[I.q.92.a.1.arg.1] It would seem that the woman should not have been made in the first production of things. For the Philosopher says (De Gener. ii, 3), that \"the female is a misbegotten male.\" But nothing misbegotten or defective should have been in the first production of things. Therefore woman should not have been made at that first production.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.arg.1] Ad primum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod mulier non debuerit produci in prima rerum productione. Dicit enim Philosophus in lib. II De generat. animal., cap. 11, non procul a fin., quod « femina est mas occasionatus. » Sed nihil occasionatum et deficiens debuit esse in prima rerum institutione. Ergo in illa prima rerum institutione mulier producenda non erat.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.arg.2] Further, subjection and limitation were a result of sin, for to the woman was it said after sin (Genesis 3:16): \"Thou shalt be under the man's power\"; and Gregory says that, \"Where there is no sin, there is no inequality.\" But woman is naturally of less strength and dignity than man; \"for the agent is always more honorable than the patient,\" as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 16). Therefore woman should not have been made in the first production of things before sin.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.arg.2] 2. Præterea, subjectio et minoratio ex peccato est subsecuta; nam ad mulierem dictum est post peccatum, Gen., 11, 16: Sub viri potestate eris. Et Gregorius dicit, XXI Moral., c. xv, § 22, col. 203, t. 2, quod « ubi non delinquimus, omnes pares sumus. » Sed mulier naturaliter est minoris virtutis et dignitatis quam vir; semper enim « honorabilius est agens patiente, » ut dicit Augustinus, XII Super Gen. ad litt., c. xvi, § 33, col. 467, t. 3. Ergo non debuit mulier produci in prima rerum productione ante peccatum.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.arg.3] Further, occasions of sin should be cut off. But God foresaw that the woman would be an occasion of sin to man. Therefore He should not have made woman.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.arg.3] 3. Præterea, occasiones peccatorum sunt amputandæ. Sed Deus præscivit quod mulier esset futura viro in occasionem peccati. Ergo non debuit mulier producere.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.sc] It is written (Genesis 2:18): \"It is not good for man to be alone; let us make him a helper like to himself.\"
\n[I.q.92.a.1.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur Genes., 11, 18: Non est bonum hominem esse* solum; faciamus ei adjutorium simile sibi.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.co] 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 passive generative power together; as we see in plants which are generated from seed; for the noblest vital function in plants is generation. Wherefore we observe that in these the active power of generation invariably accompanies the passive power. Among perfect animals the active power of generation belongs to the male sex, and the passive power to the female. And as among animals there is a vital operation nobler than generation, to which their life is principally directed; therefore the male sex 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 nobler 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\" (Genesis 2:24).
\n[I.q.92.a.1.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod necessarium fuit feminam fieri, sicut Scriptura dicit, in adjutorium viri; non quidem in adjutorium alicujus alterius operis, ut quidam dixerunt, cum ad quodlibet aliud opus convenientius juvari possit vir per alium virum quam per mulierem, sed in adjutorium generationis. Quod manifestius videri potest, si in viventibus modus generationis consideretur. Sunt enim quædam viventia quæ in seipsis non habent virtutem activam generationis, sed ab agente alterius speciei generantur, sicut plantæ et animalia quæ generantur sine semine ex materia convenienti per virtutem activam cælestium corporum. Quædam vero habent virtutem generationis activam et passivam cunjunctam, sicut accidit in plantis quæ generantur ex semine: non enim est in plantis aliquod nobilius opus vitæ quam generatio; unde convenienter omni tempore in eis virtuti passivæ conjungitur virtus activa generationis. Animalibus vero perfectis competit virtus activa generationis secundum sexum masculinum, virtus vero passiva secundum sexum femininum. Et quia est aliquod opus vitæ nobilius in animalibus quam generatio, ad quod eorum vita principaliter ordinatur; ideo non omni tempore sexus masculinus feminino conjungitur in animalibus perfectis, sed solum tempore coitus; ut imaginemur per coitum sic fieri unum ex mare et femina, sicut in planta omni tempore conjunguntur vis masculina et feminina, etsi in quibusdam plus abundet una harum, in quibusdam plus altera. Homo autem adhuc ordinatur ad nobilius opus vitæ, quod est intelligere; et ideo adhuc in homine debuit esse major ratione distinctio utriusque virtutis, ut seorsum produceretur femina a mare, et tamen carnaliter cunjungerentur in unum ad generationis opus. Et ideo statim post formationem mulieris dicitur Gen., 11, 24: Erunt duo in carne una.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.ad.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 sex; 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 God, Who is the universal Author of nature. Therefore, in producing nature, God formed not only the male but also the female.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod per respectum ad naturam particularem femina est aliquid deficiens et occasionatum, quia virtus activa quæ est in semine maris, intendit producere sibi simile perfectum secundum masculinum sexum; sed quod femina generetur, hoc est propter virtutis activæ debili- 1. Non sunt expresse verba, sed tantummodo sensus. 2. Æquivalenter: « Omni enim modo præstan- I. tatem, vel propter aliquam materiae indis-positionem, vel etiam propter aliquam transmutationem ab extrinseco, puta a ventis australibus, qui sunt humidi, ut dicitur in lib. IV De generat. animal., cap. 11. Sed per comparationem ad naturam universalem femina non est aliquid occasionatum, sed est de intentione naturæ ad opus generationis ordinata. Intentio autem naturæ universalis dependet ex Deo qui est universalis auctor naturæ: et ideo, instituendo naturam, non solum marem, sed etiam feminam produxit.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.ad.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 (96, 3).
\n[I.q.92.a.1.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod duplex est subjectio. Una servilis, secundum quam præsidens utitur subjecto ad sui ipsius utilitatem, et talis subjectio introducta est post peccatum. Est autem alia subjectio œconomica, vel civilis, secundum quam præsidens utitur subjectis ad eorum bonum, et ista subjectio fuisset etiam ante peccatum. Defuisset enim bonum ordinis in humana multitudine, si quidam per alios sapientiores gubernati non fuissent. Et sic ex tali subjectione naturaliter femina subjecta est viro; quia naturaliter in homine magis abundat discretio rationis. Nec inæqualitas hominum excluditur per innocentiæ statum, ut infra dicetur.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.ad.3] If God 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 God is so powerful that He can direct any evil to a good end.
\n[I.q.92.a.1.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod si omnia ex quibus homo sumpsit occasionem peccandi, Deus substraxisset a mundo, remansisset universum imperfectum. Nec debuit bonum commune tolli, ut vitaretur particulare malum; præsertim cum Deus sit adeo potens, ut quodlibet malum possit ordinare in bonum.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.arg.1] It would seem that woman should not have been made from man. For sex 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.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.arg.1] Ad secundum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod mulier non debuerit fieri ex viro. Sexus enim communis est homini et aliis animalibus. Sed in aliis animalibus feminæ non sunt factæ ex maribus. Ergo nec in homine fieri debuit.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.arg.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.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.arg.2] 2. Præterea, eorum quæ sunt ejusdem speciei, eadem est materia. Sed mas et femina sunt ejusdem speciei. Cum igitur vir fuerit factus ex limo terræ, ex eodem debuerit fieri femina et non ex viro.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.arg.3] Further, woman was made to be a helpmate to man in the work of generation. But close relationship makes a person unfit for that office; hence near relations are debarred from intermarriage, as is written (Leviticus 18:6). Therefore woman should not have been made from man.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.arg.3] 3. Præterea, mulier facta est in adjuto-rium generationis viro. Sed nimia propinquitas reddit personam ad hoc ineptam; unde personæ propinquæ a matrimonio excluduntur, ut patet Levit., xviii. Ergo mulier non debuit fieri ex viro.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.sc] It is written (Sirach 17:5): \"He created of him,\" that is, out of man, \"a helpmate like to himself,\" that is, woman.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.sc] Sed contra est quod dicitur Eccl., xvii, 5: ex ipso, scilicet viro, adjutorium simile sibi, scilicet mulierem.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.co] When all things were first formed, it was more suitable for the woman to be made from man that (for the female to be from the male) in other animals.
\nFirst, in order thus to give the first man a certain dignity consisting in this, that as God is the principle of the whole universe, so the first man, in likeness to God, was the principle of the whole human race. Wherefore Paul says that \"God made the whole human race from one\" (Acts 17:26).
\nSecondly, that man might love woman all the more, and cleave to her more closely, knowing her to be fashioned from himself. Hence it is written (Genesis 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.
\nThirdly, 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.
\nFourthly, there is a sacramental reason for this. For by this is signified that the Church takes her origin from Christ. Wherefore the Apostle says (Ephesians 5:32): \"This is a great sacrament; but I speak in Christ and in the Church.\"
\n[I.q.92.a.2.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod conveniens fuit mulierem in prima rerum institutione ex viro formari magis quam in aliis animalibus. Primo quidem, ut in hoc quædam dignitas primo homini servaretur; ut secundum Dei similitudinem esset et ipse principium totius suæ speciei, sicut Deus est ipse principium totius universi. Unde et Paulus dicit, Act., xvii, 26, quod Deus fecit ex uno omne genus hominum. Secundo, ut vir magis diligeret mulierem, et ei inseparabilius adhæreret, dum cognosceret eam ex se esse productam. Unde dicitur Gen., 11, 23 et 24: De viro sumpta est. Quamobrem relinquet homo patrem et matrem, et adhærebit uxori suæ. Et hoc maxime necessarium fuit in specie humana, in qua mas et femina commanent per totam vitam, quod non contingit in aliis animalibus. Tertio, quia, ut Philosophus dicit VIII Ethic., cap. xii, mas et femina cunjunguntur in hominibus non solum propter necessitatem generationis, ut in aliis animalibus, sed etiam propter domesticam vitam, in qua sunt aliqua opera viri et feminæ, et in qua vir est caput mulieris. Unde convenienter ex viro formata est femina sicut ex suo principio. Quarta vero ratio est sacramentalis. Figuratur enim per hoc quod Ecclesia a Christo sumit principium. Unde Apostolus dicit ad Ephes., v, 32: Sacramentum hoc magnum est; ego autem dico in Christo et in Ecclesia. Et per hoc patet responsio ad primum.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.ad.1] is clear from the foregoing.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.ad.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.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod materia est ex qua aliquid fit. Natura autem creata habet determinatum principium; et cum sit determinata ad unum, etiam habet determinatum processum, unde ex determinata materia producit aliquid in determinata specie. Sed virtus divina, cum sit infinita, potest idem secundum speciem ex quacumque materia facere, sicut virum ex limo terræ, et mulierem ex viro.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.ad.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.
\n[I.q.92.a.2.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod ex naturali generatione contrahitur quædam propinquitas, quæ matrimonium impedit. Sed mulier non est producta a viro per naturalem generationem, sed sola virtute divina; unde Eva non dicitur filia Adæ. Et propter hoc ratio non sequitur.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.arg.1] It would seem that the woman was not formed immediately by God. For no individual is produced immediately by God from another individual alike in species. But the woman was made from a man who is of the same species. Therefore she was not made immediately by God.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.arg.1] Ad quartum sic proceditur. 1. Videtur quod mulier non fuerit immediate formata a Deo. Nullum enim individuum ex simili secundum speciem productum fit immediate a Deo. Sed mulier facta est de viro, qui est ejusdem speciei cum ipsa. Ergo non est facta immediate a Deo.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.arg.2] Further, Augustine (De Trin. iii, 4) says that corporeal things are governed by God through the angels. But the woman's body was formed from corporeal matter. Therefore it was made through the ministry of the angels, and not immediately by God.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.arg.2] 2. Præterea, Augustinus dicit, III De Trinit., c. iv, col 873, t. 8, quod corporalia dispensantur a Deo per angelos. Sed corpus mulieris ex materia corporali est formatum. Ergo est factum per ministerium angelorum, et non immediate a Deo.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.arg.3] Further, those things which pre-exist in creatures as to their causal virtues are produced by the power of some creature, and not immediately by God. But the woman's body was produced in its causal virtues among the first created works, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. ix, 15). Therefore it was not produced immediately by God.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.arg.3] 3. Præterea, ea quæ præextiterunt in creaturis secundum rationes causales, producuntur virtute alicujus creaturæ, et non immediate a Deo. Sed secundum causales rationes corpus mulieris in primis operibus productum fuit, ut Augustinus dicit, Super Gen. ad litt., lib. IX, c. xv, col. 403, t. 3. Ergo non fuit producta mulier immediate a Deo.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.sc] Augustine says, in the same work: \"God alone, to Whom all nature owes its existence, could form or build up the woman from the man's rib.\"
\n[I.q.92.a.4.sc] Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit in eodem lib., ibid.: « Formare vel ædificare costam ut mulier esset, non potuit nisi Deus, a quo universa natura subsistit. »
\n[I.q.92.a.4.co] As was said above (2, ad 2), the natural generation of every species is from some determinate matter. Now the matter whence man is naturally begotten is the human semen of man or woman. Wherefore from any other matter an individual of the human species cannot naturally be generated. Now God alone, the Author of nature, can produce an effect into existence outside the ordinary course of nature. Therefore God alone could produce either a man from the slime of the earth, or a woman from the rib of man.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.co] Respondeo dicendum, quod sicut supra dictum est, uniuscujusque speciei generatio naturalis est ex determinata materia. Mate- Cajetanus dicit formationem Evæ admittendam esse secundum mysterium, per parabolam, non per allegoriam ut Origenistæ docuerant. Hugo a S. Victore ex sola costa Adæ vult Evam fuisse productam, probabiliter per rarefactionem majorem illius, id est, per dilatationem et porositatis extensionem. Quando enim particulæ aeris spatium implent circa terram, earum dilatatio ad rarefactionem ducit, et de facto, in quacumque extensione, corporis dilatati particulæ in minoriria autem ex qua naturaliter generatur homo est semen humanum viri vel feminæ. Unde ex alia quacumque materia individuum humanæ speciei generari non potest naturaliter. Solus autem Deus, qui est naturæ institutor, potest præter naturæ ordinem res in esse producere. Et ideo solus Deus potuit vel virum de limo terræ, vel mulierem de costa viri formare.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.ad.1] This argument is verified when an individual is begotten, by natural generation, from that which is like it in the same species.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.ad.1] Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod ratio illa procedit quando individuum generatur ex simili secundum speciem generatione naturali.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.ad.2] As Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. ix, 15), we do not know whether the angels were employed by God in the formation of the woman; but it is certain that, as the body of man was not formed by the angels from the slime of the earth, so neither was the body of the woman formed by them from the man's rib.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.ad.2] Ad secundum dicendum, quod, sicut Augustinus dicit, Super Gen. ad litt., lib. IX, c. xv, col 403, t. 3, an ministerium angeli exhibuerint Deo in formatione mulieris, nescimus; certum tamen est quod sicut corpus viri de limo non fuit formatum per angelos, ita nec corpus mulieris de costa viri.
\n[I.q.92.a.4.ad.3] As Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. ix, 18): \"The first creation of things did not demand that woman should be made thus; it made it possible for her to be thus made.\" Therefore the body of the woman did indeed pre-exist in these causal virtues, in the things first created; not as regards active potentiality, but as regards a potentiality passive in relation to the active potentiality of the Creator.
\nThe Summa Theologica of St. Thomas AquinasSecond and Revised Edition, 1920Literally translated by Fathers of the English Dominican ProvinceOnline Edition Copyright © 2009 by Kevin Knight Nihil Obstat. F. Innocentius Apap, O.P., S.T.M., Censor. Theol.Imprimatur. Edus. Canonicus Surmont, Vicarius Generalis. Westmonasterii.APPROBATIO ORDINISNihil Obstat. F. Raphael Moss, O.P., S.T.L. and F. Leo Moore, O.P., S.T.L.Imprimatur. F. Beda Jarrett, O.P., S.T.L., A.M., Prior Provincialis AngliæMARIÆ IMMACULATÆ - SEDI SAPIENTIÆ
\n[I.q.92.a.4.ad.3] Ad tertium dicendum, quod, sicut Augustinus in eodem lib., c. xviii, col. 407, t. 3, dicit, « non habuit prima rerum conditio ut femina omnino sic fieret; sed tamen hoc habuit ut sic fieri posset. » Et ideo secundum causales rationes præexistit corpus mulieris in primis operibus, non secundum potentiam activam, sed secundum potentiam passivam tantum, in ordine ad potentiam activam Creatoris.
\n