The key to the interpretation of James 2:14-26 is to be found in vs. 14, “What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him?” The answer must be an emphatic “No!”

The meaning of salvation in vs. 14 is established by reference to vs. 13. It is salvation from the judgment of God. If one is not saved from this judgment he is under condemnation. If he is under condemnation he is not justified because justification is the opposite of condemnation. Vs. 14 states the theme of the passage as a whole and the theme is illustrated by hypothetical examples (vss. 15-18) and by examples drawn from the history of redemption (vss. 21-26). The use of “justify” in the latter part of the passage corresponds to the use of “save” in the earlier part. “Justify” is used in a forensic sense as in Paul. James is saying that a man is saved or justified by works and not by faith alone. James expressly relates good works to justification and it is this fact that appears to bring James into conflict with Paul.

The proper method for reconciling the two apostolic authors is the one advocated by J. Gresham Machen when he addressed himself specifically to this question. Machen did not distinguish between two different senses of “justify,” assigning one to James and the other to Paul. Rather, he writes: “The solution of the whole problem is provided by Paul himself in a single phrase. In Gal. 5:6, he says, ‘For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision; but faith working through love.’ ‘Faith working through love’ is the key to an understanding both of Paul and James” (“Faith and Works” in Machen’s Notes on Galatians, ed. John H. Skilton [Phil.: Pres. & Ref., 1972], p. 220).

In Gal. 5:6 Paul is talking about justification. Circumcision or uncircumcision do not avail for justification. That is to say, the works of the law are of no avail. What does avail? Faith avails, namely, faith working by love. Gal. 5:6 introduces a fundamental distinction which runs through the Pauline letters and, indeed, throughout the whole Bible between “works of the law,” an external and formal adherence to selected legal prescriptions apart from faith, and the working of faith wrought by the sanctifying activity of the Spirit which is the fulfillment of the law through love (Gal. 5:14).

But if Paul says that the faith which avails for justification is faith working through love, does he mean that faith derives its power to justify from love so that it is after all love or works that justify and not faith? Not at all! This is the Roman Catholic interpretation of Gal. 5:6,which affirms precisely what Paul denies in the very same verse as well as in the Epistle as a whole. Faith alone justifies – that is Paul’s doctrine. Faith looks neither to itself nor to its own working for justification. Faith lays hold of Jesus Christ and his righteousness and the righteousness of Jesus Christ is imputed to the one who believes. This is the distinctive function of faith in justification, which it shares with no other grace or virtue. The righteousness of Jesus Christ is imputed to the sinner the moment he believes. He believes and is justified. But Paul nevertheless specifically says in Gal. 5:6 that this faith which lays hold of Christ for justification is not alone, it is a faith that works through love. Hence Calvin says of Gal. 5:6, “Indeed, we confess with Paul that no other faith justifies ‘but faith working through love.’ But it does not take its power to justify from that working of love. Indeed, it justifies in no other way but in that it leads us into fellowship with the righteousness of Christ” (Institutes III, 11, 20).

Calvin makes a similar point in his Commentary on James (Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles, trans. John Owen [Rpt. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1948], pp. 316, 317). At the end of Chapter 2 James intended to show “what sort of faith that was which justified Abraham; that is, that it was not idle or evanescent, but rendered him obedient to God, as also we find in Heb. XI. 8.” Calvin concludes, “Man is not justified by faith alone, that is, by a bare and empty knowledge of God; he is justified by works, that it, his righteousness is known and proved by its fruits.” Calvin then distinguishes his position from Roman Catholicism as he had done in commenting on Gal. 5:6:

James, according to his manner of speaking, declares that Rahab was justified by works; and the Sophists hence conclude that we obtain righteousness by the merits of works. But we deny that the dispute here is concerning the mode of obtaining righteousness. We, indeed, allow that good works are required for righteousness: we only take away from them the power of conferring righteousness, because they cannot stand before the tribunal of God.

Here Calvin expressly asserts that good works are necessary for righteousness. There is no justification without them. But they do not confer righteousness. They are not the ground of acceptance as Romanism insisted because they cannot withstand the severity of God’s judgment. They are the necessary manifestation of the faith that leads the sinner into fellowship with the righteousness of Jesus Christ.

Gal. 5:6 makes clear that the doctrine of Paul and the doctrine of James are the same. James does not deny that faith justifies, but he does deny that inactive faith justifies. Faith without works is dead (2:26). Dead faith does not save (vs. 14) and dead faith does not justify (vs. 24). This is what James has in view when he says that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. Both James and Paul denounce dead works and dead faith. They both commend a living and active faith. The teaching of James and Paul is nowhere better summarized than by John Murray at the conclusion of his chapter on Justification in Redemption – Accomplished and Applied (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1955), p. 161: “Faith alone justifies but a justified person with faith alone would be a monstrosity which never exists in the kingdom of grace. Faith works itself out through love (cf. Gal. 5:6). And faith without works is dead (cf. James 2:17-20). It is living faith that justifies and living faith unites to Christ both in the virtue of his death and in the power of his resurrection.” Noteworthy is the fact that Murray relates both James 2 and Gal. 5:6 to the doctrine of forensic justification. Living faith is not to be defined simply as a faith wrought through the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. Just because it is wrought by the Spirit it is a faith that works.

It is precisely this doctrine that finds expression in the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chap. XI, Sect. 2. Faith receiving and resting on Christ and his righteousness is the alone instrument of justification. It is faith alone that receives and rests upon Christ. The Confession is rightly concerned to accent the distinctive office of faith as the Larger Catechism also does in Qu. 70, 71, and 73. But the Confession goes on to say that this faith is never alone. It is ever accompanied with all other saving graces. Specifically it is not a dead faith but works by love. The proof-texts offered by the Westminster Assembly of Divines are James 2:17, 22, 26, and Gal. 5:6.

In commenting on this section of the Confession Robert Shaw writes, “The faith that justifies is a living and active principle, which works by love, purifies the heart, and excites to universal obedience. It is accompanied with every Christian grace, and productive of good works” (An Exposition of the Confession of Faith of the Westminster Assembly of Divines [9th ed.; London: Blakie & Son, 1861], p. 133). Similarly A. A. Hodge comments, “Consequently orthodox theologians have always acknowledged that while faith alone justifies, a faith which is alone, or unassociated with other graces and fruitless in good works, will not justify” (A Commentary on the Confession of Faith [Phil.: Pres. Bd. Of Pub. 1869], p. 253). Hodge’s observation is of value not only for what it says of the Confession but also for its testimony to what is the commonly held view of orthodox theologians.

Francis Turretin is a leading exponent of classical Reformed orthodoxy in the latter part of the seventeenth century. In answer to the question whether faith alone justifies, Turretin observes: “The question is not whether solitary faith [fides solitaria], that is, separated from the other virtues, justifies, which we grant could not easily be the case since it is not even true and living faith; but whether it alone concurs to the act of justification, which we assert: as the eye alone sees, but not when torn out of the body. Thus the particle alone does not modify the subject but the predicate, that is, faith alone does not justify, but only faith justifies; the coexistence of love with faith in him who is justified is not denied, but its coefficiency or co-operation in justification [Ita particula sola non determinat subjectum, sed praedicatum, id est, sola fides non justficat, sed fides justificat sola: non negatur coextistentia charitatis in eo qui justificatur, sed coefficientia vel cooperatio in justificatione].

Turretin is saying that “alone” must not be understood as an adjective modifying “faith” so that justifying faith would have to be viewed as “solitary,” or in isolation from its working or from its manifestation in obedience to Christ. Rather, “alone” is to be understood adverbially as pointing to the distinctive role played by faith in relation to the other gifts and graces with which it is invariably associated. Only faith justifies. Only faith to receive, accept, and rest upon Christ for justification and salvation from eternal condemnation. This is what Turretin means when he says that faith alone concurs to the act of justification.

But this faith which alone concurs to the act of justification is not, in fact, alone. It is not solitary. A solitary faith is not a true and living faith and therefore cannot be a justifying faith. Turretin does not deny the coexistence of love with faith; for faith without love would be a dead faith just as love without faith would be a dead work. But he does deny the coefficiency of love with faith in justification. Turretin is here insisting that although justifying faith must be true and living – otherwise it could not justify – the ground or cause of justification is in no sense to be found in the believer himself. The ground and cause of justification is Jesus Christ and his righteousness. To be justified one must abandon all personal resources and lean wholly upon Christ. This is what is done in faith. Faith is wholehearted trust in Christ and by this faith the believer receives, accepts, and rests upon the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ alone for justification.

The analogy of the eye which Turretin uses is one that is frequently found in Reformed authors to accent the distinctive office of faith in relation to justification while preserving what must be said about the vitality of this faith. The eye alone sees. The ear or the nose or the arm do not see. There is no other instrument of vision but the eye alone. However, there is no such thing as a seeing eye in isolation from the body. The eye sees only as it is organically joined to the body. Similarly, justification is by faith alone, but a faith, which is alone, does not justify. This is the teaching of James and Paul and it has been characteristic of Reformed theology.