Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Synopsis of the Chapter
He passes from religion to faith, which is the principle and foundation of religion. Concerning faith, then, he asserts three things. First, that faith does not admit respect of persons, so as to prefer the rich to the poor, the noble to the ignoble: for this rightly coheres with what he had said a little before: Pure religion, etc., is to visit orphans and widows in their tribulation, and to keep oneself unspotted from this world. For the world prefers the rich to the poor, the noble to the ignoble, and this is its vice and stain.
Second, in verse 10, he asserts that faith teaches that he who violates one precept of the law is made guilty of all.
Third, from verse 14 to the end, he teaches with many arguments and examples that faith without works is empty and dead, like a corpse.
Vulgate Text: James 2:1-26
1. My brethren, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ of glory with respect of persons. 2. For if there shall enter into your assembly a man having a gold ring in fine apparel, and there shall enter in also a poor man in mean attire, 3. and you give attention to him who is clothed with the splendid garment, and shall say to him: Sit here well; but to the poor man you shall say: Stand there, or sit under my footstool: 4. do you not judge among yourselves, and are become judges of unjust thoughts? 5. Hear, my dearest brethren, has not God chosen the poor of this world, rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom, which God has promised to those who love Him? 6. But you have dishonored the poor. Do not the rich oppress you by power, and they themselves drag you to judgment? 7. Do not they blaspheme the good name that is invoked upon you? 8. If, however, you fulfill the royal law according to the Scriptures: You shall love your neighbor as yourself: you do well; 9. but if you accept persons, you commit sin, being rebuked by the law as transgressors. 10. But whosoever shall have kept the whole law, but offends in one point, has become guilty of all. 11. For He who said: You shall not commit adultery, said also: You shall not kill. But if you do not commit adultery, but kill, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12. So speak and so act, as those who begin to be judged through the law of liberty. 13. For judgment without mercy to him who has not done mercy: but mercy exalts itself above judgment. 14. What shall it profit, my brethren, if a man say he has faith, but has not works? Can faith save him? 15. But if a brother and sister be naked, and need daily food, 16. and one of you say to them: Go in peace, be warmed and filled: but you give them not the things that are necessary for the body, what shall it profit? 17. So also faith, if it has not works, is dead in itself. 18. But someone will say: You have faith, and I have works; show me your faith without works, and I will show you, by my works, my faith. 19. You believe that there is one God: you do well; the demons also believe and tremble. 20. But will you know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? 21. Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? 22. You see that faith cooperated with his works: and by works was faith made perfect. 23. And the Scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him for justice, and he was called the friend of God. 24. You see that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. 25. And in like manner Rahab the harlot, was she not justified by works, receiving the messengers, and sending them out by another way? 26. For as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.
Verse 1: My Brethren, Do Not Hold the Faith of Our Lord Jesus Christ of Glory With Respect of Persons
1. My brethren, do not hold the faith with (that is, accompanied by: it can however be taken properly as "in," as I shall say below) respect of persons. — "Respect of persons" is a vice opposed to distributive justice, by which someone, in distributing offices, dignities, benefices, gifts, places, etc., does not look to merit, nor to dignity, but to a quality of the person not pertaining to the matter, so as to give the better and greater things to relatives, friends, the rich, and the noble, and the worse and lesser things to outsiders, enemies, the poor, and the ignoble. Sometimes also it is opposed to commutative justice, as when a judge adjudicates a lawsuit to a friend which by justice ought to have been adjudicated to an enemy; and then it brings on an obligation of restitution.
St. Augustine, epistle 28, refers this saying of James to those who promote relatives, friends, or rich men to the episcopate and other Orders and benefices, while passing over outsiders and the poor, even though more worthy: to whom accordingly an injury is done, as also to the Church, which by right was expecting greater honor and greater help from those more worthy. Wherefore this is a mortal sin, as our Lessius teaches, On Justice and Right, ch. XXXII, doubt 1, Benedict Justinian here, and others; whence it is gravely forbidden by the Council of Trent, sess. XXIV, ch. 1, On Reform. But the saying of St. James is general and strikes all who in any way whatsoever prefer the rich to the poor on this sole ground that they are rich, whether this be done by giving them a more honorable place in the temple, at table, in the public assembly; or in courts by favoring friends more than outsiders; or in taxes and other burdens, by burdening the poor more than the rich; or in distributing offices and benefices, giving them to relatives even though less worthy, etc. But St. James here especially regards the honor which many used to give to the rich, while the poor were neglected or scorned in their common gatherings (as he himself says in v. 2) and banquets, especially the sacred ones, that is, in the agape, in which the rich after the Eucharist used to feast splendidly among themselves, the poor not being awaited or being excluded. Hence St. Paul taxes the same vice of theirs, I Cor. XI, 21, saying: "Each one takes his own supper to eat first; and one indeed is hungry, and another is drunk": see what is said there. For this is what James adds in v. 3, that they said to the rich man: "Sit here well"; but to the poor: "Stand there, or sit under my footstool."
Memorable was the example of St. Martin, who, as Severus Sulpicius says, bk. I of the Dialogues, ch. XXIII, was invited to a banquet by Maximus, a tyrant fierce and made arrogant by his victories. When the attendant had offered the cup to the king, he ordered it to be given to St. Martin, expecting and desiring to receive the same from his right hand; but the holy man, when he had drunk, handed the cup to his presbyter, who was likewise poor, judging no one more worthy to drink after himself: and that it would not be becoming for him if he had preferred either the king himself, or those who were nearest to the king, to his presbyter. The king and all who were present so admired the deed that the very thing in which they had been slighted pleased them, and it was celebrated throughout the palace that Martin had done at the king's banquet what no bishop had done at the banquets of the lowest judges.
The Gentiles saw the same thing: Lycurgus, understanding that equality conduces above all to frugality and to concord, made at Sparta a new division of fields, and distributed to each citizen an equal portion, so that all Lacedaemon seemed to be of many brothers who had divided their inheritance among themselves. For the same reason he instituted the syssitia, that is, public banquets, in which among all, drink and food were of equal portion: indeed even in dishes, and in any other thing, he established that the rich man should not have more than the poor. So Plutarch in his Laconian Sayings.
Curius, when after the conquest of the Sabines more land was offered to him by the senate, refused it, and was content with the share of the common soldiers, saying that he was a bad citizen for whom that which was enough for others was not enough. So Pliny the Younger in On Illustrious Men, ch. XXXIII.
Epaminondas, when Simonides asked something unjust, replied: "Neither would you be a good poet if you neglected the meters of a song, nor would I be a good praetor if I preferred anyone's favor to the laws."
Socrates' wealth (whom the oracle of Apollo judged to be the wisest of mortals) was a mina of silver, says Plato in his Apology of Socrates — that is, ten gold crowns. For a mina among the Greeks is a pound, containing a hundred drachmas, that is, a hundred Roman denarii, or four hundred sesterces, which make ten crowns. So Budaeus, On the As.
Themistocles, when admonished, heard from a wise man: "You will administer your principality well, if you are willing to be equal and common to all." So Plutarch in his Apophthegmata.
To hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ. — Various authors expound this in various ways, but few touch the matter to the point. First, some take "faith" here for opinion and estimation, as if to say: Do not opine or judge concerning our Lord Jesus Christ that there is in Him respect of persons, so that He has called the rich, not the poor, to faith and salvation. For He is the Lord of glory; and therefore He has need of no one, but all need His favor and grace. So Hugh.
Secondly, the same author takes "faith" properly, and gives this sense: Do not place the faith of Christ in respected persons, namely in the rich, so as to worship them as if they were gods, or certain divinities, above all others.
Thirdly, Dionysius the Carthusian refers "faith" to "of glory," as if to say: Do not have faith of the glory of Christ, that is, do not believe that you will receive eternal glory from Christ if you accept persons.
Fourthly, others take "faith" for hope and confidence, as if to say: Do not hope for the grace of Christ, if by accepting persons you show that you place your hope in men, namely in the rich. So Bede.
Fifthly and genuinely: Do not join the faith of Christ with respect of persons, so as to suppose that the one can stand together with the other. For the faith of Christ teaches and commands justice, equity, love and care for the poor, all of which respect of persons opposes, since it prefers the rich and despises the poor. Whence Vatablus expounds it thus: "Since you are Christians, do not have a choosing of persons"; others: Do not think yourselves truly Christians if you accept persons. For the preposition "in" is often taken among the Hebrews for "with"; "in acceptance," therefore, means "with acceptance of persons," as if to say: The Christian profession does not allow respect of persons, and Christianity does not admit it; but forbids, blames, and condemns it. But James says "in" rather than "with," to magnify the gravity of the vice, as if to say: Do not put in the same heart of yours both faith and the vice of respect of persons; nay, do not put faith in this vice, that is, in a heart steeped and filled with this vice: do not place and pollute the most noble balm of faith in so impure and filthy a vessel. For this is injurious to faith and to Christ Himself, who, being poor, called and chose the poor, and proclaimed them blessed. Similar is what Paul says in II Corinthians VI, 15: "What fellowship has light with darkness? What concord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has the faithful with the unfaithful, what agreement has the temple of God with idols?" You may rightly apply the same to any vice: for in the same heart cannot be placed virtue and vice, faith and unbelief, Christ and the devil.
Wherefore some expound this more vigorously, as if to say: Do not place the faith of Christ in respect of persons, that is, in accepted persons (by metonymy, or hypallage), namely so that you place your faith and confidence in rich and powerful persons, whom you cultivate and honor, equally with, or more than, in Christ. Do not transform the faith and hope of Christ into the faith and hope of men, so that you trust and have confidence in them more than in Christ: for many have their faith, just as their heart, more in bronze (money) than in the ether; because they value brass — that is, money — more than the help of heaven and of God, and they trust brass more than the ether. Of such men the Psalmist says: "Do not hope in iniquity, and do not desire robberies; if riches abound, do not set your heart upon them," Psalm LXI, 11. And this seems to be Hugh's mind according to his second exposition.
Finally, the plainest sense will be obtained if, by an easy metathesis, you connect the words thus: Do not hold the faith of the glory of Christ in respect of persons, as if to say: Do not believe that Christ's glory consists in respect of persons: which sense I will shortly explain more fully.
This is what St. Jerome says to Celantia: "Our religion knows not how to accept persons, nor the conditions of men, but inspects the souls of individuals: it pronounces both slave and noble by their morals. With God the only freedom is not to serve sins. With God the highest nobility is to be illustrious in virtues." And St. Bernard, bk. II On Consideration, ch. VI: "The use of silver and gold," he says, "is good; the abuse, evil; the anxiety, greater; the gain, more disgraceful." Whence St. Peter said: "Silver and gold I have none, but what I have, this I give you," Acts III. Apuleius too: "You praise someone," he says, "because he is well-born — you praise his parent; but if because he is rich, this is owed to fortune; if you praise him because he is of good morals, then you praise the man himself, not what is foreign to him." But St. Bernard, bk. II On Consideration to Pope Eugenius, ch. XIV, speaks freely: "Let there not be in you respect of persons: do not consider yourself slightly guilty of sin, if you face sinners and do not rather judge the causes of merits." Respect of persons, therefore, perverts justice, wounds charity, splits the unity of Christianity. For since the faith and law of Christ is the law of charity, it must comprehend all equally and unite them in itself; and consequently must neither honor and exalt the rich man for his riches, nor despise the poor man for his poverty. Therefore the contrary opinion and respect of persons is contrary to Christ and unworthy of Christianity. Truly Clement of Alexandria, bk. III of the Pedagogue, ch. VI: "The Christian alone," he says, "is rich; for true riches are in the soul, namely faith, grace, and the virtues, in which the Christian abounds."
Of glory. — In Greek τῆς δόξης, which Erasmus and the Zurich version translate as "according to opinion," namely not of Christ, but of the vulgar — which honors riches and the rich, and despises poverty and the poor. But these add the τὸ ἐκ, and supply many things which are not in the Greek text. Wherefore others everywhere translate it "of glory," and refer this either more remotely to "faith," as if to say: The faith of glory, that is, glorious, which leads to eternal glory; or more closely and aptly to "of Christ": for Christ is called "of glory," namely as King and Lord, that is, most glorious in Himself and in His elect and Blessed; as if to say: By accepting persons in the faith of Christ, you do injury to the most glorious Christ; as if He depended on the rich, and not rather the rich on Him; or as if He could not help, protect, and promote you, so that you must capture the favor and grace of the rich: each of which is injurious to the glory of Christ and to the most glorious Christ. In a similar way Christ is called the "hope of glory," Colossians I, 27. And the grace of Christ is called "of glory," that is glorious, Ephesians ch. I. So it is proper to God to be and be called the King of glory, Psalm XXIII, 10. Whence St. Cyril, bk. XII of the Thesaurus, ch. XIII, proves Christ to be God from the fact that He is here called the Lord of glory. Finally, Joannes Alba, On the Elect, ch. XCVI, expounds "of glory" as "according to glory," as if to say: Do not value Christ's faith and the faithful according to glory, that is, according to wealth, honor, and their power, so as to accept persons, by honoring the rich and powerful, and by despising the poor.
But to say frankly what I think, all these expositions seem remote, harsh, and gaping. Wherefore we shall most plainly expound thus: Do not have faith in the glory of Christ, that is, do not believe that Christ's glory is placed in respect of persons — namely, that Christ glories or is glorified, when at your agapes and gatherings you admit only the rich, noble, and glorious, while the poor and shabby are spurned or excluded, as if the glory of Christ and of Christianity consisted in the glory of golden and purple garments, in the splendor of courtiers and servants, in the pomp of horses and chariots. For this is the glory of the world, not of Christ; of the Jews, not of Christians; of paganism, not of Christianity: so Thomas the Englishman. Let confessors, preachers, doctors, and heads of congregations note this — those who glory when they have noble, rich, splendidly clothed penitents, listeners, disciples, followers; but who unwillingly see, unwillingly hear, and unwillingly admit the common and shabby. Let them know this is the sense of vanity, not of truth; of the world, not of Christ: often beneath silken garments great filth lies hidden.
Posthumus, he does not smell well who always smells well.
Let them therefore put off this base affection, and put on the contrary one worthy of a disciple of Christ.
Verse 2: For if There Shall Enter Into Your Assembly a Man Having a Gold Ring in Fine Apparel
2. For if there shall enter into your assembly, — whether private or public, whether civil or sacred, namely a sermon, liturgy, holy synaxis (which fittingly corresponds to the Greek συναγωγή, that is, assembly, gathering, congregation, Church, as well in etymology as in meaning: for the synaxis was held in the synagogue, that is, assembly and Church), and the agape, as I said above, and as Thomas the Englishman, Salmeron, Serarius, and Gagneius teach here. He declares respect of persons by the example of those who in assembly and gathering honor the rich, despise the poor: which was once common, and is even now a vice, according to Ovid, Fasti, Book I:
Now value is in worth; income gives honors,
Income gives friendships: the poor man lies prostrate everywhere.
And Euripides: "In poverty there is ignobility, and timidity, and the disgrace of life." Truly the Wise One says, Ecclesiastes X, 19: "Money," he says, "all things obey"; the Septuagint, "all things are humbled"; others, "sing," that is, flatter and applaud, all things; others, "testify," all things; others, "answer," all things, as servants answer their mistress when she calls and commands: for the Hebrew יענה (iaane) signifies all of these.
This sense of the crowd and the world, this paganism, Christ and Christianity correct, which in faith, grace, and glory equate poverty with riches, and the poor with the rich — indeed, prefer them. "That most of us are called poor," says Minucius in the Octavius, "is not our shame, but our glory: he is not poor who does not lack, who does not gape for what is another's, who is rich toward God." St. Salvian, bk. II On the Catholic Church: "Of those," he says, "who, freed from all or nearly all burdens, follow the Savior's way, and imitate the Lord Jesus Christ not only in sanctity but also in poverty, there is nothing that can be said except what the Prophet also said: But to me Your friends, O God, have been exceedingly honored. For I honor all of them in no other way than as imitators of Christ, I venerate them in no other way than as images of Christ, I receive them in no other way than as members of Christ." In bk. III he calls these same the money-changers of Christ: for Christians who seek heavenly riches despise earthly ones; nay, they buy the former by their contempt of the latter. Whence Christ's precept is: "Let go of earthly things, and you shall receive heavenly," says St. Augustine, Sermon 233 On the Seasons. "For poverty," says the same Father, "is the price of the heavenly kingdom," Sermon 28 On the Words of the Apostle. And St. Gregory, Homily 18 on Ezekiel: "Those fly," he says, "who, as it were, do not touch the earth, because they desire nothing in it." St. Prosper, bk. II On the Contemplative Life, ch. XXVI: "He who wishes," he says, "to possess God, let him renounce the world, that for him God may be a blessed possession."
Wearing a golden ring. — Baronius, in the year of Christ 34, and Pineda, bk. VI, On the Affairs of Solomon, ch. V, judge that this ring was on the garment, namely a golden brooch (for this is inserted and fastened with a golden circle as a ring), which the kinsmen of kings and princes, or singular friends, wore on their garments, as is clear from Josephus, bk. XIV of Antiquities, ch. XVI. Thus King Alexander gave a golden brooch to Jonathan as a sign of the highest goodwill and honor, I Maccabees X, 88, as among the Romans there was the broad stripe (latus clavus). Our Raderus, in bk. V on Martial, epigram 42, judges that the form of this brooch was like that of the gilded and gemmed brooch of the cope of Abbots and Bishops, by which one side is connected to the other at the breast; whence Virgil, Aeneid IV:
A golden brooch fastens up the purple garment.
But the Greek δακτύλιος means not a brooch, but a finger-ring: for δάκτυλος in Greek is a finger; whence the fruits of the palm are called dactyls, because, curved with great length and slenderness, they are similar to human fingers, as Dioscorides testifies in bk. I, ch. LXVII. Hence δακτύλιος is called the ring which is inserted on the finger. Therefore χρυσοδακτύλιος is, word for word, the same as "gold-ringed" or "gold-fingered," namely one who wears a golden ring on his finger. From of old, the rich and powerful are accustomed to wear a golden ring, both for sealing letters, and as ornament, and for cheering the heart: whence they used to wear it on the second-to-last finger of the left hand, which is called the auricular, because from it a nerve or artery extends to the heart, as Gellius testifies in bk. X, ch. X; for gold, and especially hyacinths, carbuncles, emeralds, and similar gems which are set in the bezel of rings, cheer and comfort both the heart and the eyes. Bishops, however, wear the ring on the middle finger of the right hand, which is called the index, because it indicates silence, as Apuleius teaches in bk. I. The very formula of giving the ring at the consecration of a bishop gives the reason; it runs thus: "Receive the ring of discretion and the sign of honor of faith, that you may seal what is to be sealed, and unfold what is to be opened; bind what is to be bound, loose what is to be loosed." See Alexander ab Alexandro, bk. II of the Genial Days, ch. XIX, and Pierius, Hieroglyphica, ch. XLI.
Furthermore, that the rings of the rich are of vain splendor, St. Augustine teaches in bk. III of The City of God, ch. XIX, from a deed of Hannibal in the victory at Cannae, from which "he sent three modii of golden rings to Carthage: that they might understand that so great a dignity of Rome had fallen in that battle that measure could more easily contain them than number." And shortly after: "Then also, when the treasury had failed for paying the stipends, private wealth came into public uses, with each one contributing what he had, so that besides single golden rings, and single bullae — pitiable insignia of dignity — the senate itself left nothing of gold for itself; how much more did the other ranks and tribes do likewise." For of old among the Romans only the senators and knights used rings, as Dio testifies, bk. XLVIII. Wherefore Clement of Alexandria, bk. III of the Pedagogue, only permits the ring to Christians for this purpose, that they may seal their things with it. "But other rings," he says, "are to be cast away, as Scripture wills. To the prudent man the world is a golden discipline." And shortly after: "But neither is a ring to be worn by men on the joint (for this is womanly), but on the small finger, and even on the extreme part of it: for so the hand will be most ready for working; nor will the seal easily fall off, which is guarded by the larger ligament of the joint."
In a garment. — That is, with a garment; for, as I said, the ring was not on the garment, but on the finger: for both the white garment and the ring were a sign of dignity.
White, — λαμπρά, that is splendid, as was the white. For whiteness shines above all other colors, and is splendor itself: so shines the whiteness of the swan, of snow, of lightning, of the sun. Hence at Rome the garment of those who sought magistracies was once white, and they were therefore called Candidates: for the candidates would descend into the Campus Martius, where the assemblies of the people were held. So also princes used both white and purple. Whence Herod mocked Christ by clothing Him in a white garment, in Greek λαμπρά, that is splendid, by which he tacitly accused Him of having foolishly aspired to the kingdom of Judea, Luke XXIII, 11. Hence both Christ and the Apostles, Apocalypse VI, 2, are represented by a white horse. "Behold," he says, "a white horse, and he who sat upon it had a bow, and a crown was given to him, and he went forth conquering that he might conquer." For white is a beautiful color, glad, shining and splendid: hence a white garment is festive, joyful, splendid, magnificent. Hear Prudentius Against Symmachus:
You may see the fathers exult, the most beautiful lights
Of the world, and the council of aged Catos rejoicing
In a whiter toga, taking up the snowy mantle
Of piety.
And Martial, bk. VIII, epigram 28, thus extols the whitest and most excellent toga given to him by Parthenius, prefect of Domitian's bedchamber:
You surpass the lilies, and the privets not yet fallen,
And the ivory which whitens on the Tiburtine mountain;
The Spartan swan will yield to you, and the Paphian dove,
The gem dug from the Erythraean shoals will yield.
Wherefore St. John saw in heaven the Saints and the Blessed clothed in white robes, Apocalypse VII, 9; for white colors most befit gods, says Plato, bk. XII On the Laws. Finally Christ the glorious triumphator leads after Himself an army of those clothed in white, Apocalypse XIX, 14: "The armies," he says, "which are in heaven, followed Him on white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean." See what is said there. The whiteness of garments, therefore, is a certain emulation of divine glory: for white brightness is the ornament of divinity, Daniel VII, 9.
Furthermore, how vain it is to glory in or to honor splendid garments, and those splendidly clothed, is clear, first, from this: that a garment is the punishment and covering of sin. For Adam was created innocent and naked, but soon, blushing at his concupiscence after his sin, he covered himself with garments sewn from fig leaves. Just, then, as a King cast into chains, wearing golden fetters, would not be honored by them, but rather despised: for although they be golden, they are still fetters; and the very fact that they are golden re-opens for him the former glory of his kingdom, from which he fell into fetters, as one cast from the highest pinnacle of honor into the lowest dishonor: so likewise the rich man in splendid garments ought to blush, because these are nothing but the stigma of sin, the veil of concupiscence, the covering of shame. Secondly, because the first garments with which God clothed Adam were simple and natural — namely, raw skins of animals, Genesis ch. III, 21 — to teach him and his posterity that the garment was given to man only out of necessity, and that it is a symbol of penance and mortality, to which through sin we have been made subject, as I said on Genesis III, 21. Therefore the rich man in a fine-linen garment should no more be exalted than a thief in a fine-linen noose. Thirdly, because simple and rude was the clothing of Elijah, Elisha, the Prophets, St. John the Baptist, Christ the Lord, the Apostles, the Essenes, and the first faithful. Whence Lucian, in the Philopatris, describing the Christian's habit: "A worn-out cloak," he says, "without shoes or covering, walking with bare head, with hair shorn." Fourthly, because the adornment of garments is womanly, and indicates women, not men: for the adornment of these latter is interior, in judgment, wisdom, and virtue. For what is gold and silver, except white and red earth? What is fine linen, except the rotting of worms — namely silkworms? What are pearls, except the excrements of shellfish? What are precious wools, except the fleeces of sheep?
Hear St. Bernard, Sermon 4 On Advent: "Are not gold and silver red and white earth, which only the error of men makes (or rather reckons) precious? True riches, then, are not wealth, but virtues, which conscience carries with itself, that one may be rich for ever." And St. Cyril, bk. IV on John, ch. IV: "The Saints are to be considered not by their flesh, but by their inner glory."
Note: a splendid garment is often a sign of magistracy, dignity, or nobility: and then honor is to be paid not to it, but to the dignity and office; but St. James here abstracts the garment from these, and considers it only as a sign of riches, as well as of luxuries and a sumptuous life. For they used of old, at festive feasts, games, sacrifices, etc., to be clothed in a white garment as a sign of joy, as Valerius Maximus teaches, bk. I, ch. I, and as Ecclesiastes indicates, ch. IX, verse 8.
Wherefore St. James, by the white garment, understands here not only the rich man, but also the voluptuary, who abuses that text of Ecclesiastes IX, 8: "At every time let your garments be white." So Socrates, bk. VI, ch. XXII.
St. Jerome praises St. Asella, epistle 15 to Marcella: "Speech," he says, "silent, and silence speaking: a gait neither swift nor slow, ever the same bearing, a neglected cleanness, and in an unadorned garment, adornment itself without adornment."
Aristotle, seeing a young man clothed in a more sumptuous toga, said: "Young man," he said, "will you some day temper this excessive elegance, gained by the virtue of sheep?" Plato said to Aristippus: "To you alone has it been given to wear both the chlamys and the rag." The chlamys was the garment of princes, the rag of the poor. Whence Horace: "Every color suited Aristippus." Witness Laertius, bk. II, ch. VIII.
Diogenes used to call a rich but unlearned man, splendidly clothed, χρυσόμηλον, that is a golden sheep, or, as others read χρυσόμαλλον, that is a golden fleece. Witness Laertius, bk. VI.
Demonax said in the ear of one who waxed insolent in purple clothing: "Hey you — a sheep wore this before, and was a sheep"; signifying that he was equally stupid in purple as before, and that the purple had not added intelligence to him. That saying is well-worn: "An ape in purple." And, "An ape is an ape, even if it wear golden insignia." Artaxerxes said to Tiribazus, who waxed insolent in his clothes: "To you, as to a woman, I concede the right of wearing gold; as to a madman, the right of wearing royal garb." Augustus Caesar's axiom was: "A distinguished and soft garment is the banner of pride and the nest of luxury." Witness Suetonius in his Life.
The Emperor Alexander Severus, walking in humble clothing, when he was rebuked by his courtiers for it, said: "Imperial majesty consists in virtue, not in the adornment of the body."
Alfonso, king of Aragon, did and said something similar: "I prefer," he said, "to surpass my own people in morals and authority, than in diadem and purple." So Panormitanus, bk. I On the Deeds of Alfonso. I have said more on Isaiah, ch. III, at the end.
Finally Clement of Alexandria, bk. II of the Pedagogue, ch. X, relates that Caeus the sophist represented wickedness as veiled in a white garment, but virtue as clothed only in modesty: just like that painter who, when he could not paint Helen as elegant, painted her in a golden and gemmed garment not so much adorned as buried.
Thus Sisinnius, Bishop of the Novatians, a soft man, was rebuked by the faithful because he washed himself twice daily and clothed himself in a white garment as though sumptuously living, one who passes his life in festivals, games, and feasts with contempt for the poor: such was the rich Epulo who was clothed in fine linen, and feasted splendidly, and despised Lazarus, and refused him the crumbs of his table. As therefore Christ, Luke XVI, censures this rich man who despised Lazarus, so James censures those who honor the rich and the luxurious with contempt and injury to the poor and needy.
But if a poor man shall enter also in sordid attire. — In Greek ῥυπαρά, that is squalid, worn-out, sordid: I have spoken about ῥυπαρά in ch. 1, verse 21. Most of the faithful in the primitive Church were poor either by condition, or by the despoiling of their goods which they suffered from the Jews, or by will and spirit. Hear St. Justin, in his epistle to Diognetus, describing the customs of the Christians of his age: "Every foreign region," he says, "is their fatherland, and every fatherland is foreign. They are in the flesh, but do not live according to the flesh; they dwell on earth, but their conversation is in heaven; they are poor, and enrich many; they need all things, and abound in all things."
Verse 3: And You Shall Say to Him, Sit Here Well; but to the Poor Man, Stand There, or Sit Under My Footstool
3. Splendid, — λαμπράν, that is splendid, namely white, of which I spoke a little earlier. Excellently does Seneca say, epistle 37: "As," he says, "he is foolish who, about to buy a horse, does not inspect the horse itself, but its saddle and reins: so also is he most foolish who judges a man from the condition which clothing has now placed around us. Is he a slave? but perhaps with a free spirit. Is he a slave? this will harm him, it will not harm others." Therefore he is of little judgment who judges a man not from himself, but from his clothing, as fools and children do. St. Chrysostom, homily 47 to the People: "Clothes," he says, "and gold and silver are the food of worms: but he who is clothed with virtue has such a garment as not only the moth, but death itself cannot harm. And rightly so: for these virtues of the soul do not draw their origin from the earth, but are the fruits of the spirit."
And you shall say to him: Sit here well. — In Greek καλῶς, the Syriac שפיר scappir, that is beautifully, namely in a place not only convenient and honored, but also elegant, namely in a primary or higher seat, spread with a fine linen cushion, surrounded with hangings and a canopy. The Jews sat in the synagogues: the masters indeed higher up, but the hearers and disciples lower down, as St. Ambrose relates, on I Corinthians XIV, 30, and the Apostle hints at the same place. Philo also relates that the Essenes sat, in his book On the Contemplative Life. The same about the Roman Christians is related by St. Clement, in bk. II of the Constitutions, ch. LVII. For in Africa it was not permitted for laymen to sit in church, as Optatus of Milevis testifies, bk. IV, just as also it is not permitted for the same to sit in the temple in Ethiopia, or Abyssinia, not even for old men and the infirm: for to these alone it is conceded to lean on a staff, as I have heard at Rome from the Abyssinians. It is memorable what Eusebius writes about Constantine the Great in his Life, bk. IV, ch. XXXIII, that he himself heard the sermon in church standing, and did not wish to sit, although he was invited to it by the Bishop, indeed even commanded; because he said divine things ought to be heard with raised spirits, attentive ears and feet. Among the Romans in the theater each had his own place according to his rank: whence among the knights no one was permitted to sit unless he had the equestrian census, namely four hundred sestertia, that is, ten thousand gold pieces. Hear Martial, bk. V, epigram 26: "You do not have four hundred, Charestratus, get up. Behold, Lectius (the censor of places) comes: stand, flee, run, hide." In a similar manner with St. Clement, in bk. II of the Constitutions, chs. LVII and LVIII, the Apostles ordain things which it is worth our while to hear, that from them we may learn the order of the synaxis and of sitting in it. "When you call together the Church of God," they say, "(O Bishop), like the helmsman of a great ship, command that they be gathered with all prudence, instructing the Deacons as sailors, that they arrange the places for the brethren, as for those sailing, very carefully and decently. And first let there be an oblong building toward the East, similar to a ship, with the pastophoria on either side toward the East. Let the throne of the Bishop be set in the middle, and on either side of it let the Presbyters sit and the Deacons stand, girt and ready without much clothing: for those are like sailors, these like those who run through the gangways of the ship. And let it be their care that the laity sit in the other part in order, with decorum and quiet: likewise that the women sit separately, and in silence." And a little later: "But if anyone is found sitting in a place not becoming, let him be rebuked by the Deacon, as by the prow officer, and let him be moved to a place that befits him. For the Church is not only similar to a ship, but to a flock; for as Shepherds place each sheep, I mean goats and sheep, according to their kind and age, and each of them is gathered with its like: so in the Church let the youths indeed sit apart, if there is room: but if not, let them stand; let those advanced in age sit in order: let parents and mothers receive the boys standing; again let the young women sit apart, if there is room; but if not, let them be placed behind the women. Wives now and mothers of families likewise apart: but virgins, and widows, and aged women let them stand or sit first of all. Let the Deacon preside over the seating, that each of those who enter may go to his own place, and let no one sit beyond what is becoming: likewise let the Deacon watch the people, that no one disturb with murmuring, doze, or make signs. For one ought to stand in the church wisely, soberly and vigilantly, with ears intent on the word of the Lord. Then all rising together and looking toward the East, after the catechumens and penitents have gone out, let them pray to God, who ascended above the heaven of heavens, and that toward the East." And below: "But if when one is already seated, another comes who is honorable and noble, whether a stranger, or from that region, etc., let the Deacon move a younger one from his place, prudently however, and not angrily, and let him receive the seated one: for it is fair that he who is benevolent toward the brethren, do this of his own accord: but if he refuses, move him by compelling, and reject him to the lowest place, that the rest may learn to yield place to those more honored. But if a poor man, or one of low birth, or some stranger old man or youth comes, and there is no vacant place, the Deacon should also with all his heart make a place for these, lest there be respect of persons toward a man, but the ministry be acceptable to God: when women come, whether poor or rich, the Deaconess should do both of these things."
St. Clement adds that the Christians sat only during the preaching and reading, but during prayer and the liturgy they stood, or certainly knelt. The latter is expressly taught by Tertullian, in his book On Prayer, ch. XII: "It is irreverent," he says, "to sit down under the gaze, and against the gaze of him whom you most reverence and venerate: how much more under the gaze of the living God, with the angel of prayer still standing by, this thing done is most irreligious. Unless we reproach God, that prayer has wearied us. But when we worship with modesty and humility, we more commend our prayers to God." See what was said on Acts ch. XX, verse 36.
But say to the poor man: Stand thou there, or sit under the footstool of my feet. — (Tigurine version, beneath; others, beside; Syriac, before.) The contempt of the poor man is signified, as if to say: Sit not on the footstool, but under the footstool of my feet: for so vile are you that you are not worthy to touch my feet, indeed not even their footstool. Therefore sit there, or like another Alexius stand in the corner, or with Lazarus lie down like a dog at the door of the rich Epulo: which contempt is indeed grave, and therefore a deadly sin. From this followed the oppression of the poor, which is a sin crying to heaven, about which, verse 6, St. James says: "Do not the rich oppress you by power?"
Note first: Honor is a common good, just as duties and benefits. For at the table, in judgment, in council, or in any other public assembly, his own honor and place is owed to each, which if it is not given, becomes an injury to him, and is a sin of respect of persons. Secondly, honor is owed to a rational creature on account of excellence, which consists in wisdom, virtue, office, dignity and power. Therefore riches in themselves are not to be honored, because in themselves they do not make a man wiser, more virtuous, more worthy and more excellent than others: therefore the rich are honored only through received custom, or because riches accompany dignity and rule. Wherefore if anyone, out of inner reverence toward riches, prefers a rich man, by this name alone that he is rich, to a faithful poor man, he sins by the vice of respect of persons: and it can happen that he sins mortally, namely if it is done with notable contempt for the poor man, or injury and oppression, as is said in verse 6, otherwise he sins only venially. So our Lessius On Justice and Right, ch. XXXII, doubt 1.
Verse 4: Do You Not Judge Among Yourselves, and Are Become Judges of Unjust Thoughts
4. Do you not (in Greek οὐ, that is no, customarily put for οὐχί, that is do you not) judge — διεκρίθητε, that is you have judged, that is you have made distinction of persons by exalting the rich man supremely, debasing the poor man to the lowest. So Vatablus. Whence the Syriac translates, אתפרגתון etpalgetun, that is you have divided, you have made a distinction, you have unjustly distinguished between the poor and the rich, which Our Latin Vulgate translates, "you judge"; because it is the judge's task to divide equity between parties, that he may give to each his own right, but not unjustly prefer one to another, and attribute everything to him through right and wrong: for the poor man should not be despoiled of his right because of poverty, so that it might be unjustly transferred to the rich man only because of his riches. Secondly, the Tigurine version, Erasmus and others take διεκρίθητε passively, and translate assertively, not interrogatively, as "and you have not been judged among yourselves," as if to say: You have not perceived the judgment and remorse of conscience, namely that in this respect of persons you offend God. Whence Cajetan: "You are not," he says, "judged in yourselves," but you are judged in your clothes, while you honor the rich because of splendid clothes, you despise the poor because of squalid ones. Others translating interrogatively explain thus, as if to say: Are you not by your own judgment judged, convicted, and damned? as if to say: Does not right reason and judgment condemn you, and prove that you act unjustly? so Bede. But that it should be translated actively as "you judge," is clear from what St. James adds in explanation: "And are become judges of unjust thoughts"; for it is the judge's task to judge, not to be judged: whence Gagneius suspects that Our Translator read ἐκρίνετε, in the indicative, that is "you judge"; but "you judge" is the same as "you are accustomed to judge," that is you have judged: which is what the Greek διεκρίθητε signifies. Hugh and Dionysius press the ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, "among yourselves," as if to say: From yourselves, and your perverse imagination, you take this perverse judgment, not from God; for God commands that his right and place be given both to the poor and to the rich. Wisely Plato in the Protagoras: "Do not," he says, "judge in another tribunal before you yourself have been judged before justice (before God)." And Seneca, epistle 37: "If you wish to subject all things to yourself, subject yourself to reason (and consequently to God); you will subject many kings, if reason rules you: from her you will learn what and how you ought to undertake." And Socrates in Stobaeus, sermon 48: "The best," he says, "king is he who can rule his own affections."
And are become judges of unjust thoughts. — מפרשנא mepharsane, that is separators, discussers of the poor and the rich. For "of thoughts" the Greek is διαλογισμῶν, that is of reasonings, disputations, consultations, reflections, discourses, as if to say: You are become unjust judges of perverse reasonings, that is, judges perversely reasoning and concluding that the poor man is to be despised because he is poor; that the rich man is to be honored because he is rich. Therefore you are become judges of unjust judgments, because you judge unjustly by thinking, reasoning, concluding, conversing, and carrying these things out in deed; namely while you despise the poor man before the rich man, and attribute more to the splendor of clothes than to faith and virtue, by honoring the wicked rich and despising the holy poor, says St. Jerome on ch. V of Isaiah. For by this very thing you make judgment, "that the rich man is so much better than the poor man, the richer he is," says St. Augustine, epistle 29 to St. Jerome, which is certainly a false and perverse judgment, and like a monster. For the saying is incongruous, says Epictetus, if you say: "I am richer than you, therefore better than you. I am wiser, therefore better." But these are congruous: "I am richer than you: therefore my possession is better than yours. I am wiser: therefore my discourse is better than yours. But you are neither possession nor discourse." So he himself in Enchiridion ch. LIX.
Seneca, bk. X, epistle 77: "You will call a sword good," he says, "not because its belt is gilded, nor because its scabbard is set with gems; but because it has a fine edge for cutting. The question of a ruler is not how beautiful, but how straight it is. Therefore in a man nothing pertains to the matter how much he plows, how much he lends at interest, by how many he is greeted, on how precious a couch he reclines, but how good he is. None of those whom riches and honors set on a high pinnacle is great. Why then does he seem great? because you measure him with his pedestal. A dwarf is small, even if he stands on a mountain. A colossus will keep its size, even if it stands in a well. We labor under this error, that we do not value anyone for what he is, but we add to him also those things with which he is adorned, indeed from those things we value and measure him."
Furthermore, St. James says "of thoughts," not "of thought," in Greek διαλογισμῶν, that is of reasonings, consultations, conclusions: because this one thought, by which riches are preferred to poverty, includes many, and from this one as from a principle many others are drawn out, e.g. he who prefers riches to poverty will reason with himself thus. First, riches are more comfortable, and more in human esteem; therefore the rich are to be preferred to the poor. Second, the rich man can help me, commend me, promote me, enrich me, not the poor man: therefore the rich are to be cultivated, not the poor. Third, the rich man can avenge contempt of himself, not the poor man: therefore his offense is to be taken care of, not the latter's. Fourth, I expect nothing from the poor man: therefore he is to be neglected by me. Fifth, the poor man is to me a disgrace and a burden, because he asks and begs alms from me, and so diminishes my wealth: but the rich man is to me an honor and an advantage: therefore the latter is to be followed, the former to be avoided.
These are unjust and false reasonings, namely paralogisms of the world and of worldly men. On the contrary God against these, says Philo, in bk. I On Monarchy, ordains in Exodus 20: "You shall not make to yourselves gods of silver and gold," in a mystical sense: "For these," he says, "going to worship in the morning at the houses of the rich as if at most sacred temples run about, about to ask good things from them as if from divinities"; though that of Augustine is most true, bk. V Of the City of God, ch. VI: "With boasting set aside, what are all men except men?" Therefore against these first Christ argues, saying: "Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of iniquity, that when you shall fail, they may receive you into everlasting dwellings," Luke XVI, 19.
Second, St. Augustine, sermon 55 On the Times: "This world," he says, "either laughs at us or is laughed at by us. It is better that you tread the world underfoot, and having trodden it, make for yourself a step by which you may ascend on high."
Third, Seneca, in his book On the Happy Life, ch. XXVI: "Riches with the wise man are in servitude, with the fool in command. The wise man permits nothing to riches, but to you riches permit everything." Whence also Alexander the Great, as Plutarch testifies, in oration 1 On the Fortune of Alexander, said: "If I were not Alexander, I would wish to be Diogenes."
Fourth, the Author of the Imperfect Work in St. Chrysostom, homily 22: "If you honor a rich man," he says, "on account of his own person, you honor him: but if you honor a poor man, you honor him on account of the person of Christ."
Fifth, St. Ambrose, bk. II On Duties, ch. XXV, teaches by many reasons that favors and benefits should be shown to the poor rather than to the rich. First, because Christ, he says, teaches that "to the feast not those who are rich, but the poor, are to be invited," Luke XIV. Second, the rich seem to be invited so that they themselves may also repay us: the poor, because they do not have what to restore, when they have received, make the Lord our Rewarder, who has offered Himself to be obligated for the poor man. Third, because the rich man disdains a benefit, and is ashamed to be a debtor of gratitude. Indeed he even arrogates to his own merits that which has been bestowed on him. Fourth, because in receiving a benefit, by that very fact that they have received, the rich think that they have given rather than received: but the poor man, even if he does not have whence to repay the money, repays gratitude; in which it is certain that he repays more than he received. For money is paid back with a coin, but gratitude is never exhausted. Fifth, what the rich man refuses, the poor man confesses, that he is obligated by debt, and thinks himself succored, not that the favor was bestowed on his honor: he reckons sons given to him, life restored, family saved. The same in the same place, ch. I: "So great," he says, "is the splendor of honesty, that tranquility of conscience and security of innocence make life blessed. And therefore as the rising sun hides the orb of the moon and the other lights of the stars, so does the splendor of honesty; but where it shines with incorrupt beauty, it overshadows the other things that are thought to be good according to the pleasure of the body, or according to the world, bright and illustrious." And ch. IV, speaking of Elijah, to whom, a poor man, the raven brought bread, III Kings XVII: "Was he therefore," he says, "less blessed, because he was poor to himself? By no means, indeed all the more blessed, because rich to God. For he excels in being rich to others rather than to himself, as that man was, who in time of famine asked food from a widow, about to bestow on her that the jar of meal might not fail for three years and six months, and that the vessel of oil might suffice and minister to the needy widow through daily uses."
Sixth, in the poor man we honor Christ as an exemplar in His image. Whence Chrysologus, sermon 14, explaining that of Psalm CXL, Blessed is he that understandeth concerning the needy and the poor, says, He does not say, He that sees, but "He that understands." For it is a hidden thing, and the price of poverty is hidden from the world. "Let us pray, brethren, that He Himself may grant us to understand the things to be understood, He who shows Himself thus to be understood in the poor man, that He Himself who covers heaven, is naked in the poor; that the satiety of things hungers in the hungering; that the fountain of fountains thirsts in the thirsting. Therefore he is to be considered blessed who understands this, so that he understands concerning the poor by meeting their needs, and rescuing them from their necessities."
Seventh, St. Bernard, sermon 1 On the Vigil of the Nativity: "Poverty," he says, "was not found in heaven: but on earth this species abounded, and man did not know its price. Therefore the Son of God, desiring it, descended to choose it for Himself, and also to make it precious for us by His estimation." This is what Christ says, Isaiah LXI, and Luke IV, 18: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He hath anointed Me, He hath sent Me to preach the gospel to the poor." I have said more about the good of poverty in Acts IV and V.
Verse 5: Has Not God Chosen the Poor in This World, Rich in Faith, and Heirs of the Kingdom
5. Has not God chosen the poor in this world? — Syriac, "the poor of the world." He proves that persons are not to be accepted so that we honor the rich, despise the poor, by the example of God, which ought to be for us a model of a norm and precept. For God chose those poor in money, and made them rich in faith; needy in census, and made them wealthy in the sense of divine things. Whence St. Leo, sermon 10 On Lent: "Those whom carnal wisdom makes vile," he says, "we do not know how precious spiritual grace will make."
Rich in faith, — namely so that they might become rich, and He Himself might make them rich in faith. For in similar manner he adds: "And heirs of the kingdom." But it is clear that God chose no one who was already an heir of the kingdom, but by choosing made him an heir of the kingdom, as if to say: The poor are not to be despised, because God did not despise, but chose the poor, and by choosing them enriched them with faith, and made them heirs of the kingdom. The Pelagians therefore have nothing here by which they may prove that faith is from us, not from the grace of God, as if God chose the faithful man on account of faith elicited by the powers of nature, and rejected the unbeliever. For faith is the first gift of God, by which God enriched the poor Apostles and the first faithful. So St. Augustine, in bk. I On the Predestination of the Saints, ch. XVII. Therefore James treats of election both to faith and grace, and to the kingdom and glory. For those whom God chose to grace, He consequently destined to glory, that they might become heirs of the heavenly kingdom. This is the genuine sense. However, secondly, Gabriel Vasquez, part I, disputation 89, ch. II, explains it thus, as if to say: God chose the Apostles, poor in census, but rich in faith and virtue, to glory, namely to the inheritance of the heavenly kingdom, and to eternal life from merits; namely because He foresaw that they themselves, by using well and cooperating strenuously with the faith and grace given to them by God, would by good works merit the heavenly kingdom. Whence follows: "Which God hath promised to those that love Him." He therefore considers that here it is treated of election to glory only, and contends to prove from this passage that it comes about from merits; for glory is an inheritance, because it is given to sons; the same is also a crown of justice, and a reward, because it is given to those who deserve and conquer. Hence also James first says that God chose the rich in faith, then "heirs of the kingdom," because through the riches of faith He destined us to the kingdom in the first election, which He made from eternity.
Morally: here St. James teaches that true riches are not gold, silver, splendid clothes, but faith and the virtues of faith: just as on the contrary, want does not make poverty and the poor, but cupidity and impiety. Whence St. Augustine, in the homily On the hundred sheep: "God," he says, "is equally present to all, but with God he has more place who has brought more, not of silver, but of faith." And St. Gregory, homily 15 on the Gospels: "Those alone are riches," he says, "which make us rich in virtues." And Clement of Alexandria, in bk. VI of the Stromata: "True riches," he says, "are the abundance in those things which are from virtue in actions: but poverty is the want in moderate actions." St. Ambrose, bk. III, epistle 10: "God knows that man alone to be rich, who is rich for eternity."
Excellently indeed St. Prosper, in bk. II On the Contemplative Life, ch. XIII: "Those riches," he says, "are to be sought by us, which can equally adorn and fortify us; which we cannot acquire unwillingly, nor lose; which arm us against hostile assaults, separate us from the world, commend us to God, enrich and ennoble our souls, are with us, are within us. Our riches must be reckoned to be chastity, which makes us chaste; justice, which makes us just; piety, which makes us pious; humility, which makes us humble; meekness, which makes us meek; innocence, which makes us innocent; purity, which makes us pure; prudence, which makes us prudent; temperance, which makes us temperate; and charity, which makes us dear to God and men, powerful in virtues, despisers of the world, and pursuers of all good things. These are not the riches of all, but the holy virtues of the Saints, not the resources of the proud rich, but of the humble poor, the patrimony of hearts, the incorruptible riches of morals, in which they do not abound, except those who renounce those carnal ones from the heart." And below: "Therefore for this reason riches are to be fled from with the whole heart by those who war for God: which those who wish to have, do not seek without labor, do not find without difficulty, do not preserve without care, do not possess without anxious delight, do not lose without pain. But the Apostle says to the soldiers of Christ: I want you to be without care. And: The desire of money is the root of all evil, which some coveting have erred from the faith, and have entangled themselves in many sorrows; and so this earthly wealth is, for those by whom it is loved viciously, not material for pleasure, but for sorrows."
Briefly but vigorously St. Gregory, in bk. VI, epistle 190 to Andrew: "Therefore," he says, "honors or riches which are dismissed should not be sought; but if we seek good things, let us love those which we shall have without end. But if we fear evils, let us fear those which are endured by the reprobate without end." The same, homily 18 on Ezekiel: "He," he says, "is poor who lacks what he does not have. For he also who, not having, does not desire to have, is rich. For poverty is in the want of mind, not in the quantity of possession: for he with whom poverty agrees well, is not poor."
Heirs of the kingdom, — that is, destined for the heavenly kingdom, and certain to obtain it, if they constantly persevere in faith and in the works of faith to the end of life. Excellently St. Ambrose, sermon 10: "Since the kingdom of God," he says, "belongs to the poor, what can be richer." See here the wonderful harmony of James and Paul. For the same Paul in the same age thundered, writing, I Corinthians ch. I, verse 26: "See," he says, "your vocation, brethren, etc.: God hath chosen the foolish things of the world, and the ignoble, and the contemptible." Moreover the kingdom of God is God Himself with all His happiness and glory. See St. Augustine, sermon 419 On the Times, and on Psalms CXXXVI and CXLIX, where he says: "They are heirs of God in such a way that God Himself is our inheritance. This inheritance is not diminished by the abundance of possessors, nor is it made narrower by the multitude of co-heirs; but it is as great for many, as for few; as great for individuals, as for all: He has not made you such an heir as one to whom you succeed when dead, but with whom you live eternally." And St. Ambrose on Psalm CXVIII: "All possess, nor is the inheritance diminished; the emolument remains whole, and it grows for individuals so much the more, the more it has been acquired." For perfect charity in heaven makes all things common: whence every blessed one rejoices in the glory of each of the others, as if it were his own. Wherefore not once, but a thousand times, and thousand times a thousand times is he blessed and glorious. St. Bernard, On the Triple Kind of Goods: "What," he says, "is the abundance, where there is nothing you do not wish, and everything is what you wish?" The same, in the sermon On the deceit of the present age: "In reward," he says, "there is a torrent of pleasure and the rush of a river. It is plainly a river, but one that flows in, not one that flows out or away; it is called a river, not because it passes by or passes through, but because it abounds." Again St. Augustine, in bk. III On Free Will, near the end: "So great," he says, "is the delight of eternal light, that even if it were not permitted to remain longer in it than the delay of one day, on account of this alone the innumerable years of this life full of delights, and the abundance of temporal goods, would rightly and deservedly be despised." The same, in the Manual, XIV: "O my soul, if daily we should have to endure torments, if to bear gehenna itself for a long time, that we might see Christ in His glory and be associated with His Saints, would it not be worthy to think every sad thing, that we might be made partakers of so great a good and so great a glory? Therefore let demons lay snares, let them prepare their temptations, let fastings break the body, let garments press the flesh, let labors weigh down, let vigils dry up, let this one cry out against me, let that one or that one disturb me, let cold bend, let conscience murmur, let heat burn, let the head ache, let the breast burn, let the stomach be inflated, let the face grow pale, let the whole body be weakened, let my life fail in sorrow, and my years in groanings, let putrefaction enter into my bones and bubble up beneath me, that I may rest in the day of tribulation, and ascend to our girded people. For what will be the glory of the just, how great the joy of the Saints, when each face shall shine as the sun, when with distinct orders the Lord shall begin to review His people in the kingdom of His Father, and shall restore the promised rewards to the merits and works of each, heavenly things for earthly, eternal for temporal, great for small? Truly there will be a heap of happiness when the Lord shall lead His Saints into the vision of paternal glory, and shall cause them to sit in heavenly places, that He may be all in all. O happy delight, and delightful happiness: to see the Saints, to be with the Saints as a holy one; to see God, and to have God for eternity and beyond!"
Furthermore the causes why God chose the poor rather than the rich for faith and the kingdom are various, and these fitting. The first, because the apt distribution of gifts requires this, that those who lack earthly things may abound in heavenly, and vice versa. Whence St. Jerome, epistle 34 to Julian: "It is difficult," he says, "indeed impossible, that anyone enjoy both present and future goods; that here he fill the belly, and there the mind, that he pass from delights to delights, that he be first in both ages, that he appear glorious in heaven and on earth." And St. Chrysostom, homily 2 to the People, teaches that St. Paul, when he names the rich of this age, I Timothy VI, 17, by this very thing signifies that others are rich of the future age, namely the poor of this age. Thus the rich man of this age was Epulo, but of the future Lazarus, Luke XVI, 24; thus Nazianzen, oration 16, calls religious "exalted on account of humility, and enriched on account of poverty." Wherefore the Fathers call the poor of the Gospel rich, and those true and alone. So St. Nazianzen, oration 20 On St. Basil: "Riches," he says, "to him were to have nothing." And St. Leo, sermon 4 On Lent: "Christian poverty is rich, because what it has is more than what it does not have: nor does it fear to labor in want in this world, to which it has been granted to possess all things in the Lord of all things." And St. Ambrose, bk. IV, epistle 24 to Simplicius: "Truly," he says, "he is rich, who can seem rich in the sight of God, in whose sight the earth is small, the world itself is narrow; but only God knows that man alone to be rich, who is rich for eternity, who lays up not works, but the fruits of virtues." See the whole Epistle, in which he demonstrates this paradox: "That the wise man alone, though poor, is rich."
Second, because riches are kindlings and enticements of ambition, avarice, gluttony, luxury and all the vices, by which one goes into gehenna: but poverty supplies the material of humility, continence, modesty, sobriety, chastity and all the virtues, by which one tends to glory. Whence Christ, Matthew XIX, 24: "It is easier," He says, "for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven." As therefore only by a miracle can a camel pass through the eye of a needle: so also a rich man can only by a miracle enter into the kingdom of heaven. See what I said about the destruction of riches in Isaiah, ch. V, verse 9. Therefore poverty is nearer than wealth to heaven. "Poverty is a certain great wing, by which one flies so quickly into the kingdom of heaven," says St. Bernard, sermon 4 On Advent.
Third, God in order to show the riches of His goodness, mercy and magnificence, chose the poor rather than the rich, and to stir up the poor to great humility, gratitude, honor, and love of God. See what was said on I Corinthians I, 26 and following.
Fourth, because the poor by contempt of the world buy heaven from God. God therefore becomes their debtor: for since they have left all things for God, it is fair that God repay them with His kingdom. Whence Nazianzen in his Poem On the Beatitudes: "Happy," he says, "is he who buys Christ with all his fortunes." And in oration 18: "This," he says, "is the most excellent business, by which brief and fragile goods are exchanged for eternal glory." And St. Augustine, the last sermon On Various Subjects: "What," he says, "is more glorious for a man than to sell his own things, and to buy Christ?" See Matthew ch. XIX, verse 28.
Fifth, because God requires an empty heart, that He may possess it wholly; but the hearts of the poor are empty, while those of the rich are full of riches as well as vices; therefore the former are capable of faith, glory and grace, but the latter incapable. Therefore the rich man who has his heart in money, is unfit to grasp ethereal things; but the poor man, since he cannot have his heart in money which he lacks, transfers it to the ether which he hopes for: therefore he has a heart that is free and ample, and capable of God. See St. Chrysostom, homily 2 To the People. Seneca saw the same thing through a shadow, epistle 8: "No one else," he says, "is worthy of God, except him who has despised wealth; and therefore formerly to the flamen Dialis it was not only criminal to touch ivy, but even to name it": For ivy was the symbol of tenacity and adhesion to earthly things, as Pierius testifies, Hieroglyphics ch. LI.
Excellently St. Augustine, in the book On the 12 Degrees of Abuses, degree 8: "By a right dispensation," he says, "the merciful judge commits the kingdom of heaven to those from whom He has taken away participation in the kingdom of earth among mortals, that he may appear rich in the heavenly seat,
Which God hath promised to those that love Him, — and therefore obeying His law. For he who loves God, ought to love those things which God loves; and to hate those things which God hates, says St. Augustine, indeed Christ, John XV, 15: "If you love Me," He says, "keep My commandments." Hence learn first, that not to faith alone and to believers, as the heretics wish, but to love and to those loving, that is, to those exercising the works of charity toward God and neighbor, the kingdom of God is promised; and therefore for him who wishes to attain it, the works of charity are necessary. Second, that the kingdom of heaven is promised and given as a reward for the merit of the works of charity. Third, that it is holy to undertake these things with a view to this reward and prize, as David did, Psalm CXVIII, 112, saying: "I have inclined my heart to do Thy justifications for ever, for the reward."
He alludes to Isaiah LXIV, 4, which around the same time when James wrote these things, St. Paul writing to the Corinthians, epistle I, ch. II, 9, cites thus from the Septuagint: "That eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man, what things God hath prepared for them that love Him." For these last words of Isaiah and of Paul are the antistrophe to these words of James, namely because the same Holy Spirit was speaking through the mouths of these three witnesses, indeed His prophets.
Morally: Learn at how easy a price God sells the kingdom of heaven, namely love: His love is the price. Love God, and you will merit, buy and obtain God and the kingdom of God. Love God and reign, both in heaven and on earth, as Moses promises Israel in Deuteronomy XI, 24.
Furthermore, who would not love God, supremely lovable and his highest good, who is the joy of all angels and men; in whom are all delights, all wealth, all honors, all wisdom, all glory, all good things in an immense and infinite degree? Who would not love God, who first loved us so intensely, that He created us out of nothing, recreated and redeemed us when lost through His Son, recalled us when turned away, drew us back to heaven from rushing into gehenna? Who would not love God, who has poured forth most lavishly into us His love, His whole self, and the bowels of His charity? who daily, indeed at every moment, animates us, vivifies us, feeds us, heaps us with His grace and innumerable gifts? Who would not love God, who desires to be loved by us, indeed commands it, and to one loving promises heaven, to one not loving threatens hell? Wherefore sinners and the reprobate are inexcusable; nay rather, they are foolish and insane, who, that they may enjoy a tiny creature, namely some vile pleasure or honor, and may love it, hate the Creator; who prefer the earth to paradise, men and beasts to angels, the kingdom of the demon to the kingdom of God, hell to heaven. What is more demented? what is more insane?
St. Augustine excellently teaches, in homily 9 On the Words of the Apostle, that the poor man purchases heaven by good will alone, that is, by love: "For he has," he says, "what is most necessary: he is poor in his chest, but rich in conscience; poor in his house, but rich in soul, etc. How cheaply does the kingdom of heaven cost, at how vile a price is so great a possession set forth? It is set forth on earth, that you may possess in heaven; it is set forth in time, that you may possess for eternity." And soon after: "With two mites a certain widow purchased the kingdom of heaven, who cast into the treasury two coins, Mark XII. She put them into the house of God, and bought the kingdom of heaven. Behold, it is worth two coins. I add more, it is worth even less: a cup of cold water is worth less, good will alone is worth less. Hear the angels crying out: On earth peace to men of good will. For good will itself is called charity. Therefore he has the whole, who has good will." The same, hom. 13: "He proposed the kingdom of heaven for sale, and willed its price to be a cup of cold water," Matthew X, 42. Wherefore the same in his Manual, ch. X, sighing to God: "I love Thee," he says, "my God, I love Thee, and I wish to love Thee more and more. Give me, O Lord my God, beautiful above the sons of men, that I may desire Thee, that I may love Thee as much as I will and as much as I owe: immeasurable, and without measure must Thou be loved, especially by us, whom Thou hast so loved, so saved, for whom Thou hast done such great things. O love that always burns and is never extinguished, sweet Christ, good Jesus, charity my God, kindle me wholly with Thy fire, Thy love, Thy sweetness, Thy affection, Thy desire, Thy charity, Thy joy and exultation, Thy piety and pleasantness, Thy delight and concupiscence, which is holy and good, which is chaste and pure, that wholly filled with the sweetness of Thy love, wholly inflamed with the flame of Thy charity, I may love Thee my Lord most sweet and most beautiful with all my heart, with all my soul, with all my strength, and with all my intention, with much contrition of heart and a fountain of tears, with much reverence and trembling, having Thee in my heart, in my mouth, and before my eyes always and everywhere, so that no place in me may lie open to adulterous loves." And in ch. III: "O sweetness of love, and love of sweetness, let my belly eat Thee, and let my entrails be filled with the nectar of Thy love, and let my mind belch forth a good word. Charity my God, sweet honey, snowy milk, Thou art the food of the great; make me grow in Thee, that with a healthy palate Thou mayest be eaten by me. Thou art my life by which I live, the hope to which I cling, the glory which I desire to attain. Hold my heart for me, govern my mind, direct my understanding, raise up my love, suspend my soul, and draw the mouth of my spirit, thirsting for Thee, into the streams above. Let the tumult of the flesh, I pray, be silent. Let the phantasms of the earth and the waters, of the air and the heavens, be silent; let dreams and imaginary revelations, every tongue, every sign, and whatever happens in passing, be silent. Let the soul itself be silent to itself, and let it pass beyond itself, not thinking of itself, but of Thee, my God, since Thou art truly all my hope and confidence."
Verse 6: But You Have Dishonored the Poor; Do Not the Rich Oppress You by Power, and Drag You to Judgments
6. But you have dishonored the poor man: — ητιμάσατε, that is, you have dishonored, despised, scorned: so the Syriac; and consequently you have dishonored God, who is the author of poverty and the father of the poor, according to that of Ecclesiasticus XI, 14: "Good things and evil, life and death, poverty and honor (that is, wealth) are from God." And Proverbs XXII, 2: "The rich and the poor have met one another: the Lord is the maker of them both." Whence the same infers in ch. XIV, 31: "He that oppresseth the poor, upbraideth his Maker; but he honoreth Him that hath pity on the poor." Wherefore Damascene rightly exclaims, Parallel. 3, ch. XXXVII: "O how great is the dignity of poverty! It becomes as it were a mask of God: for God lies hidden under poverty; and the poor man indeed extends his suppliant hand; but God is He who receives."
Furthermore, St. James changes the third person to the second, saying: "But you have dishonored," that he may more sharply reprove and prick the proud rich and those injurious to the poor.
Finally, some understand by the poor man Christ, who was the poor of the poor (that is, the poorest), and therefore their father. But this is restricted and mystical: for in the literal sense he understands any poor people whatsoever, as is clear from the whole course of the discourse.
Do not the rich oppress you by power! — O poor. Having addressed the rich oppressors, he now addresses the oppressed poor. In Greek, καταδυναστεύουσιν ὑμῶν, that is, they lord it over you, they tyrannically command you, they violently oppress you with burdens, robberies, injuries, unjust taxes: while, as Salvian says, bk. IV On Providence: "the powerful decree that the poor pay; the favor of the rich decrees what the throng of the wretched loses." Truly Ecclesiasticus XIII, 23: "The hunting of the lion is the wild ass in the wilderness; so likewise the poor are the pasture of the rich," as if to say: As a lion hunts and preys upon the wild ass, so does the rich man prey upon the poor. For riches inflate the soul of the rich, so that he thinks all things are lawful for him, that he can dominate others, that the poor must be subjected and obey him, that all things are owed to him; and consequently that the poor are as it were servants and slaves, by whom he may increase his wealth and pomp: finally they devour their resources, as a larger fish devours a smaller. Wherefore Sallust in Catiline: "Riches and dominions," he says, "stir up wars and contentions among mortals." And: "O venal city and quickly to perish, if it finds a buyer!" And Juvenal, satire 6:
Luxury has settled in, and avenges itself on the conquered world;
No crime is absent, no deed of lust, since
Roman poverty perished.
They drag you to judgments, — to the tribunals, even of Gentile and infidel judges, whom they either have as kinsmen and friends, or corrupt with bribes. For St. Paul teaches that this was practiced by Christians in that age, and gravely censures it, I Cor. VI, 1: see what is said there. This is what the Sage warns, Ecclesiastes V, 7: "If thou shalt see the oppressions of the poor, and violent judgments, and justice perverted in the province, marvel not at this matter, for he that is high hath another higher, and there are others still higher than these, and moreover the King ruleth over all the land that is subject to Him."
Verse 7: Do They Not Blaspheme the Good Name That Is Invoked Upon You
7. Do they not blaspheme the good name. — "They blaspheme," that is, they cause it to be blasphemed, they are the cause that it be blasphemed. It is a Hebraism: the qal is put for the hiphil. The sense is, as if to say: Christian rich men by their pride, avarice, tyranny, and oppression of the poor cause the Gentiles, seeing their crimes, to blaspheme the name of Christ and of Christianity, and the faith and religion of Christ itself; as if it taught such things, or at least permitted them, and neither chastised nor punished them. Note: For "good" in Greek it is καλόν, which signifies not only good but also illustrious, as if to say: They blaspheme the name of Jesus, which is illustrious and divine, equally as it is good, mellifluous, and salvific. For the name "of Jesus is honey in the mouth, melody in the ear, jubilation in the heart," says St. Bernard, sermon 15 on the Canticle.
The name which is invoked over you, — that is, the name by which you are called, and which you are wont to invoke, namely the name of Christ and Christian: for from Christ we are called Christians, as it were followers, disciples, and sons of Christ. It is a Hebraism frequent in the Scriptures, as I have often noted. He alludes to Isaiah LXII, 2: "And thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name." Truly St. Ambrose, sermon 12 on Psalm CXVIII: "Reply must be made," he says, "to so glorious a name: when I say Christian, I say perfect: for in Christ is the fullness of dignity, whose name it usurps; you who bear the title, why do you flee the interpretation and perfection of the title?"
Verse 8: If, However, You Fulfill the Royal Law According to the Scriptures, You Shall Love Your Neighbor as Yourself
8. If however (if fully, that is, if indeed, if however, nevertheless if, indeed if) you fulfill the royal law. — He meets a tacit objection: are the rich therefore to be hated and despised? He replies, by no means; as if to say: Yet I do not forbid you from loving the rich also by the common law of charity: for if you do this, you do well, provided you do not accept persons nor despise the poor, especially because, as St. Ambrose says on Luke XVI: "Not all poverty is holy, nor are riches criminal, but as luxury defames riches, so sanctity commends poverty." And Ecclesiasticus ch. XIII, verse 30: "Good is the substance to which there is no sin in the conscience (for it is an instrument of almsgiving and beneficence), and most wicked is poverty in the mouth of the impious."
Secondly, si can be expounded as therefore if, or furthermore if, certainly if, surely if, as if to say: Furthermore, if you fulfill the royal law which says: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself," you do well. For thus you will avoid acceptance of persons, for love excludes this, which embraces all neighbors in the same bosom of charity, and pursues both the poor and the rich with due love and honor. For he seems here to assign the remedy for acceptance of persons, namely charity. For where charity is, there cupidity is exiled, and consequently acceptance of persons.
You will ask, what law is here called royal, and why? First, some, as Cajetan, judge that the royal law is called that by which kings command that their prefects, messengers, and friends be honored by their subjects, according to the edict of King Assuerus concerning Mardochai: "This honor is he worthy of, whomsoever the King shall will to honor," Esther VI, 11, as if James were to say: While I forbid acceptance of persons, lest you honor the rich and despise the poor, I do not forbid honor being paid to kings and magistrates, who are rich: for this is due to them, and is enjoined by the law of nature, divine and human. But no mention of kings here precedes or follows.
Secondly, others judge that any law is called royal, because it prescribes and sanctions what is just. For justice is a royal virtue, and the foundation of a kingdom and commonwealth. Whence Orpheus in his hymn calls νόμος, νόμος, that is law, "the queen of gods and men." And Cicero, Philippic 1, defines law as "right reason, and from the divine power of the gods." And Aristotle, bk. III of the Politics, last chapter, says, that what the law commands, this God commands. For every law is a derivation and ray of the eternal law, which is in God. Wherefore Archidamus, when asked: "Who were the prefects of the Spartan city? The laws," he said, "and the legitimate magistrates." But Demaratus, when asked: "Why was Sparta in exile, since there was a King? Because," he said, "the laws in it are more powerful"; therefore laws are royal, because they command kings.
Thirdly, others judge that the law is called royal because it leads us to the heavenly and eternal kingdom, and is given by God, who is King of kings and Lord of lords; whence the Syriac translates "the royal law" as "the law of God."
Fourthly, Hugh, Thomas Anglicus, and the Gloss: The royal law, they say, is the law of grace, namely the Evangelical law: for this stands out as a queen above the law of nature and the Mosaic, and makes us kings, Apoc. ch. V, verse 10.
Fifthly, in the genuine sense, the royal law is called the law of charity and mutual love: for of this James explains, when he immediately adds: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."
Love of neighbor therefore is the royal law; and this first, because charity is the queen and prince of all virtues. Therefore the law of charity is royal and regal, that is, exceptional, splendid, magnificent, and the most outstanding of all: thus a mind is called royal, a virtue royal, an office royal, that is, magnificent and excellent: for such a thing befits a king.
Secondly, because this virtue befits and adorns all men, especially the powerful, princes, and kings: for as in other virtues, so in charity these ought to excel most of all, since they must show it to all their subjects. Hence Christ, when about to establish St. Peter as prince of the Church, demanded this one virtue of charity from him as a necessary condition, saying: "Simon, son of John, lovest thou Me more than these?" and when he answered: "Yea, Lord, Thou knowest that I love Thee"; He added: "Feed My lambs," John XXI, 15.
Thirdly, because this is the chief law of Christ, the King of kings, which He earnestly and most frequently commended, as in John XV, 17: "These things I command you, that you love one another." And ch. XIII, verse 34: "A new commandment I give unto you, that you love one another, as I have loved you." Romans XIII, 8: "Every commandment is fulfilled in this one word: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Love worketh no evil: love therefore is the fulfilling of the law." Therefore the law of charity is royal, because it embraces the others within itself.
Fourthly, the law of charity is royal, that is, common and universal, because it obligates all, and extends to absolutely all men, even enemies, barbarians, the poor. Therefore as a royal way is so called, that is, public, common, by which all walk, not pathless or out-of-the-way: so the law of charity walks the royal road, because it has no obliquity, nor turns to the right or to the left. So Hugh and Dionysius. Whence by it all the just and the saints walk, and tend to heaven.
Fifthly, because it is superior to all kings and tyrants, and to their threats and tortures. Hence Christians of old offered themselves to death and martyrdom for Confessors who had been captured and condemned. Whence St. Nilus exclaims, hom. II On the Ascension of Christ: "O religion mightier than all kings, and more royal! For what kings stirred up by arms, this religion dissolved without arms; what those forbade by slaughter, this religion stirred up while being slaughtered, and from the slaughters of its own raised trophies against the slaughterers."
Sixthly, it is royal, that is, inviolable, says Vatablus; for the laws of kings are inviolable, because he who violates the law of charity will pay the penalty by Gehenna and eternal fires.
Seventhly, the law of Moses was of fear, and therefore servile; but the law of Christ is of love, and therefore royal. For the ancients painted Love everywhere girt about with golden crowns, as if entirely royal.
Eighthly, finally the law of charity is "royal," because, as St. Bernard says, sermon 83 on the Canticle: "When love comes, it draws all affections to itself and captivates them, as a King commanding all the affections." And soon after: "Of all the senses, motions, and affections of the soul, love alone is that in which the creature, though not equally, can respond to its Author, or render a like exchange in return," etc. For when God loves, He wills nothing else than to be loved: indeed He loves for no other reason than to be loved, knowing that those who love Him are made blessed by that very love.
Morally, the royal law of charity and of Christ signifies that all Christians, subjects of Christ, and endowed with this law, are kings, and have a royal mind, that is, a large, distinguished, beneficent, and munificent mind toward all, that they may strive to love, help, protect, and promote each one — both poor and rich; both foreigners and fellow citizens; both ill-disposed and well-disposed: for the heart of private men is narrow, restricted, and cold, who seek only their own conveniences, and therefore contract themselves against injuries, evils, and slanders, and turn from those who injure them: but the heart of kings and princes is broad, liberal, lofty, glowing like the sun, which scatters the rays of its beneficence on all, whether friends or enemies, as I said on Isaiah XLV, 1. This is what St. Peter says, harmonizing with St. James: "You are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation," epistle I, ch. II, verse 9. Wherefore Saul, seeing the charity of David, by which he had spared his enemy whom he had in his power, accepted it as a certain omen of his kingdom. "Now I know," he said, "that thou shalt most surely reign, and shalt have the kingdom of Israel in thy hand," I Kings XXIV, 21. In a similar way God is said to have given King Solomon largeness of heart, III Kings IV, 29, that is, greatness and magnificence of soul, so that among Jews and men he might excel and stand out in spirit, wisdom, counsel, judgment, equity, charity, providence, governance, as an angel; and he might be as a father among children, as a master among disciples, as a shepherd among sheep, as a leader among soldiers; thus from Abulensis, Lyranus, Cajetan, and others, our Pineda, bk. VI On the Affairs of Solomon, ch. IX. Excellently Pliny in the Panegyric of Trajan: "As it is the mark of felicity," he says, "to be able to do as much as you wish; so it is the mark of greatness, to wish as much as you are able."
Furthermore, this greatness of soul induces in itself rectitude, equity, tranquility in all things and through all things, so that he is not moved from rectitude or from beneficence by any flatteries, gifts, forces, no insults, injuries, ingratitude, etc. "The honorable," says Polybius, sermon 6, "belongs to the gods, or to those who are reckoned closest to the gods." On the contrary: "It is better to serve tyrants than passions," says Pythagoras. Wherefore Iamblichus excellently, epistle to Agrippa: "It is fitting," he says, "that the one set over laws be most highly purified, according to the supreme rectitude of the laws; and that he be not deceived by seduction or fraud through ignorance, nor inflict force on his inferiors, nor be enticed by any unjust occasion: for the preserver and guardian of laws ought to be as incorrupt as can possibly be in human nature." Wherefore the royal law is the same as the law of perfect liberty, as St. James called it, ch. 1, verse 25. For he who is free from fear, love, and every other cupidity which subjects those who obey it to its own servitude and makes them slaves, has a royal mind and royal works, and therefore fulfills the law in a royal manner. But the law of charity, because it kills cupidity, gives birth to this liberty, and therefore is the law of perfect liberty, and so a royal law.
Secondly, the law of charity and of Christ is royal and golden, not only because its object is royal, golden, and excellent, but because its manner equally is royal, golden, and eminent. For Christ willed that we fulfill it liberally out of love of justice, not slavishly out of fear of vengeance. Moreover Christ, according to that of Hosea XI, 4: "I will draw them with the cords of Adam, with the bands of charity," Himself went before by His own example in the royal law of charity which He imposed on us, when for us ungrateful and sinful ones, out of immeasurable love, He expended His whole life, body, and blood, that we might do the same by His love and example.
Thirdly, charity is royal, because it never feels labor as a servant, but as a mistress takes pleasure even in death and torments. Whence St. Augustine, tractate 65 on John: "What a wondrous kind of death it is," he says, "for which it was not enough not to be in punishments, unless it were moreover in delights?" This was foreshadowed in Samson, Judges XIV, 8, who, having gone to his beloved Philistine woman, killed a lion, and returning found a honeycomb in the mouth of the lion; because love makes whatever things are most difficult sweet and honey-like. So the Martyrs went rejoicing to crosses and fires, because the law was urging them, the royal charity, I say, was burning them.
Fourthly, finally, charity is royal, because it makes lovers kings, and places upon them crowns and diadems of the kingdom in heaven. But most of all the love of enemies makes the mind lofty and royal. Whence Didymus, Chrysostom, and Euthymius on Psalm IV, assert that David in that place, when he says, verse 1, "In tribulation Thou hast enlarged me," asks for an enlargement of heart and the gift of magnanimity, and the breadth of charity, by which he might love even enemies. Therefore charity is royal, because it embraces every good, every dignity, every eminence. "Porus the king, when captured by Alexander and asked how he wished to be treated? In a kingly manner, he answered. And asked again whether he wished anything else? he answered: Nothing; for in kingly manner all things are included," says Plutarch, oration 1 On the Fortune of Alexander. Much more in the royal law of charity and love are all things included. Wherefore if any battle of cupidities, lawsuits, or wars assails us either among our neighbors, let charity as it were the King, law, and judge of all, dissolve, conquer, and triumph over it, according to that of Colossians III, 15: "But above all these things have charity, which is the bond of perfection; and let the peace of Christ rejoice in your hearts." See what is said there.
According to the Scriptures. — as if to say: The royal law which I have admonished is to be fulfilled, is that which the sacred Scriptures both of the Old and the New Testament dictate and sanction, namely: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself": for this law is written and sanctioned in Leviticus XIX, 18, where it says "Thou shalt love thy friend as thyself." For a friend is any neighbor who is joined to us by nature, as I said there; and Matt. V, 43, and Romans XIII, 9. For St. James wrote this Epistle after the Epistle of Paul to the Romans, as I showed in the proem, and consequently after the Gospel of St. Matthew. For St. Matthew wrote this in the year of Christ 41, as Eusebius and St. Jerome relate. But Paul wrote the Epistle to the Romans in the year of Christ 58, as I taught there from Baronius.
Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. — A neighbor is any man: for he shares the same nature with us; and therefore he was made to the image of God, and is destined by God to the same grace, glory, and eternal felicity. See what is said on Leviticus XIX, 18, and Romans XIII, 9. The sense is, as if to say: The royal law of charity, which commands and says: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself," neither accepts nor excepts persons, but embraces all in the same bosom of charity, both poor and rich, friends and enemies, foreigners and household members. Practice this therefore everywhere, and so you will not sin by acceptance of persons, or by any other sin. For every sin violates the law of charity.
You do well, — if indeed you fulfill the law, as preceded. Whence it is evident that we can fulfill the law with the grace of God. Therefore the heretics wrongly deny this.
Verse 9: But if You Accept Persons, You Commit Sin, Being Rebuked by the Law as Transgressors
9. Reproved by the law. — For the law forbids acceptance of persons, Leviticus XIX, 15; Deuteronomy I, 17, and elsewhere. Others, "by the law," namely of nature, which is written and engraved in the conscience. For the conscience dictates that acceptance of persons is sin: whence of it Menander said: "To all mortals, conscience is God."
Verse 10: Whosoever Shall Have Kept the Whole Law, but Offends in One Point, Has Become Guilty of All
10. But whosoever shall keep the whole law, but offend in one point, has become guilty of all. — He meets an objection. For lest anyone say: I keep the rest of the law, even if I accept the persons of the rich; therefore I am just, therefore I shall be saved. For this was the error of the Pharisees, and afterwards of Rabbi Moses and Rabbi Solomon in Deuteronomy, title 1 On Penitence, namely that he would be saved who kept the greater part of the law, even if not the whole: because he would have a greater heap of good works than of evil. St. James responds that he who violates one law violates all, and becomes guilty of all; and consequently is unjust, and guilty of Gehenna. So Bede and St. Augustine, epistle 29.
You will ask, how is this true? For many violate only one law, and observe the rest. Therefore they become guilty only of one, not of all the others. First, the Author cited by St. Augustine, book On True and False Penitence, ch. XIV, responds that one becomes guilty of all, because all sins remitted in some way return through ingratitude and are imputed. Secondly, Dionysius and Richard of St. Victor, book On the Incarnation of the Word, part I, ch. XIV, say that one becomes guilty of all, because he loses all merits, as if he had violated the whole law, according to that of Ezekiel XVIII: "All his justices shall not be remembered." Thirdly, others judge that one becomes guilty of all, that is, harms all the acquired virtues, because he destroys their perfect state, namely by generating a vicious habit which impedes their operations. But these responses do not address the matter. For when James says one becomes guilty of all, by "all" understand the precepts; not sins, merits, or acquired virtues. Fourthly, more probably the Gloss, Lyranus, and others say one becomes guilty of all, because he incurs the same penalty of damnation, namely the privation of grace, charity, the infused moral virtues, merits, and of glory and heaven itself, just as if he violated all the precepts. But this also does not reach the point, both because it does not explain how he becomes guilty of all the commandments when he does not violate them all; and because guilt properly signifies fault, not punishment, although from fault follows obligation to punishment and the punishment itself.
By way of response: Note what I hinted shortly before about the Pharisees from Burgensis and others, namely that in that time there was an error and heresy of the Pharisees, who, as they erred in many ways in explaining the precepts of the Decalogue, as Christ shows, Matt. V, so likewise they judged that to transgress one or another precept of the law was not a grave sin, by which God would be offended, unless one transgressed all the precepts or the greater part of them: for from the greater part which he keeps, he should rather be judged just, than from one violated, unjust: and not every sin is iniquity: and there is no crime if anyone denies the duty of charity to a neighbor, provided he retains love toward God. Against these James here asserts that he who offends in one becomes guilty of all, and incurs God's offense and wrath, since He commanded both one and the other: for He who established the universal law, also established each of its precepts. Against the same St. John writes, epistle 1, ch. III, and says: "Whosoever committeth sin committeth also iniquity; and sin is iniquity." Again: "He that loveth not his brother, is in darkness, and remaineth in death: he that hateth his brother, is a murderer"; read ch. III, which is entirely about this matter.
A similar error was held by some Christians in the time of St. Augustine, as he himself relates in Enchiridion LXXV, who thought they would be holy and saved if they gave alms, even if they violated the other precepts and lived shamefully, from this, that Christ said, Luke XI, 41: "Give alms, and behold all things are clean unto you." Just as now the heretics teach that they and their followers are sanctified and saved through faith alone, even if they violate the law of God and commit many sins. Against all these St. James here teaches that he is impious and unjust, and guilty of damnation, who violates even one law of God, and in order to break the root of the error, says that he becomes guilty of all, far from being able to be said to have kept them, and thereby be called or named just. For good, says St. Dionysius, On the Divine Names, ch. IV, is from an integral cause, evil from individual defects. For in order that a work be good, it must have all the requisite conditions: but if even one is lacking, it will be evil, not good. In a similar way, in order that one be called good and just, he must keep the whole law. For if he violates even one, he will be evil and unjust, and guilty of all.
But by what reason of all, when he has violated only one? I answer: understand τὸ omnium conjunctly, or as taken together copulately, not copulatively. For all laws and precepts integrate and constitute one total law, just as the ten precepts integrate and constitute the Decalogue, as if to say: He who violates one law violates the whole universality of the law, which is integrated from individual laws, by despising the majesty and power of the legislator, namely God, as follows. Therefore he violates all, not individually, inasmuch as all constitute one whole: for when the whole is violated, all the parts which integrate it are violated, inasmuch as they integrate it. There is therefore an enallage of the universal whole for the integral whole; namely "of all," that is of the whole law, as if to say: He violates every, that is the whole law, he violates the integrity of the law: for the whole perishes and ceases to be a whole, if even one part is taken from it, though the others remain in it. Thus he who fornicates transgresses the whole Decalogue, which is named from the ten commandments, and from them coalesces as one composite. For though he keeps all the others, yet he cannot be said to have kept and fulfilled the Decalogue. With a similar enallage James said, ch. 1, verse 2: "All," that is whole and full, "joy esteem, brethren, when ye fall into various temptations." So Bede: "He who," he says, "offends in one, becomes guilty of all; not because he has violated all the precepts of the law, but because he has despised the author of the law, and by merit lacks that reward which is set forth for the keepers of the law." That this is the sense is clearly evident from the reason which James adds: "For He who said: Thou shalt not commit adultery, said also: Thou shalt not kill. If thou commit not adultery, but kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law," which namely is integrated as a certain whole quantity from the individual laws, as from its parts. In a similar way in music a single dissonant voice corrupts the whole music and harmony. The sense of James therefore is, as if he said: Justice consists in the observance of the whole law: wherefore, in order that one be just and be called so, he must observe the whole law; so much so that if he offends even in one, namely in acceptance of persons, he is and is called unjust and a transgressor of the law; and therefore guilty of divine wrath and liable to condemnation. For the law and the justice of the law is as it were one crown, one garment, one golden robe clothing and adorning the whole man; which is wholly violated, if you take away or violate even one part from it: for thus its integrity, beauty, and adornment are taken away.
Hence secondly, St. Augustine, epistle 29 (which is wholly about this saying of James): "He who," he says, "offends in one, becomes guilty of all," because he acts against charity, on which the whole law depends. "He becomes therefore guilty of all, by acting against that on which all things depend," since in it they are connected, and become as one integral commandment of charity: for charity is the form of all laws and virtues. So also Oecumenius, and St. Gregory, hom. 27 on the Gospel: "All precepts," he says, "are one in the root of charity." Just as therefore a heretic, who does not believe one article of faith, loses the whole faith not only of that article but also of all the others: for though he says that he believes them, yet he does not believe them by divine faith but human: so he who violates one law loses the charity, not only of that law, but also of all the others, so that although he observes and does them, yet he observes and does none of them out of charity.
Hence thirdly, Dionysius: "He becomes," he says, "guilty of all, because he turns himself away from the highest good, in which all things have a certain connection: for all things flow from it, and tend to the same; so that if you neglect one, you will not attain the highest good."
Hence fourthly, he becomes guilty of all, because he loses the friendship, grace, and spiritual life of God, and incurs the spiritual death of the soul and the guilt of Gehenna; just as one armored over the whole body, except in one part, receives a lethal blow in that part, which kills him equally as if he had received a lethal blow in all the others. Just as therefore the wound of one member takes life from the others as well: so one sin, e.g. of drunkenness, takes away life not only from sobriety which is contrary to it, but also from all the other virtues; so the Author of the Imperfect Work in Chrysostom, hom. 35.
Hence fifthly, Hugh, as if to say: He becomes guilty of all, that is, will be damned just as an enemy of God, as if he were guilty of all, although not so gravely or with so great a punishment: just as he who opens one gate to the enemy, opens all and the whole city: for the enemy enters through one, and occupies and ravages the city. Thus one spark of fire burns the whole house; thus one hole in a dyke makes a deluge of the whole river, so that it inundates all the fields; thus a little leaven corrupts the whole mass, says the Apostle, I Cor. V, 5.
All these senses therefore are connected, and from the first which St. James properly intends, they are deduced as streams from a fountain and as conclusions from their principle. For all of them refute the error of the Pharisees and rabbis cited a little before, and of certain rough Christians, who judge that those will be saved who have had more good works than evil. And to prove this they abuse the saying of Christ: "Give alms, and behold all things are clean unto you," Luke XI, 41. Whom St. Augustine refutes, Enchiridion ch. LXXV, as I have already said. For the mind of Christ is far different, namely to exhort the avaricious Pharisees to almsgiving, for it washes away sins, not the baptisms and legal lustrations, as the Pharisees thought, as if to say: All internal and external things which you, O Pharisees, think are washed by your lustral water, are not washed by that, but rather by alms. For alms, if done by a sinner as they ought, namely with prior contrition for sins and the resolution of restoring goods ill-gotten, wipes away all fault, or at least disposes the man to it, and conciliates and obtains for him the grace and mercy of God for repenting.
Note: St. James is treating of grave and perfect offense, namely that which is mortal sin. For this is perfect violation of the law, and makes one guilty of all: but venial sin is not such. Whence rightly the Doctors gather from this place the distinction of venial from mortal sin. Secondly, from this saying of James the dogma of the Stoics and Lutherans does not follow, namely that all sins are equal or connected; rather James supposes that it can happen that one keeps the whole law, and offends only in one. So St. Thomas, I II, Question LXXXIII, art. 1.
Mystically and morally, he who offends in one becomes guilty of all, because the violation of one law gradually entices and draws to the violation of another and another, and finally of all; e.g. excessive love of money draws to frauds, illicit contracts, lawsuits, fights, blows, slaughters, again to pride, gluttony, lust, finally to blasphemy, heresy, and atheism: for sins are bound together as ropes which constrict the impious man, according to that: "By the cords of his own sins he is bound," Prov. V, 22; and: "Woe to you that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as the rope of a cart," Isaiah V, 18. See what is said there. This is what the Author of the book On True and False Penitence says, vol. IV of the works of St. Augustine, ch. XIV: "He who," he says, "offends in one becomes guilty of all, because every virtue suffers detriment from one vice: for if anyone falls into avarice, he destroys liberality, and has already diminished chastity: for from love of money he would violate chastity, or at least love it less." Hence again one sin cannot be remitted unless all the others are remitted, because one cannot be remitted unless grace and charity is infused, which is repugnant to all the others as well as to one alone. Hence learn with what care and zeal we ought to avoid any sin whatever, and with all our soul to be zealous for virtue and charity. Because, as Nazianzen says in his Poem to Virgins:
He who will go to meet small things,
Will never be carried headlong into graver crimes.
For although one imperfect virtue can be without another, yet one perfect virtue generally brings with it all the others: for virtues in the perfect state are connected, as St. Thomas teaches, I II, Question LXXIII, art. 1, reply 1. Likewise from the contrary side; one perfected vice draws in the rest. Hence St. Augustine, epistle 29: "By how much," he says, "each one sins more or less gravely, so much greater is he in committing the sin, as he is less in loving God and his neighbor. Therefore he is so much fuller of iniquity as he is emptier of charity. And we are then perfect in charity when nothing remains of infirmity." And earlier, drawing from the opinion of the Stoics, he shows the linking together of virtues and vices thus: "Certainly from this they persuade us that he who has had one virtue has all of them; and all are lacking to him to whom one has been lacking, because prudence cannot be either cowardly, or unjust, or intemperate: for if any of these were lacking, it would not be prudence. Furthermore, prudence will then be such if it is also brave and just and temperate; assuredly, where it shall be, it has the rest with it. So also fortitude cannot be imprudent, or intemperate, or unjust; so it is necessary that temperance be prudent, brave, and just; so justice is nothing if not prudent, brave, and temperate. Thus where there is one true one of these, the others likewise are present. But where the others are lacking, that one true one is not present, even if it should seem somehow similar, etc. For if it were a virtue, it would never be left by the other virtues as inseparable companions." St. Ambrose, bk. V on Luke, on the passage Blessed are the poor, etc.: "The virtues," he says, "are connected to one another and linked together, so that he who has one seems to have many; and to the Saints one virtue belongs, but the more abundant it shall be, the more abundant is its reward."
Seneca, epistle 67: "You will find nothing more upright than the upright, no more than truer than the true, or more temperate than the temperate; all virtue lies in measure; measure is a fixed standard. Constancy has nowhere to go further, no more than trust, or truth, or faith. What can be added to the perfect? Nothing. Otherwise it was not perfect to which something has been added. Therefore not even to virtue; or if anything can be added, something was lacking. To be able to grow is the sign of an imperfect thing: every good falls under the same laws: private and public usefulness are conjoined." The same, epistle 68: "When someone bravely endures torments, he uses all the virtues, though perhaps with one ready at hand and most apparent, namely patience. But there is fortitude, of which patience and endurance and tolerance are branches. There is prudence, without which no counsel is undertaken, which urges one to bear most bravely what one cannot escape. There is constancy which cannot be cast down from its place, and which lets go of its purpose by no force wresting it away. There is that inseparable companionship of the virtues. Whatever is done honorably, one virtue does, but from the judgment of counsel. But what is approved by all the virtues, even if it seems to be done by one, is desirable."
Plutarch, oration 1 On the Fortune of Alexander the Great: "Alexander," he says, "confirmed that decree of the Stoics: Whatever the wise man does, he does with all the virtues, and one particular virtue takes the leading part, while he calls in the rest as companions for accomplishing the matter. Thus in Alexander one may see warlike valor tempered by humanity, brave gentleness, liberality in giving accommodated to the reckonings of his domestic estate, anger easy to appease, tempered love, leisure that is not idle, endurance of labors not lacking solace. Who mingled festivities with war, banquets with expeditions, weddings and nuptial songs with sieges and the most difficult enterprises? Who showed himself more hostile to those sinning, more humane to those suffering adverse things? Who was harsher to those fighting, kinder to those seeking pardon?"
In a similar way one sin, unless it is at once blotted out by penance, immediately by its own weight draws to another and another, and at length brings in the rest. For just as there is a chain and connection of virtues, so also of vices. St. Gregory, bk. XXXI Moralia, ch. XXXI, otherwise XVII, says: "Pride herself, the queen of vices, when she has fully captured a conquered heart, soon hands it over to be devastated by the seven principal vices as her commanders, whom indeed she follows as commanders of an army, because from them without doubt the troublesome multitudes of vices arise." And below: "For pride is the root of every evil, of which it is said in Ecclesiasticus X: The beginning of all sin is pride. But her first offspring, namely the seven principal vices, are brought forth from this venomous root." See the same, bk. VII Moralia, ch. XII, on that passage of Job VI, 18: "The paths of their steps are entangled."
Verse 11: For He Who Said, You Shall Not Commit Adultery, Said Also, You Shall Not Kill
11. For He who said: You shall not commit adultery, said also: You shall not kill. — He proves and shows that he who offends in one becomes guilty of all, from the fact that all the precepts have been sanctioned by the same lawgiver, God, whose authority is therefore despised and offended if you transgress even one, just as if you transgressed all. In the one lawgiver, then, all the laws come together and have their unity, so that if you violate one, you are reckoned to violate all, because you violate the integrity of the law, in the manner I expounded a little before.
Verse 12: So Speak and So Act, as Those Who Begin to Be Judged Through the Law of Liberty
12. So speak ye, and so do. — James concludes by exhorting them to do what has now been said, and not to accept the persons of the rich, but to fulfill the royal law of love of neighbors, both poor and rich, mindful of the divine judgment, in which Christians who have violated it shall be more gravely condemned, since they themselves received the law of liberty from Christ, and have ungratefully abused it — indeed, transgressed it. The sense, therefore, is, first, as if to say: What I have taught up to this point, especially about avoiding respect of persons and pursuing love of all opposed to it, namely, that respect of persons is repugnant to Christian faith and religion; and that consequently it is not lawful for the faithful to despise the poor and exalt the rich, but that the law which sanctions: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself," must be fulfilled with regard to both — receive these things, I say, as said not by me but by Christ, and therefore believe them, and so speak when conversation about these matters comes up, and so do by bringing your faith and speech into work when the matter calls for action. To which I suggest a spur for you, namely the memory and fear of the divine judgment, in which God will demand from you a strict reckoning of words and of each deed; and the greater the more, in that He has given you the Evangelical law, which is royal and of perfect liberty, as I have already said: for in this way you will in turn be loved by God and obtain mercy at His judgment. So Bede.
Secondly, Thomas the Englishman restricts these things to the precept of love of neighbor, which preceded, as if to say: Speak to your neighbors so kindly, so affably, so lovingly, and show and do for them such works of love, that they themselves perceive that they are loved by you, and that you fulfill the mandate of divine love.
Thirdly, Feuardent, as if to say: Speak things honorable, Christian, religious, as befits the disciples of Christ; not dishonorable, pagan, worldly things: for such are fitting to the carnal, to Gentiles, and to the worldly.
Fourthly, more generally, Dionysius and our Lorinus, as if to say: In all words and deeds conduct yourselves so prudently, honorably, and ardently, as though you were soon to be judged by the law of liberty, that is, the Evangelical law, which, granted with such great liberty to those who are His own, demands greater perfection. Whence in agreement with James, St. Peter, epistle I, ch. IV, verse 11: "If any man speak," he says, "let him speak as the words of God (which is what James says, 'so speak ye'); if any man minister, as of the power which God administereth (which is what James says, 'and so do'): that in all things God may be honored." The first sense seems more genuine and more suited to the text.
As beginning to be judged through the law of liberty (the Evangelical, of which I, 25). — In Greek μέλλοντες κρίνεσθαι, that is, about to be judged, that is, those who are to be judged. But μέλλω in the Scriptures is often the same as "I begin," as is clear from Apoc. III, 16; Acts III, 3, and ch. XVIII, verse 14; John IV, 47, and elsewhere, and that signification is here more fitting and more effective, as if to say: The judgment is at hand and is soon to begin: prepare yourselves therefore for it diligently: wherefore so do, and so speak, as mindful that you are shortly to be judged, and to render an account of all your words and deeds to Christ the judge. For since the Evangelical law is a law of liberty, it demands not only strict, but also free and liberal observance of the commandments of Christ. God therefore begins to judge us at once in this life by the judgment of conscience, which He establishes as His tribunal in the mind of man, and often by external plagues and internal threats which He inflicts on sinners; but properly by the particular judgment which the soul undergoes at death; and He will perfect it on the last day of the world, on which He will judge us according to the law of liberty, that is, the Evangelical, not the Mosaic.
Morally James teaches us in all our words and deeds to remember the judge Christ, and the divine judgment; for it is near, indeed it begins from now. For the inspirations and threats sent within into the mind by God, and the warnings and rebukes of Preachers, Confessors, Superiors; likewise the adversities and plagues inflicted by God, are as it were the beginning of the final judgment that is soon to follow. Add: this brief life is nothing other than a race toward death, and the beginning of death and a continual persecution; and at death the particular judgment of the soul takes place, which is the beginning — indeed the summary and certain prejudgment — of the universal and final judgment. This is what James says, ch. V, verse 9: "Behold the judge standeth before the door." And St. Paul urges the Areopagites to penance through fear of the day of judgment, Acts XVII, 30; likewise the governor Felix, Acts XXIV, 25. The same in Hebrews IX, 27: "It is appointed," he says, "unto men once to die, and after this the judgment." Again he inculcates this judgment to the Romans, ch. II, verse 5; and to the Corinthians communicating unworthily, I Cor. XI, 29; and to the Thessalonians, epistle II, ch. I, verse 5; and St. John, epistle I, ch. IV, verse 17: "That we may have confidence," he says, "in the day of judgment." St. Jude verse 14, from the prophet Henoch: "Behold," he says, "the Lord cometh with His holy thousands to execute judgment upon all." St. Peter, epistle II, ch. III, verse 10: "The day of the Lord shall come," he says, "as a thief, in the which the heavens shall pass away with great violence, etc. Therefore what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conversations and godliness, looking for and hastening unto the coming of the day of the Lord."
St. Clement, epistle 1, relates that St. Peter was wont to say: "Who will be able to sin, if he always sets the judgment of God before his eyes?" Splendidly Climacus, step 20: "Just as," he says, "the one who is hungry remembers bread, so he who desires to be saved cannot but remember the final judgment." Whence this thought continually passing before the mind of St. Augustine before his conversion, if it did not extinguish in him the ardor of concupiscence, certainly bridled it, lest he sin so many and such great things, as he himself relates in bk. VI of the Confessions, last chapter. And St. Jerome, epistle to Florentius: "I," he says, "defiled by all the filth of sins, day and night with trembling await to render the last farthing." St. Ephrem assiduously turned over in his mind the judgment of God, and was therefore in continual fear, compunction, and tears, with which all his books and treatises are full. He is therefore wise who imitates these wise ones, and namely St. James, in this place punishes less than is deserved, and rewards the pious beyond what is deserved, as the common opinion of the Schoolmen holds.
Hence some interpreters in Bede explain it thus, as if to say: More are saved through God's mercy — namely those who showed mercy — than are condemned through judgment; the elect are more numerous than the reprobate. This is true among the angels: for more stood firm than fell; whence in Apoc. XII, 4, the dragon is said to have drawn down only the third part of the stars, that is, of the angels, mystically: for that passage has another literal sense, as I shall say in that place.
Among men it is false. For it is certain that by far the greater part of men are condemned, if you include absolutely everyone — Gentiles, Saracens, and heretics. But if, excluding these three, you take only Catholics, some judge that more of them are saved — not only infants (for almost all of these are saved, since almost all are baptized), but adults too, because most of them at the end of life receive the holy Sacraments, by which they expiate all their sins, and so depart purified in a state of grace and salvation. The parable of the marriage of the heavenly kingdom favors this view, in which only one of those invited was excluded, because he did not have a wedding garment, Matth. XXII, 12: where that one man represents the whole multitude of the reprobate. So from Silvester argues Franciscus Suarez, On the Triune and One God, bk. VI, ch. III.
But on the contrary, reason and authority seem to persuade us that more adult Christians are condemned than saved. Reason, first, because by far more were condemned both in the state of natural law — since in it all perished in the flood, from which only the just Noah with his sons and their wives escaped — and in the state of Mosaic law, since all who came out of Egypt, that is six hundred thousand men and more, perished in the wilderness for their murmuring and sins, and only two, namely Joshua and Caleb, entered the promised land; nor were the children of those who perished, who did enter it, better than their parents; and many Christians are no better than they. Second, because by far the greater part of Christians live in a state of mortal sin: for according to St. Augustine's rule, as a man has lived, so he dies, so that rarely does one who has lived ill, die well, and vice versa. You will say: All receive the holy Sacraments at the end of life. I answer: not all — for many die without the Sacraments in battles, on ships, on mountains, in villages, etc. Again, of those who do receive them, many receive them badly, and so do not expiate their sins: for many labor under gross ignorance of the articles of the faith, which they are bound to know and believe explicitly, as well as of the Sacraments; and especially they are ignorant that an effective resolution to abstain from sins is required for one to be capable of absolution, and they do not know how strong and constant a resolution of soul is required for the resolution to be deemed absolute and effective. Others, granted that they know what is necessary for salvation, nevertheless live careless of their own salvation, wholly bent on heaping up riches and dignities, building houses, gardens, vineyards, etc., so that rarely or never do they think of God and eternal life, and of their conscience, except at Easter, and that only because they are compelled by the Church's precept to confess and communicate; once Easter is past, they return at once to earthly things, plunging — nay, drowning themselves in them. Others are entangled in usuries, simonies, ill-gotten goods which they refuse to restore. Others keep concubines, or are caught in obscene loves, from which they cannot disentangle themselves, because they do not in earnest wish to disentangle themselves. Others foster lawsuits, brawls, and undying hatreds. Finally, many — though they know that an effective resolution is required for absolution — nevertheless do not exert themselves to obtain and possess it, but only pretend to have it, indeed falsely persuade themselves. For this serious resolution is a hard, lofty, and difficult matter: many will not bring force upon themselves, and strain with all their might toward so arduous a thing, especially in sickness and at the moment of death, when reason, judgment, sense, and strength are weakened and dulled: hence out of the habit of so many years they form in death the same kind of resolution they used to form at Easter, that is, superficial, verbal, and ineffective.
For by this just visitation the sinner is punished, so that he who while living forgot God, in dying forgets himself, as St. Gregory and St. Augustine say, bk. III On Free Will. That is the most just penalty of sin: that he who, when he could do right, would not, should lose the power when he wishes. Moreover, that many lack this serious resolution is gathered from various signs. The first is that they elicit this resolution only in passing, once at Easter, in order to confess, because they are forced to it by their pastors: whence this resolution is more extorted and compelled than free and spontaneous: hence soon after Easter and confession they return to their lusts, vices, and crimes, as many return to the same things after a confession made in danger of death, if they escape that danger and recover: which return is a sign that the resolution was forced and extorted by fear of death, not sincere and serious.
Second, because many have evil habits — of getting drunk, of fornicating, etc., of brawling, perjuring, cursing — which they will not lay aside, or if they wish to, they do not apply the remedies necessary for scrubbing off so ingrained a thing. Moreover, beyond the other vices, lust and pride generally rule among men: these two are most powerful and fill hell.
Third, because many hold political or vicious principles, directly contrary to this resolution, in which from boyhood they are nourished, grow up, and live: for example, that an injury done to you and yours must be avenged in kind; that he is inglorious, base, and infamous who does not do so; that a duel, if offered, must be accepted, lest honor be lost; that at banquets, when anyone offers you a draft, you must reply with an equal one, and so must get drunk above all things; that one must look out for one's status, advancement, and family; that to keep or increase one's status and honor, one must strive by every means; that the laws of the Church, or of God, are not to be heeded if they stand in the way; that life and fortunes are to be defended above all things, even at the cost of God's law; that insults, slanders, blows are not to be tolerated, but repaid in kind. These maxims and principles, when occasion arises, they often actually think over, resolve upon, and confirm, and they never lay them aside, not even in confession; so that, if asked precisely about them by the Confessor, they answer that they will persist in them: such men, when honor, gain, or advantage are at stake, care nothing for conscience, nor for God, nor for hell. Now these resolutions, habitually — nay, virtually always — abiding in them, are diametrically opposed to a serious resolution to avoid all sins and to obey God's laws in everything: and Preachers often do not teach, do not explain, do not inculcate these things, but follow the common track of explaining the Gospels, commending to sinners the passion of Christ, the mercy of God, the giving of alms, and devotion to the Blessed Virgin, that she will not let her devotees perish; nor do they come down to the vices peculiar to this or that place, so as to thunder and lighten against them and root them out: whence cities and peoples remain in the same evil laws, customs, resolutions, and vices, and reap no, or but tiny, fruit from all sermons. Let them therefore change their manner of preaching, if they would consult God, conscience, the Church, and their hearers, so as to strike consciences and uproot from them every evil seed which they know is rampant in such a place.
Fourth, granted that some, confessing in death, conceive a true resolution, yet after confession, if they lie sick for many days as commonly happens, the memory of former lusts, on which their mind was wont to feed, recurs and bends them to consent, so that they consent to a wicked thought and to morose delight in past and habitual unlawful pleasure; especially because the devil is then accustomed to throw the same thing before the mind and rub it raw, and most grievously to tempt the man in that last duel, and indeed in the very agony in which the soul departs from the body; for God by His just judgment permits this to the devil as a punishment for those crimes and negligence by which, while sound and vigorous, they took no care to mortify those lusts, but indulged them like horse and mule: hence then many succumb and perish, of which thing many sad examples remain. For truly did our Reverend Father Franciscus Villanova say, as Father Sacchinus reports, vol. II Hist. of the Society, bk. I, no. 131: "The passion and the vice which you neglected to mortify in life will fiercely tempt you when death comes upon you."
Fifth, virtue, salvation, and the heavenly glory are a sublime and arduous matter, surpassing all the powers of nature: on the other side, man's nature is corrupted by sin and quite cast down to earthly things, and in it the earthly affections and lusts of wealth, honors, conveniences, and delights are so vigorous, that it scarcely grasps or takes hold of heavenly things, much less raises itself to them and rises by straining with all its powers. For though it be prevented by God's grace, yet that grace operates in fallen man as medicine in a sick and prostrate man, so that it can scarcely raise him up; and if it does raise him, he easily collapses again and falls. Therefore, in this general corruption of nature, it is easy for anyone, amid so many occasions and temptations of the flesh, the world, and the devil, to fall into some mortal sin; but to rise again from it through penitence and an effective resolution is hard and most difficult. And these are the two causes, and as it were the two poles, on which the hinge of this question turns, namely the multitude of those to be condemned and the fewness of those to be saved. For true is the maxim of St. Justin in Damascene, bk. II Paralip., ch. LXXXVII: "The soul can be brought back only with difficulty to the goods from which it has fallen; and again it cannot easily be drawn out of the evils to which it has grown accustomed."
Indeed, the weight of these reasons and the experience have compelled wise men, and among them our Benedict Justinian, to change opinion, so that, having previously thought more Christians were saved, here he revokes that opinion and judges that more are condemned. At Rome I heard many of the same opinion, and among them a certain renowned doctor and preacher recently was preaching everywhere that the confessions of those who confess at imminent death, when they have lived ill, are worse than all the rest of what they have done in their whole life before. And St. Augustine, sermon 57 De Tempore: "Nor let him keep this practice," he says, "of seeking penitence only at the very end of his life, when he cannot perform it. For that persuasion, beloved, is useless." And shortly after: "Therefore the penitence which is sought from a sick man is sickly. The penitence which is sought only from a dying man, I fear, dies itself. And therefore, beloved, whoever wishes to find God's mercy, let him perform penitence while sound in this world, that he may be sound in the world to come." The same in hom. 41 of the 50: "He who has done penitence," he says, "and been reconciled, if he departs hence secure, I am not secure." He gives the reason: "If you wish to do penitence at the time when you cannot sin, the sins have left you, not you them, etc. Therefore hold the certain, let go the uncertain." The same in On the Words of the Lord according to Luke, sermon 24: "Live well, lest you die ill." These same reasons almost persuade me also, so that, although in some towns, places, and peoples of good disposition and education, where namely there are eminent teachers, pastors, confessors, senators, and governors, who from boyhood train, nourish, and foster the people in faith and piety, I believe more are saved; yet in many others, where these are lacking — where there is great ignorance and neglect of salvation, and where the disposition of the people, perverse, is fed and strengthened by bad education or company — I judge or fear that more are condemned than saved.
There is added the authority, first, of Holy Scripture: "This age God made for the sake of the many; the age to come, however, for the sake of the few: just as the earth gives much material from which earthen vessels are made, but little from which gold and silver are made. Many indeed have been created, but few are saved," says IV Esdras, ch. VIII, vv. 1, 2, 3 — a book which, though not canonical, has its own authority. Again: "Many are called, but few are chosen," Matth. ch. XX, v. 16, where commentators commonly teach that more Christians are condemned, few saved. So Origen, Euthymius, Bede, Haymo, St. Thomas, Lyranus, Abulensis, Dionysius, Arias Montanus, and others, and Maldonatus on ch. XXII of St. Matth., v. 14, Ludovicus Molina, I part., Question XXIII, art. 7. Only Cajetan, expounding the parable of the five foolish virgins and five wise, Matth. ch. XXV, v. 3, judges the number of those to be saved and condemned to be equal, and as many to be saved as condemned. Moreover the words of Christ are clear: "Enter through the narrow gate, for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter through it. How narrow is the gate and confined the way that leads to life, and few are those who find it!" Matth. ch. VII, v. 13; that is, as Isaiah says, ch. XXIV, v. 13: "As if a few olives that remain should be shaken out of the olive tree, and clusters when the vintage is ended." And Micah, ch. VII, v. 1: "Woe is me, for I have become as one who gathers clusters in autumn after the vintage." St. Anselm on a journey came upon hunters and dogs pursuing a hare, which, when it was already almost in the dogs' mouths, ran to the Saint's feet, all trembling and sweating. St. Anselm received it in his hand and said to his companions: "Such is the soul in the last peril of life, which the infernal dogs pursue and strive to devour." So his Life records.
Next, the authority of the Fathers favors this opinion. St. Augustine, bk. III Contra Crescon., ch. LXVI: "They themselves," he says, "the good and true Christians, who are many in themselves, compared with the bad and false are likewise few. Thus the many grains which fill many granaries we call few in comparison with the chaff." St. Chrysostom, hom. 46 to the People: "Many more are entering Gehenna, but greater is the kingdom of heaven." The same more clearly, hom. 40: "How many," he says, "do you think there are in this city of ours (Antioch) who are saved? It is unwelcome what I am about to say, but I will say it nonetheless: there cannot be found among so many thousands a hundred who are saved — and even of these I doubt. For how great the malice in the young? how great the torpor in the old," etc.? St. Gregory, hom. 19 on the Gospels: "To the faith more come, but few are led through to the heavenly kingdoms." Alfonsus Mendoza extensively proves the same in Positive Question I, "Whether the number of the predestined exceeds the number of the reprobate?" concl. 4, who among other things, recounting the depraved morals of our age, says: Go to the courts, the tribunals, the workshops, the markets, the army, the fora, the ships, the chariots, etc., and there of boys, youths, men, old men behold the most corrupt morals — perjuries, envies, detractions, frauds, abuses, brawls, obscenities, corrupt desires, pride, avarice, gluttony, drunkenness, etc., — you will surely think and say with me: There is no one, or only one or two of these, who, mindful of his salvation, ever returns to God, according to that of Psalm XIII, 1: "They are corrupt, and have become abominable in their pursuits. There is none that does good, no, not one"; and Micah VII, 2: "The holy man has perished from the earth, and there is none upright among men." These reasons and this opinion cast upon every man great fear and holy dread concerning salvation, so that according to the Apostle he may work it out with fear and trembling, and therefore seriously search his conscience; and if he finds in it any principles and maxims contrary to salvation, let him utterly renounce and tear them out, withdraw his heart and will from excessive love of riches and honors, generously resist his lusts, and fasten himself wholly to the Lord and to God's law, preferring to suffer all things, to lose all things, and to die a thousand times rather than offend Him or lose His grace and friendship. For since so many even Christians are condemned, so few are saved, who would not fear? who would not strive to be among the few? who would not studiously avoid the perils of salvation? who would not secure it in every way? For we have one soul, not many: one lost, we lose all, and that irrevocably for all eternity, so that through it the future shall be most miserable, doomed to be burned by eternal fires. On the contrary, if you save the one, you have saved all, and shall be eternally most blessed and most glorious. Consider this, whoever you are who read these things. Live for God, live for eternity.
Verse 13: For Judgment Without Mercy to Him Who Has Not Done Mercy; but Mercy Exalts Itself Above Judgment
13. For judgment without mercy (supply: shall be) to him who has not shown mercy. — These words connect aptly with what precedes. For James had said that we should so speak and so do all things that, ever mindful of the divine judgment, we may make it favorable to ourselves and so find Him kind and merciful. Now he teaches the way to make it favorable: it is mercy, according to the promise of Christ: "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy," Matth. V, 7. For on the contrary, he who has not shown mercy will experience that which is harsh and "without mercy," that is, unmerciful. By "judgment" understand, by metonymy, the very condemnation which the divine judgment will inflict upon the impious and the merciless, Matth. XXV, 42. Christ teaches the same in that parable of the unmerciful servant, from whom the master recalled the whole debt of ten thousand talents, already forgiven, because he had been unwilling to remit a hundred denarii to his fellow-servant, Matth. XVIII, 34. In Greek there is an elegant paronomasia: ἡ γὰρ κρίσις ἀνέλεος τῷ μὴ ποιήσαντι ἔλεος — as if to say, the cruel and merciless man will undergo a merciless and cruel judgment. St. Gregory gives the reason, hom. 13 on the Gospels: "Consider," he says, "brethren, that the loving-kindness of God has shut out our hardness: there is now nothing of excuse that man can find. God is despised and waits: He sees Himself contemned, and calls back: He suffers injury from contempt of Himself, and yet at times promises rewards to those who return: and therefore, after James had said that mercy exalts itself above judgment, he rightly added that strict judgment will be undergone by him who has not imitated this ineffable mercy." Therefore he who does not show mercy to the needy excludes God's mercy from himself, says Oecumenius.
But mercy exalts itself above judgment. — Mercy here may be taken either as divine or as human. As divine, many with St. Gregory just cited take it as if to say: God's mercy surpasses God's justice and judgment, because it is proper to God to have mercy and to spare. Hence when, the human race having fallen by Adam's sin, judgment willed to punish and condemn all, mercy hastened in and prevailed, decreeing that man should be redeemed through the Incarnation and Passion of the Word. For although in God all attributes are equal, and there is as much justice as there is mercy, yet He uses and exercises mercy more than justice. For as the Psalmist says, Psalm CXLIV, 9: "His (God's) tender mercies are over all His works." Whence even the impious God
Secondly, others, as Damasius, II Parallel. ch. XVI, Catharinus, and Salmeron, take these words here of human mercy, so that it is an antithesis with the preceding hemistich, as if to say: A strict judgment without mercy will be his who has not shown mercy: but he who shows mercy will have a judgment mixed with great mercy, and so mercy will surpass judgment, and will bend and soften its severity. Hence Vatablus translates, "mercy fears not judgment"; the Syriac clearly, "you are exalted by mercies above judgment." For the merciful obtain through mercy and almsgiving the remission, or mitigation, of the punishment due to their sins and to be inflicted upon them in God's judgment; and if they are in mortal sin, through almsgiving they dispose themselves to receive mercy, grace, and justification from God, and merit it congruously and obtain it from God: hence it comes that in judgment, on account of this sin, they are not to be condemned but absolved. Therefore mercy surpasses and breaks the rigor of judgment, and as it were wrenches the rod and lash from the judge's hand, so that the guilty one, who would have been scourged by it, departs free and unharmed.
This is what the Wise Man says, Prov. XIV, 21: "Mercy and truth prepare good things." And Psalm XL, v. 1: "Blessed is he who understands concerning the needy and the poor, on the evil day the Lord will deliver him"; and: "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy," Matth. V, 7. Finally, Christ on the day of judgment will adjudge all the elect to heaven for the works of mercy they have done, but the reprobate to hell for having neglected them, Matth. XXV, 34.
Thirdly, the sense will be full and adequate if you join the first with the second already given, and take mercy here as both human and divine, as if to say: The mercy of the merciful man calls forth God's mercy, and takes it as his advocate and patron: but both are so powerful and effective with God that mercy resists His judgment and justice, conquers, and breaks it. It is a personification. For judgment and mercy are imagined as two persons, contending before God concerning a sinful and guilty man: judgment as plaintiff accuses him and pleads for his condemnation; mercy defends and excuses him, obtains and makes it that he is absolved and goes free.
Thus mercy appeared to St. John the Almsgiver as a most beautiful virgin, splendidly clothed, crowned on the head with a wreath of olive, urging him to almsgiving, saying that she was the daughter of the highest King, and most familiar and most gracious to Him, and that she could obtain from Him all that she would; as Leontius reports in his Life. Rousing John from sleep, she looked upon him cheerfully with a smiling and joyous countenance and said: "I am the first of the daughters of the great King. If you make me your friend, I shall be able to make you familiar with Him. For no one has greater trust before Him than I, since I persuaded Him to come down from heaven to earth and take human flesh." Wherefore John was thereafter most generous to the poor, and called them his lords, and gave the reason: "For these alone," he said, "can give me help, that I may not fall from Christ's kingdom." So St. Augustine explains it on Psalm CXLIII, saying: "Mercy is set above judgment, in which a work of mercy shall be found, even if there should be something in the judgment for which one might be punished, the wave of mercy extinguishes the fire of sin as it were." And St. Jerome to Nepotian: "I do not remember," he says, "having read of one dying an evil death who willingly exercised the works of charity: for he has many intercessors, and it is impossible that the prayers of many should not be heard," so that they obtain for him contrition and repentance, if he is in mortal sin, lest he die in it and be condemned, according to that of Tobit IV, 11: "Almsgiving delivers from every sin and from death, and will not let the soul go into darkness." See Serarius and Bellarmine on this passage, bk. III On Good Works, ch. III.
Now let us weigh and explain the very words precisely. "But mercy exalts itself above judgment," that is, mercy lifts itself above judgment, surpasses and conquers judgment, and breaks and abolishes its strict sentence of condemnation, to which the sinner is liable, by causing the merciful to be saved according to mercy, and not by the strict rigor of judgment. Our Vulgate translator seems to have read κατανχᾶται (and so some Greek codices have it), that is, raises the neck, lifts the throat against judgment: for αὐχήν in Greek is neck or throat; whence αὐχέω means the same as "I lift the neck, I am proud"; and μεγαλαυχεῖ, which our translator renders "exalts greatly," ch. III, v. 5. "Therefore mercy super-exalts judgment," that is, exalts itself against judgment, lifts its neck above judgment — as if to say: Mercy is the conqueress of judgment, and as judge it discerns and judges it: for it has a higher tribunal, by which it can annul or change judgment's sentence, just as a king or Pontiff annuls or changes the sentences of cardinals or princes. Therefore as from cardinals there is appeal to the Pope, so from judgment to mercy by the merciful an appeal is made; so that those who, on account of sins, stood in judgment with head bowed and trembling, as if to be condemned, in mercy's tribunal, on account of the mercy they have shown, lift their head and await a sure sentence of absolution, grace, and glory. Hence our Mariana so explains it, as if to say: "Mercy is superior to judgment." And Emmanuel Sa: "Mercy," he says, "super-exalts, namely, the man, that is, places him above judgment, that is, makes him escape condemnation. Some read super-exalts by judgment, that is, prevails by judgment, freeing the man from condemnation." And Thomas of England: "Mercy," he says, "exalts judgment, because the court of mercy as it were is greater than that of justice: as one may appeal from a lesser court to a greater, so from the court of justice to the court of mercy." Just as at Rome many obtain in the signatura gratiae the case they lost in the signatura justitiae. Therefore Paul exhorts in Hebrews IV, 16, saying: "Let us therefore approach with confidence the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace in seasonable help." Hence St. Cyril, or rather Clictoveus (for he supplied the eight middle books of Cyril's that had been lost), bk. V on John, ch. XIV: "Mercy is exalted above judgment," he says, "like oil above water"; as therefore oil floats upon water, so mercy surpasses judgment.
Further, the Greek now has not κατανχᾶται but κατακαυχᾶται, which corresponds to the Hebrew מתהלל mithallel, that is, mercy boasts against judgment, as conquering it and triumphing in the cause: just as one who wins a lawsuit is wont to boast of his victory over the opposing party. Therefore "boasts," that is, conquers, overcomes, blunts, and dulls judgment, says Oecumenius; for κατακαυχᾶται is put for νικᾷ, by catachresis, because boasting customarily accompanies victory. Again, it boasts against judgment, that is, against condemnation — that is, it insults condemnation as if superior to it and victorious over it. To this reading and sense some adapt our super-exaltat, supplying the Greek κατά, that is, "against," as if to say: "Mercy super-exalts itself in judgment," or "against judgment," that is, mercy lifts itself up and boasts against judgment, gloriously raises itself up and becomes superior to judgment. But it is unusual in Latin to supply the "against." Therefore Erasmus, Gagneus, and others suspect that for super-exaltat one should read super-exultat (super-rejoices). For so St. Augustine, ep. 29, reads super-exultat judicium; and ep. 89, super-exultat judicio; and Bede here, when he explains it thus: "As in judgment he will grieve who has not shown mercy, so he who has shown it will, being rewarded, exult and rejoice." For he who wins a lawsuit boasts and exults over the judgment, as one who has conquered it; as if to say: As those who do not show mercy will be condemned by God's judgment, and by His very mercy, so on the contrary those who show mercy will not dread God's judgment and condemnation, but will, as victors, insult judgment itself — that is, condemnation, death, Gehenna, sin, and the devil — saying with Christ, the conqueror over these and their Savior: "Death is swallowed up in victory. Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?" I Cor. XV, 55. And that of Rom. VIII, 34: "If God is for us, who is against us?" And v. 33: "Who shall accuse against God's elect (the merciful)? God it is that justifies; who is he that condemns?"
The antithesis with the preceding hemistich demands this sense: "For judgment without mercy to him who has not shown mercy"; to which he opposes: "But mercy super-exalts judgment," as if to say: The unmerciful will be judged strictly by judgment, since he has no advocate mercy to defend him: but the merciful will be judged mercifully and will obtain mercy, because mercy will defend him and plead and carry through his cause in judgment, that he may conquer and triumph.
The same sense is required by the connection with the preceding verse: for it gives the reason, as is plain from the rational particle for; in the preceding verse he said: "So speak and so act, as those who are about to be judged by the law of liberty," as if to say: So speak and so act, that you may remember that you will render an exact account to God in judgment of your speech and deeds. He then adds the reason, saying: "For judgment without mercy to him who has not shown mercy," as if to say: He who shows partiality to the rich, but despises the poor, and is unmerciful to them, and so violates the law of charity, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," which I commended a little before — he likewise will undergo a strict judgment without mercy; but he who does not show partiality, but loves all, both poor and rich, and is merciful to them, will likewise experience God's merciful judgment; so that mercy will overcome and take away every force and dread of judgment, and will cause the merciful man not only to escape condemnation, but also to be given the heavenly reward and glory. This sense is the true and genuine one: from which we learn how great is the power of mercy, and how acceptable it is to God, and how we ought to embrace and exercise it, if we wish to be saved, since our salvation consists in it. For so great is the power of mercy, that in judgment it can exalt the merciful through the poor, who will receive them into eternal dwellings, says St. Augustine, bk. XXI On the City of God, ch. XXVII; who also writes that this very thing was prefigured in the ark and propitiatory in Quaest. CV on Exodus: "In the ark," he says, "the law was commanded to be placed, and the manna, and Aaron's rod; in the law are precepts; the rod signifies power; the manna grace, because without grace there is no power for performing the precepts. Yet because the law is not in every part fulfilled by anyone making progress, the propitiatory is above. For this is needed, that God may be propitious, and therefore it is set above, because mercy super-exalts judgment. The two Cherubim with their wings overshadow the propitiatory, that is, they honor it by veiling. And their faces are toward the propitiatory, because they greatly commend the mercy of the Lord, in which there is one hope." Beautifully Oecumenius declares the power and use of both from the analogy of the words ἔλαιον, oil, and ἔλεος, mercy: "As," he says, "oil smeared on athletes lets them slip away, lest they be held by their adversaries, so also in the universal judgment our mercy toward the needy will give us escape from the assaults and perils which will threaten us from the demons our accusers." Therefore as the precious Sardius stone, ruddy and as it were bloody, and so a symbol of judgment and vengeance, is dulled by oil, according to Pliny, bk. XXXVII, ch. VII: so God's judgment is dulled and broken by mercy. Again St. Augustine, hom. 39 of the 50: "Before the gates of Gehenna," he says, "stands mercy, and lets no one be sent into the prison." Therefore she herself is mistress of heaven, earth, and hell, and holds the keys of all. St. Chrysostom, hom. 33 to the People: "Almsgiving," he says, "stands at the tribunal not only pleading, but persuading the very judge to grant patronage to the accused, and to deliver the sentence for him." Peter Chrysologus, sermon 42: "God eats in heaven," he says, "the bread which the poor man has received on earth. Give bread therefore, if you wish to have God as debtor, not as judge. Divine fire knows not how to burn up mercy." See St. Leo, sermon 5 On Fasting, where among other things he excellently says: "What differs in expense is often equaled in merit; because the spirit can be equal where the income is unequal." The same, sermon 10 On Lent: "Where God finds care of mercy, there He recognizes the image of His own kindness." Nazianzen, oration 16 On the Care of the Poor: "Be God," he says, "to the unfortunate." The same in his Monosticha: "If you are beneficent, you will imitate God. Be kind, that you may have God kind." Finally "mercy in itself is the greatest of the virtues," says St. Thomas, II II, Question XXX, art. 4; "whence to have mercy is set down as proper to God, and in this above all His omnipotence is said to be manifested." And shortly after: "Among all the virtues which pertain to the neighbor, the chief is mercy. For to supply another's defect is the part of one superior and better." And St. Ambrose on that of I Timothy IV, Piety is profitable for all things: "The whole sum," he says, "of Christian discipline lies in mercy and piety." And St. Matthew, ch. XII, v. 7: "I will," He says, "mercy and not sacrifice."
Furthermore, Hugh of St. Cher brings forward four other senses, true in themselves, but unsuitable and unconnected with this passage. The first is, as if to say: Mercy is set above the reason and judgment of man, and illuminates it as a lamp does a lampstand. The second, as if to say: God's mercy in the judgment will reward the good and merciful beyond their deserving more than it will relax and remit the punishment of the bad and unmerciful. The third, as if to say: More are saved through mercy than through judgment, for more depart in venial sins, which are to be remitted through God's mercy; fewer die so pure that they fly straight to heaven. The fourth, as if to say: Mercy will make heavier and graver the judgment of him who has obtained great mercy from God, if he is unmerciful. The fifth is Denis the Carthusian's, as if to say: Charitable compassion pleases God more than judicial strictness. Whence it is fitting that laws should incline to mercy, and stand rather on the oath of the accused than of the accuser, and in doubtful cases lean to the side of mercy. The sixth is Cajetan's, as if to say: As in a balance one pan, weighed down by some weight, lifts the other opposite, so mercy lifts judgment — as if to say: With God mercy has more weight and moment than judgment, and so mercy itself attenuates and lifts the force of judgment.
All these senses are partly forced, partly accommodated, partly symbolic: hence they cannot be the literal and genuine senses.
Mystically, first, Elias of Crete on Nazianzen's orat. 10, no. 23: "Mercy super-exalts judgment," because the works of mercy, he says, ascend to God and exalt the merciful man; but those which are poured out in pleasures, depart and consign one to torments, namely to Gehenna, where is the seat of judgment and condemnation. And Denis the Carthusian: "Mercy," he says, "is higher than judgment, because it shines forth in the blessed in heaven, but judgment lies upon the damned in Tartarus."
Secondly, St. Thomas, I part., Question XXI, art. 3, ad 2: "Mercy super-exalts judgment," because "God," he says, "acts mercifully, not by doing against His justice, but by doing something above justice: just as if one, to whom a hundred denarii are owed, gives him two hundred from his own, he does not act against justice, but acts liberally or mercifully. And similarly if one remits an offense committed against himself: for he gives and forgives it. From which it is plain that mercy does not take away justice, but is a certain fullness of justice; whence it is said in James II that mercy super-exalts judgment"; just as works of supererogation surpass commandments, and the evangelical counsels transcend precepts: for mercy often surpasses the strict justice of the law.
Third, Peter of Blois, in his book On Penance and Satisfaction, applies this saying to fraternal correction, as if to say: He who corrects another should do so rather through mercy, showing leniency, than through judgment by harshly rebuking him; lest the same temptation overtake him too, as the Apostle teaches, Galatians VI, 1. See what was said there.
Anagogically, they shall be wondrously exalted, and therefore the merciful shall wondrously exult in the judgment, when from Christ the Judge they shall hear this swan-like voice: "Come, ye blessed of My Father, possess the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave Me to eat," etc. Matthew XXV, 34. This is what James said in ch. 1: "But let the brother of low degree glory in his exaltation." And Peter, I Epistle, ch. V, v. 6: "That He may exalt you in the time of visitation." And Psalm LXXIV, 14: "The horns of the just shall be exalted." And: "His horn shall be exalted in glory," Psalm LXXXVIII, 25. And: "The saints shall rejoice in glory; they shall be joyful in their beds." And: "The high praises of God in their throats," Psalm CXLIX, 5. And: "I shall pass over into the place of the wonderful tabernacle, even to the house of God, with the voice of joy and praise, the noise of one feasting," Psalm XLI, 5. And: "The voice of rejoicing and of salvation is in the tabernacles of the just," Psalm CXVII, 15. And: "They shall rejoice before Thee, as they that rejoice in the harvest, as conquerors rejoice after taking a prey, when they divide the spoils," Isaiah IX, 3.
Verse 14: What Shall It Profit, My Brethren, If a Man Say He Has Faith but Has Not Works
14. What shall it profit, my brethren, if a man say he has faith, but has not works? — This is the third part of the chapter, in which against the heresy then arising he teaches that faith does not suffice for salvation, but that good works are also required. St. James therefore passes over to these on the occasion of the works of mercy, which he had a little before commended, saying: "And mercy exalteth itself above judgment." From these, then, he rises as it were from the species to the genus, to the necessity of any good works whatsoever; he likewise explains what he said in ch. 1:22: "But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only," namely by teaching that faith in the word does not suffice, but that the word must be put into works; and that of this chapter, v. 8: "If, however, you fulfil the royal law according to the Scriptures, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, you do well"; namely by teaching that this law is fulfilled not by bare faith, but by works of charity. He further explains the "law of liberty," which he named in v. 12, that is, the Evangelical law, namely that it does not so make Christians free that, loosed from every law, they may freely do whatever they please, as if the faith by which they believe in Christ the Savior were sufficient. For Simon Magus taught this in that age, as Irenaeus testifies, bk. 1, ch. 20, and Theodoret, bk. Of Heretical Fables, and after him Valentinus, Basilides, Eunomius, Aetius, as Irenaeus and Theodoret testify in the places already cited, and St. Augustine, bk. On Heresies, ch. 54, and St. Jerome, bk. II Against Jovinian. After Simon and his already-named followers, our heretics follow like a worthy lid for the dish, who teach that for salvation it suffices to have faith by which you believe that Christ has died for you, satisfied for your sins, and merited grace and glory for you; wherefore good works are not required for salvation. Simon proved this, just as our heretics still prove it, from the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, in which Paul, against the Jews glorying in Moses and the works of the Law, and despising the faith of Christ, depresses the works of the Law and exalts the faith of Christ. Therefore, in order to overthrow this error, St. Peter, St. James, and St. John wrote Canonical Epistles, in which they explain Paul's mind, and earnestly commend and require zeal for good works, as St. Augustine clearly affirms, bk. On Faith and Works, chs. 14 and 15.
Whence it is clear that Paul, when he says in Rom. 3:28 that we are justified by faith without works of the Law, is not opposed to Peter, James, and John, who say that we are justified not by faith alone, but also by works. For Paul understands the works of the Law, done by the strength of nature without the faith and grace of Christ, such as the Jews boasted of. But Peter, James, and John understand the works of faith, that is, those done out of the faith and grace of Christ, which Paul comprehends and includes under the name of faith. So St. Augustine, bk. 83, Question 76. Paul, he says, means works that precede faith; James means works that follow faith. Furthermore, there are two kinds of justification: the first, by which a man becomes just from being unjust; the second, by which from being just he becomes more just and holier; which therefore is nothing other than an increase of justice. Now the works of faith confer the first justification dispositively, but the second would profit toward attaining salvation. I said the rich man who can help: for the poor man gives a great alms to the poor, if he show him not the effect of compassion, but the affection, and pray well for him. Whence St. Augustine on Psalm CXXV: "If you have mercy in your heart," he says, "even though you have nothing to extend with your hand, God accepts your alms." And St. Job, ch. XXX, 25: "I wept," he says, "over him that was afflicted, and my soul had compassion on the poor." On which place St. Gregory, bk. XX Morals, ch. XXVI: "The holy man," he says, "knew that with Almighty God a gift of the mind is sometimes greater than a gift of substance. For he who bestows external things gives a thing outside himself; but he who gives weeping and compassion to his neighbor gives him something of himself as well. And we say that compassion is more than the gift, because anyone, even one who does not show compassion, often gives some thing; but he who truly has compassion never denies what he sees is necessary to his neighbor."
Verses 15-16: If a Brother or Sister Be Naked and Lack Daily Food, and One of You Say, Go in Peace, Be Warmed and Filled
16. The things that are necessary for the body. — Because the body needs food for sustenance, and clothing to cover its nakedness, St. James intimates that Christians in this life ought to seek only the necessities of life, and not crave the delicacies and luxury of garments. The same St. Paul taught: "Godliness with contentment," he says, "is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world: and certainly we can carry nothing out. But having food and wherewith to be covered, with these we are content. For they that will become rich fall into temptation, and into the snare of the devil, and into many unprofitable and hurtful desires, which drown men into destruction and perdition. For the love of money is the root of all evils," in Greek φιλαργυρία, that is, "the desire for silver and money," I Timothy VI, 6. Hence St. Basil severely, in the oration on the text I will destroy my barns, near the end: "But you," he says, "are you not a robber, who count as your own what you have received to be dispensed? It is the bread of the famished that you hold; the tunic of the naked that you keep in your wardrobe; the shoe of the unshod that rots with you; the silver of the needy that you possess unburied. Wherefore you do injury to as many of the poor as you would have been able to give to."
Verse 17: So Also Faith, If It Has Not Works, Is Dead in Itself
17. So also faith, if it has not works, is dead. — "As if not having a soul, namely love itself, by which it might be quickened and moved to works," says St. Bernard, epistle 42. Such a faith, then, is like a lifeless cadaver, as the same says in Sermon 24 on the Canticles, and a dead body, which nevertheless is a true body — just as faith without works is true faith, which Calvin falsely denies, but enfeebled, bloodless, sluggish, empty, idle, and as it were dead: so a root is called dead from which leaves, flowers, and fruits do not spring; so stagnant water, because it stands and does not flow, is called dead, because it lacks motion, which in living things is the index and effect of life. So virtues are called dead if charity be lacking: for charity is as it were their form and life, not physical but moral, because by its presence it gives them dignity and the state of virtue, and the power of meriting, so that a man may be reckoned before God as endowed with virtue, just, a friend, a son, whose works are worthy and meritorious of eternal life; otherwise that charity is not the proper form of faith and the virtues, neither essential nor accidental, but only extrinsic and moral, is plain from this, that faith is in the intellect, but charity and the virtues are in the will; and again, that faith in its own genus is a perfect species, just as charity is: yet charity directs faith and the other virtues to God as to the highest good and ultimate end, and therefore confers on them the dignity and state of virtue. See Gregory of Valencia, II II, disp. 1, Question 4, point 3, and dispens. 3, Question 1, point 3.
Excellently St. Chrysostom on I Tim. V: "The living," he says, "differ from the dead not only in this, that they see the sun and the air, but in this, that they do something good: for unless this is present in the living, they are nothing better than the deceased." This is the second argument by which James proves that to faith, in order that it may save, works are required.
From this passage of St. James, St. Cyril in the Council of Ephesus, part III, ch. 43, gathers: As faith without works is dead, so conversely works are dead if true faith is lacking. Again: therefore faith having works is alive.
Finally, many of the Fathers assert that faith lacking works is not true faith, because, namely, it is not living, burning, perfect, and formed by charity, which works through love, as the Apostle says, Galatians V, 6, but is unformed and dead; and because the believer slothful toward good works easily falls into sins, so grave that at length he loses the very faith and becomes an unbeliever. Third, because faith teaches and commands the doing of good works. If, then, it does them not, it appears deceitful and lying. So Didymus here: "Faith," he says, "that is dead is not faith, just as a dead man is not a man." St. Bernard, Sermon 24 on the Canticles: "You offer," he says, "a dead gift to God, etc.: do you well honor God with a foul gift? Do you well appease God, you slayer of your own faith?" Cyril of Alexandria on Malachi ch. IV, n. 43: "If anyone," he says, "after justification falls back into sins, he as it were kills faith in himself." St. Jerome on Galatians V: "When love has been far away, faith likewise withdraws." Cyril of Jerusalem: "Faith," he says, "without works is like a lamp without oil." Just as this cannot give light, so neither can that save: for only faith burning with love can do this. Wherefore faith must be nourished by good works, otherwise it dies, like a burning lamp when the oil fails. Hence St. Jerome on Ezekiel ch. III says that heretics, on account of impure morals and works, have lost the faith. The same St. Gregory teaches happens not infrequently to Christians living impiously, bk. XXV Morals, ch. X. Symbolically too, idle faith is not faith, because it is called faith from the fact that what is said is done, says Thomas Anglicus. Whence also St. Gregory: "The proof," he says, "of love (and consequently of faith) is the showing forth of work." By a similar phrase we say that wild and barbarous men are not men, but beasts; that heretics are not men, but wolves; that tyrants are tigers and lions.
Dead in itself. — καθ' ἑαυτήν, that is, according to itself, that is, by itself alone and solitary, because removed from charity and its works: for although faith and the act of faith is in itself living, both naturally — because, namely, it is an act of a vital faculty, that is, of intellect and will, vitally proceeding — and supernaturally, because, namely, it is an act of faith, which is a supernatural virtue and inchoate grace; for grace gives supernatural life to the soul: yet inasmuch as it is destitute of charity, which gives to faith as well as to the man the full and perfect supernatural life, to that extent it is called dead; just as a benumbed arm is called dead, which from the soul receives vegetation and nutrition, but not motion and sensation: for it is dead with respect to the sensitive soul, but lives with respect to the vegetative.
Excellently St. Bernard, Sermon 24 on the Canticles: "The death of faith," he says, "is the separation of charity. Do you believe in Christ? Do the works of Christ, that your faith may live. Let love quicken your faith, let action prove it. Let no earthly work bend it down, which faith of heavenly things lifts up. You who say that you abide in Christ, you also ought to walk as He walked. But if you seek your own glory, envy him who flourishes, detract from the absent, repay him who hurts you: this Christ did not do. You confess that you know God, but in deeds you deny Him. Not rightly indeed, but impiously you have given your tongue to Christ and your soul to the devil." Therefore the life and tongue of faith are works: for works speak, says St. Augustine, tractates 3 and 6 on the Epistle of St. John, they speak, I say, that the faith which produces such worthy works is true and worthy. For, as Nazianzen says, Oration On the plague of hail: "More excellent is the wisdom which is shown in deeds, than that which is splendid in words. For 'a good understanding,'" he says, "'have all they that do thereafter,' not those that merely preach."
Therefore faith ἀπράγμων and lacking the practice of works is dead, because when it ought to work and refuses this very thing, it is a sign that it is not alive, nor has the soul and life of charity: for charity works if it exists; but if it refuses to work, it is not charity, says St. Gregory — both because the life of the soul, namely justice, charity, and grace, must be nourished, preserved, and increased by good works, just as the life of the body must be nourished and preserved by food: for if this is lacking, it wastes away with hunger and dies. So Trent, sess. VI, ch. X. By a similar phrase a man is said to live by respiration and breath, and so to be dead when lacking breath, because breath so accompanies and fosters the soul that it cannot subsist without it; for by cooling the heart, it preserves the body, the soul, and life. Understand these things of adults, namely that they cannot long live the life of grace if they neglect to work well. For in little ones and adults justified, if they die immediately after baptism or justification, it is plain that they are saved without works. Therefore when James says that faith without works is dead, understand it of faith which refuses to work when the law of charity or another commands and demands some work. So Cajetan. For daily the divine or human law commands not one, but many works to be done; and if anyone scorns or neglects to do these, he sins, and thus loses God's grace, which is the life of the soul: whence it follows that faith in him is now not living, but dead. This is what St. Augustine says, bk. On the Knowledge of true life, ch. XXXVII: "This faith is nourished by hope, as the body is refreshed by food; it is animated by love, as the body is vivified by the soul." The same On the Spirit and the Letter, ch. XXXII: "The charity which is the life of faith does not precede it, but follows it." St. Bernard, Epistle 42: "Dead is the faith which does not work from love, as not having love itself for its soul, by which it might be quickened and moved to works."
Verse 18: But Someone Will Say, You Have Faith, and I Have Works
18. But someone will say. — Erasmus thinks this is a prolepsis, as though James, in order to show that neither faith without works nor works without faith avails, here introduces two speakers, of whom one, relying on faith, neglects works. To him it is said: You have faith, let this be enough for you. The other in turn, trusting in works with faith neglected, replies to him: And I have works, that is enough for me. James, however, refutes the speech of each, saying: Nay, neither of what either of them has suffices for salvation. But you who boast your faith, show by the deeds themselves that you have faith, which certainly is no idle thing: and I by the deeds themselves will declare that neither is lacking to me. But this is too intricate, nor can a colloquy of three persons be found in this text. For the pronoun "I," when he says: "I have works," is the same and of the same (not another) speaking person, who soon says: "I will show thee my faith from my works"; and consequently three persons and three sayings of theirs cannot be found here.
Secondly, the Gloss, Hugh, and Thomas Anglicus think these things are said in derision and reproach, as if he who has both faith and works derides him who boasts of faith alone and from it hopes for salvation, to signify that such a one is worthy of laughter and reproach, and therefore to be hooted off. But, to be silent on other matters, this derision seems unworthy of the Apostolic gravity and modesty of St. James.
Thirdly, then, and genuinely, this whole utterance and objection of St. James belongs to him, by which with a new — namely third — argument, or with a new confirmation of the argument already brought, he beats back the boasting of him who glories in faith alone: for the τὸ ἀλλά, that is "but," is a particle not of one opposing, but of one confirming, or amplifying his own statement, so that it is the same as "but indeed," "yet," "certainly," "moreover," "besides"; or "inasmuch as," "wherefore," "on which account"; or "nay rather," "yea," "indeed": for ἀλλά means all these things, and all these fit this place, as if to say: But indeed, yet, or moreover, or inasmuch, or nay rather one will say, that is, anyone could rightly say and properly object to him who keeps boasting of faith and neglects works (and says to the naked and famished: Go in peace, be warmed and filled): You have faith and boast of it, but I have works joined to faith. Show me, then, your faith without works: certainly you will never show it to me bare and destitute of these. But I will plainly show you my faith from works, and so will at the same time show you that I am truly faithful, and of the assembly of the Church and of the true faithful, and likewise will show that my faith profits not myself alone, but also you and others, either as help or as example. For the showing forth of faith through works is required in the Church for these two ends: namely, first, that by them the faithful may mutually show their faith to one another, and so come together and form one assembly of the faithful, and that visible. For the faithful, because they are men, not angels, cannot see the faith of the mind: by works, therefore, they must show it forth, and exhibit it for others to see, that they may know one another, and be distinguished from unbelievers, and may come together into one assembly and coalesce. Wherefore Salvian, bk. III On Providence, treating this passage of James, says: "good acts are witnesses of the Christian faith." Secondly, that the faith of one may profit not him alone, but also the rest of the faithful, either by helping them or by furnishing an example of good morals and virtues. For therefore in the Church, as the Creed has it, there is the communion of Saints, that is, the mutual communication of goods, that in it individuals may strive to share what is theirs with others, and to profit them.
And the word "show" signifies both. For "to show" in Scripture signifies not only to propose a thing for inspection, but also to exhibit, give, bestow, or grant the very thing; as when we say to God: "Show us, O Lord, Thy mercy." "Show," that is, exhibit and bestow, namely that Thou mayest impart to us Thy gifts, benefits, and works of mercy. When therefore James says: "Show me thy faith," he requires not only that it be subjected to be seen by the eyes, but also that it be communicated to me in reality, and confer on me some advantage and utility, either by imparting alms, or helping, or counseling, or in any other ways. Again, as if to say: Show me that your faith is living, and animated by charity is alive, and not dead and a corpse; for life is shown from disposition and motion. For if an animal moves itself and breathes, it lives; if it is motionless, it is dead: so likewise faith shows itself to be alive if it moves itself and acts toward good works; but if it rests from them and is unmoved, it shows itself to be dead.
Show me thy faith without works. — Now contrariwise the Greek reads ἐκ τῶν ἔργων, that is "from the works": but for ἐκ one should read ἐκτός, that is "without"; for so our Vulgate reads, the Syriac, and many Greeks: and the antithesis demands it: "Show me thy faith without works, and I will show thee my faith by works," as if to say: You cannot show me faith without works, but I will plainly show you my faith from works. Thus the Apostles, Martyrs, and Virgins, despising wealth, honors, delights, and life itself, showed that they believed in the future life and heavenly wealth, honors, and delights. For they here embraced poverty, were humbled, afflicted, that in heaven they might be enriched, exalted, and overflow with eternal joys.
Salmeron thinks that St. James alludes to Proverbs XII, 17, where for what our Vulgate translates "He that speaks what he knows is a witness of justice," the Septuagint renders ἐπιδεικνυμένην πίστιν ἀπαγγέλλει δίκαιος, that is, "the just man declares manifested faith," as though "manifested" were the same as "demonstrable by works"; Symmachus has ἐκφαίνων πίστιν ἀπαγγέλλει δικαιοσύνην, that is, "he who makes faith plain (namely by works) declares righteousness." But faith there is taken for truth and faithfulness, as if to say: The just man manifests truly and faithfully faith itself, that is, the truth of a matter made plain and demonstrated to him. For this is what our Vulgate translates "He that speaks what he knows is a witness of justice," that is, he indicates that which is true and just; to whom by antithesis, as is the custom of the Wise man, he soon opposes: "But he that lies is a deceitful witness." If, then, St. James alludes to this, he alludes only verbally, or certainly only mystically and symbolically.
Symbolically you may apply these things to heretics, and say to them: Show me your new — rather, perfidious — faith without divine works, that is, miracles: I from them will show you my orthodox faith. For the miracles of orthodox faith are to raise the living from the dead, to make the seeing from the blind, the hearing from the deaf; but the miracles of heretical faith are to make the dead from the living, the blind from the seeing, the deaf from the hearing.
Thus Calvin, wishing to raise a living man who feigned himself dead, made him truly dead, as Bolsec, his disciple, relates in his Life, ch. XII. The same did Cirola, an Arian bishop, as Gregory of Tours teaches, bk. II Hist. Franc., ch. III. So St. Macarius, disputing with a Eunomian heretic, challenged him to a miracle, that each might show his faith from works, and therefore raised a dead man; whereupon the Eunomian, distrustful of his faith — rather perfidy — withdrew himself, as Cassian relates, Collation XV, ch. III.
George, Duke of Saxony, more effectively confutes these same men: for when invited by Luther to his heresy, he answered that the works of Luther and the Lutherans show his faith to be not from God but from the devil: for the works which Luther's faith teaches and persuades are: to violate vows, fasts, feasts, to profane temples and altars, to break images of the Saints, to trample on the Holy Sacraments, to blaspheme the Blessed Virgin and all the Saints, indeed God Himself, whom he makes the author of every evil work. When ever, he says, were so many sacrileges committed by priests, Religious, and Virgins consecrated to God, as under your Gospel, O Luther? When were rebellions against princes more frequent? When have so many despoilings of sacred buildings, so many thefts and rapines, been seen? When have so many wives been taken from their husbands and handed over to others? When so many fornications, adulteries, incests, etc.?
Verse 19: You Believe That There Is One God; You Do Well; the Demons Also Believe and Tremble
19. You believe that there is one God: you do well: and the demons believe and tremble. — This is the fourth argument proving that good works are required for justifying faith, namely that faith devoid of works belongs to devils, not to the faithful and saints. Calvin objects that St. James by "faith" means a shadow of faith, because devils do not have true and divine faith, but human. I reply that many probably hold that in devils and the damned the habit and act of divine faith remains; because they, except for heretics, never had an act of unbelief, which, as contrary to faith, expels it, and because in the damned remains the character of baptism, which is as it were the mark of faith and the faithful. So judge Durandus, in III, dist. XXIII, Question IX, art. 2; Alensis, III part., Question LXIV, memb. 7, Catharinus and Salmeron here, the Master of the Sentences in III, dist. XXIII, § "It is another thing," where he proves it from Augustine on Psalm LXXVII. Gregory of Valencia, II II, Question V, art. 2, point 2, judges the same to be probable, and more so Justinian here, who ascribes the same to St. Augustine, Enchirid. III, and to St. Thomas, II II, Question XVIII, art. 3, ad 2.
But it is more true that faith does not remain in devils and the damned, because God takes it away from them, as well as the other supernatural virtues; because these virtues order and direct man to salvation and eternal life, of which the damned are unworthy and incapable. So judge St. Thomas, II II, Question V, art. 2, whom Thomas Anglicus, Gregory of Valencia, and the Scholastics generally follow. St. Dionysius On the Divine Names, ch. IV, favors this, where he says that natural things have remained intact in the devils, but the gratuitous things have perished: for faith is one of the gratuitous gifts.
I say, then, that James's argument is not drawn from the same species and faith, but from a similar or parallel one, as if to say: There is no reason for you to boast that you believe in God and the other articles of faith; because even the devils, compelled by their evidence (whence Plato in the Cratylus says that demons are called δαήμονες, that is, "knowers"), believe the same things, whether they do this by divine or by human faith: and yet this credulity of theirs profits them nothing, except unto greater torment. In the same way, then, your faith, though divinely infused, will not profit you, except unto greater damnation, if you have not lived according to it, nor exercised the good works which faith dictates are to be done; but with the devils your faith will be, and so will be your lot and your gehenna; you will sink below the devils, you will burn with the devils: for your faith, equally with the devils', is nothing but empty knowledge, indeed an inert and slothful credulity, by which you believe that God has commanded that you do these and those things, which nevertheless you are unwilling to do and perform. Wherefore St. Augustine, Enchiridion VIII, calls faith without works "demoniacal," and opposes it to the faith which works through love. And St. Anselm, on Galatians V, calls faith destitute of works the faith of devils, not of Christians.
And tremble. — φρίσσουσι, that is, they shudder, because they not only believe but also in reality experience and feel the so great majesty, power, and severity of God the Judge and Avenger.
Verse 20: But Will You Know, O Vain Man, That Faith Without Works Is Dead
20. But wilt thou know, O vain man. — St. James presses more sharply, and brings forward a fifth argument, by which he completes the matter, namely by proposing Abraham, the father of faith and justice, who was justified by works, not by faith alone. He calls the man "vain" who boasts a vain faith, as devoid of fruits, that is, of works, and therefore is vain and devoid of prudence and a sound mind.
Is dead. — So the Roman, Greek, and Syriac: less correctly, therefore, do some read "is idle."
Verse 21: Was Not Abraham Our Father Justified by Works, Offering Isaac His Son Upon the Altar
21. Abraham our father. — Both according to the flesh, and according to faith and spirit. For James, being a Jew, speaks chiefly to Jews, as their Bishop. He brings forward Abraham, both because he was the father of believers and the exemplar of the just; and because Paul, Rom. IV, 3, had brought forward Abraham, and had said that he was justified by faith; from which Simon Magus inferred that he was justified without works. James therefore here explains Paul, namely that the faith of Abraham was not idle, but heaped up with good works. Thus too Paul explains himself, Heb. XI, 8 and 17, where he recounts and celebrates the heroic works of Abraham's faith.
Offering Isaac. — "Offering," that is, preparing to offer, namely binding him, placing him on the altar and drawing the sword over him; but, prevented by an Angel, he did not in fact offer or immolate him. "Offering," therefore, in an act intended and begun, not perfected and consummated. This was for Abraham a heroic act of faith, fortitude, obedience, charity, and religion, by which he immediately obeyed God commanding him to immolate his son, even his only one. Hence the Wise Man, ch. X, v. 5, calls Abraham strong against pity for his son, because by fortitude he overcame pity. Wherefore the act of Abraham immolating his son was far more excellent than the act of Jephthah, Agamemnon, Codrus, Iphigenia, Harmonius, Aristogiton, Leonidas, Epaminondas, L. Brutus, the Decii, Creon, Idomeneus, and the like, of whom Cicero speaks in Tusculans 1, and our Serarius on Judges XI, Question XVII: who immolated themselves or their sons or daughters, or devoted themselves to death, because they did it either compelled, to defend their country's safety, or out of desire for fame and glory. But Abraham did it freely, impelled solely by the will and zeal of obeying God.
Add: Abraham immolated the son from whom God had promised him the greatest posterity, and Christ Himself; therefore he believed that God would raise up the son immolated by him. Hence the Apostle says that "against the hope" of nature, "in hope" of the grace and resurrection promised by God he believed, Rom. IV, 18; "reckoning that God is able to raise up even from the dead," Heb. XI, 19. See what was said on Gen. XII and XXII.
Note first, with Bede, that James produces this example of Abraham to encourage the faithful to imitate it, namely that in the onset of persecution they offer their own life and the lives of their own to God in martyrdom, and much more that they bestow their goods upon Him in the poor, and so exercise the works of charity and other virtues, and join them with faith.
Note second, Abraham was already just: for it had already been said of him in Gen. XV, 6: "Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him for justice." Therefore that which afterwards, Gen. XXII, 10, while offering his son, he is here said to be justified, understand rather that he greatly progressed and grew in the justice already received through so heroic an act of obedience, religion and charity, as is plain from this, that as a reward for so great an act God heaped up His blessing, promising him the Son the Messiah, that is, Christ. For He says in Gen. XXII, 16: "By Myself have I sworn, says the Lord, because you have done this thing, and have not spared your only-begotten son for My sake, I will bless you and multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and as the sand which is on the seashore: your seed shall possess the gates of his enemies. And in your seed shall all the Gentiles of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice."
From which Calvin and Beza are refuted (which the Calvinists also inserted into Vatablus's Bibles), who hold that St. James requires works besides faith, not as a cause of justification but as its effect; as if works were merely a sign and demonstration of the justifying faith, which, they say, cannot be separated from charity. Therefore they interpret "was justified" as "was declared just." But wrongly, because these blessings and these rewards already recounted from Genesis were not given by God to Abraham for the declaration of justice, but for his outstanding virtue and justice, by which in offering his son he eminently pleased God, and obtained His extraordinary grace and justice. For who would deny that Abraham, who with such faith, charity, and obedience willed to immolate his son, was more pleasing to God, and therefore more justified? Second, the same is clear from what James adds, that Abraham was justified by works, not only by faith. But by faith he is said not only to be declared just, but truly justified, as the heretics admit: therefore by works also he is not only declared just, but truly justified. Third, because James adds that Abraham's faith was consummated by works: because, namely, it was truly consummated by them, not because it was declared consummated from them: therefore works bring perfection and consummation to faith, because, namely, they merit increase and perfection of justice. Fourth, because in v. 25 he says that Rahab the harlot was justified by works, for the harlot could not be declared just, but truly justified, that is, from unfaithful made faithful, and from a harlot made chaste and just. Fifth, thus explain the Council of Trent, session VI, ch. 8 and 10, and St. Augustine, in his book On Faith and Works, ch. XIV, and To Dulcitius, Question I, and often elsewhere, and everywhere the Fathers and all orthodox Doctors.
Morally St. Ambrose, bk. 1 On Abraham, ch. VIII, teaches that God advanced Abraham gradually to this degree of trial and perfection, that he should immolate his son, through many preliminary tests and experiences, just as commanders are wont to train and form soldiers through skirmishes for battle and victory. "And holy Abraham," he says, "He proved first, and so tempted him, lest if He tempted before He had proved, He should weigh him down. He proved him when He commanded him to go out from Haran, and found him obedient; He proved him when, relying on the title of faith, he rescued his nephew, when he touched nothing of the spoil, when He promised the old man a son; and when he was a hundred years old, though he regarded Sarah's womb as dead, yet he believed, nor wavered in faith; He proved him by his diligence of hospitality. Therefore, having been proved, He thought him as if stronger to be tempted by greater things, and by certain harsher commands," by ordering him to immolate his only-begotten son.
Let Prelates and Superiors learn from God not to tempt their subjects suddenly, nor to burden them with heavy precepts, but gradually to advance them from lesser to greater. St. Ambrose adds another moral lesson: "And by this example we are taught that one is proved by true things, but is tempted by composed and feigned things. For God did not wish the son to be immolated by the father, but was testing the father's affection, whether he would prefer God's commands to his son, whether by contemplating paternal piety he would bend the force of devotion." In great things, therefore, to have willed is enough, and the affection suffices for God. Let Prelates imitate the same.
Verse 22: You See That Faith Cooperated With His Works, and by Works Was Faith Consummated
22. You see that (because) faith was cooperating (Syriac: "was helping") his works. — Just as the root cooperates with the branches, instilling into them sap to produce fruits: for what the root is in the tree, this is faith in the series of virtues and good works: for faith is like a torch showing and persuading what is to be done, what is to be shunned, that we may avoid hell and obtain heaven, and by that very fact impels us to undertake good works and to decline evils. "For faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the evidence of things not appearing," Heb. XI, 1. See what was said there.
And by works faith was consummated. — In Greek ἐτελειώθη, that is, first, was perfected; second, attained its end; third, achieved victory; fourth, was crowned and obtained the crown; fifth, was consecrated: see what was said on ch. 1, v. 4. Therefore works confer on faith perfection and consummation, because they confer on it the merit of eternal life, and likewise the increase and perfection of charity, and of the other virtues. For from their repeated and intensifying acts, the habit of these same virtues is intensified and perfected. To this purpose is what Origen mystically notes, homily 10 on Genesis, namely that Abraham's servant, when by his master's command he chose Rebekah as Isaac's bride, at once offered her earrings and bracelets, so that she might have her ears and hands simultaneously adorned. And mystically explaining this: "For Christ the bridegroom," he says, "wishes the soul, His bride, to receive the words of faith into golden ears, and to have golden acts in her hands."
Verse 23: And the Scripture Was Fulfilled, Saying, Abraham Believed God, and It Was Reputed to Him for Justice; and He Was Called the Friend of God
23. And the Scripture was supplemented. — Hugo and Thomas Anglicus read, was fulfilled: both meanings the Greek ἐπληρώθη signifies. The sense is, as if to say: Lest we should think that Abraham and the faithful are justified by faith alone, because Scripture in Gen. XV, 6 says of him: "Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him for justice"; behold, another Scripture supplies and fulfills the same, adding that works are required besides faith; namely when it says that Abraham offered his son, and performed many other heroic works of the virtues, by which he more and more obtained for himself God's grace, justice, and friendship. Others reading was fulfilled, simply explain it thus, as if to say: And by this means the Scripture was fulfilled which says Abraham was justified by faith: for by works was faith fulfilled and perfected, and consequently the justice of Abraham. But "was supplemented" demands the former sense, especially because James here urges that justification comes from works, not from faith alone: for this is his very purpose.
Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him for justice. — I have explained these words on Gen. XV, 6. Morally Philo, in his book Who is the Heir of Divine Things, says: "It is difficult to believe in God alone, on account of the kinship which we have with mortal things, which persuade us to believe and trust in glory, principality, friends, health, strength, etc. To wash away these persuasions, and to distrust the creature, which by itself is most untrustworthy, and to trust God alone, who alone is truly trustworthy, is a matter of a great and heavenly mind, not enticed by any of our things." The same, in book On Rewards and Punishments: "Whoever," he says, "believes in God from the heart, places no trust in any created and corruptible thing, not even in those things in which he most pleases himself." The same, in book On Abraham: "The only, therefore," he says, "sure and firm good is the faith by which God is believed, the consolation of life, the supplement of good hope, the dispeller of calamities, the conciliator of felicities, the renunciation of superstition, the assertion of piety, the inheritance of prosperity, the advancement in all goods supported by the Author of all, who can do all things, wills only the best."
And he was called the friend of God. — II Paral. XX, 7, and Judith VIII, 22: "They ought," he says, "to be mindful how our father Abraham was tempted, and tried by many tribulations, was made the friend of God"; and Isaiah XLI, 8: "And you, Israel, my servant Jacob, whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend"; and Daniel III, 35: "Neither take away your mercy from us for the sake of Abraham your beloved, and Isaac your servant, and Israel your holy one."
Note: Although all the just are and are called friends of God, yet properly and as if by antonomasia this title and epithet is given to Abraham, as Epiphanius, heresy 78, because the familiarity and friendship of God with Abraham was wonderful, as is plain in Genesis, from ch. XII to XXV. Hence God revealed His secrets to him as to His singular friend, such as the destruction of Sodom and the Pentapolis. "Shall I," He says, "be able to hide from Abraham (the Septuagint adds: My friend) what I am about to do?" Gen. XVIII, 17. Truly Philo, bk. III, says, in Noah Came to His Senses: "Whoever," he says, "it falls to by lot to be a friend of God, he transcends the boundaries of human happiness."
The reason for this friendship was: first, that Abraham, wonderfully loving and worshipping God, following Him calling, went out from his country into Canaan, and there lived as a pilgrim, but a citizen of heaven and a member of God's household. Second, that he conformed himself to God's will in all things. So St. Augustine, sermon 46 On Time, ch. IV. For true friendship is to will the same and not to will the same, says Aristotle. Third, that he performed arduous and heroic works of the virtues, and remained faithful to God and constant in a strong trial, as Judith says in the words cited a little before. For, as Seneca says, bk. I On Providence: "God does not hold the good man in delights"; but in wonderful ways tests, purges, and shakes him. Fourth, that he was like God: for as God immolated His Son for the salvation of the world, so also Abraham immolated Isaac, who was a type of Christ, as Abraham was of God the Father. Now likeness is the bait of love and friendship, as Aristotle bears witness. Fifth, because Abraham was beneficent and liberal toward all. And this wonderfully pleases God and makes us very similar to Him: for God is most beneficent toward all. The Emperor Titus, when in the evening he remembered that he had bestowed a benefit on no one that day, exclaimed: "Friends, I have lost a day." Which St. Jerome, citing on ch. VI of Galatians: "And we," he says, "do we not think we lose an hour, a day, a moment, a time, an age, when we speak an idle word, for which we shall render account in the day of judgment?" Sixth, because his conversation was in heaven with God and the angels; whence in mind, tongue, and morals he was not so much earthly as heavenly and divine. Seventh, because by teaching, praying, sacrificing, and therefore by building altars throughout all Canaan, he propagated the faith, worship, and glory of God. Again, he imbued the same in his whole family and most ample posterity, which following the discipline of the patriarch Abraham stood constant and firm in the religion of God for two thousand years until Christ. Eighth, because he was outstanding in all things and events for moderation and equity of soul; by which as God excels, so He loves those endowed with it as friends. Seneca celebrates this in Scipio Africanus, Epist. 87: "His soul," he says, "I am persuaded returned to heaven, from which it came, not because he led great armies, for the furious Cambyses also did this, and used his fury successfully, but because of his outstanding moderation."
For the same reasons, St. John, as another Abraham of the new law, is called "that disciple whom Jesus loved," John XIII, 23. Indeed, all the Apostles are called friends by Christ: "But I have called you friends," He says, "because all things whatsoever I have heard of My Father, I have made known to you," John XV, 15. So also the rest of Christians are called not only friends but also sons of God, of whom St. John, as if in wonder, says, I epistle, ch. III, verse 1: "See what charity the Father has given us, that we should be called and be sons of God." Foreseeing them in spirit, the Psalmist exultantly sang: "But to me your friends, O God, are made exceedingly honorable, their principality is exceedingly strengthened," Psalm CXXXVIII, 17; and the Spouse, Canticle V, 10: "My beloved," she says, "is white and ruddy, chosen out of thousands"; and v. 16: "Wholly desirable: such is my beloved, and He is my friend." Furthermore, the friendship of men, even of princes, is unfaithful, fragile, perishable, useless, and often harmful, bringing extreme ruin not only to the body but also to the soul: but the friendship of God is faithful, stable, secure, useful, and gains salvation both for body and soul, both present and eternal. Wherefore wisely that courtier in St. Augustine, bk. VIII Confessions, ch. VI, after reading the Life of St. Anthony, turning to his companion: "Tell me, I pray you," he said, "by all our labors, where do we strive to arrive? what do we seek? for what cause do we serve as soldiers? Can our hope be greater in the palace than to be friends of the Emperor? And there what is not fragile and full of perils? And through how many perils is one reached a greater peril? And how long will this be? But if I will, behold I now become a friend of God." He willed, and it was done. Furthermore, between God and the just there is not a rigid friendship, which only exists between equals: for God immensely surpasses all men, angels, and creatures; but such as can and is wont to be between prince and subject, between father and son, between Creator and creature, which wholly relies on the supreme condescension and benevolence of the Creator, and is founded and stands therein. And in this sense receive that saying of St. Jerome, on ch. VII of Micah: "Friendship either accepts equals, or makes them equal"; equals, namely, in the duties of friendship.
Verse 25: And in Like Manner Rahab the Harlot, Was She Not Justified by Works, Receiving the Messengers
25. Rahab the harlot. — The Chaldeans, Lyranus, Abulensis, Pagninus, Arias translate harlot as innkeeper or hostess. For the Hebrew זונה zona signifies both an innkeeper and a harlot: both fit here, because not rarely hostesses, when they lack husbands, prostitute both themselves and their goods. Furthermore, our Serarius in Joshua, ch. II, Question III and following, teaches from Clement of Rome, Origen, Irenaeus, Nazianzen, Ephrem, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, and others that Rahab was a harlot. Hence by the example of Rahab converted to the faith and chastity, just as of St. Magdalene, St. Ephrem in vol. 1, sermon 2 On Penitence, invites all sinners to penitence. The same does St. Chrysostom, homily 5 On Penitence, where he says of Rahab: "She was in the brothel as a pearl confounded in a wallowing-place, gold cast away in mud, a flower pierced with thorns, a religious soul shut up in the place of piety," because, namely, she was such not in act, but in God's foreknowledge and predestination. Whence Rahab in Hebrew is the same as strength, or breadth. Origen, homily 3 on Joshua, calls her a Prophetess. Cyril of Jerusalem, catechesis 2, says she was saved; indeed St. Paul also, Heb. XI, 31, places her in the catalog of Saints of the Old Testament, and commends her for outstanding faith: "By faith," he says, "Rahab the harlot did not perish with the unbelievers, receiving the spies with peace," as if to say: When all the citizens of Jericho persisted as unbelievers and refused to surrender themselves to the Hebrews, to whom God had given the city and the whole of Canaan as a gift, they perished and were slain by the Hebrews; only Rahab, believing, and surrendering herself and her country to the Hebrews, was saved.
Morally St. Ambrose, bk. III, epist. 25, near the end: "Love hospitality," he says, "by which St. Abraham found grace, received Christ in hospitality, deserved a son from Sarah even when she was now in old age, and Lot also escaped the fire of the Sodomite destruction: and you can receive angels, if you offer your hospitality to those coming. What shall I say of Rahab, who by this office found salvation?"
Was she not justified by works? — The works of faith of Rahab were illustrious. First, outstanding was her hospitality, which received, hid, and saved the foreign and unknown spies of Jericho — though enemies of her country — by hospitality, because by divine instinct she had understood that God willed the city to be handed over to the Hebrews. Wherefore Abulensis is wrong in Joshua 1, Question XL and XLI, where he says Rahab could have betrayed or killed the spies without sin; for she could not resist God and His known will. Second, there was in her a great love of God, by which she conquered the love of country, and so by it she betrayed and gave up her country to the Hebrews: for the love of country in a citizen is vehement, and is preferred to the love of father and mother, says Plato in the Crito. Thus for their country Codrus, king of the Athenians, devoted themselves to death; Curtius, the Decii, Brutus, Thrasybulus, Themistocles and others, whom Valerius Maximus marvelously celebrates, bk. V, ch. VI, and Cicero, Tusculans 1. Third, there shone in her great fortitude, by which she exposed herself, her fortunes, and her whole family to the extreme danger for God and His people. For, as St. Ambrose says, on Psalm XXXVII: "She thought her soul was to be redeemed not only by contempt of all that she had, but also by perils of life, since she denied the spies of Joshua son of Nun to her fellow citizens seeking them, and chose to hide rather than betray the enemies of her country, who were yet ambassadors of faith. The threats of the citizens did not terrify her, nor the perils of war, nor the burnings of her country, nor the dangers of her own people. Learn, O man, learn, O Christian, how you ought to follow the true Jesus, when a woman despised all her own, and followed Jesus in figure on account of the similarity of name."
Wherefore R. Simeon and R. Johai in Masius on Joshua II, p. 16, assert that the faith of Rahab was so great, and so accepted by God, that even if she had had two hundred kinsmen and two hundred foreign families joined to them by affinity, all of them would have been saved on account of Rahab.
Hence note first, that St. James here and St. Paul, Heb. ch. XI, v. 31, assert that Rahab was justified, by the common consent of the Synagogue and the Jews, and from her faith so generous, by which she exposed both her life and all her own to evident peril for God's people, and from being an idolater and a Canaanite was made faithful and a proselyte, and so passed over into the true religion of God, the Church, and Judaism; whence she also married Salmon, prince of the tribe of Judah, from whom Christ descended. For Salmon by Rahab begot Boaz, he Obed, he Jesse, he David, Matt. I, 5. Wherefore she deserved to be the mother and grandmother of David, Solomon, and of Christ Himself. The Rabbis add (with whom be the credit), that Rahab by her faith merited that from her stock should be born the Prophets and priests Jeremiah, Helcias, Sarias, Maasias, Barachias, Hanameel, Sellum, Ezekiel, and Huldah.
Note second, that Rahab, before the coming of the spies, hearing the prodigies which God had done for the Hebrews in Egypt and in the crossing of the Red Sea, by God's instinct believed in Him, saying: "The Lord your God, He is God in heaven above and on earth beneath," Josh. II, 11. But it is a problem whether before she received the spies she had faith perfected by contrition and charity, and so was justified; or whether she conceived it after their coming and conversation, so that by receiving them she was not first justified, but having already been made just, became more just and holier. Either is probable and has weighty authors; the historical narrative in Joshua II seems to indicate that she was justified before their coming. That she was not justified, is suggested by this, that here, and by St. Paul, Heb. ch. XI, 31, she is called a harlot, who, as Ambrose says on Psalm XL, "nourished herself on the wages of perfidy and intemperance; yet when she saw the spies whom Joshua son of Nun had sent, she put on faith and at the imminent peril preserved justice." Second, because she could not will to change paganism into the true religion and Judaism unless she had seen and heard the Jewish spies and been instructed by them about Judaism; but she had to change paganism into the worship and religion of the true God of the Hebrews before she could be justified: therefore she had first to hear them and be instructed by them. Wherefore there is no doubt that many conversations took place between her and the spies about God and the Hebrews' religion and their wonders, although these are passed over in silence in Joshua 2. If this is true, it follows that Rahab was after and by the coming of the spies fully converted to God, and first justified; which justice she afterwards increased by hiding and dismissing the spies. Wherefore St. James treats both of her first and second justification, namely of the increase of justice.
Receiving the messengers, — the two spies sent to Jericho by Joshua. Some Hebrews relate that these two were Caleb and Phinehas, son of Eleazar, whom some hold to have been an angel, or like an angel, who when he willed was seen, when he willed not was hidden; and accordingly that when Rahab wished to hide him, he answered: I am a priest; for priests are like angels: if they will, they are visible; if they will not, they are not seen: and therefore Rahab hid only Caleb, not Phinehas. But this smells of a Rabbinic fable and is repugnant to the Latin version of Joshua II, 4, where each is said to have been hidden by Rahab.
Verse 26: For as the Body Without the Spirit Is Dead, So Also Faith Without Works Is Dead
26. For as the body without the spirit (that is, the vital breath, which is the indicator and fomenter of the soul, and the indication of life) is dead, so also faith without works is dead. — Hence it is plain that those err who place virtue in words, not in things, of whom Plutarch, in his book On Superstition, and Horace: "You think virtue is words," he says, "as a grove is wood." For on the contrary Paul, I Cor. IV, 20: "Not in speech," he says, "is the kingdom of God, but in power." Philo, in book On Migration of Abraham: "The words of God," he says, "are the works of the wise: for what God speaks, this the wise man does." St. Ambrose, on Psalm CXVIII: "Virtue," he says, "consists not in words and in voice, or in pretense, but in the thing and in the hands and works." St. Ephrem, in book On the Spiritual Life: "Consider," he says, "whether you have works in keeping with faith. For if you are eager only to speak and hear, that will be cast at you: Faith without works is dead."
Hence Christ, in order to commend to us the necessity of works, "in His active life had action, and in His death sustained an active passion, while He works salvation in the midst of the earth," says Bernard, sermon for Wednesday of Holy Week; because, as the same says in his sermon On Obedience, Patience, and Wisdom, Christ while He was acting, was simultaneously suffering, and while He was suffering, was simultaneously acting; that He might teach us to seek and join both. The same, sermon On the Resurrection: "True faith," he says, "works testify to. For as we recognize the life of this body in its motion, so also the life of faith from good works. Therefore the life of the body is the soul, by which it is moved and feels: but the life of faith is charity, because by that it operates; whence also when charity grows cold, faith dies, as the body, when the soul withdraws. You, therefore, if you see a man living vigorously in good works, do not doubt that there is faith in him, holding the arguments of that faith." This is what Paul says, Ephesians II, 10: "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works," that is, for performing and accumulating good works, "which God has prepared that we should walk in them," as if to say: Therefore Christ made us Christians and bestowed on us such grace, that it should not be inert and idle, but operative, and zealously brought to bear on good works.
Morally, Thomas Anglicus: "Note," he says, "that we ought to have a true faith, not feigned, I Timothy 1: The end of the precept, he says, is charity from a pure heart and a good conscience and unfeigned faith. Certain, not doubtful, ch. 1, v. 6: Let him ask in faith, in no way wavering; Matthew XIV, 31: O you of little faith, why did you doubt? One, not divided, Ephesians IV, 5: One Lord, one faith, one baptism. Living, not dead, Habakkuk II, 4: But the just shall live in his faith. Great, not small, Matthew XV, 28: O woman, great is your faith. Fervid, not tepid, Matthew XVII, 19: If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed. Operative, not idle, as here: Faith without works is idle. Firm, not infirm, Colossians II, 5: Seeing your order, and the firmness of that faith which is in Christ. Spirited, not timid, Ephesians VI: In all things taking the shield of faith. Perpetual, not transitory, Tobit II, 18: We are the children of the saints, and we look for that life which God will give to those who never change their faith from Him."
From what has been said it is clear how St. James, who says that we are justified by faith and works, is to be reconciled with St. Paul, who asserts that we are justified by faith, not by works. For James by works understands works of faith; but Paul, works of the law and of nature, with faith and the grace of Christ excluded, by which it is plain that we are not justified. Furthermore, Paul under faith comprehends works of faith, and does not deny that we are justified by them, indeed asserts it, just as James. To say nothing of other things, he confirms this very thing by very many examples throughout chapter XI of Hebrews, where he narrates the heroic deeds of faith of the fathers, by which they themselves merited the grace and glory of God and men. Whence concluding by anadiplosis, v. 33: "Gideon," he says, "Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel, etc., by faith conquered kingdoms, wrought justice, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, etc., were stoned, were cut asunder, were tempted, died by the slaughter of the sword. They wandered about in sheepskins, in goatskins, needy, distressed, afflicted, of whom the world was not worthy, wandering in deserts, in mountains and dens, and in the caves of the earth." So St. Augustine, bk. On Faith and Works, ch. XIV, who also bk. LXXXIII Quaestiones, ch. LXXVI, says that Paul understands works that precede faith, but James, works that follow faith.
Some add that Paul speaks of the first justification, by which one becomes just from being unjust; James of the second, by which one becomes more just from being just: but on Rom. IV, 3, I have shown that both Paul and James speak of either. Yet it is true that James speaks more of the second, namely of the increase of justice: for he tries to stir up the faithful and the just to the pursuit of good works; while Paul speaks more of the first, by which one is made just from being impious. This is clear from ch. III to Romans, v. 23, where he says thus: "All have sinned and need the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace, etc., on account of the remission of preceding sins"; and ch. IV, v. 3: "To him," he says, "who believes in Him who justifies the impious, his faith is reputed to him for justice." And this he proves from Psalm XXXI, v. 1: "Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered."
Finally, Paul by works properly understands legal works. For when the Jews thought they were justified by circumcision and by the ceremonies prescribed by the Mosaic law, Paul refutes this very thing, and teaches that all these things without faith and the grace of Christ are ineffectual and useless for justice and salvation. The same is plain in Rom. III, 28, where he expressly says: "We reckon that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law," and adds: "Or is He the God of the Jews only?" as the Jews thought; "Is He not also of the Gentiles? indeed of the Gentiles also." The same is clear from this, that in Rom. II, III, IV, and in the Epistle to the Galatians, when he names works of the law, he always brings up the example of circumcision, which was the chief legal work of the old law. But James by works understands evangelical and Christian works, which are done from the faith and grace of Christ, by which both Paul and faith teach us to be justified.