Seeking a richer Catholic understanding of passion vs intellect as it applies to our first parents

I was tempted to answer [this question about freewill and Adam and Eve](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/1378/if-adam-and-eve-were-perfect-why-did-they-choose-to-sin) but I chose not to because all I've got it conjecture and I'm not even sure if it's not borderline heresy on the matter. What I'd like to know is if what I would have answered lines up with Catholic thought. I would have said: > Adam and Eve could sin because they chose to follow their intellect and made a rational decision that being like God was in fact a good idea. They could give in to temptation, without following their passions (as they had complete self-mastery in this regard) for the same reason that Lucifer could want to be like God. Then I might have gone on with: > In this way God shows us the difference between following divine law (i.e. not eating an apple because God commanded it) and not following natural law (i.e. not intentionally eating (or giving someone) a poisoned apple because it will cause death) and divine law is a kind of law that can be violated without giving into your passions. That is to say, an act of pure intellect can violate divine law, but violating natural law requires giving in to the passions (intentionally diverting your will from your intellect). If someone could run that through their Catholic fluff and heresy parser and give me a readout I'd sure appreciate it before I go and tell it to my Religious Ed. kids, should the matter arise.