Dist. 21, Art. 1, Q. 3
Book II: On the Creation of Things · Distinction 21
QUAESTIO III.
Utrum ordo et progressus tentationis in primis parentibus fuerit conveniens.
Tertio quaeritur de tentatione primorum parentum quantum ad ordinem et progressum. Et dicit Scriptura et Magister in littera1, quod tentatio incepit a muliere, et per mulierem pervenit ad virum. Et videtur, quod hic modus progrediendi competat astutiae diaboli, et quod etiam debeat a Deo permitti.
*Fundamenta.*
1. Ordo enim destructionis contrarius est ordini constructionis, quae enim sunt ultima in componendo sunt priora in resolvendo2; sed mulier fuit ultimo facta et formata: ergo videtur, quod via deformationis et corruptionis a muliere debuit habere exortum; ergo tentator debuit eam prius aggredi.
2. Item, tentatio exterior debet conformari interiori; sed in tentatione interiori peccatum ascendit a sensualitate ad superiorem partem mediante inferiori portione rationis: si ergo superior portio est vir, et inferior est mulier; sicut tentatio interior procedit ad virum mediante muliere, sic et tentatio exterior3.
3. Item, cautus pugnator citius aggreditur ad bellandum4 illum, quem potest expugnare facilius: si ergo mulier facilius poterat expugnari quam vir, videtur, quod progressus tentationis pervenire debuit ad virum mediante muliere.
4. Item, facilius est alicui expugnare fortem inimicum per domesticum quam etiam per se ipsum; sed vir erat fortis et spirituali mente praeditus: ergo non videtur, quod diabolus ausus fuerit eum tentare per se ipsum, sed per suum domesticum: ergo mediante muliere tentatio pervenit ad virum5.
*Ad oppositum.* Sed contra:
1. Peccatum non est in carne, sed in Dei imagine6; sed mulier et vir aequaliter sunt ad imaginem Dei, quia in anima non est distinctio sexus: ergo videtur, quod tentatio non magis debuit inchoari a sexu muliebri quam a virili.
2. Item, mulier nullam habebat pronitatem ad peccatum, sicut nec vir, et ita erat recta, sicut vir, nec caro eius aliquo modo animam incurvabat7: ergo videtur, quod ita difficile erat mulierem sicut virum deiicere: nulla ergo ratio videtur esse, ob quam tentatio diaboli magis inciperet a muliere.
3. Item, vituperabilius est vinci a muliere quam a viro, et gloriosius est vincere virum quam mulierem: si ergo diabolus maxime refugit vituperium et avidissime quaerit gloriam, videtur, quod magis tentationem a viro quam a muliere inchoaverit.
4. Item, natura audacium est libenter fortibus occurrere8; sed diabolus est audacissimus et procacissimus et maxime praesumens de suis viribus: ergo videtur, quod dedignatus fuerit primo aggredi muliebrem sexum: non ergo videtur probabile, quod prius tentaverit mulierem quam virum.
CONCLUSIO.
Propter duplicem rationem diaboli tentatio a muliere inchoavit.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod, sicut dicit Scriptura et Magister dicit in littera, non est dubitandum, quin tentatio diaboli a muliere inchoaverit et per eam pervenerit ad virum. — Ratio autem huius sumitur ex parte sapientiae Dei, et ex parte astutiae diaboli.
*Ratio quae est ex pte. Dei. Ex parte sapientiae Dei. Dominus enim tali ordine permisit diabolum tentare, tum propter viri exercitationem, tum ne mulier haberet excusationem, tum etiam propter nostram eruditionem. — Propter viri exercitationem, quia ipse adeo fortis erat et spirituali mente praeditus, quod non solum poterat resistere tentationi serpentis, sed etiam suggestioni mulieris; et ideo fortiori tentatione permissus est tentari. — Propter mulieris vero removendam excusationem primo debuit ab ipsa tentatio incipere. Nam si vir primo peccasset, cum vir sit caput mulieris[^9] et dominetur ei, non esset multum mirandum, si mulier ei consentiret; immo magnum haberet excusationis colorem. — Propter nostram eruditionem* etiam hoc permissum est. In illo enim modo tentandi sensibili cognoscimus nos modum et progressum tentationis invisibilis; et sicut ille a serpente venit ad virum mediante muliere, sic iste a sensualitate pervenit ad superiorem portionem rationis mediante inferiori.
*Ratio 2, item triplex. Ex parte similiter astutiae diaboli potest sumi ratio. Diabolus enim attendebat, mulierem esse minoris sapientiae et debilioris constantiae et importunioris adhaerentiae. Quia minoris sapientiae erat, facilior erat ad seducendum; et ideo diabolus seductor per eam voluit sibi facere transitum ac viam. Quia debilioris constantiae, facilior erat ad pervertendum: et ideo diabolus expugnator aggressus est hominis civitatem ex ea parte, ex qua erat aditus minus munitus. Quia vero importunioris erat adhaerentiae, cogitavit diabolus, quod si ipsa primo vinceretur, non quiesceret, quousque perverteret virum. Unde dicitur Ecclesiastis septimo de muliere, quod laqueus est venatorum, et sagena cor eius, vincula sunt manus illius*. Propterea diabolus, astutus impulsor10, incepit a sexu femineo.
*Conclusio 2.* Et sic patet, quod sicut dicit Scriptura, per omnem modum congruum fuit, tentationem incipi a muliere, tum quia hoc diaboli astutia expetebat, tum quia hoc divina providentia disponebat. Unde concedendae sunt rationes ad hoc inductae.
*Solutio oppositorum.* 1. Ad illud autem quod primo obiicitur in contrarium, quod quantum ad imaginem non est sexuum differentia; dicendum, quod licet in viro et muliere reperiatur imago aeque expresse, quantum est de natura ipsius animae; quia tamen anima, quamdiu est in corpore, complexionem corporis imitatur, ex ratione debilitatis complexionis11 et sexus contrahit anima quandam effeminationem; et propterea, quantum est ex parte naturae, nisi adsit fortitudo maioris gratiae, facilius incurvatur ad malum sexus femineus. Et propterea illud non cogit.
2. Ad illud quod obiicit, quod mulier nullam habuit ad hoc pronitatem; dicendum, quod verum est: non tamen ex hoc sequitur, quod haberet aequalem stabilitatem. Quamvis enim non haberet curvationem in affectu nec deceptionem in aspectu, facilius tamen poterat in hoc incidere quam vir, in quo et natura erat fortior, et gratia creditur fuisse abundantior.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod vituperabile est vinci a muliere etc.; dicendum, quod verum est; verumtamen gloriosius est mulierem luctando superare, quam cum viro luctando succumbere. Et quia diabolus, si incepisset a viro, timebat, ne viriliter sibi resisteret, ideo maiori cautela studuit gloriam adipisci.
4. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod audaces libentius aggrediuntur fortes; dicendum, quod illud verum est, ubi est audacia sine astutia; diabolus autem non tantum est audax et procax, immo etiam est astutus et fallax: et ideo in tentando non aggressus est viam difficiliorem, sed potius efficaciorem. Praeterea, non permittebatur sibi totam suam exercere potentiam; cum enim non vincat nisi volentem, est debilis in pugnando12; et ideo non a fortiori, sed a debiliori suam inchoavit tentationem13.
---
Question III.
Whether the order and progress of the temptation in the first parents was fitting.
Thirdly it is asked concerning the temptation of the first parents with respect to the order and progress. And Scripture and the Master in the Littera1 say that the temptation began from the woman, and through the woman came to the man. And it seems that this manner of proceeding suits the cunning of the devil, and also that it ought to have been permitted by God.
*Fundamenta.*
1. For the order of destruction is contrary to the order of construction, since the things that are last in composing are first in resolving2; but the woman was formed and made last: therefore it seems that the way of deformation and corruption had to have its rising from the woman; therefore the tempter ought to have approached her first.
2. Likewise, exterior temptation ought to be conformed to the interior; but in interior temptation sin ascends from the sensuality to the higher part by means of the lower portion of reason: if therefore the higher portion is the man, and the lower the woman; just as the interior temptation proceeds to the man by means of the woman, so also the exterior temptation3.
3. Likewise, the cautious warrior more readily approaches to fight4 him whom he can vanquish more easily: if therefore the woman could be vanquished more easily than the man, it seems that the progress of the temptation ought to have arrived at the man by means of the woman.
4. Likewise, it is easier for someone to vanquish a strong enemy through one of his household than through himself; but the man was strong and endowed with a spiritual mind: therefore it does not seem that the devil dared to tempt him through himself, but through one of his household: therefore through the woman the temptation came to the man5.
*For the opposite.* On the contrary:
1. Sin is not in the flesh, but in the image of God6; but woman and man are equally to the image of God, because in the soul there is no distinction of sex: therefore it seems that the temptation ought not to have begun more from the female sex than from the male.
2. Likewise, the woman had no proneness to sin, just as neither did the man, and she was as upright as the man, nor did her flesh in any way bend the soul downward7: therefore it seems that it was as difficult to throw down the woman as the man: therefore there seems to be no reason on account of which the devil's temptation should begin rather from the woman.
3. Likewise, it is more shameful to be conquered by a woman than by a man, and more glorious to conquer a man than a woman: if therefore the devil most flees shame and most eagerly seeks glory, it seems that he would rather have begun the temptation from the man than from the woman.
4. Likewise, the nature of the daring is to gladly meet the strong8; but the devil is most daring and most insolent and most presuming on his own powers: therefore it seems that he would have disdained to attack the female sex first: therefore it does not seem probable that he tempted the woman before the man.
Conclusion.
On account of a twofold reason the devil's temptation began from the woman.
I respond: It must be said that, as Scripture says and the Master says in the Littera, it is not to be doubted that the temptation of the devil began from the woman and through her came to the man. — Now the reason of this is taken on the part of the wisdom of God, and on the part of the cunning of the devil.
*Reason which is from the part of God. On the part of the wisdom of God. For the Lord permitted the devil to tempt in such an order, both for the man's exercising, and lest the woman should have an excuse, and also for our instruction. — For the man's exercising, because he was so strong and endowed with a spiritual mind that he could not only resist the temptation of the serpent, but even the suggestion of the woman; and therefore he was permitted to be tempted by a stronger temptation. — For removing the woman's excuse the temptation had to begin from her first. For if the man had first sinned, since the man is the head of the woman[^9] and rules over her, it would not have been much to wonder at if the woman had consented to him; rather, she would have had a great color of excuse. — For our instruction* also this was permitted. For in that sensible manner of tempting we recognize the manner and progress of invisible temptation; and just as that one came from the serpent to the man by means of the woman, so this comes from the sensuality to the higher portion of reason by means of the lower.
*Reason 2, likewise threefold. On the part of the cunning of the devil a reason can be similarly taken. For the devil was considering that the woman was of lesser wisdom and weaker constancy and more importunate adherence. Because she was of lesser wisdom, she was easier to seduce; and therefore the devil as seducer wished to make for himself through her a passage and way. Because she was of weaker constancy, she was easier to pervert: and therefore the devil as conqueror approached the city of man on that side on which the entrance was less fortified. Because moreover she was of more importunate adherence, the devil reckoned that if she were first conquered, she would not be at rest until she had perverted the man. Hence it is said in Ecclesiastes seven of the woman, that she is a snare of hunters, and her heart a net, her hands are bands*. Therefore the devil, the cunning impeller10, began from the female sex.
*Conclusion 2.* And thus it is plain that, as Scripture says, in every manner it was fitting that the temptation should begin from the woman, both because the cunning of the devil sought this, and because divine providence was disposing this. Hence the reasons adduced for this are to be conceded.
*Solution of the opposed.* 1. To that which is first objected in opposition, that as to the image there is no difference of the sexes; it must be said that, although in the man and in the woman the image is found equally express, as far as concerns the nature of the soul itself; yet because the soul, so long as it is in the body, imitates the complexion of the body, by reason of the weakness of complexion11 and of sex the soul contracts a certain effeminacy; and therefore, as far as is on the part of nature, unless the strength of greater grace be present, the female sex is more easily bent toward evil. And therefore that does not constrain.
2. To that which objects, that the woman had no proneness to this; it must be said that this is true: nevertheless from this it does not follow that she had equal stability. For although she had no curvature in affection nor deception in sight, yet she could more easily fall into this than the man, in whom both nature was stronger and grace is believed to have been more abundant.
3. To that which is objected, that it is shameful to be conquered by a woman etc.; it must be said that this is true; yet it is more glorious to overcome a woman in wrestling than to succumb wrestling with a man. And because the devil, if he had begun from the man, was afraid lest he should resist him manfully, therefore with greater caution he strove to obtain glory.
4. To that which is objected, that the daring more willingly attack the strong; it must be said that that is true where there is daring without cunning; but the devil is not only daring and insolent, but is also cunning and deceitful: and therefore in tempting he did not attack the more difficult way, but rather the more efficacious. Besides, he was not permitted to exercise all his power; for since he does not conquer except the willing, he is weak in fighting12; and therefore not from the stronger, but from the weaker he began his temptation13.
---
- Hic c. 1. et 5.Here c. 1 and 5 [of the Littera Magistri of Dist. XXI].
- Et, ut dicit Aristot., III. Ethic. c. 3, quod extremum est in resolutione, in generatione esse primum videtur. — Paulo inferius pro exortum Vat. exordium.And, as Aristotle says, III Ethics c. 3, "what is last in resolution is seen to be first in generation." — A little below, for exortum the Vatican edition reads exordium.
- Cfr. August., II. de Gen. contra Manich. c. 14. n. 21; XII. de Trin. c. 11. n. 16. seq.; XIV. de Civ. Dei, c. 11. n. 2. Vide infra d. 24. p. I. a. 2. q. 2. et p. II. per totam.Cf. Augustine, II De Genesi contra Manichaeos c. 14 n. 21; XII De Trinitate c. 11 n. 16 f.; XIV De civitate Dei c. 11 n. 2. See below d. 24 p. I a. 2 q. 2 and p. II throughout.
- Satis multi codd. cum edd. 1, 2 ad bellum, Vat. in bello. Nostram lectionem habent codd. F Q T ee.Quite a few codices with editions 1 and 2 read ad bellum, the Vatican edition in bello. Codices F Q T and ee have our reading.
- Cfr. August., XI. de Gen. ad lit. c. 42. n. 58. seq.Cf. Augustine, XI De Genesi ad litteram c. 42 n. 58 f.
- Haec est lectio plurium codd. ut IP aa ee et ed. 1. Alii codd. inter sed et in Dei inepte interiiciunt etiam; in Vat. legitur: Peccatum non tantum est in carne, sed etiam in Dei imagine, scilicet anima; sed quoad rem cfr. d. 24. p. II. per totam. — De minori vide supra d. 16. a. 2. q. 2.This is the reading of several codices, namely IP, aa, ee, and edition 1. Other codices ineptly insert etiam between sed and in Dei; in the Vatican edition it reads: "Sin is not only in the flesh, but also in the image of God, namely the soul"; but as to the matter cf. d. 24 p. II throughout. — On the minor premise see above d. 16 a. 2 q. 2.
- Alluditur ad Eccle. 7, 30. ubi dicitur: quod fecerit Deus hominem rectum. Cfr. supra pag. 124, nota 3.Allusion is made to Ecclesiastes 7, 30, where it is said: "that God made man upright." Cf. above p. 124, note 3.
- Cfr. Aristot., III. Ethic. c. 7.Cf. Aristotle, III Ethics c. 7.
- Eph. 5, 23: Quoniam vir caput est mulieris. Cfr. I. Cor. 11, 3.Ephesians 5, 23: "For the husband is the head of the wife." Cf. 1 Corinthians 11, 3.
- Vers. 27. — Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 1. — Mox pro impulsor codd. T ee impugnator.Verse 27 [Eccle. 7, 27: Et inveni amariorem morte mulierem, quae laqueus venatorum est, et sagena cor eius, vincula sunt manus illius]. — Cf. here the Littera Magistri, c. 1. — Soon, for impulsor, codices T and ee read impugnator.
- Plures codd., inter quos F K T Y, compositionis.Several codices, among them F, K, T, and Y, read compositionis.
- Cfr. supra pag. 170, nota 2.Cf. above p. 170, note 2.
- Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.See the scholion to the preceding question [i.e., q. 2 SCHOLION II on p. 495 R-mid, which jointly covers q. 2 and q. 3 commentators].