On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §184

Man. Post. Cap. II §XVII: Garissoles on mediate theologians / Placeus — discrimen false; before §XIX

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

Garissoles: I take that to have been the mind of those theologians who teach that Adam's sin is imputed to us mediately—through our corruption and viciousness as means (Aegidius Hunnius, article on sin, Question 7; Walaeus, Defense of Molinaeus, chapter 8). But the learned men who use this prior/posterior imputation distinction mean something quite different. (1) They absolutely deny what we called the common, prior, immediate imputation, and so on. (2) They explain the posterior, mediate, or singular far otherwise—claiming it in no way looks to Adam's actual personal sin, but must be referred only to our own original vice and native hereditary corruption. Placeus: Both differences are plainly false. First: Hunnius and Walaeus denied immediate imputation as expressly as speech allows. Hunnius says Adam's fall is imputed to us his posterity not immediately and of itself, but mediately and on account of something else—and that that one offense yields to condemnation only mediately. What does not immediately and of itself mean? What does the exclusive only mediately mean? If that is not denying immediate imputation, what is? As for this writer, he denies even the possibility of that imputation and props the denial with an argument from God's justice; see above, page 22 (and earlier, page 20). The second difference is so openly false I cannot wonder enough how the learned man brought himself to say it. On the contrary I maintain that mediate imputation looks to Adam's actual personal sin itself; I have never used it of another sin, nor—what is more—could it be so used.

Latin

GAR. Eam existimo fuisse mentem illis Theologis, qui peccatum Adae docent nobis imputari mediate, sive mediante corruptione & vitiositate nostra. Aegid. Hunnius artic. de pecc. Quaest. 7. Walaeus Defens. Molin. cap. 8. Enimvero longe alius Doctis Viris sensus, qui hac prioris & posterioris imputationis distinctione utuntur. Quandoquidem 1. eam, quam diximus communem, priorem & immediatam, absolute negant &c. 2. Quia posteriorem & mediatam sive singularem longe aliter exponunt, ita scilicet ut eam pretendant nulla ratione ad ipsum actuale & personale Adami peccatum respicere, sed ad nostrum ipsorum duntaxat originale vitium nativamque & hereditariam corruptionem referri debere. PLAC. Utrumque hoc discrimen aperte falsum est. Et primum quidem: Negarunt enim imputationem immediatam Aegidius Hunnius & Walaeus tam diserte, ut disertius non potuerint. Ille ait lapsum Adami non immediate & per se, sed mediate & propter aliud nobis ejus posteris imputari. Item, unum illud delictum nobis ad condemnationem cedere tantum mediate. Quid sibi vult illa negatio, non immediate & per se? Quid exclusiva, Tantum mediate? Quid est negare imputationem immediatam, si hoc non est? Hic vero imputationis illius possibilitatem negat, suamque negationem firmat ducto a Dei justitia argumento. Locum habes supra pag. 22. uti superiorem pag. 20. Secundum etiam tam aperte falsum est, ut satis mirari non possim, quomodo a se Vir Doctus impetrare potuerit, ut id proferret. Contra enim contendo imputationem mediatam ad ipsum actuale & personale Adami peccatum respicere; nec de alio peccato a me unquam usurpatam fuisse, aut, quod amplius est, usurpari potuisse.

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.