This first Bulletin is consecrated to the relationship between the Letter of James and the writings of the Pauline corpus which are contemporary with it.

James has often been presented - incorrectly - as an adversary of Paul. On the contrary, as this present study aims to show by a precise line of argument, James added his weight to Paul’s efforts to call the Pauline communities to order. Moreover, this collaboration between the main representatives of, respectively, the Judeo-Christian tendencies and the pagan-Christian tendencies led to a masterpiece of balance and ecumenism, namely, the Letter to the Romans.

In this way we hope to show some aspects of the beauty of the beginnings of the early Church, which included conflicts but which were imbued with wisdom and love for the truth.

In Paul’s Letters it is abundantly clear that he himself set his seal of authenticity on them by certain phrases, which he himself wrote, so that no one could propagate false doctrines using his name (2 Thess 2:2 & 3:17; 1 Cor 16:21-24; Gal 6:11; Col 4:18; Philemon 19). This was standard contemporary practice - as can be seen, for example in the manuscripts discovered near the Dead Sea, and which today can be seen in the Museum of the Book at Jerusalem.

Moreover, the Letters were carried by emissaries who were known to the community to whom they were sent (Acts 15:27). There was no reason, then, why the Christian community should be the victim of confusion.

Finally, the testimony of the Church in the second century could not be clearer. In his polemic work Against Heresies, written at precisely the moment when allegedly "secret" gospels were beginning to proliferate, Irenæus of Lyon cites the apostolic writings, accepted by all, as irrefutable proof of their true teaching. Such an argumentation would have been impossible if his readers, and even his adversaries, had doubts about their authenticity.How things stand today

However, 19th century criticism attempted to show, by a whole range of ingenious argumentation, that many of the New Testament writings were forgeries.

Their arguments succeeded in convincing many in the scientific community, to such an extent that nowadays, the Letters to Titus and to Timothy, the Letters to the Colossians and to the Ephesians (even if 2 Col and 2 Timo are nowadays coming back into favour) can no longer be used as representing the thinking of Paul himself.

The Letters of Peter, James and Jude are also considered by most to be pseudonymous, and belonging to a later era than their nominal author. Here is Raymond Brown’s statistical analysis of the situation:

"Perhaps 90 percent of critics think that Paul is not the personal author of the Pastoral Letters (1 Timothy; 2 Timothy; Titus); something like 80 percent think he is not the author of Ephesians; 60 percent that he did not write Colossians; and just over half think he is not the author of 1 Thessalonians. I offer my estimate of these percentages to underline that we are not dealing here in exact science. Nevertheless we have to face up to the fact that we are not confronted with minority opinions. In the same way, perhaps, 95 percent of the specialists do not think that Peter wrote 2 Peter; 75 percent that Jude is not the author of the Letter of Jude, and that James is not the author of the Letter that carries his name; and as for whether Peter himself wrote 1 Peter, you might as well decide on the toss of a coin."

Responses to 101 Questions on the Bible, Paulist Press, 1990.

As far as the Letter of James is concerned, which is the subject of this present study, its authenticity is denied (by 75 percent of the specialists) for pretty feeble reasons. Because Clement of Rome calls Abraham "the friend of God" (in Clement’s Letter to the Corinthians X, 1) as does James 2: 23, and that both refer in the same way to Rahab the harlot (Clement XII, 1 and Jas 2: 25), the two letters are considered to reflect the same atmosphere and therefore to be contemporary. But why could Clement not simply have borrowed from James?

Given that the Letter of James appeals to the "law of liberty" (Jas 1:25) and is not strictly legalistic, it is thought that it cannot be the work of the leader of the Judeo-Christian party. This, despite the fact that both Paul and Acts agree in testifying that James did not disapprove of Paul’s principles (Gal 2: 1-10; Acts 15:19).

On the basis that the Greek of the Letter of James is so well written (which is itself a contested point of view), it is said that it cannot be attributed to a Galilean James. But even if it were true that James himself was not skilled in Greek - which has never been proven - this does not rule out the possibility that he used a secretary. What lawyer could hope to convince an impartial jury on the basis of such fragile evidence?

For those prepared to admit the authenticity of the Letter of James, a key to the time of its composition is given by the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, writing at the end of the 1st century: according to him, James was stoned to death in AD 62. His Letter must then be earlier than this date. But for those who deny its authenticity, this indication is considered beside the point. All that remains is to declare an informed ignorance:

"When and where the Letter of James was written, we do not know. After a century of debate we have to admit prosaically: the Letter of James is a wisdom-style text to which it is impossible to attribute either an exact date, location or known author" (H. Frankemolle, Der Brief de Jakobus, Güterloh-Würtzburg, 1994, p. 45). So much for "scientific certainty"!Escaping such uncertainty

This ignorance can easily be overcome, if only we accept in confidence what is written, and if we take the trouble to compare the Letter of James with several of the Pauline Letters, which are acknowledged without argument as being authentic: 1 Corinthians, Philippians, Galatians, 2 Corinthians, Romans.

It is quite clear

- that both James and 1 Corinthians attach a great deal of importance to seeking out true wisdom;

- that James and 2 Corinthians are the only two letters which allude to the words of Jesus: "Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ (...)" (Mt 5: 37; Jas 5:12; 1 Cor 1:17);

- that James, Galatians and Romans develop a discussion on faith and works (Jas 2: 14-26; Gal 2: 16; Rom 2:37-4:8).

It would be very surprising if these various texts were not fairly contemporary.

We need to take the time, then, to make a patient comparison between the Letters of James and Paul, looking especially for criteria which will allow us to establish a chronological ordering of the texts. Such criteria cannot be defined a priori. Rather, by working from several examples, we shall build up a set of reasons which lead to an intimate conviction; thereafter, we can set out certain principles, applicable to other similar studies which use the same method.

The Letter of James is a particularly interesting case, because comparing it with the Pauline writings provides a whole range of reasoning. What is more, the importance of this topic for the history of early Christianity is utterly evident: if it proves true that we have the direct echo of a discussion between James and Paul, between the moderate leader of the Judeo-Christian tendency and the passionate leader of the pagan-Christian tendency, we will learn how the early Church managed internal conflict. Knowing whether James was familiar with 1 Corinthians, and whether the writer of Galatians and Romans knew of James’ Letter is also very important for a correct understanding of all these texts: understanding a text’s message depends on knowing the questions to which it offers a response. Not least, if we are able to put a precise date to the Letter of James, we will then know at what era there were "elders of the Church", recognised as acting "in the name of the Lord" (Jas 5:14) among the Christian communities of the Diaspora (Jas 1:1). This would shed considerable light on the question of the origin of the ordained ministries.

Let us start by the easiest of the comparisons, that between the Letter of James and the Letter to the Romans. Key to the argument are a great number of expressions which are very rare in the New Testament, but which can be found throughout both of these texts.

We have to work from a translation which, wherever a word is the same in the Greek original, translates it by the same word in English. We are fortunate to be able to work from the RSV, which respects the original Greek in this way. Only in a very few instances has the English of the RSV been adapted to underline the use of the same word in the Greek.

Let us begin straight away by setting two similar texts in parallel, and then reflecting on them:

26 If any one thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this man’s religion is vain. 27 Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.

5 Listen, my beloved brethren. Has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which he has promised to those who love him? 6 But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you, is it not they who drag you into court? 7 Is it not they who blaspheme that honorable name by which you are called?

8 If you really fulfil the royal law, according to the scripture, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you do well. 9 But if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. 11 For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," said also, "Do not kill." If you do not commit adultery but do kill, you have become a transgressor ot the law. 12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. 13 For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy; yet mercy triumphs over judgment.

COMMENTS

1. The whole text is constructed around the theme of "the law of liberty" (Jas 1:25; 2:12).

2. For James, it is the Christian who ought "to show no partiality" (Jas 1:1).

3. For James, it is the poor man who is "dishonoured" (Jas 2:6).

4. For James, it is "the honourable name" of Jesus which is "blasphemed" by the rich (Jas 2:7).

17 But if you call yourself a Jew and rely upon the law and boast of your relation to God 18 and know his will and approve what is excellent, because you are instructed in the law, 19 and if you are sure that you are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 20 a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth 21 you then who teach others, will you not teach yourself? While you preach against stealing, do you steal? 22 You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? 24 For, as it is written, "The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you."

25 Circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law; but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision. 26 So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27 Then those who are physically uncircumcised but keep the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law. 28 For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true circumcision something external and physical. 29 He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God.

COMMENTS

1. The whole text is constructed around a polemic against "the Jew" (Rom 2: 9 & 10; 2: 28 & 29).

2. For Paul, it is God who "shows no partiality" (Rom 2:11).

3. For Paul, it is the "God" who is "dishonoured" (Rom 2:23).

4. For Paul, it is "name of God" which is "blasphemed" by the Gentiles or pagans (Rom 2:24).

It is impossible to deny that there is a relationship which exists between these two passages:

this relationship is built on a great number of parallel expressions, some of which are found nowhere else in the New Testament other than these two Letters:

- there is the antithesis between "hearers of the law" and "doers of the law";

- there is the expression "keep the law";

- there is the expression those who "break the law";

- there is the expression "to be judged by the law".

- the expression "blaspheme the name", apart from our two texts, is found only twice in Acts (Acts 13:6 and 16:9).

- the expression of someone "showing no partiality" finds its first Pauline use in Romans (Rom 2:11).

- so too, this is the first and only use by Paul of the verb "to dishonour" (Rom 2:23).

- apart from the Gospels, these are the only two New Testament texts to quote the commandment against adultery.

It makes no sense at all to conclude that there was a common source which the two texts might have used independently. As we have already noted, although the same phrases about "showing no partiality", "dishonouring" and "blaspheming the name" appear in both texts, they are applied to different people in each case. This means that outside the context in which they are used, the words which are common to both passages have no logical relationship. Therefore, one of the texts must have drawn upon the other.

Let us now examine the two passages.

The ideas developed by James, around the theme of "the law of liberty" are absolutely what one would expect him to say: strict observance of the law, attention to works, love of the poor. Do not let us forget that according to Paul, the only thing that the Church of Jerusalem demanded of him was to "remember the poor" (Gal 2: 10). On the contrary, the text of Romans is rather surprising from the pen of Paul: he who usually insists that over and above all we are justified by faith, before ever having accomplished a good action, here accepts that God judges each person according to his works. Surely here Paul is conceding to James’ proposal?

The text of James shows no knowledge whatsoever of Paul’s typical concerns: there is no allusion to there being a difference between Jew and Gentile, nor to the knowledge of the Law that Gentiles can have through their conscience, nor to circumcision of the heart, etc. On the contrary, Paul seems to adopt the typical concerns of James: that what counts is being doers not just hearers of the law, that what counts is to take God’s perspective of judgement, that one must in no way transgress the law, that one needs to have a pure heart before God.

The text of James is very spontaneous, with a whole series of images drawn from everday life: the mirror; acts of charity in favour of widows and orphans; the rich man splendidly dressed and the poor man in his rags; the president of the assembly who directs each to his proper place; the rich who drag Christians before the courts. By contrast, the text of Romans is based on a purely intellectual reasoning, which, it must be added, is extremely rich theologically.

The text of James refers directly to the teaching of Jesus. It is Jesus, after all, who proclaimed that happy are those who do not content themselves with hearing the law, but who strive to observe it (Lk 11:28; cf also Mt 7:24// Lk 6:47 & Mt 7:21//Lk 6:46). So too it was Jesus who promised the kingdom of God to the poor (Mt 5:3//Lk 6:20). Again, it is Jesus who had the reputation of "showing no partiality" (Mt 22:16//Mk 12:14//Lk 20:21). On the contrary, there is no sign of Paul intending any reference to the tradition of the gospels.

The Letter of James feeds on the Old Testament. His argument is explicitly based on Leviticus 19:15-18:

"You shall do no injustice in judgement; you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbour (...) you shall love your neighbour as yourself." The echoes of this text in James are even clearer if one reads the Greek of the Septuagint, where those who are refered to as "great" are dunastès.The verb that James chooses to express "oppress" shares the same root (katadunasteuousin). It is this explicit reference to Leviticus which explains the rather strange way in which James writes of those who oppress the poor as "judges with evil thoughts" (Jas 2:4). It is true that Paul, too, bases his arguments on Old Testament texts, but they are different ones: "Circumcise your hearts (...) God is not partial (...) he loves the sojourner" (Deut 10:16-19); "the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you" (Isaiah 52:5 - LXX). But it is to be expected that Paul, if he were replying to James’ argumentation would want to offer his own choice of scriptural references.

So we see that all the evidence converges to persuade us that James’ text does not borrow from that of Paul, but that on the contrary, this text of Romans can only be understood as a reaction to that of James.

This conclusion is of immense importance for a proper interpretation of the Letter to the Romans. It means that in reading it we should keep in mind that Paul had read James’ text, and that his purpose was to set out as precisely as possible his teaching for the Christians of Jerusalem, who had their doubts about him (Acts 21: 20-21) and who gave ear to calumnies (Rom 3:8; 6: 1; 6:15). Paul was about to set off for Jerusalem, and he was extremely concerned that the collection he so zealously arranged for the poor, because of demand that "he remember the poor" (Gal 2:10), might not be accepted by its intended beneficiaries (Rom 15:30-31). So, without wanting to go back on his principle of justification by faith, he nevertheless was being careful not to offend Judeo-Christian sensitivities.

On the basis of our study of these two texts we can now define certain principles which determine their order of writing.

1. The text of James seems to be earlier, and that of Paul seems to be later, because the ideas developed by James are totally coherent with all that we know of him, whereas they are far less coherent with what we know of Paul.

2. There is nothing to indicate that the Letter of James takes up the concerns of the Letter to the Romans, whereas the contrary can be easily shown.

3. The earlier text is based on observations from everyday life, whereas the later text worked by means of generalisations , and on the level of intellectual reasoning.

4. James makes direct reference to gospel sources, whereas Paul simply expresses his own thoughts.

5. James spontaneously uses the language of the Old Testament, without necessarily making direct quotes. And while Paul also uses the Old Testament, his references are different, and chosen to add weight to his own argument.

In summary, our criteria are:

1. The degree of coherence between the specific text and the thinking of its authors.

2. The awareness within one text of the concerns of the other.

3. The extent to which the text depends on observation of everyday life.

4. The extent to which the text is rooted in the gospel tradition.

5. The extent of implicit use of the Old Testament.

Let us now turn our attention to the passages which speak of faith and works:

18 But some one will say, "You have faith and I have works." Show me your faith apart from works, and I by my works will show you my faith. 19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe - and shudder. 20 Do you want to be shown, you foolish fellow, that faith apart from works is barren? 21 Our father Abraham, was he not justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works, 23 and so was fulfilled the scripture which says "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness"; and he was called the friend of God. 24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? 26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead.

21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction; 23 since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins; 26 it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus.

27 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On the principle of works? No, but on the principle of faith. 28 For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30 since God is one; and the circumcised he will justify on the ground of their faith and the uncircumcised because of their faith.

31 Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

9 Is this blessing pronounced only upon the circumcised, or also upon the uncircumcised? We say that faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness. 10 How then was it reckoned to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before his circumcision. 11 He received circumcision as a sign or seal of the righteousness which he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised and who thus have righteousness reckoned to them, 12 and likewise the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but follow the example of the faith which our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

13 The promise to Abraham and his descendants, that they should inherit the world, did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. (...)

16 (...) for he is the father of us all, 17 as it is written, "I have made you the father of many nations" - in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist. 18 In hope he believed against hope, that he should become the father of many nations; as he had been told, "So shall your descendants be." 19 He did not weaken in faith when he considered his own body, which was as good as dead because he was about a hundred years old, or when he considered the barrenness of Sarah’s womb. 20 No distrust made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, 21 fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised. 22 That is why his faith was "reckoned to him as righteousness."

23 But the words, "it was reckoned to him," were not written for his sake alone, 24 but for ours also. It will be reckoned to us who believe in him that raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, 25 who was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification.

7 Why, one will hardly die for a righteous man - though perhaps for a good man one will dare even to die. 8 But God shows his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. 9 Since therefore, we are now justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God, 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11 Not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received our reconciliation.

It would be a mistake to attempt to explain the relationship between these two passages in terms merely of oral tradition. In particular the use by both texts of the affirmation "God is one" (Jas 2:19; Rom 3:30) certainly cannot be justified as oral tradition; this expression makes sense only within the particular context of its use by James and by Paul. Similarly, the naming of Abraham as "our father" is an indication of mutual dependence, because these are the only two letters in the New Testament which employ this title.

It has to be said that, generally speaking, the majority of commentators quite correctly resist the idea that James would have drawn directly on Paul. In fact, Paul is very explicit: he is working out a detailed exegesis of Genesis 15:6, showing that this declaration of Abraham’s righteousness is independent of any good work on his part, and that it precedes his circumcision. This is not a point on which James could have contradicted Paul, and he would not have quoted Genesis 15:6 if he had been familiar with Paul’s exegesis of it. Moreover, James’ argument is more concerned with Abraham’s offering of Isaac; Genesis 15:6 is quoted only secondarily, to show that Abraham’s works were preceded by his faith.

On the contrary, Paul’s procedure can be understood only as being the answer to the rhetorical question, "What then shall we say about Abraham?" Paul immediately adds that if it were a question of being justified by works, then there is no lack of matter as far as Abraham is concerned; but this is not, Paul continues, what scripture says (Rom 4:1-3). The rhetorical form in which Paul formulates the question shows that he is not expressing himself in a spontaneous way, but that he feels obliged to construct an argument. The Genesis text will be quoted several times, every aspect of it closely examined, almost as if to insist that this is not a quote to be taken lightly, nor simply en passant.

Paul underlines Abraham’s title as "our father". He says explicitly that Abraham is father of the Jews only "according to the flesh" (Rom 4:1). By contrast with the text of James, rooted in the biblical tradition and which flows naturally, the introduction of these words "according to the flesh" are restrictive. Later Paul will rework the title to show that spiritually, that is to say according to the promise, Abraham is the father of all nations.

Paul does not contradict James. He does not say we are "justified without works" but rather that we are justified "without the works of the law". Paul’s entire argument is designed to show that it is not the law that brings justification. For Paul as for James, there is no opposition between faith on the one hand and on the other hand the works which accompany that faith. Rather, Paul is arguing that faith is opposed to the works of the law, by means of which, according to him, the Jews are "seeking to establish their own justice" (Rom 10:3; cf. Phil 3:9), reducing God to being a mere spectator of their merits, and claiming justice as their due, like wages (Rom 4:4) What matters for Paul is to proclaim that we are "justified by God’s grace as by a gift" (Rom 3:24). This argument is completely absent in James.

Obviously Paul is not denying that good works ought to be the product of faith. He cannot go back on what he wrote to the community at Corinth: "If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing" (1 Cor 13:2); nor can he deny what he wrote so magnificently to the Galatians: "faith working through love" (Gal 5:6).

It is important to grasp the difference of perspective between James and Paul. James is concerned about those Christians who might imagine that they are saved by faith without works. James makes no distinction between the expression being "saved" (James 2:14) and being "justified" (James 2:23; cf also James 5:6 & 1 6). For Paul, on the contrary justification and salvation are two different stages of God’s plan for us: " (...) while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we are now justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life" (Romans 5:8-10). For Paul, "justification" is equivalent to "reconciliation", and is the sine qua non of "sanctification" of which "eternal life" is the fruit. (Rom 6:22).

Paul is better acquainted than James with the Greek of the Bible. In the Septuagint, the verb "to justify" is judicial terminology: it is used to mean declaring an accused person innocent (Exodus 23:7; Isaiah 5:23). "You shall not justify a guilty person" does not mean "you shall not make a guilty person just" but rather "you shall not acquit a guilty person". For James "justify" means "to make just", but for Paul it means "to pardon", "to reconcile", "to declare innocent", "to acquit". Paul is uneasy about James’ clumsy expression, because it could be taken to mean that when God justifies us, he does not yet consider us as his friends, but waits until we prove ourselves to him. So as to avoid all ambiguity, Paul declares: "Since we are justified by faith, we have peace with God" (Rom 5:1).

James’ influence on Paul’s text can be seen in the way Paul describes the consequences of Abraham’s faith: it led him not to waver (despite his own old age and the barrenness of his wife Sarah) concerning the promise God has made, and so Abraham "gave glory to God" (Rom 4:20). In the Letter to the Romans the typical example of a wicked act is failing "to honour God or give thanks to him" (Rom 1:21). This is the fundamental sin of the pagan Gentiles, which leads to all other perversities. Abraham, on the other hand, is presented as the archetypal believer whose works accompany faith.

It is clear, then, that if the Letter of James had been written after the Letter to the Romans, then its author would have been flying in the face of Paul’s thinking. On the contrary, a host of reasons lead us to acknowledge that Paul had already read the Letter of James when he wrote his Letter to the Romans, and comparing the two letters shows that he was careful not to argue against James, but simply to avoid James’ clumsy expression so as to prevent misinterpretation.

The relationship between the Letter of James and the Letter to the Romans can be found running throughout the entirety of both texts.

James and Romans are the only New Testament texts where one finds the expression "to produce endurance" (katergazesthai hupomonèn): "the testing of your faith produces endurance" (Jas 1:3); "knowing that suffering produces endurance" (Rom 5:3). This is an idea, very dear to the author, which is developed at length at the opening of James, whereas Paul makes only a brief allusion to it.

In the Letter of James the theme of being "double-minded" is very important. The true believer is one who gives utterly and without reserve, whose faith never hesitates (Jas 12:6). While this same theme can be found in the Letter to the Romans (Rom 4:20) it is far less central.

The link between "desire", "sin" and "death" is clearly and graphically worked out in James 1:15; in Romans 7:7-11 it is presented rather more obscurely.

Apart from its two occurrences in James, the verb katakauchasthai (Jas 2: 13 "mercy triumphs over judgement"; Jas 3:14 "do not boast and be false to the truth"), the only other New Testament use is in Romans 11:18.

The very strange turn of phrase "being at war in your members" (strateuesthai en tois melesin) is common to both James 4:1 and Romans 7:23. It is found nowhere else. Its use in James is explained by the context, where he is discussing "wars" and "fightings" among believers.

The idea of "enmity with God" (echthra eis theon) is quite naturally set against "friendship with the world" in James 4:4. The only other use in the New Testament is found in Romans 8:7, where it is equally naturally "the mind that is set on the flesh" which is "hostile to God".

The question "Who are you to pass judgement?" (su tis ei ho krinôn) is found only in James 4:12 and Romans 14:4. If we compare what Paul says in the Letter to the Galatians 4:10, where he laments how "you observe days, and months, and seasons, and years!" with what he writes in Romans 14:5, namely that "One man esteems one day as better than another", then we can see how the influence of James has encouraged Paul to be more moderate.

There are a good number of other similarities that could be listed, but these are less significant. The ones we have presented demonstrate clearly enough that Romans is a response to the Letter of James.

Paul, then, had already read the Letter of James when he wrote Romans. But he certainly had not received it when he wrote 1 Corinthians, otherwise it would be incomprehensible why there is no mention of justification by faith, a theme which he treats passionately in writing to the Galatians and to the Romans.

All the same, there are certain key links between 1 Corinthians and James, spread throughout both of these letters. We will set these out, which will lead us to conclude that James wrote his letter having in mind the problems which Paul had to confront at Corinth: a faulty understanding of Christian wisdom; lack of respect for the poor at the eucharistic assembly; quarrels of various sorts; greed, which led brethren to bring each other to trial; an exaggerated appreciation of speaking in tongues; the pride of the "strong" and their disdain for the "weak"; the materialism of those who doubted the resurrection; etc. However, this needs to be demonstrated, by means of a careful comparison of the vocabulary of the two letters.

The most remarkable link concerns three expressions which are found only in these two letters, which moreover are used by both Paul and James in very similar ways:

1 Cor 1:27a "God chose what is foolish in the world (...) "

1 Cor 1:27b "God chose what is weak in the world (...) "

Has not God chosen those who are poor in the world (...) ?" Jas 2:5

1 Cor 2:8 "the Lord of glory" Jas 2:1

1 Cor 2:9 "what God has prepared for those who love him"

" (...) which God has promised to those who love him" Jas 2:5

For Paul, these three expressions are part of a unified treatment of the theme of Christian wisdom. Confronted by the pretensions to wisdom of some members of the community at Corinth, Paul draws to their attention that they cannot count among themselves many who are wise, who are powerful, or who are of high birth: in the eyes of the world, they are poor. But what the world despises is precisely what God has chosen, so that no one may boast before God. Paul then goes on to say that the wisdom of God is a hidden mystery, which none of the powerful people of the world have appreciated, otherwise they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But the wisdom of God concerns that which he has prepared for those who love him.

For James, the question is the disdainful treatment of the poor within the Christian assembly. Such discrimination between rich and poor is to dishonour the Lord of glory, because "has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which he promised to those who love him?"

The fact that the two texts are dealing with very different problems shows clearly that we cannot appeal to a common catechetical tradition to explain these similarities. Nor can these similarities be unintentional, because these three expressions are so rare that they are not found anywhere else in the New Testament in this exact form.

The idea that the faithful have been chosen by God is very Pauline, transposing to the new People of God what Deuteronomy said of Israel: "If the Lord set his love upon you and chose you (...) it is because the Lord loves you" (Deut 7:7-8). From the opening sentences of his first letter, Paul defines the faithful as those who enjoy God’s election: "We know, brethren beloved by God, that he has chosen you" (1 Thess 1:4). In Romans, Paul will first recall that the election is Israel’s privilege (Rom 9:11; 11:28). But, for Paul, this privilege is now extended to all the beloved of God. It is thanks to Paul, not to James, that the spotlight was turned on the election of those who believe.

Paul’s argument is vigorously constructed. He takes as his starting point the text of Isaiah 29:14: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I shall thwart" (1 Cor 1:19). He then sets up an opposition between the language of God and the language of the world. The world has two demands: wisdom, which is sought by the Greeks; signs of power by the Jews (1 Cor 1:22). Paul declares that for we who believe, Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God (1 Cor 1:25). It is at this juncture that he points out that, among the believers, there are very few wise, powerful, well-born people (1 Cor 1:26). The progression is very eloquent: to the original idea of wisdom is added first that of power, and then that of high-birth. The trilogy of 1 Corinthians 1:26-28 is quite simply the working out of Isaiah 29:4, and as such owes nothing to James.

The title "Lord of glory" falls quite naturally into context for Paul: it serves to underline the contrast between on the one hand the judgement of the world, which sees in Jesus nothing but a poor slave fit for nothing but crucifixion, and on the other hand the judgement of God who has given him the title "Lord" and has glorified him. In James, however, there is no such special link with the context, and one can quite easily imagine the text without this phrase.

Concerning the expression "those who love him", Paul presents it explicitly in 1 Corinthians 2:9 as quoting the scriptures: "As it is written, what no eye has seen, nor ear heard (Is 64:3), nor the heart of man conceived, (Jer 3:16) what God has prepared for those who love him (Si 1:10)".The quotation from Ecclesiasticus is the key to the others, because the context is that of wisdom: "Before all else wisdom was created (...) he conveyed it to those who love him" (Si 1:4 & 10). Paul’s text, then, is a direct allusion to the Old Testament, and owes nothing to the text of the Letter of James.

It is clear that James’ point of reference is the teaching of Jesus: "Blessed the poor, for theirs is the kingdom of God" (Lk 6:20//Mt 5:3). But he reformulates this teaching in an entirely new way, with the help of expressions that are to be read in Paul: "Has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which he has promised to those who love him?" (Jas 2:5). James has reinterpreted the Gospel in a typically Pauline fashion.

Let us continue our quest for Pauline sources to the Letter of James in this passage. Paul quotes Psalm 94 [93]:11: "The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile" (1 Cor 3:20). Shortly afterwards Paul challenges his poor Corinthians: "Who sees anything different in you? What have you that you did not receive?" (1 Cor 4:7). Speaking of those who despise the poor, James writes: "Have you not made distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts?" This rather strange formulation by James can be explained by his reminiscence of Paul’s quotation from scripture.

Having dealt with the theme of wisdom, Paul moves on to denounce two grave disorders which disturb him: the community at Corinth tolerates the presence of an incestuous person among them; and they do not hesitate to take each other to the pagan courts. Paul issues a rigorous judgement:" (...) neither the immoral, (...) nor the greedy (...) will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor 6:9-10). James uses the notion of inheritance in his presentation of the beatitude of the poor, whom he describes as "heirs of the kingdom" (Jas 2:5), and he notes that it is the rich who oppress the believers by dragging them into court (Jas 2:6). The only other place in the New Testament where the word that James uses here for "court" (kritèrion) is found is in 1 Corinthians 6:2 & 4.

A bit further on, Paul offers a long discussion of Christian freedom in relation to meat which has been offered to idols (1 Cor 8-10). He asks: "Why should my liberty be judged according to another man’s scruples? Why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks?" (1 Cor 10:29-30). In the continuation of James’ polemic against the rich he says that they "denounce that honourable name by which you are called" (Jas 2:7). This means, he goes on to say a little later that they should speak and act "as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty" (Jas 2:12). Of course, it is Paul who speaks spontaneously about liberty, and James aligns himself to match the thinking of Paul.

Paul then goes on to correct various disorders that have been observed within the Christian assembly, in particular, the way in which those who seem to have nothing are humiliated (1 Cor 11:17-34, cf especially v. 22). He declares that whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup in an unworthy manner "will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord" (1 Cor 11:27).

The word used here for "guilty" (enochos) is found elsewhere only in James 2:10 and in Hebrews 2:15. It is easy to understand why Paul is being so severe: the lack of respect toward the poor is an attack on the love of Christ and on his sacrifice. James expresses a similar severity, which would be difficult to understand unless one were already familiar with Paul’s argumentation: to violate the principle of "not showing partiality" (Jas 2:9) is quite simply to "become guilty of all" (Jas 2:10).

This lets us grasp the logic of James: when he attacks partiality and making distinctions within the Christian assembly, he is thinking of the scandal denounced by Paul. To bolster his argument, he calls upon the most cherished teachings of his predecessor: the reflection of Christian wisdom, and the account of liberty. It is only on reaching chapter 11 of 1 Corinthians that the meaning of James’ instruction and the particular situation that he wanted to remedy becomes clear.

Having read the description of the holy Supper at Corinth, and taken up the severe reprimand of those who were responsible for it, James would then have read Paul’s discussion of the question of spiritual gifts (1 Cor 12-14). He was immediately won over by the hymn to love. How right Paul was! He refocused the whole Christian life around "the royal law: you shall love your neighbour as yourself" (Jas 2:8). So it is that James expresses his agreement with what is the essence of the hymn to love: "If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing" (1 Cor 13:2).He knows that Paul is echoing the enigmatic saying of Jesus:"If you have faith (...) if you say to this mountain: Be taken up and cast into the sea, it will be done" (Mt 21:21). In complete agreement with Paul, as he thinks, he now continues to explain that it is not enough to have faith, but that one must also have an effective love of the poor, providing them with clothing and food (Jas 2:14-26). This argumentation is introduced by a question borrowed from 1 Corinthians 15:32 "What does it profit (...)?" and the rest of the question is modelled on Paul’s formulation quoted above: "What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works?"(Jas 2:14). Clearly here James means works of love. Doubtless James had heard that the Corinthians were far from being generous (cf. 2 Cor 9:4-5), and they were none too keen on "remembering the poor" of Jerusalem (Gal 2:10). He must have known that he was going to cause Paul to worry by this use of the word "works". He was careful, though, to match the reference to Abraham by mentioning Rahab the harlot, as an example of the justification of a Gentile (Jas 2:25).

There is yet another, earlier passage in James which shows signs of a dependence on the hymn of love: "If anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who observes himself in a mirror; for he observes himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like." (Jas 1:23-24). Just as for the expression "What does it profit (...)?", the word "mirror" is found only in 1 Corinthians and in James. Paul wrote: "Now we see in a mirror dimly, but then we shall see face to face" (1 Cor 13:12). The image that Paul uses refers to contemporary mirrors of polished metal, which reflected only a coarse image. The text of the Letter of James is much less natural, in as much as it is not at all clear why, having looked at oneself in a mirror, one should at once forget what one has seen.

Having dealt with the works of love, James then takes up another aspect of Paul’s teaching, that concerning charisms. Paul wrote that though a body has many members they do not each have the same function (1 Cor 12:18). The gift of tongues is priceless, but it is as nothing compared to love, and it needs to be strictly controlled, or else it can be the cause of disorder within the assembly (1 Cor 14:27-28). It will pass away when what is perfect comes, when we are no longer like children, but are men, adults (1 Cor 13:10-11).

So we find James explaining that the tongue must be tamed (Jas 3:1-12). "If anyone makes no mistakes in what he says he is a perfect man" (Jas 3:2); however, if it is not tamed, "the tongue is an unrighteous world among our members, staining the whole body (...)" (Jas 3:6). James addresses this warning particularly to "teachers" (didaskales) of the Church (cf. 1 Cor 12:28-29), warning against too many taking up this function. This supposes the ecclesial organisation in place at Corinth, "apostles, prophets, teachers", but James is concerned that some of those who exercise certain of these ministries may be wanting.

The immoderate use of the gift of tongues was troubling the Christian assembly, to the extent that Paul had to call things to order, saying: "God is not a God of confusion, but of peace" (1 Cor 14:33). For his part, James continues his discourse (Jas 3:13-18) by showing that true wisdom is the enemy of disorder and the friend of peace (Jas 13: 16-18). The word for "confusion" or "disorder" is akastasia: it is the word we find in Luke 21:9 for "tumults". Elsewhere in the New Testament, apart from 1 Cor 14:33 and Jas 3:16, this word is found only in 2 Cor 6:5 and 2 Cor 12:20.

So it is that James is brought back to the theme of Christian wisdom: Paul had said that true wisdom is inaccessible to the "natural", or "unspiritual", or "physical" man (psuchikos), and he laments that the Corinthians are not yet "spiritual men" (1 Cor 3:1): he says "while there is still jealousy and rivalry (eris) among you, are you not of the flesh" (1 Cor 3:3). By contrast, Paul boasts of his own "spirit of gentleness" (1 Cor 4:21), and he denounces those who push their quarrels so far as to carry their "grievances" before the unrighteous, that is, pagan Gentile courts (1 Cor 6:1). With this wealth of reference, James is able to write: "Who is wise and understanding among you? (cf. 1 Cor 3:18) By his good life let him show his works in the gentleness of wisdom. But if you have bitter jealousy and rivalries (eritheia) in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth. This wisdom is not such that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, devilish. For where there is jealousy and rivalries (eritheia) there will be disorder and every sort of vile grievances" (Jas 3:13-16). The qualification "earthly" is probably an echo of 1 Cor 15:40, where it is associated with the adjective "unspiritual" (1 Cor 15:44).

In such a light, the Letter of James is not an intemporal sapiential work addressed to all Christians in general, warning them against quarrelling; it is first and foremost addressed to a particular community where quarrels were, alas, all too real.

It is clear, then, how a great many of the themes around which the Letter of James is built appear in the First Letter to the Corinthians, and in exactly the same order. Let us set out these parallels:

1 Lacking in nothing 1 Cor 1:7 Jas 1:4

2 (Asking for) wisdom 1 Cor 1:22 Jas 1:5

3 Boast (in God) 1 Cor 1:31 Jas 1:9

4 Implanting (the word) 1 Cor 3:6 Jas 1:21

5 Gentleness 1 Cor 4:21 Jas 1:21

6 Widows 1 Cor 7:8 Jas 1:27

7 Troubles/Affliction 1 Cor 7:28 Jas 1:27

8 (The passing) world 1 Cor 7:31 Jas 1:27

9 Liberty (being judged) 1 Cor 10:29 Jas 2:12

10 If I have faith (...) 1 Cor 13:21 Jas 2:14

11 Confusion/disorder 1 Cor 14:33 Jas 3:16

12 Tomorrow (we die ... ) 1 Cor 15:32 Jas 4:14

Let us examine the last mentioned parallel in more detail. 1 Corinthians and James both condemn practical materialism. Paul recalls that the dead are to rise, and without the certainty of the resurrection we would obliged to say, "Eat and drink, for tomorrow we die" (1 Cor 15:32). Paul is explicitly quoting Isaiah 22:13. James takes to task the rich merchants, who strut about boasting, "Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and get gain", whereas you do not know about tomorrow (Jas 4:13-16). The verbal parallel is minimal, hinging as it does on the one word "tomorrow" (aurion). However, these are the only two Letters that use this word, and the underlying thinking of both passages is extremely close.

Such parallelism running throughout both Letters cannot be purely coincidental, and it is clear that it is not Paul who is following an order set by James. Paul is confronting the problems of his community, on the basis of questions that he has been asked and of information that he has received from "Chloe’s people" (1 Cor 1:11). He has not sought inspiration from an intemporal sapiential text!

If we are to interpret the Letter of James correctly, then, we need to seek out systematically all the passages from 1 Corinthians to which it is related. Here, following the order of the Letter of James, are the key parallels or comparisons (the most important ones are indicated in bold):

Jas 1:2 >>> 1 Cor 10:12-13

Jas 1:3-4 >>> 1 Cor 3:13; 2:6

Jas 1:4-5 >>> 1 Cor 1:7; 1:22

Jas 1:9 >>> 1 Cor 1:21; 3:21

Jas 1:12 >>> 1 Cor 9:25; 2:9

Jas 1:13-15 >>> 1 Cor 10:6-10

Jas 1:15 >>> 1 Cor 15:56

Jas 1:16 >>> 1 Cor 15:33

Jas 1:18 >>> 1 Cor 4:15

Jas 1:18 >>> 1 Cor15:23

Jas 1:19 >>> 1 Cor 8:1

Jas 1:19 & 26 >>> 1 Cor 14:2

Jas 1:21 >>> 1 Cor 14:20; 4:21

Jas 1:21 >>> 1 Cor 3:6; 1:18

Jas 1:23-25 >>> 1 Cor13:10-12

Jas 1:25 >>> 1 Cor 9:21; 10:29

Jas 1:27 >>> 1 Cor 7:8, 28, 31

Jas 2:1 1:27-28 >>> 1 Cor 2:8

Jas 2:4 >>> 1 Cor 4:7; 3:20

Jas 2:5 >>> 1 Cor 1:27-28

Jas 2:5 >>> 1 Cor 6:9; 2:9

Jas 2:6 >>> 1 Cor 11:22; 6:4

Jas 2:7 >>> 1 Cor 10:30

Jas 2:8 >>> 1 Cor 13:13

Jas 2:10 >>> 1 Cor 11:27

Jas 2:12 >>> 1 Cor 10:29

Jas 2:12 >>> 1 Cor 11:29

Jas 2:14 >>> 1 Cor 15:22

Jas 2:14 >>> 1 Cor 13:2

Jas 2:15-16 >>> 1 Cor 15:37-38

Jas 2:18 >>> 1 Cor 12:31

Jas 2:20 >>> 1 Cor 15:14

Jas 3:1 >>> 1 Cor 12:28-29

Jas 3:2 >>> 1 Cor 13:10-11

Jas 3:6 >>> 1 Cor 12:18

Jas 3:7, 9, 10 >>> 1 Cor 4:10:13-16

Jas 3:13 >>> 1 Cor 3:18; 4:21

Jas 3:15 >>> 1 Cor 2:14; 15:40-44

Jas 3:16 >>> 1 Cor 3:3

Jas 3:16 >>> 1 Cor 14:33; 6:1

Jas 3:18 >>> 1 Cor 14:33

Jas 4:1 >>> 1 Cor 14:8; 9:7

Jas 4:2 >>> 1 Cor 13:4

Jas 4:7 >>> 1 Cor 10:14

Jas 4:9 >>> 1 Cor 5:2

Jas 4:11-12 >>> 1 Cor 8:11-13

Jas 4:13-14 >>> 1 Cor 15:22

Jas 4:16 >>> 1 Cor 15:31

Jas 5:3-7 >>> 1 Cor 3:12-15

Jas 5:13 >>> 1 Cor 14:15

We see, then, how James has composed his Letter. At the very beginning he has in mind the compliment of Paul: "you are not lacking in any spiritual gift" (1 Cor 1:7). However, James is aware that the Corinthians are singularly lacking in wisdom, so that they are still, in Paul’s phrase "babes in Christ" (1 Cor 3:1). However, rather than begin by upbraiding them in an aggressive manner, he begins by sympathising with the trials that they are suffering (1 Cor 10:13), explaining that they should count this as a joy (Jas 1:3-4). He can then go on to point out to them the way of true wisdom: a prayer full of confidence to the One who humbles the mighty and raises the lowly. This first teaching section closes by returning to the beatitude of those who endure trials, by means of the image of "the crown", which Paul had used just before he evoked the temptations confronting the Corinthians (1 Cor 9:25).

James then returns to the theme of trial, or temptation. Paul had said how the Hebrews in the desert had "desired evil", in Greek epithumètas kakôn (1 Cor 10:6). James explains therefore that the trial permitted by God can never be "temptation" in the pejorative sense, "for God cannot be tempted with evil", in Greek apeirastos kakôn (Jas 1:13). Such temptation in the pejorative sense comes when a person is "lured and enticed by his own desire" (Jas 1:14); which desire, "when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin (...) brings forth death" (Jas 1:15, cf. 1 Cor 15:56).

The temptation to idolatry was related to the presumption that "all of us possess knowledge" (1 Cor 8:1a). So on the pretext of knowing that the idols were in fact nothing, there was a danger of falling into idolatrous practices. But Paul had pointed out that "knowledge puffs us up, whereas love builds up" (1 Cor 8:1b). He also warns the Corinthians, in relation to the gift of tongues, "Do not be children in your thinking but only as far as evil is concerned" (1 Cor 14:20). James bases his discourse on the pride of the Corinthians, their presumption of their "knowledge" (Jas 1:19). In order that they become perfect, become adults in the faith, he invites them to seek out love, which is "the perfect law, the law of liberty", to reject all filthiness and wickedness, and "to receive with gentleness the implanted word" (Jas 1:21), which has been planted in them by the preaching of Paul (1 Cor 3:6), and so to imitate his gentleness and to learn to tame their tongues.

Having dealt with the problem of meat which had been offered to idols (1 Cor 8-10), Paul turned his attention to certain dissensions within the Christian assembly (1 Cor 11:17-34). So we find James encouraging respect for the poor within the assembly. Then, still following the text of Paul (1 Cor 13:1-13), he shows that faith is nothing without love. He invites especially the "teachers" (didaskales) to be "perfect men" (cf 1 Cor 13:10-11). He condemns dissension and rivalry (cf 1 Cor 14:33). In this respect he has no hesitation in echoing the warlike imagery of Paul (cf 1 Cor 9:7 & 14:8). Then, since Paul finishes his Letter with the proclamation of the resurrection of the dead (1 Cor 15), James invites Christians not to judge one another, but to entrust themselves rather to the judgement of God (Jas 4:11 - 5:11). The main body of the Letter ends as it began: with an appeal to steadfastness in trial (Jas 1:2-4 & 5:10-11).

The Letter concludes with several warnings typical of James: to avoid duplicity ("let your yes be yes and your no be no"); to practice prayer; to engage in fraternal correction, just as he himself has done in this text.

The importance of these comparisons in interpreting these texts becomes very clear when we examine the relationship between 1 Corinthians, James and Romans concerning the conflict between the "weak" and the "strong".

Between 1 Corinthians and Romans, it can be seen how Paul took on board the remarks made to him by James. Here, then, are the texts, in the order in which they were written:

13 Then let us no more pass judgement on one another, but rather decide never to put a stumbling-block or hindrance in the way of a brother. 14 I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but it is unclean for any one who thinks it unclean. 15 If your brother is being injured by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. Do not cause the ruin through what you eat of one for whom Christ died.

It is clear that Paul has read the text of James as an intervention in the quarrel between the strong and the weak. Between 1 Corinthians and Romans we can see how Paul has modified his reasoning, taking into account James’ remarks.

Just exactly what is the nature of the remark that James offers? That it is paradoxical to qualify as "weak" those who quite simply conform to the dietary prescriptions of the law of God. To speak ill of a brother who does not eat meat offered to idols is to speak ill of the one who forbade having anything to do with idolatry. The precept not to judge should clearly not prevent understanding the behaviour of a brother and ultimately taking him in hand, so as to "bring back a sinner from the error of his way" (Jas 5: 19-20). On the other hand, to judge one’s brother in terms of the manner in which, in all good conscience and uprightness of heart he observes the law of God, that is to set oneself up as judge of God.

By taking up the challenge, "Why do you pass judgement on your brother" (Rom 14:10) and developing at length the idea that only the Lord has the power to judge us, the Paul of the Letter to the Romans shows he has clearly received James’ message. As long as we seek, in uprightness of heart, to serve the Lord, then let us cease to judge one another on the way in which we each interpret the law. And given that James, by his use of the word "neighbour", alludes to the royal law of love, Paul concludes his development by asking that all "walk in love" (Rom 14:15).

It can be seen how necessary it is then, if the Letter of James and the Letter of Paul are to be interpreted correctly, not to read them separately, as if they belonged to two completely different worlds. The various currents within the early Church dialogued with each other. The Letter of James was addressed to the Pauline communities, and there is a sense in which the Letter to the Romans is addressed more to the Church of Jerusalem than that of Rome.

From the perspective of the origins of Christianity, it seems pertinent to note that, at the point we have reached, the Pauline communities knew only too well, when they received the Letter of James, to whom he was referring when he wrote in James 5:14 of "the elders of the Church" who acted "in the name of the Lord". James is clearly aware (Jas 3:1) that the ministers of the Church at Corinth are called "prophets and teachers" (1 Cor 12:28). But he knows that the title in use at Jerusalem has exactly the same meaning, and that no one is likely to misunderstand what he means to say.

The Letter of James was written between the First Letter to the Corinthians and the Letter to the Romans. This already lets us situate it in time with a great degree of accuracy. But we can go even further in establishing its date, by comparing it with other Pauline Letters written at the same era.

Even if the dates of Philippians and Galatians are the subject of discussion, there is no doubt about the dating of the first part of 2 Corinthians (2 Cor 1-9). Paul left Asia (2 Cor 1:8) and went to Macedonia (2 Cor 2:13); he is getting ready to return to Corinth, in order to gather the collection for the poor that he wanted to take to Jerusalem (2 Cor 8:19-20). 2 Corinthians 1-9 corresponds to Acts 20;1-2, and is written a short time before the Letter to the Romans, which corresponds to Acts 20:2-3. This Letter is written roughly a year after the beginning of the collection which is the subject of 1 Corinthians 16:1-4 (cf. 2 Cor 8:10 & 9:2).

The dating of the three documents, then, can be established as follows:

1 Corinthians before Pentecost of the first year at Ephesus (1 Cor 16:8).

2 Corinthians 1-9 towards Pentecost of the second year, in Macedonia.

Romans in the course of the following winter, in Greece.

Paul’s arrest towards Pentecost of the third year (Acts 20:16), at Jerusalem.

In the opinion of the majority of commentators, Paul was arrested in Jerusalem in AD 58. The reliable basis for this will be dealt with in our final chapter. In the meantime, let us hypothesize the following dates:

1 Corinthians between Easter (1 Cor 5:7-8) and Pentecost AD 56.

2 Corinthians 1-9 towards Pentecost AD 57.

Romans winter AD 57-58

Paul’s arrest towards Pentecost AD 58.

Philippians, Galatians and 2 Corinthians 10-13 are soaked in the same atmosphere of the struggle against the false, pro-Judaising preachers of 2 Corinthians 1-9 (Phil 3:3; Gal 6:12; 2 Cor 11:22 & 2:17). It is with good reason, then, that these are generally thought to belong to the same era. The analysis of their relationship with the Letter of James will confirm this opinion.

Concerning the Letter to the Galatians, the reasoning already developped concerning 1 Corinthians can be reapplied: given that 1 Corinthians does not concern itself with the controversy on faith and works, it must have been written before Paul received the Letter of James. On the contrary, because Galatians passionately defends the principle of justification by faith, without the works of the law, then we can conclude that the Paul of Galatians was aware of the subject matter of the Letter of James. Moreover, James himself, as a person, has a certain prominence within the Letter to the Galatians (Gal 1:19; 2:9; 2:12).

To simplify our argumentation on this point, it will help if we observe the remarkable analogy between two passages written by Paul, one taken from the Letter to the Galatians, the other from 2 Corinthians 10-13:

The similarities between these two texts are absolutely self-evident in the same grouping of key words: "immorality, impurity, licentiousness"; "rivalry, jealousy, anger, rivalries".

It cannot be supposed that Paul simply recopied his own writing after a lapse of several years, it has to be recognised that they were written at the same era in the face of the same preoccupation, and that he expresses himself spontaneously in the same way in both contemporary Letters. The same phenomenon is observable in comparing 1 Thessalonians and 2 Thessalonians.

There are other key similarities between Galatians and 2 Corinthians 10-13. In both these Letters:

Paul warns against "turning to a different gospel" (Gal 1:6); "accepting a different gospel" (2 Cor 11:4);

he even warns against "angels", for they might be Satan in disguise (Gal 1:8; 2 Cor 11:14);

he alludes to his "visions and revelations" of the Lord (Gal 1:12 & 2:2; 2 Cor 12:1, 7);

he recalls the events of Damascus (Gal 1:17; 2 Cor 11:32);

he takes as point of reference the same figure of "fourteen years" (Gal 2:2; 2 Cor 12:2);

he is concerned by "false brethren" (Gal 2:4; 2 Cor 11:26).

As M. A. Hubaut says, "Paul uses the same words at the same moment" (Paul de Tarse, Desclée, Paris, 1989, p. 34). In both Letters, he is confronting the same adversaries.

For this reason, it is a great help to compare these two similar passages, as well as another text from 2 Corinthians and one from Philippians, namely, James’ teaching on "the wisdom that comes down from above" (Jas 3:13-18), because there are a good number of significant vocabulary parallels.

3b (...) For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving like ordinary men?

15 Some indeed preach Christ from envy and rivalry (dia phthonon kai erin), but others from good will. 16 The latter do it out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defence of the gospel; 17 the former proclaim Christ out of rivalries (ex eritheias), not from pure motives (ouch hagnôs) but thinking to afflict me in my imprisonment.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness (praütès), self-control; against such there is no law.

24 And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.

26 Let us have no self-conceit (kenodoxoi), no provoking of one another, no envy of one another (allèlois phthonountes).

Apart from Romans 2:8, these passages are the only ones to use the word "rivalries" (eritheiai). They are also, together with 1 Corinthians 1:11, the first to use the word "rivalry" (eris), which thereafter will be found only in Romans 1:29 & 13:13; Titus 3:9 and 1 Timothy 6:4. This is an exclusively Pauline term.

The words which are used for "purity" are very precise. The purity concerned here is cultual purity, which is expressed in Greek by words which all have the root hagn- (hagnizein, hagnismos). In Acts, such vocabulary is typical of James, who demands that Paul take part in a rite of "purification" linked to the celebration of the nazarite vow (Acts 21:24) This is the only time this word is used concerning this act of Paul (Acts 21:24; 21:26; 24:18). In his Letter, James asks "men of double mind" to "purify your hearts" (Jas 4:8). So in writing that the wisdom from above is first and foremost "pure", James wants to say that the wise man is one who is totally consecrated to the Lord, without any duplicity. Paul only uses vocabulary from this hagn- root from Philippians 1:17 and 2 Corinthians 11:2; subsequently it will be found in 2 Corinthians 6:6 and 7:11, as well as in the Pastoral Letters (Tit 2:5; 1 Tim 4:12; 5:2 & 22). The 1st Letter of Peter uses it twice (1 Pt 1:22; 3:2). Other, later uses can be found in John’s writings (1 Jn 3:3; Jn 11:55).

The link between Philippians and the Letter

of James is expressed above all by the use of the expression "fruits/harvest of righteousness" (Phil 1:11; Jas 3:18), which is found nowhere else in the New Testament. The link between Philippians and Galatians can be found in the use of the expression "self-conceit" (kenodoxia) which is found only in Philippians 2:3 and Galatians 5:26.

The link between James and Galatians flows from a great number of vocabulary analogies. Paul retains the opposition from 1 Corinthians between "flesh" and "spirit", (cf. 1 Cor 3:1 & 3) but he now invests it with the meaning that James expresses in the opposition between "earthly wisdom" (Jas 3:15) and the "wisdom from above" (Jas 3:16).

The link between James and 2 Corinthians is extremely close. Paul, in speaking of "jealousy" takes care to say that he is speaking "foolishly", in other words, not in the language of wisdom. The characteristic traits of a lack of true knowledge are "jealousy, rivalries (eritheiai), quarrels".

It cannot possibly be that what is clearly a spontaneous description by James would have been inspired by, at one and the same time, Philippians and Galatians and 2 Corinthians. Only the inverse relationship is possible: this key passage in James, written in the light of 1 Corinthians, caught Paul’s attention to such an extent that it remained in his memory whenever he wrote all his subsequent letters.

What is truly remarkable is that Paul, in writing to the Philippians, should adopt the language of James in preference to his own. In Philippians, rather than the Pauline opposition between "flesh" and "spirit", we find instead the difference between behaviour which is "earthly" and that of "citizens of heaven" (Phil 3:19-20). This is precisely the opposition of James: "earthly wisdom" as against "wisdom from above".

The invitation to joy with which the Letter of James begins (Jas 1:2), will be echoed throughout Philippians (11 times the verb "to rejoice" five times the noun "joy"). The reason for this joy is that "the Lord is near" (Phil 4:5): this phrase is found nowhere else in Paul, but it is very reminiscent of James 5:78: "the coming of the Lord is at hand". The related idea of epieikeia, "forbearance" found at James 3:17 will reoccur in Paul in Philippians 4:5, 2 Corinthians 10:1, Titus 3:2 and 1 Timothy 3:3.

There is one parallel between the vocabulary of James and that of Philippians which is particularly remarkable. We are well acquainted with the imagery of James: "If any one is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who observes his natural face in a mirror; for he observes himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. But he who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer that forgets but a doer that acts, he shall be blessed in his doing" (Jas 1:23-25). Philippians is the only Pauline text where the verb "to forget" is linked, as here in James to the idea of "perfection":"forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let those of us who are [called] perfect be thus minded" (Phil 3:13-15).

It is true that Philippians has as yet failed to respond to the argument of James: "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (Jas 2:24). Paul found it difficult to come up with a response. But at least he had now vigorously denounced the idea that justification had its origin in the law: "(I strive) in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own, based on law,but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith" (Phil 3:8-9).

Galatians, by contrast, expresses a first and passionate reaction to certain of James’ affirmations. In sitting at the table with Gentiles, did Paul thereby become "a transgressor of the law", even though none of the commandments had been violated (Jas 2:9-11; Gal 2:18)? When Scripture says "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness" (Jas 2:23; Gal 3:60) did it mean in reference to his works? Had not the gratuitous promise of the blessing of all nations in Abraham already been pronounced (Gen 12:3, quoted in Gal 3:8)?

In a somewhat excessive way, Paul presents the law as the source of "a curse" (Gal 3:10, 13) The word "curse" (katara), which he read in James 3:10, will not be used again by Paul in any of his Letters, except to give approval of James’ teaching in Romans 12:14. But in the present context, he has said that the law brings a curse: one can readily understand how this could have upset the Christians of Rome, and why Paul, some months later, would be concerned that his collection for the poor "might not be acceptable to the saints" (Rom 15:31).

It is not until he comes to write his Letter to the Romans that Paul affirms, in a definitive manner that "the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good" (Rom 7:12; cf. 1 Tim 1:18). But the damage had already been done. James worked hard to find a solution when Paul reached Jerusalem (Acts 21:20, 24), but it was to no avail and could not prevent Paul’s arrest.

It is extremely moving to reflect that Paul owes to James his description of "the works of the flesh" and the "fruits of the Spirit", and even for the most significant formulation of his thinking: "in Christ Jesus circumcision does not have power nor has uncircumcision, but faith through its effects in love" (en gar Christô Ièsou oute peritomè ti ischuei oute akrobustia alla pistis di’agapès energoumené) (Gal 5:6). The only other place that the highlighted phrases (which translates a double word-use in the Greek) are found is in James’ instruction on prayer: "the prayer of the righteous man has power which is expressed through its effects" (polu ischuei deèsis dikaiou energoumené) (Jas 5:16). Paul may have had no time for "certain men from James" (Gal 2:12), but James himself remained his friend.

Apart from the passages of 2 Corinthians 11:1-2 and 12:20 which are quite clearly related to those of James 3:16-17, the vocabulary links between James and 2 Corinthians 10-13 are of little significance.

However, it seems certain that there is an echo of James in the first part of 2 Corinthians. This concerns the allusion to the precept of Jesus: "Let your word be ‘Yes! Yes! No! No!’" (Mt 5:37). James quotes this in a way which remains very close to the gospel tradition: "Do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or with any other oath, but let your yes [be] yes and your no [be] no (Jas 5:12). This is how Paul formulates it: "Do I make my plans like a wordly man, ready to say Yes Yes and No No at once? As surely as God is faithful, our word to you has not been Yes Yes and No No". Jesus was quite simply forbidding the swearing of oaths. But Paul insists on the "and", that is both Yes and No at once; this "and" is found only in the text of James. It is by means of James’ expression that Paul understands (or reinterprets in his own way) the gospel text.

All these convergent indications show that Paul had received the Letter of James before he wrote the Letters to the Philippians, to the Galatians and to the Corinthians, which followed fairly soon after.

Paul was still in prison at Ephesus when he wrote Philippians. At that point, he is still not sure whether he might die, but he hopes all the same that he will be set free (Phil 1:20-26).

When Paul wrote Galatians and 2 Corinthians, it was with an awareness that he had undergone a trial which had conformed him to Christ (Gal 6:17), and he is getting ready to go to Corinth (2 Cor 12:20-13:2). What he writes, 2 Corinthians 10-13, is a severe letter to the community at Corinth (cf. 2 Cor 2:3-4).

However, afraid that he might not be well received at Corinth (2 Cor 2:1-2), he changes his plans, and goes instead to Troas, where he expects to meet up again with Titus (2 Cor 2:12-13). When he fails to find him, Paul continues his journey as far as Macedonia, where he receives comforting news from his partner. So he writes a letter of reconciliation, 2 Corinthians 1-9, in which he evokes "the tribulation suffered in Asia" (2 Cor 1:8-9).

This is a broadly accepted scenario (for example, it is the one adopted by the French Ecumenical Translation of the Bible).

This should make us aware of the speed with which the apostolic writings circulated. 1 Corinthians was written in spring AD 56; 2 Corinthians 1-9 in spring AD 57; Philippians, Galatians and 2 Corinthians 10-13 some months previously. It is between spring AD 56 and winter AD 56-57 that James received 1 Corinthians, wrote his own Letter and managed to get it back to Corinth before the sea passage became too rough. This means the Letter of James was written in summer AD 56.

Galatians was written in the course of winter AD 56-57. The Letter was sent to Galatia, from where it reached Jerusalem, and Paul was made aware of the bad impression it had made before he wrote Romans in the course of winter AD 57-58.

So by the year AD 58, the Christians of Jerusalem already had in their possession a rich collection of Pauline Letters: 1 Corinthians, Galatians and Romans.

Our final chapter will examine the question of the date of Paul’s arrest, but before that, there is a famous phrase from 2 Corinthians 11:2 that we should examine: "I betrothed you to Christ to present you as a pure bride to her one husband". Here are all the texts with a thematic similarity:

7 Likewise you husbands, live considerately with your wives, bestowing honour on the woman as the weaker sex, since you are joint heirs of the grace of life, in order that your prayers may not be hindered.

25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 that the church might be presented before him in splendour, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. 28a Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies.

It is a long way from 2 Corinthians to Ephesians, but throughout the Pauline theme remains essentially the same: the Church as bride, who must be "presented to Christ" after being "purified".

However, the theme of "purity" is rendered throughout these texts by two different, but synonymous Greek words. The expression which appears in 2 Cor 11:2, inherited from James, is not too familiar.

Yet it is precisely this term which we find in the Letter that Paul writes to Titus, advising young women to be hagnas, "chaste/pure".

We find it again in 1 Peter 3:2, where it is suggested that the "chaste" behaviour of wives can win over unbelieving husbands to Christ.

It would be paradoxical to argue that 1 Peter is inspired by 2 Corinthians, and that Titus also echoes 2 Corinthians but via the Petrine text. The more obvious genealogy would be to say that in Titus, Paul is echoing what he already said in 2 Corinthians; 1 Peter, in turn, depends on Titus.

All commentators are agreed in dating Titus and 1 Timothy as contemporary. Peter also used 1 Timothy for inspiration in his instruction on the "outward adornment" of women. But he corrects what the Pauline text lacks in what we nowadays might call feminism, by underlying the mutual debt of respect that husbands owe to their wives.

In Ephesians, Paul goes even further than Peter: it is no longer just a question of a husband behaving "wisely" in his relations with his wife, but now she has to be loved "as Christ loved the Church" (Eph 5:25) - the Church which is qualified by precisely the same adjectives that Peter uses to describe the Lamb: "without blemish or spot" (1 Pet 1:19).

The relations between 1 Peter and the Pauline corpus are the subject of much discussion, and here in this Bulletin dedicated to the Letter of James, we cannot develop our discussion of this.

However, the reader might like to implement the method which we set out earlier, on page 9: - by comparing Titus 3:4-7 with 1 Peter 1:3-5, to see how a typically Pauline text has influenced Peter.

- By comparing 1 Peter 1:18-20 with Ephesians 1:3-4 and 5:25-27, to see how, in turn, Peter has influenced Paul. The contemplation of the Lamb who was destined before the foundation of the world and made manifest at the end of time has nourished Paul’s meditation on our own destination in love before the foundation of the world.

- Or again, by studying 1 Peter 2:4-6 and Ephesians 2:20-22, to see how the Petrine theology of "the cornerstone" has been integrated into the thinking of Paul.

-There is the intriguing case of 1 Peter 2:11 and Ephesians 2:19, where Peter takes his inspiration directly from the Old Testament, whereas Paul ends up saying more or less the contrary!

All that remains now is for us to seek out with precision the date of Paul’s arrest, on the basis of the indications within the account of his voyages which are offered by Acts 20.

Some specialists prefer to argue that Festus reigned for three years, and consequently place Paul’s arrest in AD 57.

Others interpret Acts differently, so that AD 56, 55 and 54 have all been suggested as the date of Paul’s arrest. This makes it difficult to imagine what Paul must have been doing in Rome between arriving there in AD 57, 58 or 59, and his martyrdom, which probably took place during the persecution of the Christians in the years AD 64-65.

The information provided by Acts 20:6-21:16 is often overlooked, despite the fact that as long ago as the 19th century W. A. Ramsay first drew attention to it. This section of the Acts of the Apostles concerns the journey made by Paul from Philippi to Jerusalem. The author of this travelogue offers a fund of banal details on how long the sea voyages lasted, the places passed or visited, the length of time spent at each stopping place. Clearly, these details are being provided by someone who was a member of the team that made the voyage, and there is no reason not to suppose it was Luke himself.

The starting point of this journey is indicated with great precision: "we sailed away from Philippi after the Days of Unleavened Bread, and in five days we came to them at Troas, where we stayed for seven days" (Acts 20:6); "on the first day of the week, when we were gathered to break bread, Paul (...) intended to part on the morrow" (Acts 20:7,11,13).

The seven days at Troas begin toward the end of the Sunday, followed by a first night: the Saturday is the last day, followed by a seventh night (which is the beginning of the first day of the week), in the course of which Paul restores to life the young Eutychus (who fell out of a window during Paul’s sermon!) .

The sea journey, which lasted five days, ran from Wednesday to Sunday. This was notably longer than the journey described in Acts 16:11-12, where it is one day from Troas to Samothrace, and one day again from Samothrace to Neapolis, which is the port used by the citizens of Philippi situated some 15 kilometers from their city. In making the journey now in the opposite direction, Paul did not imagine that it would take far longer. He had counted on reaching Troas on Saturday at the latest, so as to be able to celebrate the breaking of the bread with the Christians of Troas on his arrival. But the length of the voyage means Paul reaches Troas on Sunday, after the celebration which has taken place the previous evening. This caused him a week’s delay, which explains why he did not want to go via Ephesus, since he wanted to arrive in Jerusalem in time for Pentecost (Acts 20:16).

This means that in the year this voyage was made, the day following the feast of Unleavened Bread was a Wednesday. This feast ends on 21st Nisan (cf. Ex 12:18), which means that the Wednesday would be the 22nd Nisan. It remains simply to establish in which years the 1st and the 22nd Nisan fell on a Wednesday.

The first day of the lunar month is fixed by the day on which the first streak of light of the new moon can be observed; this means, generally speaking, about 42 hours after the change of each moon.

The date of the new moon

AD 54 Wednesday 27 March 11 p.m.

AD 55 Monday 17 March 3 a.m.

AD 56 Friday 5 March 3 a.m.

and Saturday 3 April 7 p.m.

AD 57 Wednesday 23 March 9 p.m.

AD 58 Monday 13 March 4 a.m.

AD 59 Sunday 1 April 2 a.m.

AD 60 Thursday 20 March 6 p.m.

Friday 29 March 6 p.m.(43 hours)

Tuesday 18 March 6 p.m.(39 hours)

Saturday 6 March 6 p.m.(39 hours)

or Monday 5 April 6 p.m.(47 hours)

Friday 25 March 6 p.m.(45 hours)

Tuesday 14 March 6 p.m.(38 hours)

Monday 2 April 6 p.m.(40 hours)

Saturday 22 March 6 p.m.(42 hours)

In AD 54, the 1st Nisan fell on a Saturday; in AD 55 it fell on a Wednesday; in AD 56 on a Sunday (or perhaps a Tuesday); in AD 57 it fellon a Saturday; in AD 58 it fell on a Wednesday; in AD 59 it fell on a Tuesday; and in AD 60 it fell on a Sunday.

Which means that only the years AD 55 and AD 58 match the information given by the Acts of the Apostles.

Returning to what we saw earlier, it would be rather strange if Paul had said "Realising that for many years you have been judge over this nation (...)" if he were speaking in the year AD 55, since Felix had only been governor since AD 52. What is more, it would very surprising if Paul had been arrested in AD 55, then he would have been sent to Rome in AD 57, arriving there in AD 58: surprising, because what did he do between AD 58 and AD 65 and the presumed date of his martyrdom? Finally, if Porcius Festus governed Judea for five years between AD 57 and 62, why does Flavius Josephus have so little to say about him, given that, born in AD 37, he would have been an eye-witness to the events of this period?

Moreover, we know for certain that Paul appeared before Gallion at Corinth (Acts 18:12-17) between the spring of AD 51 and the spring of AD 52. After this, Paul stayed "many days longer" (Acts 18:18), he sailed to Ephesus (Acts 18:19), then sailed on to Cæsarea and visited the Church at Jerusalem (Acts 18:22), before sailing back to Antioch.

Let us set out the chronology of his stay at Corinth. It lasts one and a half years (Acts 18:11). The seasons for arriving and departing can only be spring and autumn, because the sea is too dangerous in winter and summer. Now, the stay at Corinth, was preceded by two sea journeys (Acts 16:11 and 17:14-15) which lasted for a full three month season (the evangelisation of Philippi, Thessalonika, Beroea and Athens); and the stay was followed by the long crossing from Corinth to Cæsarea, via Ephesus (Acts 18:18-22), which lasted more than a month.

If the evangelisation of Philippi took place at the beginning of spring, early March, Paul would not have reached Corinth until May. This would have him leaving Corinth in November, which is impossible. Consequently, the sea voyages of Acts 16:11 and 17:14-15 took place at the end of the year, and Paul left Corinth in the spring. If he left for Syria in March, he would have arrived in Corinth in September, or in October if he set out in April - but no later.

Let us propose a first hypothesis: that Paul arrived at Corinth in October AD 49, and left in April AD 51. Since we know that Gallion did not reach Greece until the spring of AD 51, Paul could not have appeared before him. Even if we push back until November, it still will not work, so the years AD 49-51 must be ruled out.

A second hypothesis: that Paul arrived at Corinth in September AD 50, and left in March AD 52. In this way he could have appeared before Gallion in either AD 51 or 52. But, in this case, it becomes impossible to place Paul’s 27 month stay at Ephesus (cf. Acts 19:8-10) between March AD 52 and winter AD 54-55. Between March AD 52 and December 54 there are only 33 months, which would leave only six months to cover the crossing from Corinth to Cæsarea (Acts 18:18-22), the visit to Jerusalem, the return to Antioch (Acts 18:22) and the subsequent journey on to Ephesus (Acts 19:1), and his stay in Macedonia.

The only solution left is that Paul was arrested in AD 58, which would give the following chronology of events:

The date of Paul’s appearance before Gallion remains uncertain. The earliest possible hypothesis gives very little time between the Council of Jerusalem in AD 49 and the establishment of the Church at Corinth:

The latest possible hypothesis would be as follows:

Paul wrote the 1st Letter to the Corinthians around Easter AD 56 (Saturday 20 March-Sunday 21 March).

James wrote his Letter the following summer. We are then at a time of year when sea journeys are easy and permit a rapid delivery of correspondence.

It is in the course of autumn AD 56 and winter AD 56-57 that Paul writes Philippians, Galatians and 2 Corinthians 10-13. He then leaves Ephesus, and goes to Macedonia, via Troas.

While in Macedonia, in either spring or summer, Paul sends his letter of reconciliation to the community at Corinth (2 Corinthians 1-9). He does not yet know that the community at Jerusalem is rather displeased with him (cf. 2 Cor 9:12-14).

However, the Letter to the Galatians reaches Jerusalem between spring and summer of AD 57. Then he arrives at Corinth around November AD 57, Paul learns that his collection for the poor may "not be acceptable to the saints" (Rom 15:31). So he writes to the Romans, with the double purpose of demonstrating to the Christians at Jerusalem that he had not betrayed his Jewish roots (Rom 9:1-5; 11:1; 11:13-14) and to witness to the Church at Rome that his teaching is in complete conformity with "standard teaching" (Rom 6:17; cf also Rom 15:14-16). The Church of Rome is already considered by Paul to be the guardian of the true faith, which is why for several months he has had "a longing" to visit Rome (Rom 1:11-12; Acts 19:21).

Paul, too, will speak of "the Israel of God" (Gal 6:16). He will rediscover in Hoseah 2:1,25, God’s promise to make "his people" out of "those who were not his people" (Rom 9:25-26). He will define the whole of Christian life as a new act of worship, a "spiritual offering" (Rom 12:1).

Peter will develop a rich theology of the People of God, who through faith have become "a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ" (1 Pet 2:5).

James is perfectly happy to admit that the Christian life is founded on a "law of liberty" (Jas 1:25; 2:12). This was the teaching of Jesus, according to the witness of the Fourth Gospel (Jn 8:31-40). But Christian liberty exists only in love.

After he received the Letter of James, Paul wrote his Letter to the Galatians, which is entirely consecrated to defending the principle of Christian liberty. In complete conformity with what Jesus taught, Paul proposes Abraham and Isaac as models of freedom in the faith (Gal 3-4). But he issues a firm reminder that Christian freedom means being enslaved to love (Gal 5:13-26). On no account can this liberty become a pretext, "an opportunity for the flesh" (Gal 5:13).

In turn, Peter will denounce the dangers of misunderstanding liberty. In his first Letter he writes: "Live as free men, yet without using your freedom as a pretext for evil; but live as servants of God" (1 Pet 2:16). In his second Letter he denounces false teachers who entice the faithful by permitting debauchery (2 Pet 2:18). This is what he writes: "They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption, for whatever overcomes a man, to that he is enslaved" (2 Pet 2:19).

When James asks the Christians of the Pauline communities to not take too lightly the responsability of becoming "teachers" (didaskales), he is warning against a certain tendency to anarchy (Jas 3:1).

It is at this period that Paul is definitively leaving the regions of Greece, Macedonia and Asia Minor that he had evangelised (Rom 15:23; Acts 20:25), and he is striving to put in place pastors who will be beyond reproach (Tit 1:5-9; 1 Tim 3:1-13; 5:17-22).

It is to these "elders of the Church" (Jas 5:14) that Peter will address his magnificent pastoral instruction: "So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ as well as a partaker in the glory that is to be revealed. Tend the flock of God that is in your charge, not by constraint but willingly, not for shameful gain but eagerly, not as domineering over those in your charge but being examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd is manifested you will obtain the unfading crown of glory" (1 Pet 5:1-4).

The dialogue between James, Peter and Paul reaches a climax of beautiful unanimity: the Church is now the People of God (1 Pet 2:9-10), whose law is liberty (1 Pet 2:16) and whom the Chief Shepherd entrusts to pastors to be "models to their flock" (1 Pet 5:3).