What James goes on to say is that, in contrast to the “poor,” the rich person should boast in his humiliation. Just as the poor often signifies low status and powerlessness in society, so the rich often has the sense of high position and power in society (compare “the rich and mighty,” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

Scholars do not agree as to whether or not the rich is a Christian. Some maintain that the rich is not a Christian for the following reasons: (1) If the rich were a Christian, our author would have used the word “brother” here as in the previous clause. (2) Elsewhere in this letter (2.6-8; 5.1-6) the rich are always depicted as bad people outside the Christian community. (3) If the rich were a Christian, the humiliation would have to be understood in a literal sense, namely a loss of wealth, as the following verses appear to confirm. However, the “exaltation” that the poor Christian enjoys can only be a spiritual blessing. It is most unlikely, it is argued, that our author would use a spiritual sense (“exaltation”) and a literal sense (humiliation) together in a single sentence. (4) It would be strange for James to speak of a Christian brother “passing away” and “fading away.”

On the other hand, the main reasons for interpreting the rich as a Christian are: (1) The structure of the sentence demands that “brother,” appearing before the modifier “lowly” in verse 9, is most naturally taken as governing “the rich” in verse 10 also. (2) Since verse 10a does not have a verb, structurally the natural one to supply is “boast” of verse 9. If so, it is reasonable to assume that it will have the same sense. The train of thought of verse 10 is then “and let the rich brother boast in his humiliation.” (3) It is unlikely and strained for our author to be giving exhortation to rich non-Christians. If that were the case, what our author says here will make sense only if he gives the meaning of “boast” a forced and ironic twist.

Here we have a case where there is no complete agreement among scholars and translators, and therefore individual interpreters and translators have to make their own decisions. It is possible to remain neutral by rendering the saying more literally, such as “The lowly brother should take pride in … and the rich in…,” leaving it to the teacher or preacher to explain what it should mean here. If, however, we decide on the first interpretation, the translation will most likely come out something like Knox: “(9) Is one of the brethren in humble circumstances? Let him be proud of it; it exalts him, (10) whereas the rich man takes pride in what in truth abases him.” Notice two interesting shifts: First there is a shift from an imperative “let him be proud of” to an indicative “… takes pride in.” This is the ironic twist mentioned above. Incidentally, in Knox‘s translation the irony is also seen in the expression “in truth.” Secondly, there is a shift from “one of the brethren in humble circumstances” to “the rich man.”

If, however, we accept the second interpretation, which appears to fit the context and the tone of the letter better, then we understand that the author is simply instructing the rich Christian to take no pride in worldly possessions or position, but to humble himself before God. The only adjustment needed in translation then is to make it clear that the rich is a Christian. This can be done in various ways; for example, “the rich Christians” (Good News Translation), “the wealthy [church] member” (Revised English Bible), or “the rich brother” (Bible en français courant). This second interpretation is the more likely one, and is recommended for translators.

The question remains as to what the author means by humiliation. Some take it in a literal sense to mean that by becoming a Christian the rich person has had to suffer loss of property through persecution, or to lose business connections and therefore incomes, as the rendering “being reduced in circumstances” (Goodspeed) appears to show. Others interpret it to mean loss of social standing or position in the general community, being treated as a social outcast by the person’s former peers; for example, “low position” (New International Version). Still others, taking it as a parallel in usage but opposite in meaning to exaltation, understand it to mean “humility” in a spiritual sense, in identifying with the humbling and self-emptying Christ (compare Phil 2.8). Translations that follow this understanding usually recognize God as the one who creates the attitude of humility; for example, “when God brings them down” (Good News Translation; similarly Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, Bible en français courant), or “God has shown him his spiritual poverty” (Phillips). This interpretation seems the more likely one. Other ways to express in his humiliation may be “The rich Christian boasts only that he has been humbled [or, that God has humbled him],” or “The rich person boasts when God shows him that in his heart he is humble.” Another way of rendering this first sentence may be “But any Christian who is rich should be glad when God humbles him.” In languages where inclusive language is preferred, the subject may be changed to the plural, as Good News Translation has done: “Those Christians … they….”

Because like the flower of the grass he will pass away: what James goes on to say next is best taken not as an explanation of the meaning of humiliation but as the reason for the rich Christian to be glad or boast in humiliation. It is quite possible that James is here alluding to the proverbial saying in Isa 40.6-8, and the similar thought that appears in Psa 103.15, 16. In both passages there is a contrast between the brief life span of humankind and the permanence of God. It is idle to debate whether flower of the grass is a correct rendering of the Hebrew original that should have been translated “flower of the field.” Most likely they mean the same thing, both referring to an uncultivated flower growing in the wild. At least this would be the case in some languages. In translation something like “wild flower” (New Jerusalem Bible, Revised English Bible), or “flower of the field” (New English Bible, New American Bible), or “the flower of a weed” will do. In many languages there will be no difference between “wild” flowers or “cultivated” flowers. In such cases flower of the grass will simply be translated as “flowers”; for example, “like flowers he will fade and pass away.”

He will pass away is normally taken to refer to the rich person in the first part of the sentence, even though it is possible also for the word to be translated “it will pass away,” referring to that person’s wealth. A number of commentators and translators, however, while understanding the rich person to be a Christian, have apparently taken he as referring to rich people in general. Note the subtle shift in 1.9-10a: “The brother … the wealthy brother … the rich man” (New English Bible, Bible en français courant), “the [Christian] wealthy member … the rich man” (Revised English Bible), or “But if any of you are rich… Rich people…” (Contemporary English Version). This is possible, and in this case it is the richness of the rich that will pass away, no matter whether the rich is Christian or not. The rich person does not need to be reminded of the certainty of death, but he needs to be made aware of the passing nature of wealth. It is recommended that translators follow the interpretation that James is talking about rich Christians in general. Another way to translate this final sentence is “For the possessions of the rich person will disappear just like the flower of a wild plant.”

Quoted with permission from Loh, I-Jin and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on The Letter from James. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .