On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §573

Man. Post. Cap. IX: GAR — same subtilty vs Christ-satisfaction / Socinian counter-thrust

ut consider the useless cleverness of the argument in a like example. So Christ's satisfaction is imputed to us, that we are said to have satisfied in Christ. Let someone from the flock of the Socinians approach; about to take joint efforts against that teaching, he will rise against the learned man and against the truth with subtle argumentation. When do we finally satisfy in Christ, by his actual satisfaction? When Christ himself satisfied on the cross? Or at another time? Surely when he satisfied on the cross. But hear. Those who have satisfied so as to placate the wrath of God, those have truly and properly satisfied. Those who have truly and properly satisfied, then when they satisfied, truly and properly were. Therefore has the Christian who now lives truly been, when Christ hung on the cross? What seems? Is it not a strongly twisted dart? Let him who taught to knot it loose the knot. For he will not refute the Socinian so as not also by the same reason to traduce his own subtilty.

Latin

GAR. 2. Sed ratiocinii vanam subtilitatem considera in exemplo simili. Ita imputatur nobis Christi satisfactio, ut in Christo satisfecisse dicamur. Accedat e Socinianorum grege quispiam; adversus eam doctrinam arma mutua biturus, Viro docto & in veritatem subtili argumentatione consurget. Quando vero demum satisfacimus in Christo, satisfactione eius actuali? An cum Christus ipse satisfecit in cruce? An alio tempore? Certe cum satisfecit in cruce. Sed audi. Qui satisfecerunt, ita ut iram Dei placarent, illi vere & proprie satisfecerunt. Qui vere & proprie satisfecerunt, tunc cum satisfecerunt, vere & proprie fuerunt. Ergone Christianus qui nunc vivit vere fuit, cum Christus penderet in cruce? Quid videtur? Annon valide contortum telum? Dissolvat nodum qui nectere docuit. Nec enim Socinianum refellet, ut non & eadem ratione subtilitatem suam traducat.

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.