Would the bolded section of these sentences be an example of the future passive participle, not being used as a passive periphrastic or gerundive?
Totum & adaequatum fidei istius objectum, omnia istius objecti adtributa necessario credenda, omnes atque universi fidei istius actus, antecedens, formalis, & consequentes, istis continentur.
My translation is:
The whole and adequate object of that faith, all things associated with that object and necessary to be believed, and every act of that whole faith, the antecedent, the formal, and the consequences, are contained in them.
Is there a hard and fast rule to help determine if the future passive participle is being used to imply necessity or obligation and is not being used as a gerundive (or a periphrastic)?
Totum & adaequatum fidei istius objectum, omnia istius objecti adtributa necessario credenda, omnes atque universi fidei istius actus, antecedens, formalis, & consequentes, istis continentur.
My translation is:
The whole and adequate object of that faith, all things associated with that object and necessary to be believed, and every act of that whole faith, the antecedent, the formal, and the consequences, are contained in them.
Is there a hard and fast rule to help determine if the future passive participle is being used to imply necessity or obligation and is not being used as a gerundive (or a periphrastic)?