Who's the closest living relative to Jesus?

Uncommon_Sense · August 12, 2004, 12:26pm

Not sure what guidelines to use for ‘closest living relative’ but there must be someone who claims to be some direct decendant of Christs’ family via Joseph or Marys’ siblings. Or an aunt or uncle off the same branch.

Walloon · August 12, 2004, 12:36pm

There are no records of Jesus’ family past what is in the New Testament. We don’t know the descendants of royalty and nobility from that era, much less peasant families from the provinces.

aegypt · August 12, 2004, 12:54pm

Jesus had a number of brothers and sisters, including a brother called James, but, unlike in Islam, nobody seems to have kept track of the Savior’s family. Why this was so almost calls for a separete thread in my opinion.

And, of course, if you’d believe the argument made in the book The Da Vinci Code, Jesus was actually married to Mary Magdalene, and a secret order called “The Priory of Sion” is keeping track of the descendants…

Shade · August 12, 2004, 1:45pm

Well, if Jesus had a number of brothers, you’d expect a gigantic number of direct descendants if they haven’t all died out, since if everyone has a couple of kids…

To ask who is ‘closest’ you’d probably have to look for (1) shorter chain of descendants (say a branch of late-breeding people or something) or (2) interbreeding. An extreme example would be if Jesus had a brother and a sister who married, and had two kids who married, etc. Each would, I think, share as much genetic material with Mary as the original brother and sister. Of course, this is implausible, but if you have a relatively small community with distant cousins marrying you’d get a better figure than the 1/2^generations a naive calculation would expect.

Of course, it’s moot, because there aren’t any records.

Polycarp · August 12, 2004, 2:07pm

A couple of casual points.

First, the “Holy Blood/Holy Grail” and “DaVinci Code” arguments are tin-hat material. It’s possible, but so is the idea that a dragon lives within every volcano, and that’s why it erupts.

Second, there’s some material from about 100 AD that makes reference to two grandsons of Jude, brother of James the Just, and half-brother to Jesus, having been arrested as potential Christian subversives and having been released when there was no case against them.

Third, there are all kinds of legendary interrelationships of probably-legendary ancestors of royal families with the Christian lineage. One that comes to mind is the ancestry of Cunedda, the just-post-Arthurian-times migrant to Wales who gave rise to the three Welsh royal houses, being traced back to Guin the son of Beli (=Heli or Joachim) and Anna, and therefore a brother of the Virgin Mary.

Uncommon_Sense · August 12, 2004, 2:10pm

You would think that something like this would carry down via word of mouth. “I’m the grandnephew of that late Jesus guy”, or something to that effect, 'cept carried on from generation to generation. I mean, who could forget being the direct decendant of Christ? I realize the Church didn’t pick up steam 'till much later (AD) but the events surrounding his life and end thereof would be memorable enough to pass on from parents to siblings.

Loach · August 12, 2004, 2:18pm

I don’t know if you realized how loaded that question is. It depends who you talk to. When I asked a similar question to people my head started to hurt. According to Catholic doctrine there are no desendants. Mary was a virgin. Period. Always. Some Christains believe that he had at least one younger half brother. Of course thats only if you believe that Mary was more than a surrogate and was actually his mother. If he was just planted in the womb by an angel then he couldn’t have had real relatives. Except for that Sion thing. My head hurts.

Polycarp · August 12, 2004, 2:29pm

And that idea – that Jesus did not inherit humanity through Mary, is one of the classic heresies, and contrary to the official doctrine of nearly all Christians other than the Assyrian Church in Iraq.

Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor · August 12, 2004, 2:33pm

Wello, Cleanliness is next to Godliness.

So, Jesus must be related to Mister Clean!

I’m going to Hell for this one.

Loach · August 12, 2004, 2:49pm

Probably just the latest on a long list

matt_mcl · August 12, 2004, 2:50pm

"My sister says she never married because she’s ‘married to Jesus.’ I said, ‘Cool! That makes Jesus my brother-in-law! And yet we never see him at family functions.’ " - Suzanne Westenhoefer

cmkeller · August 12, 2004, 4:13pm

Considering that JC was executed as a criminal in his time, and was persona non grata with both the Romans and the Jews, claiming relation to him was probably a smart thing to not do too publicly.

In addition, the spread of the Christian religion was directed by Paul, who was not related to him. So from the very earliest days, there was no doubt a focus on the message rather than the man.

AHunter3 · August 12, 2004, 5:37pm

cmkeller

Or, rather, neither of the above, since Paul pretty much ignored the message of Jesus of Nazareth (Sermon on the Plains, Sermon on the Mount, etc) to focus on the metaphysical “Son of God, God incarnate” stuff.

Which, btw, lends us this answer to the OP’s question: God, if we may posit the existence of such, and grant creedence to Christian theology for the moment, would appear to be the closest living relative of Jesus of Nazareth.

Chefguy · August 12, 2004, 6:02pm

I think I may be directly related. I distinctly remember my father saying to me: “Jesus Christ, clean up your room!”

Jpeg_Jones · August 12, 2004, 7:02pm

A classic Bill Cosby bit, yes?

Chefguy · August 12, 2004, 7:09pm

“Damn it, get in here!”
“But Dad, I’m Jesus Christ!”

Worst beating I ever got.

Still a funny bit.

Walloon · August 13, 2004, 12:43am

A direct descendant is a child, grandchild, great-grandchild, etc. Not nephews or grandnephews; those are collateral descendants.

DrDeth · August 13, 2004, 1:09am

Well, James was a leader in the early Church, but they soon split off from him and then he was also executed - by the Sanhedrin, note. Paul ran the Church after that- and since he never even met Jesus the man- let alone be related to Him- I’d guess Paul made sure to squelch that whole “I’m His Cousin, thus I am important” thing early.

It is likely that there were collateral descendants, but after a bit the Church (Roman Catholic) started pushing the “no siblings of Jesus” thing- so you saying that you were be be squelched and possible heresy.

AFAIK- no one other than “tinfoilhat brigade” dudes now claim they are in any way related to Jesus. There is no one related to Ceasar, either, AFAIK- in fact I don’t think anyone has tracked any solid lines of descent much more than a thousand years (early Norse & English Kings go to 900 AD or so…)

BrainGlutton · August 13, 2004, 1:11am

The best online source for this topic is the magazine Dagobert’s Revenge, http://www.dagobertsrevenge.com/index.shtml.

From :

Desposyni: Those Descendant From Jesus and the Royal House of Judah
(An. Greek: “Of the Master”)

Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands
A leading member of the much-maligned global affairs think tank known as the Trilateral Commission. Founded the Bilderburg Group in 1954, made up of the world’s elite in banking and industry, many of whom are also members of the Trilateral Commission. They meet in secret every year to discuss what to do with the rest of us. A well-known Bilderberg document is the infamous Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars.

Otto von Habsburg of Austria
Bears the title King of Jerusalem, which has remained in his family since the days of the Crusades and the Holy Roman Empire. As President of the Society for the United States of Europe, he and his son Karl, now a leading figure in European politics, have been largely responsible for the developing European Union. He is also a member of the Knights of Malta, the military arm of the Vatican and the avowed enemy of the Prieure de Sion. The Knights are suspected of being heavily influenced by fascist conspirators, the C.I.A. and the Mafia.

Pierre Plantard de Saint-Clair
Self-proclaimed “most direct descendant” of the Merovingian kings, and therefore a legitimate claimant to the throne of France, he is also a former Grand Master of the modern Prieure de Sion. The original Prieure was the organization that chartered the Knights Templar, and was officially dedicated to the Merovingian bloodline (as is the modern Prieure). While working in his capacity as Grand Master, M. Plantard published the mystical magazine C.I.R.C.U.I.T (Chivalry of Catholic Rules and Institutions of the Independent and Traditionalist Movement), and was interviewed extensively for the book Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

Prince Michael of Albany
Head of the Royal House of Stewart (yes, they still exist) and Scots King de jure, he is also President of the European Council of Princes and a leading figure in the fight for Scottish independence. He is also a Scottish Knight Templar, the Head of the Sacred Kindred of St. Columba, and Grand Master of the Noble Order of the Guard of St. Germain. He wrote the book The Forgotten Monarchy and the forward to the book Bloodline of the Holy Grail, by Laurence Gardner.

“Prince Michael of Albany” claims to be a direct descendant of Jesus, but for some reason think’s it’s much more important that he’s a direct descendant of Bonnie Prince Charlie. DR interviewed him (http://www.dagobertsrevenge.com/articles/interviews/pminterview.shtml):

DR: I see. Well, when it was explained to you as a child, you know, who you were and what your birthright was and stuff, did they mention the connection with Jesus and the House of David?

PM: No, not really. I mean, don’t get me wrong, it’s something that many families in Europe are aware of about themselves. However, bear in mind that Europe is extremely Catholicized in any case. Even from a Protestant point of view this would still be termed heretical. It’s not something that we mention to anyone. You know, it’s 2000 years old, so it’s pretty much in the past. We have a concept of Christianity that is very much different from the norm, that’s true. None of us have ever considered the virgin birth as explained by the Roman Catholic Church to be correct. These kinds of things, yes. But then of course we do live within a Christian world, either according to the RC - Roman Church, or C of S, Church of Scotland, or whatever, you know, it’s either orthodox Greek or Russian, or then it’s Roman Catholic or Presbyterian or Protestant. All of them still declare Jesus to have been born of a virgin who was impregnated by the Holy Spirit. Make what you wish out of that, but frankly - (laughs riotously) - we have definite and very different views on that matter, simply because, yes, we are of that bloodline. If I had to describe Jesus to any one I would say, “Well, imagine Bonnie Prince Charlie 2000 years ago making a bid for a new kingship, and unfortunately it went astray and it didn’t work.” And whoever actually survived after he died - and we’re not talking A.D. 33 or A.D. 37, you know, it’s much later than that. Christianity was not created during the lifetime of Jesus Christ, it’s after his death in A.D. 64. Actually I always say there is no such thing as Christianity. What we have is “Churchianity.”

<snip>

DR: On the Council of Princes, I assume there are other members of the Grail families, right?

PM: Well, there’s 33 of us, you know, 33 royal houses represented on the Council. Most of us are connected to one another at one point or another. So yes, most of us are of Grail families.

DR: Do all the Grail families kind of have a common goal? I mean, do they network and collaborate together for a specific cause?

PM: No, not particularly. At the end of the day, the idea is that, you know, all of us should be restored to where we belong. On an individual basis it’s bad enough working for yourself, never mind having to help and try to work on behalf of somebody else as well. Europe is quite a big continent, you know. So no, it’s more on an individualistic basis. But at present how the Council works is as a constitutional advisory body. So think in terms of Straussburg and Brussels legislating new laws. Every country in Europe has a written constitution. Some of that legislation will impinge upon on or two or three or more constitutions, so that’s what we’re dealing with. We’re pointing out that this particular legislation, say, would not or could not apply to either Spain or Holland or whatever because of a particular point of their constitution. Either they amend that legislation or it’s the constitution of that country that has to be amended, which of course becomes a bit frightening because you can make so many amendments that at the end of the day you produce a constitution which has nothing in common with the original one. So we’d rather change the legislation in Brussels of Strausburg against changing or amending a constitution in Europe.

<snip>

DR: Do you know about any Merovingian descendants who are trying to reclaim the throne, the French throne?

PM: Oh, there is Ludwig of Anjou, who lives in Spain. He actually is the rightful heir to the throne of France. You can forget about, um, what’s that chap’s name again?

DR: Pierre Plantard?

PM: Pierre Plantard de Saint-Claire. No no. Forget about that.

DR: So what, he was lying?

PM: Yeah, I think it was more wishful thinking than anything else, personally. Yeah.

DR: So you dismiss all that.

PM: I dismiss the Plantard claim, yes.

DR: And the Prieuré de Sion? You dismiss them?

PM: Well, there certainly was once upon a time the Order of Sion, yes. Again, that became defunct in medieval days. I’m not saying that it didn’t survive in some other means. It probably did. But again, you’ll find that historically speaking the Holy Blood, Holy Grail book, for example, by Michael Baigent and so forth, what they forgot to say was that it wasn’t until post-WWII that all organizations had to register, whether you were spiritual organization, temple or whatever. If you were an association of any kind, after WWII you had to register. Now WWII finished in 1945 and the Order of Sion as mentioned in Holy Blood, Holy Grail did not register before the late 1950s. So you have to ask yourself, you know, considering they had to register after 1946, why did they do it in 1958? And the answer to that is that they only became an association in 1958. It was only created in 1958.

DR: So what we know as the Prieuré de Sion today is probably not the real Order of Sion.

PM: It’s not really the real Order, no. I’m quite sure that within some families the concept of the Order still applies. But it will be individuals that are descended from an organization which was prevalent in medieval days. It’s like the Templars. You still have many families with Templar names today in France and Scotland and Portugal and such. And their ancestors were once upon a time Knights Templar. It can be said they are Templar families. But whether that makes, in effect, a live order or not, this where I have my doubts, because most of these, if you ask them: “Do you believe yourselves to be a member of the Order of Knights Templars?”, the answer to that probably would be: “No, I don’t.” They would say: “My ancestor was a Knight Templar, but I am not.”

DR: Well, that’s kind of disappointing. I kind of liked the idea that was put forth in Holy Blood, Holy Grail. It was neat.

PM: Yeah, but it was too many ifs and whats, you see. That’s the problem I had with that particular book. In Bloodline of the Holy Grail, we’re concerned with, you know, a family tree. That’s it. And of course it’s a book about the history of the Church vs. the family. It’s no longer ifs and whats. You’ve got dates, you’ve got names, you know, it’s all there. The problem I have with claims of certain historians or researchers is what they are given, they are given this by some very weird individuals, and they tend to actually believe what they’re told. I think it’s very naive, personally. If Michael Baigent and Co. had actually checked the data they were given, I’m quite sure they would have thought twice before writing the book, or they would have written something in a different vein, still about this particular concept, but written differently. When the book came out, I was quite taken aback, because I thought to myself: Well, they haven’t really done any research, because, they haven’t really scratched the surface. In fact, they haven’t really scratched at all. You’ve been given this data by one individual, claiming to be the head of one particular order. And they swallowed it, you know, like champagne. And it was an interesting book, but - which is why Bloodline of the Holy Grail was written, really, to put the whole thing back in perspective.

DR: So you would say that Pierre Plantard and friends are charlatans?

PM: I don’t like the word “charlatans”. I think, basically, like many people, he just jumped on the bandwagon. One thing you could say in your article is that Mary, Queen of Scots, for example, was very aware of her Merovingian and Davidic descent, because she actually had a book that had her family tree back to King David via Jesus and so forth. And that came from the Lorraine family, de Guise-Lorraine. And again, if you go back to The Forgotten Monarchy of Scotland then you see the descent of Marie de Guise-Lorraine from the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem, i.e. Baldwin II.

I’d like to see that book . . .