cause, that can be no better defended. There are multitudes of plain and positive texts of Scripture, which afcribe our justification to faith, and to the righteousness of Chrift alone, as I have had occasion to shew you already. These must be interpreted away at any rate; because they do not agree with this scheme, which must by all means be supported. -But then, what evidence have we from Scripture for this doctrine, which is so strenuously contended for? None but this, that holiness and new obedience are necessary to falvation, which is just so much (and no more) to the purpose, as if you should attempt to prove your point from the first verse in Genesis.

You proceed to argue, that "repentance for fin, " which includes new obedience in the nature of it, " is not only made absolutely necessary to salvation, " but has the promise of pardon annexed to it; and " is therefore plainly proposed in Scripture, as the "condition of our justification."

This is but a repetition of the former argument in other words. The question before us is not, What is necessary to our salvation; but what is the condition of our justification ? It is not the question, whether pardon and salvation be necessarily connected to repentance and new obedience; but what it is that gives us a title to this pardon and salvation; and whence it is that this repentance and new obedience flows, by which we are qualified to partake of saving benefits. - The Scriptures assure us, that this is the righteousness of Christ received by faith; and what you now offer is nowife inconsistent with the many declarations of this kind, throughout the whole word of God. - If it were granted, that whatever are the requisites in them that shall be faved, and whatever qualifications have the promise of pardon and salvation annexed to them, are the conditions

conditions of our justification, it would then follow that perfeverance is a condition of our juftification; and confequently all dispute about being justified in this present life is at an end, as I have observed before. For the benefit is suspended, till the condition on which it depends is accomplished.-Besides, I think, all men must allow, that if repentance be the fruit and consequence of our justification, it cannot be the condition of it. There can be nothing more prepofterous, than to suppose an effect to be a condition of the cause producing it. And the Scriptures affure us, that repentance is the fruit and confequence of our juftification. Thus is it particularly represented to us, Ezek. xxxvi. 26. 28. 31.. A new heart alfo will I give you'; and a new spirit will I put within you;-And ye shall be my people; and I will be your God. Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good; and shall loathe yourselves in your own fight, for your iniquities and for your abominations. Thus likewife, Zech. xii. 10. And I will pour out upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerufalem, the spirit of grace and of fupplications; and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for bis only fon, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born.-In which texts you fee there is first a new heart and a new spirit; they are first in a justified state, they are God's people, and he is their God; they are first renewed, and have a spirit of grace and fupplication; they have first the exercise of faith, they look upon him whom they have pierced; and then follows their repentance, as an immediate and necessary confequence of their regenerate justified state. -This truth is most evident, not only from the Scripture-representation of this matter, but also from the nature of a true and fincere repentance.We must be united to Christ, and have a principle

Aa

of

only of his fovereign grace and love: In the final fentence, he will proceed according to the rules of distributive remunerative justice, in adjusting and proportioning rewards. So that, from the nature of things, it is agreeable that we should here be justified by faith only; but there judged according to our works.

And now, Sir, will you indulge me the same freedom which you have hitherto borne with; and allow me to be your faithful monitor in an instance or two?

I would first put you in mind, that it is of much greater confequence to your highest interests, to make it evident to yourself, that you are indeed juftified in the fight of God, than to exercise your mind with this arbitrary distinction of a first and seeond juftification. If you are indeed interested in Chrift by faith; if you do indeed experience a change of heart and life in consequence of your faith in him, and make a progress in the divine life, in the mortification of your corruptions, in love to God and your neighbour, and in heavenly-mindedness and spirituality, you will not be examined at the bar of your Judge about your acquaintance with these modern distinctions; or, whether those qualifications which will then be gloriously rewarded, are the fruits of the first, or the conditions of a secondary justification.

I would again intreat you to confider, that the life of a Chriftian is a life of faith in the Son of God. We are not only justified by faith, but we are faved by faith; and the just must live by faith. Whatever becomes of this debate, you may be therefore certain, that you can be no longer safe, than while you are humbly committing your foul to Christ as to the Author of your eternal falvation, depending upon him as the Lord your Righteousness; and expecting

pecting all supplies of grace from his fulness. - And believe me, Sir, a lively exercise of faith in Chrift will afford you more present comfort, will much more quicken you in devotion and true holiness; ✓ and more strengthen and establish you in every good work, in your progress to the heavenly kingdom, than all your studies in these fruitless doctrines about a first and secondary justification.

I will take leave to add once more, that the way to heaven is certainly a way of holiness; and with. out holiness you can never fee God. It therefore concerns you to look to the fountain of holiness for all supplies of grace, to watch over your heart and life, to endeavour and pray for a holy conformity to the whole will of God; and amidst, and after all, to bring your great defects to the blood of Chrift for pardon; and continually implore the divine influences, that the work of grace may be carried on in your foul with power, till you arrive without spot and blameless, before the throne of your Sovereign and righteous Judge.

That you may thus be directed safe, amidst all the snares and delusions in your way, is the prayer of, Sir, Your, &c.

Wherein the Apoftle

LETTER XV.
JAMES'S Doctrine of Juftification by Works,
in his fecond Chapter, is distinctly review-
ed, and fet in its genuine Light, by a
Comparison with the Apostle PAUL'S
Doctrine of Juftification by Faith.

SIR,

Youre acknowledge, that, if it were not for

"one difficulty in your way, you should think "the evidence offered against the doctrine you have

Aa3

" proposed, " proposed, must be conclusive: But you do not "know how to give into a scheme that is not only "expreisly contradicted, but particularly refuted, "in the word of God. -The Apostle Paul, you "say, does indeed seem to speak in favour of my " principles; but he ought to be interpreted by the "Apostle James, who expressly rejects my inter"pretation of St Paul's difcourses on the subject "before us. What appearance therefore foever "there may be, in favour of my principles, in "St Paul's Epistles, these must not be understood " in direct contradiction to the express declarations " of another inspired writer. - You therefore defire " me to shew, how it is poffible to reconcile my "scheme with the doctrine of St James, in the fe"cond chapter of his Epiftle, from the 14th verse "to the end."

If this be all your remaining difficulty, I hope it will not prove an hard matter to give you full fatiffaction, that the doctrine of the Apostle James, in the place referred to, is nowise inconsistent with the doctrine of our justification by faith, so plainly and fully taught by the Apostle Paul in all his Epistles; and therefore, that our justification by work's (in the sense that I oppose it) has no foundation at all in the whole word of God.

That this may be set in a proper light, there are two or three things necessary to be premised, and diftinctly confidered, previous to a direct and immediate view of the consistency and concurrence of these two Apostles, in the doctrine of a finner's justification by faith, notwithstanding their seeming difagreement and repugnancy.

It should first be premised, that these two Apostles must be understood in fuch a sense as will make them confiftent. We must take this for a principle, that whatever becomes of our schemes, on one fide or

the