JUDAS THADDEUS. - Apostle, distinguished in the lists from the namesake traitor by the designation "J. [brother] of James" (in Lk. 6:16 in the penultimate place; in Acts 1:13, in the last place, the Iscariot being absent), or by the epithet Thaddeus (in Mt. 10:3 and Mk. 3:18, in the third-to-last place). Instead of Thaddeus (= "broad-chested, magnanimous") codices D, k, and Origen have Lebbaeus (= "courageous"), in Mt. 10:3. Other witnesses of the text join Lebbaeus to Thaddeus (EFGKL). Some codices of the Old Latin write Iudas Zelotes (a b g h q).
Some, following the Arabic and Dutch recension of Tatian's Diatessaron (v.), think that the expression "J. of James" means "J. son of James." But in formulas of this kind, when the person in the genitive is better known than the father, the article 706 (= "of the") can imply another degree of kinship. For example, in Mk. 15:14 "Mary of James" does not mean "daughter of James," but "mother of James," that is, of the famous James the Less (v.), head of the Church of Jerusalem. The author of the Epistle of J. clearly identifies himself as "J. brother of James." For the kinship of J. with James and Jesus, see JAMES THE LESS.
Jn. 14:22 preserves a question addressed by J. "not the Iscariot" to Jesus at the Last Supper: "Lord, how is it that you will manifest yourself to us and not to the world?"
Tradition is uncertain about the rest of J.'s life. According to Nicephorus Callistus, J. would have fished with the evangelical net first in Judea, Galilee and Samaria, then in the cities of Syria and Mesopotamia, and would have died at Edessa, the city of Abgar (PG 145, 864). Eusebius (Hist. eccl., I, 13: PG 20, 124) and the Syriac writers distinguish our J. T. from the Thaddeus (Addaj) who went to Edessa to Abgar. According to the Syriac writers he would have suffered martyrdom at Arad, near Beirut.
In the Latin liturgy he is joined with the apostle Simon (28 October) and is invoked by the people in desperate cases.
Bibliography
EPISTLE OF JUDAS THADDEUS
The last of the seven catholic epistles of the New Testament.
After the inscription and the greetings (vv. 1-2), the author states the purpose for which he writes: "to exhort you to com-
"to contend for the faith" against the intruding false teachers (3-4). Against these he warns the readers, citing examples from biblical history and from Jewish traditions (vv. 9-16). He reiterates warnings and directives (vv. 17-23) and concludes with a fine doxology (vv. 24 ff.). The author presents himself as "J. a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James" (v. 1). The term "servant" does not exclude his being an apostle, and precisely J. Thaddaeus.
As for genuineness and canonicity, in all probability the J. is already used by II Peter. It is cited in the Muratorian Canon (lin. 68 f.), is attributed to the apostle J. by Tertullian (De cultu foem., 1, 3: PL 1, 1308), is commented on by Clement of Alexandria (PG 9, 731), accepted in the canon by Origen (PG 12, 857; 13, 877). It is known from the Didache (2, 7), from Polycarp, from Theophilus of Antioch and others.
Eusebius lists it among the disputed books (antilegomena: Hist. eccl., III, 25: PG 20, 269). The reason for the doubts about its canonicity is indicated by St. Jerome in the fact that the Epistle of J. seems to cite the apocryphal Henoch (De viris ill., 4: PL 23, 645). For their part Eusebius and St. Jerome use it as Holy Scripture.
The opponents of its canonicity, cited by St. Jerome, based themselves especially on the fact that J. cites the apocryphal Henoch (v.) thus: "Now indeed for these also the seventh [patriarch] after Adam, Henoch, prophesied, saying: - Behold, the Lord comes, etc." (vv. 14-15). These words are in fact also read in the Greek fragments of Henoch, 1, 9.
To resolve this difficulty, some ancients, with Tertullian and St. Augustine, thought that Henoch had in fact written something inspired; but St. Jerome observed that a whole book is not understood to be approved when a small part of it is found to be approved (In Tit., 1, 12: PL 26, 571). Other solutions are given to the question: it is pointed out that the term "prophet" can be used in an improper sense: thus Epimenides (v.) is called such by St. Paul in Tit. 1, 12; the verb "to prophesy" among the Jewish apocalyptic writers known to J. and to his Jewish readers often meant "to compose fictitious visions, attributed to famous ancient personages." Thus inerrancy is saved, supposing that author and readers knew that literary artifice of apocalyptic.
The prologue is addressed generically: "to the called, beloved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ." But from the context and from the fact that the author qualifies himself as "brother of James," it follows that the Epistle of J. is not a circular letter, but rather a writing destined for determined Jewish-Christian readers of the diaspora, to whom James had already addressed himself with his epistle. Among the readers false teachers had infiltrated who made a kind of syncretism between Judaism, paganism and Christianity. J. warns the faithful against such impious, dishonest men, who are "blemishes in the agapes" (v. 12), who deny the only master and lord our Jesus Christ (v. 4), who defile their body, despise authority, insult the angelic glories (v. 8), who are murmurers, proud (v. 16).
The Epistle of J. seems composed after the death of James (a.d. 62) and before II Peter, which uses it (a.d. 67). With Cornely one can set an approximate date around 65. J. Chaine, who considers II Peter pseudepigraphic, seeks the date of composition of ours between 70 and 80. Non-Catholics are at variance: some, with Jülicher, go down to 180; Renan, who sees in it an anti-Pauline writing, goes back as far as 54.
Numerous Semitisms confirm the author's Hebrew origin. The style is simple, lively, fond of the so-called triplet (analogous expressions that go in threes): for example, vv. 2. 4. 6-7. 8. 11. 19. 20 f. 22 f.
The principal truths of the Creed are contained in this brief writing; in particular the doctrine concerning the angels and the demons is developed.