Obj. 3:  Further, a sin does not deserve greater punishment through being united to another sin; for Divine justice has allotted its punishment to each sin.  Now a venial sin deserves eternal punishment if it be united to a mortal sin in a lost soul, because in hell there is no remission of sins.  Therefore venial sin by itself deserves eternal punishment.  Therefore temporal punishment is not due for any sin.

On the contrary, Gregory says (Dial. iv, 39), that certain slighter sins are remitted after this life.  Therefore all sins are not punished eternally.

I answer that, As stated above (A. 3), a sin incurs a debt of eternal punishment, in so far as it causes an irreparable disorder in the order of Divine justice, through being contrary to the very principle of that order, viz. the last end.  Now it is evident that in some sins there is disorder indeed, but such as not to involve contrariety in respect of the last end, but only in respect of things referable to the end, in so far as one is too much or too little intent on them without prejudicing the order to the last end:  as, for instance, when a man is too fond of some temporal thing, yet would not offend God for its sake, by breaking one of His commandments.  Consequently such sins do not incur everlasting, but only temporal punishment.

Reply Obj. 1:  Sins do not differ infinitely from one another in respect of their turning towards mutable good, which constitutes the substance of the sinful act; but they do differ infinitely in respect of their turning away from something.  Because some sins consist in turning away from the last end, and some in a disorder affecting things referable to the end:  and the last end differs infinitely from the things that are referred to it.

Reply Obj. 2:  Original sin incurs everlasting punishment, not on account of its gravity, but by reason of the condition of the subject, viz. a human being deprived of grace, without which there is no remission of sin.

The same answer applies to the Third Objection about venial sin.  Because eternity of punishment does not correspond to the quantity of the sin, but to its irremissibility, as stated above (A. 3). ________________________

SIXTH ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 87, Art. 6]

Whether the Debt of Punishment Remains After Sin?

Objection 1:  It would seem that there remains no debt of punishment after sin.  For if the cause be removed the effect is removed.  But sin is the cause of the debt of punishment.  Therefore, when the sin is removed, the debt of punishment ceases also.

Obj. 2:  Further, sin is removed by man returning to virtue.  Now a virtuous man deserves, not punishment, but reward.  Therefore, when sin is removed, the debt of punishment no longer remains.

Obj. 3:  Further, “Punishments are a kind of medicine” (Ethic. ii, 3).  But a man is not given medicine after being cured of his disease.  Therefore, when sin is removed the debt of punishment does not remain.