Session 5: Jesus’s family

In the next two sets of passages that we are going to explore, the Gospels refer to Jesus’s “brothers.”  The question of how to interpret the word “brothers” divides the body of Christ, with Protestants on one side and Catholics and Orthodox on the other.  At its root, the question is whether Mary had other children after she gave birth to Jesus or remained a virgin all her life.  Protestants say she gave birth to many children and Catholics and Orthodox say she was “ever-virgin.”  There is also a question as to whether Jesus had stepbrothers who were children of Joseph from a prior marriage.

This study is designed to be useful to people from all Christian denominations, so we will not insist that everyone reach the same conclusion.  What this study will do, however, is call attention to the many pieces of evidence that scholars consider as they study the question, because the evidence is not as simple as some would like to think it is.

Matthew 13:54-58 / Mark 6:1-6 Isn’t Jesus the son of Mary and the brother of James et al?

Matthew and Mark tell about the same incident in these passages, which is why they are paired together here.  Before we explore the main point of the passage (which is not whether Mary was a perpetual virgin), let’s deal with the issue of Jesus’s “brothers.”

Without trying to argue one side or the other, can you state in one sentence why the word “brothers” is controversial?  Why does it matter whether Jesus had “brothers” or not?

There are a variety of issues to consider in exploring the disagreement about what “brothers” means in this passage.  Here is the background:

Three common interpretations of the references to Jesus’s “brothers”

• Protestants take the word “brothers” literally and argue that Mary had sex with her husband Joseph after Jesus was born and gave birth to children who were the blood brothers and sisters of Jesus.

• The Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church have always maintained that Mary was a virgin throughout her life and that “brothers” is properly interpreted as “relatives” – most likely cousins.

• A third view, which is acceptable to the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, is that “brothers” refers to sons of Joseph from a prior marriage, who would therefore be stepbrothers of Jesus (because Jesus was, in effect, adopted by Joseph).

What is the evidence that might help us determine whether “brothers” means blood brothers, cousins, or stepbrothers, when it is used with regard to Jesus?

To evaluate whether when the Bible refers to Jesus’s “brothers” it is referring to blood brothers, cousins, or stepbrothers, we must consider a variety of evidence, background information, and Scripture passages.  Here are some of the factors to consider:

• In both the Old and New Testaments, the word “brother” is used for a variety of relationships, figurative and literal, partly because the Hebrew language did not have a word for “cousin”  (Ignatius Catholic Study Bible, Matthew 12:46 fn., pp. 29-30).  In Greek, which is the language of the New Testament, the word for “brothers” is adelphoi, which is used for many kinds of relationships:

  
  

       (1) blood brothers (including stepbrothers),

       (2) people from the same nation,

       (3) one’s fellow men, and

       (4) fellow believers. 

  
  

  It does not always mean a literal blood brother, so its meaning in any particular passage must be considered carefully, taking into account everything we know.

• The Gospels never refer to any person as a child of Mary except Jesus.  We see references to Jesus’s brothers, but no one other than Jesus is ever called a child of Mary.  This does not prove that Mary was ever-virgin any more than the references to Jesus’s “brothers” proves they were blood brothers.  It is just evidence to be considered.

• Matthew 12:55 and Mark 6:3 tell us the names of four “brothers” of Jesus: James, Joseph (or its Greek variant Joses, in Mark’s Gospel), Judas, and Simon.  Later, Matthew 27:56 tells us that one of the women looking on at Jesus’s crucifixion was “Mary, the mother of James and Joseph.”  Similarly, Mark 15:40 refers to “Mary the mother of the younger James and of Joses.”  Joses is a variant of Joseph.  If both of these references to a James and Joseph are referring to the same pair of brothers, (which is likely but can’t be proved), it would mean that James and Joseph are not blood brothers of Jesus because their mother was with Jesus’s mother Mary at the crucifixion.  They could be relatives, however, if, for example, this Mary and Mary the mother of Jesus are sisters or sisters-in-law.

• John 19:25 says that standing at the cross of Jesus were his mother and “his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas.”  This might indicate that the Mary who was with Jesus’s mother at the cross was Jesus’s mother’s sister.  Some people find that doubtful because it would mean that the two sisters were both named Mary.  Alternatively, since “brother” and “sister” could refer to a wider circle of family relationships and not just blood brothers, it is possible that this Mary is the wife of a brother of Joseph.  If that is the case, then she is the sister-in-law of Jesus’s mother, not her immediate sister.  In either case, this might indicate that the James and Joseph who are identified as Jesus’s “brothers” are these relatives, sons of the Mary who was with Jesus’s mother at the cross.

• While Jesus is hanging on the cross, in John 19:26-27 Jesus entrusts his mother Mary to the beloved disciple (who is traditionally believed to be John).  If Mary had other children, it would have been the norm for Mary to automatically come under the care of her other children.  Jesus would not have needed to entrust her to a non-relative, and to do so would have been considered a serious breach of tradition.

• One explanation sometimes offered for why Jesus might have entrusted his mother to someone outside the family is that Jesus’s “brothers” did not believe in him.  John 7:5 tells us that this was true for at least a period of time earlier in Jesus’s ministry.  However, if the word “brother” is to be taken literally every time it shows up with reference to Jesus, then Jesus did have a “brother” who soon after that was a recognized leader of the church.  Either he was already a believer when Jesus was executed, or he became a believer soon after.  This “brother” is mentioned by Paul in Galatians 1:19, where Paul says that when he first went to Jerusalem after he started preaching the gospel of Christ (probably around AD 37, which is only a few years after Jesus’s death), he met with Peter but did not see “any other” apostles except “James, the brother of the Lord.”  His use of the word “other” indicates that this James was considered an apostle.  Two Jameses are named as apostles in the Gospels: the James who, along with John, was a son of Zebedee (Matthew 4:21), and the James who was the son of Alphaeus (Matthew 10:3).  Matthew tells us the names of their fathers.  Since neither of their fathers is Joseph, they cannot be sons of Mary.  Therefore, if “brother” always means blood brother when applied to Jesus, then Paul is not referring to either of them.  Acts 12:17 and Acts 15:13-21 tell us of a James who is a leader of the church in Jerusalem.  According to tradition, the first bishop/leader of the church in Jerusalem was “James the brother of the Lord,” so that is probably who Paul is referring to.  That means there was a James who believed in Jesus and was a “brother of the Lord,” and he was so prominent that he was a recognized leader of the church just a few years later.  Jesus could have entrusted his mother to that “brother,” if indeed it was a blood brother; there would have been no need to turn Mary over to a non-family member.  Therefore, the claim that Jesus turned his mother over to John because his family didn’t believe in him does not easily fit the facts.  A better case can be made that this James the brother of the Lord is the son of the other Mary who was with Jesus’s mother at the cross, and therefore that in at least this instance, “brother” may mean cousin or relative.

• Some early church fathers taught that Joseph was an older man when he married Mary and that he had children by a previous marriage.  That claim first appears in the Protoevangelium of James, a document written around AD 150.  That document was not accepted as part of Scripture and was specifically rejected by some early Church leaders because some of its content was considered fiction or legend, but it offers some insight regarding ideas that were circulating in the early days of the Church.  That document explains that Mary was dedicated to God as a virgin when she was born, that she was raised in the Temple from the age of 3 until she was 12, and that Joseph was then selected by lot, with a full understanding that she was a dedicated virgin, to take care of her by taking her as his wife.  The references to the brothers and sisters of the Lord would then be references to the children of Joseph from an earlier marriage.  They would therefore a stepbrothers and stepsisters of Jesus by adoption – not sons and daughters of Mary but still “brothers and sisters” of the Lord.

• A variety of church fathers before AD 400 taught that Mary was a perpetual virgin, but many of the early church fathers did not discuss the question, perhaps because it did not become an issue until a group of people in the 4th century began to teach explicitly that Mary was not a perpetual virgin.  The details of who taught what over the years are beyond the scope of this study, but citations and quotes from various church fathers on the subject can be found in many places, including in “Which church father first taught the perpetual virginity of Mary?”  A thousand years later, Martin Luther rejected the Catholic practices of venerating Mary and praying to her, but he taught the perpetual virginity of Mary.

To summarize, there is a lot of evidence indicating that this is not a simple question.  “Brothers” can mean many things in the Bible.  Catholic and Orthodox readers find a lot of support for the position that Mary was a lifelong virgin and the word “brothers” refers to relatives of Jesus, but Protestant readers of the Scriptures prefer the plain-language interpretation of the literal words of the Bible.

No Bible Study is going to resolve the ongoing disagreement among Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants about whether Mary remained a virgin throughout her life (or about the other issues about Mary that divide us).  For the purpose of how you live your life, to what extent does this disagreement matter?

_____

Matthew 13:54-58 / Mark 6:1-6 continued

Now let’s return to these passages and look at what actually happens in this incident.  Jesus has been traveling around Galilee preaching, and he returns to his hometown of Nazareth.  What happens?

Why do they not believe in him?

How do you think Mary feels about the resistance of her fellow townspeople to believing in Jesus?

What does Jesus’s statement about “a prophet” in Matthew 13:57 and Mark 6:4 mean?

What do you think Mary’s view of Jesus is at this point?  Who do you think she believes him to be?

Are there ways that we are like the people of Nazareth?  Do we ever find ourselves unwilling to accept the value of people who are doing the work of God, because they are too familiar to us?  If so, what do we need to do to avoid missing what God is doing?

It may require humility, letting go of our ego that wants to ask why he’s so great if I’m not, seeing with new eyes, and having some faith that God is at work in people and that they can grow to be more than what we may have seen in them.

Are there ways that we are like the people of Nazareth in not embracing the teachings of Jesus because he or his teachings have become too familiar to us?  If so, what do we need to do to continue to embrace his teachings and have them remain fresh and potent for us?

Matthew 12:46-50 / Mark 3:31-35 / Luke 8:19-21 Jesus’s mother and brothers come to him

Jesus has been traveling all over the region of Galilee.  His mother and brothers have not been traveling with him.  From Mary’s perspective, what happens at the beginning of this story?

Why do you think she and the brothers have come and are standing outside the place where Jesus is preaching?  What do you think Mary wants?

When Jesus receives word that his family is outside, how does he react?

Jesus says that whoever “hears the word of God” (Luke 8:21) and “does the will of God” (Mark 3:35) or “does the will of my heavenly Father” (Matthew 12:50) is his brother and sister and mother.  What do you think he means by that?

How can determine whether we are hearing the word of God and doing the will of God?  How do we know if our actions are consistent with that description of the brothers and sisters of Jesus?

How might God be calling you to respond right now to the call to hear the word of God and do God’s will?

Even before Jesus was conceived, Mary was someone who heard the word of God and did God’s will.  So is Jesus drawing a distinction that separates her from those who follow him?  Or is he expanding the concept of his family, as he expanded on many Old Testament teachings when he said, “You have heard . . . , but I say . . .” (for example, in Matthew 5:21-48), to include others along with his mother?  Explain.

How do you think Mary interprets what Jesus says here?

Note that Jesus presumably loves his mother dearly, but he wants to make a bigger spiritual point.  We will see Jesus push us to see a bigger picture again soon.

Take a step back and consider this:

Jesus’s relationship with his mother was different when he was an adult than when he was a child.

In what ways did Mary have to accept a change in her relationship with Jesus, and how do you think she dealt with it?

We also have a changed relationship with parents and other family members as we grow older.

Are there times when we are called to step outside the comfort zone of our previous relationship with a parent or other family member, as Jesus did?  If so, how do we continue to honor our parents or other family members even as we live our lives in ways that might be different from their expectations?

Sometimes it is the other person (perhaps a grown-up child) rather than us who is responding to an inner call that changes their relationship with us.  What can we learn from this story that might help us deal with those changes?