@article{oai:bunkyo.repo.nii.ac.jp:00003894,
 author = {山崎, 裕子},
 issue = {2},
 journal = {文教大学国際学部紀要, Journal of the Faculty of International Studies Bunkyo University},
 month = {2012-01-01, 2012-02-20},
 note = {In this paper St. Anselm’s theory of original sin is considered in comparison with Peter Abelard’s understanding of original sin.
　Anselm of Canterbury concludes that every sin is an injustice and that original sin is sin in an absolute sense. Moreover, he says that it is a sin to consent to appetites when one ought not to. But original sin is not a sin that we ourselves commit. It is transmitted as a result of the act by Adam and Eve. Transmission of sin and committing a sin are essentially incompatible. Why does Anselm claim that original sin is sin in an absolute sense?
　For Anselm, original sin is the absence of required original justice. Original justice is given by God and if it is abandoned, God is dishonored. Therefore, the honor of God is the criterion for committing a sin. If order is violated, God is dishonored. One is required to keep original justice, and ever since the first parents’ sin God requires satisfaction from the sinner, because human nature has incurred corruption. Corruption means disorder. There is no difference between original sin and actual sin in the point that sin brings dishonor to God.
　Anselm’s understanding of original sin is characteristic of his theology that the honor of God, the keeping of justice and the beauty of order are connected with each other.},
 pages = {75--82},
 title = {アンセルムスの原罪論},
 volume = {22},
 year = {}
}