The Problem with Partiality
James 2:1-13
Are you a fair-minded individual? Do you oppose discrimination? Chances are that most of us alive today would describe ourselves as impartial and fair in most senses. But are we really as fair as we like to think?
Suppose that today a cook from the local Chinese restaurant joined us for worship. Or just suppose that a poorly dressed man reeking of cheap wine and a strong case of body odor decided to worship with us. Would we welcome these men as readily as we might welcome a modestly dressed, clean-cut person who looks and smells a lot like us?
Better yet, let’s reverse the example and say that a wealthy businessman or famous politician arrived at our door in a chauffeur-driven limousine. What if Bill Gates were to suddenly arrive for the Sunday morning service? Would we treat these guests with the same level of courtesy with which we treat everyone else?
The truth of the matter is that we are not as impartial as we would like to believe ourselves. We have preferences, comfort zones for interacting with others. We are less likely to connect with those from outside our own circles than we are to connect with those like us. But is that the way God intends for us to be? Better yet, is there anything we can do about it?
James addresses the problem with partiality early in his epistle to the dispersed believers. He obviously sees partiality in the fellowship as a major hindrance to Christian maturity. When we examine today’s passage from a structural and grammatical perspective, these instructions regarding partiality naturally follow the instructions on pure religion at the end of chapter one. In other words, in addition to visiting widows and the fatherless and keeping oneself unspotted from the world, a believer must also resist any form of partiality.
These instructions on partiality, though, form a logical unit of study for Christians. As important as they were to the first-century believers, they are especially important to twenty-first century believers as well. If our fellowship is to experience true spiritual growth and maturity, we must apply ourselves to the removal of every hint of partiality in our midst. Let’s examine the five lessons James teaches so that we may better understand the problem with partiality.
The principle of partiality goes against the character of our faith (v.1). James begins chapter two with a distinct admonition to the believers. To paraphrase James’ words, “Brothers, being partial to different people doesn’t fit with a proper faith in Jesus.” He indicates that, owing more to Jesus than to our own merits, partiality is unworthy of the life of a believer.
It is interesting to note that the section begins with the greeting, “My brethren.” I heard this week that, of the 104 verses in the book of James, 54 are commands. This command, though, is softened with these words. James makes sure that his audience is keenly focused on the words to come by reminding them that they are not some strangers or part of a faceless crowd. The reader is a spiritual relative of the writer. This is important, especially in light of the coming admonition.
Christ’s title is also of importance to this initial statement regarding partiality. James refers to him as “our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory.” Charles B. Williams, in his translation of the New Testament, simply moves the word “glory” to an adjectival form, making it “our glorious Lord Jesus Christ.” Many writers have taken great pains to compare the concept of glory with that of the glory of God’s presence as seen in the Old Testament and at certain places in the New Testament. It is important to note that, in the King James Version, the words “Lord of” are usually in italics, indicating that they are not in the Greek text but are implied by the usage. I say all that to say this: the Lord Jesus Christ, the living glory of God, is not honored by followers who pick and choose in their relationships here on the earth. Everyone is a candidate for the Gospel, and every believer is a brother or sister in Christ.
Do you remember the achievement tests used by our schools to evaluate performance? I used to love to gloat about my scores and the fabulous “percentile” ratings I achieved. You may remember that a percentile rating represents where you fall in relation to all the other people taking the test. For example, a rating at the ninety-fifth percentile means that you did better than ninety-five percent of the people who took the test. It also means that five percent of the people who took the test did better than you. I used to always wonder how it made the people feel who scored at the seventieth percentile, or worse yet the fiftieth percentile. Somehow, just knowing that so many people were better prepared or performed better on the test than I had was disturbing. And what about the people who scored at the ninety-ninth percentile? Who in the world is in that mysterious one percent ahead of them?
Showing partiality for Christians is like being happy being at the fiftieth percentile. It represents a willingness to settle for mediocrity in faith. It comes with the full knowledge that there is a better way to conduct yourself, but it leaves you unwilling to be any better. And James says that that kind of attitude does not mesh with the kind of Savior we have in Jesus.
An example of partiality helps to correct the pattern of our faith (vv.2-4). James continues by showing the kind of partiality of which he is speaking. He contrasts the arrival of a rich man and a poor man in the assembly (synagogue) of the believers. By their words and their actions, he charges them with the aforementioned sin of double-mindedness.
Let’s take a look at the guests. The rich man wore a gold ring, apparently a sign of wealth at the time. The “goodly apparel” indicates that his robes were fashionable and clean, standing in stark contrast to the “vile raiment” on the poor man. These two men represent opposite ends of the economic spectrum, but we believers tend to overlook the rich man and focus entirely on the poor man. Remember, the treatment of the one was just as bad as the treatment of the other.
Now consider the attitude toward the two men. First, the rich man was invited to sit in a place with a likely shortage of seats. Most traditions indicate that the meeting places of the early church were sparsely furnished, with most believers either crouching on the floor or standing around the walls. That a man would be offered a seat was probably the kind of treatment reserved for elder members of the congregation. It was, quite simply, overkill in the kindness department. The poor man, on the other hand, was immediately directed to the cheap seats, literally “under my footstool.” Have you ever wondered why, if there was a shortage of seats, anyone would have a footstool? I feel quite certain that it would be justified for “health” reasons. Regardless, the attitude toward the two men represented two very different extremes in welcoming newcomers to the fellowship.
James takes the opportunity to strike at the real point in verse four, where he says, “Wouldn’t you agree this kind of partiality betrays your attempts at sincere faith?” (paraphrase mine). It is impossible for us to build a real, vital faith if we put more stock in people than we do in God. By giving this example, we are all made to think of how we have treated people at times simply in order to gain their favor or discourage them from invading our comfort zones. This kind of behavior simply will not fit with a life of faith in Christ.
The truth about partiality realigns the priorities of our faith (vv.5-7). James next delves skillfully into the truth about the rich and the poor and how they generally relate to believers. He shows the tendencies of both groups in the form of a series of rhetorical questions and leaves the reader to answer. The result is a sermon in itself from silence that challenges the audience to really stop and think about motives and how they affect our treatment of those with whom we come in contact through the church.
“Listen” or “Hearken” marks the transition to this hard-line teaching segment. I would prefer the words, “Pay attention!” The point of any or all of these words is that James is getting ready to ask some important, pointed questions. They are the kinds of things we would do well to consider thoughtfully and carefully. He adds the phrase, “my beloved brethren” this time, closing the circle of hearers to those who really had a common passion with James. These words are not just for any believer – they are for the one who is at one with the author. These are words for those who consider themselves to be on the same page as James.
It is generally true that those who are poor are more likely to be rich in faith. The fact is that they have less to distract them from their faith. That does not mean that the wealthy are incapable of faith. The existence of the church in America is living proof of that fact. We are the wealthiest nation on the earth. It stands to reason that the faith of believers in the Third World is by far greater than our own. Remember, though, that this statement is a general principle and not a law. It is possible for you and I to have a remarkable faith, but it is not generally as likely. Remember the story of the rich young ruler in Matthew 19:16-25. The fewer the distractions, the greater the faith.
If you are going to err, though, err on the side of the poor. The reason for this is that, in general, those who are wealthy are more likely to create problems for believers. James says that those who were rich were the ones oppressing believers and carrying them to court. It does indeed seem true that, even today, the wealthy are so used to having things their way that they believe that the church ought to operate according to their desires as well. James warned his readers about this under no uncertain terms.
Chuck Colson, in his book, Loving God, tells the story of Mickey Cohen, a famous gangster who supposedly made a profession of faith in Christ. His “conversion” was highly publicized in the papers and other new media. Cohen’s problem, though, was that his lifestyle actually changed little. He continued to be involved with his mafia connections and many of his underworld activities. When confronted with his need for change in his lifestyle, Cohen replied, “Couldn’t God use a Christian gangster?” He expected Christianity to adapt to his lifestyle, rather than adapt his lifestyle to Christianity.
It was also the wealthy of James’ day who were the most anti-Christian. The Romans considered the faith we hold as common to be a wild, cannibalistic sect of Judaism. They misconstrued the teachings regarding the Lord’s Supper, where Jesus told his disciples they were eating his body and drinking his blood, as implications of human sacrifice and cannibalism. It was popular to ridicule and abuse believers, especially among the wealthy. The church did not gain any real degree of respect until the conversion of emperor Constantine in A.D. 316. Until that time, the name “Christian” was synonymous with outcast, psychopath, and anything else detestable.
In asking these questions, James challenged his reader to really consider the priorities of faith in Christ. Are we to be driven by our need to pay the bills or our desire to build God’s kingdom? Personally speaking, I would rather have one poor little lady who has a vital relationship with God than a hundred fools of any rank who love themselves more than they love the Lord. Moreover, I have found by experience that most poor folks give a larger percentage of their income than their wealthy counterparts. Go figure. It makes sense to say that James knew what he was talking about.
The practice of partiality violates the laws of our faith (vv.8-11). The conflict between Law and grace has been a difficult subject for believers since the first Gentile trusted Christ. It has produced sects, divided congregations, birthed denominations, and even led to the Protestant Reformation. James shows his balanced approach to the Law when he reveals that the Law was imperfect in that, while it caused man to realize his sin, it offered no lasting way out of sin.
The concept of two types of laws, the “royal law” and the “law of liberty,” drives this passage. James teaches that the former, as noble as it seems, is not enough to motivate the kind of impartiality needed by believers. The latter, however, encompasses the first and provides the impetus needed to carry out the task.
The royal law, according to James, is “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Jesus cites this as the second greatest commandment, immediately after “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength” (Mark 12:28-31). He says that showing partiality is a violation of the royal law. When we stop to consider the breadth of loving our neighbors as we love ourselves, I am always reminded of the Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-37).
Verses ten and eleven go on to discuss the holistic nature of the Law. I read an illustration this week that compares practicing partiality to throwing a rock at a plate glass window. Even though the rock will only contact the window at one point, the entire window will shatter because of the structural failure that the impact of the rock produces. It is the same way with the Law and violating one point. As an older preacher used to say, “Sin is sin is sin.” The fact of the sin far outweighs any sense of degree or seriousness. That is why a prostitute or convicted criminal can experience the same kind of grace that a school girl or school boy who has grown up in the church experiences. In essence, the sin of partiality is not an issue of “how” as much as it is a question of “why.”
The alternative to partiality builds the perseverance of our faith. Judgment is forthcoming for all humankind. 2 Corinthians 5:10 tells us, “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ . . .” How we will stand at that judgment depends largely on the decisions we make here. James indicates this as he discusses the standard for our judgment and the needed attribute for our vindication. As we consider both, may we understand the real alternative to partiality as it prepares us for eternity.
The twelfth verse is perhaps the most encouraging of the entire passage for today. James says that we ought to live as those who will be judged according to the “law of liberty.” It is interesting to note that this same phrase also appears in 1:25. In that instance, we interpreted the “law of liberty” as the Gospel. If that holds true in this passage as well, and I believe that it does, then 2:12 tells us to live in such a way that is in accordance with the Good News of the Gospel, since we will be judged according to it. What have my efforts been to extend the Gospel? Has my conduct, my words, my actions, my attitudes, pointed people to Christ? This is the standard for the judgment of believers: what kind of kingdom building have we been up to while on earth?
Finally, James points to the need of every believer in the earth: mercy. He writes, “No mercy will be shown to the one who has never shown mercy, and mercy is the release valve for the pain of judgment” (paraphrase mine). It is essential that Christians be about the business of showing mercy. There is a distinct difference between partiality and showing mercy. Remember that mercy is not giving a person what he or she deserves in a negative sense (e.g. not giving a child the full punishment, not charging the full amount for services rendered, not demanding full satisfaction of a debt, etc.) Partiality is treating a person better or worse than he deserves for selfish reasons.
The bottom line in the issue of mercy is that James says that God’s mercy in judgment is attached somehow to our practice of mercy here. Could it be that God will take into consideration our involvement in showing mercy when it comes to His opportunity to extend mercy to us at the judgment? How, then, will you and I find ourselves when that time comes? Will we indeed be the recipients of mercy in judgment if we never make a practice of showing mercy here? It’s enough to make us stop and think.
We have seen five lessons on impartiality today. But where does the “rubber meet the road?” If you and I look into God’s Word and fail to do anything about it, we learned last week that we are doing God and ourselves a great disservice. So what do we do? May I propose a short list of applications for today’s study? Consider these:
1. Understand that anyone can practice partiality, but it takes a real commitment to living our faith to rise above the level of mediocrity.
2. Show equally warm hospitality to everyone who visits and/or joins our fellowship, regardless of their background.
3. Remember that, while anyone can have faith, it is the poor who generally are more vital.
4. Balance the royal law with the law of liberty: it’s easier to love your neighbor when you’re doing it because you love Jesus!
5. Show mercy instead of partiality. If you’re going to be kind to a person, do it according to what God has done for you, not according to what you want the person to do for you.
