The Pulpit Commentary — James — Section 41

were it possible, abridge his liberty in the exercise of his ordinary ri!:,:hts as a member of the congregation. In these and many other ways Christian people have often shown themselves to be "evil-thinking judges," and have thereby entailed upon the Church much mischief and damage. III. THE GROUNDS OF THE CONDEMNATION. The apostle's reproof is faithful, but it is also affectionately tender (vers. 1, 6). He indicates from various points of view the wrongfulness of the partiality which he is denouncing. 1. Mere earthly distinctwns should be indiscernible in the presence of" the Lord of glory." (Ver. 1.) There is an argument in foe very use here of this great title. Worldly distinctions of wealth and rank should be dwarfed into nothingness before our minds when we realize that those who assemble in the house of God are the guests of "the Lord of glory." 2. Respect of persons is inconsistent with sound Christian principle. (Ver. 4.) The believer "looks at the things which are not seen;"· and he ought not to do so with a wavering mind or a vacillating will. Ecclesiastical servility towards the rich is a form of ma.m- mon-worship; while the one power which the Church should exalt is that of character. 3. ,." God is no respecter of persons." (Ver. 5.) The New Testament rings with declarations of this truth. "The Lord of glory," when he lived on earth, was no sycophant of the rich. He was himself a poor man. He chose the poor rather than the rich to possess spiritual means in his kingdom. In "dishonouring the poor man," therefore, the Church was despising one for whom Christ died, and a possible heir of the heavenly glory. 4. The rich as a class had been the enemies both of Ghrist and his people. (Vers. 6, 7.) With a few noble exceptions, the upper classes persecuted the Christians in the days of the apostles. They hara8sed them with lawsuits. They sla.ndered them before the judges. They cursed the blessed Name of Christ which it is the mission of the Church to exalt. It was, therefore, contrary to " the spirit of a sound mind" to court the rich. To do so showed a deficiency of common sense. It indicated a lack of self-respect. And, above all, it was disloyal to the blessed Name.-0.J. Vere. 8-11.-Stum1iling in one point. In these verses James takes the high ground that "respect of persons" is a transgression of the law by which we are to be judged; and one which, like every other, involves the guilt of breaking the whole law. I. To RESPECT PERSONS IS TO COMMIT sm. (Vers. 8, 9.) It involves disobedience to "the royal law." This is a noticeable expression. Any Divine commandment may be described as "royal," seeing that it emanates from the supreme Sovereign of the universe. Rather, however, may the moral law receive this epithet because it is regal in its own character. God's law is the law of love ; and love is kingly. The Divine nature itself is the foundation of virtue; and "God is love." Hence the Divine law is the eternal rule and final standard of rectitude. It possesses supreme excellence and supreme authority. Every other system of legislation, and all other rules of duty, ought to be subordinate to " the royal law." 'l'his law, we know, cannot be unjnst; for it is a transcript of the moral perfection of the Divine nature, and is therefore the Alpha and Omega of all laws. The royal law is to be fulfilled "according to the Scripture;" for, while its ultimate source is in the nature of God, the one authoritative record of it to which sinful men have access is to be found in the Bible. We musb consult "the law and the testimony" if we would ascertain the edicts of the great King, and learn the "newness of the spirit" in which these are to be obeyed. God's Word lays bare before us our half-buried and forgotten moral convictions; it restores the weather-worn inscriptions upon the gravestones of our sin-dead hearts. The apostle cites, as the great precept which forbids respect of persons, the words of Lev. xi.x. 18, " Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thyself "-the same precept which our Lord had employed as his summary of the principle underlying the last six commandments. We are to love our neiahbour, i.e. any one to whom we have it within our power to become helpful, even although he may be a stranger and a Sama.rita.n. 'rhose who discharge this duty aright "do well." But, enlightened love for one'~ neighbour is incon- sistent with respect of persons. We may not limit the prec~p~ e1t~er to our wealthy neighbour or to our poor neighbour. Indeed, to sho~. part_1ahty 1s not so much to limit the precept as to discard it altogether. Favount1sm 1s the outcome of selfish- ness, rather than of tho love that "sceketh not its own." Those, therefore, who 36 THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JAMES. [011, II, 1-28,