On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §166

Man. Post. Cap. II §III: Garissoles — fourfold needless; only actualis transgressio meant

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

Garissoles. Next I notice that no necessity, and no great usefulness, drove the learned man to divide the subject so anxiously and scrupulously into four senses. Everyone who has spoken until now of the imputation of the first sin has meant by that name, as their writings sufficiently show, only that actual transgression of the first man by which he broke God's command not to taste the fruit of the forbidden tree. Why then lead the reader through laborious windings, and speak of sin inhering in us—or our original corruption—and of imputation and the penalty that follows guilt, matters everyone knows are not at issue in this dispute? The question is not whether corruption is planted in us all, for which God may justly exact penalties from us or impute it to us—no Evangelical ever called that back into doubt. What some today delight to bring into question is only this: whether from Adam's first actual sin some guilt and some liability to penalty rests on the posterity.

Latin

GAR. Observo deinde, nulla necessitate, vel magna utilitate, compulsum Virum Doctum, ut ita anxie et scrupulose subjectum in quatuor significata distingueret; cum quicunque hactenus de primi peccati imputatione locuti sunt, nihil aliud eo nomine intellexerint, ut ex ipsorum scriptis satis patere potest, quam ipsius primi hominis actualem illam transgressionem, qua Dei mandatum de non gustando fructu arboris interdictae violavit. Ut quid igitur opus erat per operosas ambages lectoris animum circumducere, et de peccato in nobis inhaerente, sive corruptione nostra originali, deque imputatione ac poena reatum ipsam consequente verba facere, de quibus in hac disputatione nequaquam agi satis notum est? Non enim quaeritur, utrum nobis omnibus insita sit corruptio, propter quam Deus poenas a nobis exigere merito possit, aut eam nobis imputare, quod nemo Evangelicorum unquam revocavit in dubium: Illud unum in Quaestionem hodie vocari quibusdam volupe est, utrum ex primo illo actuali Adae peccato aliquis reatus, et aliqua poenae dignitas posteris incumbat.

About this text

Josue de la Place (Placeus) — Capita I–XIV partial of De imputatione primi peccati Adami from the 1661 Saumur Latin, through Man. Post. Caput X (GAR.1–3 Rom. 5.13 tip) / before PLAC on reatus-only. Honest partial; Cap. X Rom. 5:14+ / ~494 pp Disputatio remain.

English follows the locked 1661 Saumur Latin of Capita I–XIV partial through Man. Post. Caput IX (eph-ho / eph-ho pantes) before eph-ho / eph-ho pantes, reconstructed from IA PDF page images with Vision OCR and pdftotext as check. No modern English was copied. Cap. IX deepen+ remain.

Catalogue & scope

IA deimputationepri00lapl. Densify: Capita I–XII + Caput XIV + Man. Post. Cap. II–VI through Cap. X Rom. 5:14 tip. Not whole Disputatio; Cap. X Rom. 5:14+ / ~494 pp Disputatio remain.

Witnesses

This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.