FOURTH ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 82, Art. 4]

Whether Original Sin Is Equally in All?

Objection 1: It would seem that original sin is not equally in all.

Because original sin is inordinate concupiscence, as stated above

(A. 3). Now all are not equally prone to acts of concupiscence.

Therefore original sin is not equally in all.

Obj. 2: Further, original sin is an inordinate disposition of the

soul, just as sickness is an inordinate disposition of the body. But

sickness is subject to degrees. Therefore original sin is subject to

degrees.

Obj. 3: Further, Augustine says (De Nup. et Concep. i, 23) that "lust

transmits original sin to the child." But the act of generation may

be more lustful in one than in another. Therefore original sin may be

greater in one than in another.

_On the contrary,_ Original sin is the sin of nature, as stated above

(Q. 81, A. 1). But nature is equally in all. Therefore original sin

is too.

_I answer that,_ There are two things in original sin: one is the

privation of original justice; the other is the relation of this

privation to the sin of our first parent, from whom it is transmitted

to man through his corrupt origin. As to the first, original sin has

no degrees, since the gift of original justice is taken away

entirely; and privations that remove something entirely, such as

death and darkness, cannot be more or less, as stated above (Q. 73,

A. 2). In like manner, neither is this possible, as to the second:

since all are related equally to the first principle of our corrupt

origin, from which principle original sin takes the nature of guilt;

for relations cannot be more or less. Consequently it is evident that

original sin cannot be more in one than in another.

Reply Obj. 1: Through the bond of original justice being broken,

which held together all the powers of the soul in a certain order,

each power of the soul tends to its own proper movement, and the more

impetuously, as it is stronger. Now it happens that some of the

soul's powers are stronger in one man than in another, on account of

the different bodily temperaments. Consequently if one man is more

prone than another to acts of concupiscence, this is not due to

original sin, because the bond of original justice is equally broken

in all, and the lower parts of the soul are, in all, left to

themselves equally; but it is due to the various dispositions of the

powers, as stated.

Reply Obj. 2: Sickness of the body, even sickness of the same

species, has not an equal cause in all; for instance if a fever be

caused by corruption of the bile, the corruption may be greater or

less, and nearer to, or further from a vital principle. But the cause

of original sin is equal to all, so that there is no comparison.

Reply Obj. 3: It is not the actual lust that transmits original sin:

for, supposing God were to grant to a man to feel no inordinate lust

in the act of generation, he would still transmit original sin; we

must understand this to be habitual lust, whereby the sensitive

appetite is not kept subject to reason by the bonds of original

justice. This lust is equally in all.

________________________

Summa Theologica, Part I-II (Pars Prima Secundae) From the Complete American Edition · 第 538 / 746 题