Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Loss of Grace · Book IV: On Original Sin
Chapter 13: That original sin is drawn not from Eve, but from Adam alone
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. V, De Amissione Gratiae et Statu Peccati, Book IV. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
We have hitherto explained the first controversy about the sin of origin, which was: whether there is any sin which is carried over into posterity through generation. Now, before we come to the other principal controversy, which will be on the nature of the sin of origin, three briefer questions seem to be treated. The first: whence this sin is drawn. The second: to whom it is drawn. The third: what sin is drawn.
Concerning the first question, this is certain: that this sin is drawn from Adam. For of him the Apostle says: By one man sin entered into the world, etc., Romans 5. And: As in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive, 1 Corinthians 15. Two things there are which can be called into controversy: one, if Eve alone had sinned, Adam remaining in innocence, whether the sin of Eve would be transmitted to posterity; the other, if the first parents had not sinned, but Cain had sinned, or some other of the posterity of Adam, whether that sin would flow down to his sons.
As to the former question, all agree that sin properly so called would not have been carried over into posterity if Eve alone had sinned; yet they dissent in this, that some judge that from the sin of Eve alone there would have flowed down into the sons the necessity of dying, and the other inconveniences which mortality draws with it. Others dispute contrariwise: that neither sin nor the necessity of dying would have had place in the sons of Adam from the sin of Eve alone. Which latter opinion is of St. Thomas, in 1-2, question 81, article 5, and without doubt most true. For we contract original sin because, when Adam sinned, we were in him as in an active principle. But we were not in Eve as in an active principle, since the mother furnishes not the active power, but only the matter, for generating the offspring. And if we do not draw sin from Eve, certainly neither do we draw death from her, which is the punishment of sin. For the wages of sin is death, Romans 6. Wherefore Scripture does not say, “In Eve all die,” but, In Adam all die, 1 Corinthians 15; and yet, since Eve sinned before Adam, if we drew death from Eve, it would altogether have had to be said: In Eve all die. Ecclesiasticus indeed writes, chapter 25: From the woman came the beginning of sin, and by her we all die. But it is one thing “by her,” another “in her”: by her we die, because she furnished her husband the occasion of sinning, whence death followed; but not in her, but in Adam, all die, because not Eve's, but Adam's sin was common to all; and therefore, he sinning, we all sinned in him, and he dying, we all died in him. Finally, the Council of Orange, canon 2, determined that death cannot pass to men without sin, unless injustice be ascribed to God, and the Apostle be contradicted, who says: By one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death.
Now as to the other question, the common opinion is that, if the first man had not sinned — who bore the person of the whole nature — then, whoever else sinned, the sin would have been personal and particular, and therefore his posterity could by no means have been infected and vitiated. St. Thomas indeed seems to indicate the contrary, question 5 On Evil, article 4, ad ultimum; but perhaps that place is corrupted.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XIII. Non ab Evo, sed a solo Adamo peccatum ori¬ ginale trahi. Explicavinus hactenus primam controver¬ siam de peccato originis, quae erat : An sit aliquod peccatum, quod per generationem trajiciatur in posteros. Nunc antequam ad alteram controversiam principalem, quae erit de natura peccati originis, veniamus, tractandae videntur tres quaestiones brevio¬ res. Prima, unde hoc peccatum trahatur. Altera, ad quos trahatur. Tertia, quod pec¬ catum trahatur. De prima quaestione illud est certum, hoc peccatum ex Adamo trahi. De illo enim Apo¬ stolus dicit : Per unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum, elc. ad Roman. v. Et : Sicut in Adam omnes moriuntur, ita in Christo omnes vivificabuntur, I ad Corinth. xv. (i). Duo sunt, quae in controversiam vocari pos¬ sunt, unum, si Eva sola peccasset, Adamo in innocentia permanente, an peccatum Evai ad posteros traduceretur ; alterum, si primi parentes non peccassent, peccasset autem Cain, vel aliquis alius ex posteris Adae, utrum peccatura illud ad filios dimanaret. . Quod ad priorem quaestionem attinet, con¬ veniunt omnes, peccatum proprie dictum non fuisse trajiciendum in posteros, si sola Eva peccasset ; tamen in eo dissentiunt, quod aliqui existimant, ex peccato solius Evae dimanaturam in filios moriendi neces¬ sitatem, et ccetera incommoda, qua! mor¬ talitas secum trahit. Alii contra disputant, neque peccatum, neque moriendi necessitatem in filiis Adaj locum habitura ex peccato solius Evae. Quae sententia posterior est S. Thomae in 1.2. quaest. 81. art. et sine dubitatione verissi¬ ma. Nam peccatum originale contrahimus, quia cum Adam peccavit, in illo fuimus, ut in activo principio. Non fuimus autem in Eva, ut in activo principio, cum mater non virtutem activam, sed materiam solum ad prolem generandam praibeat. Quod si pec¬ catum ab Eva non trahimus, certe nec mor¬ tem ab illa trahimus, quai est pcena pec¬ cati. Stipendium enim peccati mors, Roman. vi. Quare Scriptura non dicit : In Eva om- 0) Rom. V, 12; I Corin. XV, 22. / CAPUT XIV. 371 nes moriuntur, sed in Adam omnes moriun¬ tur, \ Gorinth. xv. (i). Et tamen cum Eva prius peccaverit, quam Adamus, si ab Eva mortem traheremus, omnino dicendum fuis¬ set : In Eva omnes moriuntur. Scribit quidem Ecclesiaticus cap. 23. A muliere initium factum est peccati, et per illam morimur omnes. Sed aliud est, per il¬ lam, aliud, in illa ; per illam morimur, quia illa occasionem peccandi viro suo prsebuit, unde mors consecuta est ; at non in illa, sed in Adam omnes moriuntur, quia non Evae, sed Adae peccatum commune fuit omnibus et ideo illo peccante, omnes in illo peccavi¬ mus, et illo moriente, omnes in illo mortui sumus. Denique Concilium Arauscicanum canon. 2. statuit, non posse mortem sine peccato ad homines transire, nisi injustitia Deo detur, et contradicatur Apostolo di¬ centi : Per unum hominem peccatum in hunc mundum intravit, et per peccatum mors. Jam vero quod attinet ad alteram quae¬ stionem, communis sententia est, si primus homo non peccasset, qui totius naturae per¬ sonam gerebat, quocumque alio peccante, peccatum luturum fuisse personale et parti¬ culare, et ideo posteritatem ejus infici et vitiari minime potuisse. Videtur quidem S. Thomas contrarium indicare quaest. 5. de malo, art. 4. ad ult. sed fortasse corruptus est is locus.