On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §517 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: action is not reatus; relation cannot transfer the act

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

action is one thing, guilt another. That is an action, this a relation, that passes, this remains. Is it then, if guilts rightly said to enter, rightly also said that the action enters? Can whatever is said of guilt also be said of the action? Is action a relation? Does it remain after the action has passed? Does it follow the action? 2. It is one thing to be held guilty because of an action, another for the guiltf the action to enter into someone: that signifies only an external denomination, this imports something more. Nay the guilt itself, since it is a relation, cannot be said to enter, except either by reason of the foundation, that is, of sin whether it be action or habit, or of the term, that is, of penalty, so far is it from it that by reason of guilt the action can be said to enter into another.

Latin

PLAC. Atqui 1. aliud est actio, aliud reatus. Illa est actio, haec relatio, illa transit, hoc manet. Num igitur si reatus recte dicitur introire, recte etiam dicitur introire actio? Num quicquid dicitur de reatu, dici etiam potest de actione? Num actio est relatio? num manet postquam actio transiit? num sequitur actionem? 2. Aliud est propter actionem reum haberi, aliud reatum actionis introire in aliquem: illud externam tantum denominationem significat, hoc aliquid importat amplius. Imo ipse reatus, cum sit relatio, introire dici non potest, nisi aut ratione fundamenti, hoc est, peccati sive sit actio, sive habitus, aut termini, hoc est, poenae, tantum abest ut ratione reatus actio dici possit in alium introire.

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