On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §129

Cap. X: Retorsion — if prior reatus is only by will, why Christ’s suffering?

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

I can turn the argument on its maker. If no evil means no need of a remedy, and there is no evil unless we carry a guilt earlier than our original stain from Adam’s disobedience, and the sole true cause of that guilt in us is God’s will — then I cannot see why imputed justice is necessary at all. Let God simply withhold imputation of the first Adam’s sin, as He already withholds imputation of other sins — Adam’s own, or our forefathers’ — and there will be no evil and no need of a remedy. On Garissoles’s account there is no reason God should charge us with that sin rather than with Adam’s other sins or other parents’ sins, except His bare will. If imputing or not imputing hangs on that will alone, why did Christ have to suffer such horrors so that this sin might not be charged to us?

Latin

Possem etiam hanc rationem in suum autorem retorquere. Nam si ubi nullum est malum, nullo opus est remedio, & nullum sit malum, si nullus sit in nobis propter Adae inobedientiam reatus labe nostra originali prior, & cur sit in nobis iste reatus vera & unica causa est Dei voluntas, non intelligo quae sit imputatae justitiae necessitas. Abstineat modo Deus ab imputatione primi Adae peccati quemadmodum sibi temperat ab aliorum peccatorum, vel ipsius Adami, vel nostrorum majorum, imputatione, nullum erit malum, nec opus erit remedio. Nulla enim est causa, si D. Garissolio fides habetur, cur Deus illud peccatum nobis potius quam alia peccata, vel Adami, vel aliorum parentum, imputet, praeter unam eius voluntatem. Cum ergo id pendeat ab eius voluntate ut imputet, vel non imputet, quid opus fuit, Christum tam dira pati, ut posset nobis illud peccatum non imputari?

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.