Home  »  Volume V: May  »  St. James the Less, Apostle

Rev. Alban Butler (1711–73). Volume V: May. The Lives of the Saints. 1866.

May 1

St. James the Less, Apostle

        See Tillemont, t. 1, p. 405. Ceillier, t. 1, p. 422.

ST. JAMES, to distinguish him from the other apostle of the same name, the son of Zebedee, was called the Less; which appellation is supposed to have taken its rise, either from his having been called later to the apostleship than the former, or from the lowness of his stature, or from his youth. He is also known by the title of James the Just, a denomination all agree, with Hegesippus 1 and St. Clement of Alexandria, to have been given on account of his eminent sanctity. He was the son of Alpheus 2 and Mary, the sister of the Blessed Virgin, and seems to have been born some years before our Lord. Jesus came with his brethren, and probably St. James among the rest, to settle in Capharnaum, at the beginning of his ministry. 3 James and his brother Jude were called to the apostleship in the second year of Christ’s preaching, soon after the Pasch, in the year 31. He was favoured with an extraordinary apparition of his Master after his resurrection. 4 Clement of Alexandria says, that Christ being risen from the dead, communicated the gift of science 5 to SS. James the Just, John, and Peter, and that they imparted it to the other apostles. We are told by SS. Jerom 6 and Epiphanius, 7 that our Lord, at his ascension, recommended his church of Jerusalem to St. James; in consequence whereof the apostles, before their dispersion, constituted him bishop of that city. It was probably for a mark of his episcopal authority, and as an ensign of his dignity, that he wore on his head a lamina, or plate of gold, as is recounted by St. Epiphanius. 8 Polycrates, quoted by Eusebius, 9 testifies, that St. John did the same: others relate the like of St. Mark. It was probably done in imitation of the Jewish high-priest.
  St. James governed that church in perpetual dangers, from the fury of the people and their violent persecutions; but his singular virtue procured him the veneration of the Jews themselves. As to his sanctity, Eusebius 10 and St. Jerom 11 give from Hegesippus the following account concerning him: “He was always a virgin, and was a Nazarite, or one consecrated to God. In consequence of which he was never shaved, never cut his hair, never drank any wine or other strong liquor; moreover he never used any bath, or oil to anoint his limbs, and never ate of any living creature except when of precept, as the paschal lamb: he never wore sandals, never used any other clothes than one single linen garment. He prostrated so much in prayer, that the skin of his knees and forehead was hardened like to camel’s hoofs.” St. Epiphanius says, 12 that, in a great drought, on stretching out his arms to heaven, he by his prayers instantly obtained rain. His eminent sanctity made even the Jews style him the just man: and Origen observes, 13 that Josephus himself gives him that epithet, though it is not to be found now in Josephus’s works. The same reverence for his person procured him the privilege of entering at pleasure into the sanctum or holy place, namely, that part of the temple where none but the priests were allowed by the law to enter. 14 St. Jerom adds, 15 that the Jews strove, out of respect, who should touch the hem of his garment. In the year 51, he assisted at the council of the apostles, held at Jerusalem, about the observance of circumcision, and the other legal ceremonies of the law of Moses. Here, after having confirmed what St. Peter said, he devised the sentence which the apostles drew up on that occasion. 16 This apostle being bishop of a church, which then chiefly consisted of Jewish converts, tolerated the use of the legal ceremonies, 17 and, together with others, advised St. Paul to purify himself and offer sacrifice. 18 He is the author of a canonical epistle which he wrote in Greek. It is at the head of those called catholic or universal, because addressed not to any one particular church, but to the whole body of the converted Jews dispersed throughout the then known world. It was penned some time after those of St. Paul to the Galatians, in 55, and to the Romans in 58. It could not therefore be written before the year 59, fourteen years after the death of St. James the greater. The author’s view in this epistle is to refute the false teachers, who, abusing certain expressions in St. Paul’s writings, pretended that faith alone was sufficient to justification without good works: whereas, without these, he declares our faith is dead. He adds excellent precepts of a holy life, and exhorts the faithful not to neglect the sacrament of extreme unction in sickness.  2
  The oriental liturgy or mass, which bears the name of this apostle, is mentioned by Proclus, patriarch of Constantinople, and by the council in Trullo, and is of venerable antiquity. 19—St. Basil, indeed, testifies, 20 that the words of the sacred invocation in the consecration of the bread and of the cup, were not committed to writing, but learned and preserved by tradition down to the fourth century, which was done on a motive of respect and veneration: but other parts of the liturgy were written. Perhaps St. James gave only general directions about this liturgy, upon whose plan it was afterwards drawn up or enlarged. His singular learning in sacred matters is extolled by St. Clement of Alexandria, 21 and St. Jerom. 22  3
  The Jews, being exasperated at the disappointment of their malicious designs against St. Paul, by his appeal to Cæsar, to whom he was sent by Festus, in the year 60, were resolved to revenge it on St. James. That governor, dying before the arrival of his successor, Albinus, this vacancy gave them an opportunity of acting more arbitrarily than otherwise they durst have done. Wherefore, during this interval, Ananus, the high-priest, son of the famous Annas mentioned in the gospels, having assembled the Sanhedrim, or great council of the Jews, summoned St. James and others before it. Josephus, the Jewish historian, says, 23 that St. James was accused of violating the laws, and delivered to the people to be stoned to death. And Hegesippus adds, 24 that they carried him up to the battlements of the temple, and would have compelled him from thence to make a public renunciation of his faith in Christ, with this further view, thereby to undeceive, as they termed it, those among the people who had embraced Christianity. But St. James took that opportunity to declare his belief in Jesus Christ after the most solemn and public manner. For he cried out aloud from the battlements, in the hearing of a great multitude, which was then at Jerusalem on account of the passover, that Jesus, the Son of man, was seated at the right hand of the Sovereign Majesty, and would come in the clouds of heaven to judge the world. The Scribes and Pharisees, enraged at this testimony in behalf of Jesus, cried out: “The just man also hath erred.” And going up to the battlements, they threw him headlong down to the ground, saying: “He must be stoned.” St. James, though very much bruised by his fall, had strength enough to get upon his knees, and in this posture, lifting up his eyes to heaven, he begged of God to pardon his murderers, seeing that they knew not what they did. The rabble below received him with showers of stones, and at last a fuller gave him a blow on the head with his club, such as is used in dressing of cloths, after which he presently expired. This happened on the festival of the Pasch, the 10th of April, in the year of Christ 62, the seventh of Nero. He was buried near the temple, in the place in which he was martyred, where a small column was erected. Such was the reputation of his sanctity, that the Jews attributed to his death the destruction of Jerusalem, as we read in St. Jerom, 25 Origen, 26 and Eusebius, 27 who assure us that Josephus himself declared it in the genuine editions of his history. Ananus put others to death for the same cause, but was threatened for this very fact by Albinus, and deposed from the high-priesthood by Agrippa. The episcopal throne of St. James was shown with respect at Jerusalem, in the fourth century. His relics are said to have been brought to Constantinople about the year 572.  4
Note 1. B. 2, c. 1, 23. [back]
Note 2. Some take Alpheus and Cleophas to be only different names for the same person. Others are of opinion, that Cleophas was Mary’s father; or perhaps she married Cleophas after the death of Alpheus. Joseph, called in the original text Jose, was a brother of St. James, and son of Mary. (Mark xv. 40.) St. Jude styles himself his brother. (Jude i.) He had also a brother called Simon, the same with Simeon, son of Cleophas, and bishop of Jerusalem, whose life was given on the 18th of February. These were called our Lord’s brethren, according to the use of that word among the Jews, which extends it to all near relations. They had also sisters: St. Epiphanius names two, Mary and Salome. The sons of Cleophas were likewise cousins-german to our Saviour, by St. Joseph his reputed father: for Hegesippus assures us that Cleophas was brother of St. Joseph. Cleophas was himself a disciple of Christ, who, going to Emmaus with another disciple, was favoured with the apparition related, Luke xxiv. He is honoured in the Roman Martyrology the 25th of September; and Mary, his spouse, who had followed and served Christ in Galilee, and attended him in his passion and burial, on the 9th of April. [back]
Note 3. John ii. 12. [back]
Note 4. 1 Cor. xv. 7. [back]
Note 5. [Greek], Eus. b. 2, c. 1. [back]
Note 6. In Gal. p. 164. [back]
Note 7. Hær. 87. [back]
Note 8. Hær. 29. [back]
Note 9. Eus. b. 3, c. 24. [back]
Note 10. B. 2, c. 23. [back]
Note 11. In Jovin. b. 2, c. 24. [back]
Note 12. Hær. 78. [back]
Note 13. Orig. in Cels. l. 1, p. 35. [back]
Note 14. Heges. apud Eus. ib. [back]
Note 15. In Galat. 1. 19. [back]
Note 16. Acts xv. [back]
Note 17. Gal. ii. 11. [back]
Note 18. Acts xxi. 17. [back]
Note 19. See Le Brun, Sur les Liturgies. [back]
Note 20. L. de Spir. S. c. 27. [back]
Note 21. Apud Eus. l. 2, c. 1. [back]
Note 22. L. contra Cels. [back]
Note 23. Ant. 1. 20. [back]
Note 24. Apud Eus. l. 2, c. 23. [back]
Note 25. In Jovin. b. 1, c. 24. [back]
Note 26. Contra Cels. l. 1, and in Matt. p. 223. [back]
Note 27. Eus. Hist. l. 1, c. 23. [back]