|
Objection 1: It would seem that in the state of innocence men would
not have been born in a state of righteousness. For Hugh of St.
Victor says (De Sacram. i): "Before sin the first man would
have begotten children sinless; but not heirs to their father's
righteousness."
Objection 2: Further, righteousness is effected by grace, as the
Apostle says (Rm. 5:16,21). Now grace is not transfused
from one to another, for thus it would be natural; but is infused by
God alone. Therefore children would not have been born righteous.
Objection 3: Further, righteousness is in the soul. But the soul
is not transmitted from the parent. Therefore neither would
righteousness have been transmitted from parents, to the children.
On the contrary, Anselm says (De Concep. Virg. x): "As long
as man did not sin, he would have begotten children endowed with
righteousness together with the rational soul."
I answer that, Man naturally begets a specific likeness to himself.
Hence whatever accidental qualities result from the nature of the
species, must be alike in parent and child, unless nature fails in its
operation, which would not have occurred in the state of innocence.
But individual accidents do not necessarily exist alike in parent and
child. Now original righteousness, in which the first man was
created, was an accident pertaining to the nature of the species, not
as caused by the principles of the species, but as a gift conferred by
God on the entire human nature. This is clear from the fact that
opposites are of the same genus; and original sin, which is opposed to
original righteousness, is called the sin of nature, wherefore it is
transmitted from the parent to the offspring; and for this reason
also, the children would have been assimilated to their parents as
regards original righteousness.
Reply to Objection 1: These words of Hugh are to be understood as
referring, not to the habit of righteousness, but to the execution of
the act thereof.
Reply to Objection 2: Some say that children would have been born,
not with the righteousness of grace, which is the principle of merit,
but with original righteousness. But since the root of original
righteousness, which conferred righteousness on the first man when he
was made, consists in the supernatural subjection of the reason to
God, which subjection results from sanctifying grace, as above
explained (Question 95, Article 1), we must conclude that if
children were born in original righteousness, they would also have been
born in grace; thus we have said above that the first man was created
in grace (Question 95, Article 1). This grace, however,
would not have been natural, for it would not have been transfused by
virtue of the semen; but would have been conferred on man immediately
on his receiving a rational soul. In the same way the rational soul,
which is not transmitted by the parent, is infused by God as soon as
the human body is apt to receive it.
From this the reply to the third objection is clear.
|
|