no other things can be said, yet they may be more explained, and with more liveliness of phrase and expression, every truth receiving some savour from the vessel through which it passeth; and yet I may speak it without arrogance, some arguments thou wilt find improved for thy further edification; and therefore I suppose (though there be now some glut) this book may crowd forth in the throng of Comments. I confess I have made use of those that have formerly written upon this epistle, and upon others' instigation, that the work might be more complete, more than I at first intended; and yet I hope I cannot be said to "boast in another man's line of things made ready to our hand" (2 Cor. x. 16). For thy direction in this work, I do entreat thee to compare the notes with the exposition, especially if thou dost at any time stick at the genuineness of any point. "Well then," so often repeated, is the usual note of the use or practical inference. If the style seem too curt and abrupt, know that I sometimes reserved myself for a sudden inculcation and enlargement. For the great controversy of Justification, I have handled it as largely as the epistle would give leave, and the state of the auditory would bear. Had I been aware of some controversies grown since amongst us, I should have said more; yet, take it altogether, enough is said as to my sense, and for vindicating this epistle. If some passages be again repeated, which I suppose will seldom fall out, impute it to the multitude of my employment. I never saw the work all together; and, my thoughts being scattered to so many subjects throughout the week, I could not always so distinctly remember what I had written. In short, if thou receivest any benefit, return me but the relief of thy prayers for an increase of abilities, and a faithful use of them to the Lord's glory; and I shall be abundantly recompensed. PROLEGOMENA, OR A PREFACE, WHEREIN, BESIDES AN EXPLICATION OF THE TITLE, SEVERAL NECESSARY PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS ARE HANDLED AND DISCUSSED. I INTEND, by the assistance of God's Holy Spirit, in the weekly returns of this lecture, to handle the Epistle of James. It is full of useful and practical matter. I have the rather chosen this Scripture, that it may be an allay to those comforts which, in another exercise, I have endeavoured to draw out of the fifty-third of Isaiah. I would at the same time carry on the doctrine both of faith and manners, and show you your duties together with your encouragements, lest with Ephraim you should only love to tread out the corn, and refuse to break the clods (Hosea x. 11). We are all apt to divorce comfort from duty, and to content ourselves with a barren and unfruitful knowledge of Jesus Christ (2 Pet. i. 8), as if all that he required of the world, were only a few naked, cold, and inactive apprehensions of his merit, and all things were so done for us, that nothing remained to be done by us. This is the wretched conceit of many in the present age; and therefore either they abuse the sweetness of grace to looseness, or the power of it to laziness. Christ's merit and the Spirit's efficacy are the common-places from which they draw all the defences and excuses of their own wantonness and idleness. It is true God hath opened an excellent treasure in the church to defray the debts of humble sinners, and to bear the expenses of the saints to heaven; but there is nothing allowed to wanton prodigals, who spend freely and sin lavishly upon the mere account of the riches of grace; as in your charitable bequests, when you leave monies in the way of a stock, it is to encourage men in an honest calling, not to feed riot and excess. Whoever left a sum for drunkards; or a stock to be employed in dicing and gaming? Again, I confess whatever grace doth, it doth freely; we have grace for grace* (John i. 16); that is, grace for grace's sake. But there is a difference between merit and means. A schoolmaster may teach a child gratis, freely, and yet he must take pains to get his learning. And there is a difference between causality and order. Mercy is never obtained but in the use of means: Wisdom's dole is dispensed at Wisdom's gate (Prov. viii. 34). But the use of means doth not oblige God to give mercy: there are conditions which only show the way of grace's working. Again, I grant that closing with Christ is an excellent duty, and of the highest importance in religion. But in Christ there are no dead and sapless branches. Faith is not an idle grace; wherever it is, it fructifieth in good works. To evince all this to you, I have chosen to explain this epistle; the apostle wrote it upon the same reason; to wit, to prevent or check their misprisions who cried up naked apprehensions for faith, and a barren profession, for true religion. Such unrelenting lumps of sin and lust were there even in the primitive times, gilded with the specious name of Christians. The epistle in our translation beareth title thus: "The Epistle General of James,” in the Greek, Ιακώβε το Αποςόλε Επιτολὴ Καθολική, The Catholic or General Epistle of James the Apostle; for the clearing of which, before I enter upon the body of the epistle, give me leave to premise these questions:— 1. Whether this epistle be of Divine authority? 2. Concerning the subordinate author or instrument James, what James this was? 3. What was the time of writing it? 4. The persons to whom it was written? 5. What is the occasion, matter, and scope of it? 6. The reason of that term in the title, Catholic or General ? First, Concerning the Divine authority of this epistle, I desire to discuss it with reverence and trembling. It is dangerous to loosen foundation stones. I should wholly have omitted this part of my work, but that the difference is so famous; and to conceal known adversaries, is an argument of fear and distrust. The Lord grant that the cure be not turned into a snare, and that vain men may not unsettle themselves by what is intended for an establishment! That which gave occasion to doubt of this epistle, was some passages in Jerome and Eusebius, in which they seem, at least by reporting the sense of others, to infringe the authority of it, I shall give you the passages, and then show you what little reason there is why they should justle James out of the Canon. The passage of Eusebius runneth thus, Και τὰ κατα τον Ιάκω * Xápiv ȧvrì xápirog' id est, non pro ullo merito, sed ex mera bonitate, quod alibi distinctius enunciat apostolus, Xapiopara ката тην xαρiv, Rom. xii. 6. Grot. in locum. βον, ὃ ἡ πρώτη τῶν ἐπιτολῶν τῶν ὀνομαζομένων καθολικῶν εἶναι λέγεται, ἰσέον ὡς νοθεύεται μὲν· ἐ πολλοὶ γῆν τῶν πάλαι αυτῆς ἐμνημόνευσαν, ὡς ἐδὲ τῆς λεγομένης Ιέδα, μίας καὶ ἀυτῆς ἔσης τῶν λεγομένων καθολικῶν· ὅμως δ ̓ ἴσμεν καὶ ταύτας μετα τῶν λόιπων εν πλείταις εκκλησίαις, * &c. That is, "And these things concerning James, whose epistle that is reported to be, which is the first among the epistles called universal; yet we are to understand that the same is not void of suspicion;t for many of the ancients make no mention thereof; nor of Jude, being also one of the seven called universal; yet, notwithstanding, we know them to be publicly read in most churches." So far Eusebius. The other passage of Jerome is this: Jacobus unam tantum scripsit epistolam, quæ et ipsa ab alio quodam sub ejus nomine edita esse asseritur, licet paulatim tempore procedente obtinuerit authoritatem; that is, "James wrote but one epistle, which is also said to be put forth by another in his name, though, by little and little, in process of time it gained authority in the church." These are the clauses which first begat a doubt of this epistle; but without reason, these two authors reporting the sense of others rather than their own. And, if any part of Scripture should be laid aside because some have questioned it, the Devil would soon obtain his purpose. One time or another, the greatest part of it hath been impeached by men of a wicked and unsober wit, who, when they could not pervert the rule, to gratify their purposes, reflected a scorn and contempt upon it. Now, it would exceedingly furnish the triumphs of hell, if we should think their private quarrels to be warrant sufficient to weaken our faith, and besides disadvantage the church by the loss of a most considerable part of the Canon; for the case doth not only concern this epistle, but divers others; as the second of Peter, the second and third epistles of John, the book of the Revelation, the last chapter of Mark,§ some passages in the twenty-second of Luke,|| the beginning of the eighth of John, some passages in the fifth chapter of the first epistle of John. Where would profaneness stay, and, if this liberty should be allowed, the flood of atheism stop its course? But, besides all this, why should a few private testimonies prejudice the general consent of the church, which hath transmitted this epistle to us together with other parts of the New Testament? For, if we go to external testimony, there is no reason but the greater number should carry it. It were easy to instance in councils and Fathers, who, by a unanimous suffrage, have commended this epistle to the faith and reverence of the church. Those canons which commonly go under the name of the apostles** (though I build not much upon that testimony), decreed it to be received for Scripture so the council of Laodicea, can. 59; so of Milevis, cap. 7; so the third council of Carthage, cap. 47; of Orange, cap. 25; concilium Cabilonense, cap. 33; of Toledo, cap. 3. So for the consent of the most ancient Fathers, by whom it is quoted as Scripture, as by Ignatius, Epist. * Euseb., lib. ii., Hist. Eccles., cap. 23. † So Dr. Hamner rendereth that clause ισέον μὲν ὡς νοθέυεται. Hieron. in Catal. Eccles. Script. § See Hieron., Quæst. 3, ad Hedibium et Euthymium. || Sextus Senensis, Bibl. Sanct., lib. i., cap. 23, 24. Hieron., Adversus Pelagianos, lib. ii. ** See Caranza's Summa Conciliorum, p. 7. tt Eusebius himself differenceth it from those that are plainly spurious, lib. iii., Eccles. Hist., cap. 25. ad Ephesios, &c. You may see Brochmand, in prolog. Epist. Jacob., and Jodocus Coccius's Thesaurus Theologicus, tom. i., lib. 6, art. 23. Read also Dr. Rainolds De Libris Apocryphis, tom. i., prælect. 4, &c. Out of all which you may see what authority it had among the ancients. Of late, I confess, it hath found harder measure. Cajetan and Erasmus show little respect to it. Luther plainly rejecteth it; and, for the incivility and rudeness of his expression, in calling it stramineam epistolam, as it cannot be denied,* so it is not to be excused. Luther himself seemeth to retract it, speaking of it elsewhere with more reverence, Epistolam hanc, quamvis rejectam a veteribus, pro utili tamen et non contemuendam habeo, vel ob hanc causam, quod nihil plane humance doctrine offerat, ut legem Dei fortiter urgeat: verum ut meam de illa sententiam candide promam extra præjudicium, existimo nullius esse apostoli (Luther, præf. Epist. Jacob.); that is, "This `epistle, though not owned by many of the ancients, I judge to be full of profitable and precious matter, it offering no doctrine of a human invention, strongly urging the law of God; yet in my opinion (which I would speak without prejudice) it seemeth not to be written by any apostle;" which was the error and failing of this holy and eminent servant of God; and therein he is followed by others of his own profession, Osiander, Camerarius, Bugenhag, &c., and Althamerus, whose blasphemies are recorded by Grotius in his Rivetian Apol. Discuss., pag. 170, and by him unworthily urged to reflect a scorn upon our churches. Concerning this Andreas Althamerus, see learned Rivet's Reply, in his Aiáλvçis Grot. Discuss., pag. 480. However, Luther is herein deserted by the modern Lutherans, who allow this epistle in the Canon, as is plain by the writings of Hunnius, Montrer, Gerhard, Walther, &c. Brochmand, a learned Lutheran, and Bishop of Seland in Denmark, hath written a worthy comment upon this epistle, to whom (though I received him late, and when the work was in a good progress) I have been beholden for some help in this Exposition, especially in the critical explication of some Greek words, and most of the quotations out of the Socinian pamphlets; and for whom I acknowledge myself indebted to the courtesy of that learned and worthy gentleman; Colonel Edward Leigh, to whose faithfulness and industry the church of God oweth so much. The reasons which moved Luther to reject this epistle, shall be answered in their proper places. By his own testimony cited before, it containeth nothing repugnant to other Scriptures, and it savoureth of the genius of the Gospel, as well as other writings of the apostles; and, though he seemeth to make little mention of Christ and the Gospel, yet if you consider it more thoroughly, you will find many passages looking that way. The epistle of Paul to Philemon, hath been hitherto reputed canonical; yet it treateth not of the merits and death of Christ. I confess the style which the apostle useth is more rousing, much of the epistle concerning the carnal Hebrews, as well as those that had taken upon themselves the profession of Christ. In short, it hath a Dr. Whitaker denieth it, as not finding it in his works; but it is generally granted that this was Luther's expression, it being found in his German Bibles, printed 1528. The words recorded by Brochmand are these :-" Epistola Jacobi vere straminea epistola est, collata cum Evangelio Johannis et ejus Epistola prima, et cum Epistolis Paulinis, imprimis quæ ad Romanos, Galatas, Ephesios, scriptæ sunt; nec enim genium indolemque habet evangelicam." So in his Comment on Genesis, in cap. xxii., he saith, "Facessant de medio adversarii, cum suo Jacobo, quem toties nobis objiciunt." force upon the conscience, and is not only delivered by the church, but sealed up to our use and comfort by the Holy Ghost, as other Scriptures are. It was written by an apostle as other epistles taken into the Canon, as the inscription showeth; and there is no reason why we should doubt of this title, more than of Paul's name before his epistles. It is true, there were some spurious writings that carried the names of the apostles, as the Acts of Andrew, the Liturgy of St. James, the canons of the Apostles, Luke's History of the Acts of Paul and Tecla, Mark's Life of Barnabas, the Gospel of Paul. But all these, by the just hand of God, had some mark of infamy impressed upon them, by the enforcement of matters false or ridiculous, or contrary to the truth of doctrine or history. But this epistle hath nothing contrary to the truth of religion, nor unbeseeming the gravity of it and the majesty of other Scriptures. Therefore, upon the whole, we may pronounce, that, it being represented to us with these advantages, it hath a just title to our respect and belief, and should be received in the church with the same esteem and reverence which we bear to other Scriptures. Secondly, concerning the subordinate author James, there is some controversy about stating the right person, who he was. In the general, it is certain he was an apostle, no epistles but theirs being received into the rule of faith; and it is no prejudice that he styleth himself" the servant of the Lord;" for so doth Paul often, as we shall prove anon in the explication of the first verse. But now, among the apostles there were two called by this name of James, James the son of Zedebee, and James the son of Alpheus. Many of the ancients, indeed, thought there were three of this name; Jacobus major, or of Zebedee; Jacobus minor, or of Alpheus; and James the brother of the Lord, called also Chobliham,* or Oblias, or James the Just, whom they thought not to be an apostle, but bishop of Jerusalem. Jerome calleth him decimum tertium apostolum, "the thirteenth apostle." In Isa. lib. v. cap. 7, Dorotheus maketh him one of the Seventy, the first in his catalogue; but without reason. For, indeed, there were but two Jamess,† this latter Janies being the same with him of Alpheus; for plainly the brother of the Lord is reckoned among the apostles (Gal. i. 19), and called a pillar (Gal. ii. 9); and he is called the brother of the Lord, because he was in that family, to which Christ was numbered; some suppose his mother's sister's son, the son of Mary of Cleophas, who was sister to the Virgin. Now, Cleophas and Alpheus is all one, as a learned author supposeth,‡ though Junius contradicteth it in Epist. Judæ sub initio. And Rabanus saith, after the death of Alpheus she married Cleophas. But, however it be, this James is the same, which is enough for our purpose. Well then, there being two, to which of these is the epistle to be ascribed? The whole stream of antiquity carrieth it for the brother of the Lord, who (as I said) is the same with Jacobus minor, or the son of Alpheus; and with good reason, the son of Zebedee being long before beheaded by Herod from the very beginning of the preaching of the Gospel (Acts xii. 2). But this epistle must needs be of a latter date, as alluding to some passages * Which is rendered by Clemens, περιοικὴ τῇ λάς ἐν δικαιοσύνη by Epiphanius, τεῖχος τὸ λάθ. And no more are reckoned by Clemens and by Eusebius, yea by the Scripture, among the apostles. See Matt. x. 2, 3, and Mark iii. 17, 18. Herbert Thorndike, Of the Primitive Government of the Church, pp. 11, 12, 13; who discusseth this matter at large, and with satisfaction. |