On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §608 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: Art. 10 'spoiled in his person' does not yield Adam's death imputed; more in Chapter 12

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

Does that tenth article of the Confession teach the contrary? Why then am I set against it? But it says we were spoiled of all those goods in his (Adam's) person, and fell into all this misery and curse. Therefore we die in Adam's own person—that is, by Adam's death imputed to us. No such thing follows from those words of the Confession. Indeed not even any imputation can be drawn from them, either of those gifts or of that spoiling—as will be shown more fully in chapter XII.

Latin

Contrariumne docet Art. ille Confessionis decimus? Cur igitur cum illo committo? At dicit nos in ipsius (Adami) persona spoliatos bonis illis omnibus, in omnem hanc miseriam & maledictionem incidisse. Ergo morimur in ipsa Adami persona, hoc est morte Adami nobis imputata. Nihil tale sequitur ex illis Confessionis verbis. Imo ne imputatio quidem ulla ex ijs colligi potest, vel donorum illorum, vel spoliationis illius, ut plenius declarabitur cap. XII.

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