Introduction
1. The Author. In the New Testament we meet with four persons named James (Jacob): (1) the father, or, possibly, brother of Jude; (2) the son of Alphæus; (3) the brother of John; (4) the brother of the Lord and head of the Church at Jerusalem (Acts 1:14; Acts 12:2; Acts 15:13; Acts 21:18; Galatians 1:19; Galatians 2:12), Of these four, we know nothing but the names about (1) and (2); (3) was put to death by Herod Agrippa I in 44 a.d., some time before the earliest date usually assigned to our Epistle. We are, therefore, almost driven to the conclusion that the author is (4), James the Lord's brother, whom we meet in the Acts as head of the Church at Jerusalem. And this conclusion, reasonable in itself, is confirmed by all the evidence at our disposal. Besides the positive statement of St. Jerome ('Vir. Ill.' 2) that 'James called the brother of the Lord' wrote it, we have the striking correspondence in the thoughts and language of the Epistle to what we know of the character of the head of the Jerusalem Church. In the first place, there is the tone of authority which we find in the Epistle, natural to one in the position of St. James. Then there are the frequent references to the Old Testament, and to books like the Wisdom of Solomon and the Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach (called in our version 'Ecclesiasticus'), which to a devout Jew like St. James would be very familiar. [Observe the allusions to Genesis 1 (James 1:18), Abraham (James 2:21), Rahab (James 2:25), Deuteronomy 6:4; (cp. James 2:19), Job (Job 5:11), Elijah (James 5:17), and compare James 1:2; James 1:5; James 1:12; James 1:23 with Sir 1:26; Sir 2:1-15; Sir 7:10; Sir 12:11; Sir 14:23; Sir 15:11; Wis 7:18, etc. See also Job 28:12; (James 3:13), Proverbs 3:34; (James 4:7), Proverbs 10:12; (James 5:20), Isaiah 40:7; (James 1:11).] Then, again, the language of the Epistle is similar to that found in the speech of St. James, and in his circular letter (Acts 15). We conclude, therefore, that the well-nigh unanimous opinion, which assigns the Epistle to the brother of the Lord, is the only reasonable one. For the relationship implied by 'brother' see on Matthew 12:46.
Of the personality of this great man we can form a tolerably clear idea from the New Testament and early Church tradition. Re-fusing to accept Christ as Messiah during His earthly life, he was converted by a special appearance to him of the Risen Lord (1 Corinthians 15:7). We can well believe that in the Nazareth home he was carefully trained in all the precepts and practices of the Jewish faith, and to that faith he clung with deep devotion all through his life. We must picture him to ourselves, not as one of those false Jews whose observances were merely formal and external, but as one of those true and earnest Jews whose obedience to the Law was a joy and an inspiration—whose life was lived in the spirit of Psalms 119. His sincere and spiritual Judaism would be a guide to lead him to Christ, the 'fulfiller' of the Law (Matthew 5:17). The good Jew would make a good Christian. And in those early days it was possible to combine observance of the Law with obedience to the 'Royal Law' of Christ. To St. James Christianity presents itself primarily as a Law (James 1:25; James 2:12; James 4:11). This idea is found elsewhere in the New Testament (Romans 8:2; Hebrews 8:7). The time had not yet come when (as in the crisis which called forth the Epistle to the Hebrews) it was necessary to choose between Judaism and Christianity. And so, even as 'bishop' of Jerusalem, St. James went on keeping the whole Law, although he was ready to grant the fullest liberty to those Gentile converts who had never been Jews by religion (Acts 15). He combined strong personal convictions with the widest sympathy with the views of others. Hence, although himself a strict Jew, he could act cordially with St. Paul, the champion of Gentile liberty. At the end of each of his three missionary journeys the Apostle of the Gentiles went up to Jerusalem to report progress to St. James (Acts 15; Acts 18:22; Acts 21:18), and it was at his suggestion that St. Paul undertook the Nazirite vow in the Temple which led to the attack on him of the unbelieving Jews. At this point the narrative of the Acts leaves St. James; but from the Jewish historian Josephus, and the converted Jew Hegesippus, we get accounts of his death which, though they differ in details, agree in their main facts. From them we learn that he was held in great esteem by his fellow-countrymen, and even permitted to enter the Temple. A Sadducean high priest, Ananus, brought him before the Sanhedrin, and caused him to be put to death by stoning, spite of the remonstrances of all the better sort of Jews. James 'the Just' (as he was called by his fellow-countrymen) died praying, like St. Stephen, for his murderers, a few years before the final overthrow of Judaism by the Romans. In very truth he was taken away from the evil to come. Some have seen in St. James the Restrainer of 2 Thessalonians 2:7, after whose removal the Jewish apostasy would stand revealed, and receive its due reward in the overthrow of the nation and the religion of the Jews.