James Through the Centuries E-Book

David Gowler

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Religion und Spiritualität
• Serie: Blackwell Bible Commentaries
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 753

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2013

Beschreibung

This unique commentary on James by an outstanding New Testament specialist, David B. Gowler, provides a broad range of original perspectives on how people have interpreted, and been influenced by, this important epistle. The author explores a vast array of interpretations extending far beyond theological commentary, sermons, and hymns, to also embrace the epistle's influences on literature, art, politics, and social theory. The work includes examples of how successive generations have portrayed the historical figure of James the Just, in both pictorial and textual form. Contextualizing his analysis with excerpts from key documents, including artistic representations of the epistle, the author reviews the dynamic interactions between the James and Jesus traditions and compares James's epistle with those of Paul. The volume highlights James's particular concern for the poor and marginalized, charting the many responses to this aspect of his legacy. Drawing on sources as varied as William Shakespeare, John Calvin, Charles Schultz's Peanuts, and political cartoons, this is an exhaustive study of the theological and cultural debates sparked by the Epistle of James. James Through the Centuries is published within the Wiley Blackwell Bible Commentaries series. Further information about this innovative reception history series is available at www.bbibcomm.info.

Leseprobe

Contents

List of Plates

Series Editors’ Preface

Preface

Acknowledgements

Texts

Illustrations

Introduction

Aim and Design of the Commentary

Reception History from a Bakhtinian Perspective

Brief History of Interpretation

Key Interpreters

Patterns of Interpretation

James of Jerusalem: In History and Tradition

James of Jerusalem as the Author of the Epistle of James

The Relationship of James of Jerusalem and Jesus

Portraits of James outside the New Testament

Conclusion

Other Visual Representations of James of Jerusalem

James 1:1–11

James 1:1–4

James 1:5–8

James 1:9–11

James 1:12–27

James 1:12–15

James 1:16–18

James 1:19–21

James 1:22–5

James 1:26–7

James 2:1–13

James 2:1–7

James 2:8–13

James 2:14–26

James 2:14–17

James 2:18–26

James 3:1–12

James 3:1–5a

James 3:5b–12

James 3:13–4:12

James 3:13–18

James 4:1–10

James 4:11–12

James 4:13–5:6

James 4:13–17

James 5:1–6

James 5:7–11

James 5:7–11

James 5:12–20

James 5:12

James 5:13–18

James 5:19–20

Biographies

References

Indexes

Index of Names

Index of Subjects

Wiley Blackwell Bible Commentaries

Series Editors: John Sawyer, Christopher Rowland, Judith Kovacs, David M. Gunn

John Through the Centuries

Mark Edwards

Revelation Through the Centuries

Judith Kovacs & Christopher Rowland

Judges Through the Centuries

David M. Gunn

Exodus Through the Centuries

Scott M. Langston

Ecclesiastes Through the Centuries

Eric S. Christianson

Esther Through the Centuries

Jo Carruthers

Psalms Through the Centuries: Volume I

Susan Gillingham

Galatians Through the Centuries

John Riches

Pastoral Epistles Through the Centuries

Jay Twomey

1 & 2 Thessalonians Through the Centuries

Anthony C. Thiselton

Six Minor Prophets Through the Centuries

By Richard Coggins and Jin H. Han

Lamentations Through the Centuries

Paul M. Joyce and Diana Lipton

James Through the Centuries

David B. Gowler

Forthcoming:

1 & 2 Samuel Through the Centuries

David M. Gunn

1 & 2 Kings Through the Centuries

Martin O’Kane

Psalms Through the Centuries: Volume II

Susan Gillingham

Song of Songs Through the Centuries

Fiona Black

Isaiah Through the Centuries

John F. A. Sawyer

Jeremiah Through the Centuries

Mary Chilton Callaway

Ezekiel Through the Centuries

Andrew Mein

Mark Through the Centuries

Christine Joynes

The Acts of the Apostles Through the Centuries

Heidi J. Hornik and Mikeal C. Parsons

Romans Through the Centuries

Paul Fiddes

1 Corinthians Through the Centuries

Jorunn Okland

Genesis 1–21 Through the Centuries

Christopher Heard

Genesis 22–50 Through the Centuries

Christopher Heard

Deuteronomy Through the Centuries

Jonathan Campbell

Daniel Through the Centuries

Dennis Tucker

Luke Through the Centuries

Mark Bilby

Matthew Through the Centuries

Ian Boxall

Chronicles Through the Centuries

Blaire French

Colossians and Philemon Through the Centuries

Harry O. Maier

Numbers Through the Centuries

Ryan P. O’Dowd

Job Through the Centuries

David Tollerton and Stephen J. Vicchio

This edition first published 2014© 2014 David B. Gowler

Registered OfficeJohn Wiley & Sons, Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

Editorial Offices350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148–5020, USA9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UKThe Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services, and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell.

The right of David B. Gowler to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author(s) have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services and neither the publisher nor the author shall be liable for damages arising herefrom. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Gowler, David B., 1958–    James through the centuries / David B. Gowler.        pages cm    Includes bibliographical references and index.

    ISBN 978-1-4051-5114-6 (cloth)1. Bible. James–Commentaries. I. Title.    BS2785.53.G69 2014    227′.9107–dc23

2013020984

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Cover image: St Michael fighting the dragon, woodcut by Albrecht Dürer, 1498, from The Revelation of St John (Revelation 12:7–9)Cover design by www.cyandesign.co.uk

In memory ofAurelia StookeyandMitchell StookeyWho is wise and understanding among you?Show by your good life that your works are done with gentleness born of wisdom.James 3:13

List of Plates

1.1:

Mural of the flight into Egypt (from left to right: James, Joseph, Jesus, and Mary), Dormition Abbey, Jerusalem

1.2:

The martyrdom of James, Sts. James Cathedral, Jerusalem

1.3:

The martyrdom of James, James thrown from the pinnacle of the Temple, Sts. James Cathedral, Jerusalem

1.4:

The martyrdom of James, James about to be struck with the fuller’s club, Sts. James Cathedral, Jerusalem

1.5:

James with episcopal robes, wearing a mitre, and holding a crozier, a painting by E. Esme in the western courtyard of Sts. James Cathedral, Jerusalem

1.6:

James (close-up view) with episcopal robes, wearing a mitre, and holding a crozier, in the western courtyard of Sts. James Cathedral, Jerusalem

1.7:

The throne of St. James, chancel area, Sts. James Cathedral, Jerusalem

1.8:

Painting of St. James of Jerusalem seated on the chair of the episcopate, chancel area, Sts. James Cathedral, Jerusalem

1.9:

Painting of St. James of Jerusalem seated on the chair of the episcopate (close-up view), chancel area, Sts. James Cathedral, Jerusalem

1.10:

The throne of St. James with paintings of the patriarchs of Jerusalem in the background, Sts. James Cathedral, Jerusalem

1.11:

Painting of St. James as the first patriarch of Jerusalem, Sts. James Cathedral, Jerusalem

1.12:

Painting of Mary and Jesus (center), James the Great (left), and James of Jerusalem (right), Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem

1.13:

Close-up view showing James the Great (left) and Mary and Jesus (right), Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem

1.14:

Close-up view showing Mary and Jesus (left) and James of Jerusalem (right), Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem

1.15:

Painting of St. James of Jerusalem seated on the chair of the episcopate, chancel area, Sts. James Cathedral, Jerusalem

1.16:

Ceramic tile icon of James of Jerusalem by George Sandrouni, Jerusalem

1.17:

James Tissot, James the Lesser (1886–1894)

1.18:

Western face of Salisbury Cathedral, Salisbury, UK

1.19:

James the Less, western face of Salisbury Cathedral, Salisbury, UK

1.20:

Close-up of fuller’s club held by James the Less, western face of Salisbury Cathedral, Salisbury, UK

1.21:

James the Less (left) and James the Great (right), western face of Salisbury Cathedral, Salisbury, UK

1.22:

Johann von Eck, The Martyrdom of James (1531)

1.23:

Hieronymus Emser, James Reads His Letter (1539)

1.24:

Illustration from Martin Luther, Luther’s Bible: The Apostle James the Lesser (seventeenth century)

1.25:

“The Apostle James (the Less),” by Solis the engraver, in Martin Luther, Das symbolum der Heyligen Apostel (1548)

1.26:

“The Apostle James the Less,” in The Book of Common Prayer, Church of England (1708)

1.27:

El Greco (Domenikos Theotokopoulos), James the Lesser (ca. 1610–14)

2.1:

“S. J. T. [Samuel Tilden] as ‘Mr. Facing-Both Ways’ . . .” Cartoonist: A. B. Frost. Harper’s Weekly, August 26, 1876

2.2:

“Saint and Sinner” (Grover Cleveland and Adlai Stevenson). Cartoonist: Victor Gillam. Judge, August 6, 1892, p. 81

3.1:

Image of James the Just in Christoph Weigel, Biblia ectypa (1695)

7.1:

Jan Luiken, “The Scrubbing-Brush: The Courtyard Is Perfect” (1711)

7.2:

Pride and humility in Charles Schulz, Peanuts

9.1:

The seventh engraving in William Blake, Illustrations of the Book of Job [in Twenty-One Plates] (1878)

9.2:

Harriet Powers, Pictorial Quilt

10.1:

Nicolas Poussin, Extreme Unction (ca. 1639)

Series Editors’ Preface

The Wiley Blackwell Bible Commentaries series, the first to be devoted primarily to the reception history of the Bible, is based on the premise that how people have interpreted, and been influenced by, a sacred text like the Bible is often as interesting and historically important as what it originally meant. The series emphasizes the influence of the Bible on literature, art, music, and film, its role in the evolution of religious beliefs and practices, and its impact on social and political developments. Drawing on work in a variety of disciplines, it is designed to provide a convenient and scholarly means of access to material until now hard to find, and a much-needed resource for all those interested in the influence of the Bible on Western culture.

Until quite recently this whole dimension was for the most part neglected by biblical scholars. The goal of a commentary was primarily if not exclusively to get behind the centuries of accumulated Christian and Jewish tradition to one single meaning, normally identified with the author’s original intention.

The most important and distinctive feature of the Wiley-Blackwell Commentaries is that they will present readers with many different interpretations of each text, in such a way as to heighten their awareness of what a text, especially a sacred text, can mean and what it can do, what it has meant and what it has done, in the many contexts in which it operates.

The Wiley Blackwell Bible Commentaries will consider patristic, rabbinic (where relevant), and medieval exegesis as well as insights from various types of modern criticism, acquainting readers with a wide variety of interpretative techniques. As part of the history of interpretation, questions of source, date, authorship, and other historical-critical and archaeological issues will be discussed, but since these are covered extensively in existing commentaries, such references will be brief, serving to point readers in the direction of readily accessible literature where they can be followed up.

Original to this series is the consideration of the reception history of specific biblical books arranged in commentary format. The chapter-by-chapter arrangement ensures that the biblical text is always central to the discussion. Given the wide influence of the Bible and the richly varied appropriation of each biblical book, it is a difficult question which interpretations to include. While each volume will have its own distinctive point of view, the guiding principle for the series as a whole is that readers should be given a representative sampling of material from different ages, with emphasis on interpretations that have been especially influential or historically significant. Though commentators will have their preferences among the different interpretations, the material will be presented in such a way that readers can make up their own minds on the value, morality, and validity of particular interpretations.

The series encourages readers to consider how the biblical text has been interpreted down the ages and seeks to open their eyes to different uses of the Bible in contemporary culture. The aim is to write a series of scholarly commentaries that draw on all the insights of modern research to illustrate the rich interpretative potential of each biblical book.

John SawyerChristopher RowlandJudith KovacsDavid M. Gunn

Preface

Hanging on the wall near my desk is a ceramic tile on which is painted the image of James of Jerusalem. It is the only one of its kind and was difficult to obtain. As I discovered first hand, even in the Old City of Jerusalem, where centuries before James had served as the first leader of the nascent group of post-Easter followers of Jesus, modern icons of James of Jerusalem are impossible to find. I searched for an icon of James, without success, in a seemingly countless number of shops in Jerusalem. After a long and fruitless quest, I returned to the workshop of George Sandrouni, which at that time was located across the street from the Cathedral of Sts. James in the Armenian section of the Old City. I asked him to paint for me an image of James of Jerusalem, based on the painting situated by the throne of James in the altar of the cathedral. After I explained about the commentary on James that I was beginning to research, George readily agreed, and a few weeks later I received in the mail a ceramic tile with the image of James painted upon it. That image has graced the wall next to my desk ever since, and it helped inspire me as I continued to research and write this volume.

That quest for an icon of James was well worth the effort. Likewise, the quest to discover how people have responded to the Epistle of James through the centuries was both sometimes elusive but also rewarding, as I hope readers of this volume will agree. This commentary seeks to illuminate the diversity of historical responses to James, drawing on a vast array of sources, whether scholarly, theological, or secular, from erudite texts to devotional hymns and sermons to popular culture. It attempts to be as comprehensive as possible, but it necessarily focuses on some key voices. This approach enables a myriad of responses to James to be heard; those that have dominated discussions and those interpreters—like James, sometimes—that have been marginalized or otherwise traditionally underrepresented. A few items in this book have not, to my knowledge, been published before; some materials are not readily available; other sources are quite familiar. What I hope is that readers will become, as I have, more appreciative of the enigmatic and compelling nature of this often ignored text.

I am grateful to Judith Kovacs and Chris Rowland for their invitation to write the volume on James in this innovative and unique series. Their commentary on the Book of Revelation, the initial volume in the series, set a very high standard for the rest of us. Judith and Chris also set a very high standard as editors whose vision for the series established helpful parameters, parameters that include a wise understanding that each volume needs a distinctive voice in and of itself. I am grateful to have them as both colleagues and friends. I am also grateful for the patience and professionalism of the people at Wiley Blackwell with whom I worked, including Rebecca Harkin, Karen Raith, Georgina Coleby, Nora Naughton, and Rebecca du Plessis.

I began this commentary during a sabbatical at the University of Oxford. Chris Rowland facilitated my being named a Visiting Theologian by the Theology Faculty, which gave me valuable access to both the resources of the main Bodleian Library and the Theology Faculty Library. Chris and Catherine Rowland, both dear friends, were most gracious hosts to my family and me during the sabbatical. I also spent part of my sabbatical happily ensconced at a desk in Pitts Theology Library of Emory University, making use of its incredible resources. I am especially thankful for Myron McGhee—Senior Circulation Specialist at Pitts, as well as a scholar and artist in his own right—whose diligent work assisting me in locating those resources added much to this volume. I also am fortunate that my position as Pierce Chair of Religion at Oxford College of Emory University includes significant research funds; these funds financed research trips to Florence, Madrid, Berlin, and Jerusalem, as well as two trips to England, during the writing of this book. In Jerusalem, Father Emmanuel Atajanyan, the former Dean of the Theological Seminary of the Monastery of Sts. James and a member of the Synod and Supreme Religious Court of the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem, escorted me to the chancel area of the Sts. James Cathedral, where I was able to see rare artifacts, including the painting of James that George Sandrouni turned into an icon for me. I was also fortunate to have the assistance of two Oxford College of Emory University student research scholars, both of whom worked for a year on a project related to this book. Alexa Hayes’s research focused on certain images of James of Jerusalem in visual art, and Isaac Payne, now a graduate student at Harvard, researched the use of James in the Social Gospel movement, the Civil Rights movement, and Liberation Theology.

John Kloppenborg and Alicia Batten, eminent specialists in the interpretation of James, graciously agreed to read a draft of the book manuscript. I am grateful for their many insights that made the volume much stronger. I ignored their sage advice at my peril. Many thanks are also due to Douglas Low, who traveled with me on two memorable research trips to Israel. His biblical knowledge, theological expertise, and friendship were invaluable not only on those trips but also during the thirty years we have known each other. I am indebted to his knowledge, patience, good humor, and skill at photography—especially after I dropped and broke my camera while photographing images of James at the Dormition Abbey.

My brother-in-law, Jerry Stookey, OP, was on sabbatical at the École biblique during our second trip to Israel. Jerry was a model of hospitality for Douglas and me during our stay in Jerusalem. Jerry’s excitement for this project was contagious, and he contributed much to its success. Without his assistance, for example, the rare photographs from the Cathedral of Sts. James would not have been taken. More importantly, Jerry has dedicated his life to promoting justice and peace throughout the world, and he is a kindred spirit, in many ways, with James of Jerusalem. I think especially of James’s prophetic words to the rich and of encouragement to the poor, the “militant patience”—steadfastness, resistance, and heroic endurance—of which Elsa Tamez speaks. But most of all, the words of James 3:18 reflect Jerry’s ministry as a priest who works diligently for justice: “And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.”

Just yesterday, October 22, 2012, my brother Gary was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. As I write this preface, I am reminded that in the preface of my first book, Host, Guest, Enemy, and Friend, I included words about the courage of my nephew James, the son of Gary and his wife Lorna, who as a young child endured multiple surgeries to try to repair a life-threatening arterio-venous malformation in his brain. James has now lived for over thirty years with AVM and has undergone additional surgeries in recent years. Through it all, James continues to be an inspiration to our family. Gary and Lorna’s family was also mentioned in a more recent book that I edited, Sea Voyages and Beyond, by Vernon K. Robbins. My dedication in that book was to the memory of Bethany Gowler, Gary and Lorna’s daughter. It was almost exactly ten years ago, on November 6, 2002, that Bethany, then seventeen, was killed in an automobile accident.

So, in this preface, it is with great sadness that I write about Gary and Lorna’s more recent trial in a lengthy series of trials over the past three decades. As I do so, however, I also marvel at their courage, goodness, and faith. May they take comfort in the words of James that, through such endurance, they will become “mature and complete, lacking in nothing” (James 1:4). My deepest wish is that the preface of my next book will be able to include a note of thankfulness that Gary is cancer-free and in full health.

This volume is dedicated to the memory of two of the most wonderful human beings I have ever known: Aurelia Stookey and Mitchell Stookey. They, more than anyone I know, were “doers of the word,” spending much of their time either actively working for the well-being of others or thinking about what actions they could take to promote the well-being of others. Aurelia and Mitchell Stookey epitomized the wisdom (from above) and understanding mentioned in James 3:13, and their good lives were filled with good works done in “gentleness born of wisdom.” They were also exceedingly gracious, loving, and kind, and they welcomed me into their family with open arms. They, justifiably, were incredibly proud of their children—Donald, Charlyn, Patricia, Mary Jane, Jerry, Tom, Joe, and Rita—their grandchildren, and their great-grandchildren (too numerous to mention here). I am grateful for the years that I was able to be with them and to learn from them, and I am proud to be a member of their wonderful family. Most of all, I am thankful for their eighth child, the greatest gift I have ever received.

David B. GowlerThe Feast of St. JamesOctober 23, 2012

Acknowledgements

Texts

The Commentary on the Seven Catholic Epistles of Bede the Venerable (CS 82). © 1985 by Cistercian Publications. Published by Liturgical Press, Collegeville, MN. Reprinted with permission.James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John,Vol. 11, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, ed. Gerald Bray. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000. Copyright © 2000 by the Institute of Classical Christian Studies (ICCS), Thomas C. Oden, and Gerald Bray. Used by permission of InterVarsity Press PO Box 1400 Downers Grove, IL 60515. www.ivpress.com.Blassingame, John W., et al., eds. The Frederick Douglass Papers, Series One: Speeches, Debates, and Interviews, Vol. 1: 1841–6. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1979.Blassingame, John W., et al., eds. The Frederick Douglass Papers, Series One: Speeches, Debates, and Interviews, Vol. 2: 1847–54. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982.Scripture quotations are from the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright © 1989 by the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA. Used by permission. All rights reserved.Unless stated otherwise, primary texts quoted within this book are taken from Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL): www.ccel.org. In a few cases, small modifications were made to modernize the language.

Illustrations

1.16: Ceramic tile of James of Jerusalem by George Sandrouni. Photograph by Cathy Wooten, Oxford College of Emory University.1.7: James Tissot, James the Lesser. The Art Archive / Superstock.1.22: Johann von Eck, 1531. The Martyrdom of James. Courtesy of the Richard C. Kessler Reformation Collection, Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory University.1.23: Hieronymus Emser, 1539. James Reads His Letter. Courtesy of the Richard C. Kessler Reformation Collection, Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory University.1.24: Martin Luther, Luther’s Bible: The Apostle James the Lesser, seventeenth century. Courtesy of the Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory University.1.25: Martin Luther. Das symbolum der Heyligen Apostel (Solis the engraver), 1548. Image Title: “The Apostle James (the Less).” Courtesy of the Richard C. Kessler Reformation Collection, Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory University.1.26: The Book of Common Prayer (Church of England). “The Apostle James the Less,” 1708. Courtesy of the Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory University.1.27: El Greco (Domenikos Theotokopoulos), ca. 1610–14. James the Lesser. The Art Archive / Superstock.2.1: “S. J. T. as ‘Mr. Facing-Both Ways’ . . .” Cartoonist: A. B. Frost. Harper’s Weekly, August 26, 1876, p. S705. Provided by Manuscript, Archives, and Rare Book Library, Emory University.2.2: “Saint and Sinner.” Cartoonist: Victor Gillam. Judge, August 6, 1892, p. 81. Provided by Archives & Special Collections, Valdosta State University.3.1: Christoph Weigel, 1695. Biblia ectypa. Courtesy of the Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory University.7.1: Jan Luiken, 1711. The Scrubbing-Brush: The Courtyard Is Perfect. Courtesy of the Pitts Theology Library, Candler School of Theology, Emory University.7.2: PEANUTS © 1959 Peanuts Worldwide LLC. Dist. by UNIVERSAL UCLICK. Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved.9.1: William Blake, Illustrations of the Book of Job [in Twenty-One Plates]. Yale Center for British Art, Gift of J. T. Johnston Coe in memory of Henry E. Coe, BA 1878, Henry E. Coe, Jr., BA 1917, and Henry E. Coe III, BA 1946.9.2: Harriet Powers, Pictorial Quilt. Photograph © 2014 Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.10.1: Nicolas Poussin, ca. 1639. Extreme Unction. The Art Archive / Duke of Rutland / Eileen Tweedy.All other photographs were taken by Rita Gowler, Camden Gowler, Jacob Gowler, or David B. Gowler.

Introduction

Aim and Design of the Commentary

The Apostle James must be dragged a little into prominence—not in behalf of works against faith; no, no, that was not the Apostle’s meaning, but in behalf of faith.

(Kierkegaard 1974: 49)

“Why in the world did you pick the Epistle of James?” a colleague asked when I started this project. “I have never found James particularly interesting. Just a list of admonitions; not much there, it seems.” My response was that I had just finished writing a book on Jesus and was intrigued by the convergence of the message of Jesus and the message of James. As Patrick Hartin puts it, “. . . James is the true heir to the message and way of life of Jesus. On him the mantle of Jesus truly rests” (2004: xvii).

Inheriting the mantle of Jesus, however, did not ensure that the Epistle of James was quickly and universally accepted by the Christian church. Unlike the mantle of Elijah/Elisha, the waters of canonicity did not part at the touch of this inherited mantle (cf. 2 Kings 2:1–18). It is ironic that a text which echoes so much of the teachings of Jesus, especially the Sermon on the Mount, and which inherits in many ways the heart, mind, and message of Jesus, ran into so many difficulties in being accepted as scripture. In this instance, Jesus was correct about a prophet being without honor in his own land. One is tempted to wonder whether these objections about James might stem from more than just questions about apostolic provenance or perceived disagreements with Paul’s justification by faith, for example. Perhaps it also stems in part from the fact that James often ventriloquates sayings of Jesus that many Christians attempt to ignore or domesticate (cf. Tamez 2002: 62). The “works” of which James speaks (e.g., James 2) include works of social justice, making sure that one’s less fortunate sisters and brothers have their physical needs met, such things as food, clothes, housing, a living wage, and adequate health care.

The fact that James inherits to a large extent the heart and mind of Jesus means that this book’s exploration of how the Epistle of James has been received over the centuries is not just an academic exercise. As will become clear in the commentary, the Letter of James often has an “immediate” effect on its readers, as Robert Wall, Professor of Scripture at Seattle Pacific University, notes about his students:

. . . [M]ost who closely read what James says are able to locate themselves in its literary and moral worlds. As a result, my students sometimes locate themselves among the rich and powerful who disregard the powerless; they often confess themselves to be the very believers who substitute facile confession for an embodied devotion to God, or use malicious words to gain an advantage over a rival—all important contours of James’s concern . . . . An interpretation of James should search out those meanings that allow the text to have a prophetic effect on its current readers and their context; indeed this is one canonical role that any biblical book performs, James more so than others (1997: 2).

This commentary highlights a number of diverse responses to James through the centuries, while attempting to balance depth and breadth, to focus on important voices while being as comprehensive as possible. The commentary, however, does not merely focus on theological or academic responses, and it often omits details of academic debates in modern scholarship that are adequately covered in historical-critical commentaries on James. This overview of the reception history of James takes into account not only commentaries and theological works, but also sermons, hymns, and other materials, as well as addressing, where possible, social and political elements, literature, and the arts. An essential element of this endeavor is to allow a wide variety of responses to James to be heard: those that have dominated discussions and those—like James, sometimes—that have been marginalized. Because of its unique role within the canon and the vagaries of its reception by various groups within and outside the church, the amount and depth of response to James is rather meager compared to the reception of the Gospels, Paul, or Revelation. Yet, we find numerous voices responding to James over the centuries in both expected and unexpected places and in both predictable and unpredictable ways.

This reception history commentary follows the same basic pattern for each section of James. First, a brief analysis of the “Ancient Literary Context” paints an overall portrait of the verses to which interpreters respond and sets the stage for the types of interactions they have with the text. The discussions of these responses, “The Interpretations,” are divided into two sections, “Ancient and Medieval” and “Early Modern and Modern.” The interpretations follow a roughly chronological order, although some deviations from that chronology are made for the sake of clarity or to illustrate certain themes more completely. For the sake of context, the commentary includes numerous excerpts to permit those voices to speak for themselves as extensively as possible.

Reception History from a Bakhtinian Perspective

Truth is not born nor is it to be found inside the head of an individual person, it is born between people collectively searching for truth, in the process of their dialogic interaction.

(Bakhtin 1984: 110)

Although not made explicit in this commentary, the philosophical foundation for my own approach to reception history is influenced by the “Dialogism” of the philosopher and classicist Mikhail Bakhtin. As the quote above indicates, Bakhtin stresses the importance of the dialogic interaction of numerous voices, a polyphony, in other words. Polyphony is an expression derived from music that denotes a combination of two or more independent, melodic parts. Bakhtin, however, applies it to what he discovers in Dostoevsky’s novels, where Dostoevsky unfolds “a plurality of consciousnesses, with equal rights and each with its own world.” The voices of the characters, alongside the author’s voice, are “full and equally valid voices” (1984: 6–7). Polyphony thus can be seen as any environment devoted to the idea that all voices—often contesting voices representing a variety of ideological positions—receive a fair and equal hearing (Gowler 2000: 444; cf. Gregory the Great’s words about the single “tambourine” versus the voices in a “chorus” in my chapter “James 3:13–4:12” below). These voices, then, are simultaneously independent and interdependent in various ways.

This goal of polyphony is exactly the aim of “The Interpretations” sections of the Wiley Blackwell Bible Commentaries series. As Christopher Rowland notes concerning the commentary on Revelation that he and Judith Kovacs produced, numerous interpreters are allowed “to speak for themselves without being subjected to editorial judgment,” but Rowland and Kovacs also maintain their own “distinctive point of view” (http://bbibcomm.net/files/rowland2004.pdf). That approach is polyphony at its best, and the “The Interpretations” sections of this commentary on James will have the same goal.

From a Bakhtinian perspective, language is produced out of social interaction among people (see Gowler 1993: 220). As texts are read and reread, then, dialogues are created among interpreters of differing conceptual horizons, dialogues that enrich and deepen our understandings of what a text connotes and denotes (see Bakhtin 1991: 282). Any utterance—whether text, speech, or work of art—is in essence a rejoinder, an active participant in social dialogue. The Epistle of James, for example, was created by and existed in conversations with its cultural environment(s) and with numerous dialogical social discourses over the centuries, and James’s significance must be understood in the context of those discourses.

Therefore, the “meaning” of the Epistle of James does not reside alone in the creative genius of its author; it exists in a relation between creator and contemplators (see Gowler 2000: 102), and a complex correlation exists between the text and the contexts in which James has been read and reread. We stand, therefore, on the shoulders of centuries of conversations; our own interpretations are never independent of the reception history of these texts. Thus a reading of James does not allow a passive role; interpreters participate in the formation of meaning as have, broadly speaking, the whole complex of people and social situations in which the Epistle of James has been read and heard through the centuries. Current interpreters thus are not like telegraph operators who must receive and decode an “original” message. Instead interpreters participate in the construction of meaning, a construction that began in the dialogues to which the Epistle of James responds and continued through the centuries in which James was received. Those dialogues endure and are extended every time James is interpreted anew, and this volume celebrates those continuing dialogues. Thus a major strength of this commentary series is that it makes explicit what in reality is inherent but usually implicit—that our own interpretations are incomplete without a dialogic response to the responses of those interpreters who have preceded us.

Brief History of Interpretation

Luke Timothy Johnson noted in 1995 that an “adequate account of how James was first received and subsequently interpreted has yet to be written” (1995: 124). Johnson’s commentary offers a sketch of the history of interpretation that provides an excellent starting point for these discussions (1995: 124–61; cf. 2004: 39–100), and other scholars before and after Johnson provide additional helpful details (e.g., Mayor 1990: 84–102; Ropes 1916: 86–109; Adamson 1989: 147–66; Penner 1999: 257–308; Myllykoski 2006, 2007; Batten 2009). Volumes in the Wiley Blackwell Bible Commentaries series, however, do not provide lengthy and comprehensive accounts of the history of reception. Instead, these brief volumes are more representative, and they allow that story to unfold as interpreters react to specific scriptural texts. Such it is with this volume.

What makes a study of the history of reception of James especially interesting is the fact that James has, as Todd Penner observes, “an unusual place in the history of interpretation” (1999: 257). James has been labeled an “oddity” (Laws 1980: 1), the “Melchizedek” of the Christian canon (Penner 1999: 257), the “junk mail” of the New Testament (Elliott 1993: 71), and the “stepchild of New Testament scholarship” (Hartin 2003: ix). Dan McCartney observes that James has a “unique voice” within the New Testament, one that focuses on “practical theology” with memorable phrases and aphorisms helpful for moral exhortation (2009: 1). Craig Blomberg and Mariam Kamell suggest that the numerous “challenging pronouncements” in James—such as the ones to which McCartney alludes—caused many Christians to “have avoided this book in their studies or at least given it short shrift” (2008: 21). Christopher Church provides a more imaginative illustration for James’s reception in the church. He compares the uniqueness of James to a coelacanth (Latimeria chalumnae), a “living fossil” of a fish thought to be extinct for 65 million years but discovered alive in the waters off the coast of South Africa in 1938. This comparison to a coelacanth is apt, Church believes, because James in many ways is a “living” representative of an ancient, flourishing “Jewish Christianity” (McKnight and Church 2004: 323). These explanations may not be mutually exclusive, since the “challenging pronouncements” in James stem from the Torah obedience—following the law of God—so important to Jesus and the resulting Jewish Christianity (i.e., Jewish followers of Jesus who also followed the law because of God’s covenant with Israel), not to mention the eventual dominance within the church of Paul’s formulation of justification by faith. And, as Elsa Tamez points out, the difficulties for many Christians are increased by James’s radical pronouncements on wealth and poverty (Tamez 2002).

The most striking thing about the reception of James in the early church is the paucity of references to James—especially in the West. The reception in the East is somewhat easier to ascertain. Origen (185–254 CE), the successor of Clement as the head of the Alexandrian School, is the first person to cite James explicitly as scripture. One example is in his second homily on Leviticus (2.4.5), where he cites James 5:20 and calls James “divine scripture” (Origen 2005: 47). In addition, Origen provides evidence that at least some in the church believed that James of Jerusalem wrote the epistle. Origen calls the author of James the “brother of the Lord,” for example, when Origen cites James 4:4 in his Commentary on Romans (8.2; see other references in Johnson 2004: 65–6; as Johnson notes, John Chrysostom later elevates this title to “brother of God”).

Other members of the Alexandrian tradition use James extensively, including the first extant commentary of James attributed to Didymus the Blind (but see the questions of authenticity raised by Ropes 1916: 110). Both Athanasius and Cyril of Alexandria cite James extensively as well. The lack of references to James by other early church figures could be to some extent attributed to competition between rival schools such as Alexandria and Antioch. As Johnson notes, “The more fervently the Alexandrians quoted James in favor of their theological positions, the less attractive James would likely appear to those opposing such positions” (2004: 71). John Chrysostom and others greatly concerned with morals and practical theology (e.g., monks), however, were more accepting of James and utilized it more frequently.

The story in the Western church is much different. The lack of clear references to James is extraordinary. Although both Irenaeus and Tertullian use the term “friend of God,” that in itself is not a clear reference to James 2:23 (cf. 2 Chron. 20:7; Isaiah 41:8). Cyprian, Novatian, and Ambrose also give no clear evidence of knowing the epistle, although Ambrose might allude to James 2:5 and 4:8 (Ropes 1916: 101). The absence of clear citations or even allusions to James from early writings in the West is intriguing, especially if, as some scholars argue, James were known and used by the Roman church by the middle of the second century and if 1 Clement and the Shepherd of Hermas (which uses the term dipsychos; cf. James 1:8; 4:8) allude to James (Johnson 1995: 135; 2004: 91–6; Hartin 2003: 6).

Beside these possible but disputed uses of James in the West, James does not appear in the Muratorian Canon (ca. 200 CE)—even though it does mention Jude and two letters of John—or in the writings of early Latin authors. Jonathan Yates’s investigation of the reception of James in the West provides some important insights as to how this might have occurred. He notes that “the first irrefutable reference” to James in the West comes from Hilary of Poitiers in his anti-Arian work, On the Trinity (ca. 356–60 CE; see Yates 2004: 276–7). Hilary, the premier fourth-century theologian in the West before Ambrose and, of course, Augustine, was a lawyer who, although married, was elected Bishop of Poitiers. Hilary is called the “Athanasius of the West,” because he championed the theological formulation of the Council at Nicaea and vigorously defended it against the Arians. Hilary quotes James in a section where he is discussing the “fraud and fallacy” of the Arians who cite sections of the Bible in order to “attempt, by praising the Godhead of the Father only, to deprive the Son of His Divinity.” James 1:17, Hilary says, is one of the passages the Arians misuse and cites the “apostle James” as its author: “And further, they profess themselves certain that in the Father there is no change nor turning, because He has said through the prophet, I am the Lord your God, and I am not changed [Malachi 3:6], and the apostle James, With Whom there is no change [1:17]” (On the Trinity 4.8.26).

The next unambiguous citation of James in the West is attributed to Ambrosiaster, a mysterious author who—apparently in Rome—wrote the oldest Latin commentary on the Pauline epistles. Ambrosiaster’s commentary on Galatians 5:10 (ca. 380; see Yates 2004: 277), cites James 5:20 as from the “apostle James” and as authoritative.

Yates also argues that Pelagius provides critical information about James’s acceptance in the West. Pelagius assumes that James of Jerusalem wrote the letter and calls James “blessed,” “saintly,” and “veteran soldier of Christ.” Pelagius also cites James in abbreviated form, which, Yates contends, means that he expected his readers to know the epistle well enough to be familiar with the full citations: “In other words, Pelagius’ manner of citing James offers significant evidence that James had been accepted as scripture in certain circles of Rome at least by circa 390” (2002: 487–8).

Johnson, for one, argues that James became more popular in the West due to the influence of Jerome (who included it in the Vulgate), Augustine, and Rufinus. Among those three, it was Augustine’s authority that firmly established James’s status as scripture (Johnson 1995: 137–8; 2004: 96–100). Yates suggests another, earlier influence on James’s acceptance in the West, one that might have influenced both Hilary and Ambrosiaster: Athanasius, the Bishop of Alexandria. In Yates’s view, this influence primarily occurred during Athanasius’s two exiles in the West (a total of eight years). As noted above, Athanasius cites James extensively, considers it authoritative, and includes it in his influential “Thirty-Ninth Festal Epistle” (367 CE), in which were listed, for the first time, the twenty-seven books that came to be the canon of the New Testament. James, of course, was among them (2004: 273–88).

The details of the reception of the Epistle of James will unfold as the commentary proceeds, but a brief introduction to the key interpreters who arose in the process of writing this commentary will be helpful in setting the stage. The inclusion of some voices will be uncontroversial—Martin Luther obviously will play a major role in the interpretations that follow. Other voices, however, may be unexpected— Søren Kierkegaard, Frederick Douglass, and Elsa Tamez, for example. Their voices are included not only because of the depth and breadth of their responses to James but also in the interest of polyphony, where voices representing a variety of ideological positions, including voices that are sometimes silenced or marginalized, receive a fair and equal hearing.

Key Interpreters

John Chrysostom (347–407)

John Chrysostom served as a deacon and then presbyter in Antioch, during which time he wrote the majority of his exegetical homilies. Against his wishes, he was appointed Bishop of Constantinople in 398, and, though popular with the people, he quickly became unpopular in some circles for his denunciations of iniquity—the clergy and the wealthy were typical targets. In his sermons, he rails against the abuses of the wealthy and speaks words of comfort to the poor. A gifted orator—chrysostom in Greek means “golden-mouthed”—Chrysostom was also unafraid to stand up against the emperor, such as when he gave the eunuch Eutropius sanctuary in his church against the wishes of the Emperor Arcadius (Davies 1980: 220). His ascetic practices and generous almsgiving were indicative of his concern for the poor. Chrysostom’s devotion to the Bible sometimes generated animosity against those who ignored the Bible or who did not work diligently to understand it and apply it in their lives. This anger led him to castigate his listeners for their ignorance and malfeasance. His goal was to exhort his listeners to live faithfully as Christians, which for him “meant striving for social justice for the poor through almsgiving and turning one’s back on material goods to strive for spiritual virtues” (McKim 2007: 571).

Although Chrysostom does not utilize James extensively (forty-eight times from twenty separate verses, e.g., 2:18; 5:12; Homilies I, V, XVII; see Johnson 1995: 132) and has no (extant, at least) homilies on James, his voice is an important one in the reception of James. Adamson, in fact, states that Chrysostom’s support of the epistle and his identification of its author as James the brother of Jesus were critical in James’s acceptance as scripture in the Syrian church (1989: 154). Chrysostom also is important because he often stands in contrast with other interpreters who tend to domesticate some of James’s more radical statements about the rich and poor.

Augustine (354–430)

Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, a small town in North Africa, was the most influential theologian of Western Christianity. Born at Tagaste, about fifty miles from Hippo, Augustine studied rhetoric in Carthage and, although not yet converted to Christianity, was deeply influenced by his Christian mother, Monica, and, later, by Ambrose, Bishop of Milan. Augustine documents his early life through his classic work, Confessions, the first Christian autobiography. His narrative covers his early “muddy cravings of the flesh,” to opening a grammar school in Tagaste, to teaching rhetoric in Carthage, to the birth of his son, Adeodatus (while remaining unmarried to his mother), to his nine years as a Manichean, to his move to Rome and then Milan (where he became an instructor in rhetoric), to hearing the voice to “take up and read” the New Testament (and reading Romans 13), to his baptism by Ambrose, and to the moving account of his mother’s death in Ostia, on their way back to Africa.

Augustine was ordained a priest in Hippo and eventually became bishop. A prolific author, Augustine wrote voluminous letters, sermons, commentaries, and other books—such as The City of God, On the Trinity, and On Christian Doctrine—that have exerted a tremendous influence throughout the history of the church. He also was engaged in a number of controversies with such groups as the Donatists, Arians, and Pelagians, and he utilizes James frequently in these dialogues to argue about issues such as free will and the relation of faith and works. Unfortunately, Augustine’s attempt at a commentary on James—put together by some of his students—is no longer extant. Augustine, though, cites James frequently in his writings (especially James 1:17; 2:10, 19–26; in his works, he cites all but 18 of the 108 verses in James), and two of his sermon expositions on James are extant (1:19–22 and 5:12).

Bede the Venerable (673–735)

When Bede was seven years old, his family presented him as an oblate to the monastery at Wearmouth, and he spent the rest of his life as a monk in the service of the church. The monastery had an impressive library, and Bede became well versed in a number of fields—science, mathematics, grammar, rhetoric, history, theology, and the study of the Bible. As Bede notes in the conclusion of his Ecclesiastical History of England, the study of the Bible was his primary love and focus: “I wholly applied myself to the study of Scripture; and amidst the observance of monastic rule, and the daily charge of singing in the church, I always took delight in learning, or teaching, or writing . . .” (XXIV). Included among Bede’s numerous biblical commentaries are his commentaries on the seven epistles that “church tradition calls catholic, that is, universal” (i.e., not addressed to particular churches; James; 1 and 2 Peter; 1, 2, and 3 John; and Jude; Bede 1985: 3), which he wrote from approximately 709–16 CE. Afraid that his fellow Christians might be led astray by false teachings, Bede often uses the commentary on James (and the other catholic epistles) to refute “false” doctrines espoused by such groups as Manicheans, Arians, and Pelagians.

Bede’s commentary on James is especially helpful, because it not only provides a full treatment of James, but it also dialogues with earlier authors, especially Augustine. Bede writes with clarity, precision, depth, and, as many note, personal charm. Bede treats the historical sense of the passages he exegetes, but he also seeks to strip “off the bark of the letter to find a deeper and more sacred meaning in the pith of the spiritual sense” (Bede 1985: x–xi). Since his commentary on James was one of the earliest he wrote, it does not include the amount of allegorical interpretations that his later works utilize (xi). Bede’s interpretations of the “poor” in James 2:5 and the “rich” in James 1:11 and in 2:7 certainly are more “spiritualized” (i.e., “domesticated”) than other, especially more recent, commentators. In addition, Bede’s comments about faith and works are important contributions to the discussions, and he elaborates how the views of James and Paul are complementary (e.g., “faith and charity cannot be separated from one another”; Gal. 5:6; James 2:20–1; 1985: 28–32).

Martin Luther (1483–1546)

Every discussion of Martin Luther and the Epistle of James includes the famous comment from his Preface to the New Testament that James “is really an epistle of straw” (Luther 1955–76, (hereafter abbreviated as LW) 35: 362; cf. 1 Cor. 3:12, LW 35: 395). Luther’s doubts about the epistle’s apostolic authorship and authority were anticipated in comments by Erasmus (and Jerome). As Timothy George notes, Luther’s first recorded criticism about James (1519) merely echoes Erasmus’s critique that James’s style was “far inferior” to the majority of “apostolic” writings in the New Testament and certainly not comparable to Paul (2000: 22).

Even Luther’s lectures on Romans, however, demonstrate Luther’s appreciation for aspects of James. His comments about Romans 3:20, for example, envision no contradiction between Paul and James about being “justified by works.” Paul, in fact, indicates in Romans 2:13 that “doers of the Law will be justified before God”:

Therefore, when St. James and [Paul] say that a man is justified by works, they are contending against the erroneous notion of those who thought that faith suffices without works, although the apostle does not say that faith justifies without its own works (because then there would be no faith, since, according to the philosophers, “action is the evidence that form exists”), but that it justifies without the works of the Law. Therefore, justification does not demand the works of the Law but a living faith which produces its own works (LW 25: 235).

Luther then cites James 2:10 to argue that faith is indivisible; such works are not the works of the law but are instead produced from faith and grace (LW 25: 236).

In later writings, however, the impact of Luther’s further study of Paul’s Letter to the Romans and his conclusion that one is justified by faith alone led Luther to make more trenchant criticisms of the Epistle of James. After the debate with Johann Eck in Leipzig (1519) and the famous “Here I stand” comment attributed to Luther at the Diet of Worms (1521), Luther was protected by Frederick the Wise at Wartburg Castle. Plagued by insomnia, constipation, and depression, he set to work translating the entire New Testament into German (George 2000: 22–3). It was in this first edition of his translation that Luther penned perhaps his most quoted thoughts on James:

In a word, St. John’s Gospel and his first epistle, St. Paul’s epistles, especially Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians, and St. Peter’s first epistle are the books that show you Christ and teach you all that it is necessary and salvatory for you to know, even if you were never to see or hear any other book or doctrine. Therefore St. James’ epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to these others, for it has nothing of the nature of the Gospel about it.

What is not quite as well known, however, is that Luther deleted this characterization of James from subsequent editions of his New Testament (after 1522). Luther also always includes James in his editions of the New Testament, although he places James, Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation, which he finds to be less helpful works, out of their canonical order at the end of his New Testament (George 2000: 23).

In his Preface to the Epistle of James, Luther praises James as a “good book” but, as elaborated in chapter “James 1:1–11” below, discusses a number of reasons why he does “not regard it as the writing of an apostle” (LW 35: 395–6). The contradiction “against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works” and the omission of “the Passion, the resurrection, or the spirit of Christ” are the most important reasons. Luther concludes that the author of James “wanted to guard against those who relied on faith without works, but was unequal to the task.” Luther thus removes James from “among the chief books . . . though I would not thereby prevent anyone from including or extolling him as he pleases, for there are otherwise many good sayings in him” (LW 35: 397; editions prior to 1530 were more critical of James).

As my chapter entitled “James 2:14–26” explains, near the end of his life, Luther made another (in)famous comment about James at the Licentiate Examination of Heinrich Schmedenstede (1542). This exchange reflects, most likely, Luther’s frustration with his Roman Catholic opponents using James against his views. In addition, chapter “James 5:12–20” discusses another major point of contention between Luther and his Roman Catholic opponents: whether James 5:14 teaches the sacrament of extreme unction.

Nevertheless, despite his reservations about the epistle, Luther, particularly in his sermons, also says many positive things about James. The variety of Luther’s responses contained in this commentary will give a more balanced portrayal of Luther’s complex and often strained relationship with this book.

John Calvin (1509–64)

Other Reformers, such as Melanchthon, Tyndale, and Zwingli, defend James’s message and role in the canon. The best representative and most extensive example, however, is John Calvin’s commentary on James, a work that clearly demonstrates Calvin’s considerable talents as an interpreter of scripture.

Calvin was born in Noyon, France, and, according to his father’s wishes, was educated in Paris and studied law at Orleans and Bourges. After a “sudden conversion,” to which he briefly alludes in the preface to his commentary on the Psalms, he began to change course and eventually was no longer “obstinately devoted to the superstitions of Popery” (Preface to the Commentary on the Psalms). After publishing the first edition of the Institutes of the Christian Religion, he was offered a position as a lecturer and preacher in Geneva (1536), where he stayed for the rest of his life, except for a three-year exile in Strasbourg (1538–41; CCEL).

Calvin’s commentary on James reflects the approaches of Calvin’s contemporary humanist scholars with its, for example, emphasis on rhetoric, philology, and historical insights. The commentary thus in many ways anticipates a historical-critical approach; Calvin believes that an interpreter should ascertain the “original” meaning of the text—in its literary and historical contexts—before applying the text to contemporary life (see McKim 2007: 291). Calvin expresses his exegetical perspectives in his very first commentary (1540), on Paul’s letter to the Romans. In the Dedication (to Simon Grynaeus) of that commentary, Calvin states that the “chief excellency of an expounder consists in lucid brevity” and the exegetical task is “to lay open the mind of the writer whom he undertakes to explain, the degree in which he leads away his readers from it, in that degree he goes astray from his purpose, and in a manner wanders from his own boundaries” (“The Epistle Dedicatory” to Romans; CCEL).

Calvin’s commentary is an important voice in James’s reception, not just because of its interaction with his contemporaries like Luther and Erasmus, but because Calvin provides a close reading of James, attends carefully to its religious and ethical message, insists that Paul and James are not in disagreement, and skillfully uses Greco-Roman sources (e.g., Plato, James 1:16, 5:2; Horace, James 3:6, 4:2; Aesop, James 1:26; Pliny, James 4:3) and classical rhetoric to explicate James’s message and arguments (i.e., see his treatment of James 2:14).

Calvin’s positive view on the worth of James perhaps is best summed up by this quote from his preface to the commentary:

. . . it is a rich source of varied instruction, of abundant benefit in all aspects of the Christian life. We may find striking passages on endurance, on calling upon God, on the practice of religion, on restraining our speech, on peace-making, on holding back greedy instincts, on disregard for this present life . . . (1995: 259).

Søren Kierkegaard (1813–55)

This commentary contains numerous types of responses to James from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, including selections from such figures as Thomas Manton and John Wesley. Wesley’s Notes on the Bible and his sermons (e.g., Sermon 83, “On Patience”; James 2:4) are important resources for any reception history of James. Wesley, for example, approves of James’s criticism of the “antinomian spirit” that had infected many in James’s day—and Wesley’s—and had “perverted the glorious doctrine of justification by faith into an occasion of licentiousness” ( “Introduction to James” in Notes on the Bible, Wesley 1755).

Yet the next key interpreters of James actually come from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. As the historical-critical approach to James became dominant in the nineteenth century, four distinct voices stand out from among all the interpreters of James during that era: Søren Kierkegaard, Frederick Douglass, Joseph B. Mayor, and Charles F. Deems.

The philosopher Søren Kierkegaard held the Bible in great esteem: “The Bible is always on my table and is the book I read most” (1988: 218). Kierkegaard refers to the Bible at least 1,500 times in his writings, and he is very disappointed with the church’s lack of ability to put the teachings of the Bible into practice. One main complaint Kierkegaard has against the Lutheranism of his day, for example, was its utilizing the Bible to enumerate doctrines instead of using scripture for true spiritual guidance. The Bible should be “the object of faith,” and it proclaims—especially in the Synoptics and James—“radical demands” for Christian life (McKim 2007: 609, 612).

Kierkegaard thus champions James. He argues that James has a deep understanding of the logic and pathos of the heart, of receptivity and doubt, and the recognition that hearing God’s word entails doing it as well (Polk 1988: 206–33). This latter focus on doing the word includes self-examination and then action. The one who only hears the word “is outside it”; only then does one actually hear what one “is proclaiming to [one]self” (Kierkegaard 1990: 173).

Kierkegaard is important not because of the breadth of his interaction with James but because of its depth, especially his extensive focus on James 1:17.

Frederick Douglass (1818?–1895)

In 1838, a slave named Frederick Bailey fled Maryland to live in freedom in New York City and then in New Bedford, Massachusetts. He changed his last name to Johnson and then to Douglass to avoid detection from fugitive slave hunters. Three years later, Douglass rose to prominence when he spoke at an antislavery convention in Nantucket and delivered an extremely moving and eloquent extemporaneous address. As Douglass concludes in his autobiography: “From that time until now, I have been engaged in pleading the cause of my brethren—with what success, and with what devotion, I leave those acquainted with my labors to decide.” William Lloyd Garrison—who heard Douglass speak in Nantucket—writes in his preface to Douglass’s autobiography about the “multitudes” of minds Douglass enlightened that day about the evils of slavery through his “stirring eloquence.” This fugitive slave, “trembling for his safety,” was “in natural eloquence a prodigy”: “As soon as he had taken his seat, filled with hope and admiration, I rose, and declared that PATRICK HENRY, of revolutionary fame, never made a speech more eloquent in the cause of liberty, than the one we had just listened to from the lips of that hunted fugitive” (Douglass 1845).

Because of that speech, Garrison and others prevailed upon Douglass to become a “lecturing agent” to promote antislavery for the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society: “As a public speaker, he excels in pathos, wit, comparison, imitation, strength of reasoning, and fluency of language. There is in him that union of head and heart, which is indispensable to an enlightenment of the heads and a winning of the hearts of others” (Douglass 1845).