PIETY AND POVERTY IN JAMES

by

Robert Lee Williams

M. Dibelius insisted that "James has no 'theology.'" 1 Nevertheless, in his discussion of "ethos" we read,

Clearly some trains of thought emerge which-without any artificial construction-combine to form an animated and characteristic unity. Without doubt, what is stressed the most is the piety of the Poor and the accompanying opposition to the rich and to the world. 2

Scholarship on James has made great strides since Dibelius, but that claim from 1920, unlike most other important ones in the work, has never been seriously contested. Two outstanding commentators of recent years, while correcting certain of Dibelius' perspectives, have proceeded to build on his enunciation of the rich-poor issue in the letter. S. Laws places the issue first among "the characteristic ideas and interests of James." 3 P. Davids considers it not only a theological issue 4 but also the entire basis for a Sitz im Leben of the letter. 5 It remains unclear what kind of issue it is. Whether ethos, piety, ideas and interests, or theology, the issue of the poor and the rich is a major one in James.

How then shall we approach it to bring some clarity to the discussion and hopefully thereby to bring the discussion into more direct relevance to our own lives? We shall consider the matter from a viewpoint that some have called "social history." Such an approach will address the issue less in terms of the above labels and more in terms of the actual use of the letter by some writer for some group(s). Thereby we shall sense the force of the letter with respect to the economic question and grasp how the writer and the addressees were oriented to that question.

The procedure will consist of three parts. First, we shall re-examine the question of the letter's setting. Then we shall analyze the passages relevant to the piety and poverty question on the basis of the revised understanding of the setting. Finally we shall describe the writer's overall perspective on piety and poverty emerging from the passages as a whole in light of their historical setting.

I. The Setting of the Letter

In 1970 F. O. Francis assumed to be correct "the general view that James lacks situational immediacy." 6 This view has proved to be both imprecise and misleading. By 1980 S. Laws considered it "reasonable" to conclude that the teaching on rich and poor constituted a "real concern of the author" and his concern was "not shared by the Christian group he knows most intimately."7 Two years later P. Davids insisted, "The epistle will reflect the Sitz im Leben of its place of publication." 8 However, Davids can elucidate in prudence only a "general situation" for the epistle from the "late 40s and early 50s." 9 By contrast, this writer thinks that evidence can deliver more on the promise of knowing the setting of James in two respects.

The Situation of the Writer

First, R. P. Martin has carefully crafted a "tentative hypothesis" for the writing of James that has not absolute historical certainty, but genuine historical probability. 10 He observes that Josephus' account of events surrounding the death of James in 62 A.D. (Ant. 20.197-203) corresponds to the socio-economic orientation of the letter of James. Josephus records that from 59 A.D. the aristocratic high priests oppressed the lower priests by withholding their Temple wages. The lower priests, then, were inclined to support the militant Zealots and sicarii (20.180-81).11 James' letter, in turn, teaches support for the poor, who could have included Jewish Christian priests (Acts 6:7), over against the rich (Jas.1:27; 2:1-9,15-16; 5:1-6), as well as patient waiting for God rather than responding with violence in times of stress (1:2-4, 19-21; 2:11-13; 3:13-4:4; 5:7-11).12 In short, Martin's "tentative hypothesis" is sufficiently compelling for us to employ it as a "working hypothesis."

Furthermore, we can clarify the hypothesis on the matter of when the letter of James was written. If the letter can reasonably be seen to address circumstances in Jerusalem beginning in 59 A.D., was it written before James' death or after his death as a counsel of moderation in his name? Placing the writing shortly before his death in 62 A.D. has the merit of offering a plausible explanation for two somewhat conflicting comments by Josephus in connection with James' death. He notes that James was charged with "breaking the law" (Ant. 20.200). Then he adds that those who were "the most fair-minded and who were strict in observance of the law" strongly disapproved and took extraordinary steps to have deposed the high priest Ananus, who was responsible for James' death (20.201-3).

What is behind the charge of James' breaking the law? If we suppose with Martin that the charge against James arose from his contact with Paul at the time of Paul's arrest (Acts 21:18, 23-24, 27-33),13 we encounter two difficulties. The first is Paul's arrest was in 57 or 58 A.D., several years before James' death in 62. The second is that if James had been closely linked with Paul by the Jerusalem believers "all zealous for the law" (21:20; cf. the Pharisee believers in 15:6), those described similarly by Josephus, "strict in observance of the law" (Ant. 20.201), would probably not have reacted so strongly against Ananus.

An alternative basis for the charge is the letter of James. While the letter would seem to us not to violate the Mosaic Law, the aristocratic high priests might find it much more questionable. Would it not violate their sense of the law to read of the rich fading away (Jas. 1:11) or of no distinction to be made between themselves and those in filthy clothing (2:1-4) or of the rich oppressing the poor in the court and committing blasphemy (2:6-7) or of the rich as facing judgment soon (5:1-6)? Such perspectives would probably make James the same intolerable political liability to the Sadducean aristocracy as his brother Jesus (cf. Matt. 23) and the radical Hellenistic Jew Stephen (cf. Acts 7:51-53) were to Sanhedrins three decades earlier. Furthermore, the strong objections from the city's conservatives suggest that James was not guilty of breaking the law according to their "strict" understanding of it (Ant. 20.201). 14

In connection with Martin's hypothesis then we have evidence for understanding the letter of James as precipitating James' death and therefore for dating the letter not long before his death in 62 A.D.

Communication with the Addressees

The second respect in which we can know more about the setting of the letter of James concerns the addressees.

Discussion of addressees has been stymied in large part by the seemingly conflicting data of a Christian author, "servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ," alongside Jewish addressees, "the twelve tribes in the Dispersion" (1:1). Davids therefore limits his projected findings accordingly, "The epistle will reflect the Sitz im Leben of its place of publication, not that of its 'recipients.' "l5 While the foregoing analysis does indeed reflect conditions in Jerusalem rather than among the addressees, evidence is available on communication between Jerusalem and Jewish groups around the Mediterranean. This evidence will shed light on why the concerns in this letter were not just delivered as a Christian homily in Jerusalem but were written down and sent around the Mediterranean. We shall ascertain first what contact James had with non-Christian Jews in Jerusalem, then how the letter would be sent, and finally why the letter was sent.

First, James' contact with non-Christian Jews in Jerusalem. Having discovered the historical situation which probably underlies the writing of the letter, we can interpret the addressees in a more Jewish sense, a more natural sense. We propose that the Jewish Christian James addressed his letter to Jews throughout the Diaspora. The avoidance of such a possibility by scholars has apparently been related less to NT usage than to an inability to conceive of such contact between Christian Jews and non-Christian Jews. The "twelve tribes" are mentioned prior to James only in Q (Matt. 19:28//Luke 22:30) and probably constituted for Jews a traditional OT term for their ethnic group, literal Israel, at least prior to Luke's using it. 16 Similarly, the term "Dispersion" has no necessarily Christian reference. 17

While the inability of scholars to conceive of friendly contact between Christian and non-Christian Jews is understandable in light of the NT record of Jewish opposition to the Christian movement, that general perspective need not close our minds to evidence to the contrary. Davids has acknowledged James' role as a mediating figure in the tension between conservative Jewish Christians and supporters of Paul. 18 He fails to take seriously evidence of a similar role for James in the Jerusalem community as a whole, Christian and non-Christian. It is customarily discounted as gross exaggeration when Hegesippus records that Jewish leaders killed James because of concern that "the whole people were in danger of looking for Jesus as the Messiah" from the Jewish Christian leader's influence (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 2.23.10). However, Josephus, as we saw earlier, insisted from a more objective point of view that a very influential group of citizens was extremely upset at the action against James and "some others" (Ant. 20.200-201). 19 It is reasonable to consider that this influential group with sympathy for James consisted to some extent, and perhaps totally, of non-Christian Jews. Martin aptly characterizes James' mediating role from reading his letter in light of the tensions in Jerusalem in 62 A.D.

May we propose that in James we meet a leader caught in a very delicate position and trying to effect a modus vivendi between opposing factions? He was in declared sympathy with the needy priests, whether Jewish or messianic, and championed their cause. On the other side, he opposed the Zealot manifesto of violent lawbreaking, murder and hatred. 20

Thus far we have seen evidence for his friendly relations with the significant elements of the Jerusalem non-Christian community during the period of increasing difficulties in the city beginning in the late 50s.21 Now we turn to the question of how letters were sent to Jewish communities around the Mediterranean. A body of information on communication links between Jerusalem and Diaspora Jewish centers has been largely ignored. H. Vogelstein informs us in general that "fully authorized messengers" (Heb. seliah, Gr. apostolos) moved regularly in two directions among Jews, from Jerusalem to the Diaspora communities and from those communities to Jerusalem. 22 NT evidence of such emissaries from the Jerusalem Jewish establishment is found in Paul's trip to Damascus with letters from the high priest to the synagogues for arrest of Christians (Acts 9:1-2; cf. 28:21). James could transmit letters the same way (15:22-23). Regarding the importance of these envoys in Judaism, S. Safrai has drawn attention to the fact that they were often leading figures who preached, resolved halakic problems, inspected facilities, and collected money. 23 This pattern indicates that letters were delivered to Jewish synagogues by official emissaries from the high priest and to Christian congregations by official representatives of James.

Furthermore, we get the impression that to some extent the high priest and James were interacting with the same Diaspora groups, the same local synagogues. 24 In the 30s Paul certainly expected to find Jewish Christians around the synagogues in Damascus (Acts 9:1-2). In Antioch the Jewish synagogues are the most likely locations for the Jewish Christians (11:19). Luke considered it Paul's custom to preach in synagogues (17:1-2), but also to leave when his message was resisted (13:43-46; 14:1-6; 18:4-7; 19:8-9). Where the social situation was disagreeable, we may assume that most of Paul's converts, though not necessarily all of them, left the synagogue and started a new group in a house (18:7-8; cf. 14:23; 19:9-10). Where no such difficulty developed, the Christians presumably continued to meet in the synagogues (13:5; 17:10-14, 17). Other mission work may have resulted in less disagreement and therefore left the Christians in the local synagogues. Such seems to have occurred in Antioch (11 :20-36; cf. Gal. 2: 11 -12). Peter's mission work may have followed this pattern (Gal. 2:7; cf. 1 Cor. 1:12). The four groups not identified as churches in Rome may also still be part of synagogue congregations (Rom.16:10-11,14-15; cf. Heb.10:24-25, possibly to Roman Christians). The result of this data is that a number of synagogues from Antioch to Rome probably had both Christian and non-Christian Jews 25 and therefore maintained some communication with both the high priest and James in Jerusalem. 26

In the stylized language, we find, contrary to other commentators, indication that James is addressing a synagogue not limited to Christian Jews but containing both Christian and non-Christian Jews. In Jas. 2:7 the phrase "the good name called upon you" is unique in the NT but is found referring to Yahweh in prophetic contexts of the LXX, including Amos 9:11 quoted in its LXX version by this James at the Jerusalem Council according to Luke (Acts 15:17). Truly Laws observes, "Were the epistle to be taken as originally a Jewish writing, that idea ('the good name called upon you') would be understood here." 27 We need only add that the Jewish Christian, being a Jew, would identify with the term just as easily, even though he would relate the "name" to Jesus as well as Yahweh. 28 E. Haupt stated long ago, "Palestinian Christianity externally still remained within the confines of Judaism, and therefore continued to adhere to the legal regulations of this religion." 29 In effect, Haupt's comment on Palestinian Christianity seems to apply to Christianity in the Diaspora to a greater degree than has been noticed.

            That James' letter was composed for such Diaspora audiences is suggested by its literary form. Davids cites W. W. Wessel as establishing long ago that James' so-called "diatribe" style is in fact the style of a Jewish synagogue homily. 30 Such a homily would presumably be delivered by the official bearer as a "word of exhortation" in a synagogue service such as we see in Acts 13:14-41 (cf. Heb. 13:22).

Why, then, did James write his letter to the Diasporic synagogues? We have accepted as a working hypothesis Martin's proposal that the letter reflects James' concern for the needy priests and his opposition to any use of force to rectify the injustice of the priestly aristocracy in Jerusalem around 60 A.D. His interest in relating this message to synagogues in the Diaspora is related to the ongoing communication we have found to exist between Jerusalem and the synagogues. He evidently wants to apply to the synagogue congregations some lessons he has learned in the recent past. Since about 59 A.D. there has been growing tension in Jerusalem. The Diaspora synagogues, in their ongoing contact with Jerusalem, will not be immune to the basic problems. From seeing the corruption of the priestly aristocracy, he counsels against deference to the wealthy (Jas. 2:1-13). His sympathy for the unpaid priests leads him to promise exaltation and vindication of the lowly (1:9; 2:5; 5:9). In light of increasing militancy he counsels against all violence as well as the attitudes that lead to it (4:1-2; 5:7-9). We shall now examine the specific sections on piety and poverty in the letter.

II. The Sections on Piety and Poverty

The foregoing perspective on the setting and purpose sheds light on the structure of the letter. Francis has drawn attention to a "double opening statement" in Hellenistic letters. 31 Following this "tendency to repeat topics in the opening verses," "these themes . . . are subsequently developed in the body of the epistle." 32 He found this pattern in James and was thereby the first to propose a structural unity for the letter. The themes introduced in James' "double opening statement" (Jas. 1:2-11, 12-25) are three: testing (1:2-4,12-18), wisdom-words (1:5-8,19-21), and poor-rich (l:9-11,22-25). 33 Interrelating the three themes, he notes that testing constitutes "the fundamental issue that underlies the development" of the other two themes in the body, rich and poor (2:1-26) and wisdom and words (3:1-5:6). 34 Davids then modifies this analysis of 3:1-5:6. Quite properly, and helpfully for the needs of this study, he limits the section on wisdom and words to 3:1-4:12 and entitles 4:13-5:6 "testing through wealth." 35 This modification clarifies the "testing" theme as fundamental by not only beginning each part of the double introduction with it (1:2-4, 12-18) but also concluding the body with it (4:13-5:6).

If we are correct in placing the writing of this letter in the context of James' difficulties coming from two sides in Jerusalem subsequent to 59 A.D., the three topics isolated by Francis take on a historical identity corresponding to their literary unity. The fundamental issue of testing in the letter corresponds to the stressful character of life as James had been experiencing it in Jerusalem. The other two topics correspond to the two kinds of difficulties he had found to be causing the stress. In the topic of rich and poor James offers a Christian interpretation that the rich oppress the poor. While the particular oppressors and oppressed of his society, the two socioeconomic classes of priests, are not named, careful exegesis of the relevant passages will show that their situation underlies James' choice of material. In discussing the topic of wisdom and words, the author seems to be giving a Christian analysis of how violence comes about, from wisdom and words emanating from the "evil impulse" (4:1,3). 36 Again, while the militant Zealots are not mentioned, their mentality is clearly reflected in his criticism of wisdom and speech promoting violence as a means of accomplishing the divine purpose. Then in the concluding topic of testing, perhaps regarding both speech and wealth (see n. 35 above), James offers a jarring Christian perspective on what those not under stress are truly facing. He makes no mention of the aristocratic priests, but, we shall find again, their lifestyle underlies his comments.

If we are correct in interpreting this letter's structure as reflecting, albeit in generalized ways, the two problems James saw "tempting" or "testing" people in his society, and the third problem of imminent "testing" which the secure in society were not aware of facing, we can determine which passages to examine closely for information on our subject of piety and poverty. We shall focus on chap. 2 for James' attention to the poor and 5:1-6 for attention to the rich. Meanwhile, since James introduces his concerns with a double opening statement containing his themes, we do well to begin our study with his two comments of introduction on piety, poverty, and wealth (1:9-11,22-25), as well as the second half of his transitional comment (1:27) between the introduction and the major section on the poor in the body of the letter.

1:9-11, 22-25-Introduction

In these two preliminary statements James consoles the poor person with eschatological gain and threatens the rich person with eschatological loss.

In 1:9-11 he commands "the humbled brother" to boast in his exaltation and "the rich person" to boast in his humiliation. The command constitutes a promise of "reversal of fortune" by James to each category of persons, similar to the aphorism of Jesus in Q, "Whoever exalts himself will be humbled and whoever humbles himself will be exalted" (Matt. 23:12; Luke 14:11; 18:14). 37 That society is here divided along economic lines is evident from use of the term "rich." The writer expresses solidarity with the poor man, as a "brother." At the same time, his statement to the rich man is the much more emphatic of his two messages. He devotes one line to exaltation of the poor and five lines to the humiliation of the rich. The warning is made on the basis of comparing the brevity of man's life to that of grass, a proverbial perspective with OT parallels (Ps. 103:15-16; Isa. 40:6-7). It is therefore a reversal at death about which the author is writing. This passage then suggests that the letter will devote more space to criticism of the rich than to comfort of the poor. Here "his emphasis is firmly on the fate of the rich." 38 Accordingly, we shall find this first passage of the introduction to relate most closely to 5:1-6, where James launches an extended, scathing attack on the rich.

The second statement of the general piety and poverty theme in the introduction arises in 1:22-25. Being "doers of the word and not hearers only" is found to continue discussion of "reversals" in connection with Jesus' teaching. On the Jewish debate over hearing and doing ('Abot 1:17; 5:14) 39 James is expressing the firmly held position of his brother Jesus (Matt. 23:2-3; cf. 7:24-27; Luke 6:46-49), a position regarding which he attacked "the scribes and the Pharisees" (Matt. 23:2), his religious opponents in the Jewish establishment. James is issuing a warning to the religious, here his "beloved brothers" (Jas. 1:19) in the synagogue audiences. This warning he develops by a contrast. The one who only hears ends up "deceived" by himself instead of "blessed." The process of self deception, employing the mirror symbolism, indicates that the one who only hears fails to "persevere" in accordance with "his true self." Perseverance means submitting to the ethical demand of the gospel (1:21). 40 One who so fails to persevere will lose the eschatological, perhaps also experiential, 41 "blessing" of "wholeness" and "freedom" he expects from the law. As 1:9-11 on the poor and the rich relates closely to 5:1-6 about the gross mistreatment of the poor by the rich, so 1:22-25 to James' beloved Jewish brothers is a preliminary warning related to 2:1-13 and 2:14-26, two extended warnings on heeding the needs of the poor.

1:27 - Transition

The writer has promised eschatological benefits to the poor. He identifies with them and urges them in their present plight to live in light of their future hope. The writer has at the same time promised the rich eschatological reversal. He then issues a warning to his synagogue addressees to heed the actions, implicitly ethical, called for by God's word. The transitional section 1:26-27, specifically 1:27, the second verse, makes this ethical requirement explicit.

James requires of his listeners that worship of God be expressed in attention to the "defenceless." 42 Certain people are clearly "religious" in cultic activity 43 That practice cannot be considered valid, however, unless it is "pure and undefiled," ethically legitimate. 44 The specific "to visit orphans and widows in their affliction" was such a common OT perspective that our author is probably employing it as typical of God's more general concern to secure legal rights and material provisions for any "socially disadvantaged." 45 Furthermore, NT use of the term "affliction" (thlipsis) in reference to endtime difficulties 46 link the trials of the helpless in his society with the matters to be reversed for the humbled brother (1 :9). In thus reinforcing concern for the poor, the writer makes clear that his ethical concern that "hearers" also be "doers" (1:22-25) is an exhortation to his "beloved brothers" (1:19), the Jews, Christian and non-Christian, in the Diaspora synagogues for the self-sufficient to be diligent to keep track of, and provide for, the needs of those not self-sufficient, as one would do with "brothers" of one's own family (1:9).

            Meanwhile, the fact that James cites typical OT figures, practically proverbial, rather than contemporary individuals suggests that he wanted "a consciously 'Biblical' situation" that would apply broadly, "pointedly evocative of a whole tradition of divine judgment on injustice." 47 This transitional verse shows James' concern in 1:22-25 to be for the unprotected, equivalent to the humbled in 1:9, and leads directly into 2:1-7, his first major warning to his addresses to heed the needs of these unprotected and relates directly to 2:14-17, the subsequent major warning of a similar kind.

2:1-7-Social Dignity for the Poor

We have found that James sympathizes with the poor, condemns the rich, and warns his synagogue "brothers." Becoming more specific, he urges this last group, his audience, to be attentive to the needs of the unprotected among them. These needs can be differentiated as social and economic. At this point the writer elaborates on the social need, the importance of guarding the social dignity of the poor.

The writer describes a situation in which such "brothers" as he is addressing sin against a poor person who comes into their "synagogue," an assembly of the Jews. Their sin is one of social discrimination in favoring a rich man also visiting the assembly. 48 While not an actual instance the example used by the writer must bear some relation to his readers', or hearers', reality. 49 Such a situation is readily found in the high priest's aristocratic emissaries' arriving for a visit at a Diasporic synagogue. 50

Certainly James' own emissaries, presumably not persons of wealth, carried this letter and would be the ones delivering these words to James' synagogue addressees. Knowing this, we can understand the immediate relevance of this initial example on the hearers. 51 James condemns the assembly's action initially on the general principle of anti-discrimination in the OT (2:1, 4; Lev. 19:15) but subsequently and more importantly on the ground of choosing differently from God when they use their judgment (2:5-7). In 2:5-6a the listeners hear that God has made a decision actually favoring the poor, whereas the assembly's action has moved in the opposite direction "dishonoring" the poor. The plain implication is that the assembly ought to treat the poor in a manner that corresponds to God's perspective toward the poor. R. B. Ward has shown that the poor are here being considered "brothers" with the synagogue group. 52 The poor should receive honor in the congregation. God has selected that economic group 53 for eschatological benefits to which he alluded in 1:9. The first beatitude in its Lukan form (6:20), that the poor have the kingdom, lies close to James' thought. "Rich in faith" refers to their future economic status upon actual inheritance of "the kingdom," not to the quality of their faith. 54 Their attitude toward God is expressed, instead, by the term "love." 55 So James is making the painful observation that Diasporic synagogue practice runs counter to God in dishonoring the very ones that God has destined, already, for honor in the future society for those devoted to Him. The observation is reinforced in 2:8-9 by placing the poor person into the OT category of "neighbor." James could make this connection from the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:29-37), associating the neighbor with a person in grave need (though with a curious twist, v.36), illustrating the OT command to love one's neighbor as oneself (Luke 10:27; cf. Lev.19:18). The same connection, however, could be found in the OT (Prov. 14:21). Classifying the poor person as neighbor made discrimination against him not just "ridiculous" from a logical standpoint but Biblically "a transgression." 56 Nothing less than one's love of the poor person as oneself will do. Only this understanding of the "royal law" (2:8), the "law of the kingdom" 57 to love one's neighbor is commensurate with the standards of the "kingdom" promised to those who love God (2:5). The clear indication, now in legal (or Biblical) terms as well as logical terms, is that the synagogue members could end up more than embarrassed in, positively excluded from, that royal society. They will be judged without mercy because of their lack of mercy for the poor (2:13a).

            In 2:6b-7 James turns from inappropriate negative behavior toward the poor in light of God's perspective to inappropriate positive behavior toward the rich in view of a history of being victimized by the rich. The rich are known to make life difficult for the synagogue in two ways, economically and socially with the surrounding culture. The rich oppress the synagogue society, here James' "beloved brothers" (2:5), not the poor, by legal court action. Such legal oppression for financial benefit was common in the OT, which is behind the thought here. 58 If the letter was written from Jerusalem in the early 60s, the high priest, who collected tithes by an unjust method in Judea (Ant. 20.181), may have had a similar approach to milking the Diaspora synagogues for taxes. Just as this practice would have been implemented by the high priest's envoys, 59 in turn word could get back to James through his own envoys. Resulting from the economic injustice is the second problem caused by the rich. The reputation of the Jews' God Yahweh, along with their own reputation as Jews, was tainted among the surrounding pagan populace by such scandalous practices being perpetrated by Jewish leaders on their synagogue members.

            We conclude that the stylized example and the traditional language show not that the writer is unacquainted with the synagogue settings he is addressing but that he seems to be generalizing from information he has about them and is clearly invoking OT prophetic terminology to convey what he considers to be God's disapproval of the synagogue activities.

This passage is the first of two in the body of the letter to address a warning to the synagogue audience about the importance of helping the poor. This warning is an immediate outgrowth of the introductory warning on being doers and not hearers only in 1:22-25 and the subsequent explanatory transition in 1:27 showing that doers' attention must be on the unprotected. The next passage we consider, 2:14-17, complements 2:1-7.

2:14-17-Material Help for the Poor

      Having addressed the social dignity of the poor in 2:1-7, the writer considers the economic matter, the material needs of the poor, in 2:14-17. While James constructs another hypothetical scene with stylized description of a person in need in 2:15, commentators agree on some continuity between the poor man with shabby clothing in 2:2 and the brother or sister lacking food and clothing in the present passage. Laws is probably correct in appraising the situation as one not of utter destitution but of ordinary poverty that could too easily be dismissed. 60 The one with words of comfort is not ignoring the poor one. The passive voice commands in 2:16 constitute prayer to God for the person in need. 61 In 2:19 the belief that God is one probably refers to James' hearers as reciting the Shema of Deut. 6:4. 62 James nevertheless voices strong and repeated disapproval of this relationship to God. The hearer must learn from Abraham 63 and Rahab the importance of "works" of hospitality (2:21-23, 25). The person's faith is of no profit, it cannot save him (v. 14); it is of no profit (v. 16); it is dead (v. 17), useless and dead (v. 20)!

This stern warning is not James' message for the rich. It is directed to all those the author considers "brothers" (2:14), those in the Diasporic synagogues listening to his message. The warning is not because of the writer's displeasure with certain social classes. It is because of his concern, which he considers a reflection of God's concern, for the poor. James' point is thus reminiscent of his brother's parable of sheep and goats (Matt.25:31-46). Jesus insists that destiny for "eternal punishment" or "eternal life" is determined strictly by whether or not individuals have performed charitable deeds "for one of the least of these brothers of mine." Presence or absence of such charitable deeds will be the Son of man's single consuming concern when he "comes in his glory."

This second section of chap. 2, making it imperative to provide for the material needs of the poor, completes the first section, which requires granting to the poor the same acceptance one would accord his "neighbor." Both of the passages grow out of 1:22-25, 27 warning his listeners to be "doers" in attending to the unprotected. We now shift to a different focus on the poor, an expose on the exploitation of the poor by the rich in 5:1-6.

5:1-6 Condemnation of the Rich

This section is an expansion on the reversal of fortune promised in the first of our two introductory passages on the poor (1:9-11). 5:1-6 alludes to why God plans to exalt the humbled and humble the exalted. In Davids' structural analysis this section is the second and last of the third major unit 4:13-5:6, in the body of the letter. The unit focuses on greed and explores two ways that his addressees are tested because of wealth. 64 In our particular section those being tested are unjustly treated employees of the rich. 65 The employees are evidently considered "brothers" with whom those addressed in the synagogue communities (5:7) could identify. 66 As before (1:10; 2:6), the rich, by contrast, are not considered part of the community of "brothers."

This section does not concern the poor as primarily an economic class it concerns the unjustly treated, a legal class. However, what the writer says here tells us a cause of poverty, indeed the only cause that he mentions in the letter, and therefore a reason, perhaps the only reason, for God's sensitivity to the plight of the poor. As a result, the section indicates much about the historical basis for the poverty and the theological basis of God's sympathy for the poor evident earlier in the letter.

Again we find a setting of traditional material, powerful landowners withholding wages of their day-laborers (5:4). Here more than usual the language "appears to be consciously archaised or 'Biblicised' " probably in order "to add particular force to his general argument" in some relation to his addressees. 67 From our earlier findings based on Martin's hypothesis this agrarian setting probably had its inspiration in the crisis created by the wealthy Jerusalem priests' withholding wages. The use of a traditional setting is attributable in part to the Jerusalem problem's not being directly relevant to the Diasporic synagogues (though indirectly, as we discussed above regarding 2:6b-7) and in part to the writer's subsuming under a single memorable picture, a "traditional class of oppressor," 68 the variety of forms that worker exploitation may have taken among the Jews of the Diaspora. Whereas in 2:6b-7 the wealthy exploited synagogue members legally through the court system, here they defraud illegally (5:4), outside the courts, evidently simply because they are powerful enough to get away with it.

The writer reserves his most scathing denunciation for this situation. The rich, as rich, are unrighteous! "Miseries" are coming upon them (5:1). The reasons are numerous and are stated vividly. As in Jesus' parable of the rich fool (Luke 12:13-21) the rich man's assets are temporal (Jas. 5:2-3) and therefore "essentially valueless." 69 Moreover, in similarity to Jesus' recommendation of spending one's assets for "heaven" (Matt. 6:19-21), the assets here, which "could have been used by the poor," are, because they are stored, "being withheld from the service which God intended them." 70 Therefore, they "will be evidence against you" (Jas. 5:3). Third, and worse than the lack of generosity, is the fact that the wealth constitutes ill-gotten gain. The wages of laborers were "withheld" (v. 4), presumably "with intent to defraud." 71 This action has resulted in frantic cries from these workers in their desperate straits, and God is careful to hear and, in view of "Lord Sabaoth" from Isaiah 5, is poised to respond with swift judgment. Fourth, the writer bitterly contrasts with the impoverished workers the sumptuous life of the rich (Jas. 5:5), comparable to Jesus' rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31). The rich have unwittingly prepared themselves for "a day of slaughter" in eschatological judgment. Finally, to this threat the writer appends the charge that the rich are responsible for illegitimate legal action against, and even deaths of, righteous people (Jas. 5:6; cf. 2:6). Certainly perversion of the justice system by the rich was part of OT prophetic complaint. Indeed, "murder" from starvation would seem to refer more to how bad oppression could become rather than to how bad it actually was in the writer's situation. 72 However, Josephus records that among the poorer priests whose wages were withheld starvation did in fact occur during the period in which we are placing this letter. The high priests' slaves received "the tithes that were due to the priests, with the result that the poorer priests starved to death. Thus did the violence of the contending factions suppress all justice" (Ant. 20.181). In summary, "he (James) presents the rich as the traditional enemies of God and of his innocent people." 73 5:1-6, at the end of the body of the letter, thereby affords us, in its stylized way, a historical explanation for the promised reversals of fortune in 1:9-11, located somewhat chiastically in the earlier half of the letter's introduction.

This "sharp, cutting cry of prophetic denouncement" 74 is not a warning to the rich, only a vitriolic condemnation of them. As such, however, we can readily understand it also as a warning to the "brothers" of the synagogue about what real dangers to expect from association with the rich. We earlier identified the wealthy visitor in 2:2 with the high priest's envoy. In light of the apparently specific reference to the same group in the killing of the righteous man in 5:6, we can interpret 5:1-6 to be a veiled but vicious denunciation of the high priestly aristocracy who were oppressors of the people. It was therefore the most serious warning from James in Jerusalem to the Diaspora synagogues for them to dissociate themselves from such godless corruption, albeit corruption in the form of religious leadership at the highest levels in Judaism. If our historical hypothesis is correct, the great influence held by the high priestly aristocracy explains the writer's choosing to employ traditional OT prophetic language which denounces corrupt religious leaders in league with the governmental and commercial power brokers of the society. 75

Meanwhile, 5:1-6 makes clear to us that a historical cause of poverty is the rich man, specifically the rich man's lack of generosity in redistributing his wealth (v. 3), and his callous and corrupt business practices with his employees, who have less influence in society (vv. 4, 6).

            This brings us to an understanding of why God watches over the poor with such singlemindedness. It is not because of a nobility in poverty. On the contrary, poverty seems to be a compromised state with little to commend it except perhaps for inclining a person more urgently to God in desperation (5:4). God's interest is also not based on the poor person's exceptional piety as is often thought in connection with "the poor" coming to have a connotation of "the pious" in OT developments. 76 Instead, the source of God's interest in the poor seems to be God's righteousness. 77 His preoccupation with the poor seems to stem from his obsessive concern for people who are being denied their due. The defrauded employees are "innocent" and have not resisted their oppressor (v. 6). Instead they have cried out to God (v. 4) who will "resist" the oppressor on their behalf. "God is the God who secures the rights of those who have no hope." 78 This is the reason we find Him intent to reverse their fortunes (1:9), to provide them human support (1:27), both in social status (2:6) and material help (2:15-16), to select them for His future society (2:5), and to avenge every cruelty meted out to them in their positions of inferiority (5:4).

III. James' Perspective

James' overall perspective on piety and poverty, which evidently reflects the critical situation in Jerusalem around 60 A.D. and addresses his fellow Jews in the Diaspora synagogues of that time around the Mediterranean, deserves to be synthesized in a social scenario in view of its continuing relevance.

The synthesis consists of three categories of people, the poor man, the rich man, and the synagogue member. The situation logically begins with the rich man. He unfairly withholds an employee's wage (5:4). The employee, taking no steps to resist the employer (5:6), is thrown into poverty through no fault of his own. He is innocent of any wrongdoing (5:6). If it were not for such actions by employers, or other wealthy people who utilize the court system to take control of others' assets legally but unjustly (2:6; 5:6), there would be no poor. The unscrupulous, but often legal, actions of the rich are the only causes that James, from his perspective in Jerusalem (Ant. 20.180-81), relates. The employee thrown into poverty in some cases dies of starvation (5:6). In other cases he appears in a synagogue service (2:2), or perhaps along a street (2:15). In the synagogue he is prone to get a cool reception if there is a wealthy visitor present as well (2:3). The poor man may also be subjected to a display of pious concern by a synagogue member, a concern, however, which evaporates into no relief of the poor man's needs (2:16). The third category of people, the synagogue member whom we have just mentioned, shows great respect for the rich man entering his synagogue (2:3). The obsequiousness to his socio-economic superior contains a bitter irony. The wealthy man has no more compunction about legally defrauding the synagogue member of his property (2:6) than the wealthy man had in withholding his employee's wage (5:4). Adding insult to injury, the synagogue member's God is discredited among his pagan neighbors in the process (2:7).

James responds in the following ways to the three categories of people. He consoles the poor man as a brother (1:9; 2:15) by promising him that God will exalt him in the coming kingdom (1:9; 2:5) at "the parousia of the Lord" (5:7), which may, however, be after death (1:10-11). He can assure the poor man too that God is well aware of the cruel injustice the poor man has experienced and that the perpetrator will pay and will pay in full (5:1-5). God is equally aware of the social indignities the man has suffered (2:3, 6) and the pressing material needs regarding which prayers have been said and then backs have been turned (2:15-16). No special piety is attributed to the poor man, only special treatment from God to compensate for the rich man's exploitative "inhumanity to man."

To the synagogue member James issues warnings as a brother with loving concern (1:19; 2:1, 5, 14; 5:7). In general, the warning is to act in accordance with the message from God that will save him from future judgment (1:21-22). Such action means primarily helping people in need in the Jewish synagogue community (1:27; 2:15-16). The synagogue member must be sensitive both to the social dignity of the poor man (2:2-3,6) and to his material needs (2:15-16). The reason for such attention to the poor, he explains, is God's special focus on them as the special objects of His present concern (5:4, 6) and His future benefits (1:9, 2:5). In addition to warnings to be solicitous toward the helpless, James issues other warnings to be distrusting of the wealthy. They employ unrighteous but legal means to bring even synagogue members to their knees (2:6), just as they do their employees (5:4, 6). They also bring disgrace to the synagogue as a whole (2:7). James warns his brothers overall that they must turn to the poor and away from the rich if they are to escape both temporal disaster and shame (2:6-7) and eternal condemnation (2:13). To the rich man James issues not warnings but scathing denunciations. He never tells him to turn. He clearly considers him to be set irrevocably in his course of unrighteousness. Never identifying the rich man as a brother, James distances himself from the man. He is content to tell the man that God knows his sins and to promise the offender that God will repay. God knows of the defrauded wages (5:4) and the unscrupulous court actions (2:6; 5:6), which have ruthlessly driven people into poverty (5:4) and even to death (5:6). God knows too of the rich man's enormous assets, stored (5:2-3) or lavished on himself (5:5) instead of distributed to alleviate need (5:3). Therefore, James counsels as a promise, the rich man shall suffer in the future for all his wrongs (5:1). His present life is simply preparing him as an animal sacrifice (5:5), for a future as painful as fire (5:3). Furthermore, that future will come soon (1:10-11).

We see then that James issues promises to the poor man and to the rich man and warnings to the synagogue member. We find too that while the poor man is not commended for his piety, the synagogue member is warned to turn from his hypocrisy, and the rich man is simply castigated for sins, without any reference to this piety. Presumably, in the perspective of God's righteousness, the piety of the poor man and the rich man pale in comparison to God's compassion for the victimized and God's anger against the perpetrator.

Conclusion

We have found principally three things about the letter of James. First, the letter probably has a determinable and much more specific Sitz im Leben for its writing than has been noticed heretofore. Second, the author, seeing the devastation of the poor by the high priestly aristocracy in Jerusalem, wrote the Diasporic Jews to be especially solicitous to the poor with whom they had contact. Indeed, by way of threat, to do less was to incur God's eternal condemnation at the eschatological judgment. Third, he also warned the synagogue community against associating with the rich, by which term, again because of recently deteriorating priestly leadership in Jerusalem, he had primary reference to the high priest's envoys. Compared to the Acts' picture of James as the moderate diplomat, James had perhaps undergone a considerable change of mind about the rich in general, in light of the atrocities in which he had seen the wealthy priests participate. He was quite possibly "radicalized" in the direction of his brother, and Lord, and the result was that he ended up suffering the same fate as well. There may be some truth to Hegesippus' account when he claims from his source 79 that James was killed because the religious establishment considered him too great a political liability (cf. Jesus and Mark 11:18), "The whole people was in danger of looking for Jesus as the Messiah" (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 2.23.10).

We conclude with an attempt to make clear the kind of issues involved in this study. In terms of the title, the issues are two. James' "piety" is an ethic consisting of the activity of helping those in need. "Poverty," a social state not only of economic destitution but also of social, legal, and psychological problems, is traceable to one social factor, oppression by the wealthy. This ethic of active kindness needed for such a state of social difficulty James has based on a theology, a concept of God's righteousness, which is used to judge all social interaction. The issues involved in the topic of piety and poverty in James therefore consist of human interaction in society, with the result being a bad social state, which is then evaluated by a theology, with the result being an ameliorative ethic.

Notes

1M. Dibelius, James (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975) 21.

2Ibid. 48.

3S. Laws, The Epistle of James (San Francisco: Harper & Row,1980) 26.

4P. Davids, The Epistle of James (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982) 41-47.

5Ibid. 28-34.

6F. O. Francis, "The Form and Function of the Opening and Closing Paragraphs of James and I John," ZNW 61 (1970) 118.

7Laws, James 9.

8Davids, James 24.

9Ibid. 30, 34.

10R. P. Martin, "The Life-Setting of the Epistle of James in Light of Jewish History," Biblical and Near Eastern Studies (ed. G. A. Tuttle; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1978) 97-103. Davids is the only one I have found to have interacted with Martin's proposal. The concern that Martin "appears to take Hegesippus' narrative too seriously" (Davids, James 30 n. 95) seems unwarranted when Martin bases his argument primarily on the earlier evidence of Josephus and Acts and employs Hegesippus only as secondary evidence, and very critically even then (Martin, "Life-Setting" 98-99, 102 n. 14).

11Ibid. 99.

12Ibid. 99-100.

13Ibid. 101 n. 8.

14We have now addressed indirectly the authorship of the letter. The above evidence together with other research on the figure of James and the letter bearing his name leads us to conclude authorship by James or an amanuensis for him during his life. The question of whether a Palestinian Jew could have written the rather good Greek of this letter has been answered in the affirmative, barely, by J. N. Sevenster (Do You Know Greek ? Leiden: [Brill, 1968] 3-21, 189-91). Whether James the brother of Jesus in fact had the education to write the letter or instead entrusted it to an amanuensis is impossible to ascertain (Davids, James 13). James' knowledge of his brother's perspectives in the Q material are certainly reflected in the letter (J. Cantinat, Les Epítrês de Saint Jacques et de Saint Jude [Paris: J. Gabalda, 1973] 27-28 n. 16). Also, the perspective on the Torah in the epistle has been reconciled with relevant data about James by Davids' careful sorting out (Davids, James 19-20). The same writer has shown that the connection between Jas. 2:14-26 and Paul is probably apparent rather than real (ibid. 20-21).

15Ibid. 24.

16I. H. Marshall, The Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978) 818.

17Davids, James 64.

18Ibid. 19.

19In a similar vein Luke was of the opinion that conservative Jewish believers already numbered in the thousands in Jerusalem at the time of Paul's arrest (Acts 21:20).

20Martin,"Life-Setting" 100.

21The fact that James' letter was written concerning intra-Jewish problems in the late 50s and early 60s would seem to explain how James 2 could be written after Romans and not in any relation to it. Such an explanation, made possible by Martin's historical hypothesis, is simpler than the early composing and later redacting proposed by Davids (James 12, 16, 22, 34).

22H. Vogelstein, "The Development of the Apostolate in Judaism and Its Transformation in Christianity," HUCA 2 (1925) 99, 103, 119.

23S. Safrai, "Relations between the Diaspora and the Land of Israel," The Jewish People in the First Century (ed. S. Safrai and M. Stern; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974), 1.208-9.

24J. Adamson (The Epistle of James [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976] 105) suspected this ten years ago.

25The coexistence of both kinds of Jews makes it easier to understand the surprising phenomenon that the Jewish term "synagogue" and the Christian term "church" appear in the same letter (2:2; 5:14). The synagogue represents for Jew, whether Christian or not, an assembly of the group. By the church is meant only the Christian Jews of the group. Only elders who are Christian Jews can exercise such "eschatological power" (Davids, James 194) for healing.

26The compilation by J. Jeremias (Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967] 63-71) of Jewish communities in the Diaspora shows that the potential number of synagogues is enormous.

27Laws, James 105.

28Furthermore, thinking in terms of such mixed synagogues eliminates the awkwardness created by trying to interpret the economic terms of rich and poor, which one finds in the text, as religious terms of Christian Jew and non-Christian Jew, which one wants to find in a Christian document. The writing is not, and evidently need not, be so clear to be Christian.

29E. Haupt, Zum Verstaendnis des Apostolats im Neuen Testament (Halle, 1896) 126, cited in Vogelstein, "Development" 111.

30W. W. Wessel, "An Inquiry into the Origin, Literary Character, Historical and Religious Significance of the Epistle of James" (Ph.D. dissertation, Edinburgh, 1953) 71-112, cited in Davids, James 23.

31Francis, "Form" 111. Davids (James 24-29) follows closely Francis' analysis.

32Francis (Form)

33Ibid. 118.

34Ibid.

35Davids, James 28-29. This section should perhaps be further revised to "testing through speech (4:13-18) and wealth (5:1-6)."

36p, H. Davids, "Theological Perspectives on the Epistle of James," JETS 23 (1980) 99-100.

37Cf. the juxtaposed blessings and woes in Luke 6:20-26.

38Laws, James 66.

39Ibid. 85.

40Ibid. 83.

41Ibid. 87.

42Ibid. 89.

43Davids, James 101.

44Ibid. 102.

45Laws, James 89-90. D. J. Roberts ("The Definition of 'Pure Religion' in James 1:27," ExpTim 83 [1972] 215-16) finds from a variant reading here the aspect of protection.

46Laws, James 89-90.

47Ibid. 9.

48Whether the assembly is judicial, as R. B. Ward holds ("Partiality in the Assembly: James 2:2-4," HTR 62 [1969] 87-97) is not certain. See Adamson (James 105) and Laws (James 101-2). Davids (James 109), however, is convinced by Ward.

49Laws, James 98.

50The stylized character of the account does not cancel its value "as a historical source for actual circumstances." as Dibelius (James 129) claimed.

51The situation is reminiscent of the Corinthian Christians' pandering to the wishes of Jewish visitors who claimed authorization as "apostles of Christ" (2 Cor. 11:13, 20, 22).

52Ward, "Partiality" 94-96.

53The fact that "the poor" became a term for the pious in the OT and subsequently, as Davids (James 111 -12) has noted, does not cancel or dilute the economic meaning here since James refers to the group as "the poor of the world."

54Ibid.

55The statement that "God chose" the poor for an inheritance promised to "those who love him" does not in itself make clear the relative sequence of God's choosing and man's love. The context seems to favor God's choosing first and man's love afterward.

56Laws, James 107.

57M. L. Smith, "James 2:8," 7 ExplTim 21 (1910) 329.

58Davids, James 112-13.

59Safrai, "Relations" 209.

60Laws, James 120-21.

61Ibid.

62This is another indication of a Jewish group with both non-Christian and Christian perspectives. If they were all Christian, one could expect a more christological watchword, such as "Jesus is Lord" (1 Cor. 12:3).

63R. B. Ward, "The Works of Abraham: James 2:14-26" HTR 61 (1968) 286-89.

64JDavids, James 26.

65We exclude 4:13-17 from consideration because the discussion of wealth there seems to shed no light on the poor.

66The "brothers" can still be considered a mixture of non-Christian and Christian Jews to whom the Christian writer counsels patience until the "parousia of the Lord" (5:7). It is his hope, not theirs, on which he is drawing for their comfort. What comfort is it, though, for those who are not Christians? Since he foresees the Lord's parousia as righting all wrongs for the victimized (5:4), he would probably expect his words of eschatological comfort to have an evangelizing effect on the victimized non-Christian Jews (cf. 5:9). Furthermore, it is not unlikely that he anticipates a climactic turning to the Lord by his non-Christian Jewish "brothers" at the time of his return (cf. Paul's hope in Rom. 11:26). After all, it is well known that Christian Jews were not the only Jews with a messianic expectation in the first century.

67Laws, James 196.

68Davids, James 178.

69Laws, James 198.

70Davids, James 176.

71Laws, James 201.

72Ibid. 205.

73Ibid. 197.

74Davids, James 175.

75It also perhaps explains why he would so often make the same point as his brother Jesus but not use the same story. In a period still before the gospels James may have realized that the stories and comments he would use against the high priestly aristocracy were, in most cases, ones which Jesus employed against Pharisees. Pharisees had become James' main support group, it would seem (Ant. 20.201; Acts 21:20), and his use of stories directed against Pharisees might provoke much offense among them that could be avoided by utilizing ideas from the ancient prophetic texts of the OT.

76Davids, James 111.

77A. Kuschke, "Arm und reich im Alten Testament," ZA W 57 (1939) 56.

78Davids (James 103) considers this to be the theme of chap. 2.

79W. Telfer ("Was Hegesippus a Jew?" HTR 53 [1960] 148-149) has shown that Hegesippus employed here a Jewish Christian document probably written outside Palestine in the period 115-30 A.D.

Edited by Michael Mattei for the
Wesley Center for Applied Theology
at Northwest Nazarene University
© Copyright 2000 by the Wesley Center for Applied Theology

Text may be freely used for personal or scholarly purposes, provided the notice below the horizontal line is left intact. Any use of this material for commercial purposes of any kind is strictly forbidden without the express permission of the Wesley Center at Northwest Nazarene University, Nampa, ID 83686. Contact the webmaster for permission or to report errors.