Epistle of St. James

[Sonny1954]

The 2nd reading at mass yesterday from St. James “a faith without works is a dead faith”, got me to thinking. When Martin Luther was removing books from the Bible that did not jive with his theology, why did he leave the epistle from St. James in? The passage read out yesterday SEEMS on the surface to contradict those writings of St. Paul which are often used to support saved by faith alone. (Personally, I don’t think there is a contradiction, if St. Paul is read in the proper context). I wonder if anyone here who has examined the matter would offer an opinion as to why Luther kept St. James’ passage in his Bible?

Thanks

 

[erikd]

The 2nd reading at mass yesterday from St. James “a faith without works is a dead faith”, got me to thinking. When Martin Luther was removing books from the Bible that did not jive with his theology, why did he leave the epistle from St. James in? The passage read out yesterday SEEMS on the surface to contradict those writings of St. Paul which are often used to support saved by faith alone. (Personally, I don’t think there is a contradiction, if St. Paul is read in the proper context). I wonder if anyone here who has examined the matter would offer an opinion as to why Luther kept St. James’ passage in his Bible?

Thanks

Hi, Sonny

Martin Luther did cast some doubts of canonicity on the Epistle of St. James, he wrote that the canonicity is “doubtful.” The Epistle of St. James, for the Lutherans, was part of what’s known as “antilegomena” The Catholic Encyclopedia has an article regarding this:

“As for Protestantism, the Anglicans and Calvinists always kept the entire New Testament. But for over a century the followers of Luther excluded Hebrews, James, Jude, and Apocalypse, and even went further than their master by rejecting the three remaining deuterocanonicals, II Peter, II and III John. The trend of the seventeenth century Lutheran theologians was to class all these writings as of doubtful, or at least inferior, authority. But gradually the German Protestants familiarized themselves with the idea that the difference between the contested books of the New Testament and the rest was one of degree of certainty as to origin rather than of instrinsic character. The full recognition of these books by the Calvinists and Anglicans made it much more difficult for the Lutherans to exclude the New Testament deuteros than those of the Old.”

newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm

Let me know if this answers the question or if we need to go deeper.

 

[Portrait]

Dear Sonny1954,

As you know the Letter to James has always proved a stumbling-block to Protestants, well at least historically, because it unequivocally teaches that we are justified by our works and not merely by faith alone (per solam fidem). Now it is an historical fact that Martin Luther spoke very disparagingly about the Letter of James because it did not square with his novel doctrinal position of Justification by faith alone. However he was unable to find a rationale for its removal from the Canon of Scripture.

Following a debate with a Lutheran here on CAF, I gather that Luther, along with the early Fathers, placed St. James with Jude, I Peter, II & III John and the Revelation in the antilogemena (books that lacked universal approval of the Church as canonical); whereas the rest of the N.T. belonged to the homolegoumena, that is, books recognised by all segments of the Church as canonical.

Apparently Luther left acceptance of James to the individual Christian (an extreme example of the use of private judgement if ever there was) with the warning that no doctrine can be established from the antilogemena that would either contradict or conflict with the clear words of the authoritative Scriptures (homolegoumena). This was a desperate casuistical attempt on the part of Luther to evade the teaching of James, which ran counter to his own doctrinal opinions.

That notwithstanding, the Letter of James is cited as Sacred Scripture by SS. Ephraem, Hillary, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine and others. Thus it can be claimed that James found acceptance in the Church from the 4th. to the 16th. cent., when Erasmus, Cajetan, as well as Luther, revived doubts about its authenticity and catholicity. However, for we Catholics, both of these issues were settled at the Fouth Session of the Council of Trent. Hope this and the previous posting has enlightened you a little. Let us know if you have any further questions, either your own or arising from our respones.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait