On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §368 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 7: Adam's goods inseparable from faithfulness

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

But what was the violation of the condition—Adam's sin? unfaithfulness, disobedience, ambition, pride, ingratitude, greed, curiosity, aversion from God, conversion to creatures, &c.—which, how they could have stood with perfect rectitude, justice, holiness, innocence, I for my part cannot understand. Hence another difference is born: for faith being violated, that the Courtier be deprived of the goods received from the King, there is need of the King's or a judge's action, namely judgment and execution of judgment. Otherwise those titles, dignities, and estates would be retained by the Courtier.

Latin

Quaenam autem fuit conditionis violatio, quod peccatum Adami? infidelitas, inobedientia, ambitio, superbia, ingratitudo, cupedia, curiositas, a Deo aversio, ad creaturas conversio &c. quae, quomodo cum perfecta rectitudine, justitia, sanctitate, innocentia consistere potuerint, equidem intelligere non possum. Hinc aliud nascitur discrimen, nam violata fide, ut bonis a Rege acceptis Aulicus privetur, opus est Regis, vel judicis actione, nempe judicio, & judicii executione. Alioqui tituli illi, dignitates, & fundi retinerentur ab Aulico.

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