Part I (Prima Pars) Part 141 (2/2)
Obj. 3: Further, occasions of sin should be cut off. But G.o.d foresaw that the woman would be an occasion of sin to man. Therefore He should not have made woman.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (Gen. 2:18): ”It is not good for man to be alone; let us make him a helper like to himself.”
_I answer that,_ It was necessary for woman to be made, as the Scripture says, as a _helper_ to man; not, indeed, as a helpmate in other works, as some say, since man can be more efficiently helped by another man in other works; but as a helper in the work of generation. This can be made clear if we observe the mode of generation carried out in various living things. Some living things do not possess in themselves the power of generation, but are generated by some other specific agent, such as some plants and animals by the influence of the heavenly bodies, from some fitting matter and not from seed: others possess the active and pa.s.sive generative power together; as we see in plants which are generated from seed; for the n.o.blest vital function in plants is generation.
Wherefore we observe that in these the active power of generation invariably accompanies the pa.s.sive power. Among perfect animals the active power of generation belongs to the male s.e.x, and the pa.s.sive power to the female. And as among animals there is a vital operation n.o.bler than generation, to which their life is princ.i.p.ally directed; therefore the male s.e.x is not found in continual union with the female in perfect animals, but only at the time of coition; so that we may consider that by this means the male and female are one, as in plants they are always united; although in some cases one of them preponderates, and in some the other. But man is yet further ordered to a still n.o.bler vital action, and that is intellectual operation.
Therefore there was greater reason for the distinction of these two forces in man; so that the female should be produced separately from the male; although they are carnally united for generation. Therefore directly after the formation of woman, it was said: ”And they shall be two in one flesh” (Gen. 2:24).
Reply Obj. 1: As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active force in the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine s.e.x; while the production of woman comes from defect in the active force or from some material indisposition, or even from some external influence; such as that of a south wind, which is moist, as the Philosopher observes (De Gener. Animal. iv, 2). On the other hand, as regards human nature in general, woman is not misbegotten, but is included in nature's intention as directed to the work of generation. Now the general intention of nature depends on G.o.d, Who is the universal Author of nature. Therefore, in producing nature, G.o.d formed not only the male but also the female.
Reply Obj. 2: Subjection is twofold. One is servile, by virtue of which a superior makes use of a subject for his own benefit; and this kind of subjection began after sin. There is another kind of subjection which is called economic or civil, whereby the superior makes use of his subjects for their own benefit and good; and this kind of subjection existed even before sin. For good order would have been wanting in the human family if some were not governed by others wiser than themselves. So by such a kind of subjection woman is naturally subject to man, because in man the discretion of reason predominates. Nor is inequality among men excluded by the state of innocence, as we shall prove (Q. 96, A. 3).
Reply Obj. 3: If G.o.d had deprived the world of all those things which proved an occasion of sin, the universe would have been imperfect.
Nor was it fitting for the common good to be destroyed in order that individual evil might be avoided; especially as G.o.d is so powerful that He can direct any evil to a good end.
_______________________
SECOND ARTICLE [I, Q. 92, Art. 2]
Whether Woman Should Have Been Made from Man?
Objection 1: It would seem that woman should not have been made from man. For s.e.x belongs both to man and animals. But in the other animals the female was not made from the male. Therefore neither should it have been so with man.
Obj. 2: Further, things of the same species are of the same matter.
But male and female are of the same species. Therefore, as man was made of the slime of the earth, so woman should have been made of the same, and not from man.
Obj. 3: Further, woman was made to be a helpmate to man in the work of generation. But close relations.h.i.+p makes a person unfit for that office; hence near relations are debarred from intermarriage, as is written (Lev. 18:6). Therefore woman should not have been made from man.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (Ecclus. 17:5): ”He created of him,”
that is, out of man, ”a helpmate like to himself,” that is, woman.
_I answer that,_ When all things were first formed, it was more suitable for the woman to be made from man than (for the female to be from the male) in other animals. First, in order thus to give the first man a certain dignity consisting in this, that as G.o.d is the principle of the whole universe, so the first man, in likeness to G.o.d, was the principle of the whole human race. Wherefore Paul says that ”G.o.d made the whole human race from one” (Acts 17:26). Secondly, that man might love woman all the more, and cleave to her more closely, knowing her to be fas.h.i.+oned from himself. Hence it is written (Gen. 2:23, 24): ”She was taken out of man, wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife.” This was most necessary as regards the human race, in which the male and female live together for life; which is not the case with other animals. Thirdly, because, as the Philosopher says (Ethic. viii, 12), the human male and female are united, not only for generation, as with other animals, but also for the purpose of domestic life, in which each has his or her particular duty, and in which the man is the head of the woman. Wherefore it was suitable for the woman to be made out of man, as out of her principle. Fourthly, there is a sacramental reason for this. For by this is signified that the Church takes her origin from Christ. Wherefore the Apostle says (Eph. 5:32): ”This is a great sacrament; but I speak in Christ and in the Church.”
Reply Obj. 1 is clear from the foregoing.
Reply Obj. 2: Matter is that from which something is made. Now created nature has a determinate principle; and since it is determined to one thing, it has also a determinate mode of proceeding. Wherefore from determinate matter it produces something in a determinate species. On the other hand, the Divine Power, being infinite, can produce things of the same species out of any matter, such as a man from the slime of the earth, and a woman from out of man.
Reply Obj. 3: A certain affinity arises from natural generation, and this is an impediment to matrimony. Woman, however, was not produced from man by natural generation, but by the Divine Power alone.
Wherefore Eve is not called the daughter of Adam; and so this argument does not prove.
_______________________
THIRD ARTICLE [I, Q. 92, Art. 3]
Whether the Woman Was Fittingly Made from the Rib of Man?
Objection 1: It would seem that the woman should not have been formed from the rib of man. For the rib was much smaller than the woman's body. Now from a smaller thing a larger thing can be made only--either by addition (and then the woman ought to have been described as made out of that which was added, rather than out of the rib itself)--or by rarefaction, because, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. x): ”A body cannot increase in bulk except by rarefaction.” But the woman's body is not more rarefied than man's--at least, not in the proportion of a rib to Eve's body. Therefore Eve was not formed from a rib of Adam.
Obj. 2: Further, in those things which were first created there was nothing superfluous. Therefore a rib of Adam belonged to the integrity of his body. So, if a rib was removed, his body remained imperfect; which is unreasonable to suppose.
<script>