BpAndre
Site Admin
Joined: 20 Aug 2005
Posts: 126
Location: Chicago, IL.
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:18 pm Post subject: Brethren of the Lord |
 |
|
Many Protestants state that Mary had other children, and so Jesus had brothers. As proof, they offer Matthew 12:46, “his mother and his brethren were standing about.” Also, “Is not his the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James and Joseph and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?” (Mark 6:3) In addition is provided: “For even his brethren did not believe in him.” (John 7:5)
To this, we respond that the use of the term “brother” or “brethren” referred to more than just blood brother, in the sense we are used to seeing it. Neither Hebrew nor Aramaic, the languages spoken by Christ and the Apostles, had a special word meaning “cousin” as we do in English. Speakers of those languages used either the word for “brother” or a circumlocution, such as, “the son of the brother of my father”. Translating the Hebrew or Aramaic into Greek, the word for “brother” is rendered as “adelphos” (meaning sons of the same parent), and so one must carefully understand and consider the wording within the proper context.
The word “brother” can refer to a kinsman, as in Deut.3:7, or Jer. 34:9. It could also refer to a friend, such as in 2 Sam. 1:26, or an ally as in Amos 1:9.
As opposed to seeing multiple sons mentioned, in Mark 6:3, we read “the son of Mary”. In Matthew 1:25 we read, “And he knew her not till she brought fourth her first-born son.” The term “till she” does not, as some believe, mean that immediately after that time, Joseph did “know” Mary. To illustrate this point, we turn to Deuteronomy 34:6 where scripture states, with regards to the burial of Moses and the location of his grave, that no man knows the place of his burial “until this present day.” In fact, no one has ever known since that time where it is. Elsewhere in scripture, we read in Genesis 8:7 that Noah “sent forth a raven; and it went to and fro until the waters were dried up from the earth.” We know that the raven did not come back at all. In this, we are taught by the early Church, as is explained below by St. Jerome:
“Our reply is briefly this, - the words knew and till in the language of Holy Scripture are capable of a double meaning. As to the former, he himself gave us a dissertation to show that it must be referred to sexual intercourse, and no one doubts that it is often used of the knowledge of the understanding, as, for instance, ‘the boy Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem, and his parents knew it not.’ Now we have to prove that just as in the one case he has followed the usage of Scripture, so with regard to the word till he is utterly refuted by the authority of the same Scripture, which often denotes by its use a fixed time (he himself told us so), frequently time without limitation, as when God by the mouth of the prophet says to certain persons, ‘Even to old age I am he.’ Will He cease to be God when they have grown old? And the Savior in the Gospel tells the Apostles, ‘Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.’ Will the Lord then after the end of the world has come forsake His disciples, and at the very time when seated on twelve thrones they are to judge the twelve tribes of Israel will they be bereft of the company of their Lord? Again Paul the Apostle writing to the Corinthians says, ‘Christ the first-fruits, afterward they that are Christ's, at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father, when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.’ Granted that the passage relates to our Lord's human nature, we do not deny that the words are spoken of Him who endured the cross and is commanded to sit afterwards on the right hand. What does he mean then by saying, ‘for he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet’? Is the Lord to reign only until His enemies begin to be under His feet, and once they are under His feet will He cease to reign? Of course His reign will then commence in its fullness when His enemies begin to be under His feet. David also in the fourth Song of Ascents speaks thus, ‘Behold, as the eyes of servants look unto the hand of their master, as the eyes of a maiden unto the hand of her mistress, so our eyes look unto the Lord our God, until he have mercy upon us.’ Will the prophet, then, look unto the Lord until he obtain mercy, and when mercy is obtained will he turn his eyes down to the ground? Although elsewhere he says, ‘Mine eyes fail for thy salvation, and for the word of thy righteousness.’ I could accumulate countless instances of this usage, and cover the verbosity of our assailant with a cloud of proofs; I shall, however, add only a few, and leave the reader to discover like ones for himself.” St. Jerome. A.D. 383 The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary - Against Helvidius. CCEL.
The term “first-born” refers to Mosaic Law, and does not state a fact, that additional children were in fact born (Ex. 13:2, Num. 3:12). Under Mosaic Law, the first-born son was significant and special, and inherited the birthright from the father, and the headship of the family (Ex. 34:20). The first male child of a marriage was termed the “first-born”, even if there were never any additional children born. In Exodus 13:1-2, we read, “The Lord said to Moses, ‘Consecrate to me all the first-born; whatever is the first to open the womb among the people of Israel, both of man and of beast, is mine.”
In Genesis 14:14 Lot, Abraham’s nephew (Gen. 11:26-28) is described as Abraham’s brother. In Genesis 29:15, Laban, Jacob’s uncle, calls Jacob his “brother”.
Mary, the wife of Cleophas, and “sister” of the Virgin Mary (John 19:25) is the mother of James and Joseph (Mark 15:47, Mat. 27:56) who are called the “brothers” of Jesus (Mk 6:3). In Acts 1:12-15, we read about the apostles, Mary, “some women” and Jesus “brethren” which number about 120. Certainly we are not to believe that Jesus had about 120 blood brothers. In John 19:26-27, we read that Jesus gives the care of his mother to John. Had Jesus blood brothers, it would have been horrifically and sinfully negligent of them to not care for their mother, particularly in Jewish culture and faith. She was placed in John’s care because there were no other sons to care for her, as she had no other children. This is what the Church teaches, in agreement with both Scripture and Tradition:
“Let me point out then what John says, ‘But there were standing by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.’ No one doubts that there were two apostles called by the name James, James the son of Zebedee, and James the son of Alphaeus. Do you intend the comparatively unknown James the less, who is called in Scripture the son of Mary, not however of Mary the mother of our Lord, to be an apostle, or not? If he is an apostle, he must be the son of Alphaeus and a believer in Jesus, ‘For neither did his brethren believe in him.’ If he is not an apostle, but a third James (who he can be I cannot tell), how can he be regarded as the Lord's brother, and how, being a third, can he be called less to distinguish him from greater, when greater and less are used to denote the relations existing, not between three, but between two? Notice, moreover, that the Lord's brother is an apostle, since Paul says, ‘Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and tarried with him fifteen days. But other of the Apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.’ And in the same Epistle, ‘And when they perceived the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars,’ etc. And that you may not suppose this James to be the son of Zebedee, you have only to read the Acts of the Apostles, and you will find that the latter had already been slain by Herod.
The only conclusion is that the Mary who is described as the mother of James the less was the wife of Alphaeus and sister of Mary the Lord's mother, the one who is called by John the Evangelist ‘Mary of Cleophas,’ whether after her father, or kindred, or for some other reason. But if you think they are two persons because elsewhere we read, ‘Mary the mother of James the less,’ and here, ‘Mary of Cleophas,’ you have still to learn that it is customary in Scripture for the same individual to bear different names. Raguel, Moses' father-in-law, is also called ‘Jethro’. Gedeon, without any apparent reason for the change, all at once becomes ‘Jerubbaal’. Ozias, king of Judah, has an alternative, ‘Azarias’. Mount Tabor is called ‘Itabyrium’. Again Hermon is called by the Phenicians ‘Sanior’, and by the Amorites ‘Sanir’. The same tract of country is known by three names, Negebh, Teman, and Darom in Ezekiel. Peter is also called ‘Simon’ and ‘Cephas’. Judas the zealot in another Gospel is called ‘Thaddaeus’. And there are numerous other examples, which the reader will be able to collect for himself from every part of Scripture.
Now here we have the explanation of what I am endeavoring to show, how it is that the sons of Mary, the sister of our Lord's mother, who though not formerly believers afterwards did believe, can be called brethren of the Lord. Possibly the case might be that one of the brethren believed immediately while the others did not believe until long after, and that one Mary was the mother of James and Joses, namely, ‘Mary of Cleophas,’ who is the same as the wife of Alphaeus, the other, the mother of James the less. In any case, if she (the latter) had been the Lord's mother S. John would have allowed her the title, as everywhere else, and would not by calling her the mother of other sons have given a wrong impression. But at this stage I do not wish to argue for or against the supposition that Mary the wife of Cleophas and Mary the mother of James and Joses were different women, provided it is clearly understood that Mary the mother of James and Joses was not the same person as the Lord's mother. How then, says Helvidius, do you make out that they were called the Lord's brethren who were not his brethren? I will show how that is. In Holy Scripture there are four kinds of brethren-by nature, race, kindred, love. Instances of brethren by nature are Esau and Jacob, the twelve patriarchs, Andrew and Peter, James and John. As to race, all Jews are called brethren of one another, as in Deuteronomy, ‘If thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee.’ And in the same book, ‘Thou shalt in anywise set him king over thee, whom the Lord thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shall thou set king over thee; thou mayest not put a foreigner over thee, which is not thy brother.’ And again, ‘Thou shalt not see thy brother's ox or his sheep go astray, and hide thyself from them: thou shalt surely bring them again unto thy brother. And if thy brother be not nigh unto thee, or if thou know him not, then thou shalt bring it home to thine house, and it shall be with thee until thy brother seek after it, and thou shalt restore it to him again.’ And the Apostle Paul says, ‘I could wish that I myself were anathema from Christ for my brethren's sake, my kinsmen according to the flesh: who are Israelites.’ Moreover they are called brethren by kindred who are of one family, that is patria, which corresponds to the Latin paternitas, because from a single root a numerous progeny proceeds. In Genesis we read, ‘And Abram said unto Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdmen and thy herdmen; for we are brethren.’ And again, ‘So Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan, and Lot journeyed east: and they separated each from his brother.’ Certainly Lot was not Abraham's brother, but the son of Abraham's brother, Aram. For Terah begat Abraham and Nahor and Aram: and Aram begat Lot. Again we read, "And Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife. and Lot his brother's son." But if you still doubt whether a nephew can be called a son, let me give you an instance. ‘And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen.’ And after describing the night attack and the slaughter, he adds, ‘And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot.’
Let this suffice by way of proof of my assertion. But for fear you may make some cavilling objection, and wriggle out of your difficulty like a snake, I must bind you fast with the bonds of proof to stop your hissing and complaining, for I know you would like to say you have been overcome not so much by Scripture truth as by intricate arguments. Jacob, the son of Isaac and Rebecca, when in fear of his brother's treachery he had gone to Mesopotamia, drew nigh and rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, and watered the flocks of Laban, his mother's brother. ‘And Jacob kissed Rachel, and lifted up his voice, and wept. And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brother, and that he was Rebekah's son.’ Here is an example of the rule already referred to, by which a nephew is called a brother. And again, ‘Laban said unto Jacob. Because thou art my brother, shouldest thou therefore serve me for nought? Tell me what shall thy wages be.’ And so, when, at the end of twenty years, without the knowledge of his father-in-law and accompanied by his wives and sons he was returning to his country, on Laban overtaking him in the mountain of Gilead and failing to find the idols which Rachel hid among the baggage, Jacob answered and said to Laban, ‘What is my trespass? What is my sin, that thou hast so hotly pursued after me? Whereas thou hast felt all about my stuff, what hast thou found of all thy household stuff? Set it here before my brethren and thy brethren, that they may judge betwixt us two.’ Tell me who are those brothers of Jacob and Laban who were present there? Esau, Jacob's brother, was certainly not there, and Laban, the son of Bethuel, had no brothers although he had a sister Rebecca.” St. Jerome. The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary - Against Helvidius. A.D. 383. CCEL
[cited from the oficial catechism of the Catholic Apostolic National Church]
_________________
Bishop Andre' Jhohn-William Queen, SCR
Vicar General
Catholic Apostolic National Church
Phone: 773.942.4660 |
|
