On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §137 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 11: Socinians, Arminians, Walaeus — Garissoles’s arguments closed before Chapter 12

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

As for the Socinians, since they differ not at all from the Pelagians, what more is there to say? As for the Arminians, by God's kindness Placeus shrinks from their errors too. The learned Walaeus, answering Corvinus for the distinguished Du Moulin, did not hesitate to deny immediate imputation in plain words — as we noted above at page 22 — and is not for that reason thought to side with the Remonstrants. And those were Lord Garissoles's arguments.

Latin

De Socinianis, cum nihil differant a Pelagianis, quid opus est dicere? Ad Arminianos autem quod spectat, ab eorum etiam erroribus, Dei beneficio, abhorret Placeus. Qui autem pro Clariss. Molineo Respondit Corvino doctissimus Walaeus, is non dubitavit imputationem immediatam disertis verbis negare, uti a nobis observatum est supra, pag. 22. nec propterea partibus Remonstrantium favere existimatur. Atque haec fuerunt argumenta D. Garissolii.

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