But other of the apostles I saw none, saving James the brother of the Lord.

“Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king [Agrippa], desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrim without his consent.”

“James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the government of the Church in conjunction with the apostles. He has been called the Just by all from the time of our Saviour to the present day; for there were many that bore the name of James. He was holy from his mother's womb; and he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head; he did not anoint himself with oil, and he did not use the bath. He alone was permitted to enter into the holy place; for he wore not woolen but linen garments. And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple, and was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel, in consequence of his constantly bending them in his worship of God, and asking forgiveness for the people. Because of his exceeding great justice he was called the Just, and Oblias, which signifies in Greek, 'Bulwark of the people' and 'Justice,' in accordance with what the prophets declare concerning him. Now some of the seven sects, which existed among the people and which have been mentioned by me in the Memoirs, asked him, 'What is the gate of Jesus?' and he replied that he was the Saviour. On account of these words some believed that Jesus is the Christ. But the sects mentioned above did not believe either in a resurrection or in one's coming to give to every man according to his works. But as many as believed did so on account of James. Therefore when many even of the rulers believed, there was a commotion among the Jews and Scribes and Pharisees, who said that there was danger that the whole people would be looking for Jesus as the Christ. Coming therefore in a body to James they said, 'We entreat you, restrain the people; for they are gone astray in regard to Jesus, as if he were the Christ. We entreat you to persuade all that have come to the feast of the Passover concerning Jesus; for we all have confidence in you. For we bear you witness, as do all the people, that you are just, and do not respect persons. [Matthew 22:16] Therefore, persuade the multitude not to be led astray concerning Jesus. For the whole people, and all of us also, have confidence in you. Stand therefore upon the pinnacle of the temple, that from that high position you may be clearly seen, and that your words may be readily heard by all the people. For all the tribes, with the Gentiles also, have come together on account of the Passover.' The aforesaid Scribes and Pharisees therefore placed James upon the pinnacle of the temple, and cried out to him and said: 'You just one, in whom we ought all to have confidence, forasmuch as the people are led astray after Jesus, the crucified one, declare to us, what is the gate of Jesus.' And he answered with a loud voice, 'Why do you ask me concerning Jesus, the Son of Man? He himself sits in heaven at the right hand of the great Power, and is about to come upon the clouds of heaven.' And when many were fully convinced and gloried in the testimony of James, and said, 'Hosanna to the Son of David,' these same Scribes and Pharisees said again to one another, 'We have done badly in supplying such testimony to Jesus. But let us go up and throw him down, in order that they may be afraid to believe him.' And they cried out, saying, 'Oh! Oh! The just man is also in error.' And they fulfilled the Scripture written in Isaiah, 'Let us take away the just man, because he is troublesome to us: therefore they shall eat the fruit of their doings.' [Isaiah 3:10 LXX] So they went up and threw down the just man, and said to each other, 'Let us stone James the Just.' And they began to stone him, for he was not killed by the fall; but he turned and knelt down and said, 'I entreat you, Lord God our Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.' [Luke 23:34] And while they were thus stoning him one of the priests of the sons of Rechab, the son of the Rechabites, who are mentioned by Jeremiah the prophet, cried out, saying, 'Stop. What are you doing? The just one prays for you.' And one of them, who was a fuller, took the club with which he beat out clothes and struck the just man on the head. And thus he suffered martyrdom. And they buried him on the spot, by the temple, and his monument still remains by the temple. He became a true witness, both to Jews and Greeks, that Jesus is the Christ. And immediately Vespasian besieged them.”

“For they say that Peter and James and John after the ascension of our Saviour, as if also preferred by our Lord, strove not after honor, but chose James the Just bishop of Jerusalem... The Lord after his resurrection imparted knowledge to James the Just and to John and Peter, and they imparted it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom Barnabas was one. But there were two Jameses: one called the Just, who was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and was beaten to death with a club by a fuller, and another who was beheaded.”

“Let us pray for every episcopacy which is under the whole heaven, of those that rightly divide the word of Thy truth. And let us pray for our bishop James, and his parishes; let us pray for our bishop Clement, and his parishes; let us pray for our bishop Euodius, and his parishes; let us pray for our bishop Annianus, and his parishes: that the compassionate God may grant them to continue in His holy churches in health, honour, and long life, and afford them an honourable old age in godliness and righteousness.”

“"But other of the Apostles saw I none, save James, the Lord's brother." See what great friends he was with Peter especially; on his account he left his home, and with him he tarried. This I frequently repeat, and desire you to remember, that no one, when he hears what this Apostle seems to have spoken against Peter, may conceive a suspicion of him. He premises this, that when he says, "I resisted Peter," no one may suppose that these words imply enmity and contention; for he honored and loved his person more than all and took this journey for his sake only, not for any of the others. "But other of the Apostles saw I none, save James." "I saw him merely, I did not learn from him," he means. But observe how honorably he mentions him, he says not "James" merely, but adds this illustrious title, so free is he from all envy. Had he only wished to point out whom he meant, he might have shown this by another appellation, and called him the son of Cleophas, as the Evangelist does. But as he considered that he had a share in the august titles of the Apostles, he exalts himself by honoring James; and this he does by calling him "the Lord's brother," although he was not by birth His brother, but only so reputed. Yet this did not deter him from giving the title; and in many other instances he displays towards all the Apostles that noble disposition, which beseemed him.”

“After the Apostle has above shown that he did not receive the Gospel from man before his conversion, nor at the time of his conversion, here he proves that he did not receive it from man even after his conversion; rather, here he shows how his teaching was approved by men. And concerning this he does two things. First, he shows how his teaching was approved by the apostles; second, he shows how it was approved by the other faithful, at the place then I came into the regions, etc. And first he narrates the fact; second he confirms the truth of what he has said, at the place behold, before God, etc. He says therefore: although I did not go to the apostles in order to be instructed by them concerning the beginning of my conversion, since I was already instructed by Christ, nevertheless, driven by an affection of charity, after three years — namely, of my conversion — I came to Jerusalem, since I had for a long time desired to see Peter, not in order to learn from him, but in order to visit him. Job 5:24: "visiting your beauty," etc. And I remained with him fifteen days, being found by him to be a truthful apostle. And he says fifteen days, because this number is composed of eight and seven. Now the number eight is the number of the New Testament, in which the eighth day of those who rise again is awaited; while the number seven is the number of the Old Testament, because it celebrates the seventh day. He remained with Peter fifteen days, conferring with him about the mysteries of the Old and New Testament. And lest it be believed that, although he was not instructed by Peter, he was nevertheless instructed by others, he adds that he was not instructed by others either. Hence he says but of the other apostles I saw none, that is, no one, by whom I might have been instructed, except James the brother of the Lord. For he saw him in Jerusalem. Concerning this James it should be known that he was bishop of Jerusalem, and was called James the Less, because he had been called after the other James. Many things are said about him at Acts 15:13ff. He also wrote a canonical epistle. But why he is called the brother of the Lord is said differently by different people. For Helvidius says that he is called brother of the Lord for this reason, that he was the son of the Blessed Virgin. For he says that the Blessed Virgin conceived and bore Christ, and after the birth of Christ conceived by Joseph, and bore other sons. But this error has been condemned and rejected. Likewise it is plainly false, because James was not the son of Joseph, but of Alphaeus. Others, however, say that Joseph, before the Blessed Virgin, had another wife, from whom he had a son James and others, and when she died, he took the Blessed Virgin as wife, from whom Christ was born, yet not known by Joseph, but by the Holy Spirit, as is said in the Gospel. Because, then, kinships are named from the father, and Joseph was thought to be the father of Christ, therefore this James, although he was not the son of the Virgin, was nevertheless called brother of the Lord. But this is false, because if the Lord did not wish his mother, a virgin, to be entrusted to the keeping of anyone but a virgin, how would he have permitted her spouse not to have been a virgin, and to have remained so? Therefore others say, and it is touched on in the Gloss, that this James was the son of Mary of Cleophas, who was the sister of the Virgin. For they say that Anna, the mother of the Blessed Virgin, married first Joachim, from whom she bore Mary, the mother of the Lord; when he died, she married Cleophas, the brother of Joachim, from whom she bore Mary of Cleophas, and from her was born James the Less, Jude, and Simon; when he died, it is said that she then married a certain third man, who was called Salome, from whom she conceived and bore another Mary, who was called Salome, and from her was born James the Greater, and John, his brother. But Jerome contradicts this opinion in two ways. First, because Salome is not the name of a man, as also appears in the Greek, but is the name of a woman, who was the sister of the Blessed Virgin, and by Zebedee bore James the Greater and John, just as Mary of Cleophas by Alphaeus bore James the Less, Jude, and Simon. Now this James is called brother of the Lord specially among his other cousins, and this for two reasons: first, on account of a likeness of appearance, because he was like Christ in face; and on account of a likeness of life, because he imitated Christ in his ways. Or because Alphaeus his father was of the kinship of Joseph; and therefore, since the Jews were accustomed to trace the line of kinship from the males, and Christ was thought to be the son of Joseph, as is said in Luke 3:23, therefore he in particular was called brother of the Lord, and not the others, who were joined to him only through the mother. Here, however, "brother" is taken in the sense of kinship. For in Scripture "brothers" are sometimes said by nature. Matthew 1:2: "and Jacob begot Judah and his brothers." By kinship, as all blood relations are brothers. Genesis 13:8: "let there be no quarrel, I beg, between me and you, for we are brothers." By people, and thus all of one language are called brothers. Deuteronomy 17:15: "you may not set a man of another people as king, who is not your brother." By affection, and thus all friends, and those who have the same affection, are called brothers. 2 Corinthians 2:13: "because I did not find Titus my brother," etc. By religion, and thus all Christians who have one rule of life are called brothers. Matthew 23:8: "you are brothers," etc. Psalm 132:1: "behold how good and how pleasant it is for brothers to dwell together," etc. And commonly all men are called brothers, because they are governed and brought up by the one God. Malachi 2:10: "have we not all one father," etc. Next, when he says but the things that I write to you, etc., he confirms by an oath what he had said, as if to say: these things which I now write to you about myself, behold, they are in the open, so that it is sufficiently established that I do not lie. And this I say, before God, that is, with God as witness. Now the Apostle swears here not out of levity, but out of the necessity of those for whom it was necessary that they believe. For unless he did this, they would not believe him. 2 Corinthians 2:17: "before God, in Christ, we speak." Romans 1:9: "God is my witness," etc. What, then, does the Lord say: "let your speech be, yes, yes; no, no; what is more than this is from evil"? It must be said that it is from the evil of him who does not believe, or from the evil of the punishment by which someone is compelled to swear. Next, when he says then I came, etc., he shows how he was approved by the other churches of Judea. Here he does three things. First he shows where he stayed, namely, in Cilicia. Hence he says then I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, namely, of his homeland; whence also he had been carried off — for it is said at Acts 22:3: "now Paul was from Tarsus of Cilicia," etc. Second, how he was known by them, namely, not by face, but only by hearing and report. Hence he says for I was unknown by face to the churches of Judea that were in Christ, that is, in the faith of Christ. 2 Corinthians 6:8: "as unknown, and known." Whence it is clear that the churches of Judea did not teach me. For they had only heard, namely, of me by report, that he who persecuted, etc. Third, how he was approved by them, because they glorified God in me, that is, in my conversion they approved as great him who by his grace converted me. Isaiah 43:20: "the beast shall glorify me," etc.”

“But other of the apostles saw I none save James the Lords brother. I.e., a cousin or relation of Christ’s, for the Hebrews call cousins brothers. S. Jerome adds that S. James was called the Lord’s brother before all the Apostles, even those related to Christ, on account of his lofty character, his incomparable faith and wisdom, which made him seem like a brother to Christ For the same reason he was surnamed the Just Secondly, S. Jerome says that Christ, when going to His Father, commended to James, as to a brother, the eldest children of His mother, i.e., those in Judaea who believed on Him; for this James, the son of Alphaeus, the son of Mary, wife of Cleophas, one of the twelve Apostles, was the first Bishop of Jerusalem. This is why, in the First Council of Jerusalem, he was the first after Peter to pronounce judgment (Acts xv. 13). A Canonical Epistle of his is extant. S. Jerome hints both here and in his book on Ecclesiastical Writers, when writing of James, that this James was not of the twelve Apostles, but was called an Apostle, only because he had seen Christ and preached Him. In this case we have three of the name of James — the brother of John, slain by Herod ; the son of Alphaeus, both of whom were Apostles ; and this brother of the Lord. But since this brother of the Lord is called an Apostle, A 234 THE EPISTLE TO THE and there is no cogent reason for distinguishing him from James the Apostle and son of Alphaeus, when, indeed, there are many reasons why we should identify them, the first opinion seems the better one. Ver. 2a — Befort God I lie not. Vatablus paraphrases this verse : “What I write unto you, behold I write before God — I lie not; 9 * and Theophylact agrees with him. But Ambrose and Augustine think that before God is a formal oath — I call God to witness. The Apostle asserts that he had not seen the other Apostles so strenuously that no one might be able to say that he had visited them in secret, and had not been taught by God (Jerome)”

“But other of the apostles saw I none,.... This is observed to show, that as he did not receive the Gospel from Peter, so neither from any of the other apostles, whom he did not so much as see, much less converse with; save James the Lord's brother; not James the son of Zebedee, the brother of John, whom Herod slew with the sword; but James the son of Alphaeus, he who made the speech in the synod at Jerusalem, Act 15:13 was the writer of the epistle which bears his name, and was the brother of Joses, Simon, and Judas, who are called the brethren of Christ, Mat 13:55 and that because they were the kinsmen and relations of Christ according to the flesh, it being usual with the Jews to call such brethren. The relation came in and stood thus; this James was James the less, the son of Mary the wife of Cleophas, Mar 15:40 which Cleophas was the brother of Joseph, the husband of Mary the mother of our Lord, as Eusebius, from Hegesippus, relates; and so our Lord and this James were brothers' children, as was supposed: or else the wife of Cleophas the mother of James, was sister to Mary the mother of Christ, as she is called, Joh 19:25 and so they were sisters' children, or own cousins; and thus Jerom (t), after much discourse on this subject, concludes that Mary the mother of James the less was the wife of Alphaeus, (or Cleophas, which is the same,) and the sister of Mary the mother of the Lord, whom the Evangelist John surnames Mary of Cleophas; and persons in such a relation, and even uncles and nephews, were called brethren by the Jews; see Gen 12:5 nor is James one of our Lord's disciples being called his brother, any contradiction to Joh 7:5 as the Jew (u) affirms, where it is said, "neither did his brethren believe in him"; since they might not believe in him then, and yet believe in him afterwards: besides, Christ had brethren or relations according to the flesh, distinct from his disciples and apostles, and his brethren among them; see Mat 10:1 such as were James, Judas, and Simon; nor does the Evangelist John say, that none of Christ's brethren believed in him, only that they that came to him and bid him go into Judea did not. Some have been of opinion that a third James, distinct from James the son of Zebedee and James the son of Alphaeus, is here meant; who was not of the twelve apostles, and was surnamed James the just, and called the brother of Christ because of his faith, wisdom, and becoming conversation; but certain it is, that this James was of the number of the apostles, as appears from the exceptive clause, "other of the apostles saw I none, save James", &c. and from his being put with Cephas and John, who were pillars and the chief among the apostles; and besides it was James the son of Alphaeus, who was surnamed the "just", and Oblias (w), and presided over the church at Jerusalem, and was a man of great esteem among the Jews; and is by (x) Josephus, as here, called the brother of Jesus. (t) Advers. Helvidium, Tom. II. fol. 4. M. (u) R. Isaac, Chizzuk Emuna, par. 2. c. 8. p. 469. (w) Euseb. Eccl. Hist. l. 2. c. 23. Hieron. Catalog. Script. Eccl. sect. 3. fol. 89. (x) Antiqu. l. 20. c. 8. sect. 1.”

“James the Lord's brother - Dr. Paley observes: There were at Jerusalem two apostles, or at least two eminent members of the Church, of the name of James. This is distinctly inferred from the Acts of the Apostles, Act 12:2, where the historian relates the death of James, the brother of John; and yet, in Act 15:13-21, and in Act 21:18, he records a speech delivered by James in the assembly of the apostles and elders. In this place James, the Lord 's brother, is mentioned thus to distinguish him from James the brother of John. Some think there were three of this name: - 1. James, our Lord's brother, or cousin, as some will have it; 2. James, the son of Alphaeus; and 3. James, the son of Zebedee. But the two former names belong to the same person.”

“Compare Act 9:27-28, wherein Luke, as an historian, describes more generally what Paul, the subject of the history, himself details more particularly. The history speaks of "apostles"; and Paul's mention of a second apostle, besides Peter, reconciles the Epistle and the history. At Stephen's martyrdom, and the consequent persecution, the other ten apostles, agreeably to Christ's directions, seem to have soon (though not immediately, Act 8:14) left Jerusalem to preach elsewhere. James remained in charge of the mother church, as its bishop. Peter, the apostle of the circumcision, was present during Paul's fifteen days' stay; but he, too, presently after (Act 9:32), went on a circuit through Judea. James, the Lord's brother--This designation, to distinguish him from James the son of Zebedee, was appropriate while that apostle was alive. But before Paul's second visit to Jerusalem (Gal 2:1; Act 15:1-4), he had been beheaded by Herod (Act 12:2). Accordingly, in the subsequent mention of James here (Gal 2:9, Gal 2:12), he is not designated by this distinctive epithet: a minute, undesigned coincidence, and proof of genuineness. James was the Lord's brother, not in our strict sense, but in the sense, "cousin," or "kinsman" (Mat 28:10; Joh 20:17). His brethren are never called "sons of Joseph," which they would have been had they been the Lord's brothers strictly. However, compare Psa 69:8, "I am an alien to my mother's children." In Joh 7:3, Joh 7:5, the "brethren" who believed not in Him may mean His near relations, not including the two of His brethren, that is, relatives (James and Jude) who were among the Twelve apostles. Act 1:14, "His brethren," refer to Simon and Joses, and others (Mat 13:55) of His kinsmen, who were not apostles. It is not likely there would be two pairs of brothers named alike, of such eminence as James and Jude; the likelihood is that the apostles James and Jude are also the writers of the Epistles, and the brethren of Jesus. James and Joses were sons of Alpheus and Mary, sister of the Virgin Mary.”