On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §595 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: A proper penalty presupposes a proper sin

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

Again I ask whether he can be said to have sinned properly or not—that is, not figuratively or metaphorically. No one will say he sinned only metaphorically or figuratively: for since penalty and sin answer each other, a penalty truly and properly so called presupposes a sin that is truly and properly so called—another's, when the penalty is inflicted on someone the sinner; one's own, when it is inflicted on him as on a sinner who has earned a properly so-called penalty.

Latin

Rursus quaero an proprie dici possit peccasse, necne, hoc est, non figurate, aut metaphorice? Nemo etiam dixerit, peccasse tantum metaphorice aut figurate: cum enim poena & peccatum sibi mutuo respondeant, poena vere & proprie dicta supponit peccatum vere & proprie dictum, alienum quidem cum poena infligitur alicui ut vadi peccatoris, suum vero, cum infligitur ut peccatori poenam proprie dictam commerito.

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