FathersVia Patrum

On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §404

Man. Post. Cap. VII: PLAC — concupiscence/semen; mediate from parent; olive

Do you want to know how we sinned through one will? From the will, he says, there is sin. Perhaps he seeks original sin too. I answer: original sin altogether, because this too was sown from the first man's will so that it might be in him and pass into all. Did he think with the learned man that it passes by imputation, and that its sole cause is God's will? Plainly the contrary; he contends it should be ascribed neither to God nor to human nature as from God, but to concupiscence or lust which passes from parent to children through seed. He does not want the vice to descend immediately from Adam by imputation, but mediately, and to be carried into the offspring from each nearest parent's vice by carnal generation. And when he asks how what is remitted in the parent is drawn into the offspring, he says it happens in wondrous ways, yet happens—and illustrates with the olive from which a wild olive is born. Had he sensed with the learned man, he would not have fled to nature, carnal generation, nearest parents' vice, or the wild-olive example, but to God's will, which was pleased immediately to impute Adam's actual sin to all his posterity and, to punish that imputed sin and satisfy justice, to inflict that original vice on them all. For otherwise, the learned man cries in many places—and namely cap. 11 §8, above at p. 125—no account of the matter can be given.

Latin

Vis scire quomodo per voluntatem unius peccavimus? Ex voluntate, inquit, peccatum est. Quaerit forte etiam & originale peccatum. Respondeo prorsus originale peccatum, quia & hoc ex voluntate primi hominis seminatum est, ut & in illo esset, & in omnes transiret. Putavitne cum viro docto id per imputationem transire, & huius causam unicam esse Dei voluntatem? Contra plane; contendit neque Deo, neque naturae humanae ut est a Deo, sed concupiscentiae seu libidini quae a parente in liberos transit per semen debere ascribi. Non vult immediate ab Adamo per imputationem vitium descendere, sed mediate, & a proximi cuiusque parentis vitio per carnalem generationem trajici in prolem. Cumque inquirat, quomodo quod dimissum est in parente trahatur in prolem, id quidem miris modis fieri dicit, sed tamen fieri: & illustrat exemplo olivae ex qua nascitur oleaster. Si idem cum viro docto sensisset, non confugisset ad naturam, non ad carnalem generationem, non ad vitium proximorum parentum, non ad oleastri exemplum, sed ad voluntatem Dei, cui placuit omnibus Adami posteris peccatum actuale immediate imputare, & ut illud imputatum puniret, & satisfaceret justitiae, ipsis omnibus vitium illud originale infligere. Aliter enim illius rei rationem reddi non posse clamat vir doctus multis locis, ac nominatim cap. 11. §. 8. de quo supra pag. 125.

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.