On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §439 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 8: a fortiori never-could-live; interdict silence on posterity

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

What then would he say of that time when the little child not only was not living life, but could not even live; and of a sin which it not only did not do, but never could do? But if by the Apostle's example in the Epistles to the Galatians and to the Hebrews we wish carefully to weigh Scripture's words and silence, what reason is there why we should not observe that in the Interdict, in the sentence pronounced to Adam after the interdict was violated, no mention of posterity was made? God already then took care, to be sure, lest he should offer you any handle for sensing concerning his justice as you do.

Latin

Quid ergo diceret de eo tempore quum puerulus non modo vita non vivebat, sed ne poterat quidem vivere; deque peccato quod non modo non fecit, sed neque potuit unquam facere? Quod si Apostoli exemplo in Epistolis ad Gal. & ad Heb. velimus Scripturae verba & silentium accurate perpendere, quid est quamobrem non observemus in Interdicto, in sententia post violatum interdictum Adamo pronunciata nullam esse posteritatis factam mentionem? Cavit nimirum Deus jam tum, ne vobis ullam praeberet ansam ita de justitia sua, ut facitis, sentiendi.

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