On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §546 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: posterity 'sinned in another' as Christ-satisfaction analogy

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

So for someone to satisfy, and for satisfaction to be imputed to someone, are surely far diverse. And yet when the theologians teach that we have satisfied in Christ, they mean nothing else than that Christ's satisfaction is imputed to us. Or that Christ exhibited that satisfaction which, because of the union which we have with him as our spiritual and mystical head, is imputed to us, so that before God we are held as if we ourselves had satisfied through ourselves.

Latin

Sic satisfacere aliquem, & alicui satisfactionem imputari, sunt sane longe diversa, & tamen cum docent Theologi nos in Christo satisfecisse, non aliud sibi volunt, quam Christi satisfactionem nobis imputari, sive Christum eam satisfactionem exhibuisse, quae propter unionem, quam cum eo habemus tanquam capite nostro spirituali & mystico, nobis imputetur, ita ut apud Deum habeamur, quasi ipsi per nos satisfecissemus.

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