On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §649 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: if actual Adam-sin imputed, habitual corruption is too (and more strongly)

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

And if Adam's actual sin is imputed to us, then certainly his habitual sin—or inherent corruption—is imputed too. For what reason can be offered for imputing Adam's actual sin that does not equally—and more strongly—serve for imputing his habitual sin? That was a passing act; this is a permanent vice. That had already long passed when, at age 130, Adam begot Seth, from whom we take our origin; but this was then present and thoroughly inherent in Adam's powers when he gave himself to generation.

Latin

Atqui si peccatum actuale Adami nobis imputatur, profecto etiam imputatur eius peccatum habituale sive corruptio inhaerens. Nam quae ratio afferri potest pro imputatione peccati actualis Adami, quae eadem non militet pro imputatione peccati eiusdem habitualis, & quidem validius? Illud enim fuit actio praeteriens, hoc vitium permanens: illud iam pridem praeterierat cum anno aetatis 130. Adamus Sethum genuit, a quo nos ducimus originem; hoc vero tum aderat praesens & inhaerens penitus facultatibus Adami cum generationi operam daret.

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