On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §202

Man. Post. Cap. II: Placeus denies strict poena; Fathers/Calvin by similitude

In the Theses I refused to count it that sort of penalty, and conscience still will not let me reverse that denial. The Fathers do call this corruption—or concupiscence—a penalty, and Calvin does in places; I do not deny the word, only the so-proper, so-strict sense. The name rides on likeness. Penalty tracks fault and clings to it; hereditary corruption likewise tracked Adam's fault and sprang from it.

Latin

Ego vero talem esse poenam & negavi in Thesibus & non possum impetrare a conscientia mea ut nunc quoque non negem. Scio hanc corruptionem seu concupiscentiam poenam a Patribus appellari, necnon alicubi a Calvino, sed nego sensu ita proprio, ita stricto. Sed ob similitudinem quandam poenae nomen ei accommodatur. Ut enim poena sequitur culpam & cum ea cohaeret, sic corruptio haereditaria secuta est culpam Adami atque ex ea nata est.

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. 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.