On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §169

Man. Post. Cap. II §III: Placeus — analogy opposite; passive justice omitted; false consensus

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

Placeus. This likeness is not a parallel but an opposite. To that bland prestidigitator I am as unlike as white to black. First, he would pretend to have listed every sense of Christ's righteousness, yet omit the one most decisive in justification: that singular obedience he rendered by suffering death—death, I say, of the cross—which is commonly called passive righteousness and which all Protestants without hesitation believe is imputed to believers, while about imputing active righteousness (the only sense D. Garissoles mentioned) there is some difference of opinion that does not disturb the Church's peace. I, by contrast, reviewed every sense of Adam's first sin and omitted none. Second, he would say that Christ's righteousness, taken in a sense in which all Protestants constantly deny it is imputed, is imputed; whereas I affirmed that Adam's sin is imputed to posterity in the sense in which all Protestants constantly hold it is. So he would invent a plainly false consensus with the Evangelicals: for who among them ever taught that the inhering righteousness we have from Christ is imputed to us for justification? The consensus I profess is true, and no one who is not a Pelagian denies it or can deny it.

Latin

PLAC. Hoc simile non est appositum, sed oppositum. Huic enim blandulo praestigiatori tam sum dissimilis quam album nigro. Primo ille se enumerasse prae se ferret omnes acceptiones justitiae Christi, cum tamen unam omitteret in justificationis negotio maxime momentosam, qua justitia Christi accipitur pro singulari illa obedientia quam praestitit patiendo mortem, mortem, inquam, crucis; quae vulgo justitia passiva appellatur, et imputari fidelibus ab omnibus Protestantibus sine dubitatione creditur, cum de imputatione justitiae activae, quam solam D. Gar. commemoravit, sit aliqua sententiarum discrepantia, quae pacem Ecclesiae non turbat. Ego vero primi Adae peccati acceptiones omnes recensui, nullam praetermisi. Secundo ille Christi justitiam eo sensu acceptam imputari diceret, quo sensu accepta imputari negatur constanter ab omnibus Protestantibus. Ego vero peccatum Adami eo sensu posteris imputari affirmavi, quo sensu iis imputari omnes Protestantes constanter tenent. Itaque ille consensum fingeret cum Evangelicis plane falsum: Quis enim unquam Evangelicorum docuit justitiam inhaerentem, quam habemus a Christo, nobis ad justificationem imputari? Quem autem ego profiteor consensum, is verus est, neque negatur, aut negari potest a quoquam non Pelagiano.

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.