(3.) The apostle answereth this objection, by discovering the ne- cessary relation that faith hath unto the death of Christ, the grace of God, with the nature of sanctification, excellency, use, and advan- tage of gospel holiness, and the end of it in God's appointment.
OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. S83
This he doth at large in the whole sixth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, and that with this immediate design, to show the con- sistency of justification by faith alone with the necessity of personal righteousness and holiness. The due pleading of these things would require a just and full exposition of that chapter, wherein the apostle hath comprised the chief springs and reasons of evangelical obedience. I shall only say, that those unto whom the reasons of it, and motives unto it, therein expressed, — which are all of them compliant with the doctrine of justification by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, — are not effectual unto their own personal obedience, and do not demonstrate an indispensable necessity of it, are so unacquainted with the gospel, the nature of faith, the genius and inclination of the new creature (for, let men scoff on whilst they please, " he that is in Christ Jesus is a new creature"), the constraining efficacy of the grace of God, and love of Christ, of the economy of God in the disposition of the causes and means of our salvation, as I shall never trouble myself to contend with them about these things.
Sundry other considerations I thought to have added unto the same purpose, and to have showed, — 1. That to prove the necessity of inherent righteousness and holiness, Ave make use of the argu- ments which are suggested unto us in the Scripture. 2. That we make use of all of them in the sense wherein, and unto the ends for which, they are urged therein, in perfect compliance with what we teach concerning justification. 3. That all the pretended argu- inents or motives for and unto evangelical holiness, which are incon- sistent with the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, do indeed obstruct it and evert it. 4. That the holiness which we make neces- sary unto the salvation of them that believe is of a more excellent, sublime, and heavenly nature, in its causes, essence, operations, and effects, than what is allowed or believed by the most of those by whom the doctrine of justification is opposed. 5. That the holiness and righteousness which is pleaded for by the Socinians and those that follow them, doth in nothing exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees; nor upon their principles can any man go beyond them. But whereas this discourse hath already much ex- ceeded my first intention, and that, as I said before, I have already at large treated on the doctrine of the nature and necessity of evan- gelical holiness, I shall at present omit the farther handling of these things, and acquiesce in the answers given by the apostle unto this objection.
384 ON JUSTIFICATIOX.
CHAPTER XX.
The doctrine of the apostle James concerning faith and works — ^Its agreement with that of St Paul.
The seeming difference that is between the aj)ostles Paul and James in what they teach concerning faith, works, and justification, requires our consideration of it ; for many do take advantage, from some words and expressions used by the latter, directly to oppose the doctrine fidly and plainly declared by the /orwer. But whatever is of that nature pretended, hath been so satisfactorily already answered and removed by others, as that there is no great need to treat of it again. And although I suppose that there will not be an end of contending and writing in these causes, whilst we " know but in part, and pro- phesy but in part;" yet I must say that, in my judgment, the usual solution of this appearing difficulty, — securing the doctrine of justifi- cation by faith, through the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, from any concernment or contradiction in the discourse of St James, chap. ii. 14, to the end, — hath not been in the least impeached, nor hath had any new difficulty put upon it, in some late discourses to that purpose. I should, therefore, utterly forbear to speak any thing thereof, but that I suppose it will be expected in a discourse of this nature, and do hope that I also may contribute some light unto the clearing and vindication of the truth. To this purpose it may be observed, that, — ]. It is taken for granted, on all hands, that there is no real repugnancy or contradiction between what is delivered by these two apostles; for if that were so, the writings of one of them must be pseudepistolae, or falsely ascribed unto them whose names they bear, and uncanonical, — as the authority of the Epistle of James hath been by some, both of old and of late, highly but rashly ques- tioned. Wherefore, their words are certainly capable of a just recon- ciliation. That we cannot any of ns attain thereunto, or that we do not agree therein, is from the darkness of our own minds, the weakness of our understandings, and, with too many, from the power of pre- judices.
2. It is taken also for granted, on all other occasions, tliat when there is an appearance of repugnancy or contradiction in any places of Scripture, if some, or any of them, do treat directly, designedly, and largely about the matter concerning which there is a seeming repugnancy or contradiction; and others, or any other, speak of the same things only " obiter," occasionally, transiently, in order unto other ends; the truth is to be learned, stated, and fixed from the former places : or the interpretation of those places wdiere any truth