On the Imputation of Adam's First Sin · §55

Cap. VII: Garissoles Resp. 1 — alleged confession said to overturn the corruption reading

What does the learned man reply? "First," he says, "let the respondent's confession be noted: for while he acknowledges that that sin which is said to have entered through one man is one sin of one man, namely Adam's, by the same reason he confutes and overthrows all those arguments by which another above was striving to confirm that here by the name of sin not Adam's own sin, but only our inward and original corruption, is to be understood." Does he so confute and overthrow all those arguments? Can another's arguments — many, and strong, and long after that affirmation devised and proposed — be confuted and overthrown by one man's simple affirmation? If it is so, there is no argument so necessary and demonstrative that it cannot by that reason be most easily confuted and overthrown. But those arguments, because they belong to a later manuscript, how valid and invincible they are will then become plain when a comparison of that manuscript with Doctor Garissoles's book is instituted.

Latin

Quid reponit vir doctus? Primo, inquit, notetur respondentis confessio: Nam dum agnoscit peccatum illud, quod per unum hominem introiisse dicitur, esse unum unius hominis, nempe Adami peccatum, eadem ratione omnia illa argumenta confutat & convellit, quibus supra moliebatur alius confirmare, hic peccati nomine non ipsius Adami peccatum, sed nostram internam & originalem corruptionem tantum intelligendam esse. Ita-ne, omnia illa argumenta confutat & convellit? Possunt-ne unius simplici affirmatione, alterius argumenta & multa, & valida, & diu post illam affirmationem excogitata & proposita confutari & convelli? Si est ita, nullum est argumentum usque adeo necessarium, & demonstrativum, quod non possit ea ratione facillime confutari & convelli. Argumenta autem illa, quia sunt posterioris manuscripti, quam sint valida & invicta, tum fiet manifestum, cum instituetur manuscripti illius cum libro D. Gar. comparatio.

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.