Theological Theses · §1298 · Louis Le Blanc de Beaulieu

Ames and Crocius: sin that wastes the conscience vs sin that does not

Reformed schools (Ames, Crocius) split sins that waste the conscience from those that do not.

Conscience-wasting sin cannot share true piety; infirmity-slips can remain in a godly good conscience.

Latin

XXI. Huc facit distinctio peccati in Reformatorum Scholis usitata, qua distinguitur peccatum in illud quod conscientiam vastat, & in illud quod non vastat conscientiam. Quae distinctio habetur apud Gul. Amesium & Lud. Crocium. Etenim per peccatum vastans conscientiam intelligitur illud quod cum vera pietate, & bona conscientia consistere non potest: per peccatum vero quod non vastat conscientiam, illud quod ex infirmitate & negligentia commissum reperiri potest in eo qui & vere pius est, & bonam habet erga Deum conscientiam. Ames. in Medulla Theologiae, lib. 1. cap. 14. num. 11. Lud. Croc. in Syntag. Sacr. Theolog. lib. 3. cap. 38. num. 23. & 24.

Report a mistake in this passage

About this text

Louis Le Blanc, a Reformed professor at Sedan, sets out theology in theses argued against Rome: Scripture, faith, grace, free choice, good works and the saints.

This volume holds the Theses on Theology I–XLIII and On Faith I–XXII, in eighteen sections.

Louis Le Blanc de Beaulieu (1614–1675) was minister and professor of theology at the Academy of Sedan, the Reformed school on France's eastern border. His Theses were disputed by students over many years and collected in a London folio (1675).

The Theological Theses range across the whole Reformed system — Scripture, God, predestination, grace, and justifying faith — in the crisp thesis-and-proof form of the seventeenth-century schools.

Date1675 AD (Sedan theses; London collection)

No modern English.

Reference

ESTC R17887; Wing L802. IA bub_gb_eOkHAW4G0-wC (+ EEBO 1675 for gap leaves).

Printed text used

Translated from Latin (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
Also checked PDF of the 1675 (Latin)
Also checked pdftotext of De Theologia pages (Latin)
Also checked DjVu machine-read text of the 1675 (Latin)

We have not yet re-checked this work against its source. We made this study translation with AI help. No scholar has yet certified it as faithful and complete. Open Latin on any section, or the Latin source link, to see the source text. It is not a critical edition.

Report a mistake