Rome ruin'd by VVhite Hall, or, The papall crown demolisht

SECT. 7. How the Popish writers would reconcile Paul and James.

NOw whereas Paul thus proving Abraham to be justified by faith without workes, Rom. 4. 2. 5. and James, that Abra∣ham was justified through workes, which at the first seeme to be contrary to each other, the Popish writers goe about three waies to reconcile these places, viz.

1. Say they, The Apostle in that expression excludeth Abrahams Morall workes before faith, and therefore by such workes they grant a man is not justified, but by such as follow and proceed of faith.

Ans. Before that God had imputed righteousnesse unto A∣braham by faith, he had done divers faithfull workes, as the Apo∣stle sheweth, As that by faith when he was called obeyed God, and by faith abode in the Land of promise, Heb. 11. 8, 9. therefore the Apostle speaking of Abrahams justification by faith after he had done these faithfull workes, excludeth even such workes also from justification. Againe he saith, to him that worketh, the wages is not counted by favour, but by debt; but the workes done before, or without faith; no wages is due, because without faith it is im∣possible to please God, therefore he meaneth not such workes.

2. They say that Paul speaketh de fide charitate formala, of a saith formed with charity, and furnished with good works, and such 〈◊〉〈◊〉 faith truly justifieth.

Ans. True it is that Abrahams faith, which Paul so much commendeth, was a lively and working faith, and yet it did not justifie him as it was active, in bringing forth good workes, but as it was passive in apprehending, and laying on hold of the righte∣ousnesse of God, as the Apostle sheweth, in that Abrahams man∣ner of justifying and Davids was all one, but David declareth that man blessed to whom God imputed righteousnesse without workes, Rom. 4. 6. to which the Apostle addeth Abrahams full assurance, that he that had promised was also able to performe, and therefore it was imputed to him for righteousnesse, Ver. 21, 22. it was not then imputed for the working of his faith, but for his bebeeving.

3. They use a distinction of a first and second justification, the first as when of a sinner a man is made just. 2. When a just man be∣comes more just: of the first (say they) Paul speaketh, of the se∣cond James.

Ans. The Scriptures knoweth no such distinction of a first, and second justification; that which they call the second justification, is no other but sanctification, which is an increasing, and going forward in the fruits and further assurance of justification; the Prophet saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered, speaketh of that justification when of a sinner a man becommeth just before God, which they call the first justification. But to that blessednesse is promised, and where happinesse and blessednesse is obtained, no further justification is necessary; wherefore the first and one justification sufficeth, and so there needeth not a second.

Further, this distinction admitted, Paul should rather treat of the second justification, because he alledgeth the example of A∣braham, who was called already, and had done many righteous workes, before the Scriptures maketh any mention of the imputa∣tion of any righteosnesse unto him by faith; and James of the first, who bringeth in the example of Rahab the Harlot, who was cal∣led, before she had done any worthy works, so that the two Apo∣stles must be, and are truly reconciled as aforesaid. And as to the assurance of our justification, the same instance of Abrahams offe∣ring up his Son Isaac will verifie; at which time the Papists them∣selves confesse that Abraham was certain of his salvation, or that he was in the state of grace.