The idea
'According to the ancient Christian historian Hegesippus — who was apparently the first person to write a history of the Church — two of the so-called brothers of Jesus (James and Simon) also happened to be the first two bishops of Jerusalem,' and both 'were widely known to be Jesus' cousins' (anepsioi). Eusebius preserves him: 'Simon, his cousin, the son of Clopas, was appointed bishop… because he was another cousin of the Lord,' and 'Hegesippus records that Clopas was a brother of Joseph.' Pitre stresses motive: 'There is no evidence that he is attempting to defend Mary's perpetual virginity. To the contrary, Hegesippus is simply reporting the history of the bishops in Jerusalem.' This testimony 'is frequently just ignored' — including by scholars who claim the cousin theory was 'made up' by Jerome two centuries later.
Key verses
- Galatians 1:19 — James, 'the Lord's brother,' bishop of Jerusalem.
- Mark 6:3 — James and Simon among the 'brothers.'
- John 19:25 — Clopas — Joseph's brother, the cousins' father.
The connection
| Old Testament root | New Testament fulfilment | |
|---|---|---|
| The Jewish-Christian record of Jerusalem's bishops | → | James and Simon: cousins of the Lord, sons of Clopas |
This is the only external historical testimony Pitre adduces on the 'brothers,' and it is disinterested. It matches the New Testament evidence exactly: the brothers were children of another Mary and of Clopas, Joseph's brother.
Sources
- Hegesippus — in Eusebius, Church History 3.11; 4.22 (pp 110–111) · read · read
- Eusebius of Caesarea — Church History 3.11; 4.22 (pp 110–111)