cessary that
his will should have a movement contrary to the previous movement.
Thus if one man be parted from another on account of some kind of
movement, he is not reunited to him as soon as the movement ceases,
but he needs to draw nigh to him and to return by a contrary movement.

Reply Obj. 1: Nothing positive remains in the soul after the act of
sin, except the disposition or habit; but there does remain something
privative, viz. the privation of union with the Divine light.

Reply Obj. 2: After the interposed body has passed by, the
transparent body remains in the same position and relation as regards
the illuminating body, and so the shadow passes at once. But when the
sin is past, the soul does not remain in the same relation to God:
and so there is no comparison.

Reply Obj. 3: The act of sin parts man from God, which parting causes
the defect of brightness, just as local movement causes local
parting. Wherefore, just as when movement ceases, local distance is
not removed, so neither, when the act of sin ceases, is the stain
removed.
________________________

QUESTION 87

OF THE DEBT OF PUNISHMENT
(In Eight Articles)

We must now consider the debt of punishment. We shall consider (1)
the debt itself; (2) mortal and venial sin, which differ in respect
of the punishment due to them.

Under the first head there are eight points of inquiry:

(1) Whether the debt of punishment is an effect of sin?

(2) Whether one sin can be the punishment of another?

(3) Whether any sin incurs a debt of eternal punishment?

(4) Whether sin incurs a debt of punishment that is infinite in
quantity?

(5) Whether every sin incurs a debt of eternal and infinite
punishment?

(6) Whether the debt of punishment can remain after sin?

(7) Whether every punishment is inflicted for a sin?

(8) Whether one person can incur punishment for another's sin?
________________________

FIRST ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 87, Art. 1]

Whether the Debt of Punishment Is an Effect of Sin?

Objection 1: It would seem that the debt of punishment is not an
effect of sin. For that which is accidentally related to a thing,
does not seem to be its proper effect. Now the debt of punishment is
accidentally related to sin, for it is beside the intention of the
sinner. Therefore the debt of punishment is not an effect of sin.

Obj. 2: Further, evil is not the cause of good. But punishment is
good, since it is just, and is from God. Therefore it is