On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §499 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: habitual agreed; actual denied; two entry-modes

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

Next it is agreed between us that habitual sin entered through one man into all humans, and experience itself confirms it; but it is not agreed that actual sin entered through one man into all humans; for this we flatly deny, and it cannot be proved. Our interpretation therefore cannot be denied, since it is in confession. Those who oppose us must therefore prove their interpretation, before it can or ought to be admitted. Finally since those two modes of entering, of which one is feigned, the other is certain and confessed, are wholly diverse, and one with respect to the other is either nothing or figurative, how can such different things be expressed by a single verb meaning 'entering'?

Latin

Deinde convenit inter nos peccatum habituale per unum hominem in omnes homines intrasse, idque ipsa experientia confirmat; sed non convenit peccatum actuale per unum hominem in omnes homines intrasse; hoc enim pernegamus, neque potest probari. Nostra igitur interpretatio negari non potest, cum sit in confesso. Suam igitur qui nobis adversantur, probent interpretationem necesse est, antequam admitti aut possit aut debeat. Denique cum duo illi introeundi modi, quorum alter fingitur, alter est certus & confessus, prorsus sint diversi, alterque alterius respectu, vel nullus vel figuratus sit, qui potest tam diversa unum introeundi verbum semel usurpatum significare?

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