(1) Luther's Opinion. We have already re ferred to Luther's opinion (See ANTILEGOMENA), who is generally accused of calling this an epistle of straw. The following are his words:—'This epistle in comparison with the writings of John, Paul, and Peter, is a right strawy epistle (eine rechte stroherzu• cpistel), being destitute of an evangelic character' (Pral. to New Testament). And again (Pral. to Ianzes and lohn): 'This epistle, although rejected by the ancients, I not withstanding praise and esteem, as it teaches no doctrines of men, and strenuously urges the law of God. But, to give my opinion frankly, though without prejudice to any other person, I do not hold it to be the writing of an apostle—and these are my _reasons ; first, it directly opposes St. Paul and other scriptures in ascribing justification to works, saying that Abraham was justified by works, whereas St. Paul teaches that Abraham was justified by faith without works; . . . but this James does nothing but urge on to the law and its works, and writes so confusedly and un connectedly that it appears to me like as if some good pious man got hold of a number of say ings from the apostle's followers, and thus flung them on paper; or it is probably written by some one after the apostle's preaching.' The centuria tors of Magdeburg follow the same train of thought. 'In addition to the argument derived from the testimony of antiquity, there are other and by no means obscure indications from which it may be collected that the authors of these epis tles (James and Jude) were not apostles. The Epistle of James differs not slightly from the analogy of doctrine, in ascribing justification not to faith alone, but to works, and calls the law "a law of liberty," whereas the law "generates to bondage." . . . Nor is it unlikely that it was written by some disciple of the apostles at the close of this (the first) century, or even later' (Ccnt. i. 1. 2, C. 4 col. 54). The same sentiments are followed by Cheunits, Brentius, and others among the Lutherans, and among the Greeks by Cyril Lucaris, patriarch of Constantinople in thc seventeenth century (Lettres Anecdotes de Cy rille Luear, Amst. 17t8, Letter vii. p. 85).
(2) Arrangement by Luther. As Luther was the first who separated the canonical from the deutero-canonical or apocryphal books in the Old Testament (see DEUTERO - CANONICAL Booxs), he also desired to make a similar distinc tion in the New (see ANT1LEGomENA; HAGIOG RAPHA); but the only variation which he ac tually adopted consisted in his placing the Epistle to the Hebrews between the Epistles of John and James. (See Junas oR JuDE.) (3) Arrangement by Calvinists. The Cal vinists, who never questioned the authority of this epistle, followed the arrangement of the Council of Laodicea, in which the Epistle of James ranks as the first of the Catholic epistles ; while the Council of Trent followed thc ordcr of thc Council of Carthage and of the apostolical can ons, viz., four Gospels, Acts, fourteen epistles of Paul (viz., Romans, and 2 Corinthians, Gala tians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians. and 2 Thessalonians, and 2 Timothy% Titus, Philemon, Hebrews), r and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, James, Jude, Apocalypse. The Lutherans them
selves soon acquiesced in the decisions of the universal church in regard to the canon of thc New Testament, until the controversy, which had long slept, was again revived in Germany in mod ern times (De Wette, Einleitung).
(4) Opinion of De Wette. De Wette main tains that although this epistle was anterior to the Clementine, it could not have been written so early as the time of James, principally because the degree of tranquility and comfort which ap pears to have been cnjoyed by those to whom the epistle was addressed, seems to him to be inconsistent with thc statc of persecution which the Christians were subject to during the life time of St. James. He conceives it to have been written by some one who assumed the name of James in order to give authority to his arguments against Paul's doctrine of justification.
(5) Opinion of Neander. But no one in modern times has combated this opinion with greater succcss than Neander (History of the First Planting of thc Christian Church, vol. ii). Neander (whose reasonings will not admit of abridgment) maintains that' there is no discrep ancy whatever between St. Paul and St. James ; that it was noi: even the design of the latter to op pose any misapprehension respecting St. Paul's doctrine, but that they each addressed different classes of people from different standpoints, using the same familiar examples. 'Paul,' he says, 'was obliged to point out to those who placed their dependence on the justifying power of the works of thc law the futility of such works in reference to justification, and to demonstrate that justifica tion and sanctification could proceed only from the faith of the gospel : James, on the othcr hand, found it necessary l'o declare to those who im agined that they could be justified in God's sight by faith in the Jewish sense . . . that this was completely valueless if their course of life were not conformed to it.' And in another place he observes that James 'received the new spirit under thc old forms, similarly to many Catholics who have attained to free evangelical convictions, and yet have not been able to disengage them selves from the old ecclesiastical forms; or, like Luther, when hc had already attained a knowledge of justification by faith, but before he was aware of thc consequences flowing from it as opposed to the prevalent doctrines of the church.' .3. Age of the Epistle.. By those who con sider James the Just, bishop of Jerusalem, to have been the author of this epistle, it is generally believed to have been written shortly before his martyrdom, which took place A. D. 62, six years before the destruction of Jerusalem, whose im pending fate is alluded to in chap. v. Neander fixes its date at a timc prcceding the separate formation of Gentile Christian churches, before the relation of Gentiles and Jews to one another in the Christian Church had been brought under discussion, in the period of the first spread of Christianity in Syria, Cilicia, and the adjacent regions. It is addressed to Jewish Christians, thc descendants of the twelve tribcs ; but the fact of its being written in Greek exhibits the author's desire to make it generally available to Chris tians.