Thomas Aquinas

Summa Theologica: Thomas Aquinas

Question 92 of Part I: The Production of Woman

First Article: Whether the Woman Should Have Been Made in the First Production of Things?

Aquinas began by stating 4 questions: "(1) Whether the woman should have been made in that first production of things? (2) Whether the woman should have been made from man? (3) Whether of man's rib? (4) Whether the woman was made immediately by God?" The first article dealt with answering the first question.

Each article had contained objections in response to the question. The first objection referred to Aristotle, who stated that "female is a begotten male." Thus, because the female was begotten, she should not have been made in the "first production of things." The second objection referred to Gregory of Nyssa, who elucidated, "Where there is no sin, there is no inequality." In other words, before sin, there should have been no inequality. But because woman (according to Augustine, who said "the agent is always more honorable than the patient")naturally had "less strength and dignity than man," this statement would be invalid if women were created at the first production of things, since inequality would exist before sin. Thus, women could not exist before sin. The third objection explained that because woman was the cause of sin, God should not have created women, since "sin should be cut off."

Aquinas replied with his own arguments against these objections. He began with a direct quote from Genesis 2:18, "It is not good for man to be alone; let us make him a helper like to himself." Aquinas argued that it was absolutely necessary for woman to be created for the purpose of reproduction. He did not believe that the word "helper" meant "helpmate" as some had interpreted, but rather as "a helper in the work of generation." Then, he used both scientific and philosophic observations to support this argument. He observed that some plants and animals could reproduce without a helper, but humans in particular could not do this. Plants could do this because their principle means of survival was reproduction. But because "perfect animals" had a "nobler vital function" than reproduction, males and females had to unite in order for reproduction to take place. Males would possess the "active power of generation" and females the "passive power of generation." One plant posessed both of these powers, and therefore, did not need a helper in reproduction. As such, in perfect animals, male and female had to become one in order for offspring to be produced. Their union during sexual intercourse represented the duality of active and passive powers of generation, and thus, reproduction was possible through man and woman becoming one flesh. Thus, Aquinas once again used Genesis 2 as a reference, which stated that men and women "shall be two in one flesh" (Gen 2:24) right after the formation of women. Thus, women's purpose was for this union of two fleshes to form one, which would lead to the production of offspring.

In his reply to the first objection, Aquinas pointed out that, arguably, the masculine sex's active force provided the attributes characteristic of Adam, who was of "perfect likeness," while the feminine sex originated from defects in the active force or "some material disposition." In other words, the male's active force created the human, but females would only be produced if the male's force had a defect. However, Aquinas argued against this, saying that woman was "not misbegotten, but is included in nature's intention as directed to the work of generation." In other words, the variations in nature were necessary for the survival of man, and thus, the defects in the male seed would produce more and more females which would increase survival rates, since more females meant more births. Aquinas further elucidated that God formed the male and female in order for this "intention" of nature to exist. In other words, Aquinas acknowledged the notion of genetic variability that existed in nature in order to support his argument. He recognized that each living thing on earth was unique, even if it was very subtle. This variation was apart of nature, and thus, because God created nature to be this way, man and woman would provide their offspring with variation. Instead of having many Adam clones, God intended that each human being would be distinct and unique, and thus, he created man and woman.

In his reply to the second objection, Aquinas listed the two versions of subjection, one more "servile" and the other more "civil." He explained that the latter subjection existed before sin. This subjection, in which "the superior makes use of his subjects for their own benefit and good," was the relationship between Adam and Eve before they were punished. Naturally, Aquinas explained, men were superior in intellect, and thus, had natural subject over women. He argued that the more servile type of subjection, in which the husband would rule over their wife, began after sin. Thus, subjection existed before sin, but a more intense version of this subjection originated from God's punishments in response to their sins. In response to Aquinas' argument, it seemed that once again, his anti-feminist beliefs still overshadowed his reasoning. Eve was the only one who pursued and acquired knowledge from the forbidden tree on her own, without the input of Adam. Thus, Eve seemed to be the more knowledgeable human. Adam only ate the fruit after Eve gave him it. Thus, there was inequality between the sexes before sin, and thus, was the cause of this sin, but it was not in the same nature as Aquinas explained. Despite this, Aquinas elucidated that, after sin, the inequality between man and woman was increased because of God's punishments, who had the husband rule over the wife.

In his reply to the third objection, Aquinas explained that things that were occasions of sins made the universe complete, and thus, dearth of these things would make the universe imperfect. He also elucidated that it was not rational to destroy the imperfections of the world in order to make it perfect, considering the notion that God had the divine power of directing evil toward good. For instance, if God took away sex, a sometimes sinful action, there would be no life, since sex is essential to reproduction, which is vital to survival. Thus, sex, a practice that can occasionally be sinful, is absolutely vital to the survival of mankind. If it was destroyed with all other occasions of sin, life would not exist.