The real Christian, or, A treatise of effectual calling wherein the work of God…

^*Herebord, in answering to an Argument which supposeth Faith to be only in the mind or understanding, tells his Adversary, that Amesius, with other famous Divines, especially the English ^†Divines, do place Faith in the will, and make knowledge and assent but conditions of Faith that went before it: but the common opinion of most, place (saith he) Faith both in the understanding and the will. Mr. Jackson, who will not own any real distinction between ⟨p. 173⟩the understanding and will, and so doth not appropriate Faith to the understanding or will, yet saith he, Such as do acknowledge a real distinction between them, ³or in their acts, should rather place it in the will, because the objects of it are rather moral than merely speculative; nor can we ever understand them aright, but we must understand them as good to us. With this agrees that which I quoted before out of Amesius: Objectum Fidei est immediate semper aliquod axioma sub ratione veri: sed illud de quo & propter quod assensus praebetur illi axiomati per fidem est ens incomplexum subratione boni. In the next Thesis he gives the reason: Actus enim credentis non terminatur ad axioma sed ad rem, fatentibus Scholasticorum clarissimis. Ratio est, quia non formamus axiomata, nist ut per eade rebus cognitionem babeamus. Principalis igitur terminus in quem tendit actus credentis est res ipsa, quae in axiomate praecipue spectatur. See him also in Medul. Theol. l. 1. cap. 2. Those. 2.3.

^*Herebord, in answering to an Argument which supposeth Faith to be only in the mind or understanding, tells his Adversary, that Amesius, with other famous Divines, especially the English ^†Divines, do place Faith in the will, and make knowledge and assent but conditions of Faith that went before it: but the common opinion of most, place (saith he) Faith both in the understanding and the will. Mr. Jackson, who will not own any real distinction between ⟨p. 173⟩