Theological Theses · §2515 · Louis Le Blanc de Beaulieu

Hence: premotion in Eden for the Thomists, not for Jansenius

Thesis LXXVII. On the Thomists' assumptions, then, the physically predetermining aid was necessary even for man unfallen, quite apart from any thought of sin. On Jansenius's view, by contrast, the efficacious aid by which a person comes to will and act had no place in the state of innocence.

There was only the aid without which man could not act well, and which could easily coexist with his not acting well, since it was subject to free choice and in no way brought man's free choice under itself.

Latin

LXXVII. Ac proinde, secundum Thomistarum hypotheses, auxilium physice praedeterminans necessarium fuit, homini etiam integro, & citra ullam peccati considerationem. Sed juxta Jansenium, adjutorium efficax, quo fit ut homo velit & operetur, nullum locum habuit in statu innocentiae; Sed solum adjutorium sine quo homo quidem bene agere non poterat; & cum quo poterat facile consistere, ut homo bene non ageret; Utpote quod libero arbitrio subdebatur, minime vero liberum hominis arbitrium sibi subjiciebat.

Report a mistake in this passage

About this text

Louis Le Blanc, a Reformed professor at Sedan, sets out theology in theses argued against Rome: Scripture, faith, grace, free choice, good works and the saints.

This volume holds the Theses on Theology I–XLIII and On Faith I–XXII, in eighteen sections.

Louis Le Blanc de Beaulieu (1614–1675) was minister and professor of theology at the Academy of Sedan, the Reformed school on France's eastern border. His Theses were disputed by students over many years and collected in a London folio (1675).

The Theological Theses range across the whole Reformed system — Scripture, God, predestination, grace, and justifying faith — in the crisp thesis-and-proof form of the seventeenth-century schools.

Date1675 AD (Sedan theses; London collection)

No modern English.

Reference

ESTC R17887; Wing L802. IA bub_gb_eOkHAW4G0-wC (+ EEBO 1675 for gap leaves).

Printed text used

Translated from Latin (Pitt 1675) (Latin)
Also checked PDF of the 1675 (Latin)
Also checked pdftotext of De Theologia pages (Latin)
Also checked DjVu machine-read text of the 1675 (Latin)

We have not yet re-checked this work against its source. We made this study translation with AI help. No scholar has yet certified it as faithful and complete. Open Latin on any section, or the Latin source link, to see the source text. It is not a critical edition.

Report a mistake