On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §236

Man. Post. Cap. IV: PLAC — forensic/moral; habitus; ἀποστασία

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

I still distinguish, as before, privation of righteousness: actual and habitual—actual law-breaking and habitual. Righteousness itself must be split again: forensic or moral; and each either legal or evangelical. Forensic legal righteousness is perfect lifelong conformity to the law, so a single breach loses it—one is enough for condemnation. Evangelical forensic righteousness rests on remission of sins, so breaking the law does not shut out forgiveness.

Moral righteousness stands opposite injustice—actual to actual, habitual to habitual. Does an actual breach necessarily strip habitual righteousness? Distinguish. Natural or legal habit (as in Adam) neither hopes for remission nor rests on anything but natural faculty, so law-breaking loses it. Supernatural or evangelical habit includes faith and hope of remission and hangs on the regenerating Spirit and the decree of election, so a mere breach does not shake it off.

Law-breaking itself is twofold: universal ἀποστασία from God—a change of the last end—or any particular sin. The first destroys the habit of righteousness; the second wounds it but does not wreck it. Adam's righteousness was legal and natural, and his sin a universal apostasy, a turn of the last end; so the moment he sinned he lost righteousness, and God needed no separate judicial act to strip him of it.

Latin

Distinguo tamen ut supra justitiae privationem. Est enim privatio justitiae actualis & privatio justitiae habitualis: illa est violatio legis actualis, haec habitualis. Sed rursus distinguenda est justitia: accipi enim potest vel forensi significatione vel morali. Utraque rursus vel est legalis vel evangelica. Justitia forensis legalis, quia consistit in perfecta totius vitae conformitate cum lege, vel unica legis violatione amittitur. Una enim ad condemnationem sufficit. Evangelicae dispar est ratio: cum enim in remissione peccatorum consistat, palam est violationem legis non excludere remissionem peccati. Justitia vero morali sensu accepta opponitur, ut dixi, violationi legis, hoc est, injustitiae, actualis quidem actuali, habitualis vero habituali. Sed quaeritur an violatio actualis inducat necessario privationem justitiae habitualis? Distinctione opus est. Dispar enim est ratio habitus justitiae naturalis seu legalis, qualis ponitur esse in Adamo, & habitus justitiae supernaturalis seu evangelicae. Illa enim nec spem includit remissionis peccatorum, nec aliunde pendere videtur quam a facultate hominis naturali. Itaque violatione legis amittitur. Haec vero quia fidem ac spem remissionis peccatorum includit, & pendet ab alio principio quam humano, nempe a Spiritu regenerationis Sancto, & Decreto electionis, simplici legis violatione non excutitur. Est etiam violatio legis duplex: una est universalis a Deo ἀποστασία, seu mutatio finis ultimi, altera, particulare quodvis peccatum: Illa habitum justitiae delet, haec laedit quidem, at non destruit. Cum ergo justitia Adami legalis ac naturalis esset, ejusque peccatum universalis quaedam a Deo apostasia, seu finis ultimi mutatio, fieri non potuit, quin simul ac peccavit justitia privaretur, nec opus fuit, ut Deus judiciaria aliqua actione eum justitia privaret.

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.