On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §393

Man. Post. Cap. VII: GAR — not norming God by human law; scandal reply

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

GAR. But as to what we add second: when we propose that law against traitors in this business, our mind is not that our thoughts of God's justice are to be measured by the norm of human laws. No such thought has yet entered our mind. But because those who deny the imputation of the first sin use this among other reasons—that our religion is brought into hatred with Jews and Gentiles by asserting this dogma, as attributing something unjust and cruel to the divinity—we teach by this example that what they themselves so often observe in their public judgments cannot seem unjust or barbarous to them. We do not therefore gather thus: Men impute fathers' sins to traitors' children. Therefore God also is to be thought to impute Adam's sin to posterity. But rather thus: To men, whether Gentiles or others, it does not seem unjust if in the crime of lese-majesty a son bears penalties for the father's sin. Who then among them can charge God with injustice if he punishes Adam's sin in posterity?—so that the example is used not to confirm the truth, but only to illustrate it and to vindicate it from the charge of injustice or monstrosity.

Latin

GAR. Sed quod secundo adjungimus, nobis legem illam adversus perduelles in hoc negotio proponentibus non ea mens est, ut putemus cogitationes nostras de Dei justitia ad legum humanarum normam exigendas esse. Nulla hactenus animum subiit cogitatio eiusmodi. Sed quia, qui peccati primi imputationem negant, hac inter alias ratione utuntur, quod religio nostra Judaeis & Ethnicis huius dogmatis assertione in odium adducatur, tanquam injustum aliquid crudele divinitati attribuens, nos hoc exemplo docemus, illis injustum aut barbarum videri non posse, quod ipsimet in suis publicis judiciis tam frequenter observant. Non ergo ita colligimus: Homines perduellium liberis peccata paterna imputant. Ergo & Deus censendus est peccatum Adae posteris imputare. Sed ita potius: Hominibus sive Ethnicis, sive aliis non videtur injustum, si in crimine laesae-Majestatis filius pro peccato patris poenas ferat. Quis igitur ex illis poterit Deum injustitiae arguere, si peccatum Adae puniat in posteris? Ut exemplum non ad confirmandam veritatem usurpetur, sed ad illustrandam tantum, & ab injustitia aut immanitatis accusatione vindicandam.

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.