James 2:1–13

The moderns have invented a much subtler and more poisonous kind of eulogy. The modern method is to take the prince or rich man, to give a credible picture of his type of personality, as that he is business-like, or a sportsman, or fond of art, or convivial, or reserved; and then enormously exaggerate the value and importance of these natural qualities. Those who praise Mr. Carnegie do not say that he is as wise as Solomon and as brave as Mars; I wish they did. It would be the next most honest thing to giving their real reason for praising him, which is simply that he has money.

The truth of the matter is really quite simple. An aristocracy is a secret society; and this is especially so when, as in the modern world, it is practically a plutocracy. The one idea of a secret society is to change the password. Lady Grove falls naturally into a pure perversity because she feels subconsciously that the people of England can be more effectively kept at a distance by a perpetual torrent of new tests than by the persistence of a few old ones. She knows that in the educated "middle class" there is an idea that it is vulgar to say port wine; therefore she reverses the idea—she says that the man who would say "port" is a man who would say, "How is your wife?" She says it because she knows both these remarks to be quite obvious and reasonable.

What does it matter if you think highly of yourself, when someone else despises you? Are we not all one body, both great and small? Therefore if in principle we are all one and members of each other, why do you mindlessly exalt yourself? Why do you bring shame on your brother? For just as he is a part of you, so you too are a part of him.

My brothers, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with bias to individuals. "with bias to individuals." For he who does something with respect to individuals fills himself with many blemishes and much reproach, afflicting his neighbor with disgrace, and also himself before him: for the treatment of a companion transmits what is done even to oneself.

Whoever does anything with partiality brings great disgrace upon himself as one who does not respect his fellow and, even before his fellow, himself, because the treatment of one like oneself is also directed back to the one who acts.

Far from me is the notion that in your tabernacle, Lord, the rich should be more highly regarded than the poor, or the noble than the less well-born. You have chosen the weak things of this world to put the strong to shame, and you have chosen things which are dishonorable, despised and of no account, in order to bring to nothing the things which are.

For if there comes into your assembly a man with a gold ring, in fine clothing, and there also comes in a poor man in shabby clothing, and you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, "You sit here in a good place," while you say to the poor man, "You stand over there," or "Sit down at my feet." In this exposition of the sentence let us use the words of blessed Augustine. "If," he says, "we refer this difference of sitting and standing to ecclesiastical honors, it must not be thought a small sin to have the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ of glory with partiality. For who can tolerate that a rich man should be chosen to the seat of honor in the Church, disregarding a poorer but more learned and holier man? But if he speaks of everyday seating arrangements, who sins here (if indeed he sins) except when he judges internally within himself that the other seems better to him to the degree that he is richer?"

What James says here applies not just to rings but to any sign of wealth, for the ring is meant to stand for a treasure house of riches.

It seems that among the Jews it was especially customary to wear rings. But at this point someone may perhaps say: if James is a teacher of the covenant of Christ, then why does he not put an end to what belongs to the law but still elevates it, accepting those who remain in the piety of the law and not reproaching them? To such a person we answer that at this time James converses with them more closely and condescends to their weakness, so that by immediately abolishing the law he would not cause them to turn away from him on account of the novelty of his teaching. But he conducts matters with sound deliberation, yielding, insofar as it was harmless to him, to the rites of the law within the New Covenant. For how did the observance of the Sabbath or fasting and abstinence from certain foods turn him away from faith in Christ? Through this concession, having captured their attention for his own words, he gradually persuades them to depart from the rites of the law as useless and leading to bondage, not to the freedom given in Christ.

There is no difference between rich and poor in Christ. Pay no attention to the outward appearance, but look for the inner faith instead.

Thus, wisely making use of small concessions, he presented what was fitting for Christians precisely when they were listening to his words without hindrance.

Who could bear to see a rich man chosen to occupy a seat of honor in the church when a more learned and holier man is passed over because he is poor? Is it not a sin to judge by appearances that a rich man is a better man?

Do you not judge among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? It follows:

Now this is exactly what is present in cases of police investigation such as the one narrated above. There enters into such things a great national sin, a far greater sin than drink--the habit of respecting a gentleman. Snobbishness has, like drink, a kind of grand poetry. And snobbishness has this peculiar and devilish quality of evil, that it is rampant among very kindly people, with open hearts and houses. But it is our great English vice; to be watched more fiercely than small-pox. If a man wished to hear the worst and wickedest thing in England summed up in casual English words, he would not find it in any foul oaths or ribald quarrelling. He would find it in the fact that the best kind of working man, when he wishes to praise any one, calls him "a gentleman." It never occurs to him that he might as well call him "a marquis," or "a privy councillor"--that he is simply naming a rank or class, not a phrase for a good man. And this perennial temptation to a shameful admiration, must, and, I think, does, constantly come in and distort and poison our police methods.

In this case we must be logical and exact; for we have to keep watch upon ourselves. The power of wealth, and that power at its vilest, is increasing in the modern world. A very good and just people, without this temptation, might not need, perhaps, to make clear rules and systems to guard themselves against the power of our great financiers. But that is because a very just people would have shot them long ago, from mere native good feeling.

have you not shown partiality among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? "have you not shown partiality." The conjunction, "And", abounds, that is, you have corrupted the power of judging which was in you, making no inquiry as to whether he is to be honored, the poor man who is upright and industrious, or the rich man who is lazy: but without judgment and with respect to persons, you honored the one indeed because of his riches, but you held the other in contempt because of his poverty. "among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?" That is, unjust judges, affected by jealousy out of respect for persons. In this place, the conjunction καὶ abounds, that is, "and", as has been said, from the use of the former phrase. For since this discourse is a response to what has gone before, the conjunction is unnecessary. For the sentence should be arranged thus: For if a man wearing a gold ring, dressed in splendid clothing, enters your assembly, while a poor man in filthy clothing also enters, etc., you have not judged among yourselves and have become judges of evil thoughts: that is, corrupting the power of judging, you have chosen evil thoughts, honoring the one indeed, but holding the other in contempt: although yet the nature was the same in both.

The conjunction "and" is placed here according to the custom of the ancient manner of expression, for here is a continuation of what was said above, which is why the conjunction "and" is superfluous. The flow of speech is this: "If there should come into your assembly" and so on, then "have you not shown partiality among yourselves" — this is the second part of the sentence, which is why the meaning of the speech should be: since you did not judge as you ought, you became judges with evil thoughts. "Have you not shown partiality," that is, you corrupted your judgment, not having made any prior investigation into whether the poor man is diligent or the rich man is lazy. But your lack of discernment led you to partiality, causing you to praise one as rich and despise another as poor.

"And become judges with evil thoughts," that is, you became unjust judges, having succumbed to wickedness through partiality.

It is by choosing the poor that God makes them rich in faith, just as he makes them heirs of the kingdom. It is rightly said that he chose this faith in them, since it was in order to bring it about that he chose them.

Listen, my beloved brothers. He says, pay closer attention, because those who are richer in the world are not necessarily better in the divine judgment.

Has not God chosen the poor of this world, rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he promised to those who love him? He calls the poor, humble, and those who, through contempt of visible things, but faith in invisible riches, are despicable to this world. For such the Lord Jesus Christ has chosen by saying: Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. He has chosen such when he created poor parents for himself, whose service nourished him coming into the world. But he has made them illustrious and noble by the expectation of the future kingdom.

Likewise, on that passage of James: Has not God chosen the poor; the Gloss says: "He chose poor parents, by whose service He would be raised"; but the destitution of Christ's parents was very great, according to that passage of Luke 2: She wrapped Him in swaddling clothes and laid Him in a manger: therefore Christ loved poverty not only in Himself, but also in others.

This mere belief in bodily humanitarianism is not sentimental; it is simply snobbish. For if comfort gives men virtue, the comfortable classes ought to be virtuous—which is absurd.

But there were in the play two great human ideas which the mediaeval mind never lost its grip on, through the heaviest nightmares of its dissolution. They were the two great jokes of mediaevalism, as they are the two eternal jokes of mankind. Wherever those two jokes exist there is a little health and hope; wherever they are absent, pride and insanity are present. The first is the idea that the poor man ought to get the better of the rich man. The other is the idea that the husband is afraid of the wife.

I have heard that there is a place under the knee which, when struck, should produce a sort of jump; and that if you do not jump, you are mad. I am sure that there are some such places in the soul. When the human spirit does not jump with joy at either of those two old jokes, the human spirit must be struck with incurable paralysis. There is hope for people who have gone down into the hells of greed and economic oppression (at least, I hope there is, for we are such a people ourselves), but there is no hope for a people that does not exult in the abstract idea of the peasant scoring off the prince. There is hope for the idle and the adulterous, for the men that desert their wives and the men that beat their wives. But there is no hope for men who do not boast that their wives bully them.

Some people say that this is meant to be a comfort to the poor whohave been thrown out of the houses of the rich or who dwell in inferior accommodations. Even if they are poor in material things, they may be rich in faith.

Listen, my beloved brothers: has not God chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He has promised to those who love Him? Since poverty is a serious matter for many, when James said, "the poor of this world," he immediately added, "rich." But in what way are they rich? In faith and concerning faith. For so it is. Indeed, when the poor are not distracted by worldly things, once they come to faith, they become more diligent and more devoted to labor than the rich. Therefore, the Lord also chose such disciples, whom he declared to be heirs of the kingdom.

The apostle's testimony is a very serious matter. Do the nobility think that they are immune from his strictures, because he referred only to the rich and not to the noble as well? But there is so great an overlap between these two groups in practice that it makes little difference which one of them the apostle was speaking about. His words certainly apply to both.

Since for many it is hard even to hear about poverty, having said "the poor of this world," he immediately added: "rich." Rich in what? In faith. For the undisturbed peace of the poor, when they come to faith, makes them mightier than the rich. Therefore the Lord also chose such men as His disciples and showed them to be heirs of the Kingdom.

But you have dishonored the poor. For the one to whom it was said: You stand there, when it was said to the one with the gold ring: You sit here well.

Do not the rich oppress you by power, and drag you into courts? Do they not blaspheme the honorable name which was invoked upon you? Here he shows more clearly who are the rich, concerning whose humiliation and destruction he previously disputed. Truly, those who place their riches before Christ, entirely alien to his faith, nonetheless oppress those who believe by power, dragging them into the courts of the powerful, and blaspheming the name of Christ, which is above every name. This is shown quite clearly in the Acts of the Apostles and in the Epistles of Paul the Apostle, that many leaders among the Gentiles, especially among the Jews, did this in the times of the apostles.

The power of wealth, and that power at its vilest, is increasing in the modern world. A very good and just people, without this temptation, might not need, perhaps, to make clear rules and systems to guard themselves against the power of our great financiers. But that is because a very just people would have shot them long ago, from mere native good feeling.

Bear their greed as patiently as you can! Those people destroy themselves, not you. For while they rob you of your money, they strip themselves of God's favor and help. For the one who bases his life on greed and gathers all the wealth of the world around him is in fact the poorest of all.

This refers to the rulers of the Jews, who enriched themselves on tithes, and also to the leaders of the Romans, who were idolaters at that time.

This is the name of the God of Israel, which was invoked on your behalf in Egypt, as well as in your baptism.

Do they not blaspheme that good name by which you are called? "They blaspheme the good name." A good name is a new name according to the prophet saying: "To those who serve me, a new name will be called, which will be blessed over all the face of the earth." (Isa. 62:2)

The new name — according to the words of the prophet: "Those who serve Me shall be called by a new name, which shall be blessed on the earth, for they shall bless the true God" ("His servants He shall call by another name; he who blesses himself in the earth shall bless himself in the God of truth") (Isa. 65:15–16).

Just as you want to be treated justly and properly by your neighbor, so you must behave toward him as you would towards your kinsman and child of God. What our Savior said about this is absolutely right: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. For this is the law and the prophets."

If, however, you fulfill the royal law according to the Scriptures: You shall love your neighbor as yourself, you do well. But if you show partiality, you commit sin, being convicted by the law as transgressors. See how he calls them transgressors, because it is said to the rich: Sit here, and to the poor: Stand there. Thus, lest they think it a contemptible sin to transgress the law in this one matter, he added:

"Love your neighbor" means three different things. The first is corporal, that is, the literal sense of the words. The second is spiritual, according to which we love those close to us even though we may be absent from them. The third is contemplative, by which love itself is beheld. But we have to understand that one leads to another. The corporal inspires us to go on to the spiritual, and that in turn lifts us up to the contemplative. The spiritual may sometimes regress to the merely corporal, but the contemplative never fails us. The corporal and spiritual forms of love are common to human beings and have analogies in animals, but the contemplative is reserved for humans alone.

If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you do well. "According to Scripture." Deuteronomy says.

It is a sin to show any class distinction among persons, for the law says: "You shall not be partial in judgment, you shall hear the small and the great alike." Jesus confirmed this when he said: "Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment."

To fail in one point is to lack perfect love, for this is the source of all good deeds. If something in the head is not right, the rest of the body suffers as a result. The entire purpose and plan of God is designed to lead to perfect love. That is the meaning of the commandments such as "Do not commit adultery," "Do not kill" and so on.

Is it possible that the person who has discriminated between rich and poor is guilty of murder, adultery and sacrilege? That does indeed seem to be the conclusion which James is drawing. Such a man is guilty of every crime, because by offending in one point he has become guilty of them all.

Whoever shall keep the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all. For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not kill." Now if you do not commit adultery but you kill, you have become a transgressor of the law. Because of what was said: Convicted by the law as transgressors. Therefore, it seems accordingly (unless it can be otherwise understood) that he who says to the rich man: Sit here, and to the poor man: Stand there, giving more honor to this one than to that one, should be judged guilty of all crimes. For he who offends in one is made guilty of all. Hence, it must be questioned, how is he guilty of all if he has offended in one who has kept the whole law? Or perhaps because the fullness of the law is love, by which God and neighbor are loved, upon which commandments of love the whole law and the prophets depend, he rightly becomes guilty of all who acts against that in which all things hang? No one sins except by acting against it. Because "You shall not commit adultery," "You shall not kill," "You shall not steal," "You shall not covet," and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore, love is the fulfillment of the law (Rom. XIII). Hence, he becomes guilty of all by doing against that in which all things hang. Why then are not all sins said to be equal? Or perhaps because he acts more against charity who sins more gravely, and less who sins lightly? Yet even if he offends in one, he is guilty of all, because he acts against that in which all things hang.

"Whoever shall keep the whole law, yet offend in one point, is become guilty of all": not that for one transgression he is punished with as much punishment of sense as for the transgression of all; but he will be punished with as much punishment of loss, yet not as severely for one as for all. Therefore, if anyone wishes to attain to true life, it is necessary that he have regard to all the commandments of God in heart, mouth, and deed.

You must always fear God, because he who "keeps the whole law but offends in one point has become guilty of all." And in Deuteronomy it is said: "And now, Israel, what does the Lord your God ask of you, except that you fear him and keep all his commandments and walk in his ways?" And Solomon says: "Fear God and observe his commandments: this is the whole man," that is, the perfect man. Therefore if you wish to be perfect, fear God.

What does it mean to offend in one point and lose all, except to have fallen from the precept of love and thereby to have offended in all the other commandments? Without love none of our virtues amounts to anything at all.

Surely, when we are clothed with a garment, we are surrounded on every side, and so he is "clothed with righteousness as with a garment," who defends himself on every side with good practice, and leaves no part of his conduct naked to sin; for he that is just in some deeds and unjust in others, it is as if he covered over this side, and exposed that one naked; nor are those henceforth good deeds, which are defiled by other evil deeds springing up.

And whosoever shall keep the whole Law, but offends in one: is made guilty of all. For he that said, You shall not commit adultery, said also, You shall not kill. And if you do not commit adultery, but shall kill: you are made a transgressor of the Law. "but offends in one." James said this concerning love, for the sake of which he also discussed all the preceding discourse at greater length for the sake of proof. But he said, "You shall not commit adultery, you shall not kill," for example. Consider, however, that the examples are from the law, insofar as it contributed to love. For he who loves his neighbor perfectly will neither commit adultery nor kill. For these are his who is affected with a hostile spirit towards his neighbor. Since it would not be said in this way, no one among men would be saved, since no one keeps the integrity of the commandments in all things. For he who has preserved chastity for the sake of the word has sometimes been overcome by anger; and he who is adorned with almsgiving has perhaps been obscured by envy. Therefore, it is not said of anyone who has no defect in virtues, but of love, that it should not be attained with defect due to respect for persons, but wholly. However, we also speak of these virtues. For one who has not perfectly adhered to modest or just matters, for example, but has used them with a deficiency, here, staggering in dealing with virtues, has been corrupted in the whole body of virtue. The law must therefore be understood as dealing with love, which is its chief aim. But the law of freedom says that it is without regard to persons: this is the law of Christ. For he who respects persons is not free, but a slave: "For by whom anyone is overcome, to him he is also enslaved." (2 Peter 2:19)

Whoever sins in one thing becomes guilty of all, because he does not have perfect love, for love is the head of all that is good, and when the head is absent, the entire remaining body amounts to nothing. That he speaks about this is evident from the preceding instruction. The commandments "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder" are indicated as examples. Note that they too are taken from the law relating to the perfection of love, for whoever loves his neighbor will neither commit adultery nor murder, because such deeds are characteristic of an enemy. If this were not so, no one among men would survive, because no one keeps all the commandments; but whoever preserved purity is sometimes overcome by anger, and whoever gives alms not infrequently has envy. Therefore he speaks not of there being no deficiency at all in the virtues, but of love — that it must not be practiced with deficiency, with partiality, but wholly. The same may be said of the other virtues as well. Whoever imperfectly holds to chastity or justice but omits something, being lame in fulfillment, harms the entire work of virtue.

Why does James choose these two commandments as his examples? Because they are the ones which deal most closely with loving and with hating one's neighbors.

Thus speak, and thus act, as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. The law of liberty is the law of charity, of which it is said: If, however, you fulfill the royal law according to the Scriptures: You shall love your neighbor as yourself, you do well. Therefore, he says, speak thus, and act thus, that by loving your neighbors, you may deserve to be loved by God, and by showing mercy to your neighbors, you may expect mercy in the divine judgment. Otherwise, as the law of servitude is what was given through Moses, so the law of liberty is the grace of the Gospel which was given through Jesus Christ, as the Apostle attests, who says: For you have not received the spirit of slavery again to fear, but you have received the spirit of adoption of sons, in which we cry, Abba, Father (Hebr. VII). And again, where there is the Spirit of the Lord, there is liberty (II Cor. III). Therefore, if you speak, he says, and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. This is indeed to begin being judged. For it is more severe to be judged by the law of Moses than by the natural law. Likewise, it is more severe for those who despise the known grace of the Gospel than those who despise the edicts of the Mosaic law. For to whom much is given, much will be required from him. And to whom much has been entrusted, more will be asked from him (Luke XII). Hence, the Apostle also says: For if the word spoken by angels was confirmed, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward, how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? Which at the beginning was spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard him (Hebr. II). And again: If anyone sets aside the law of Moses, he dies without compassion on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severe do you think the punishment will be deserved by the one who has trampled the Son of God, and has considered the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified to be defiled, and has insulted the Spirit of grace (Hebr. X)? But both meanings regard one end, namely that responding to divine grace with just works, we should be kind to one another, merciful, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ forgave us.

By the New Testament law everyone is born again, free and equal with one another.

Thus, by "the whole law" one should understand the law of love, about which the apostle speaks preeminently, and he calls impartiality "the law of liberty," for one who acts with partiality is not free but a slave, because: "by whom a person is overcome, by him also he is brought into bondage" (2 Pet. 2:19).

He who judges without mercy will be judged without mercy. And in this sense only is the "same measure" to be understood, that the mercy which he did not show will not be shown to him, and that the judgment which he makes will be eternal, even though the thing judged cannot be eternal.

For judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy. Without mercy shall be judged the one who, though able to show mercy, did not do so before being judged. While this is rightly thought of all the unmerciful, it is certainly understood that the greater the mercy someone has received from the Lord, the more unjustly they have denied mercy to a needy neighbor and thereby will more justly suffer the penalties for their wickedness. Hence the Lord wisely warns: Do not judge, so that you may not be judged; do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Give, and it will be given to you (Luke 6). Therefore, judgment without mercy will be for the one who has shown no mercy.

But mercy exalts over judgment. For as the one condemned in God's judgment will grieve who did not show mercy, so the one who did will rejoice and exult when rewarded. Alternatively: Mercy exalts over judgment. It is not said: Mercy overcomes judgment. For it is not opposed to judgment but exalts over it, because many are gathered through mercy, but those who have shown mercy. For blessed are the merciful, since God will have mercy on them (Matthew 5). Again, Mercy exalts over judgment, that is, mercy is placed above judgment. In which, if a work of mercy is found, even if there is reason for punishment in judgment, like a wave of mercy, the fire of sin is extinguished.

In the second petition, the consummation of human salvation is sought, which is not obtained except through the gift of piety: "Judgment without mercy shall be done to him who has not shown mercy." This gift is touched upon when he says: "Thy kingdom come."

God will never cut us off by his severe judgment. Rather, "mercy triumphs over judgment" and with his accustomed faithfulness, he will unite us in the eternal blessedness of his storehouse, if that is agreeable to him.

Just as oil enables athletes to escape the hands of their opponents, so mercy prepares those who practice it to avoid and escape the demons.

If you are merciful and lenient to the poor in your judgment, you will have nothing to fear from the judgment of God.

Mercy is the highest art and the shield of those who practice it. It is the friend of God, standing always next to him and freely blessing whatever he wishes. It must not be despised by us. For in its purity it grants great liberty to those who respond to it in kind. It must be shown to those who have quarreled with us, as well as to those who have sinned against us, so great is its power. It breaks chains, dispels darkness, extinguishes fire, kills the worm and takes away the gnashing of teeth. By it the gates of heaven open with the greatest of ease. In short, mercy is a queen which makes men like God.

For judgment without mercy to him that has not done mercy. And mercy exalts itself above judgment. "For judgment without mercy to him that has not done mercy." If we have forgiven our neighbors the sins they have committed against us, and have made the needy among us sharers in our alms, then God's mercy will deliver us from judgment. God will also welcome the merciful. Indeed, it is a remarkable deed, just as on the other hand, a serious condemnation will be for those who have not been well and piously disposed towards the people of their own class. For those who remain unmoved by any feeling of sympathy towards their neighbors who have wronged them, the condemnation of the evil servant will embrace them, together with the retribution that the Lord's Prayer designates. For there we ask God to forgive us as we forgive those who have sinned against us. And those who are hard-hearted, moved by no feeling of mercy towards those who lack bodily comfort, will also receive judgment without mercy according to the present discourse. "mercy exalts itself above judgment." For the merciful shall obtain mercy, according to the judgment of the Lord. (Matt. 5:7) Furthermore, if in an idolater's mercy towards the poor he can erase sins, as we learned in Daniel (Dan. 4:24), what would he not do in faithful men? But this mercy seems to me to accomplish something like this oil from the manna trees, anointed on athletes. For this enables them to escape, lest they be held by their adversaries: and so also in the universal judgment our mercy towards the needy will enable them to escape the attacks and dangers which will threaten us from the demons who accuse us. In another way. "judgment without mercy." The cause of restitution is against those who have shown pride and arrogance with great cruelty towards the lower classes with respect to persons. Therefore, it softens their cruelty and hardness, with this terrifying sentence, as if it were saying: The law commands you to love your neighbor as yourself: just as no one regards a person with respect to themselves (for that would be insane), so neither should you regard a person. But if, out of arrogance and hardness, you deviate towards respect for persons, fear that in some way you too might receive similar treatment from a just judge, and exclude from yourself that mercy: for judgment without mercy, etc. "And mercy exalts itself above judgment." That is, it conquers, subdues, dulls, or blunts.

If we have forgiven our neighbors the sins they committed against us and from our possessions share a portion with the poor, then the mercy of God will also receive us when He judges our deeds. The accomplishment of this is important. On the contrary, severe condemnation awaits those who did not show goodwill toward their fellows. Those who did not have pity on their neighbors who sinned against them will be overtaken by the condemnation of the wicked servant (Matt. 18:32–35). With a recompense according to the prayer in which we ask God to forgive us "as we forgive" those who sin against us (Matt. 6:12), and those who are merciless or cruel to those in need of bodily help will meet judgment without mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment, for the merciful, according to the saying of the Lord, "shall obtain mercy" (Matt. 5:7).

Or alternatively: "mercy toward the poor" could procure pardon even for idolaters, as we hear from the prophet (Dan. 4:27). What then will it not procure for believing people? It seems to me that the action of mercy is similar to what oil produces for those contending in the arena. Wrestlers, anointed with oil, easily slip away from being seized by their opponents. So too our mercy toward the poor will give us at the judgment the ability to escape the attacks of the demons.