http://www.grailchurch.org/bishopjames.htm
ST. JAMES
First Bishop of
Jerusalem
by
Isabel Hill
Elder
with
Addendum
by
James Wesley
Stivers
I.
James the Great
II.
James the Little
III.
James the Just
IV.
James as the Lord's Successor
To order a
hardcopy of this book proceed to
Booklist.
JAMES THE
GREAT
To the
Christian, and especially to one
who is a conscious Israelite, the
identity of James, First Bishop
of Jerusalem, must be of absorbing interest.
There are,
in the New Testament, three personages bearing the name James, the Greek
form of the Hebrew name Jacob. The first of these to whom our attention is
called was, with his brother John, a son of Zebedee and Salome, and known as
James the Great, to distinguish him from another disciple of the same name.
The appellation "great" was not bestowed upon him because of any inherent
greatness in his character, but because he was a powerfully built man; we
know that both James and John had powerful voices, for our Lord, at the very
beginning of their discipleship named them Boanerges, "Sons of Thunder." Our
Lord here uses the Hebrew idea of thunder, for the Israelite ever poetically
interpreted thunder as "the voice of Jehovah" Job XXXVI, 33, Ps. XVIII, 13,
Isaiah XXX, 30). As the term "Sons of Thunder" was used in some countries
to denote twins it would point to the truth of the assertion made by some
students and also to a tradition that James and John were twins.
During
the ministry of our Lord, James and John were seldom apart; they seemed to
speak and act together (Luke IX, 54). They were witnesses of The
Transfiguration, and appear to have been more constantly with our Lord than
any of the other disciples, except perhaps Peter. Their firm belief in the
Messiahship of their Lord emerged in their famous request to take precedence
of the other disciples as Ministers of State in the
coming Kingdom. Failing in
their persistent seeking for a definite assurance on this point, they
enlisted the services of their mother Salome[1]
to make the request. It is
significant that our Lord did not answer the mother, but addressed His reply
to her sons who were the instigators of it (Matt. XX, 22.-23). "To sit on my
right hand and on my left is not mine to give but it shall be given unto
them for whom it is prepared of my Father" (v.
23).
The brothers
were strongly imbued with the Jewish national hope of deliverance from the
power and rulership of Imperial Rome; not yet had they the true perspective
of the Kingdom of God on earth.
James,
as one of the twelve disciples, followed, with the others, his Master right
up to the eve of His crucifixion; was present with them at the Last Supper
and received a check to their ambition by the example of their Master in
washing the feet of His disciples. After supper James heard His gracious
words of admonition and comfort, yet in a matter of hours "they all forsook
Him and fled" (Matt. XXVI, 56). The disciples, however, did not leave
Jerusalem, for we learn from John XVIII, 15, 16, that John and Peter came to
the Judgment Hall of Pilate before the trial of their Master began. Of James
there is no mention in this scene; he was, however, with the other disciples
in Jerusalem on the morning of the resurrection (Luke XXVI, 9). During the
forty days after the resurrection the risen Lord had been instructing James
and the other disciples in "the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God"
(Acts I, 3); then a few days before the Feast of Pentecost, or Feast of
Weeks, the disciples went up to Jerusalem where their
Lord made His last appearance
to them, and delivered to them their commission to preach the doctrine of
repentance and remission of sins; He afterwards led them on to the Mount of
Olives as far as Bethany and, lifting up His hands, blessed them; in this
action of blessing He was parted from them "in the midst of the day"; a
shining cloud receiving Him out of their sight - this brilliant cloud
compassed Him about and carried Him up to heaven. The cloud in which their
Lord ascended was more bright and pure than the clearest flame, being none
other than the Shekinah or glory of the Lord, the visible symbol of the
Divine Presence which had so often appeared to the Patriarchs of old; which
filled the Temple at its dedication, and which, in its greatest splendour
cannot be beheld by mortal eye, for which reason it is called the light
inaccessible in which the Almighty resides, and the effect upon the
worshipping disciples "they returned to Jerusalem with great joy" (Luke
XXIV, 52).
Here at
Jerusalem they gathered together day by day in "the upper room" - doubtless
the room in the house of Joseph of Arimathea where the Last Supper took
place, the doors being shut "for fear of the Jews," the same fear which
caused the owner of the house to keep His faith in Jesus the Messiah a
secret (John XIV, 38). Here not only James and the other Apostles, but an
assembly of men and women who believed, foregathered day by day in
supplication and prayer for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Luke
XXIV 29), the power which was to transform their lives into living and
fearless witnesses to the power of the crucified and risen Christ.
After
Pentecost the Apostles went forth in many directions with their dynamic
message of the Gospel. Of the destination of James the Great there is some
historical record. In the " History of the Jews of Spain" by Don Adolfo de
Castro (translated by the Rev. Edward D. Kirwan, M.A., Fellow of King’s
College, Cambridge), there is included some correspondence between the
President (or Ruler) of the Spanish Jews Synagogue of Toledo and the Spanish
Jews Synagogue of Jerusalem in which the President of the latter states that
a number of Jews are about to proceed from Jerusalem to Toledo who should
not be received at Toledo, "or if ye receive any one let that one be James
the son of Zebedee and none other; he is a good man." How long James the
Great continued his missionary work in Spain amongst the Jews is not
recorded; his work, however, must have left a deep and lasting impression
for his name continues there to the present day. St. James the Great became
the Patron Saint of Spain (Sant Iago). Some writers state that this son of
Zebedee returned to Judea in A.D. 41; be that as it may he resumed his work
there where his powerful physique and stentorian voice made him an
outstanding figure amongst the Christians and a hated one amongst the Jews.
Herod Agrippa, Governor of Judea, and grandson of the Herod who reigned at
the time of the birth of our Lord, "set his hand to oppress certain of the
Church, and killed James, the brother of John, with the sword" (Acts XII,
12) ; death by the sword was viewed as particularly ignominious."
This was a tragic blow to the
infant
Church, falling but nine years after the
Lord’s Ascension and took place during
the fifth major persecution.
James the
Great is the only Apostle whose death
is
recorded in the Scriptures and the manner of it.
Sophronius, 7th century
Patriarch of Jerusalem, states that after the Ascension of the Christ, this
Apostle preached to those of the Jewish converts in Judea and Samaria who
were dispersed after the stoning of Stephen. The officer who was his accuser
before Herod and who guarded him to the tribunal, having been converted by
the remarkable courage and constancy shown by James fell down at his feet
begging pardon for what he had said against him, whereupon the officer
publicly declared himself a Christian and both were beheaded at the same
time.
Thus fell
the disciple of our Lord and Apostle of the early Church, St. James the
Great, the first of that number to gain the crown, taking cheerfully the cup
of which he had long since told his Lord he was ready to drink (Matt. XX,
22).
JAMES THE LITTLE
Through an
error in translation this disciple has become known as James the Less ; the
appellation "little" was given in reference to stature and to distinguish
him from the other James of more powerful build.
James the Little was the son of
Cleophas and Mary; he is sometimes mentioned together with his brother Joses,
the latter, however, though a believer, was not one of the chosen twelve
disciples. James the Little is also designated "son of Alphaeus "; here is
no contradiction for Alphaeus is not a personal name but a title of office
and signifies Chief or Leader of a sect or political group among the Jews
and his sons were known as sons of "the Chief." These sons were James the
Little (Matt. X, 3), Joses (Mark XV, 40, 47), Levi (Mark II, 14). Cleophas
otherwise Alphaeus, and his wife Mary were devoted followers of our Lord;
Mary is said to have been a cousin of the Virgin Mary.[2]
Of James the
Little there is but scant record in the Scriptures. We know that he was
present at the Last Supper and afterwards, with the other disciples, failed,
for a short time, in loyalty to his Lord, "they all forsook Him and fled,"
remaining with them in the neighbourhood and was one of the "eleven" to whom
was sent the message that "The Lord is risen indeed" (Luke XXIV, 9, 33. 34).
James was present at the Ascension, and with the others was in the Upper
Room at Pentecost. Beyond this we learn nothing from the Scriptures of his
after movements. At Pentecost, having received the baptism of the Holy
Spirit. he was thus equipped for the fulfilling of the commission of his
Lord and Master "Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every
creature" (Luke XVI, 15).
That is the
Roman world, the same world that was taxed by Caesar Augustus (Luke II, 1);
in this "world" lost Israel was scattered; the lost sheep to whom our Lord
declared he was expressly sent; the "other sheep" which our Lord also
declared He must bring; the sheep who would "hear His voice" and respond to
the Gospel message, and in due time carry the message to the most distant
parts.
The last
recorded mention of James the Little is, that as one of the eleven
disciples, he was present at Pentecost (Acts 1, 13) ; afterwards all the
disciples appear to have embarked upon preaching and disseminating the
Gospel of the Kingdom as directed by the risen and ascended Christ.
There is,
however, some notice of James the Little by early Christian writers; the 7th
century Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem (quoted by Godwin) states that
James came to Sardinia in the Mediterranean as a missionary; from this point
he appears to have gone to Spain.
James would
be attracted to Spain to visit the several congregations of Jews in that
country where these sons of Judah had been firmly established for many
decades. It was probably these ancient Jewish settlements which determined
St. Paul to visit Spain. "Whensoever I take my journey into Spain I will
visit you." (Rom. XV,24,28)
Undoubtedly
there were many communities of Jews not only in Spain but in the several
islands; the Jewish envoys say to Caligula, the Roman Emperor (37 A.D.- 41)
"all the more noted of the islands of the Mediterranean are full of Jews."
In the
Itinerary of the Spanish Jew, Benjamin of Tudela who, in the twelfth
century traveled in many lands to contact his fellow Jews and to ascertain
their numbers found communities of his people in all the countries he
visited.
There
is a curious link between the Jews of ancient Spain and the Temple at
Jerusalem. At the conquest of Spain by the Arabs, the Moslem general, Tarik,
found near Toledo a rich precious table adorned with hyacinths (a blue stone
of the ancients) and emeralds. Gelif Aledrio, in his description of Spain,
calls this remarkable piece of antiquity "the table of Solomon, son of
David." It is supposed to have been saved by the Jews, with other precious
and sacred vessels from the pillage of the Temple by Nebuchadnezzar, and
brought with those fugitives who found their way to Spain. Indeed some
writers do not hesitate to assert that
there is little doubt of this having
been the original "table of shewbread" made by Solomon, spoken of in the
Book of Kings and by Josephus, and which with the candlestick and altar of
incense constituted the three wonders of the Temple." (These, most likely,
were taken from Jerusalem at the same time as the stone in our Coronation
Chair in Westminster Abbey). "That table which Titus brought with him in his
triumphal return to Rome was, clearly, not the same; for when the City and
Temple, after the first destruction, were rebuilt by order of Cyrus, the
sacred vessels were made anew, similar indeed to the old but of inferior
excellence." (See "Lights and Shadows" by E. Wilson, p. 85).
This table,
found by Tarik at Toledo, is surely in existence today, treasured perhaps in
a European noble family, or in a Museum, to be given to the world one day as
a link with the ancient past of Israel.
The death of
James the Little and the manner of it is not recorded but that this Apostle
ended his earthly life in Spain is certain from the fact that he lies buried
at Ciudad Rodrigo, while his fellow Apostle James the Great was martyred and
buried in Judea.
JAMES THE JUST
The third
James in this study is known to New Testament readers as James, the Lord’s
brother. In early Christian literature as James the Just or the Righteous.
The New Testament designation can be explained by a reference to ancient
writers and by the circumstantial evidence of the Scriptures.
In
circa 400 A.D. a Christian scholar, Jerome, traveled to Bethlehem in further
pursuit of his studies and from Bethlehem his most important works were
written. In one of these works (see Life of St. James by John
Fleetwood, D.D.) it is stated that Joseph, who was afterwards the husband of
the Virgin Mary, was first married to Escha, daughter of Haggi, brother of
Zachariah, father of John the Baptist. There were four sons and several
daughters of this marriage:
the sons were James, Simon, Joses and
Jude (Matt. XIII, 55). In Jerome's "Life of St. James the Just," he quotes
from the lost Gospel of the Nazarenes, which is recorded in the "Gospel
according to the Hebrews." This Gospel was extant and widely used during the
first three centuries of the Christian era; since then it has disappeared
and is only known by the quotations in the writings of the early Fathers. It
was treasured in the Church at Nazareth and was attributed to Matthew who
appears to have obtained much of his material from our Lord’s family. Jerome
translated it and quotes from it.
James, the
eldest son of Joseph and Escha, became a Nazarite; this Order had no
connection with Nazareth; it was the most ancient Order in Israel (Numbers
VI) and was open to both men and women. Its members were revered by the
people as possessed of special sanctity. When the vow of a candidate for the
Order was taken it could be for one month or as many months as the candidate
decided upon, or he (or she) could take the Nazarite vow for life. The rules
were of the strictest food regulations included abstinence from flesh food
and total abstinence from wine and strong drink.[3]
The hours of each day were spent in prayer, fasting and study of the
Scriptures in which they became expert in interpretation of the Law as laid
down by Moses for the people of Israel. Nazariteship or separation unto God
brings out strongly the priestly character of the people of the covenant.
The Nazarite separated himself or herself unto the Lord. "Her Nazarites were
purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body
than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire" (Lam.
IV, 7).
After the
death of Joseph, the foster-father of our Lord, his sons appear to have been
active in support and care of the Virgin Mother. We obtain glimpses here and
there of the family life of which Mary appears to have taken the headship
after the death of Joseph.
When
Mary’s Divine Son returned to Palestine at the age of thirty after an
absence of many years, to begin His ministry, hostility to His teaching and
work was unmistakably displayed by both Jewish and Roman authorities. Mary
feared for her Son’s safety, especially when surrounded by the mob; on one
occasion her stepsons accompanied her to a house where He was speaking to a
crowd. Mary, wishing to get Him out to induce Him to return home, the sons
effected a passage through the crowd to reach Jesus, but ere they achieved
this our Lord was informed by one of His hearers standing close to Him "Thy
mother and thy brethren stand without desiring to speak with Thee." Our Lord
would not permit domestic ties, and a mother’s anxiety for His safety to
interfere with His Divine message in the preaching of the Gospel of the
Kingdom and the healing of the sick. For the information of His listeners,
and a studied reply to His mother and His brethren He uttered the memorable
words "Who is
my mother and who are my brethren?"
And He stretched forth His hand towards His disciples and said: "Behold my
mother and my brethren? For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which
is in heaven, the same is my brother and sister and mother" (Matt XII,
47-50).
Another
domestic scene is revealed by John (VII, 1-13) where there appears to have
been a family discussion concerning the journey to Jerusalem for the annual
Feast of Tabernacles. Our Lord had announced his intention of going up to
Jerusalem alone rather than in the family party. Whatever His brethren may
have thought of Mary’s Son as a good man and strict observer of the Law of
Moses and His perfect obedience to the Scriptures, they did not believe that
He was the Messiah. "For neither did His brethren believe in Him" (John VII,
5). And now almost tauntingly they say to Him "If you really are the Messiah
why go up to Jerusalem secretly, why not go up openly and declare yourself
Israel’s Messiah?
His
reply yielded nothing to their argument, "My time is not yet, your time is
always ready. I go not up yet." . . .
But when His brethren were gone up, then went He up to the Feast, not
openly, but as it were in secret" (John VII, 4, 5, 10). His brethren were
not as yet to know that the day would come when they would lay all at His
feet in contrition and wholehearted belief in His Divinity and Messiahship.
In
this domestic scene we have the final mention of our Lord’s brethren before
they witnessed His sufferings and death on the Cross. At what stage in the
Crucifixion drama and the Resurrection the brethren of our Lord came to a
realization of the truth concerning Jesus and humbly bowed to Him as their
long awaited Messiah we cannot tell; of one
fact we are certain, the brethren were
present in the Upper Room in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost and received
the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The first chapter of the Acts records the
full list of the eleven disciples who were present in the Upper Room to
which is added one of the most illuminating and precious statements in the
Scriptures "With Mary the mother of Jesus and His brethren" (Acts I, 13,
14).
After
Pentecost these "brethren" and the Apostles appear to have each become the
leader of a group of converts which became the foundation of the early
Church; each Church had its overseer who was known as the Bishop, who with
his assistants were called "pillars of the Church" (Gal. II, 9).
With one
accord the Apostles elected James the Just (or the Righteous) whom they
continued to refer to as the Lord’s brother, Bishop of Jerusalem. The
Bishopric carried with it no territorial jurisdiction, until almost four
hundred years later when Rome superimposed the Christian religion on the
ancient Babylonian Paganism.
The
choice of James the Just for the superintendence of the infant Church in
Jerusalem rested on more than his reputed sanctity and new found zeal for
the Gospel of Jesus the Christ ; in those days birth and lineage still
loomed large in the mind of an Israelite, and from this point of view James
the Just possessed the qualifications, for he was of the House of Aaron on
his mother Escha’s side, and of the House of David on his father Joseph’s
side. Joseph was of the Solomon line which was cursed in his ancestor
Jeconiah (Jer. XXIII, 30), and so Joseph was debarred from the inheritance
for himself and his descendants. Joseph,
however, in legally adopting the Child
Jesus (for the protection of both mother and Child) as his heir could bring
Mary’s Son, born in the Nathan line into the Solomon line, thus fulfilling
the promise of the Angel to Mary "I will give unto Him the throne of His
father David"; for the throne was vested in the Solomon line. Legal adoption
in Israel made the adopted not one whit less a son than one born to him, and
included the privileges and rights of an heir-at-law.
It was
perfectly natural that these sons of Joseph should he referred to as the
Lord’s "brethren" ; the same term would apply today in a like domestic
situation.
James the
Just was, therefore, particularly acceptable to the Apostles from every
point of view, and it is noteworthy that immediately they deferred to James
as the elected head of the Church of Jerusalem, James presided at the first
Council of the Church at Jerusalem.
St.
Paul, three years after his conversion, went up to Jerusalem to see Peter,
and states "other of the Apostles saw I none save James the Lord’s
brother." St. Paul also states that the Lord was seen of James after His
resurrection (I. Cor. XV,
7).
When Peter
was miraculously released from prison he at once commanded "Go shew these
things unto James and to the brethren" (Acts XII, 17).
The
vexed question of circumcision, so vital a rite to every Jew and the
uncircumcision of Gentilized Israel of the Ten Tribes known as Gentiles and
as the "Dispersion" (John VII, 35) was the cause of much dissension among
the Apostles to the great detriment of the infant Church; at length the
matter was settled at a Council in Jerusalem presided
over by James; the decision of
the Bishop was final and accepted without murmur by all the Apostles (Acts
XV); the vexed question was settled by the statesmanlike reasoning of James
and the respect of all for his judgment and authority.
According to
the most ancient authorities James filled the office of Bishop into extreme
old age, enduring much hardship and persecution until at length the priests
and the Jews at the instigation of Ananus the High Priest, James was led to
one of the galleries of the Temple and cast on to the pavement beneath; he
was not killed outright and was able to rise to his knees to pray for his
murderers. It is recorded that James cried with a loud voice that Jesus was
the Son of God and would quickly come to be their judge, whereupon a
bystander with a fuller’s club put an end to his sufferings. The martyrdom
of James took place in 63 A.D., but seven years prior to the destruction of
Jerusalem by Titus. To the death of this just man some Jews ascribe the
destruction of Jerusalem and their Temple. The Talmud ascribes a variety of
miracles to James the Just.
It is
noteworthy that after the martyrdom of James, the Apostles did not appoint
one of their own number as his successor in the Bishopric, appointing Simon
the brother of James to the vacant office. Nothing further is recorded of
Simon it is, however, feasible that he obeyed his Lord’s command "When ye
shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies . . . flee to the mountains" (Luke
XVI. 20, 21).
During the
term of his Bishopric, and, it is believed, near the end of his long and
holy life, James addressed his Epistle to the "twelve tribes scattered
abroad." Many of the infant Churches were composed of Israel of the Ten
Tribes who had become Gentilized and were known as Gentiles, many were
converts to the Christian faith. James does not overlook their origin nor
the declaration of his Lord and Master "I am not sent but unto the lost
sheep of the House of Israel" (Matt. XV, 24).
James does
not refer to himself as an Apostle but with deep humility is content to
subscribe himself "a servant of Jesus Christ," though worthy as any of the
appellation "apostle."
The style of
the Epistle is forcible, graphic and rich in figures. The main subject of
the Epistle is the character and course of the true and consistent
Christians, "the doer of the Word" who steadfastly "continues in the perfect
law of liberty" as contrasted with the spirit and conduct of the mere
professor. Consolation and encouragement under manifold trials are mixed
with earnest exhortations to Christian virtue and to these are added
warnings and reproofs to those who dishonoured the Christian religion by
professions of faith without corresponding works. The Epistle strikingly
resembles the teaching of our Lord especially in the Sermon on the Mount
(Matt. V). Nor is this surprising when we consider that James was a member
of the household with our Lord and must have been very familiar with our
Lord’s expressions concerning the perfect way of life.
Notwithstanding the severity of the address in the Epistle, the result
perhaps of Nazarite training, there is constant recurrence of the word
"brethren."
There
are fourteen allusions in the
Epistle to the Sermon on the Mount;
the sins
denounced by James are precisely
the sins which he had heard denounced
by our Lord: unbelief, anger, hypocrisy, respect of persons, sins of speech,
pride, covetousness; he exhorts to patience and prayer, and is the only
Apostle who gives instruction about the sick.
Martin
Luther utterly failed to understand the Epistle of James and pronounced it
"a right strawy epistle." Luther objected to it on the ground of the
contradiction which he assumed between Romans IV and James II, but there is
no real contradiction, rather a deep harmony.
Jude
in his Epistle introduces himself as "the servant of Jesus Christ and
brother of James "; like James, Jude does not claim the position of an
Apostle. Of the life of Jude we have no certain information. His descendants
are mentioned by Eusebius who says that when Domitian ordered that all the
posterity of David should be slain "some of the heretics accused the
descendants of Jude as the 'brother' of our Lord because they were of the
family of David and as such were also related to Christ." He then refers to
the good confession they made before their persecutors (Eccles.
Hist. III, 20).
There
is a marked resemblance between
the Epistle of James and Jude; the
object of
both Epistles is similar.
Of Joses, the third son of
Joseph and Escha, nothing is recorded concerning him in either sacred or
secular history beyond that he with his brethren became a believer in the
crucified and risen Christ and was present with the others at Pentecost. It
is quite possible that Joses came to Britain with the other "Judean
refugees" after the stoning of Stephen. for the name Joses is mentioned
in the ancient records (see
The Coming of the Saints by J. W. Taylor).[4]
In the early
Church James the Just was known and beloved for his irreproachable life and
wise judgment, even his enemies bearing testimony to his strict observance
of the Nazarite vow; the merging of this ancient Order into the Christian
faith and charity was largely attributed to the life and example of James,
First Bishop of Jerusalem, who with the other two personages of the same
name made so vital a contribution to the Gospel story and the infant Church.
"They
conquered him (the accuser) by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of
their testimony; they had to die for it but they did not cling to life.
Rejoice for this O heavens and ye that dwell in them" (Rev. XII, 11, 12).
Moffatt translation.
ADDENDUM
JAMES AS THE LORD’S
SUCCESSOR
Mrs. Elder’s
previous study, while alleviating the profound ignorance and confusion about
the various Jameses in the Bible, nevertheless avoids the sticky questions
about this obscure figure. Why was he chosen to be leader of the Christian
world? How was he chosen? Who was his successor? Why was his decision at the
Jerusalem Council accepted as final, without further argument? What did his
decision mean? And most of all, why is the New Testament, and in particular,
the book of Acts, largely silent about his activities?
Because most
information about James comes from sources not readily accessible, except to
specialists in the field, I have provided direct quotes from some of the
major authoritative sources, with short explanations. This is an Addendum,
not a book. You must come to your conclusions from your own research.
Now when the royal
chair was changed, the royal dignity was in Christ transferred to the
church from the house of Judah and Israel which is of the flesh, but the
throne is established in God’s holy church forever, the throne whose royal
and high-priestly dignity rests on two bases - the royal dignity coming
from Our Lord Jesus Christ in two ways, from the fact that he is of King
David’s seed according to the flesh and from the fact that he is, as is
certainly true, a greater king from eternity in his divinity.
James having been ordained at once the first bishop, he who is called the
brother of the Lord and apostle... But we find as well that he is of
David's stock through being Joseph’s son and that he was a Nazarite.
There is much to say about
this.
- Epiphanius, Bishop of
Salamis
Panarion 29
Epiphanius,
a 4th Century bishop with an impeccably orthodox reputation, is an important
source for finding distilled information about James in one place. Most
sources are scattered. Here, he tells us that the office of the bishop is a
royal office and a continuation of the Throne of David. It is to be
distinguished from the apostolic ministry. James was chosen as our Lord’s
successor to the episcopal throne for two reasons: first, he was a holy man,
and second, he, too, was of the House of David. Here, Epiphanius
acknowledges that Davidic bishops have primacy.
His
[Joseph’s] firstborn was James, surnamed "Oblias ", meaning "wall", and
also surnamed "Just", who was a Nazarite, which means holy man. He was the
first to receive the bishop's chair, the first to whom the Lord entrusted
his throne upon earth.
- Epiphanius, Bishop of
Salamis
in The Panarion
78.6-8
Here, he
tells us that the appointment of James was done personally by our Lord, not
the disciples. This must have occurred at the Resurrection appearance the
Apostle Paul refers to in I Corinthians 15:7. This is confirmed from at
least two other sources:
The Church of the Lord which was constituted in
Jerusalem multiplied
most plentifully and grew, being
governed with the most Righteous
ordinances by
James, who was ordained Bishop in
it by the Lord.
- Recognitions 1:43
The disciples said to Jesus, "We know that you will
depart from us.
Who is to be our
leader?"
Jesus said to them, "Wherever you
are, you go to
James the righteous, for whose
sake heaven and earth came into
being.
-
The Gospel of Thomas 12
This
expression, "for whose sake heaven and earth came into being", refers to the
status of the Messianic office as a federal headship on behalf of the race
of Adam. King David was a federal representative, as was Abraham. This fact
accounts for the following:
To
James alone was it allowed to enter once a year into the holy of holies,
because he was a Nazarite and connected to the priesthood. Hence Mary was
related in two ways to Elizabeth, and James was a distinguished member of
the priesthood, because the two tribes alone were linked to one another,
the royal tribe to the priestly one and the priestly to the royal...
James
also wore a plate on his head [the plate is the sacerdotal plate or
diadem, cf. Eusebius]. And once during a drought he lifted his hands to
heaven and prayed, and at once heaven sent rain, he never wore woolen
clothing. His knees grew hard as a camel's from his continual kneeling
before the Lord out of excessive piety. Thus they no longer called him by
his name: his name was "The Just" [zadok: the righteous]. He never
washed in a bath, did not partake of animal flesh, as I explained above,
and did not wear sandals. And there is much else that one could say about
the man and his virtuous way of life.
-
Panarion 78
James was
also the leader of Israel: known in the Dead Sea Scrolls as "the Teacher of
Righteousness" (Zadok). Modern scholars have hotly debated over who this
Teacher might have been. They all fail to see that this Teacher was a
position and not a person. Like the Office of President, which has been
filled by many men, the Teacher of Righteousness was an office in the
dissident Israelite movement which spanned several centuries. It was an
office filled by John the Baptist, Jesus, and then James.
Gamaliel, a
leading member of the Sanhedrin, was a Christian, but was allowed by James
to conceal that fact in order to work as a spy (Clementine letters,
Ante-Nicene Fathers (ANF), Alexander edition, v.8. p.94-96). The
"Recognitions of Clement" in general support this view of James’ power, both
in the Church and in the Jewish Sanhedrin.
The
significance of James' stature in Israel and the Church cannot be
overstated. He was not just a king or priest, but the appointed earthly
mediator between the heavenly Messiah (Jesus Christ) and His Kingdom People
on Earth. Rain-making is cited by Epiphanius as a Divine endorsement of that
position.[5]
Later Church
Fathers are fond of citing James’ asceticism as an endorsement of later
monastic movements. They fail to understand the dynamics of the political
situation of the time. He refused to partake of the Temple sacrifices as a
repudiation of the sacrificial system, not because he was a vegetarian. The
same is true with his refusal to wear wool. Priests wore only linen. He also
refused to bathe at the laver when entering the courtyard, thus declaring
one baptism sufficient. From this report has come the silly tradition that
he did not keep good hygiene. Commentators simply do not understand the
symbolism of James’ actions and ascribe different motives to them.
He was also
a Nazarite. However, according to Epiphanius, he was at least 30 years older
than Jesus (Panarion 78.8.1), which means, that he must have
fulfilled his vows about the time of our Lord’s Crucifixion. For we are told
in the Gospel of Hebrews (cited by Jerome), that he was renewing them to
intercede on our Lord’s behalf:
The Lord, after he had given his linen clothes to
the Servant of the
Priest, went to James and
appeared to him. For James had
sworn that he would not eat bread from that hour in which he drank the Cup
of the Lord until he should see him
rising again from those that
sleep.
"Bring a table and bread", the
Lord said. He
took the bread, blessed it, and
breaking it,
gave it to James the Just, saying
to him, "My
brother, eat your bread, for the
Son of Man is
risen from among those that
sleep."
If James
remained a Nazarite, he would not have been able to partake of the Eucharist
(Numbers 6). Later commentators have confused the Nazarite vows with
celibacy. These institutions were not the same. Nazarites could be married
(e.g. Samson). James’ roles as husband and father were likely diminished by
this time, being an old man. He was at that stage of life when men are no
longer bound to the mundane tasks of home life and are free for leadership
in the Church.
For the term "resurrection" is not applied to that
which has not fallen,
but to that which has fallen and
rises again; as when the prophet
says, "I will also raise up again the tabernacle of David which has fallen
down." (Amos 9:11)
Methodius, ANF v. 6, p. 367
After this I will return, and will
build again
the tabernacle of David...
James in Acts 15:16
The above
comes from James’ ruling at the Jerusalem Council and tells us that the
prime directive of the Church is to restore the "tabernacle of David". The
Church must achieve this before it can succeed in finishing the Great
Commission.
For this
reason, the status of the Apostles in relation to James was one of
subservience. He was a Davidic prince and the viceroy of the Messiah. The
Apostles sent him reports of their activities. The Clementine literature (ANF
v.8, not to be confused with the epistles called 1 & 2 Clement) comes from
Peter’s deacon, Clement, and reports of Peter’s confrontation with Simon the
Magician. Most of the book of Acts is a compilation of these reports from
Paul.
Stephen, the first Christian martyr, was James’ deacon. His death was part
of an assault on
James by Saul of Tarsus, which James
survived
(Recognitions of Clement, ANF v. 8, p. 95-96 and
Ignatius to Hero, ANF
v.1 p. 113).[6]
How may we
account for the near silence of the book of Acts about James and the rest of
the Lord’s kinsmen? Is it, as some say, because Paul and James were bitter
enemies? There is too much in the Scriptures which gives witness to their
unity. There must be a better explanation.
Remember,
Christianity was a Davidic movement to establish the Kingdom of God on Earth
and to restore the moral and civil laws of the Old Testament. Acts was a
book meant for circulation among the Gentile churches. If Christianity had
been introduced to the world as a Davidic movement, it would have alarmed
Rome. Indeed, later, it did alarm Rome and gave rise to two inquisitions to
destroy all descendants of the House of David, especially the Desposyni.
Christianity was from the beginning a "Holy Conspiracy".
That James’
appointment was not an isolated case can be demonstrated by the persistence
of his successors in Jerusalem, who were all members of the Desposyni. They
were as follows: Simon, Judas, Zacharias, Tobias, Benjamin, John, Matthias,
Philip, Seneca, Justus, Levi, Vafer, Joses, Judas.
As to
James’ theology, much can be learned
from the books of James and his
brother, Jude. The Epistle of James is
theonomic
and populist. The Epistle of Jude shows that Desposynic theology was
Enochian.
There is not enough space, here, to discuss the particulars of this
theology, except to say that it is very different from what popular
Christianity has historically adopted. The primary concern is with God’s
Ultimate Intention in creation and the task of restoration, in time and on
Earth. It is not an "other worldly" theology, but an intensely practical one
which recognizes that there is no difference between our spiritual and
physical existences. Our lives on Earth are just as spiritual as they will
be after the General Resurrection. They are just experienced differently.
- James Wesley
Stivers
Footnotes:
[1] On Salome's
role in the Early Church see essay
Salome: Matron
Saint of Midwives
[2] It has been
suggested that "the Chief" may actually refer to the titular head of the
House of David at that time, which would be either James the Lord's brother
or Jesus Himself. In which case, some of the disciples may have been our
Lord's sons, if not by issue, then certainly by levirate adoption. See
Biblical Terranomics #22 on "The Doctrine of Election". Available only
to approved catechumens.
[3] Nowhere does
the law of the Nazarite require vegetarianism, although by inference, it may
be argued that the stipulation not to touch a dead body includes animal
flesh.
[4] For a
source for this book and other similar titles contact
clerk@grailchurch.org
[5] Since James
was the "pope" of the Church, does that mean we need a pope today? It could
be argued that the only Desposynic Church in those early years was the
Church of Jerusalem, but this succession appears to have continued until
throughout the 1st Century, when there were other Desposynic churches, at
least in Palestine. The destruction of the Temple in 70 AD should be our
line of demarcation between the centralized ecclesiocracy of the Jamesian
episcopacy and the decentralized ecclesiocracy of the Desposynic movement
which came afterward.
[6] It ought to
be noted that the confusion of the Jameses in the New Testament Church may
have been deliberate. After Stephen's death, Herod kills James, the brother
of John, thinking that he was striking at the head of the Jesus movement.
It turns out that he failed, so then he turns to take Peter, who escapes, of
course, and sends word to James (isn't he dead?). There is no distinction
between these two men in Acts. See
Pesher.
Consult the
Cambrian Episcopal Church of the Grail, P.O. Box 8701. Moscow, ID 83843 with
questions or at
overseer@grailchurch.org
|
