Of justification four disputations clearing and amicably defending the truth against the unnecessary oppositions…

Whether Good be not the object of the Will, and so Christ be not willed as Good? None doubts of it. 4. Whether this willing be not the same as Loving, as love is found in the rational appetite? ⟨p. 347⟩Sure Aquinas saith so, no man that I know contradicting it. 5. Whether you can call Affiance, or any other act of the will justifying faith, excluding this willing, or not principally including it? For 1. This is the Wills first act towards it object; and will you say that Love goes before justifying faith, and so before Justification? and such a Love as is distinct from justifying faith as being no part of it? How then is Love the fruit of faith, and as Divines say, a consequent of Justification? Yet it is beyond all doubt, that this Veil or Love to Christ goes before Affiance on him, or any other act of the Will. vide Aquin. 1.2. Q. 23. a. 33. Et. 1. Q. 20. a. 1 Et Tolet de anima, l. 3. cap. 9. Q. •7, 28 Et Ames. contra Gravinchou. pag. 16. 2. And can it be imagined that preceding assent, and subsequent Affiance, in Christ should be conditions of our Justification; and yet the Velle Christum oblatum, that Willing which we call Consent, Election or Acceptance, which goeth between assent and Affiance, should be excluded as no part of this condition? 3. Especially considering that Affiance contains divers acts, whereof one is of the Irascible of the sensitive, and so is but an imperate act of the Will, and less noble then that elicit Act (which I plead for,) as well as Posterior to it: and if Aquin. be not out in his Philosophy, when he so oft saith, that fiducia is spes roborata, then our Divines make Hope to justify.

Whether Good be not the object of the Will, and so Christ be not willed as Good? None doubts of it. 4. Whether this willing be not the same as Loving, as love is found in the rational appetite? ⟨p. 347⟩Sure Aquinas saith so, no man that I know contradicting it. 5. Whether you can call Affiance, or any other act of the will justifying faith, excluding this willing, or not principally including it? For 1. This is the Wills first act towards it object; and will you say that Love goes before justifying faith, and so before Justification? and such a Love as is distinct from justifying faith as being no part of it? How then is Love the fruit of faith, and as Divines say, a consequent of Justification? Yet it is beyond all doubt, that this Velle or Love to Christ goes before Affiance on him, or any other act of the Will. vide Aquin. 1.2. Q. 23. a. 33. Et. 1. Q. 20. a. 1 Et Tolet de anima, l. 3. cap. 9. Q. 7, 28 Et Ames. contra Gravinchou. pag. 16. 2. And can it be imagined that preceding assent, and subsequent Affiance, in Christ should be conditions of our Justification; and yet the Velle Christum oblatum, that Willing which we call Consent, Election or Acceptance, which goeth between assent and Affiance, should be excluded as no part of this condition? 3. Especially considering that Affiance contains divers acts, whereof one is of the Irascible of the sensitive, and so is but an imperate act of the Will, and less noble then that elicite Act (which I plead for,) as well as Posterior to it: and if Aquin. be not out in his Philosophy, when he so oft saith, that fiducia is spes roborata, then our Divines make Hope to justifie.