In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

161 The Catholic Epistles (CE) are often treated as what is left after the really important stuff: the gospels, Acts, and the Epistles of Paul. What is left over includes the seven CE. From our earliest knowledge of them, that is their number and that is what they were called collectively. They are often referred to as general Epistles, taking “Catholic” to mean that they are not specifically addressed. But that is not true of 3 John. What is left over also includes Hebrews and Revelation. Some modern treatments confirm that this is a ragbag collection by treating one or both of these within the general Epistles, for example, gerhard Krodel’s (editor) Proclamation Commentary on The General Letters: Hebrews, James, 1–2 Peter, Jude, 1–2–3 John.1 There are two aberrations here: the inclusion of Hebrews in the collection , and the placing of Jude before the Johannine Epistles. The location of James as first of the CE, is first noted by Eusebius (ca. 320 ce).2 He mentions by number the seven CE, but does not specify the order of the remaining six epistles, of which he names only Jude. The first evidence of the complete order of the CE is in the thirty-ninth Paschal Letter of Athanasius in 367 ce. He lists the Epistles in the order known to us, which may be the order known to Eusebius. Krodel’s editorial arrangement suggests Chapter 9 JAMES AS THE FIRST CATHOLIC EPISTLE John Painter 162 JOHN PAINTER that there is nothing special about what is in this collection or the order in which the books appear. It is unlikely to be a coincidence that the first and final books in the collection are attributed to brothers of the Lord. The principle of ordering the Pauline Epistles appears to be from longer to shorter. This is not true of the CE. James (1,749 words) is slightly longer than 1 Peter (1,678 words), but 1 John (2,137 words) is longer than either of them, and Jude is longer than either 2 or 3 John. It seems that 1, 2, and 3 John and 1 and 2 Peter are treated as subcollections, and 1 and 2 Peter together are longer than 1, 2, and 3 John. Each of these subcollections is ordered from the longer to the shorter. But why is James placed before them? It is likely that the order of the first six epistles was determined by the reference to James, Cephas (Peter), and John, the pillar apostles named in galatians 2:9. The intent seems to have been to have a collection bounded by writings attributed to brothers of the Lord. The first was attributed to the first of the three pillar apostles, leader of the Jerusalem Church in succession to Jesus and known as James the Righteous. The status of the pillar apostles reinforces the authority of the collection as the Jerusalem Epistles alongside the Pauline Epistles. Contrary to the order of the English Bible, in almost all greek manuscripts of the New Testament, the catecheses of Cyril of Jerusalem (348 ce), and the fifty-ninth canon of the Council of Laodicea (360 ce), the CE follow Acts and come before the Epistles of Paul. This is the order of the earliest full canonical list of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament (Athanasius’ thirty-ninth Paschal Letter of 367 ce). A collection issuing from the Jerusalem pillars is placed alongside and before the Letters of Paul, suggesting that Paul’s letters should be understood on the basis of the Jerusalem corpus. Tensions between James and Paul are evident within the New Testament, especially in galatians 2 and Acts. James 1:22-25 and especially 2:14-26 are intelligible in this context. The early priority of the CE is recognition of the status of their four authors, and especially of the preeminence of James. Canonically, James is the first of the CE, though not necessarily the first of the seven to be written. Reference to them as CE reflects their struggle to emerge from the contested writings (thus Clement) and to be accepted by the Catholic Church. That four of the seven do not have specific local addressees may have suggested the description of general Epistles, addressed to the church at large. But this understanding is problematic . From a canonical perspective, all Scriptures speak to the church at large without ignoring their original context. Two of the longer epistles in...

Share