On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §88

Cap. VIII: Immediate imputation needs precise actual sin

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

Why then does he not linger on that? Because, he says, whether cut off from that corruption or joined with it, it is still understood to be designated — and that is enough for our cause. No: if you are defending the cause of immediate imputation, that is not enough. Actual sin must be imputed as cut off from the corruption, if that corruption is properly the penalty of the imputed sin. For the same sin cannot be the penalty of itself — least of all a penalty properly so called.

Latin

Cur vero id non moratur? Etenim, inquit, sive praecisum ab illa corruptione, sive conjunctum cum ea, semper tamen designari intelligitur, quod ad causam nostram satis est. Immo vero si causam defendis imputationis immediatae, id non satis est. oportet enim sic imputari peccatum actuale praecisum à corruptione, siquidem haec est illius imputati poena proprie dicta. non potest enim idem peccatum esse poena sui ipsius, praesertim poena proprie dicta.

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.