On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §199 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 2: Placeus — Manuscript mediate ratio; before Posterior quaestio de poena

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

In this very Manuscript I gave the same account of mediate imputation: by sharing this corruption we communicate with Adam's sin, and we consent to it habitually, so to speak. I am plainly distinguishing Adam's sin—the one we share and habitually consent to—from the corruption through which that sharing and consent happen. That sin can only be Adam's first actual. That is what I wanted charged to us, and for that habitual consent. So the Learned Man pits me not against myself but against a fiction of his own making.

Latin

Eandem rationem, imputationis mediatae in hoc ipso Manuscrito proposui his verbis. Hujus enim corruptionis participatione communicamus peccato Adami, eique, ut ita loquar, habitualiter consentimus. Quis non videt me peccatum Adami cui communicamus, cui habitualiter consentimus, distinguere a corruptione qua ei communicamus & consentimus? Id autem aliud esse non potest quam primum illud actuale Adami. Hoc igitur volui nobis imputari, & quidem ob istum ipsum habitualem consensum. Non igitur me mecum committit Vir doctus, sed cum animi sui figmento.

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