On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §146

Cap. XII: Likeness in the thing, not the mode — Calvin vs recentiores

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

He also gibes at our reply—that the opposition's likeness lies in the thing, not in its mode—and says we take Socinus's part rather than Calvin's, when in fact he is the one leaving Calvin, to whom we hold fast. How does he refute the reply we already proved by authority and reason? He asks why our people then draw from this text the mode of justification, namely by imputing Christ's righteousness. A fine refutation! Who among ours draws that from here—Calvin, Martyr, Bucer, Bullinger, and the rest? Not at all; only later writers who leave their path on this point. They do not see, he says, how they wound the common cause when they let this supposedly invincible argument be torn from them—and, so far as they can, tear it from us to favor the other side. If we ask why they luxuriate so in this place, we shall find it is done to favor Pelagians, Arminians, Socinians, and Anabaptists. We see the opposite: they wound the common cause who cannot or will not argue well, push forward weak proofs as invincible, and meanwhile bury their brothers under slander. That we both see and lament.

Latin

Suggillat etiam nostram responsionem, In re sitam esse similitudinem oppositionis, non in rei modo; ac dicit nos Socini potius quam Calvini partes tueri: cum tamen ipse revera discedat a Calvino, cui nos arcte adhaeremus. Quomodo autem illam responsionem, quam supra & autoritate & ratione comprobavimus, refutat? petit, cur ergo nostrates justificationis nostrae modum, nempe per imputationem justitiae Christi hinc eliciunt? Haec est scilicet egregia refutandi ratio! Quinam vero sunt illi nostrates qui id hinc eliciunt? Calvinus? Martyr? Bucerus? Bullingerus &c? Nequaquam certe; sed recentiores, ab eorum vestigiis ea in re deflectentes. At, inquit, non vident quantum communem causam laedant, qui hoc sibi invictum argumentum non solum eripi patiuntur, sed & nobis, ut adversae causae faveant, quantum in eis situm est, eripiunt. Et si cur hunc locum ita luxent, anquiramus; id in gratiam Pelagianorum, Arminianorum, Socinianorum, Anabaptistarum fieri certo comperiemus. Imo vero videmus quantum causam communem laedant, qui bene argumentari, vel nesciunt vel nolunt, argumentaque nullius roboris pro invictis obtrudunt, & interim fratres suos calumniis obruunt. Hoc certe & videmus & dolemus.

About this text

New English, free to read. Open any section below.

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.