SECOND ARTICLE [I, Q. 99, Art. 2]

Whether, in the Primitive State, Women Would Have Been Born?

Objection 1: It would seem that in the primitive state woman would

not have been born. For the Philosopher says (De Gener. Animal. ii,

3) that woman is a "misbegotten male," as though she were a product

outside the purpose of nature. But in that state nothing would have

been unnatural in human generation. Therefore in that state women

would not have been born.

Obj. 2: Further, every agent produces its like, unless prevented by

insufficient power or ineptness of matter: thus a small fire cannot

burn green wood. But in generation the active force is in the male.

Since, therefore, in the state of innocence man's active force was

not subject to defect, nor was there inept matter on the part of the

woman, it seems that males would always have been born.

Obj. 3: Further, in the state of innocence generation is ordered to

the multiplication of the human race. But the race would have been

sufficiently multiplied by the first man and woman, from the fact

that they would have lived for ever. Therefore, in the state of

innocence, there was no need for women to be born.

_On the contrary,_ Nature's process in generation would have been in

harmony with the manner in which it was established by God. But God

established male and female in human nature, as it is written (Gen.

1, 2). Therefore also in the state of innocence male and female would

have been born.

_I answer that,_ Nothing belonging to the completeness of human

nature would have been lacking in the state of innocence. And as

different grades belong to the perfection of the universe, so also

diversity of sex belongs to the perfection of human nature. Therefore

in the state of innocence, both sexes would have been begotten.

Reply Obj. 1: Woman is said to be a "misbegotten male," as being a

product outside the purpose of nature considered in the individual

case: but not against the purpose of universal nature, as above

explained (Q. 92, A. 1, ad 2).

Reply Obj. 2: The generation of woman is not occasioned either by a

defect of the active force or by inept matter, as the objection

proposes; but sometimes by an extrinsic accidental cause; thus the

Philosopher says (De Animal. Histor. vi, 19): "The northern wind

favors the generation of males, and the southern wind that of

females": sometimes also by some impression in the soul (of the

parents), which may easily have some effect on the body (of the

child). Especially was this the case in the state of innocence, when

the body was more subject to the soul; so that by the mere will of

the parent the sex of the offspring might be diversified.

Reply Obj. 3: The offspring would have been begotten to an animal

life, as to the use of food and generation. Hence it was fitting that

all should generate, and not only the first parents. From this it

seems to follow that males and females would have been in equal

number.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part I (Prima Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 610 / 722 题