On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §131 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 11: Placeus alien from Pelagian, Socinian, and Remonstrant teaching

Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.

Chapter XI. That Placeus stands apart from the Pelagian, Socinian, and Remonstrant teaching on this question. Garissoles wants to make us hated and crush us under the heaviest prejudices by grieving that we make common cause with Pelagians and Socinians. There is nothing to grieve over. We shrink from the errors of such men as strongly as anyone can. He adds that the oldest heretics — I take him to mean the Marcionites and the Manichees, who with the height of impiety called the old law evil — held that there can be no just imputation of another's sin. What does that have to do with our question?

Latin

CAPUT XI. A Pelagianorum, Socinianorum, & Remonstrantium in hoc negotio sententia Placeum esse alienum. Ut nos reddat exosos, & gravissimis obruat praejudiciis, dolet nos cum Pelagianis & Socinianis paria facere. Sed dolendi causa nulla est: Nam ab hujusmodi hominum erroribus abhorremus, ut qui maxime. Vetustissimorum, addit, haereticorum (Marcionitas puto, & Manicheos, qui legem antiquam malam esse summa cum impietate afferebant) sententia fuit, nullam esse posse justam alieni peccati imputationem. Quid hoc ad rem?

Report a mistake in this passage

About this text

Josué de la Place (Placeus) on the imputation of Adam's first sin: chapters 1 to 12 and 14, and the later disputation up to its chapter on Romans 5:14, from the Latin. The rest is not yet translated.

Josué de la Place (c. 1596–1655), known in Latin as Placeus, was pastor at Nantes and from 1633 professor of theology at the Academy of Saumur, the school of Cameron and Amyraut.

On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin argues the distinctive Saumur thesis: Adam's sin reaches his posterity only mediately, through the inherited corruption — never by immediate reckoning of a sin they did not commit. Fellow Reformed theologians rejected the view, but the book remains its classic statement.

Part only: Chapters 1–12 and 14, and the disputation up to Romans 5:14

Datec. 1645–1655 AD (written after the 1645 Synod of Charenton, and read in draft by Drelincourt by 10 December 1653; printed posthumously at Saumur, 1661; Reformed / Amyraldian circle)

The English is made from the 1661 Saumur Latin of chapters 1 to 12 and 14 and part of the later disputation. No earlier English was copied.

Printed text used

Translated from Latin (Saumur 1661) (Latin)
Also checked Text extract of Caput Primum (Latin)
Also checked machine-read text of the 1661 volume (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