On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §170 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 2: Why the parallel with Christ's righteousness does not fit

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

Third and last: he would pretend that that third sense of Christ's righteousness—as righteousness inhering in us—is what is meant when we ask whether Christ's righteousness is imputed to us or not. That is false. In that question Christ's righteousness is set over against our righteousness implanted in us. I, on the contrary, removed from the state of the question we are debating among ourselves those senses of Adamic sin concerning which I said there is consensus that it is imputed—and I did so in the clearest words. So I stand wholly alien to every mockery.

Latin

Tertio denique; Ille prae se ferret tertiam illam justitiae Christi acceptionem pro justitia nobis inhaerente, esse eam, quae intelligitur, cum quaeritur, utrum justitia Christi nobis imputetur, necne? Id quod falsum est. Opponitur enim justitia Christi in ea quaestione nostrae justitiae nobis insitae. Ego vero contra istas acceptiones peccati Adamici, quibus illud imputari dixi consensum esse, removi a statu quaestionis inter nos agitandae, et quidem disertissimis verbis. Quare ab omni ludificatione alienissimus fui.

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