A further question: does God's wisdom forbid creating man without it, and is 'pure nature' a possible state?
There is a further question between the Reformed school and a great many Roman teachers: whether it is not contrary to God's wisdom and goodness for man to be created without original righteousness, and whether the state the Roman school calls "pure nature" should be counted among man's possible states.
In that state man would not be corrupted by sin, yet would lack true righteousness, would struggle with much ignorance and weakness, and would be drawn toward evil by his own concupiscence and by an appetite rebelling against reason, just as things are in the state of corrupt nature. The ordinary run of Roman teachers says yes; the Reformed school, with perhaps one or two exceptions, says no by common consent.
Latin
XLVIII. Praeterea vero quaestio est inter Scholam Reformatam & plurimos Scholae Romanae Doctores, Annon sapientiae & bonitati divinae repugnet hominem creari absque justitia Originali; & an inter status hominis possibiles numerari debeat status ille quem Schola Romana vocat purae naturae: In quo non sit homo peccato corruptus, & tamen vera justitia careat, multaque ignorantia & infirmitate laboret, & ad malum trahatur propria concupiscentia, & appetitu adversus rationem rebellante, non secus ac res se habet in statu naturae corruptae. Quod affirmat vulgus Doctorum Ecclesiae Romanae, Schola vero Reformata communi consensu negat, uno forte vel altero excepto.