་

A

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

TO THE

PARAPHRASE AND NOTES

ON

THE CATHOLIC EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES.

THE epistle of St. James, and the six following epistles, have been commonly distinguished by the appellation of catholic or general, because most of them are inscribed, not to particular churches, or persons, but to the body, either of Jewish or Gentile converts over the whole world, or at least dispersed in several countries.

The first of these, I mean that of St. James, was from the earliest times received by the Christian church, though not so universally as most of the epistles of St. Paul. But a precise detail and examination of the several arguments relating to this question, would bear too large a proportion in the space allotted to these introductions. It may however be right to observe, in support of the authenticity and authority of this epistle, that considerable stress hath deservedly been laid upon its antiquity, which appears both from internal and external evidence; and also, upon the correspondence of the sentiments it contains, with the tenor of the Christian doctrine; and though this hath been called in question by some through an attachment to particular hypotheses,* yet it is evident, I ap• It is well known, that at the beginning of the reformation, Luther apprehending the doctrine delivered by St. James concerning justification, to be inconsistent with that of St. Paul, opposed the authority of this epistle, in the preface to his German translation of the New Testament, published in the year 1522; though he is not followed in this point by those who at this day are distinguished by his name; and indeed he himself, as we are informed by Wolfius (Cure Philolog. Vol. V. p. 6) and by Fabricius, ( Biblioth. Græc. Lib. iv. cap. v. §ix.) afterwards changed his opinion.

prehend beyond all controversy, to those who read the epistle with suitable candour and attention. And it appears to me, that the authority of this, and some other parts of the New Testament, having been early questioned by some primitive churches, affords an argument of their particular caution, that no other writings should be admitted into the sacred canon, however excellent, besides those which had an undoubted claim to that distinction; and justly challenges our deference to their judgment, who doubtless were most capable of deciding, and gave sufficient evidence of their care as well as their capacity. The epistle before us having passed through a severe and accurate scrutiny, appears to have been at length universally received, and accordingly hath been transmitted down to the present age, as an authentic part of those oracles of God which are able to make us wise to salvation.

If any particular argument were to be suggested to second the force of these observations, it might be this, that this epistle is found in the Syriac version, and was received by the churches in Syria. This version is undoubtedly ancient, and is apprehended by most learned men to have been made as early as the beginning of the second century. And besides the authority conciliated to the epistle of St. James by the antiquity of the version, it should be observed, that the version was made for the particular service of the converted Jews, to whom the epistle itself was originally written; and it should therefore seem, that its authenticity and authority were from the beginning acknowledged by those for whom it was intended and I think it can hardly be doubted, that they were better judges of the question than the Gentiles, to whom it was not written, among whom therefore it was not likely to be propagated so early, and who at first might be prejudiced against it, because it was inscribed to the Jews.

If any are disposed to examine the several testimonies of the Christian fathers, as to the authority of this epistle, they may find them collected with great fidelity and accuracy, by

to the Catholic epistle of St. James.

131

the learned Dr. Lardner, in the second part of his valuable work, The Credibility of the Gospel History.

As to the author of this epistle, some have imagined it to be James the Elder, the son of Zebedee, and brother of John. But in this they are evidently mistaken. James the elder was beheaded by Herod, in the year of our Lord 44; whereas this epistle was not written till a very considerable time afterwards. So early as the year 44, the gospel does not seem to have been propagated far beyond the bounds of Palestine; and it cannot be supposed there was any very large number of the Jews of the dispersion, who were then converted to the Christian faith: and though the epistle seems to have been intended in some measure for the general benefit of the twelve tribes, yet more especially for those among them who were converts to the Christian religion. Besides, it is intimated in the epistle itself, that the Jewish Christians were at this time sunk into very remarkable degeneracy, both in doctrine and practice, which is not likely to have been the case while they were under the first impressions of their conversion. And indeed in this epistle, there are some plain intimations that the destruction of Jerusalem was near at hand, chap. v. 1-8, which event was accomplished about the year 70; and from this circumstance we may reasonably conclude the date of this epistle to be about the year 60 or 61.

It therefore appears, that this epistle was not written by James the elder, but must have been the composition of another James, called James the less, who was the son of Alpheus, or Cleophas, and is said to be the brother, that is, according to the latitude in which the Jews were accustomed to understand this expression, the kinsman of our Lord. See Mat. xiii. 55; Mark vi. 3. And who is expressly numbered among the twelve apostles. See Mat. x. 2, 3; Mark iii. And though the

17, 18; Luke vi. 14, 15; Acts i. 13.

time of this James being put to death is not absolutely certain, it is supposed by many learned men to have happened in the year 62, before St. Paul wrote his epistle to the Hebrews,

which was in the year 63. And if this account be right, the date of his epistle cannot be later than I have already assigned it.

James the less statedly resided at Jerusalem; whence he hath been stiled by some ancient fathers, bishop of that city, though without sufficient foundation, as we observed, (Vol. III. sect. 154, note b.) Now James being one of the apostles of the circumcision, while he confined his personal labours to the inhabitants of Judea, it was very natural for him to endeavour by his writings to extend his services to the Jewish Christians who were dispersed abroad in more distant regions. For this purpose there are two points which the apostle seems to have principally aimed at, though he hath not pursued them in an orderly and logical method, but in the free epistolary manner, handling them jointly or distinctly, as occasions naturally offered. And these were, "To correct those errors both in doctrine and practice, into which the Jewish Christians had fallen, which might otherwise have produced fatal consequences; and then to establish the faith, and animate the hope of sincere believers, both under their present and their approaching sufferings."

And in prosecution of this double view, after inscribing the epistle to the twelve tribes in their dispersion, the apostle enters on his subject, by endeavouring to fortify their minds under those trials wherewith they would be exercised, by suitable representations of the benefit of those trials, of the readiness of God to communicate all necessary supplies of wisdom and grace in answer to the fervent prayer of faith, and by exposing the vanity of all worldly enjoyments, which often prove the means of ensnaring and ruining their possessors; chap. i. 1-16. And then as a means of their steadfastness notwithstanding the most powerful temptations to apostasy, he exhorts them to remember and acknowledge the manifold goodness of God in the various blessings bestowed upon them; more especially in that of his regenerating grace, which should constrain them to the exercise of every virtue,