Sentences, Books I–II

Chapter 1 (206).

How original sin passes from fathers to children: whether according to the soul or according to the flesh. It remains now to investigate how that sin is transmitted from fathers to children: whether according to the soul alone, according to the flesh, or according to both.

Chapter 2 (207).

The opinion of some who wrongly believe that souls are transmitted by generation *. Some 4 thought that original sin is transmitted according to the soul, and not only according to the flesh, because they supposed that not only flesh but also the soul is transmitted by generation. For just as in the generation of offspring flesh is drawn substantially from the father's flesh, so too the soul of the begotten is thought to be derived substantially from the soul of the begetter. Therefore, just as corrupted flesh begets corrupted flesh, so too a sinful soul, infected by original corruption, is said to be drawn from a sinful soul.

Apparatus: 2 corporis om. BCOPX. 5 etiam] et OP. 9 veritatem] veritate LOPRVX. 15 ad] in NRV. 17 traducatur] transducatur OPR. 20 Rubrica om. RVW.

1 Cf. Augustine, City of God, XXII, chs. 14 and 19 (PL 41, 776ff., 780ff.; CSEL 40-II, 622ff. and 628–631; CCL 48, 833ff., 837ff.). See also below, Book IV, Dist. 44, chs. 1–3. 2 Gen. 2:21–22. 3 Mark 6:35–44; John 6:5–13. 4 Cf. Augustine, On the Literal Meaning of Genesis, X, chs. 11–26 (PL 34, 415–428; CSEL 28-I, 307–332).

Chapters 1–2: Hugh, On the Sacraments, I, 7, 29 (PL 176, 299 A–B).

Chapter 3 (208).

1. He condemns the foregoing opinion, says that sin is transmitted through the flesh, and explains how. The Catholic faith rejects this and condemns it as contrary to the truth; as we said above 1, it admits that not souls but the flesh alone is transmitted by generation. Original sin is therefore drawn from parents not according to the soul but according to the flesh alone.

2. Why concupiscence is said to be in the flesh. For original sin, as we said above 2, is concupiscence—not the act, but the defect. Hence Augustine, in To Valerius 3: «Concupiscence itself is the law of the members or of the flesh, which is a certain diseased affection or languor that stirs illicit desire—that is, carnal concupiscence, which is called the law of sin⁴». It is said to remain in the flesh, not because it is absent from the soul, but because it arises in the soul through the corruption of the flesh.

Chapter 4 (209).

He explains the cause of the corruption of the flesh, from which sin arises in the soul. For in Adam the flesh was corrupted through sin, so that although before sin man and woman could unite without the stimulus of lust and the heat of concupiscence, and their bed was undefiled 5, after sin carnal intercourse could no longer occur without lustful concupiscence. This is always a vice and also a fault, unless it is excused by the goods of marriage. The flesh that is to be formed into the body of offspring is therefore conceived in concupiscence and lust. Hence the flesh itself, conceived in vicious concupiscence, is polluted and corrupted; through contact with it, the soul, when infused, draws a stain by which it is polluted and becomes liable—that is, the vice of concupiscence, which is original sin.

Apparatus: 11 Rubrica om. RVW. 13 Unde... Valerium mg. (ut rubrica) BCLOPX (ed. 1a?), Valerium RVW, Iulianum BX, quod corr. O. 20 per] propter BCLOPX.

1 In Dist. 18, c. 7 (pp. 420ff.). 2 In Dist. 30, cc. 8–9 (pp. 499ff.); abbreviated from On Marriage and Concupiscence, I, chs. 30–31, nos. 34–35 (PL 44, 43; CSEL 42, 245ff.). 3 On Marriage and Concupiscence, I, ch. 23. 4 Cf. Rom. 7:23. 5 Cf. Heb. 13:4; see above, Dist. 20, c. 1 (pp. 427ff.). For all of ch. 4, see Augustine, On Marriage and Concupiscence, I, ch. 24, no. 27 (PL 44, 429; CSEL 42, 239ff.).

Cap. 3, no. 1. Hugh, On the Sacraments, I, 7, 30 (PL 176, 300 D–301 A). — No. 2. Master's Gloss on Rom. 7:25 (PL 191, 1430 C).

Chapter 5 (210).

1. Because the corruption of the flesh is the cause of sin, sin is said to be in the flesh. Therefore sin itself is said to remain in the flesh. The flesh sown in the concupiscence of lust has neither fault nor the act of a fault, but its cause. Thus there is corruption in what is sown, while the vice of concupiscence is in what is born.

2. Hence Ambrose says this concerning the Apostle's words 1: «How does sin dwell in the flesh, since it is not a substance but a privation of good? Behold: the body of the first man was corrupted through sin, and that corruption remains in the body by the condition of the offense, holding fast the force of the divine sentence given in Adam; through its association the soul is stained by sin. Thus sin is said to dwell in the flesh because the cause of the deed remains». This is the law of the flesh. — The same author 2: «Sin does not dwell in the soul but in the flesh, because the cause of sin comes from the flesh, not the soul; for the flesh comes from the origin of sinful flesh, and through transmission all flesh becomes sinful». The soul, however, is not transmitted, and therefore has no cause of sin in itself.

3. Augustine too shows in a certain sermon On the Words of the Apostle 3 that the soul contracts sin from the flesh, saying: «The vice of concupiscence is what the soul has contracted, but from the flesh. For human nature was not originally created by God's work with a vice, but was wounded by the vice arising from the choice of will of the first human beings», so that there is no good 1 in the flesh, but a vice by which the soul is infected.

¹ anima CLNVWX. 16 in se trp. p. peccati MRTV. 19 anima] non ex se add. V, add. mg. O2, add. interl. W2. || sed] scilicet X, om. M, interl. R.]

²

³

Chapter 6 (211).

1. Concerning the cause of original sin which is in the flesh: whether it is a fault or a punishment. It is often asked here whether the cause of original sin, said to be in the flesh, is a fault or a punishment, or something else. — It cannot be a fault, because a fault is not in an irrational thing. For if there were a fault in the flesh before the soul's infusion, it would be actual or original. But it is not actual there; nor is it original fault, because it is the cause of original sin. — If it is a punishment, what punishment is it? Passibility, mortality, or some other corruption? For it is clear that these defects are in the flesh.

2. Here he explains what it is: namely, the foulness drawn from the lust of those who unite, which may be called a vice or corruption. We may say in answer that the flesh's manifold defect—and especially a certain pollution which lustful concupiscence contracts from the heat of intercourse while the flesh is conceived—is the cause of original sin; it can rightly be called a vice or corruption of the flesh. This foulness seems greater in flesh transmitted concupiscently than in the flesh from which it is transmitted. That there is a vice or corruption in the flesh before the soul's union with it is proved by the effect: when the soul is infused, it is stained by the corruption of the flesh, just as one recognizes that wine poured into a vessel has turned sour.

3. By adducing comparisons, he shows it is not unreasonable to say that children draw sin from parents who have been cleansed of it. So that hearers may not be astonished or confused to hear that children draw original sin from parents cleansed of that sin, Augustine indicates in his book On the Baptism of Infants 1, by adducing various comparisons, that this can happen. He says: «Just as the foreskin is removed by circumcision yet remains in the one whom the circumcised beget; and just as chaff, which is separated with such care by human labor, nevertheless remains in the grain born from wheat that has been cleaned; so the sin cleansed in parents through baptism remains in those whom they beget». — «For 2 they beget from what they still carry as old, not from what advanced them in newness among the children of God». Parents do not beget children according to the generation by which they themselves were born anew 3, but rather according to the generation by which they too were first born carnally.

⁴ in added by BCX. 6 peccati originalis transposed in RVW. 14 quia] quod CLX. 18–19 Quae... traducitur omitted by BCMOPX (first edition?); in the margin of R. 24 dici omitted by BCX. || et] in added by BOPX and in the margin of T.

⁵

⁶

Chapter 7 (212).

1. Here he says why it is called original, with a summary. It has now been shown what original sin is, and how it passes from parents to children and through the flesh into the soul. These points also make clear why it is called original sin: namely, because it is transmitted from the defective law of our origin in which we are conceived—that is, the lustful concupiscence of the flesh—as was said above 4. We did not draw sin merely because we were conceived from flesh derived from Adam: Christ's body too was formed from the same flesh descended from Adam, but his conception took place not by the law of sin, that is, by the concupiscence of the flesh. Hence his flesh was not sinful, but came about through the work of the Holy Spirit. Our conception, however, does not take place without lust, and is therefore not without sin.

2. Augustine *. Augustine clearly shows this in his book On the Faith to Peter 5, saying: «Since when a man and a woman unite with one another, their intercourse is not without lust, the conception of children born from their flesh cannot be without sin: sin is transmitted to infants not by propagation but by lust; The fruitfulness of human nature does not cause human beings to be born with sin, but the foulness of lust, which human beings have from that most just condemnation of sin. Therefore blessed David, on account of original sin, by which children are naturally bound under wrath¹, says²: “In iniquities I was conceived, and in sins my mother conceived me.” From this it is therefore evident that original sin is transmitted through the law of conception⁵, because unless conception took place in the flesh in this way, the soul would not draw the defect of concupiscence from the union of flesh.

⁷ ex MN, corrected from ex to in by R, or ex added in the margin of O, or ex added interlinearly in LT.]

⁸

^[Apparatus, p. 509, Chapter 7, nos. 1–2: Summa sententiarum, III, 12 (PL 171, 1136 B–1137 A; 176, 107 D–108 C); Lombard’s Gloss on Rom. 4:8 (PL 191, 1369 B–C). — Nos. 3–4: Summa sententiarum (PL 171, 1136 B–C; 176, 107 D–108 A).

3. Objection of certain people striving to prove that sin is not transmitted through the law of intercourse. But this is opposed in the following way: In conception itself, where sin is said to be transmitted, flesh is propagated; nor is the soul then infused, according to the Physici, but only after the body has already been formed. Moses also clearly signifies this in Exodus 3, where he deals with the striking of a pregnant woman: “If anyone,” he says, “strikes a pregnant woman and causes an abortion, if the offspring is still unformed, he shall be fined money; but if it is formed, he shall give life for life.” The formed is understood to be what is animated by its own soul, and the unformed what does not yet have a soul. Therefore, in conception itself, when flesh is propagated, the soul is not yet infused. How, then, is sin transmitted there, when sin cannot exist where there is no soul?

4. Response with the solution *. To this it can be said that sin is said to be transmitted in that conception, not because original sin is there, but because the flesh there draws what causes sin in the soul when it is infused. And both are called conception: both when the flesh is propagated and receives the form of a human body, and when the soul is infused. This is also sometimes called birth, as in “what has been born in you”; properly, however, birth is called bringing forth into the light.