In taining of which, faith is declared necessary. my conception therefore, the faith by which we are justified ought to be defined with a becoming regard to the definition which I have given of the word justification; and thus be held to signify the christian's ' claim of right to that inheritance, purchased by the merits, active as well as passive, of the Lord Jesus Christ, offered and conveyed to him (the christian) as far as his Saviour's right of conveyance extends, and accepted by him in virtue only of his Saviour's right; with which right every faithful disciple is freely and graciously invested.' We now come to examine and define the third term connected with our present subject, viz. the term WORKS,' about which one should think, that there needed be but little difficulty. Yet, strange to tell, expositors do differ most widely regarding it. By the works which St Paul excludes, are to to be understood, say some, the works of the ceremonial law,' which law is abrogated, and therefore such works cannot justify. Yet certain it is, that the Greek word 'Sinapata,' which our translators, in one place, render ceremonies', does radically imply justification, which made the pious Mr Hervey to say, with great semblance of truth, that' by the moral law he was condemned, but by the ceremonial law, he was justified.' Others therefore, with more propriety, extend St Paul's exclusion to Ꮓ Ꮓ * See marginal rendering of Heb. ix. 1. the gos the whole code of the Mosaic law, moral as well as ceremonial, in contradistinction to the law of the pel; which, according to them, is what St James means to comprehend in his system of inclusion: and thus we are told are the two apostles fairly. reconciled. But, in my opinion, such a mode of reconciliation is not fairly deducible from the lan guage of St James. He speaks not of Good WORKS,' although the epithet good be for the most part (yet erroneously) added to these works, which this apostle connects with justification. Of what character, I would ask, were the two instances of justification by works, which St James particularizes? Surely not of the character or denomination of 'GOOD works,' in a moral sense, or GOOD' according to any law, whether of nature, or of Moses, or of Christ? A man's preparing to cut the throat of an only son', and a woman's deliberately telling a falsehood to deceive the messengers of her earthly sovereign, and ensure the more effectually her country's ruin, are certainly acts which it is impossible to reconcile with that moral righteousness which Socrates taught, with those laws which Moses delivered, or with any precept which our Lord Jesus Christ either uttered or sanctioned. Like sun dry "Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had "offered up Isaac his son upon the altar?" St James ii. 21. 2" Was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had re"ceived the messengers, and sent them out another way?" St James ii. 25. There came two men unto me," &c.-" but when it was "dark, the men went out," &c. Joshua ii. 2—6. 66 dry others recorded in scripture', these acts admit of no other satisfactory exposition, but that which, with becoming humility of mind, regards them as peculiar, and, as it were, pro re nata, exemplifications of a particular and temporary impulse of faith, with a view to some particular purpose of divine wisdom; but, on no account whatever, to be admitted as precedents for general or partial adoption, unless when men are placed in the same circumstances, and can shew that they act under the same authority. For my own part, in every case which the scripture exhibits, of apparent deviation from the generally received system of moral rectitude, I implicitly adopt the direction given by the venerable christian Father Irenæus- whatever the scripture ' does not reprove, but simply narrate, we ought 'not to be accusers,' (and I would add, * nor imita'tors'), but, typum quærere, it is our duty to search ⚫ for a type. 1 Rebecca's persuading a son to deceive a father, and outwit a brother-Gen. xxvii. and Jael's treachery to Sisera-Judges iv. The one in part explained, ver. 41. 42. the other accounted for, Judges iv. 9. and ch. v. 24. 2 Oper. Irenæi, lib. iv. c. 50. In the case of Rahab, this pious Father says, in his 37th chapter, Rahab the harlot confessing herself to be a heathen, guilty of all sins, yet entertained the spies who went out to spy the whole earth, and hid them with her, viz. the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.' And immediately after, commenting on the 'thread of scarlet,' (Josh. ii. 18. 21.) he calls it the sign of faith; which we find referred to in that description contained in Canticles iv. 3. 'thy Having maturely weighed the arguments above adduced, I leave it for the reader to say, whether the two cases pointed at by both apostles, and denominated WORKS' by the one, and FAITH' by the other, have any the least affinity, with what is termed moral righteousness, or GOOD WORKS.' Nay, from the instances pitched upon, instances so extraordinary in themselves, and so contrary to the common feelings of parental affection, and of that * amor patria,' to which philosophy would have all our studies, as well as all our actions directed, I am inclined to think, that the apostle St James meant, in his epistle general, to denude GOOD WORKS,' in the common acceptation of the term, of all merit in accomplishing man's justification. Indeed to think otherwise is to derogate from the apostle's character of an inspired writer; since to declare, that a man is justified by WORKs, meaning GOOD WORKS,' and to exemplify the declaration, by adducing instances morally EVIL, would be to detract from the express assurance of our blessed Lord himself howbeit, when he, the spirit of truth, is come,' (he was come long before St James wrote his epistle), he will guide you into all truth'. One thing is certain, and supported as I thy lips are like a thread of scarlet, viz. the organ of the church's con*fession. See Rom x. 10. Heb. xiii. 15. To the history of Rahab, I would also refer what St Paul says, Heb. xiii. 2. about entertaining • angels unawares,' which, I hesitate not to say, is a most ungrammatical translation. 1 St John xvi. 13. I am by some of our ablest reformers, and indeed by the highest possible authority, I am bold to affirm, that it is the good man, that maketh the good works, not the good works that make the good man,' just as it is the good ground which produceth the hundred fold return, not the hundred fold return which produceth the good ground'. Nay more, we must wholly reverse our Saviour's figurative reasoning on the tree and its fruit, before we can arrive at any conclusion other than this-that we must be justified, even in the moral sense of the term, or made righteous, before we can really perform good works, that is, works acceptable unto God through Jesus Christ; and consequently, that good works can have no concern prior to justification, and no merit in effecting the justification of a sinner. This comprehends the faith of the united churches of England, Ireland, and Scotland 3, on this most important branch of christian doctrine; being the faith derived from scripture; which, if I have 'marked, learned, and digested' aright, represents man's justification as the gratuitous act of divine grace, making us partakers of the righteousness of Christ; which precious gift of divine love we take hold of by faith, antecedent to, but at the same time, through GRACE, productive of such WORKS as the merciful giver is pleased to reckon 'GOOD;' although 1 St Luke viii. 8. 15. 2 St. Matth. vii. 15-20. xii. 33. |