PART II.

CHAPTER THE TWENTY-THIRD.

OF THE SEVEN CATHOLIC EPISTLES.

THE Epistle of St. James, the two Epistles of St. Peter, the three Epistles of St. John, and the Epistle of St. Jude, are called Catholic or General Epistles. Origen, Eusebius, and many other ancient authors, mention them under that name; and it is probable that they were so called, because most of them were written not to particular persons, or to the churches of single cities or countries, as St. Paul's Epistles were, but to several churches or to believers in general. Some Latin writers, as Dupin observes, have called these Epistles canonical, either confounding the name with catholic, or else to denote that they also were a part of the canon of the New Testament. It has been already observed, that the genuineness of five of these seven Epistles was for some time doubted, but that they have all been universally admitted into the sacred canon since the fourth century.a

a Eusebius, proposing to give a list of the books of the New Testament, says, "First in order are to be placed the holy fourfold volume of the Gospels, tǹv åyíav tv Evayyελiwv TεTρaкTηy, and then the Acts of the Apostles. Next are to stand the Epistles of St. Paul, and

then the first Epistle of John, and the Epistle of Peter; after which, if it should seem fit, the Apocalypse of John. These, indeed, are received by common consent. But of those disputed, yet recognised by many, is that which is called the Epistle of James, and

a

Many writers enumerate these seven Epistles, but not always in the same order. " The following reasons may be assigned for the order in which they stand in our Bibles: The Epistle of James is placed first, because he was bishop of the church at Jerusalem, the city where the Gospel was first preached after the ascension of our Saviour, and where the first Christian church was established; next come the Epistles of St. Peter, because he is considered as the head of the twelve Apostles; then the Epistles of St. John, who was the favourite Apostle of Christ, and more distinguished than St. Jude, whose Epistle is placed last.

PART II.

CHAPTER THE TWENTY-FOURTH.

OF THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES.

I. HISTORY OF ST. JAMES.-II. GENUINENESS OF THIS

- III.

ITS

-IV. THE PERSONS то

DATE.

EPISTLE.
WHOM IT WAS ADDRESSED. -V. DESIGN AND SUB-
STANCE OF IT.

I. IN the catalogue of the Apostles, given by the Evangelists, we find two persons of the name of James, of whom one was son of Zebedee, and brother of John, and the other was son of Alphæus or Cleophas, which are supposed to be the same name differently written", or different names of the same person. The latter is in the Gospels called James the Less, and the former is distinguished by the name of James the Great, though that appellation is not given him in Scripture. St. Paul mentions one of these two Apostles as the Lord's brother, that is, his near kinsman; and as there is no reason to think that the son of Zebedee was related to Christ, we conclude that he speaks of the son of Alphæus, who in other places of Scripture is said to be the brother of Christ. The degree of

e

Mark, xv. 40.

d Gal. i. 19.

e Matt. xiii. 55. Mark, vi. 3.

his relation to Christ seems to have been that of cousin-german; for St. John says, that Mary the wife of Cleophas was sister to Mary our Saviour's mother; and St. Mark informs us, that the name of the mother of James the Less was Mary. Some few, both ancients and moderns, have thought that James, the Lord's brother, was not his cousingerman, but that he was the son of Joseph, Christ's reputed father, by a former wife. This opinion is not supported by any authority of Scripture, and probably originated from not considering that among the Jews, persons nearly related were called brothers.

с

James the Less was the author of this Epistle. We have no account of his call to the apostleship, nor are any particulars recorded of him in the Gospels. In the Acts, and in St. Paul's Epistles, he is several times mentioned with great distinction; but not in a manner to furnish us with many circumstances of his history. He seems to have been appointed by the other Apostles, and, as Lardner thinks, soon after the martyrdom of St. Stephen, to reside at Jerusalem, and to superintend the affairs of the church there, while the rest of the Apostles travelled into other countries. His near relationship to our Saviour was probably the cause of his being selected for this honourable

a

John, xix. 25.

b xv. 40. It sometimes happened that brothers and sisters among the Jews had the same names, but it was not a very common thing.

C

Lardner, vol. vi. p. 493. Acts, xii. 17. xv. 13. xxi. 18. 1 Cor. xv. 7. Gal. i. 19. Gal. ii. 9. 12.

station, the duties of which he discharged with such inflexible integrity and holy zeal, that he obtained the surname of James the Just. By ancient writers a he is called bishop of Jerusalem, and is considered as presiding in that character at the council holden at Jerusalem, for the purpose of determining whether it were necessary that Gentile converts to the Gospel should be circumcised. Upon that occasion he was the last who delivered his sentiments; and he summed up the arguments, and proposed the substance of the decree, to which the whole assembly readily acceded. He was put to death in the year 62, in a tumult raised by the unbelieving Jews, when there was no Roman governor in Judæa', Festus being dead, and his successor Albinus not yet arrived.

James the Less was a person of great prudence and discretion, and was highly esteemed by the Apostles and other Christians. Such indeed was his general reputation for piety and virtue, that, as we learn from Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome, Josephus thought, and declared it to be the common opinion, that the sufferings of the Jews, and the destruction of their city and temple, were owing to the anger of God, excited by the murder of James. This must be considered as a strong and remarkable testimony to the character of this Apostle, as it is given by a person who did not believe that Jesus was the Christ. The passages of

a

Eus. H. E. lib. ii. cap. 1. 23. Chrys. tom. x. p. 355.

b Eus. H. E. lib. ii. cap. 23. Lardner, vol. vii. p. 129.