SECOND ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 164, Art. 2]

Whether the Particular Punishments of Our First Parents Are Suitably

Appointed in Scripture?

Objection 1: It would seem that the particular punishments of our

first parents are unsuitably appointed in Scripture. For that which

would have occurred even without sin should not be described as a

punishment for sin. Now seemingly there would have been "pain in

child-bearing," even had there been no sin: for the disposition of

the female sex is such that offspring cannot be born without pain to

the bearer. Likewise the "subjection of woman to man" results from

the perfection of the male, and the imperfection of the female sex.

Again it belongs to the nature of the earth "to bring forth thorns

and thistles," and this would have occurred even had there been no

sin. Therefore these are unsuitable punishments of the first sin.

Obj. 2: Further, that which pertains to a person's dignity does not,

seemingly, pertain to his punishment. But the "multiplying of

conceptions" pertains to a woman's dignity. Therefore it should not

be described as the woman's punishment.

Obj. 3: Further, the punishment of our first parents' sin is

transmitted to all, as we have stated with regard to death (A. 1).

But all "women's conceptions" are not "multiplied," nor does "every

man eat bread in the sweat of his face." Therefore these are not

suitable punishments of the first sin.

Obj. 4: Further, the place of paradise was made for man. Now nothing

in the order of things should be without purpose. Therefore it would

seem that the exclusion of man from paradise was not a suitable

punishment of man.

Obj. 5: Further, this place of the earthly paradise is said to be

naturally inaccessible. Therefore it was useless to put other

obstacles in the way lest man should return thither, to wit the

cherubim, and the "flaming sword turning every way."

Obj. 6: Further, immediately after his sin man was subject to the

necessity of dying, so that he could not be restored to immortality

by the beneficial tree of life. Therefore it was useless to forbid

him to eat of the tree of life, as instanced by the words of Gen.

3:22: "See, lest perhaps he . . . take . . . of the tree of

life . . . and live for ever."

Obj. 7: Further, to mock the unhappy seems inconsistent with mercy

and clemency, which are most of all ascribed to God in Scripture,

according to Ps. 144:9, "His tender mercies are over all His works."

Therefore God is unbecomingly described as mocking our first parents,

already reduced through sin to unhappy straits, in the words of Gen.

3:22, "Behold Adam is become as one of Us, knowing good and evil."

Obj. 8: Further, clothes are necessary to man, like food, according

to 1 Tim. 6:8, "Having food, and wherewith to be covered, with these

we are content." Therefore just as food was appointed to our first

parents before their sin, so also should clothing have been ascribed

to them. Therefore after their sin it was unsuitable to say that God

made for them garments of skin.

Objection 9: Further, the punishment inflicted for a sin should

outweigh in evil the gain realized through the sin: else the

punishment would not deter one from sinning. Now through sin our

first parents gained in this, that their eyes were opened, according

to Gen. 3:7. But this outweighs in good all the penal evils which are

stated to have resulted from sin. Therefore the punishments resulting

from our first parents' sin are unsuitably described.

_On the contrary,_ These punishments were appointed by God, Who does

all things, "in number, weight, and measure [*Vulg.: 'Thou hast

ordered all things in measure, and number, and weight.']" (Wis.

11:21).

_I answer that,_ As stated in the foregoing Article, on account of

their sin, our first parents were deprived of the Divine favor,

whereby the integrity of human nature was maintained in them, and by

the withdrawal of this favor human nature incurred penal defects.

Hence they were punished in two ways. In the first place by being

deprived of that which was befitting the state of integrity, namely

the place of the earthly paradise: and this is indicated (Gen. 3:23)

where it is stated that "God sent him out of the paradise of

pleasure." And since he was unable, of himself, to return to that

state of original innocence, it was fitting that obstacles should be

placed against his recovering those things that were befitting his

original state, namely food (lest he should take of the tree of life)

and place; for "God placed before . . . paradise . . . Cherubim, and

a flaming sword." Secondly, they were punished by having appointed to

them things befitting a nature bereft of the aforesaid favor: and

this as regards both the body and the soul. With regard to the body,

to which pertains the distinction of sex, one punishment was

appointed to the woman and another to the man. To the woman

punishment was appointed in respect of two things on account of which

she is united to the man; and these are the begetting of children,

and community of works pertaining to family life. As regards the

begetting of children, she was punished in two ways: first in the

weariness to which she is subject while carrying the child after

conception, and this is indicated in the words (Gen. 3:16), "I will

multiply thy sorrows, and thy conceptions"; secondly, in the pain

which she suffers in giving birth, and this is indicated by the words

(Gen. 3:16), "In sorrow shalt thou bring forth." As regards family

life she was punished by being subjected to her husband's authority,

and this is conveyed in the words (Gen. 3:16), "Thou shalt be under

thy husband's power."

Now, just as it belongs to the woman to be subject to her husband in

matters relating to the family life, so it belongs to the husband to

provide the necessaries of that life. In this respect he was punished

in three ways. First, by the barrenness of the earth, in the words

(Gen. 3:17), "Cursed is the earth in thy work." Secondly, by the

cares of his toil, without which he does not win the fruits of the

earth; hence the words (Gen. 3:17), "With labor and toil shalt thou

eat thereof all the days of thy life." Thirdly, by the obstacles

encountered by the tillers of the soil, wherefore it is written (Gen.

3:18), "Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee."

Likewise a triple punishment is ascribed to them on the part of the

soul. First, by reason of the confusion they experienced at the

rebellion of the flesh against the spirit; hence it is written (Gen.

3:7): "The eyes of them both were opened; and . . . they perceived

themselves to be naked." Secondly, by the reproach for their sin,

indicated by the words (Gen. 3:22), "Behold Adam is become as one of

Us." Thirdly, by the reminder of their coming death, when it was said

to him (Gen. 3:19): "Dust thou art and into dust thou shalt return."

To this also pertains that God made them garments of skin, as a sign

of their mortality.

Reply Obj. 1: In the state of innocence child-bearing would have been

painless: for Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xiv, 26): "Just as, in

giving birth, the mother would then be relieved not by groans of

pain, but by the instigations of maturity, so in bearing and

conceiving the union of both sexes would be one not of lustful desire

but of deliberate action" [*Cf. I, Q. 98, A. 2].

The subjection of the woman to her husband is to be understood as

inflicted in punishment of the woman, not as to his headship (since

even before sin the man was the "head" and governor "of the woman"),

but as to her having now to obey her husband's will even against her

own.

If man had not sinned, the earth would have brought forth thorns and

thistles to be the food of animals, but not to punish man, because

their growth would bring no labor or punishment for the tiller of the

soil, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. iii, 18). Alcuin [*Interrog. et

Resp. in Gen. lxxix], however, holds that, before sin, the earth

brought forth no thorns and thistles, whatever: but the former

opinion is the better.

Reply Obj. 2: The multiplying of her conceptions was appointed as a

punishment to the woman, not on account of the begetting of children,

for this would have been the same even before sin, but on account of

the numerous sufferings to which the woman is subject, through

carrying her offspring after conception. Hence it is expressly

stated: "I will multiply thy sorrows, and thy conceptions."

Reply Obj. 3: These punishments affect all somewhat. For any woman

who conceives must needs suffer sorrows and bring forth her child

with pain: except the Blessed Virgin, who "conceived without

corruption, and bore without pain" [*St. Bernard, Serm. in Dom. inf.

oct. Assum. B. V. M.], because her conceiving was not according to

the law of nature, transmitted from our first parents. And if a woman

neither conceives nor bears, she suffers from the defect of

barrenness, which outweighs the aforesaid punishments. Likewise

whoever tills the soil must needs eat his bread in the sweat of his

brow: while those who do not themselves work on the land, are busied

with other labors, for "man is born to labor" (Job 5:7): and thus

they eat the bread for which others have labored in the sweat of

their brow.

Reply Obj. 4: Although the place of the earthly paradise avails not

man for his use, it avails him for a lesson; because he knows himself

deprived of that place on account of sin, and because by the things

that have a bodily existence in that paradise, he is instructed in

things pertaining to the heavenly paradise, the way to which is

prepared for man by Christ.

Reply Obj. 5: Apart from the mysteries of the spiritual

interpretation, this place would seem to be inaccessible, chiefly on

account of the extreme heat in the middle zone by reason of the

nighness of the sun. This is denoted by the "flaming sword," which is

described as "turning every way," as being appropriate to the

circular movement that causes this heat. And since the movements of

corporal creatures are set in order through the ministry of the

angels, according to Augustine (De Trin. iii, 4), it was fitting

that, besides the sword turning every way, there should be cherubim

"to keep the way of the tree of life." Hence Augustine says (Gen. ad

lit. xi, 40): "It is to be believed that even in the visible paradise

this was done by heavenly powers indeed, so that there was a fiery

guard set there by the ministry of angels."

Reply Obj. 6: After sin, if man had [eaten] of the tree of life, he

would not thereby have recovered immortality, but by means of that

beneficial food he might have prolonged his life. Hence in the words

"And live for ever," "for ever" signifies "for a long time." For it

was not expedient for man to remain longer in the unhappiness of this

life.

Reply Obj. 7: According to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. xi, 39), "these

words of God are not so much a mockery of our first parents as a

deterrent to others, for whose benefit these things are written, lest

they be proud likewise, because Adam not only failed to become that

which he coveted to be, but did not keep that to which he was made."

Reply Obj. 8: Clothing is necessary to man in his present state of

unhappiness for two reasons. First, to supply a deficiency in respect

of external harm caused by, for instance, extreme heat or cold.

Secondly, to hide his ignominy and to cover the shame of those

members wherein the rebellion of the flesh against the spirit is most

manifest. Now these two motives do not apply to the primitive state.

because then man's body could not be hurt by any outward thing, as

stated in the First Part (Q. 97, A. 2), nor was there in man's body

anything shameful that would bring confusion on him. Hence it is

written (Gen. 2:23): "And they were both naked, to wit Adam and his

wife, and were not ashamed." The same cannot be said of food, which

is necessary to entertain the natural heat, and to sustain the body.

Reply Obj. 9: As Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xi, 31), "We must not

imagine that our first parents were created with their eyes closed,

especially since it is stated that the woman saw that the tree was

fair, and good to eat. Accordingly the eyes of both were opened so

that they saw and thought on things which had not occurred to their

minds before, this was a mutual concupiscence such as they had not

hitherto."

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 983 / 1128 题