Summa summae S. Thomae sive compendium theologiae

[I answer in the negative. The sensitive appetite in innocent Adam was so perfectly subject to reason that it was subject to no disordered motions of concupiscence.

This is of faith; for thus it was defined by the Council of Trent, sess. V, can. 5: « Concupiscence, which the Apostle sometimes calls sin, the holy synod declares that the Catholic Church has never understood to be called sin as being truly and properly sin in those born again, but because it is of sin and inclines to sin. But if anyone shall think the contrary, let him be anathema. »

Proof, 1° from Sacred Scripture. Eccles., VII, 30: God made man right. But man would not have been right, if he had been subject to disordered motions of concupiscence. Therefore. It is said, Genes., III, 7: The eyes of them both were opened, and when they perceived themselves to be naked, they sewed together fig leaves and made themselves aprons; that is, they blushed, because they felt the motions of disordered concupiscence. But they experienced this shame only after sin, for before it had been said, ibid., II, 25: And they were both naked, namely Adam and his wife, and they were not ashamed. Therefore.

Proof, 2° from the authority of St. Augustine interpreting the passage cited above, lib. XI, de Genes. ad litt., c. 1, n. 3: « They were, then, both naked. It is true; the bodies of the two people dwelling in paradise were entirely naked. Nor were they ashamed. For what should have shamed them, when they had felt no law in their members rebelling against the law of their mind? This penalty of sin followed them after the commission of the transgression, disobedience seizing upon what was forbidden, and justice punishing what was committed. Before this came about, they were naked, as has been said, and were not confounded: there was no motion in the body to which shame was owed; they thought nothing needed to be veiled, because they had felt nothing that needed to be restrained. » The other Fathers agree.

Proof, 3° from reason¹. The rectitude in which God created man consisted in this: that reason was subject to God, the lower powers to reason, and the body to the soul. But if concupiscence had held sway in the first man, order would not have been perfect in him, and he could not have been called right. Therefore.]