps, no more than that Christ gave it him by the apostles: or that they in so doing had acted by divine inspiration. Epiphanius ascribes this appointment to our Saviour himself, as do Chrysostom, and Ecumenius, and Photius. The Latin author of a Commentary upon thirteen of St. Paul's epistles, says, James was appointed bishop of Jerusalem by the apostles. Nicephorus's account is, that he was so appointed by our Saviour, or, as some said, by the apostles also. I shall cite no more writers relating to this point, but proceed.

d

e

h

And

IV. I would now take a passage of Origen from the tenth tome of his commentaries upon St. Matthew, where he discourseth upon Matt. xiii. 55, 56. “Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us?" They thought, says Origen, that he was the son of Joseph and Mary. The brethren of Jesus, some say, upon the ground of tradition, particularly what is said in the gospel according to Peter, or the book of James, were the sons of Joseph by a former wife, who cohabited with him before Mary. They who say this, are desirous to maintain the honour of Mary's virginity to the last: [or her perpetual virginity:] that the body chosen to fulfil what is said: "the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee," Luke i. 55. might not know man after that. I think it very reasonable, that as Jesus was the first fruits of virginity among men, Mary should be the same among women. For it would be improper to give that honour to any beside her. This James is he whom Paul mentions in his epistle to the Galatians, saying: "Other of the apostles saw I none, save James, the Lord's brother." This James was in so great repute with the people for his virtue, that Josephus, who wrote twenty books of the Jewish Antiquities, desirous to assign the reason of their suffering such things, so that even the temple was destroyed, says, that those things were owing to the anger of God for what they did to James the brother of Jesus, called Christ. And it is wonderful, that he who did not believe our Jesus to be the Christ, should bear such a testimony to James. He also says, that the people thought they suffered those things upon account of James. Jude wrote an epistle of few lines indeed, but filled with the powerful words of the heavenly grace, who says at the beginning: "Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James.' Of Joses and Simon we know nothing.'

Origen, in his books against Celsus, quotes Josephus again, as speaking of James to the like purpose. But there are not now any such passages in Josephus: though they are quoted as from him, by Eusebius also. But he does not say whether from his Jewish War, or from his Antiquities, or in what book of either, as he sometimes does, when he quotes Josephus. Jerom has twice quoted Josephus for these things: first in his article of St James, and then in that" of Josephus himself: but not much more expressly than Eusebius.

Upon the long passage of Origen, just transcribed, I would observe as follows.

It is strange, that Origen should take such particular notice of the epistle of St. Jude, and say nothing of the epistle of James, whose history he was writing, when it was not unknown to him. It may be suspected that a paragraph has been lost and dropt out of the Commentary in this place. It is also strange that he should say he knew nothing of Simon: when it is probable that he likewise was one of Christ's apostles, called " Simon the Canaanite" by Matthew, ch. x. 4. and Mark iii. 18. "Simon Zelotes" by Luke, vi. 15. and Acts i. 13.

Chr. in ep. 1. ad Cor. hom. 38. p. 355. tom. X. Ec. ad Act. xv. 13. T. I. p. 122. e Phot. Ep. 117. Jacobum vidit Hierosolyme, quia illic erat constitutus ab Apostolis episcopus. In ep. ad Gal. cap. i. 19. 8. Niceph. 1. 2. cap. 38.

h. Origen, in Matt. T. X. p. 452, 463. T. III. Bened, p. 223. tom. I. Huet.

i είρηκεναι, κατά μήνιν θεα ταυτα αυτοις απηντήκεται, δια τα εις Ιακωβον τον αδελφον Ιησε το λεγομενε Χρισε, ὑπ' αυτών τετολμημενα. Και το θαυμασον εσιν, ότι τον Ιησεν ήμων ο καταδεξάμενος είναι Χρισον, εδε ήττον Ιακωβῳ δικαιοσυτην εμαρτύρησε τοσαύτην. Λεγει δε, ότι και ο λαος ταυτα ενόμιζε δια τον Ιακωβον πεπονθέναι. Περι δε Ιωσήφ, και Ziparos 8dev isoprσquev. Ib. p. 463. Bened. p. 223. Huet. k Contra Cels. 1. i. p. 35. et 1. 2. p. 69. Cantab. 1. i. cap. 48. et 1. 2. cap. 13. Bened.

H. E. 1. 2. cap. 23. p. 65. C. D.

m Tradit idem Josephus, tanta eum sanctitatis fuisse, et celebritatis in populo, ut propter ejus necem creditum sit, subversam esse Hierosolymam. Hier. De Vir. Ill. cap. 2.

"Hic confitetur.et propter interfectionem Jacobi Apos toli dirutam Hierosolymam. Ib. cap. 13.

From what Origen says of the death of James it may be concluded, that in his time Christians were persuaded that James had died a martyr for Christ, and had been killed by the Jews, notwithstanding his eminent virtue. Though the passages to which Origen refers are not now in Josephus, and though it should be supposed that there was some inaccuracy in Origen's quotations of him, or references to him, I think it must be allowed, that Christians had in his time a tradition concerning the death of James, and that it happened in circumstances very dishonourable to those who were the authors of it: insomuch that many were disposed to think it was one of those things for which God was much offended with the Jewish people. Moreover we have already observed a brief account of the death, or martyrdom of James in Clement, older than Origen, though in part cotemporary with him.

All farther notice of that passage of Origen is deferred, till we come to consider how James was related to our Lord.

V. As the death of James has been mentioned, I shall now immediately take the accounts of it which are in Eusebius. And I will transcribe a large part of the twenty-third chapter of the second book of his Ecclesiastical History.

But when Paul had appealed to Cæsar, and Festus had sent him to Rome, the Jews being 'disappointed in their design against him, turned their rage against James the Lord's brother, to 'whom the apostles had assigned the episcopal chair of Jerusalem. And in this manner they proceeded against him. Having laid hold of him, they required him in the presence of all the 'people to renounce his faith in Christ. But he with freedom and boldness beyond expectation, before all the multitude, declared our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to be the Son of God. They not enduring the testimony of a man, who was in high esteem for his piety, laid hold of the opportunity, when the country was without a governor, to put him to death. For Festus having died about that time in Judea, the province had in it no procurator. The manner of the death of James was shown before in the words of Clement, who said, that he was thrown off 'from the battlement of the temple, and then beat to death with a club. But no one has so • accurately related this transaction, as Hegesippus, a man in the first succession of the apostles, in the fifth book of his Commentaries, whose words are to this purpose: James, the brother of our Lord, undertook together with the apostles the government of the church. He has been called the Just by all from the time of our Saviour to ours. For many have been named James. But he was holy from his mother's womb. He drank neither wine, nor strong drink, nor did he eat any animal food. There never came razor upon his head. He neither anointed himself ⚫ with oil, nor did he use a bath. To him alone was it lawful to enter the holy place. He wore 'no woollen, but only linen garments. He entered into the temple alone, where he prayed upon his knees. Insomuch that his knees were become like the knees of a camel, by means of his being ⚫ continually upon them, worshipping God, and praying for the forgiveness of the people.

Upon account of his virtue he was called the Just, and Oblias, that is, the defence of the 'people, and righteousness. Some therefore of the seven sects, which there were among the Jews, of whom I spake in the former part of these commentaries, asked him, which is the gate of Jesus: or, what is the gate of Salvation. And he said, Jesus is the Saviour, or the way of salvation. Some of them therefore believed that Jesus is the Christ.And many of the chief men also believing, there was a disturbance among the Jews, and among the Scribes and Pharisees, who said there was danger, lest all the people should think Jesus to be the Christ. Coming therefore to James, they said, we beseech thee to restrain the error of the people. We entreat ⚫ thee to persuade all that come hither at the time of passover to think rightly concerning Jesus

a

Διαδέχεται δε την εκκλησίαν μετα των αποσόλων ο αδελφος Te xupie laxwoo5. x. λ. p. 603. C. D.

b επυνθάνοντο αυτό, τις ή θυρα το Ιησε; και ελεγε 78TAY BYLI TOY OCTpx. Le Clerc, in his observations upon this passage of Hegesippus, says, he does not understand those words, what is the gate of Jesus.' And, perhaps, the place has been corrupted. Tistupa T8 I778; quod quid sibi velit, Τις ή θυρα το Ιησε; non intelligo. Sed forte locus est corruptus. H. E. p. 416. Ann. Ixii. Mr. Mosheim thinks, with great probability, that the question put to James was, What is the gate, or way of * salvation? Tell us, how we may obtain eternal life.' James answered, 'The gate of salvation is our Saviour Jesus Christ.' Vitium vero ejus non in vocabulo fupa, sed potius in nomine 10s queri debere censco. Judæi, quod manifestum est,

sciscitantur sententiam Jacobi de via seu de ostio salutis, id est, de verâ ratione ad salutem æternam perveniendi. Nullus ergo dubito, quin patrio sermone, quo utebantur, vocabulum Jeschuah adhibuerint, atque ex Jacobo quæsiverint: dic, rogamus, nobis quodnam tibi videatur esse salutis ostium.—Græcus quæstionis hujus interpres vero, aut sermonis non nimis gnarus, aut minus attentus, nomen proprium Servatoris nostri, Jesus, cernere se putabat, et perperam idcirco, quum σwrypia ponendum ipsi fuisset: Tis n duga ins owengias; vocabulum nee scribebat: Tis fuga Inoa; Ita si Judæorum quæstio intelligatur, nihil fieri aptius potest responsione Jacobi: ‘Ostium salutis est Servator noster, Jesus Christus.' Moshem. De Reb. Christianor. ante Constantin. Sec prim. num. 23. p. 95.

a

For all the people, and all of us put confidence in thee.Stand therefore upon the battlement of the temple, that being placed on high, thou mayest be conspicuous, and thy words may be easily heard by all the people. For because of the passover, all the tribes be come hither, and many Gentiles. Therefore the Scribes and Pharisees, before named, placed James upon the battlement of the temple, and cried out to him, and said, O Justus, whom we ought all to believe, since the people are in an error, following Jesus who was crucified, tell us what is the gate of Jesus. And he answered with a loud voice, why do you ask me concerning the son of man: he even sitteth in the heaven, at the right hand of the great power, and will come ⚫ in the clouds of heaven. And many were fully satisfied, and well pleased with the testimony ⚫ of James, saying, hosanna to the son of David. But the same Scribes and Pharisees said to one another, we have done wrong in procuring such a testimony to Jesus. Let us go up, and ⚫ throw him down, that the people may be terrified from giving credit to him.And they went up presently, and cast him down, and said, let us stone James the Just. And they began to ⚫ stone him, because he was not killed with the fall. But he turning himself kneeled, saying, I ⚫ entreat thee, O Lord God the Father, forgive them for they know not what they do. As they were stoning him, one said, Give over : what do ye? The just man prays for you. And one ' of them, a fuller, took a pole, which was used to beat cloths with, and struck him on the head.

• Thus his martyrdom was completed. And they buried him in that place, and his monument

⚫ still remains near the temple. This James was a true witness to Jews and Gentiles, that Jesus is the Christ. And soon after Judea was invaded by Vespasian, and the people were carried 'captive.' "So writes Hegesippus at large, agreeably to Clement. For certain, James was an ⚫ excellent man, and much esteemed by many for his virtue: insomuch that the most thoughtful men among the Jews were of opinion, that his death was the cause of the siege of Jerusalem, which followed soon after his martyrdom: and that it was owing to nothing else, but the wickedness committed against him. And Josephus says the same in these words: These things befel the Jews in vindication of James the Just, who was brother of Jesus, called the ⚫ Christ. For the Jews killed him, who was a most righteous man.' "The same historian, in 'the twentieth book of his antiquities, relates his death in this manner." The emperor being • informed of the death of Festus, sent Albinus to be prefect in Judea. But the younger Ananus who, as we said before, was made high priest, was haughty in his behaviour, and very enterprizing. And moreover he was of the sect of the Sadducees, who as we have also observed before, are above all other Jews severe in their judicial sentences. This then being the temper of Ananus, he thinking he had a fit opportunity, because Festus was dead, and Albinus was yet upon the road, calls a council. And bringing before them James, the brother of him who is • called Christ, and some others, he accused them as transgressors of the laws, and had them ⚫ stoned to death. But the most moderate men of the city, who also were reckoned most skilful in the laws, were offended at this proceeding. They therefore sent privately to the king [Agrippa the younger] entreating him to send orders to Ananus, no more to attempt any such things. And some went away to meet Albinus, who was coming from Alexandria, and put ⚫ him in mind, that Ananus had no right to call a council without his leave. Albinus approving of what they said, wrote a very angry letter to Ananus, threatening to punish him for what he had done. And king Agrippa took away from him the priesthood, after he had enjoyed it three months, and put in Jesus, the son of Damnæus.' "These are the things which are related of James, whose is the first of the epistles called catholic."

Thus I have given a literal version of almost the whole of this chapter, being desirous, that my readers should see the accounts, which ancient writers have given of James: though they are not altogether so credible, nor so entertaining, as might have been wished. Nor do they any where lie in better order than here. And therefore I have chosen this chapter. The same things are transcribed by Jerom from Eusebius in his chapter of James the Just, in his catalogue of ecclesiastical writers: but very inaccurately, blending together Hegesippus, and Clement, and Josephus so that, without comparing Eusebius, it could not be known what belongs to one, and

a See before, note b

» Και λαβών τις απ' αυτών, είς των γναφέων, το ξύλον εν ώ απεπίεζε τα ἱματια, ήνεγκε κατα της κεφαλής το δικαία ib. p. 65. B.

- Ο γεν Ιωσήπος εκ απώκνησε και τότ' εγγράφως επιμαρα

τυρεσθαι, δι' ὧν φησι λέξεων. Ταύτα δε συμβέβηκεν Ιεδαίοις κατ' εκδικησιν Ιακωβε το δίκαιο, ἱς ην αδελφος Ιησε το λεγόμενο Χρισε επειδήπερ δικαιότατον αυτόν οντα οι Ιεδαίοι απέκτειναν 15. p. 65. D.