Epistle of James

  • Thread starter Thread starter PrayingTwice
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PrayingTwice

Guest
I was listening to EWTN Open-Line a few weeks ago and I heard a caller debate salvation with John Martignoni. Once the Epistle of St. James was brought up, the caller tried to undermine the letter and discredit it. I couldn’t hardly make out what he was saying and I was surprised to hear that some non-Catholic christians didn’t believe in its inspiration.

I know that the reformers wanted it out due to its chapter on good works and that Luther called it an “epistle of straw” but what other arguments are protestants using to discredit it?
 
40.png
PrayingTwice:
I was listening to EWTN Open-Line a few weeks ago and I heard a caller debate salvation with John Martignoni. Once the Epistle of St. James was brought up, the caller tried to undermine the letter and discredit it. I couldn’t hardly make out what he was saying and I was surprised to hear that some non-Catholic christians didn’t believe in its inspiration.

I know that the reformers wanted it out due to its chapter on good works and that Luther called it an “epistle of straw” but what other arguments are protestants using to discredit it?
That is absolute nonsense, the letter of James contains more pure Christ than all the ravings of Paul.

The reformers probably wanted to remove it because the letter of James illuminates just how much Paul corrupted the message of Jesus.
 
St. Paul is a saint and martyr, please show him the respect that he deserves.
 
Martin Luther referred to it as too defective to be canonical. Probably because it contradicts faith alone. That is the only argument that I have heard. He justifies degrading it because some, emphasis on some, early Christians didn’t want it in due to questions as to its authenticity. This early balking at its authenticity gave way to nearly universal acceptance by the time of St. Jerome, however.
 
40.png
Mjohn1453:
St. Paul is a saint and martyr, please show him the respect that he deserves.
He may be a saint and a martyr, but his writings also justify things like being obedient to the authority of hitler (Rom.)and to acting as if there will be no tommorrow(various).

Other than that and instituting worthiness instead of Jesus’ inclusiveness , Paul only contradicted Jesus a number of times.

You can take the roman out of rome, but you can’t take the rome out of the roman.

Peace
 
I hope you realize that to deny the inspiration and inerrancy of Paul’s writings is heresy. The Church is wiser than us, and She knows there can be no contradiction between Paul and Jesus, as Paul was indeed inspired by the Spirit. Submission to the governing authorities has always been taught by the Church, as it was by Paul…the only exception is when you are forbidden to preach the Gospel (which Paul would do…break the law in that regard).

Holy Mother Church has included Paul’s writings in the Canon of the New Testament and venerates him as one of the greatest fathers of the Church…to reject Paul is to reject the infallibility of the Church.

If you have difficulty with a few of Paul’s passages, I suggest you go to a priest to help you work through them. I’m sure the vast majority of the Pauline writings you’d have no problem with.

(Sorry if I spoke a bit harshly, but the Sacred Writings are very important to me…and I’ve always deeply admired the Holy Apostle Paul).
 
Paul’s letters were certainly inspired. They were no more or less so than the Epistle of James. To say that Paul’s testimony has been misunderstood, is the fullfillment of biblical prophecy from the first of the Apostles:

[15] And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, [16] speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures. (2 Peter 3:15-16)

To whom this statement is applied is the matter of debate. Please do not derail PrayingTwice’s question. It is a valid one that many people could benefit from.
 
RIcatholic, your claim that St. Paul contradicts Jesus is heresy.

Vatican Council I, Sess. III, cap. ii, DE REV: “The Books of the Old and New Testament, whole and entire, with all their parts, as enumerated in the Decree of the same Council (Trent) and in the ancient Latin Vulgate, are to be received as Sacred and Canonical. And the Church holds them as Sacred and Canonical not because, having been composed by human industry, they were afterwards approved by her Authority; nor only because they contain revelation without errors, but because, having been written under the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their Author.”

Pope Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, no. 20f: “It is absolutely wrong and forbidden either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Sacred Scripture or to admit that the sacred writer has erred… For all the books which the Church receives as Sacred and Canonical are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can coexist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the Supreme Truth, can utter that which is not True. This is the ancient and unchanging Faith of the Church… It follows that those who maintain that an error is possible in any genuine passage of the sacred writings, either pervert the Catholic notion of inspiration, or make God the author of such error.”

Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabili Sane, no. 11, condemns the following proposition: “Divine inspiration does not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts, each and every one, free from every error.”

Pope Benedict XV, Spiritus Paraclitus, no. 13: “[T]he immunity of Scripture from error or deception is necessarily bound up with its Divine inspiration and supreme authority.”

Ibid., no. 19, condemns the following proposition: “[T]he effects of inspiration - namely, absolute truth and immunity from error - are to be restricted to that primary or religious element.”

Ibid., no. 21: He also teaches that Divine inspiration extends to every part of the Bible without the slightest exception, and that no error can occur in the inspired text.

Pope Pius XII, Divino Afflante Spiritu, no. 3: “It is absolutely wrong and forbidden either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Sacred Scripture or to admit that the sacred writer has erred.”

Pius XII, Humani Generis, no. 22, condemns the following proposition: "mmunity from error extends only to those parts of the Bible that treat of God or of moral and religious matters."
 
“This supernatural revelation, according to the belief of the universal Church, is contained both in unwritten Tradition, and in written Books, which are therefore called sacred and canonical because, ‘being written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author and as such have been delivered to the Church.’ This belief has been perpetually held and professed by the Church in regard to the Books of both Testaments; and there are well-known documents of the gravest kind, coming down to us from the earliest times, which proclaim that God, Who spoke first by the Prophets, then by His own mouth, and lastly by the Apostles, composed also the Canonical Scriptures, and that these are His own oracles and words - a Letter, written by our heavenly Father, and transmitted by the sacred writers to the human race in its pilgrimage so far from its heavenly country… uch and so great is the excellence and the dignity of the Scriptures, that God Himself has composed them.”
(Pope Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, no. 1)

“**y supernatural power, [The Holy Ghost] so moved and impelled [the sacred authors] to write - He was so present to them - that the things which He ordered, and those only, they first rightly understood, then willed faithfully to write down, and finally expressed in apt words and with infallible truth. Otherwise, it could not be said that He was the Author of the entire Scripture. Such has always been the persuasion of the Fathers. ‘Therefore,’ says St. Augustine, ‘since they wrote the things which He showed and uttered to them, it cannot be pretended that He is not the writer; for His members executed what their Head dictated.’ And St. Gregory the Great thus pronounces: ‘Most superfluous it is to inquire who wrote these things-we loyally believe the Holy Ghost to be the Author of the book. He wrote it Who dictated it for writing; He wrote it Who inspired its execution.’”
(Ibid., no. 20)

“You will not find a page in [St. Jerome’s] writings which does not show clearly that he, in common with the whole Catholic Church, firmly and consistently held that the Sacred Books - written as they were under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit - have God for their Author, and as such were delivered to the Church. Thus he asserts that the Books of the Bible were composed at the inspiration, or suggestion, or even at the dictation of the Holy Spirit; even that they were written and edited by Him. If we ask how we are to explain this power and action of God, the principal cause, on the sacred writers we shall find that St. Jerome in no wise differs from the common teaching of the Catholic Church. For he holds that God, through His grace, illumines the writer’s mind regarding the particular truth which, “in the person of God,” he is to set before men; he holds, moreover, that God moves the writer’s will - nay, even impels it - to write; finally, that God abides with him unceasingly, in unique fashion, until his task is accomplished.”
(Pope Benedict XV, Spiritus Paraclitus, no. 8f)**
 
40.png
PrayingTwice:
I was listening to EWTN Open-Line a few weeks ago and I heard a caller debate salvation with John Martignoni. Once the Epistle of St. James was brought up, the caller tried to undermine the letter and discredit it. I couldn’t hardly make out what he was saying and I was surprised to hear that some non-Catholic christians didn’t believe in its inspiration.
I heard a Protestant caller on the same program once say that the Epistle of James was not written to Christians but to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad (James 1:1). I believe this is called dispensationalism.
 
The church, which is wiser than we are, included Paul’s writings because of his teachings. I’ve heard Paul referred to as “the great theologian.” Indeed he was. He didn’t contradict the teachings of Jesus. If anything, he helped clarify them.

Look at what Paul went through for the gospel. He was beaten and stoned for preaching Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. He was finally arrested and made his way to Rome in chains. His are inspired writings, as are James’. Don’t knock it, his books are in the bible for a reason. Maybe you just need to be taught about them properly.
 
It was not my intent to divert attention away from the letter of James. In fact, you will see that I listed the letter of James as my favorite letter in the NT in another thread.

IMHO the letter of James contains the essence of the teachings of Jesus and he is not judgemental like Paul.

I am not surprised that non-catholics do not like James because he clearly points out that faith and works are both essential.

The reformers also blocked the letter of Clement to the Corinthians from the canon, which I consider an error in judgement.
 
Looks as though intellectual arrogance has run amuck here. I find it laughable that Luther, Calvin, or hermit would usurp the authority and spirit-driven gifts that were granted by Jesus to His Church. It seems that the same theme runs through the ramblings of all who would discredit Paul or James or any other inspired author of Scripture–their writings directly contradict what they WISH the message of the gospel to be. Nobody said Catholicism was an easy road, yet many who would tear it to shreds do so because they’ve either run out of gas on that road or have chosen the road that Jesus proclaimed as earthly, not spiritual. Am I judging them? No. The state of their relationship with God is not ours to decide upon. What I’m doing is making an observation regarding the entirety of those whom have proclaimed by word or in their writings(alive or dead) that THEIR decree regarding the Gospel and God’s plan take precedence over the Church’s. Each has had motives which can be called ‘peripheral’ at best. Some manifest jealousy toward Christ’s Church, some manifest desire for power, and some flat out manifest arrogance and intellectual pride.
To indict Paul in this way, given that he actually saw Jesus and had the deposit of faith given him by Jesus is misguided. I find it silly for ANYONE to rip him and his message simply because his message isn’t what you wish it was.
You claim Paul to be judgemental. What you call ‘Judgement’, many others call ‘Reproof’. Consider that the Apostles were given the power to bind and loose and forgive sins. They are Christ’s ministers on earth. Are they not able to define faith and morals then? Nowhere does any Apostle make pronouncement on/condemn a single person to Hell, for that is Jesus’ job. Each book of the Bible is written with a purpose and a style that conveys God’s plan. It is revelation. Paul’s style and harsh tone in certain parts are warranted, given that he was dealing with heresies and crises that could have destroyed the Church.
As for James, it’s no mistake that the Lord wrote through him. God anticipates the objections that humans will have toward him and uses humans and angels alike to preempt and clarify them for us. Such is James’ epistle. It’s short and sweet but very instructional.
 
40.png
hermit:
It was not my intent to divert attention away from the letter of James. In fact, you will see that I listed the letter of James as my favorite letter in the NT in another thread. IMHO the letter of James contains the essence of the teachings of Jesus and he is not judgemental like Paul.
??? You do realize that the letter is “to” James from Paul right?
 
Tom,

What’s in a name?

You know you can always write commentary for the NAB.
 
40.png
ricatholic:
He may be a saint and a martyr, but his writings also justify things like being obedient to the authority of hitler (Rom.)and to acting as if there will be no tommorrow(various).

Other than that and instituting worthiness instead of Jesus’ inclusiveness , Paul only contradicted Jesus a number of times.

You can take the roman out of rome, but you can’t take the rome out of the roman.Peace
The Epistles of St. Paul are inspired Scripture, which means that they are authorized by God to be considered as HIS thoughts. The books that are included in the final canon of Scripure were not made by arbitrary human reasoning, but by inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, anything written by Paul cannot conflict with the Gospel, because they all come from the same divine wellspring. God is NOT the author of confusion or contradiction.
 
Christy Beth:
The church, which is wiser than we are, included Paul’s writings because of his teachings. I’ve heard Paul referred to as “the great theologian.” Indeed he was. He didn’t contradict the teachings of Jesus. If anything, he helped clarify them.

Look at what Paul went through for the gospel. He was beaten and stoned for preaching Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. He was finally arrested and made his way to Rome in chains. His are inspired writings, as are James’. Don’t knock it, his books are in the bible for a reason. Maybe you just need to be taught about them properly.
Paul wasn’t crucified, he was beheaded. Peter was crucified, upside-down.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top