On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §98 · Josué de la Place (Placeus)

Chapter 9: Roses vs stones; tithes harmless, Adam's sin supreme evil — before Responsio 2

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

If someone throws roses at a passer-by, nothing absurd will follow: for these barely harm. Does it follow likewise that if someone throws stones or mud at a passer-by, nothing absurd will follow? But the payment of tithes stands as a rose that could not harm Levi; Adam's sin, however, stands not only as a stone, but as the supreme evil. It will not therefore have been alien to justice if the payment of tithes made by Abraham is attributed to Levi, because it neither harmed him nor could harm him. Does it follow from that that it is not alien to justice if the sin committed by Adam is attributed to his posterity, and so the greatest evil is inflicted on them? There is not much need of other replies; yet D. Garissoles assigns us four others, which he perhaps drew out of what he calls the Prior Manuscript, and tries at great length to refute — but, after his manner, with an unhappy attempt.

Latin

Si quis in praetereuntem rosas projiciat, nihil sequetur absurdi: hae enim minime nocent. An ergo similiter, si quis in praetereuntem lapides aut lutum projiciat, nihil sequetur absurdi? Se habet autem solutio decimarum ut rosa quae non potuit nocere Levi: At peccatum Adami non solum ut lapis, sed ut summum malum. Non fuerit igitur alienum a justitia, si solutio decimarum ab Abrahamo facta tribuatur Levi; quia id ei nullo modo nocuit, aut nocere potuit: An sequitur inde, non esse alienum a justitia, si peccatum ab Adamo commissum ejus posteris tribuatur, atque ita malum maximum illis inferatur? Non admodum opus est aliis responsionibus; quatuor tamen alias nobis D. Garissolius tribuit, quas fortasse ex Priore, quod vocat, Manuscripto exprompsit, & prolixe admodum refellere conatur, sed, pro suo more, conatu infoelici.

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