to resist the devil, James iv. 7, is given more explicitly and with a description of the spiritual adversary in 1 Pet. v. 8, 9.

The passage which is perhaps most often dwelt upon is the likeness between 1 Pet. i. 6, 7, and James i. 3. No doubt the fact that the phrase 'the proof of your faith' (R.V.) occurs in both is remarkable. But even if we admit that the phrase is used by both writers with the same meaning', the context in which it is placed is very different; in St James the thought of the writer is fixed rather upon the present, while in St Peter it is directed rather towards the future. But, without dwelling upon this, why should it be thought impossible that such a phrase should have been used by two Christian writers, who must have been at one time in each other's company (cf. Gal. i. 19) as teachers of the Christian Church, and who were also familiar with such words as those in Prov. xxvii. 21, to say nothing of other O.T. passages? In this connection it may be observed that while the similarity between James i. 3 and 1 Pet. i. 6, 7 is undoubtedly very striking both in thought and language, we may have here a reminiscence of one of the 'faithful sayings' in use among the early believers, since the language employed is to some extent the same not only in two but in three Epistles, James, 1 Peter, and Romans, cf. v. 32.

It has indeed been recently maintained that some points of resemblance between James and 1 Peter may be accounted for by a common spiritual atmosphere, or by nearness of time in composition. But the same writer, Dr Feine, who thus views the matter, admits that in some cases there is a literary dependence between the two writings, and that the only difficulty is to determine on which side to place the priority. He maintains e.g. that in James v. 20 and 1 Pet. iv. 8 we have an instance of an O.T. passage which had come to be used proverbially, so that neither writer gives an exact quotation, although both might make such reference to it as we find in the two Epistles. At the same time it is noticeable that St Peter uses the phrase 'to cover a multitude of sins' in a much closer connection with Prov. x. 12 than St James, whilst the latter writer may be simply employing the familiar phrase just quoted from the O.T. in a general way; cf. for instance, in this connection, Ps. xxxii. 3,

1 This is doubtful, as Feine, Der Jakobusbrief, p. 128, and Spitta, u.s. p. 190, both indicate.

2 Plummer, Epistle of St James, p. 59, but this must depend at least to some extent as to the previous meaning attached to the words rendered the proof of your faith.'

lxxxv. 2; Ezek. xxviii. 18; Ecclus. v. 6. But, at all events, it is a somewhat summary conclusion that James in v. 20 is necessarily borrowing from 1 Pet. iv. 8, although this is one of the alleged dependences which is most often cited.

Dr Bigg in his Commentary on St Peter and St Jude, p. 20, has argued that the resemblances between Romans and Ephesians may all be covered by what we may call the pulpit formulae of the time. Why should it be thought fanciful to maintain that such a phrase as 'the proof of your faith' (or 'that which is genuine in your faith") might become a common formula, if not in the pulpit, yet at least on the lips of the early believers in a time of trial and suffering, such as the Epistles of James and 1 Peter both presuppose 2?

Much has been made of the relation, or supposed relation, between St James and the Apocalypse. In the Encycl. Bibl. the writer of 'James (Epistle)' speaks of the relation as at least probable, but how warily we should proceed is shown by his own subsequent remarks, viz. that whilst Rev. ii. 10 is supposed by Pfleiderer to be the ground of James i. 12, another German critic, Dr Völter, reverses the relation of the two passages.

It has been suggested that much of the language common to the two writings may be easily accounted for by intercourse between St James and St John as members of the Church of Jerusalem. But if we are not prepared to accept this solution, many points of similarity may be fairly credited to the common fund of Christian thought and life; the stress e.g. laid in each upon compassionate love, and the endurance which proves itself in trial. At all events there is nothing in the language of the two books which may not be accounted for quite apart from literary dependence. It is absurd e.g. to suppose that St James must have borrowed the thought of v. 17 from Rev. xi. 6, and it is to be observed that von Soden refuses to admit the probability of any literary dependence in the alleged instances between two books of Scripture which in many respects are so widely dissimilar.

With regard to the Epistle to the Hebrews, no literary dependence can be proved, and the most recent critic, Dr Grafe of Bonn, frankly admits that the two examples of Abraham and Rahab, common to Hebrews and James, had manifestly occupied a large

1 See note on James i. 3.

2 In this connection the recent remarks of B. Weiss are of interest, Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift, June, 1904, p. 428.

place in the thoughts of Jewish as also of early Christian circles'. Pfleiderer in his new edition' still maintains that these two examples go to prove an acquaintance on the part of 'James' with the Epistle to the Hebrews, and he quotes in addition James iii. 18 which he regards as showing a verbal parallel with Heb. xii. 11. But it is noticeable that von Soden regards this and the other instances, not as marking any literary dependence, but as simply showing that the two writings were the product of the same spiritual atmosphere. It is, moreover, begging the question at issue to assume that James is dependent on Hebrews, as the reverse may have been the case, if there is dependence on either side.

IX. When we pass to extra-canonical writings, points of contact between our Epistle and the Epistle of St Clement of Rome are admitted by the most conservative critics, but it does not by any means follow that priority is to be claimed for St Clement. On the contrary there is much that makes for a reverse dependence. It is very difficult to believe that St Clement, as one who reverenced St Paul, would have used such expressions as 'being justified by works and not by words,' xxx. 3, cf. James ii. 14-17, 21, 24, unless he had some high authority behind him, to say nothing of the fact that the whole context in St Clement reminds us of words and expressions in St James's letter. There are also passages in St Clement's Epistle which point to attempts on his part to balance the teaching of St Paul and St James. Thus he asks, xxxi. 2, 'wherefore was our father Abraham justified? was it not because he wrought righteousness and truth through faith?' (cf. James ii. 22), whilst a little lower, xxxii. 3, he adds of the good of all time that they were justified not through themselves, or their own works, or the righteous doing which they wrought, but through God's will, and finally, xxxiv. 4, after urging the necessity of good works concludes that the Lord exhorteth us 'to believe on Him with our whole heart, and to be not idle or careless with every just work.' In this connection we may also note the significant words 'for her faith and hospitality Rahab the harlot was saved,' where the faith of Heb. ix. 31 is combined with the works of James ii. 25. And if we have solid ground for supposing that St Clement was thus acquainted with the teaching of St James, and

1 Grafe, Die Stellung und Bedeutung des Jakobusbriefes, p. 35; 1904. See also the admirable remarks of B. Weiss, Einleitung in das N. T. p. 385, 3rd edit. 2 Pfleiderer, Urchristentum, 11. p. 541; 1902.

3 Lightfoot, St Clement, 11, p, 100; Zahn, Einleitung, 1. 97; Mayor, St James,

K,

d

that he attached such importance to it, other parallels between the two writings may fairly tell in favour of the inference that St James's Epistle was known to St Clement'. In some cases no doubt the similarity of language may be accounted for apart from literary dependence, as we have seen in other cases, but it is difficult to suppose that St Clement in xxxviii. 2 was not acquainted with James iii. 13, and xlvi. 5 in its interrogative form and mode of expression might well be a reminiscence of James iv. 1. It is also noticeable that St Clement lays great stress upon the sin of doublemindedness, and that he uses the same word as St James, cf. e.g. xi. 2, xxiii. 3, in which the thought of God's judgment is closely associated with this sin.

The large number of parallels between James and Hermas 'necessitates the conclusion that one of the writers is dependent on the other,' and so far there is no difficulty in agreeing with Dr O. Cone, Encycl. Bibl. IV. 2323.

But it is somewhat bold to add that it is not clear to which writer the priority should be assigned, and bolder still to maintain with Pfleiderer the priority of Hermas (Holtzmann thinks it 'probable'). A study of the two writers supplies the best answer to this question of priority, and it is not too much to say with Mayor and Zahn that it would be as reasonable to affirm that a modern sermon is older than its text as to maintain that the comments of Hermas are older than the parallels in St James'. The terse sentences of James are expanded by Hermas in a manner which cannot be said to confer upon them either freshness or strength, and if a writing is any index of a writer's character it is difficult to suppose that the personality presented to us in the Epistle of St James could be dependent upon the fantastic production of Hermas3.

1 Mr Parry, St James, p. 73, remarks with great force, St Clement is the disciple; the imitator; he refers at every point to the Apostles for example, authority, and even for the substance of his teaching; he is in no sense and in no point original or independent. On the other hand, who is this tremendous personality who speaks to the whole Church with a voice that accepts no challenge or dispute? who appeals to no authority but that of God, knows no superior but the Lord Himself, quotes examples only from the great ones of the Old Dispensation, instructs, chides, encourages, denounces with a depth, an energy, a fire, second to none in the whole range of sacred literature?'

2 The most recent writer on St James, Dr Grafe, inclines to agree with this judgment of Dr Zahn as against Pfleiderer, Die Stellung des Jakobusbriefes, p. 40.

The rare words common to St James and Hermas are referred to in the notes; see e.g. James ii. 6, v. 11, and the constant use of ôlyxos with its cognates in Hermas compared with its use in James as e.g. in i. 8. Dr C. Taylor, Art. in Journal of Philology, xvII. pp. 297-325, on The Didache compared with The

Moreover, if St James had Hermas behind him, it is still more difficult to understand his omission of any definite reference to the suffering and work of the Son of God'. Jülicher speaks of the Epistle of St James as the least Christian book of the N.T., Christ is scarcely ever mentioned, and the picture of the Messiah has altogether disappeared; and he asks, could such a document have come to us from the days of primitive Christianity? But this difficulty is not removed, and to many minds it would rather seem to be increased, by placing the book about the same period as Hermas, or subsequent to him. It is surprising that Harnack should argue that the circumstances of persecution referred to in James ii. 6 demand a date shortly before the time of Hermas (see note in loco), and it is equally surprising that amongst the most recent critics Pfleiderer and Grafe should still maintain, in their endeavour to support a similar date, that technical Gnostic terms are to be found in the frequently recurring 'wisdom,' and in such words as 'sensual,' 'the wisdom that is from above,' 'perfect,' 'father of lights.' There is not one of these expressions it may be safely said which requires any such explanation (see notes in Commentary). But even the testimony of these two supporters of Gnostic influences does not always agree together, for we find that Grafe is not prepared to endorse Pfleiderer's view that in the expression 'judge of the law' in iv. 11 we have a reference to the heretic Marcion. Harnack quotes Jülicher with approval in his assertion that the moral and religious state of the Christian community in St James shows such degeneration that we can scarcely credit its existence before the time of Hermas,

Shepherd,' gives some interesting examples, p. 320, of adaptations by Hermas from the Epistle of St James, and of the way in which Hermas was accustomed to use his materials.

1 'Hermas tells of the toil and suffering which the Son of God underwent to purge away the sins of His people, and of the reward which He receives in the exaltation of His human nature and in His joy at receiving His purified people into union with Himself,' Art. Hermas,' Dict. of Chr. Biog. 11. 920.

In Vis. ii. 2, 5, 8, God is said to swear by His glory and by His Son. On the Person and work of the Son the passages which should be consulted are Sim. v. 2. 4-6, ix. 1. 12-18, 24, 28, Dr Taylor, Shepherd of Hermas, p. 49; 1903.

2 Pfleiderer, Urchristentum, p. 546; 1902. Pfleiderer still persists in placing the Epistle of St James far down in the second century, but the trenchant criticism of his endeavours by Professor Mayor has not been in any degree refuted Would the thoroughly Hebraic tone of the Epistle...the stern censure of landowners who withheld the wages of the reapers, suit the circumstances of the Christians of Rome in that age? Where were the free labourers referred to? The latifundia of Italy were worked by slaves. The writer looks for the immediate coming of the Lord to judgment (v. 7-9). Do we find any instance of a like confident expectation in any writer of the latter half of the second century?' Epistle of St James, p. cxlvii.