On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §61

Cap. VII: Regressus τὸ ὅτι / τὸ διότι — Garissoles trapped in his own circle

And yet if there were one, it ought to be called not so much a circle condemned by the philosophers as a regress praised by the same: for it would consist of two demonstrations, one 'that,' the other 'because' — the former producing a distinct knowledge of the effect, the latter a confused knowledge of the cause... But when Doctor Garissoles had objected this same circularity to himself, he could not extricate himself from it. For he touched only the later reason; the prior one, on which the circle hung, he wrapped in deep silence. I ask, therefore, from his mind: does the Apostle in verse 12 prove that all are sentenced to death because Adam's sin is imputed to them? If you say yes, the circular argumentation remains: for at once in verses 13 and 14 he will prove that Adam's sin is imputed to all, because all are sentenced to death. If you deny it, you do indeed remove the circle; but neither did Doctor Garissoles deny that, nor did he attempt anything of the kind in order to lead himself out of that circle: he therefore did the very thing of which he falsely accused us — he made of the divine Apostle, as he speaks, an inept circular arguer.

Latin

quanquam si esset, non tam circulus a Philosophis damnatus, quam regressus ab iisdem laudatus dici deberet: constaret enim ex duabus demonstrationibus, altera τὸ ὅτι, altera τὸ διότι, illa pariente distinctam effectus, hac confusam causae notitiam. Eandem autem circulationem cum ipse sibi objecisset D. G. expedire sese ex ea non potuit. Posteriorem enim tantum rationem attigit, priorem, ex qua pendebat circulus, alto involvit silentio. Peto igitur ex ejus mente, num Apostolus probet vs. 12. omnes esse morti addictos, quia peccatum Adae ipsis imputatur? Si ais, manet circularis argumentatio: statim enim vs. 13. & 14. probabit omnibus peccatum Adae imputari, quia omnes sunt morti addicti. Si negas, tollis quidem circulum; sed neque id negavit D. G. neque ut se ex eo circulo educeret, quicquam ejusmodi tentavit: fecit ergo id, cujus nos falso accusabat, ex Apostolo divino ineptum, ut loquitur, circulatorem.

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.