WITH DEEDS?

I've been working with the "Faith and Deeds" passage in James chapter 2 for this week's sermon and a question just now hit me:

How do Calvinists interpret this passage?

(I don't remember ever hearing this addressed by any Calvinist teacher.)

James writes, "What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such a faith save him?" 

If faith is an irresistible, out-of-the-blue gift from God, why have a discussion about proper faith needing to include action? And why would James urge his audience to complete their faith with actions? 

James says of Abraham, "His faith was made complete by what he did." (2:22)

According to Calvinism, either God has given each person an effective, saving faith or not. 

If God has given such faith, there is nothing the person needs to add. The very idea would appall a Calvinist. 

If God hasn't granted an individual faith, there's nothing he can add. He is incapable, being still lost. He would still be so depraved in nature that he cannot comprehend spiritual truth. 

If Calvinism were Biblical, it seems like this whole discussion about proper faith would be the perfect opportunity for the Holy Spirit, through James, to emphasize that faith is God's initiative and comes only after a person has been born again. 

As it is, isn't it odd to leave people thinking they are responsible for the depth and vitality of their own faith!?