Dist. 20, Art. 1, Q. 1
Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 20
Quaestio I. Utrum in statu innocentiae fuisset sexuum commixtio.
Circa primum sic proceditur et ostenditur, quod, si homo stetisset, facta esset sexuum commixtio:
Ad oppositum:
1. Primo per textum Genesis secundo1: Faciamus ei adiutorium simile sibi. Sed vir non indigebat adiutorio mulieris nisi quantum ad actum generationis, nec poterant simul aliquem generare, nisi simul commiscerentur: ergo etc.
2. Item, Augustinus decimo quarto de Civitate Dei2: «Quisquis dicit, non coituros, non generaturos homines, nisi peccassent, quid aliud dicit, nisi propter numerositatem Sanctorum necessarium fuisse peccatum?» Ergo si hoc est inconveniens ponere, etiamsi homo non peccasset, vir et mulier per commixtionem sexuum generarent.
3. Item, distinctio sexuum non est nisi propter generationem; sed in primaria sui conditione distinctio fuit in humana specie, sicut in aliis: ergo si sexus distincti ad unum effectum non concurrunt, nisi commisceantur, videtur, quod si homo stetisset, vir et mulier commixti essent.
4. Item, vir habuit vim generativam; sed planum est, quod prolem intra se concipere non poterat, cum nec haberet locum, in quo fetus vegetaretur, nec viam, per quam egrederetur: ergo videtur, quod ad hoc, quod generaret, necessarium erat sibi cum muliere commisceri et convenire.
Sed contra:
1. Augustinus de Bono coniugali3: «Nuptiae non nisi mortalium esse poterunt»; constat, hoc dictum esse quantum ad commixtionem sexuum: si ergo, manente statu innocentiae, homo non poterat mori, ergo nec mulieri poterat commisceri.
2. Item, Damascenus4: «Poterat Deus genus hoc absque generatione multiplicare, si homo mandatum suum servasset usque in finem»: ergo videtur, quod si homo stetisset, quod vir mulieri commisceri non haberet nec filium procreare.
3. Item, ad hoc data est vis generativa, ut quae non possunt continuari in se, conserventur in suo simili5; sed homine stante, in perpetuum continuari posset: ergo non videtur, quod homo generaret.
4. Item, commixtio sexuum est opus carnale; sed primi parentes, cum essent spirituales, non erant dediti operibus carnis nec impediebantur a quiete contemplationis: ergo non videtur, quod natura stante, haberent insimul commisceri.
Conclusio
Statu innocentiae perdurante, fuisset generatio et sexuum commixtio.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod in statu innocentiae absque dubio homo haberet generari ex homine; et hoc attestatur auctoritate Scripturae et iudicio rationis rectae. — Dicitur enim hominibus in statu innocentiae, sicut scribitur Genesis primo6: Crescite et multiplicamini et replete terram. Et alius textus dicit, mulierem in adiutorium viri esse factam. — Rationi etiam rectae hoc consonat, quae dicit, potentiam generandi spectare ad completionem naturae, usum vero generationis ad complementum et perfectionem civitatis supernae. Et quia in statu innocentiae natura perfectior erat quam in statu viae; et si homo stetisset, superna civitas suorum civium numerositate nequaquam fraudata esset7: ponendum est, quod homo in statu innocentiae generare poterat et genuisset. Et quia nec vir per se, nec mulier per se suffecisset ad generandum; ideo per commixtionem fieret coniunctio unius ad alterum, et mutuum sibi praeberent auxilium in procreatione prolis ad multiplicandum genus humanum. — Et ideo concedendae sunt rationes ostendentes, quod si homo stetisset, et esset generatio et sexuum commixtio.
Solutio oppositorum:
Ad 1. Ad illud autem quod primo obiicitur in contrarium de verbo Augustini in libro de Bono coniugali, dicendum, quod mortale non vocatur ibi quod habet necessitatem in moriendo, sed mortale dicitur generaliter pro vita animali, in qua sola potest fieri generatio, quia in ea solum potest fieri decisio et restauratio; et quia haec mortalitas esse poterat in statu innocentiae, quamvis non in statu gloriae: ideo patet illud.
Ad 2. Ad illud quod obiicitur de verbo Damasceni, dicendum, quod Damascenus non vult dicere, quod non esset generatio, si homo stetisset, sed quod non esset per eum modum, per quem est modo, scilicet cum libidine et foeditate. Praeterea, ipse non dicit, quid Deus faceret, sed quid facere posset.
Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod ideo data est vis generativa, quod perpetuentur corruptibilia; dicendum, quod illa non est ratio tota; immo ratio praecipua et secundum fidem, quam ignoravit Philosophus, est propter multiplicationem numeri electorum, quam Deus sic disposuit facere successive propter congruentiam multiplicem, sicut supra8 tactum est: tum videlicet propter divinae gloriae manifestationem; tum etiam propter hominum maiorem coniunctionem, ut magis ad invicem se diligerent; tum etiam propter universi decorem et perfectionem, quae non solummodo attenditur secundum esse permanens, immo etiam secundum esse decurrens; decursus autem in rebus irrationalibus debet esse secundum ordinem et exigentiam ad res rationales, propter quas factae sunt.
Ad 4. Ad illud quod obicitur, quod commixtio sexuum est opus carnale; dicendum, quod caro uno modo sonat in vitium, sicut illud ad Galatas quinto9: Caro concupiscit adversus spiritum; alio modo caro dicit naturam, sicut illud ad Ephesios quinto: Nemo carnem suam odio habuit. Et sic carnale potest dici dupliciter: vel a carne, secundum quod dicit naturam, vel a carne, secundum quod dicit vitium. Et hoc ultimo modo in primo statu sexuum commixtio non esset carnale opus, eo quod non esset ibi vitiositas; esset tamen opus carnale, secundum quod caro sonat in naturam; et nihilominus esset spirituale opus, quia natura et opus naturae concordaret spiritui et gratiae.
I. De nonnullis in hac distinctione quaesitis S. Doctor dicit, quod plus habent curiositatis quam utilitatis; simul rationem addit, quare a Magistro et ceteris Scholasticis tractentur (infra q. 4. in corp.).
II. De hac et sequente quaest.: Alex. Hal., S. p. II. q. 89. m. 1. — Scot., apud Hier. de Montefortino, t. II. p. I. q. 89. a. 1. 2. — S. Thom., hic q. 1. a. 1. 2; S. I. q. 89. a. 1. 2. — B. Albert., hic a. 1; S. p. II. tr. 14. q. 84. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 1. a. 1. 2. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 1. q. 1. — Aegid. R., hic q. 1. a. 1. 2. — Durand., hic q. 1. — Dionys. Carth., de hac et seqq. qq. hic q. unica. — Biel, hic q. unica.
---
Question I. Whether in the state of innocence there would have been intercourse of the sexes.
Concerning the first point one proceeds thus, and it is shown that, if man had stood, intercourse of the sexes would have taken place:
For the opposite [view]:
1. First, by the text of Genesis 21: Let us make him a help similar to himself. But man did not need the help of woman except as regards the act of generation, and they could not generate anyone together unless they were joined together: therefore, etc.
2. Likewise, Augustine, On the City of God XIV2: «Whoever says that they would not have come together, would not have begotten human beings, unless they had sinned, what else is he saying but that sin was necessary for the great number of the saints?» Therefore, if this is unfitting to posit, then even if man had not sinned, the man and the woman would have begotten by intercourse of the sexes.
3. Likewise, the distinction of the sexes is for nothing except generation; but in its primary condition there was a distinction in the human species, just as in others: therefore, since the distinct sexes do not concur to one effect unless they are joined, it seems that, if man had stood, man and woman would have been joined.
4. Likewise, the man had generative power; but it is plain that he could not conceive offspring within himself, since he had neither a place in which the fetus could be nourished, nor a way through which it might emerge: therefore it seems that, in order for him to generate, it was necessary for him to be joined and come together with the woman.
On the contrary:
1. Augustine, On the good of marriage3: «Marriages cannot be except of mortals»; it is clear that this was said as regards the intercourse of the sexes: if therefore, the state of innocence remaining, man could not die, then he could not be joined to the woman either.
2. Likewise, Damascene4: «God could have multiplied this race even without generation, if man had kept his commandment to the end»: therefore it seems that, if man had stood, the man would not have to be joined to the woman nor to procreate a son.
3. Likewise, generative power was given for this, that those things which cannot be continued in themselves might be conserved in their like5; but with man standing, he could be continued in perpetuity: therefore it does not seem that the man would generate.
4. Likewise, the intercourse of the sexes is a carnal work; but the first parents, since they were spiritual, were not given to the works of the flesh nor were they impeded from the quiet of contemplation: therefore it does not seem that, nature standing, they would have to be joined together.
Conclusion
The state of innocence persisting, there would have been generation and intercourse of the sexes.
I respond: It must be said that in the state of innocence without doubt man would have had [offspring] generated from man; and this is attested by the authority of Scripture and the judgment of right reason. — For it is said to human beings in the state of innocence, as is written in Genesis 16: Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. And another text says that the woman was made as a help for the man. — This also accords with right reason, which says that the power of generating pertains to the completion of nature, but that the use of generation pertains to the completing and perfecting of the supernal city. And since in the state of innocence nature was more perfect than in the state of the wayfarer; and if man had stood, the supernal city would in no way have been cheated of the great number of its citizens7: it must be posited that man in the state of innocence was able to generate and would have begotten. And since neither the man by himself nor the woman by herself would have sufficed for generating, therefore through joining there would come about a conjoining of one to the other, and they would furnish mutual help to one another in the procreation of offspring for multiplying the human race. — And therefore the arguments showing that, if man had stood, there would have been both generation and intercourse of the sexes are to be conceded.
Reply to the [arguments] for the opposite [view]:
To 1. To that which is first objected on the contrary side from the word of Augustine in the book On the good of marriage, it must be said that mortal is not called there that which has necessity in dying, but mortal is said generally for animal life, in which alone generation can occur, because in it alone can decision [seminal] and restoration occur; and because this mortality could be in the state of innocence, although not in the state of glory: therefore that point is plain.
To 2. To that which is objected from the word of Damascene, it must be said that Damascene does not wish to say that there would be no generation if man had stood, but that it would not be by that mode by which it is now, namely with libido and foulness. Moreover, he himself does not say what God would do, but what He could do.
To 3. To that which is objected, that generative power was given for this, that corruptible things might be perpetuated; it must be said that this is not the whole ground; rather, the principal ground, and the one according to faith, which the Philosopher did not know, is for the multiplication of the number of the elect, which God thus disposed to do successively on account of a manifold fittingness, as was touched on above8: namely, both for the manifestation of the divine glory; and also for the greater conjoining of human beings, that they might love each other more; and also for the beauty and perfection of the universe, which is attended to not only according to permanent being but also according to being in flux; and the flux in irrational things ought to be according to the order and requirement toward rational things, on account of which they have been made.
To 4. To that which is objected, that the intercourse of the sexes is a carnal work; it must be said that flesh in one way sounds as vice, as that to the Galatians 59: The flesh lusts against the spirit; in another way flesh signifies nature, as that to the Ephesians 5: No one has hated his own flesh. And thus carnal can be said in two ways: either from flesh insofar as it signifies nature, or from flesh insofar as it signifies vice. And in this last way, in the first state, the intercourse of the sexes would not have been a carnal work, since there would not have been viciousness there; it would, however, have been a carnal work according as flesh sounds for nature; and it would nonetheless have been a spiritual work, because nature and the work of nature would accord with spirit and grace.
I. Concerning many of the questions asked in this distinction, the Holy Doctor says that they have more of curiosity than of utility; he at the same time adds the reason why they are treated by the Master and the other Scholastics (below, q. 4 in the body).
II. On this and the following question: Alex. of Hales, S. p. II, q. 89, m. 1. — Scotus, in Hier. of Montefortino, vol. II, p. I, q. 89, a. 1, 2. — S. Thomas, here q. 1, a. 1, 2; S. I, q. 89, a. 1, 2. — B. Albert, here a. 1; S. p. II, tr. 14, q. 84. — Petrus a Tarantasia, here q. 1, a. 1, 2. — Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 1, q. 1. — Aegidius Romanus, here q. 1, a. 1, 2. — Durandus, here q. 1. — Dionysius the Carthusian, on this and the following questions, here q. unica. — Biel, here q. unica.
---
- Vers. 18. (Gen. 2, 18: Faciamus ei adiutorium simile sibi.)Verse 18. (Gen. 2:18: Let us make him a help similar to himself.) — Migrated forward from p. 477 L-2 footer ³ per the d20-divisio hand-off; anchors at Faciamus ei adiutorium in argument 1.
- Cap. 23. n. 1, ubi in textu orig. post generaturos omittitur vox homines, et dein post necessarium subiicitur hominis.Augustine, de Civ. Dei XIV, c. 23, n. 1, where in the original text after generaturos the word homines is omitted, and then after necessarium the word hominis is added.
- Cap. 2. n. 2: Nec esse concubitus nisi mortalium corporum possit etc.de Bono coniugali c. 2, n. 2: Nor can intercourse exist except of mortal bodies etc.
- Libr. IV. de Fide orthod. c. 24: Poterat enim Deus alio quoque modo genus etc.Damascene, Book IV, On the Orthodox Faith, c. 24: For God could also in another way [multiply] the race etc.
- Cfr. Aristot., II. de Anima, text. 35. (c. 4). — Dein pro sed homine stante Vat. sed homo, natura stante.Cf. Aristotle, II On the Soul, text 35 (c. 4). — Then for but with man standing the Vatican edition has but the man, with nature standing.
- Vers. 28. — Seq. textus est Gen. 2, 18: Faciamus ei adiutorium simile sibi. — Paulo ante cod. O: attestatur auctoritas Scripturae in iudicio, ceteri codd. cum edd. et Vat.: attestatur auctoritati Scripturae et iudicio, pro qua lectione mira substituimus: attestatur auctoritate etc., innixi auctoritate Forcellini, qui exempla affert pro usu verbi attestari in sensu passivo. Paulo inferius pro completionem naturae Vat. cum paucis codd. complexionem naturae.Verse 28 [Gen. 1:28]. — The following text is Gen. 2:18: Let us make him a help similar to himself. — Slightly earlier, codex O reads: the authority of Scripture attests in the judgment; the remaining codices with the editions and the Vatican: it attests to the authority of Scripture and to the judgment; in place of which strange reading we have substituted: it is attested by the authority etc., relying on the authority of Forcellini, who adduces examples for the use of the verb attestari in the passive sense. A little further down, for completion of nature the Vatican with a few codices reads complexion of nature.
- Cod. T fuisset.Codex T reads would have been.
- Cfr. August., XIV. de Civ. Dei, c. 21–24.Cf. Augustine, de Civ. Dei XIV, cc. 21–24.
- Dist. 18. a. 2. q. 1. ad 3; ibid. a. 1. q. 1. et dub. 1; d. 19. a. 1. q. 2. in corp. — Mox pro divinae gloriae multi codd. cum edd. divinae generationis, codd. D aa Dei gloriae. — Subseq. (ad arg. 4): Vers. 17. — Seq. textus est Eph. 5, 29.Dist. 18, a. 2, q. 1, ad 3; ibid. a. 1, q. 1 and dub. 1; d. 19, a. 1, q. 2, in the body. — Soon after, for of the divine glory many codices with the editions read of divine generation, codices D aa of God's glory. — Subsequent (to argument 4): Verse 17 [Gal. 5:17]. — The following text is Eph. 5:29.