Scotus Academicus, Tomus quintus: De Creaturarum Corporalium et de Homine

Three things come above all to be discussed in this Section: First, what sort of instrument the tempter made use of: Second, by what motive he was led to tempt: Third, what fraud and cunning he employed in the temptation, and what order he observed, whereby he might the more easily lead our First Parents

Note 1. That Moses, the chief interpreter of things divine and human, delineated the encounter of the devil with the First Parents in chapter 3 of Genesis, in these words: But the serpent was more subtle than all the beasts of the earth which the Lord God had made, etc. Or as the Septuagint render it, the serpent was the most prudent of all the beasts which were upon the earth: or as the Chaldean has it, the serpent was wiser than all the beasts of the field: in which words three things are above all signified: First indeed, that the devil used the serpent as an instrument for assailing and deceiving the first men. Second, that the demon infected the serpent itself, and thrust himself into its body, in such wise that through the mouth and tongue of the beast, as through an organ, he might emit voices, and hold converse with the first woman. Whence St. Augustine, book 11. De Civitate, chapter 11. writes: The devil chose the serpent in Paradise, a corporeal one, that is, a slippery animal, mobile in tortuous windings, and suited to his work, through whom he might speak: and him, subjected to himself by his angelic presence and his pre-eminent nature of spiritual wickedness, abusing as it were an instrument, he uttered his deceit in speech to man. Thirdly, finally, that serpent is said to have been more subtle than all the beasts of the earth: by which is designated that he was a true, and not a masked serpent, inasmuch as he is compared with other earthly beasts; otherwise the account would altogether limp, and that comparison would be utterly incongruous.

Note 2. That although the devil was the sole architect of this lamentable temptation: nevertheless Moses prudently called the tempter, not the devil, but the serpent; namely, that he might take away from the Jewish people — rude indeed, and of a grosser genius — every occasion of idolatry: since heretics have not been wanting who, judging that all knowledge of good and evil had been suggested to the first parents by the serpent, held and worshipped it as a Divinity, whence they were called Ophites: perhaps also there would not have been wanting some of the Jews who would have held the devil, endowed with spiritual nature, as a divinity; seeing that by his own prudence, even against the will of God, he had drawn over the First Parents to his party, as Anastasius Synaita learnedly observes, book 10. Hexaemeron. If you ask, he says, why God then did not speak this nakedly, but named the serpent in place of the devil: learn openly, that when speaking with much and wanton indulgence, he would not open to Israel either those things which pertain to the Angels, nor those which pertain to Satan, who trampled Eve underfoot, lest they should conspire with him and adore him as stronger than God, he who by his own prudence had been able to draw the first-formed men away from God to himself. — Another reason is subjoined by Severianus Gabalitanus, bishop, oration 6, namely that Moses undertook to relate the deeds done at the beginning of the world in a ruder style and popular narration, because he was undertaking to instruct not only the unlearned vulgar in hidden matters: but that was the age of the nascent and yet infantile Church, which could not yet receive a deeper doctrine. Nothing therefore absurd, if he fed them with milk who for that time were as it were infants. The Apostle used a like precaution, 2. ad Cor. chapter 11, when addressing virgins he writes: For I fear lest, as the serpent seduced Eve by his subtlety, so your senses should be corrupted. Whence Severianus: Paul indeed, he says, as a faithful minister and guardian of the sacred Scriptures, did not invert the diction, but indicated the sense. But who lay hid under the serpent and breathed into him, Christ manifested when addressing the Jews. John 8. he said they were sprung from their father the devil, who was a murderer from the beginning; namely, that he lethally wounded the whole human race in the first parent, and led it into the death of sin.

Note 3. From the Seraphic Bonaventure in 2. dist. 20. art. 1. q. 2. that that manner of tempting was not from diabolical election, as St. Augustine says, book 11. de Genesi, chapter 5, but also from divine permission: for it was not lawful for the devil to tempt in every manner that he wished, and could; but in that manner in which the Lord would permit: moreover divine wisdom (which orders, and governs, and permits all things) granted that the devil should tempt man under the likeness of a brute animal, and not of any whatsoever, but of a serpent: for thus did the congruence of order require. For > man to be tempted by the devil under the likeness of a brute animal was congruous: both in respect of the work; and in respect of the end; and also in respect of the divine judgment. 1. In respect of the work, because man was born to be inclined to good at that time chiefly on the sensible and brutish side, and therefore it was congruous that he be tempted under the likeness of a brute animal. 2. In respect of the end likewise it was similarly congruous, because the temptation was ordered to this, that man should be made like a brute animal, when, having despised the immutable good, he should adhere to a changeable good, and rest therein: and therefore to insinuate this, he ought to be tempted in the species of a brute animal. 3. In respect of the divine Judgment also it was congruous, since the Lord just and faithful does not permit man to be tempted beyond that which he can bear: and therefore he suffered the devil to lie hidden in the temptation in such wise that nevertheless he could be detected by man, and therefore he did not suffer the devil to tempt man altogether in a similar species, namely in the human species or likeness, but rather in a brutish one.

These things thus premised, two things are here above all to be resolved: First, why the devil took up the serpent as the instrument of temptation: Second, why he made use of it in that temptation.

First Conclusion. — The devil congruously took up the serpent as the instrument of his temptation by divine permission.

This truth the Seraphic Doctor proves in the place cited, by a threefold reason: First indeed, he says, by the reason of the work: for since the temptation was being wrought, and the ingress of suggestion, which enters into the heart after the manner of a serpent, and there diffuses the venom of sin, from which man has spiritually to die, therefore, that the exterior likeness might answer to the interior work, it was congruous that man be tempted by the devil under the likeness of the serpent, whose property it is to creep, and to diffuse poison, and by diffusing it to destroy man. — 2. In respect also of the end it was likewise congruous: for since the devil intended to turn the face of man, and the head, and the higher mind downward, and to prostrate the whole, and thus by prostrating to lead him to an evil end, proposing to himself some delightful reward, therefore it was permitted that he tempt in the serpent, which according to its whole body has the earth cleaving to it in its going. — 3. It was also congruous in respect of the divine judgment: for since from that temptation the divine judgment ought to raise up enmity between the tempted and the tempter, therefore the temptation of man ought to be made in the serpent, whom he dreads exceedingly after the Fall, and who lies in wait above all by his subtlety, that he may harm man. Such are the words of Bonaventure. — Nor however ought we to opine, says St. Augustine, book 11. De Genesi ad litteram, that the devil swallowed the serpent, whom he persuaded to be the prey through which he would tempt: but since there was in him, by reason of a perverse and infirm will, the cupidity of deceiving: he could not except through that animal through which he was permitted to be able: for the cupidity of harming can be proper even to his own spirit: but power is not except from God, and this in hidden and lofty justice, since there is no iniquity with God. Moreover the Master of the Sentences teaches, dist. 21. that if the demon had been permitted, perhaps he would have come more gladly in the form of a dove: For the devil, he says, has the cupidity of harming, but the faculty only such as is given him, either for subverting and destroying by cause of wrath, or for humbling or proving by cause of mercy. But God did not permit, says our Lyranus, man to be tempted by the devil in a gracious and noble species, through which he could more easily deceive: but rather in a horrible species, in which the deceitfulness of the demon could the sooner be detected; or, as Moses Bar-Cepha says, book De Paradiso, chapter 27, the devil was permitted to abuse no other animal for deceiving the woman; partly that there might appear therein the vileness, and abjection of the demon: partly also that by the aspect of the tortuous and malignant animal, Eve might the more easily detect the fraud. St. Thomas the Angelic Doctor adds in his commentary on Genesis that God permitted the devil to tempt in the species of the serpent for this reason, that by this, that it is a foul and venomous animal, Eve might somewhat detect his deceit; that namely the temptation might be less violent, and if she fell, Eve might be less excusable. Whence God seems thereby also to have provided for himself, lest afterwards the woman, having collapsed into sin, should allege some grave violence which she could not easily have withstood, impelled to the deed by another animal, or one more potent for deceiving, inciting by bulk of body, or beauty of mouth; and should thereupon cast back the whole cause of her fault upon God, for not resisting so great and so strong an adversary.

You will say. The more hidden a temptation is, the more efficacious it is for deceiving: therefore it seemed more congruous that man be tempted by some spiritual temptation than in a corporeal species, whereby namely his observance toward God might the better be proved. Moreover, the more efficacious is a temptation, the more affable the tempter is in suggesting: but a temptation, and speech, had it been made in an assumed human species and likeness, would have been far more affable than that which was touched upon through the serpent: therefore this seems less to accord with the intention of the tempter. Finally, the greater a species of sanctity the tempter assumes, the more he prevails in tempting: but there are many animals which by their properties present sanctity more than the serpent, as for instance the dove and the lamb: therefore it seems that the devil the tempter ought to have assumed those very animals. — I answer, these forms indeed perhaps the devil would have assumed, if it had been permitted him by God; for he could attempt nothing except what was permitted: but why God did not permit the temptation to be made in any other than the serpentine species we have already said; namely, that the temptation might be lighter, and that serpentine species would the more easily draw away the woman from the tempter.

Second Conclusion. — In truth the devil was infused into the body of the serpent, and through the mouth and tongue of the beast, as through an organ, he uttered human voices. So St. Augustine, book 11., De Civitate Dei, chapter 11. and likewise book 11. De Genesi ad litteram, chapter 29. where he says: The devil himself spoke in the serpent, using it as it were an organ, and moving its nature in that manner in which he himself could move it, and it be moved, to express the sounds of words, and bodily signs, through which the woman might understand the will of him persuading her. He did not himself err in the very woman, because she was a rational creature, which by her own motion could use herself to make words, but his operation, and persuasion, though with an occult instinct he aided inwardly what he had wrought outwardly through the serpent. I judge therefore that the serpent, by those little blandishments of motion, and certain quasi gesticulations and sweetly-winding turnings, but wholly poisonous and deadly, the demon moving within, crept into familiarity with the woman, and first offered itself to be looked upon. Nearly all sacred Interpretes agree that that serpent, which as an instrument the devil used, by the varied beauty of its skin enticed the woman to look upon it, that he might the more easily induce her to conversation. But since the kinds of serpents are various, many dream which one it was that was assumed by the demon: for in a matter so uncertain, and most remote from all human conjecture, of which Moses expressed not so much as any trace, who would dare affirm anything for certain? Yet some are found to have been of opinion it was a basilisk: but they seem less congruously to conjecture: for the most loathsome aspect, and most pestilent breath of this serpent would not invite Eve to conversation, but rather avert her: of it Pliny writes, book 8. chapter 21.: The Cyrenaic Province produces the basilisk, of a size of not more than two digits, distinguished by a white spot on its head, as it were a certain diadem: by its hiss it puts all serpents to flight, nor does it impel its body with multiplied flexions, as the rest: but goes along elevated and straight from the middle, it kills shrubs not merely touched, but even breathed upon. It burns up herbs, and breaks rocks, etc. — Some conjecture it to have been a Scytale, led by its beauty and magnitude doubtless: For the Scytale, says Solinus, chapter 30., shines with so great a variety of back, that by the grace of its markings it retards beholders, and since it is slower in creeping, it desires that what it cannot attain, beholders should stand stupefied at the wonder of itself. This description of Solinus Delrio confirms upon the first verse of the third chapter of Genesis, wherein he testifies that he once saw the spoils of a Scytale; which indeed was seven feet long, variegated throughout by the artifice of most beautiful nature, radiant with the splendor of gold and the sheen of silver. — Rupertus asserts that the serpent assumed by the demon was one of those which they say are reported to bear a face like a virgin's; but our Lyranus rightly laughs to scorn that such a serpent was ever seen in the world, as an old wives' fable. Wherefore I should judge it better to say, that that serpent was our common snake, or coluber; whose nature it is to be bloodthirsty, greedy of milk, covered with a bark or shell, shining with variety of back, retarding beholders by the grace of its azure markings. But why that serpent is called more subtle, or more prudent, or wiser than all the beasts of the earth, St. Augustine renders the reason, book 11. De Genesi ad litteram, chapter 2. By transferred speech, he says, it was said most prudent, or as most Latin codices have, most wise, not in the proper sense in which wisdom is wont to be taken in reference to good, whether of God, or of the Angels, or of the rational soul: as if we should say wise bees also, and ants, on account of works as it were imitating wisdom. Although that serpent, not by its own irrational soul, but by another spirit already, that is, a diabolical one, could be called wisest of all beasts. However much the prevaricating Angels by their own perversity and pride have merited to be cast down from supernal seats: nevertheless by nature they excel all beasts, on account of the eminence of reason. What wonder therefore, if by his own instinct the devil, already filling the serpent, and mingling his own spirit with it, after that manner in which the demon is wont to fill the lares, rendered it wisest of all beasts according to the living but irrational soul of the creature? For wisdom is so said in evil after the manner of the name, as astuteness is in good: since properly, and more customarily in the Latin tongue only, the wise are commendatorily called: but the astute are understood as ill-affected.

Note 1. That although the devil is infected with all vices of which created spiritual substance is capable; for which cause the Apostle to the Ephesians 6. calls demons spiritual wickednesses in heavenly places: nevertheless he is agitated by three movements of sins above all. He excels chiefly in pride, wrath, and envy: pride indeed: For every high thing shall fall, says Job chapter 11. He is King over all the children of pride: hence that of Psalm 73. must above all be understood of demons: The pride of them that hate thee ascendeth continually. Wrath likewise: for he is a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour, says St. Peter: whence Christ the Lord, John 8., addressing the Pharisees says: You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do, he was a murderer from the beginning: wherefore St. John rightly admonished, Apocalypse 12.¹ Woe to the earth, and to the sea, because the devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath. Envy lastly. for the Wise Man says, chapter 2. By the envy of the devil death came into the world. — It is asked moreover by which of those movements the demon was led to assail and assault the first parents.

Note 2. From Hugh of St. Victor in the Annotations upon Matthew, chapters 3. and 4. that pride is love of one's own excellence: envy is the spite at another's felicity; wrath is an irrational perturbation of the mind... Through pride a good is loved as one's own property: for the proud man rejoices that he has what another has not; or that he may have what another has not: therefore, because he loves excellence as his own property, he hates communion, and envy is born, the daughter of pride. For envy is hatred of another's felicity, which is born of pride; for it could not displease thee that another have it, unless thou hadst before willed to have it alone thyself: therefore it wounds thee, and another's felicity is burdensome to thee, because in it thine own defect is shown to thee, and thou art reproved by it that thou art not that which thou didst rejoice to be, or hadst coveted to be. In pride therefore thou dost delight unjustly: in envy thou art tormented justly: in pride it pleases thee perversely that thou art what thou art; in envy it displeases thee iniquitously that another is what he is.... In this envy is known to have something of justice, that he who acts unjustly is punished justly. After this follows wrath, that is, an irrational perturbation of the mind, by which it is called wrath, when thou dost disdain to suffer an inflicted evil, and art therefore troubled, agitated by impatience, because thou dost not sustain adversity. There is however a good wrath, by which thou dost disdain to do evil: but an evil one, by which thou dost disdain to suffer evil: the former rejects guilt, the latter does not receive justice: wherefore evil wrath is troubled by adversity occurring, and by impatience disturbs the quiet of the mind: nor does the soul any longer wish to stand firm in the toleration of punishment, which is just, as before it would not stand firm through continence of guilt, which is unjust. For it increases misery, while it receives the torment of the flesh to the grief of the mind.

Note 3. That of the three foresaid vices envy is the more cruciating and afflicting: whence St. Bernard rightly warns, treatise On the interior house, chapter 33. Nothing is sadder than envy, which straightway torments and crucifies its very bearer. Therefore it is wholly to be fled and abhorred: since in it God is offended, the neighbor wounded, the mind afflicted: For envy always torments the mind of its possessor, although often it cannot wound its neighbor, against whom it rages. Wherefore St. Augustine, book De disciplina Christiana, chapter 1. calls envy a diabolical vice. May God, he says, discern the pest of envy from the souls of all, nay of Christians: for it is a diabolical vice, by which alone the devil is guilty, and inexplicably guilty: for it is not said to the devil, Thou art condemned, because thou hast committed adultery, hast committed theft, hast ravished another's life: but because thou, fallen thyself, hast straightway stumbled upon man standing. These things thus briefly premised, let there be

Only Conclusion. — The devil was moved by two vices of the soul to tempt man in Paradise, namely pride and envy. Such is the teaching of the Seraphic Doctor in 2. dist. 20. q. 1. where he says: the mind of the devil possessed by these two vices, namely pride and envy, seeing man in that state in which he could fall under diabolical power, and in which he could ascend to the supernal felicity from which he himself had fallen, was moved by pride, and by envy, that he might impede him from supernal felicity. Pride indeed was the first motive, but envy the proximate and immediate: for even suppose he could not acquire dominion over man, still he would have studied to impede him from the joys of Paradise. Such are the words of the Seraphic Doctor. Which St. wonderfully explains and confirms, book 11. De Genesi ad litteram, chapter 14. Some, he says, say that that fall from supernal seats befell him because it fell upon man made to the image of God; moreover envy follows pride, it does not precede it: for envying is not the cause of boasting: but pride is the cause of envying. Since therefore pride is the love of one's own excellence: but envy the hatred of another's felicity, that it is born thence is sufficiently manifest: for each one loving his own excellence, envies either equals, that they be made equal to him: or inferiors, lest they be made equal to himself: or superiors, that he be not made equal to them: therefore by boasting he is envious, not by envying proud. — But for what cause the devil envied man, various authors bring forward various things. For St. Bernard judges that the object of this diabolical envy against men was that cognition which the demon had received, God revealing it. That the divine Word was to become incarnate, that God-Man might be at once Head of men and of Angels. — There are those who judge that the devil envied man for this reason, that God constituted him Monarch of the whole world. Thus judges Anastasius Synaita, chapter 1. Since therefore God, he says, was fashioning this visible world, that is Heaven, and Earth, and whatever things the earth contains, the devil judged, as a certain Doctor says, that he would be constituted by God King and Lord of visible Creation. But after he saw man produced, and dominion over all earthly things conferred upon him by God, bearing this hardly, and envying man, he deceived him. To this sentiment subscribes Tertullian, book De patientia, chapter 5. though he ascribed it to impatience, which others to envy: Therefore, he says, I detect the nativities of impatience in the very devil, that even then he bore impatiently that the Lord God had subjected to His image, that is, to man, all the works which He had made: for neither would he have been lost, had he sustained: nor would he have envied man, had he not grieved. Therefore he deceived him, because he had envied; but he had envied, because he had grieved; he had grieved, because he certainly had not borne patiently, etc. All which Prudentius elegantly weighs in the Hamartigenia, where he teaches that the devil blazed out in envy against man newly created:

For from the tinder of zeal a spark of hatred burned, And sudden grief established his wit iniquitous. He had poured forth the clay, and the fragile image set To grow warm with the heat of God: and the Lord too, by condition, Who should rule the whole World by his own moderating sway, Imposed upon the nature of Soil, of sea, and sky, That, serving man, it knew how to pour forth its opulent issue, And, poured forth, devote it to the earthly King: With the ferment of a chafing spirit the Beast pressed on Its swelling rage, and drew bitter force from its acid marrow.

Others affirm, and indeed, as it seems to me, more rightly, that the daemon for this reason blazed out in envy against man, because he saw that he was to be conducted into Heaven, whence he himself had been cast down. Which St. Ambrose excellently explains, book De Paradiso, chapter 12. where weighing that word of Wisdom 2. By the envy of the devil death came into the world, he says: Envy moreover was the cause of the beatitude of man placed in Paradise: and therefore he himself, the devil, unable to endure the grace received as a punishment, envied man, for that from clay he was elected to be an inhabitant of Paradise. For the devil considered that he himself, who had been of superior nature, had fallen into these secular and worldly things: but man of inferior nature hoped for eternal things. This therefore is that which he envies, saying: Shall this inferior attain that which I could not keep? Shall he depart from earthly things to Heaven, while I, fallen from Heaven, am upon the earth? Many ways have I whereby I may deceive man: he was made of clay, earth is his mother, he is wrapped in corruptible things: although his soul is of superior nature, yet even it can lie liable to fall, constituted in the prison of the body, when I could not avoid falling. — So subscribes St. Gregory the Pope in the book Pastoralis, part 3. c. 11. likewise weighing the same words of Wisdom: But the envy of the devil, etc. For since, he says, that malignant spirit himself our adversary lost Heaven, he envied man created for this end, and lost himself, he yet accumulated his damnation by losing others. To these equally accords St. Augustine, book 10. Confessionum, c. 36. Our adversary presses upon our true beatitude: everywhere scattering his snares, Well done, well done, that while we greedily gather, we may be caught lying in wait... and in that manner, having made them like himself, he holds them with him, not for concord of charity, but for fellowship of punishment. — Alcimus Avitus, bishop of Vienna, elegantly describes all these things, book 2. of his Poems, where he describes the spite and envy of the demon against men newly created in this manner:

When he saw that these new men in tranquil seat Were leading a happy life without distinction, That under a law accepted they served the Lord of the Orb, And enjoyed placid joys amid subject things:

The sudden spark of zeal stirred up his rapine, And burning spite grew hot into savage conflagrations. Near then by chance was he by whose lofty fall, Slipping, he had drawn the whole train headlong undeserving. Recalling this, and pressing the fresh fall in his heart, He grieved more that another possessed what he had lost. Then shame mingled with gall thus sought utterance in his breast, And unfolds it, and relaxes sighs with such a voice: O grief! that to us this sudden plasma should arise, And a hated race have grown from our ruin! Virtue held me exalted; now behold, rejected I am driven forth, and clay succeeds to angelic honor, Earth holds Heaven, raised upon a vile frame The clod reigns, and translated power perishes for us. Yet not altogether does it perish: a great part retains; Nor does it help to delay: now now with bland contest Will I engage, while prime safety, knowing no guile, Untried of any deceits, shall lie open to my weapons. And better shall they be caught by guile alone, before They send forth a fertile progeny into eternal ages. Nothing immortal must be suffered to proceed from earth: Let the fountain of the race perish; the casting down of the vanquished head Shall be the seed of death: let it bring forth the beginning Of a life of perilous distinction: let all be smitten in one: A slain root shall make no wine-bearing top. These solaces at length remain to me cast down, If I cannot again ascend the closed heavens. These also shall be shut: it must be thought lighter to have fallen, If new substance perish by a like fall, If a companion of my ruin enter the fellowships of my punishment, And share with us the fires whom I foresee. But lest the cause of deceiving seem difficult, This way must be shown, which long ago of its own accord he ran headlong in his prone fall: which pride, casting me from the kingdom Thrust down, this thrusts man from the threshold of Paradise. Thus he spoke, and closed his voice with the groan of grieving.

You will say 1. Envy is in respect of a good which the envious can acquire: but the devil could not attain eternal beatitude: therefore he did not envy man on account of its attainment. — I deny the major: because, as the Seraphic Doctor says in the place cited, ad secundum, one envies not only that which he can obtain; but also that which he is born to have, although he cannot; as the maimed and blind envy others sight and progress. And although the devil cannot arrive at beatitude, he has nonetheless a natural inclination to it, and therefore envies those who are destined to obtain it.

You will object 2. Envy is in respect of a good desired; for no one envies another on account of anything unless because he loves and covets it: but the devil did not covet to obey the commandments of God, nor to ascend to the supernal fatherland, nor to become a friend of God: since he fell into despair: therefore for this cause he could not envy man. — I answer there the Seraphic Doctor, that envy is not only in respect of a desired good, but also in respect of that good by whose obtaining the desired good is diminished, or judged to be diminished: but since the devil desired to be carried aloft and sublime through pride, therefore he judged that by the exaltation of man his own good was impeded, and therefore he envied, and out of envy assaulted the first Parents.

You urge. Envy, as has been said, is only in respect of that which is born to diminish one's own good: but the acquisition of beatitude can diminish no one's good: therefore it cannot be a motive of envy. — I answer that although the beatification and exaltation of man truly diminishes no one's good, nevertheless according to the estimation made (says the Seraphic Doctor there) it could be believed that that glorification of man was diminutive of the good desired by the demon, and out of that false estimation envy could arise: for the affections arise not only from certain judgments, but also from suspicions, and false estimations.

Note 1. From Hugh of St. Victor, Annotation on book 4. of Kings, chapter 11, that there are, in general, four modes of temptation:

For first, he says, temptation is light but hidden, namely when someone is lightly tempted, and yet does not yet understand whether that thing about which he is tempted be evil: e.g. when someone is lightly tempted concerning an office or prelacy; the temptation is light and hidden, because he knows not whether what he desires is expedient for him. Another temptation is light but manifest, when someone is lightly, but manifestly, tempted concerning evil: e.g. when someone is lightly tempted concerning fornication; the temptation is light, because he is lightly tempted, and manifest, because it is manifestly concerning evil. Another is a grave and hidden temptation, when someone is gravely tempted, and yet knows not whether that about which he is tempted is harmful to him: e.g. when someone is gravely tempted concerning prelacy or some ministry; the temptation is grave, because he is gravely tempted; but hidden while he knows not that a diabolical snare lies hidden there, for the devil tempts concerning exaltation in order that through exaltation he may fall more grievously into damnation. Finally, another temptation is grave and manifest, when someone is gravely and manifestly tempted concerning evil: e.g. when someone is gravely tempted concerning fornication; the temptation is grave, because he is gravely tempted; and manifest, because it is manifestly concerning evil. The Psalmist well designates all these modes of temptation, where he says in Psalm 90: Thou shalt not fear from the fear of the night: from the arrow that flieth in the day: from the business that walketh about in the dark: from invasion and the midday demon: for the temptation light but hidden is the fear of the night: the temptation light and manifest, the arrow flying in the day: the temptation grave and hidden, the business walking in the dark: but the temptation grave and manifest, the invasion and the midday demon.

Note 2. From the Seraphic Doctor, in 2. dist. 21. ad dubium 3.

Temptation can be considered in five ways: namely as regards the motive, as regards the instrument, as regards the effect, as regards the degree, and as regards the mode. First indeed, as regards the motive, it can be considered either generally or specially. If generally, temptation is thus divided into that which is from the enemy, and from the flesh, and from the world, as is said in a certain Sequence: The world, the flesh, the demons, stir up diverse battles. If specially, so that the motive is said to be not only that which moves by way of object, but also that which induces and excites by way of impelling cause, temptation is rightly divided into that which is from the enemy, and that which is from the flesh, since each inflames unto evil. — Likewise as regards the instrument, temptation can be considered in two ways: first indeed generally, and thus is that division of St. Gregory, namely that some temptation is through vices, some through scourges: secondly specially, and thus is that division of temptation which the Gloss sets forth upon that verse, Every abominable food, etc., where it is said that temptation is fourfold: of which the first is error, or ignorance by the force of truth: the second, the difficulty of overcoming concupiscences: the third, weariness of the good: the fourth, the tempest of the age. — In the third way, namely as regards the effect, temptation is likewise considered, either generally, and thus it is twofold: namely one diabolical, the other human: of which the first terminates in mortal sin: the second truly, either in none, or only in venial, as the Gloss has it upon that verse: Let not temptation take hold of you, etc. If specially, thus is that division of St. Augustine, saying in the book On Christian Doctrine, that the devil tempts, either by recalling the flesh, or by infusing natural things, or by despoiling of graces. — But if temptation be considered as regards its degree, this can also be done in two ways: if generally, one temptation is exterior, another interior: if specially, temptation is accomplished in a threefold manner, namely by suggestion, by delectation, and by consent, as St. Gregory says upon that verse of James: Every one is tempted by concupiscence, etc. — Finally, if temptation be considered as regards the mode of tempting, this consideration can be made either generally or specially. If generally, it is done either explicitly or implicitly. If implicitly, thus are the four degrees of temptation assigned above by Hugh. But if explicitly, thus is that which St. Bernard sets forth through seven members: of which the first is importune, namely whereby he insolently presses. The second doubtful, namely whereby he involves the mind in the fog of doubt. The third is sudden, namely that which forestalls the judgment of reason. The fourth hidden, namely that which escapes the order of deliberation. The fifth violent, whereby our strength is transcended. The sixth fraudulent, whereby namely he seduces the mind. The seventh perplexed, which is impeded by various vices. But if temptation be considered specially, insofar as it is restricted to the temptation of the devil, its modes can be assigned in two ways: either implicitly, and thus St. Augustine divides it, saying in a certain sermon, that the devil tempts as a lion, tempts as a Dragon: or explicitly, and thus is that division of Gregory upon Job, where he says: Against the faithful servant the enemy insinuates all the machinations of his cunning, namely, that by oppressing he seizes, by lying in wait he surrounds, by threatening he terrifies, by persuading he flatters, by driving to despair he breaks, by promising he deceives.

Note 3. That although Eve, newly formed by God, adorned with the divine gifts of grace and the endowments of human wisdom, and moreover instituted Queen of the sublunary world, princess of living creatures, mother-to-be of the whole human race, rival of the supernal Angels, and candidate for Heaven and the everlasting fruition of God: nevertheless her perfection was far less than Adam's, for it did not pertain to her to have the most certain and most perfect knowledge of all animals, and of all their properties, virtues, and faculties: but to have a knowledge of the things to be done, and of those which pertain to the administration of the household, and to all the duties which were to be discharged and fulfilled toward her husband and children: hence it is no wonder that she did not stand astonished at the serpent speaking with her; for, as SS. Bonaventure and Thomas teach in 2. dist. 21., she could have judged that some Angelic spirit lurking in the serpent was benevolent toward her, and was consulting well for her advantage. Or, because newly created she knew not that the faculty of speaking was naturally given to no animal: for both the novelty of the things, and the inexperience of Eve herself, and the fact that the perfection of the female condition would by no means require a perfect knowledge of all natural things, were the cause of her ignorance. But why the devil lurking in the serpent attacked Eve before Adam, and by what art he overcame her, is here to be determined.

First Conclusion. — The devil, cunning in deceiving, first tempted the woman, that, she being overcome, he might the more easily attack and cast down Adam.

This is evident plainly from Sacred Scripture, and stands openly from the narration of Moses, who relates in Gen. 3. the colloquy of Eve with the serpent, and adds: The woman therefore saw that the tree was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and delightful to behold, and she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave to her husband. Whence it is written in Ecclesiasticus chapter 25: From the woman came the beginning of sin, and by her we all die. Now the devil tempted Eve before Adam, because he knew her first, more ready to believe, secondly weaker to resist; thirdly more prone as to the cause. This moreover was known to him from the weaker and less noble constitution of her body, and the nature of her sex, from the lesser excellence and perfection of her natural endowments, and because God had made the woman for the man: but he knew that Adam himself was more instructed in all things, and firmer in resisting: whence he judged that, the woman being persuaded and deceived, he would easily through her impel Adam to sin.

The holy Fathers explain this truth luminously, above all St. Augustine lib. 14. De Civit. Dei, cap. 11. The female, he says, that is, the inferior part of that human union, began, that she might reach by degrees to the whole, not judging the man easily credulous, nor capable of being deceived by erring: but while she yielded to another's error. Hence St. Ambrose in Sermon 15. upon Psalm 118. teaches that it seemed to the devil that the love of woman would be stronger for undermining a manly soul than his own poisons and diabolical assaults: That serpent, cunning and crafty, he says, to accustom his arts of wickedness, committed himself rather to feminine enticements than to his own poisons. And so the woman drew the man, whom the serpent had not dared to tempt, with a certain soft and alluring amorous sedulousness of affection.

Odo subscribes, book 3. of the Moralia on Job; where he seems to intimate that temptation through a woman is more vehement than through the devil; for, speaking of the temptation of Job made by a woman, after he had been tempted by the devil, he says: The ancient enemy was accustomed to tempt the human race in two ways, namely that he may either break the hearts of those standing by tribulations, or soften them by persuasions: therefore in both ways he exercised himself vehemently against blessed Job: for he brought losses of goods upon the father of a family: and he turned to subtle arguments of tempting: therefore he held the heart of the woman, and found in her as it were a ladder by which he might ascend to the heart of the man.

The Seraphic Doctor proves the same in 2. dist. 21. q. 3. by a twofold reason; of which the first is sought on the part of the wisdom of God: the second on the part of the cunning of the devil. The first, I say, on the part of the wisdom of God:

For the Lord permitted the devil to tempt in such an order: both on account of the man's exercise; and also lest the woman should have an excuse: and also on account of our instruction. On account of the man's exercise, because he himself was so strong, and endowed with a spiritual mind, that he could not only resist the temptation of the serpent, but also the suggestion of the woman; and therefore he was permitted to be tempted with a stronger temptation. On account of doing away with the woman's excuse, the temptation ought first to begin from her: for if the man had sinned first, since the man is the head of the woman, and has dominion over her, it would not be much to be wondered at, if the woman should consent to him: nay, she would have a great color of excuse. On account of our instruction also this was permitted: for in that sensible mode of tempting we come to know the mode and progress of the invisible temptation: and as that one came from the serpent to the man through the mediation of the woman; so this one comes from sensuality to the higher portion of reason through the mediation of the interior.

Likewise on the part of the cunning of the devil the reason can be taken:

The devil attended to the woman being 1. of lesser wisdom. 2. of weaker constancy. 3. of more importunate adherence. Because she was of lesser wisdom, she was easier to seduce; and therefore the devil, the seducer, willed through her to make for himself a passage to the man. Because she was of weaker constancy, she was easier to pervert: and therefore the devil, the assailant, attacked the city of man from that side from which the approach was less fortified. But because she was of more importunate adherence, the devil thought that if she were first conquered, she would not rest until she had perverted the man: whence it is said of the woman, that she is a snare to those who pass by, and her bands are the cords of her love. Therefore the devil, the cunning instigator, began from the feminine sex. And thus it is evident that, as Scripture says, it was in every way congruous that the temptation begin from the woman: both because the cunning of the devil expected this: and because the divine providence disposed this.

Thus the Seraphic Doctor.

You will say 1. Eve had no greater propensity to sinning than Adam; since she was endowed with an equal innocence, grace, and wisdom with him; nor did her sensitive appetite strive against the soul in her: therefore it was not easier for the devil to overcome Eve by tempting than Adam: therefore no reason appears why the devil ought rather to have tempted the woman than the man. — I answer, indeed Eve had not a greater propensity to sinning than Adam; yet she did not obtain an equal stability and firmness with him; for, as the Seraphic Doctor says, she had not corruption in effecting, nor deception in sight. Yet she could fall more easily than the man, in whom nature was stronger, and grace is believed to have been more abundant.

You will say 2. It is a greater disgrace and reproach to be conquered by a woman than by a man, and it is far more glorious for a man to conquer than a woman: since therefore the devil, with an affection of proud glory, most greedily seeks after, it seemed more congruous that he should first attack the man rather than assault the woman. — I answer, indeed a victory won over a man is nobler than over a woman: but it is more laudable to overcome a woman by wrestling than to succumb to a man by attacking: since however the devil had to fear lest, if he began his temptation from the man, he should find him resisting him constantly, the same, with cunning prudence and malice, judged it better to begin the temptation from the woman, whom he judged easier to overcome.

You will say 3. It belongs to a bold and generous soul to attack the stronger adversaries: but the devil is most bold and most insolent, and above all presuming upon his own strength: therefore he ought not to have assailed the woman, but the man, as being far stronger than his wife. — I answer, it shows a greater truly generous soul when one attacks an adversary in open combat: but not where the battle is waged more by cunning than by boldness: but the devil is not only bold and insolent, as the Seraphic Doctor says, nay he is also cunning and deceitful: and the same in tempting did not undertake the more difficult way, but rather the more efficacious: and therefore he judged the weaker part should first be attacked, that, she being conquered, he might overcome the stronger with less trouble.

You ask 1. Why did God permit the first Parents to be tempted by the devil, whom He knew would be cast down by the temptation?

St. Augustine answers, book 11. On Genesis according to the letter, chapter 6, that therefore God permitted it, that now, he says, by temptation the virtue be proved and opened, and the palm is more glorious, not that the tempted one did not consent, but that he could not tempt. Since also they who, having forsaken the Creator, go after the tempter, tempt more and more those who abide in the word of God, and set before them an example against the dereliction of concupiscence, and instil a pious fear against pride. Hence the Apostle says: Attending to thyself, lest thou also be tempted. For humble is that humility, as much as any humility is, whereby one is subjected to the Creator, lest we presume upon our own strength as needing not His aid, by all the divine Scriptures it is commended to all with continual care. Since therefore even by the unjust the just profit, and by the impious the pious, it is said in vain: God would not create those whom He foreknew would profit evil men, since they are born both that their goods may be admitted for exercising good wills, and that justly they may be punished for their evil will.

You ask 2. How did the serpent approach Eve: namely, whether in Paradise, or outside Paradise?

Rupertus answers, book 3. On the works of the Trinity, chapter 2, that the serpent was outside Paradise; For, he says, Paradise was the proper dwelling of man, given to him by the great grace of the Creator, with the condition of good work and most diligent guardianship interposed: now if Paradise was common to serpents, it follows that that place of delights was not without wolves and lions and other beasts: and the same would not be judged of such beatitude that it might deservedly be called the Paradise of pleasure, and be said to have been planted by God Himself. Therefore the serpent, especially possessed by the devil corporally invading, was not in Paradise: but the woman, for the sake of the body and its culture, while she walked incontinently, perhaps looking out what was outside Paradise, and gaping more closely and ambitiously upon the serpent as cunning, and upon the sweetness of that land, a place was given to the devil, and an occasion briefly proffered, whence he might tempt Eve. Thus Rupertus. — But the opinion of nearly all the holy Fathers and Theologians cries out against this, and the very narration of Moses seems to indicate quite plainly that that serpent was within the place of Paradise, inasmuch as he conversed with Eve with the tree of the knowledge of good and evil present and in view.

You ask 3. How was the very colloquy of the serpent with the woman not known to Adam?

I answer, perhaps Eve, newly formed, withdrew from Adam and wandered through the garden, at that time namely when Adam himself was wholly detained by the sight of the celestial orbs, and the consideration of the whole of nature, or by the contemplation of God Himself the Creator of all things, and therefore did not diligently care for and contain the woman delivered to him by God, as befitted a pastor and husband. By this example other wives are taught not easily to withdraw from their husbands, lest perchance they fall in with serpents and tempters. Whence St. Gregory Nazianzen wrote to Olympias not less prudently than piously: Commit outward business to the man; do not often put forth thy foot beyond the threshold, lest thou set out to public games and an unbridled crowd: for thence modesty is shaken out even from the bashful, and joined to no eyes; but the loss of modesty is the most certain parent of all disgraceful deeds. Let thy house be to thee as the city and the groves; make not the sight of thee copious to others than to thy kinsfolk, even to the most pleasing and honest, and to the priest, and to old age excelling in youth; nay, do not even show thyself in the sight of pious men, whom however thy husband does not bar from his house, although otherwise thou holdest them dear and honorest them. For what so great utility can anything bring, as a good husband, if in him alone thou hast fastened thy love? Take care also that thou blushest at the sight of men, having eyes blind, and brow depressed to the ground. This moreover must thou guard against with the utmost zeal, lest thy tongue be borne along with headlong and unbridled impulse: it is better to be silent, when to speak is useful: than to speak when time imposes silence with indecorous and dishonest speech. Would that this first woman had observed these things, that she might neither put forth her foot beyond the sight of her husband, nor incautiously have begun a discourse with the serpent! would that she had neither given the serpent the opportunity of seeing her, nor had she herself seen the serpent! for from the sight to the speech, from the speech to disobedience, and from disobedience to ruin, she advanced with fatal step.