Zealot - The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth

ascendant. Imperial
     Christianity, like the empire itself, demanded an easily determinable power structure,
     one preferablyheadquartered in Rome, not Jerusalem, and linked directly to Jesus. Peter’s role as
     the first bishop of Rome and his status as the chief apostle made him the ideal figure
     upon which to base the authority of the Roman Church. The bishops who succeeded Peter
     in Rome (and who eventually became infallible popes) justified the chain of authority
     they relied upon to maintain power in an ever-expanding church by citing a passage
     in the gospel of Matthew in which Jesus tells the apostle, “I say to you that you
     shall be called Peter, and upon this rock I shall build my church” (Matthew 16:18).
     The problem with this heavily disputed verse, which most scholars reject as unhistorical,
     is that it is the only passage in the entire New Testament that designates Peter as
     head of the church. In fact, it is the only passage in any early historical document—biblical
     or otherwise—that names Peter the successor to Jesus and leader of the community he
     left behind. By contrast there are at least a dozen passages citing James as such.
     What historical records do exist about Peter’s role in early Christianity are exclusively
     about his leadership of the assembly in Rome, which, while certainly a significant
     community, was just one of many assemblies that fell under the overarching authority
     of the Jerusalem assembly: the “mother assembly.” In other words, Peter may have been
     bishop of Rome, but James was “Bishop of Bishops.”
    There is, however, a more compelling reason for James’s steady abatement in early
     Christianity, one that has less to do with his identity as Jesus’s brother or his
     relation to Peter than it does with James’s beliefs and his opposition to Paul. Some
     measure of what James stood for in the early Christian community has already been
     revealed through his actions in the book of Acts and in his theological disagreements
     with Paul. But an even more thorough understanding of James’s views can be found in
     his own often overlooked and much maligned epistle, written sometime between 80 and
     90 C.E .
    Obviously James did not himself write the epistle; he was, like his brother Jesus
     and most of the apostles, an illiterate peasant withno formal education. James’s epistle was probably written by someone from within his
     inner circle. Again, that is true of almost every book in the New Testament, including
     the gospels of Mark, Matthew, and John, as well as a good number of Paul’s letters
     (Colossians, Ephesians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus). As noted, naming
     a book after someone significant was a common way of honoring that person and reflecting
     his views. James may not have written his own letter, but it no doubt represents what
     he believed (the epistle is thought to be an edited and expanded version of a sermon
     James gave in Jerusalem just before his death in 62 C.E .). The overwhelming consensus is that the traditions contained within the epistle
     can confidently be traced to James the Just. That would make James’s epistle arguably
     one of the most important books in the New Testament. Because one sure way of uncovering
     what Jesus may have believed is to determine what his brother James believed.
    The first thing to note about James’s epistle is its passionate concern with the plight
     of the poor. This, in itself, is not surprising. The traditions all paint James as
     the champion of the destitute and dispossessed; it is how he earned his nickname,
     “the Just.” The Jerusalem assembly was founded by James upon the principle of service
     to the poor. There is even evidence to suggest that the first followers of Jesus who
     gathered under James’s leadership referred to themselves collectively as “the poor.”
    What is perhaps more surprising about James’s epistle is its bitter condemnation of
     the rich. “Come now, you wealthy ones, weep and howl for the miseries that are about
     to come upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold
     and silver have corroded, and the venom within them shall be a witness against you;
     it shall eat your flesh as though it were fire” (James 5:1–3). For James there is
     no path to salvation for the wealthy who “hoard treasures for the last days,” and
     who “live on the land in luxury and pleasure” (James 5:3, 5).