Favouritism

James 2:1-10 

Introduction

I love the Bible in general but the letter of James in particular. I believe that all of the Bible is relevant and applicable. But I will also admit that some books and some passages need more work for us to bridge the gap between the text and our context. But when it comes to James, you can almost just read the text and there is the application, plain as day. 

It is not that James is a better writer than Paul or any of the others, but James happens to write an extremely practical letter that reflects the needs of the church, both in his day and in our own. This passage is no different.

A question I have asked different congregations is this: If God spoke to us and told us that he would add one hundred new people to our congregation, and God would also allow us to choose the type of people who would be added, who would we want to join our church? I do not mean specifically named individuals but the kinds of people. It could be teachers, doctors, lawyers, university professors, carpenters, plumbers, you name it. You could choose the age range and the ethnic background. What kind of people would we choose? We might be tempted to choose the most affluent occupations, because that would give us the financial basis to expand ministry. We might choose people with specific leadership skills to help guide our congregation into the future. We might say that we do not have any preference, but I suspect if we looked really deep down, we would have some preferences. The truth is that some people are going to be able to add much to the church and other people are going to require a lot from the church. Those factors need to be considered. So I want you to just pick a few kinds of people that you might want to add to the list of people that God, hypothetically, was offering to add to our congregation. Now, let us consider what James has to say.

Who Do We Want

It is only natural to want to see a congregation prosper. That includes more people, a diversity of gifts, and the financial support to do ministry. I cannot criticize anyone for having those feelings. There have been numerous times that Amanda and I have visited a church while we are on vacation. Immediately after the benediction, the pastor walks directly toward us, seeing a relatively young couple, that potentially could have much to offer. I can see the expression on their face as they are about to launch into their sales pitch. That’s when I tell them that we are pastors on vacation and that we will never be back again. You can see the disappointment spread across their faith. In some case, they actually walk away instead of continuing the conversation. We were not who they had hoped we would be.

This is not something new to the church. Much has changed in 2000 years but not human nature. Try to imagine what church was like in the first century. There were no church buildings. Worship would take place either outside or in a house. Many of the churches were house churches, and these houses would not necessarily be huge. Being small, you would definitely recognize when someone new came.

Something else about about the early church was that it often attracted the poor. Yes there were some wealthy people, some educated, but the liberating message of the gospel really appealed to the poor. For some outsiders, this was a criticism of Christianity as it seemed to attract all the “wrong kind of people.” The reason for this was that in Christ, we are all equal, as God shows no partiality. God doesn’t but people do. And when a rich person arrived, despite knowing the theological truth, people would fall into the old patterns. And the old pattern that society enforced was that the rich and the poor are treated differently. It would begin with a judgment based on appearance. You did not have to look at bank statements to know who was who. And the expectation was that the rich person would be treated better. This was such a part of culture that in the second century, there were some rabbis who insisted that during court cases, that both parties dress exactly the same. Otherwise, people would tend to judge in favour of the rich person.

What James describes is that the rich person is given a place of honour to sit and the poor person gets to either stand or sit at someone’s feet. 

This is ironic in that the Scriptures are filled with warnings toward the rich and blessings toward the poor. Jesus gave teaching about how hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God, but there is no such teaching with the poor. It would be very easy to see the poor as being closer to God’s heart and yet it is so easy to fall into those old patterns and to treat the rich better.

Our Preferences

How have things changed? Have we learned enough from the Scriptures to show no partiality? My goal is not to beat up on the church. I actually think we do pretty good here and I see people actively reaching out to people who look very different from them.

But I do want to bring you back to that exercise of picking the kind of people that we would want to start attending. When we think about potential additions to the church, do we think in terms of what people would be able to offer us or what we might be able to offer people? It is not wrong to hope for people with leadership skills, ministry gifts, or financial resources. When that happens, that is very nice.

However, I believe that the goal that gospel of Jesus Christ is pointing us to is to see people beyond what they can give to us. The point is not that rich people are bad and poor people are good. The point is that seeing people through the lens of what they have to offer is the wrong lens. The problem is that these lenses are not glasses that are easily removed but are goggles that are attached very tightly to us. We regularly evaluate people to determine what value they are to us. This can come at us in some very insidious ways. For example, there is a trend of helping out homeless. But the problem is that these people video themselves doing this and post it online to get views. So in the end, they see the homeless people not as people to help but the means by which to get more views on their video channel. No most of us would never consider such a thing, but we may think about what we or our church could get out of treating someone with some extra care. 

James is warning us about being partial. Can we be impartial? As you may know, I write and speak on disabilities, especially in the context of the church. Do disabled people have some extra needs when it comes to access and inclusion? Definitely. I find that most churches are sympathetic with the needs but are hesitant to do anything about it. The reason? It comes down to return on investment. It can cost a lot, not just financially, but in terms of time and relationships to fully welcome disabled people. And churches will wonder what they get out of it? While they are probably not realizing the full ministry potential of disabled people, we should also ask if such a calculation should even be a part of our decision making. 

There was a lady at a previous church who did not like me very much. I regularly received criticism from her. One of the last messages she sent me before leaving the church was something like: “You keep focusing on children, the poor, and people with disabilities. That is no way to build a church.” In a way she was right. It is not going to infuse the church with the kinds of people that are often associated with success. But perhaps it is a way to live out the gospel.

Conclusion

Are people partial? Of course. I am very aware that if I visited a random church and wore either ripped jeans and t-shirt or my army dress uniform, I would be treated differently. I am neither rich nor poor. And the point James is making not that rich are bad and poor are good. But James is recognizing that we have a utilitarian lens through which we see people. Sometimes we are aware of our bias and sometime we are not. 

There is a story about an old saint of the church. St Lawrence, who lived in the third century, was ordered to hand over all of the wealth of the church to the Roman Emperor. The Emperor was getting all excited about the gold and silver and precious stones. When Lawrence arrived, he gestured and behind him came a great multitude of the poor, the sick, and the disabled. Lawrence told the Emperor, “The is the true treasure of the church.” 

Will we ever be perfect in how we treat people? Probably not. But James sets a high goal for us to aim at, and in our attempts we might find that we see people less for what they can do for us and more for what we can do for them.