On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §398

Man. Post. Cap. VII: PLAC — men not integrating parts; hand/foot vs Adam's will

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

The body's diverse members are integrating parts of the whole man. But all men are not integrating parts of human nature. Nature is not composed of many men. Otherwise, since human nature is in me entire, all men would be in me. They are Logical or subjective parts, as the schools say, and nature abstracted and cut off from individuals and given universality is a Logical or universal whole—but it has that reason of a whole not from the side of the thing, but through our mind's operation. So Metaphysically speaking the matter is the contrary. Person is the whole, nature the part: person is what acts, nature that by which it acts. Thomas adds: we see that an act of sin exercised through some member—say hand or foot—has the nature of fault not from the hand's or foot's will but from the whole man's will, from which as from a principle the motion of sin is derived to the several members. And likewise from Adam's will, who was the principle of human nature, the whole inordination of nature has the nature of fault in all to whom it reaches, insofar as they are capable of fault. Mark, I pray, how badly this likeness proceeds.

Latin

Diversa membra corporis sunt partes integrantes totius hominis. Omnes vero homines non sunt partes integrantes naturae humanae. Non componitur natura ex multis hominibus. Alioqui cum mihi natura humana insit integra, inessent mihi omnes homines. Sed sunt partes Logicae, sive subjectivae, ut vulgo loquuntur in scholis, & natura abstracta & praecisa ab individuis, ac universalitate donata totum est Logicum seu universale: sed hanc rationem totius non habet a parte rei, sed per mentis nostrae operationem. Itaque Metaphysice loquendo contra res habet. Persona est totum, natura pars: persona est id quod agit, natura id quo agit. Addit Thomas, videmus autem quod actus peccati exercitus per aliquod membrum, puta per manum, vel pedem, non habet rationem culpae ex voluntate manus vel pedis, sed ex voluntate totius hominis, a qua sicut a quodam principio derivatur motus peccati ad singula membra. Et similiter a voluntate Adae, qui fuit principium humanae naturae, tota inordinatio naturae habet culpae rationem in omnibus ad quos pervenit, quantum ad hoc quod susceptivi sunt culpae. Adverte quaeso quam non bene procedat ista similitudo.

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.