Summa summae S. Thomae, Tomus II

You will ask 1° what sin of Adam was the cause of the traduction of original sin.

I answer. More probably, with the Author¹, that it was the first, not because it was such, but because it was first: because that sin of Adam was the cause of the traduction of original sin through which he lost original justice to be transfused into posterity. But whatever sin had been first, whether of deed or of will, by it he would have lost original justice, namely by losing sanctifying grace, which was the root of original justice, or at least was contained in it. Therefore.

You will ask 2° whether other sins of the first parent or of proximate parents are traduced into posterity.

I answer. Negatively², because the first sin of Adam is traduced into posterity insofar as he was constituted by God the moral head of all posterity, as to the conservation or loss of original justice. But proximate parents are not thus constituted moral head of their stock, and Adam himself by the first sin had fallen from the dignity of headship. Therefore.

Hence this proposition is condemned: « Every crime is of such condition that it can infect its author and all posterity in the manner in which the first transgression infected them. » It is number 52 among the Baians condemned by St. Pius V, October 1, 1567.

You will ask 3° whether, if Adam had not sinned and Eve had sinned, posterity would have contracted original sin.

I answer. Negatively³.

It is proved 1°. The Apostle, Rom., v, 12, says: By one man sin entered into this world. But if a woman were to transmit original sin to offspring, it ought rather to have been said, by two men, since both sinned, or rather by the woman, who sinned first⁴. Therefore.

It is confirmed. In the same place, verses 18 and 19, the Apostle says that through the offense of one, through the disobedience of one, sin entered into the world; and there he always compares one with one, namely Adam with Christ. Therefore the same as before.

2° Adam alone, and not Eve, was constituted moral head of posterity, as to the conservation or loss of original justice. Consequently the sin of Adam was capital, but the sin of Eve personal. Therefore.

You will ask 4° whether, if Adam had not sinned, and some one of his posterity, for instance Cain, had sinned, the posterity of Cain would have contracted original sin.

It is commonly answered negatively, for the same reason, because namely Adam alone, and not Cain or another of Adam's posterity, was constituted moral head of all men, as to the conservation or loss of original justice.

You will ask 5° whether, if Adam alone had sinned after his son was born, that son and his posterity would have contracted original sin.

I answer. More probably negatively: because neither that son nor his posterity would have been in the loins of Adam when he sinned, nor consequently would they be propagated seminally from sinful Adam. But those alone contract original sin who were in the loins of Adam while he sinned, and are propagated seminally from him as sinner. Add that this son would already have been just; but justice once possessed is not lost except by one's own will.

You will ask 6° whether all men contract original sin.

I answer. 1. It is of faith that all men whatsoever, propagated seminally from Adam, special privilege set aside, contract original sin.

It is proved 1° from that Rom., V, 12: In whom all have sinned. 2° Because otherwise not all would need the redemption which is through Christ; which is erroneous. 3° Because human nature deprived of original justice is traduced into all, in which deprivation, as voluntary in the head, original sin consists, as we shall say presently. 4° It is evident from the perpetual practice of the Church, which is wont, and is most solicitous, that infants of all, both of the faithful and of the just, be baptized, lest they be damned forever. Finally all that we have brought forward in proof of the existence of original sin proves this.

I said 1° : « Into all propagated seminally from Adam, » that Christ might be excepted, who was conceived not of virile seed, but by mystical breathing, and thus, since he was not contained in the loins of sinning Adam, did not sin in him.

I said 2° : « Special privilege set aside, » because many piously hold that blessed Mary was immune, not indeed from the obligation of contracting, but from the actual contraction of original sin. But in this matter Mother Church has defined nothing⁵, but leaves each free to embrace whichever opinion he wills, forbidding under pain of excommunication either party to presume to note the other with error or heresy.

And although Paul V, by decree of the universal Inquisition in 1617, to avoid scandals, quarrels and dissensions, forbade that the party affirming blessed Mary to have been conceived in original sin should be defended in public sermons, lectures and public acts, and Gregory XV by a decree likewise of the universal Inquisition in 1622 extended this to private conversations and writings, nevertheless from this silence the same Gregory XV, by the constitution Eximii given July 28, 1622, excepts the Friars Preachers, and grants them that they may freely and lawfully treat among themselves of this matter and expound their own opinion, in these words: « Of our own motion and from certain knowledge and mature deliberation, to all and singular the Friars of the said ORDER OF PREACHERS we grant and impart, by apostolic authority, by the tenor of these presents, license that henceforth in whatsoever their private conversations or conferences, among themselves only, and not among others or with others, they may freely and lawfully be able to discuss and treat of the matter of the same Conception of blessed Mary ever Virgin, without incurrence of any of the penalties contained in the said decrees: decreeing that the aforesaid Friars can and ought by no means to be molested, disturbed or disquieted by anyone, by whatever authority concerning this matter. » This constitution is found in the Bullarium of the Order of Friars Preachers, tom. vi, pag. 13.

You will ask 7° whether, if someone were formed miraculously from human flesh, he would contract original sin.

I answer. Negatively: because those alone contract original sin who descend originally from Adam according to seminal reason, or drawn originally from Adam by virtue of seed, and not merely according to bodily substance. But this man would not descend from Adam according to seminal reason, but only according to bodily substance; for he would not be made by the active virtue of seed, but by divine virtue. Therefore.

The major is proved. The sin of Adam is traduced into posterity insofar as they are his sons, or insofar as they are moved from him by generation, that is, insofar as he moves them so as to be generated. But to move by generation is proper to the active virtue which is in the seed. Therefore. Whence the council of Trent, session VI, chapter 3, says: « Unless men were born propagated from the seed of Adam, they would not be born unjust. »

Nevertheless this man ought to be baptized, not that he might be cleansed from original sin, but that he might obtain sanctifying grace, become a member of Christ, and have a right to the kingdom of heaven, according to that of John, III, 5 : Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.