On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §51

Cap. VII: Secunda responsio — 1 Cor. 15:22 and hereditary corruption neglected

The second response likewise sins by ignorance of the argument, and takes the uncertain cause otherwise than it ought, and besides has some things less rightly said. "Who will have said," he says, "that an uncertain cause is proposed by Paul, when in 1 Corinthians 15:22 he ascends as far as Adam the first-formed, and says that we all die in Adam?" What is the point of this? Does the Apostle there bring forward some cause why all die by the force of the communion they have with Adam? Or are those words, "in Adam all die" (1 Corinthians 15:22), to be understood even imputatively, as they speak? Worse are the things that follow. "Namely," he says, "neither there nor here does the Apostle properly look to particular causes that can reside in each individual of the human race and on account of which it comes about that they die; but he sets out a general cause that looks upon all in the genus equally," and so on. He speaks just as if hereditary corruption were not a general cause looking upon all men equally — when yet that is as common as the death of those who have sinned is common, as human nature is common to them, indeed as imputation is said to be common. So little by little the doctrine of the force and guilt of hereditary corruption, which the first reformers defended with highest zeal, is neglected and nearly blotted out, that it may give place to that imputation which those great men either altogether did not know, or even refuted.

Latin

Secunda similiter responsio peccat ignoratione argumenti, causamque incertam aliter quam debuit accipit, et praeterea nonnulla habet minus recte dicta. Quis dixerit, inquit, incertam causam a Paulo proponi cum I. Cor. xv. 22. ad Adamum usque protoplastam conscendit, et nos omnes dicit in Adamo mori? Quorsum hoc spectat? Ibine causam aliquam affert Apostolus, cur omnes vi communionis quam habent cum Adamo moriantur? aut suntne illa verba, in Adamo omnes moriuntur, etiam imputative, ut loquuntur, intelligenda? Deteriora sunt quae sequuntur. Nimirum, inquit, neque ibi, neque hic Apostolus proprie ad causas particulares respicit, quae residere possunt in unoquoque individuo generis humani, et propter quas fit ut moriantur: sed causam generalem exponit quae omnes in genere ex aequo respiciat etc. Perinde loquitur, quasi corruptio haereditaria non esset causa generalis omnes homines ex aequo respiciens: Cum illa tamen tam sit communis, quam communis est eorum qui peccaverunt mors, quam communis est illis natura humana, immo quam communis dicitur esse imputatio. Ita paulatim doctrina de corruptionis haereditariae vi et reatu, quam summo studio primi reformatores tuebantur, negligitur ac prope obliteratur, ut det locum illi imputationi, quam magni illi viri, aut ignorarunt prorsus, aut etiam refutarunt.

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.