On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §573 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: A Socinian could turn the same argument against Christ's satisfaction

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

ut consider the useless cleverness of the argument in a like example. So Christ's satisfaction is imputed to us, that we are said to have satisfied in Christ. Let someone from the flock of the Socinians approach; about to take joint efforts against that teaching, he will rise against the learned man and against the truth with subtle argumentation. When do we finally satisfy in Christ, by his actual satisfaction? When Christ himself satisfied on the cross? Or at another time? Surely when he satisfied on the cross. But hear. Those who have satisfied so as to placate the wrath of God, those have truly and properly satisfied. Those who have truly and properly satisfied, then when they satisfied, truly and properly were. Therefore has the Christian who now lives truly been, when Christ hung on the cross? What seems? Is it not a strongly twisted dart? Let him who taught to knot it loose the knot. For he will not refute the Socinian so as not also by the same reason to traduce his own subtilty.

Latin

GAR. 2. Sed ratiocinii vanam subtilitatem considera in exemplo simili. Ita imputatur nobis Christi satisfactio, ut in Christo satisfecisse dicamur. Accedat e Socinianorum grege quispiam; adversus eam doctrinam arma mutuabitur a Viro docto & in veritatem subtili argumentatione consurget. Quando vero demum satisfacimus in Christo, satisfactione eius actuali? An cum Christus ipse satisfecit in cruce? An alio tempore? Certe cum satisfecit in cruce. Sed audi. Qui satisfecerunt, ita ut iram Dei placarent, illi vere & proprie satisfecerunt. Qui vere & proprie satisfecerunt, tunc cum satisfecerunt, vere & proprie fuerunt. Ergone Christianus qui nunc vivit vere fuit, cum Christus penderet in cruce? Quid videtur? Annon valide contortum telum? Dissolvat nodum qui nectere docuit. Nec enim Socinianum refellet, ut non & eadem ratione subtilitatem suam traducat.

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