On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §369 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 7: courtier needs judicial act; Adam falls by the act itself

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

But Adam, faith being violated, made an apostate from God and a rebel against God, could no longer be integral, just, holy, upright, or good. Nor was any judgment of God, or any judicial action, needed for him to be deprived of justice and rectitude. By this very thing—that he fell—he ceased to be in the grade in which he had been placed. By this very thing—that he twisted and bent himself from the true last end to a falsely apparent one—he ceased to be upright. By this very thing—that unwilling to render God his right he became unfaithful and a rebel to his creator and best lord—he ceased to be just.

Latin

Adamus vero violata fide factus a Deo apostata, Deo rebellis, non potuit amplius integer, justus, sanctus, rectus, bonus esse: nec ut privaretur justitia & rectitudine ullo Dei judicio, ulla actione judiciaria opus fuit: hoc ipso quod lapsus est desiit esse in eo, in quo collocatus fuerat, gradu: hoc ipso quod se a fine ultimo vero ad falso apparentem intorsit & incurvavit, desiit rectus esse, hoc ipso quod suum Deo jus reddere noluit infidelis & rebellis creatori suo & domino optimo, desiit justus esse.

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