1 This epistle of St. Jacob, although rejected by the ancients, I praise, and yet consider it good, because it sets no man's doctrine at all, and drives God's law hard. But that I place my opinion on it, but without anyone's disadvantage, I consider it to be no apostle's writing, and that is my reason:
(2) First of all, that it straightly gives righteousness to works, contrary to St. Paul and all other Scriptures, and says that Abraham was justified by his works when he sacrificed his son, when St. Paul teaches Rom. 4:2. (3) On the other hand, that Abraham was justified without works, only by his faith, and proves this with Genesis, Gen. 15:6, before he sacrificed his son. Whether this epistle might be helped and a gloss found on such righteousness of works, it cannot be protected by the fact that it contains Cap. 2, 23, the saying of Moses, Gen. 15, 6 (which speaks only of Abraham's faith and not of his works, as St. Paul uses it in Rom. 4, 3), yet it refers to the works, which is why this deficiency suggests that it has no apostle's righteousness.
On the other hand, that it wants to teach Christian people, and does not even remember, in such long teaching, the suffering, the resurrection, the spirit of Christ. He mentions Christ several times, but he teaches nothing about him, but says about the common faith in God. For the
The office of a true apostle is to preach about Christ's suffering and resurrection and ministry, and to lay the foundation of the same faith, as he himself says, John 15:27: "You will bear witness of me. And in this all righteous holy books agree that they all preach and practice Christ. This is also the right test to reprove all books, when one sees whether they teach Christ or not, since all Scripture shows Christ, Rom. 3, 21, and St. Paul wants to know nothing but Christ, 1 Cor. 2, 2. What does not teach Christ is not yet apostolic, even if St. Peter or Paul taught it. Again, what Christ preaches would be apostolic if Judas, Annas, Pilate and Herod did it.
4 But this Jacobus does nothing more than drift to the law and its works, and throws one thing into the other in such a disorderly way that I think it was some good, pious man who took some of the sayings of the apostles' disciples and threw them down on paper, or is perhaps described by someone else from his sermon. He calls the law a law of freedom, when St. Paul calls it a law of bondage, wrath, death and sin, Gal. 3, 23. 24. Rom. 7, 11. 23.
5 About this he cites Cap. 5, 20. the sayings of St. Peter, 1 Petr. 4, 8.: "Love covers the
*) This preface is found in the Leipzig edition, vol. XII, p. 69 and in the Erlangen edition, vol. 63, p. 156.
Sins multitude"; item, Cap. [1) 5, 6.: "Humble yourselves under the hand of God"; item, Cap. 4, 5. St. Panli saying Gal. 5, 17.: "The spirit lusts against hatred", although St. Jacob was killed by the Herod in Jerusalem before St. Peter, so that it seems that he was long after St. Peter and Paul.
6 He wanted to hurt those who relied on faith without works, and was too weak in the matter; he wants to do it with the law that the apostles do with charms for love. Therefore I cannot put it under the right ledgers, but I will not prevent anyone from putting it and lifting it up as he pleases, because there are many good sayings in it. 2)
1) Inserted by us to prevent misunderstandings. In Walch and the Erlanger: Cap. 5, 16; in the Weimar Bible: Cap. 4, 16. 4, 16. Only in our Altenburg Bible correctly: Cap. 5, 6.
2) In the edition of 1522, this decision reads thus: Summa, he wanted to defend those who relied on faith, without works, and is the matter with spirit,
(7) But no one can deny that the epistle of St. Jude is an excerpt or copy of St. Peter's other epistle, since all the words are almost the same. He also speaks of the apostles as a disciple long after. He also tells sayings and stories that are nowhere to be found in Scripture. This also moved the old fathers to throw this epistle out of the main scripture. In addition, the apostle Jude did not come into the Greek language, but into Persian, as it is said that he did not write Greek. Therefore, although I praise it, it is an unnecessary epistle to include among the main books that are to lay the foundation of faith.
He has been too weak in mind and words, and tears up the Scriptures, and with them resists Paul and all Scripture, and wants to do it by means of proselytizing, which the apostles do by means of appeals to love. Therefore I will not have it in my Bible in the number of the right ledgers; but I will not hinder any man with it, that he may set it and lift it up as he pleaseth; for many other sayings are in it. A man is not a man in worldly matters; how then should this single one alone apply against Paul and all other Scripture?