But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith. …
For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is also dead. (James 2: 14-18, 26, NRSV)
Today, as the lectionary begins a series of five Sundays when one of the readings is from the Letter of James, my talk is on the topic “the Letter of James: the most underrated book in the New Testament”.
There are three important Jameses in the New Testament.
· The first is James the son of Zebedee, and the brother of John. He was one of the Twelve disciples, and part of a group of three (along with his brother John and with Peter) whom Jesus spent time with when he needed to relate to a smaller group of disciples than the Twelve. This James became a martyr early in the book of Acts.
· There’s another James, known as James the Less. He’s the patron saint of people with low self-esteem. He was also one of the Twelve.
· Then there is the James known as James the Brother of the Lord, or James of Jerusalem, or James the Just. Early Christian writers assume that this James wrote the Letter of James. He was the brother of Jesus. For at least part of Jesus’ public life, James thought his brother had gone bonkers. In the Book of Acts, however, James emerged as a significant leader in the Christian Church, particularly in the congregation at Jerusalem. He engaged in major theological debates with Paul, of which we see evidence in the Book of Acts, in Paul’s letters, and in the Letter of James.
This letter was often a controversial addition to the New Testament. The 16th century reformer Martin Luther called it an “epistle of straw” and doubted that it really belonged in the New Testament. In many ways, this was because of Luther’s dependence in his own beliefs on the ideas of Paul and Luther’s reluctance to give much credence to any ideas that seemed to be in conflict with those of Paul, even if hey were found in the Bible.
For a while there
was a theory that the Letter of James was based on a pre-Christian Jewish
document, with a little bit of Christian language added in. This theory is no longer really given wide
acceptance.
The view now is that the
Letter of James was the product of the early Jewish-Christian community in the
first century of the Christian faith. It
reflects a Jewish style of spirituality and a very practical Jewish approach to
personal and social ethics. It
presupposes a knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures. But, it does not give any attention to Jewish
ritual practice. All of this points to
an origin in a Jewish-Christian community rather than among either
non-Christian Jews or among Gentile Christians.
At the time it
was written, the small Jewish-Christian communities within which, and for
which, the letter was written were already very vulnerable, under pressure from
two sides.
· Similarly, following the success of the mission led by Paul to the Gentiles of Europe, Christianity was becoming far less a movement within Judaism and increasingly a Gentile religion appealing to the Greek and Latin speaking communities of the
· There was the beginning of the parting of the ways between the Christian and Jewish faiths. And, at some points, this parting of the ways was bitter. We see this bitterness particularly in some of the language of the Gospel of John. In addition to becoming a Gentile religion, Christianity was tragically allowing an anti-Judaic perversion of its faith to develop.
The small Jewish
Christian communities by whom and for whom the Letter of James was written saw
themselves both as good Jews and as good Christians. They did not want to participate in the
parting of the ways, but it was forced upon them from both sides. I believe that the rather improbable survival
of this letter is a gift of God’s grace.
This letter
in many ways represents James’s side of the robust theological argument he had
with Paul. It’s very important to note
that the same New Testament contains both sides of the argument between Paul
and James. Just as Christians today have
real diversity in our beliefs and our spiritualities, a similar diversity was
present among the earliest generation of Christians. The fact that this diversity is found in the
New Testament itself tells us that this diversity is a good and healthy thing.
In many
ways, when Paul and James argued the toss with each other about the
relationship between faith and works, they may not have really been listening
to each other. In any event they had
very different definitions both of “faith” and of “works”.
When Paul
spoke about faith, he was referring to a bedrock trust in the love, grace, and
generosity of the Living God. James
tended to use the word “faith”, not in Paul’s terms, but in terms of a list of
beliefs, a lifeless and loveless orthodoxy.
“Do you believe in this … and this … and this … and this? If so you’re OK. It not, you’re in trouble … eternal trouble.” So it made perfect sense, then, for Paul to
place greater value on faith in the life of the people of God than James did,
as he had a much more positive and healthy definition of “faith” than
James.
Similarly,
though, when James spoke about works, he referred to actions in our lives which
reflected the love of God to others in a very practical way. Paul used the word “works” to speak of the
sort of religious “busy-work” that can be found in the life of any religious
community, including Christianity (and, yes, including the Uniting Church, and
including each of our three parent denominations). So it made perfect sense, then, for James to
place greater value on works in the life of the people of God than Paul did, as
he had a much more positive and healthy definition of “works” than Paul.
The problem
was that the two of them were not really listening to each other.
The good
news is that both James the practical Christian disciple and Paul the visionary
Christian mystic had their writings included in the same New Testament. If we had the writings of either of them, but
not both, our faith would be much poorer and much less balanced.
But there’s
a big downside to James. He saw
Christianity essentially as a branch of Judaism and was very apprehensive about
the outreach to the Gentile world in which Paul was engaged. Had James’ view prevailed, both Christianty
and Judaism would have been much the poorer for it. It was tragic that the parting of the ways
between Judaism and Christianity was as bitter as it was (and, historically,
the vast bulk of the blame for this bitterness must be laid squarely on
Christian shoulders). Nevertheless, it
was essential for the positive future of both faiths that they became
independent of each other.
The
following centuries were a highly creative time for both faiths:
· Judaism developed its understanding about how the community would live and worship without a Temple or a sacrificial system; a faith with an emphasis on study, on lifestyle, and on ethics.
These
creative tasks would have been much harder for both faiths if James had his way
and Christianity remained a branch of Judaism.
Still,
James the brother of the Lord … James of Jerusalem … James the Just … is
regarded as a saint of the Christian Church.
This shows us the great and liberating good news that God doesn’t
require us to be right all the time.
I believe that
the Letter of James is the most underrated book in the New Testament. In our lessons over the next few weeks, we’ll
continue to have an opportunity to hear some of James’ perspective on the
practicalities of Christian faith.
Sometime, please take the opportunity to read all of this short letter
in one sitting. It will take you less
than half-an-hour. It will open your
horizons to the practicality of a significant mind within the life of the early
Christian church
What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say
you have faith but do not have works? Can faith save you? If a brother or sister is naked and lacks
daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and eat your
fill,” and yet you do not supply their bodily needs, what is the good of that? So faith by itself, if it has no works,
is dead.
But someone will say, “You have faith and I have
works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show
you my faith. …
For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so
faith without works is also dead.
