SECOND ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 83, Art. 2]

Whether Original Sin Is in the Essence of the Soul Rather Than in the

Powers?

Objection 1: It would seem that original sin is not in the essence of

the soul rather than in the powers. For the soul is naturally apt to

be the subject of sin, in respect of those parts which can be moved

by the will. Now the soul is moved by the will, not as to its essence

but only as to the powers. Therefore original sin is in the soul, not

according to its essence, but only according to the powers.

Obj. 2: Further, original sin is opposed to original justice. Now

original justice was in a power of the soul, because power is the

subject of virtue. Therefore original sin also is in a power of the

soul, rather than in its essence.

Obj. 3: Further, just as original sin is derived from the soul as

from the flesh, so is it derived by the powers from the essence. But

original sin is more in the soul than in the flesh. Therefore it is

more in the powers than in the essence of the soul.

Obj. 4: Further, original sin is said to be concupiscence, as stated

(Q. 82, A. 3). But concupiscence is in the powers of the soul.

Therefore original sin is also.

_On the contrary,_ Original sin is called the sin of nature, as

stated above (Q. 81, A. 1). Now the soul is the form and nature of

the body, in respect of its essence and not in respect of its powers,

as stated in the First Part (Q. 76, A. 6). Therefore the soul is the

subject of original sin chiefly in respect of its essence.

_I answer that,_ The subject of a sin is chiefly that part of the

soul to which the motive cause of that sin primarily pertains: thus

if the motive cause of a sin is sensual pleasure, which regards the

concupiscible power through being its proper object, it follows that

the concupiscible power is the proper subject of that sin. Now it is

evident that original sin is caused through our origin. Consequently

that part of the soul which is first reached by man's origin, is the

primary subject of original sin. Now the origin reaches the soul as

the term of generation, according as it is the form of the body: and

this belongs to the soul in respect of its essence, as was proved in

the First Part (Q. 76, A. 6). Therefore the soul, in respect of its

essence, is the primary subject of original sin.

Reply Obj. 1: As the motion of the will of an individual reaches to

the soul's powers and not to its essence, so the motion of the will

of the first generator, through the channel of generation, reaches

first of all to the essence of the soul, as stated.

Reply Obj. 2: Even original justice pertained radically to the

essence of the soul, because it was God's gift to human nature, to

which the essence of the soul is related before the powers. For the

powers seem to regard the person, in as much as they are the

principles of personal acts. Hence they are the proper subjects of

actual sins, which are the sins of the person.

Reply Obj. 3: The body is related to the soul as matter to form,

which though it comes second in order of generation, nevertheless

comes first in the order of perfection and nature. But the essence of

the soul is related to the powers, as a subject to its proper

accidents, which follow their subject both in the order of generation

and in that of perfection. Consequently the comparison fails.

Reply Obj. 4: Concupiscence, in relation to original sin, holds the

position of matter and effect, as stated above (Q. 82, A. 3).

________________________

Summa Theologica, Part I-II (Pars Prima Secundae) From the Complete American Edition · 第 541 / 746 题