Desposyni
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into Genealogy of Jesus. (Discuss) |
 |
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (April 2007) |
 |
This article is missing citations or needs footnotes. Using inline citations helps guard against copyright violations and factual inaccuracies. (April 2007) |
The Desposyni (from Greek δεσπόσυνος (desposynos) "of or belonging to the master or lord"[1]) is a contemporary term used to refer to alleged blood relatives of Jesus mentioned in Mark 3:21 and Mark 3:31. A closely related word, δεσπότης (despotes) -- meaning lord, master, or ship owner -- is commonly used to refer to God, human slave-masters, and Jesus Christ in the reading Luke 13:25 (found in Papyrus 75), in Jude 1:4, and possibly in 2nd Peter 2:1 (Strong's G1203). In Ebionite belief, the desposyni include his mother Mary, father Joseph, and relative John the Baptist (Luke 1:36); and the modern Protestant Christian perspective includes, as well, his brothers as named in the New Testament: James the Just, Joses, Simon and Jude. In modern Catholic and Orthodox Christian belief, Mary alone is counted as a direct blood relative due to the doctrine of Perpetual Virginity, Joseph only as a foster father, and the rest as close relatives with no direct blood ties, such as step-siblings or cousins.
As some asserted their descent from king David, all male desposyni could have fashioned themselves pretenders to the throne of the Kingdom of Israel. However, with the Roman occupation of the land of Israel (Iudaea Province) and its collaboration with the Herodians and the priestly dynasty of Annas, the rise of any desposynos to relevant political or religious power was unlikely, if not impossible, for example, according to Eusebius of Caesarea's Church History[2], Vespasian ordered the arrest of all descendants of David in 70.
Different sects of Christians hold broadly divergent interpretations of what actual relation the family members listed in Matthew 13:55and Mark 6:3 may have had with Jesus, as a mortal or in his risen manifestation as "the Christ"[3]. Eastern Christianity, following Eusebius, believes that they were "Joseph's children by his (unrecorded) first wife." Roman Catholicism, following Mark 15:40, Mark 16:1, John 19:25 and Jude 1 agrees with Jerome that they were Jesus' cousins, sons of another Mary, the wife of Cleopas, which the Greek word for "brother" or "relative" used in the Gospels would encompass. Following Hegesippus, quoted by Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 3, 11), Clopas was the brother of Joseph, and Simon was the cousin of Jesus. Both beliefs agree with the tradition that Mary remained a perpetual virgin,[4] thus having no biological children before or after Jesus. While such notable reformers as Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli as well as the 18th Century evangelist Wesley affirmed the perpetual virginity of Mary, most Protestants today believe that these family members were in fact the biological children of Mary and Joseph.[5]
Contents |
[edit] Jesus' relations with his biological family in the New Testament
- See also: Rejection of Jesus, Mark 3#A house divided, and But to bring a sword
According to the Synoptic Gospels, and particularly the Gospel of Mark, Jesus was once teaching a large crowd near the home of his own family, and when this came to their attention, his family went to see him and "they" (not specified) said that Jesus is "...out of his mind."
- Then he went home; and the crowd came together again, so that they could not even eat. When his family heard it, they went out to restrain him, for people were saying, ‘He has gone out of his mind.’ -Mark 3:20-21 NRSV
- And he comes back home, and the crowd gathers again, to the point where they couldn't even eat a meal. Hearing of that, his folks came out [from Nazareth] intending to take him away, saying, "He's gone mad!" -Mark 3:20-21 (Andy Gaus, Unvarnished New Testament, 1991)
- And He came home, and the crowd gathered again, to such an extent that they could not even eat a meal. When His own people heard of this, they went out to take custody of Him; for they were saying, "He has lost His senses." -Mark 3:20-21 NASB
In the narrative of the Synoptic Gospels, and of the Gospel of Thomas, when Jesus' mother and brothers are outside the house that Jesus is teaching in, Jesus tells the crowd that whoever does what God wills would constitute his mother and brothers (Thomas 99). According to Kilgallen, Jesus' answer was a way of underlining that his life had changed to the degree that his family were far less important than those that he teaches about the Kingdom of God. The Gospel of John states that Jesus' brothers did not believe in him, because he wouldn't perform miracles with them at the Feast of Tabernacles.
There is much disagreement over whether the brothers referred to by these narratives are actual brothers or merely stepbrothers or cousins - argued to be valid translations for the underlying Greek term (adelphos). The official Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox doctrine is that Mary was a perpetual virgin, and so could not have had any other children besides Jesus, thus making these Jesus's stepbrothers, sons of Joseph by another, unrecorded marriage (since according to Christian doctrine Joseph was not Jesus' biological father, such children would have no relation to Jesus whatsoever), or cousins. Only Tertullian seems to have questioned this in the early Church. Islam also holds that Mary was a perpetual virgin as did many of the early Protestants, although many Protestants today do not hold to the doctrine of perpetual virginity, and would thus believe that these are Mary's children.
The negative view of Jesus' family portrayed in Acts and the Gospels may be related to the conflict between Paul of Tarsus and Jewish Christians, who held Jesus family in high regard, for example at the Council of Jerusalem.[6]
[edit] Historical accounts of the Desposyni
Hegesippus (c.110-c.180) wrote five books of Commentaries on the Acts of the Church. They are lost, but a few fragments are quoted by Eusebius in Historia Ecclesiae, 3.20. Among them is the following relation, ascribed to the reign of Domitian (81-96):
There still survived of the kindred of the Lord the grandsons of Judas, who according to the flesh was called his brother. These were informed against, as belonging to the family of David, and Evocatus brought them before Domitian Caesar: for that emperor dreaded the advent of Christ, as Herod had done. So he asked them whether they were of the family of David; and they confessed they were. Next he asked them what property they had, or how much money they possessed. They both replied that they had only 9000 denaria between them, each of them owning half that sum; but even this they said they did not possess in cash, but as the estimated value of some land, consisting of thirty-nine plethra only, out of which they had to pay the dues, and that they supported themselves by their own labour. And then they began to hold out their hands, exhibiting, as proof of their manual labour, the roughness of their skin, and the corns raised on their hands by constant work. Being then asked concerning Christ and His kingdom, what was its nature, and when and where it was to appear, they returned answer that it was not of this world, nor of the earth, but belonging to the sphere of heaven and angels, and would make its appearance at the end of time, when He shall come in glory, and judge living and dead, and render to every one according to the course of his life. Thereupon Domitian passed no condemnation upon them, but treated them with contempt, as too mean for notice, and let them go free. At the same time he issued a command, and put a stop to the persecution against the Church. When they were released they became leaders of the churches, as was natural in the case of those who were at once martyrs and of the kindred of the Lord. And, after the establishment of peace to the Church, their lives were prolonged to the reign of Trajan.
– Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiae, 3.20
In "The Ecclesiastical History", Eusebius records an account by Sextus Julius Africanus recorded the following concerning the family:
For the relatives of our Lord according to the flesh, whether with the desire of boasting or simply wishing to state the fact, in either case truly, have handed down the following account...But as there had been kept in the archives up to that time the genealogies of the Hebrews as well as of those who traced their lineage back to proselytes, such as Achior the Ammonite and Ruth the Moabitess, and to those who were mingled with the Israelites and came out of Egypt with them, Herod, inasmuch as the lineage of the Israelites contributed nothing to his advantage, and since he was goaded with the consciousness of his own ignoble extraction, burned all the genealogical records, thinking that he might appear of noble origin if no one else were able, from the public registers, to trace back his lineage to the patriarchs or proselytes and to those mingled with them, who were called Georae. A few of the careful, however, having obtained private records of their own, either by remembering the names or by getting them in some other way from the registers, pride themselves on preserving the memory of their noble extraction. Among these are those already mentioned, called Desposyni, on account of their connection with the family of the Saviour. Coming from Nazara and Cochaba, villages of Judea, into other parts of the world, they drew the aforesaid genealogy from memory and from the book of daily records as faithfully as possible. Whether then the case stand thus or not no one could find a clearer explanation, according to my own opinion and that of every candid person. And let this suffice us, for, although we can urge no testimony in its support, we have nothing better or truer to offer. In any case the Gospel states the truth." And at the end of the same epistle he adds these words: "Matthan, who was descended from Solomon, begat Jacob. And when Matthan was dead, Melchi, who was descended from Nathan begat Eli by the same woman. Eli and Jacob were thus uterine brothers. Eli having died childless, Jacob raised up seed to him, begetting Joseph, his own son by nature, but by law the son of Eli. Thus Joseph was the son of both."
– Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiae, 1.7.11,13-14
[edit] The Desposyni and the Pope
|
|
This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (September 2007) |
The controversial Irish priest Malachi Martin, without giving a legitimate reference, noted in "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church" that:
- "...A meeting between Sylvester (Pope Sylvester I) and the Jewish Christian leaders took place in 318....The vital interview was not, as far as we know, recorded, but the issues were very well known, and it is probable the Joses, the oldest of the Christian Jews, spoke on behalf of the Desposyni and the rest."
- "...That most hallowed name, desposyni, had been respected by all believers in the first century and a half of Christian history. The word literally meant, in Greek, "belonging to the Lord." It was reserved uniquely for Jesus' blood relatives. Every part of the ancient Jewish Christian church had always been governed by a desposynos, and each of them carried one of the names traditional in Jesus' family---Zachary, Joseph, John, James, Joses, Simeon, Matthias, and so on. But no one was ever called Jesus. Neither Sylvester nor any of the thirty-two popes before him, nor those succeeding him, ever emphasized that there were at least three well-known and authentic lines of legitimate blood descent from Jesus' own family..."
- "...The Desposyni demanded that Sylvester, who now had Roman patronage, revoke his confirmation of the authority of the Greek Christian bishops at Jerusalem, in Antioch, in Ephesus, and in Alexandria, and to name desposynos bishops to take their place. They asked that the practice of sending cash to Jerusalem as the mother church be resumed... These blood relatives of Christ demanded the reintroduction of the Law, which included the Sabbath and the Holy Day system of Feasts and New Moons of the Bible. Sylvester dismissed their claims and said that, from now on, the mother church was in Rome and he insisted they accept the Greek bishops to lead them."
- "...This was the last known dialogue with the Sabbath-keeping church in the east led by the disciples who were descended from blood relatives of Jesus the Messiah."
[edit] Extended family
Other known relatives of Jesus include Simeon, the second bishop of Jerusalem, who was according to some traditions the son of Joseph's brother Clopas (mentioned by Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiae 3.11,32), and three Nestorian bishops of Seleucia on the Tigris in the 3rd century (according to the 13th-century Syrian historian, Gregory Barhebraeus). According to Chapter 1 of Luke's Gospel, John the Baptist was also a relative of Jesus.
[edit] Family trees and pedigrees
Aside from the Genealogies of Jesus present in the Gospel of Luke and Gospel of Matthew, there have been several attempts to piece together a detailed family tree of Jesus' immediate nuclear family:
- Version I (after James Tabor)
Matthat bar Levi
|
Eleazar |
| Heli/Eliakim
| |
Matthan ________|____________
| | |
| | |
Mary + = Joseph (1st) = Clophas (2nd)
| |
| _______________________|___________
Jesus | | | | | |
5 B.C.- A.D. 28. | | | | | |
James Jose Judas Simon Mary Salome
d.A.D. 62 | d.A.D. 101
____|____
| |
| |
Zechariah James
alive in the reign of Domitian
- Version II (edited; see external link)
__________________________________________
| |
| |
Mary=Joseph Cleopas=Mary
| |
|______________________________________ |
| | | | | | | Simeon
| | | | | | | d. 106
Jesus James Joses Simon Sister Sister Jude
d.62 |
| Menahem
Jude ____|____
| | |
Elzasus James Zoker
| ?
Nascien |
Bishop Judah Kyriakos
fl.c.148-149.
[edit] Patriarchal Rule
According to author Malachi Martin, every early community of Judean followers of Jesus, whether it was Nazarene or Ebionite, was governed by a desposynos as a patriarch, and each of them carried one of the names traditional in Jesus' family but no one was ever named after him. This does not seem absolutely true, as: there is no recorded Ebionite bishop; Hegesippus makes a special mention that the grand sons of Jude, the Lord's brother, were elevated to the Priesthood after suffering as Confessors; and many of the early Church Fathers were the Bishops of the major Sees Malachi Martin mentions - yet it doesn't seem likely that any more than half of them, if even that many, were related to Jesus.
[edit] References in Popular Culture
The purportedly non-fiction book The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail, the fictional book and film The Da Vinci Code, and the documentary The Lost Tomb of Jesus claim that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. The children of such a marriage would have been desposyni.
In the film Dogma, the main character, Bethany, is the many-times great granddaughter of one of Jesus' younger siblings.
Popular culture often outright denies biological siblings of Jesus. The phrase "Jesus was an only son" occurs in numerous songs, including the Bruce Springsteen song of the same name from his Devils & Dust album, and also occurs as a lyric in The Smashing Pumpkins' song Bullet With Butterfly Wings and the Lyle Lovett song Lungs.
[edit] References
- ^ http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%2324201
- ^ Eusebius' Church History 3.12
- ^ Witherington, Ben III, "Jesus' Extended Family," Bible Review, 19:3, pg.30. Witherington lists a fourth possibility, that they were the full brothers and full sisters of Jesus, but notes that "this explanation does not mesh with most Christians' belief that Hodm not Joseph, was Jesus' father."
- ^ e.g., Origen's Commentary on Matthew, §10.17
- ^ In other words, in this view they shared one parent (Mary) with Jesus. "So James, according to this view, would be Jesus' younger half-brother." Witherington, Ben III, "Jesus' Extended Family," Bible Review, 19:3, pg.30–31. In addition, the Nelson Study Bible (NKJV) lists the traditional authors of the Epistles of James and Jude as "James, the half brother of Jesus, traditionally called "the Just" (pg 2102) and "Jude the brother of James and the half brother of the Lord Jesus" (pg. 2156). The term "half brother" is used to denote parentage, not genetics. In this view, the other brothers and sisters listed in the Gospel passages would have the same relationship to Jesus. However, some Protestants reject the term "half brother" because it is too specific; the Gospel accounts refer to these relatives as brothers and sisters of Jesus, without specifying their parents, and refer to Mary only in relation to Jesus.
- ^ http://www.jesuspolice.com/common_error.php?id=11 "Wilson (1992) [Wilson, A.N. Jesus: A life. 1992. New York: Norton & Co.] has hypothesized that the negative relationship between Jesus and his family was placed in the Gospels (especially in the Gospel of Mark) to dissuade early Christians from following the Jesus cult that was administered by Jesus’ family. Wilson says: “…it would not be surprising if other parts of the church, particularly the Gentiles, liked telling stories about Jesus as a man who had no sympathy or support from his family (p. 86).” Butz (2005) [Butz, Jeffrey. The brother of Jesus and the lost teachings of Christianity. 2005. Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions.] is more succinct: “…by the time Mark was writing in the late 60s, the Gentile churches outside of Israel were beginning to resent the authority wielded by Jerusalem where James and the apostles were leaders, thus providing the motive for Mark’s antifamily stance… (p. 44).” Other prominent scholars agree (e.g., Crosson, 1973 [Crosson, John Dominic. “Mark and the relatives of Jesus”. Novum Testamentum, 15, 1973]; Mack, 1988 [Mack, Burton. A myth of innocence: Mark and Christian origins. 1988. Philadelphia: Fortress]; Painter. 1999 [Painter, John. Just James: The brother of Jesus in history and tradition. 1999. Minneapolis: Fortress Press])."
- Cooper, L.E. The Jesus Presidents. iUniverse, 2004. ISBN 0-595-33300-1.
- Kilgallen, John J. A Brief Commentary on the Gospel of Mark, Paulist Press, 1989.
- Malachi Martin. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church. New York, Bantam, 1983, pages 30–31.
- James D. Tabor. The Jesus Dynasty. Simon & Schuster, 2006.
