Chapter 10: Retorsion of Bellarmine’s rationes — stop before Christ’s justice
Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.
Besides, who cannot see these reasons turned back on themselves?Guilt follows the act of the person whose guilt it is, not someone else's; and habit usually follows that person's act, not another's.Could we — or should we — have stopped Adam from sinning?How is something voluntary with respect to our will if it was done long before we had any will at all?Does the imputation make Adam's actual sin proceed from our voluntary act?Are we any less necessarily guilty than corrupt?Did we earn being born this way?Read our own theologians against Pelagius, Pighius, or Bellarmine himself, especially where they ask whether original sin and concupiscence remain sin even after baptism.
Latin
Caeterum quis non videt has rationes posse retorqueri? Reatus enim est relatio consequens actionem eius cujus est reatus, non autem alterius: & habitus sequi solet actionem eius cujus est habitus, non autem actionem alterius: Et, Num impedire potuimus, aut debuimus ne peccaret Adamus? Et, quomodo est voluntarium respectu voluntatis nostrae, quod tanto tempore, antequam ullam haberemus voluntatem factum est? Et, facit-ne illa imputatio, ut peccatum illud actuale Adami processerit ab actu voluntario nostro? aut sumus-ne minus necessario rei, quam corrupti? Num sumus commeriti, ut tales gigneremur? Legantur Theologi nostri, adversus vel Pelagium, vel Pighium, vel ipsum Bellarminum disputantes, praesertim cum tractant controversiam de peccato originali & concupiscentia, an sit peccatum, etiam post susceptum baptismum.