On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §376 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 7: officer still needs judgment; grade already lost

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

is there room for you to say that man by this very thing—that he fell—fell from his holiness and justice, and so there was no need of God's judicial action to strip him of these gifts. What then? Does not also a royal officer who by raising war against the King leaves city, province, kingdom, by that very thing fall from the office he had formerly borne—and yet is none the less by the King's subsequent judgment abdicated from his office? He altogether falls from the office—that is, he has deserved to be deprived of the office, and that the same office be conferred on another: for which the King's sentence is needed; otherwise it would not be lawful to adorn another with that office. For that royal officer would still be held to retain his office. For it is one thing to raise war and leave city or province, another to be deprived of office: and so sometimes, such a crime being committed, the judicial sentence is deferred for some time, during which such an officer is not yet held to have lost his office. But what is this to the matter? Have I not shown that by this very thing—that Adam fell—he fell from the grade of obedience and justice in which he formerly was?

Latin

GAR. Neque est quod dicas, hominem eo ipso quod lapsus est, excidisse sua sanctitate & justitia, adeoque nihil opus fuisse actione Dei judiciaria, ut his donis spoliaretur. Quid enim? Non & Regius officiarius, qui bello adversus Regem suscitando, urbe, provincia, Regno excedit, eo ipso excidit illo quod antea gesserat munere: nec tamen eo minus consequenti Regis judicio abdicatur officio suo. PLAC. Omnino excidit munere, hoc est, commeritus est ut munere privetur, idemque munus in alium conferatur: quam ad rem opus est Regis sententia: alioqui non liceret eo munere alium ornare. Censeretur enim is Regius officiarius suum illud munus adhuc retinere. Aliud enim est bellum suscitare, urbe, aut provincia excedere, aliud munere privari: Et sic nonnunquam admisso eiusmodi crimine, ut ad aliquod tempus differatur sententia judiciaria, quo tempore eiusmodi officiarius nondum amisisse suum munus censetur. Sed quid hoc ad rem? Nonne enim ostendi, hoc ipso quod Adamus lapsus est, excidisse eum ex gradu, in quo antea erat, obedientiae & justitiae?

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