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

Note 1. That there is a twofold uprightness of man, namely spiritual and corporeal, of which Ecclesiastes chap. 7 speaks, saying:

God made man upright: namely as regards the disposition of the body, and as regards the habit of the mind, as our Alexander of Hales explains, part 2, qu. 81, mem. 2. The former is that natural and inborn inclination of the rational soul, by which, superior to all bodily things, and likewise mistress of all the senses and passions of the body which it informs, it is borne toward God as toward the center in which it may rest, toward the first truth which it may contemplate, and toward the highest good in whose love and comprehension it may be blessed and delight. The latter is the tall and upright posture of the human body itself, whereby it is not bent, as the other animals are, with face prone toward the ground: but is borne heavenward with countenance erect, and looks forth. Of the former uprightness there will be treatise in what follows; here, however, of the latter.

Note 2. That since man can be considered in a threefold state: namely of nature, of grace, and of glory, in which he has diverse gifts and operations, even the dignity and majesty of the uprightness of his body can be gathered from the operations to be elicited in this threefold state. For since God by His divine wisdom and counsel brought forth all things in number, weight, and measure, that is, constituted each in a just and certain order of perfection, of disposition, and of position, according to the nature of each and its mode of existing and operating; hence it is that He ought to grant to man, according to his threefold order, that figure and disposition of body which was more congruent and apt for his diverse operations to be elicited in this threefold state; which corporeal uprightness we shall demonstrate to be such.

Note 3. That corporeal uprightness considered in itself does not indeed confer the highest perfection upon the one possessing it: for certain creatures, even of the least dignity, have an upright figure and are raised toward heaven, such as nearly all genera of plants; on the contrary, however, certain most noble bodies, such as the stars and precious stones, do not have this uprightness and erection toward heaven: for the virtue of the stars inclines more toward the earth than toward heaven, and the most precious pebbles grow sordid and lie hidden in the earth. Whence the dignity of the human body is not to be measured and gathered from its uprightness alone, but chiefly from its erection; for erected uprightness, says Alexander of Hales, in the same place, is the first sign of the perfection of the human body, namely of its noble and heavenly form, and likewise of its appetite for beatitude, which it can have complete only in heaven. Not so, however, of plants, which although upright are not yet erect, but rather bowed down by the adhesion of their part to the earth from which they obtain life and growth; hence man and plant hold a contrary position, wherefore man is called the inverted tree.

One Conclusion. — THE HIGHEST DIGNITY AND MAJESTY OF THE HUMAN BODY SHINES FORTH CHIEFLY IN ITS TALLNESS AND ITS ERECTION TOWARD HEAVEN.

This truth our Alexander of Hales proves from the threefold state of man, namely of innocence, of grace, and of glory, in which man ought to have various operations, toward which the very erection of the body especially conduces. For first, the state of innocence was endowed with three excellencies; for in it man had power in ruling, wisdom in speaking, and goodness in loving: despoiled of which by sin, he fell into infirmity of operation, into the darkness of ignorance, and into the malice of concupiscence, as Alexander of Hales says: but for the fulfilling of these three gifts the tallness and erection of the body were necessary; for first, it indicates that royal majesty and power by which innocent man ought to rule over the fishes of the sea, the fowls of the air, and the beasts of the earth; for all these animate creatures, that they might testify their obedience and observance toward man, held their bodies prone, and were inclined downward more readily, that, subjected to man as standing above them, as to their prince and head, they might exhibit their veneration. — This erect state likewise serves for demonstrating the wisdom of man in speaking: for if his body had been inclined and not erect, he would not have had easy use of speech, which is the most excellent indication of the divine wisdom communicated to him.

Hence St. Gregory of Nyssa, in the book De hominis opificio, chap. 9, gathers that man was therefore endowed with hands, not only that they might be ready instruments for all the arts and all works to be carried on in peace and in war; but also that they might serve speech and language. For if, he says, man had to be without these, doubtless, after the manner of four-footed animals, the parts of the human face would needs have been so formed that they would be accommodated to the nourishing of man; and therefore the form of this had to be oblong, attenuated, and pressed in where the nostrils are situated, while the lips had to be prominent, covered with callus, hard and thick, that manifestly they might be aptly fitted for cropping herbs. Moreover the tongue between the teeth, not indeed such as we now use; but either ample in flesh, solid, rough, which would crush together with the teeth whatever had been cast between them: or on the contrary, soft toward the sides, and fluid; such as is the tongue of dogs and of the other raw-eating animals, whereby it is diffused between the as it were iron-fenced chinks of the teeth. Wherefore if hands had not been added to the human body, how at last could articulate as it were speech have been expressed, the parts of the mouth being conformed not sufficiently apt for aiding the sound? For assuredly man would have had either to bleat, or to frisk like a goat, or to bark, or to neigh, or to low, or to trumpet, or indeed to utter bellowsings after the manner of beasts. Now since hands have been given to man, the mouth serves and is occupied solely in expressing speech: therefore it is rightly established that the hand is a certain proper instrument of nature endowed with the faculty of speaking, and that it has been made chiefly for this end, that through its agency the use of speech might be more ready in us. » So he. Whence if hands were not present to the human body, man could utter no speech. But if the body of man were inclined and prone, it would not have hands; because in all inclined animals the anterior members of the body are feet: and therefore if the body did not have erection, neither would it have the free ministry of speech; nor consequently would it be endowed with wisdom, for speech is not only an indication of wisdom, but also its vehicle. Hence Ovid, 1 Metamorphoses, says elegantly:

Pronaque cum spectent animalia cetera terram, Os homini sublime dedit, coelumque tueri Iussit, et erectos ad sidera tollere vultus.

Lastly, it is evident that that erection of the human body also conduces most of all to divine contemplation and divine love: for since love is in spirits what weight is in bodies, according to that familiar saying of St. Augustine, My love is my weight: by it I am borne, whithersoever I am borne. Hence it is that since bodies tend downward by their natural weight, the very human body, which is the sanctuary of divine love, the vessel and organ of the spirit tending toward God, ought also by its natural disposition to tend upward, whither the love of man ought to be borne: for there love is, where the eye is. Whence Cassiodorus, book De anima, chap. 16: Moreover the animal of man, erect in the likeness of most beautiful contemplation, looks toward the things above and renewed: whose harmonious disposition declares to us the mysteries by our understanding. He subjoins how all the parts of our body conduce to the glory of God.

Likewise this erection of the human body conduced most of all to the operations of grace, which are contained chiefly in two things: the first is that carnal delight be cast aside: the second, that man be wholly ordered and occupied in pursuing spiritual delights. But both are rightly evident and gathered from the very tallness and erection of the human body. For therefore the other animals are prone, and have their looks turned toward their belly: because all their delight is carnal and earthly: but the delights of man are heavenly and spiritual. Which St. Basil in the Hexaemeron explains excellently: All cattle, he says, are earthly, and they disdain not those things which are earthly: but man is a certain heavenly plantation, who as much exceeds the cattle in habit as in dignity. Their gaze is borne downward, that it may look upon the belly, and follow that which is pleasing to its lust: but thy head is ever raised toward Heaven: thy eyes look upon the things above. But if thou delight in the pleasure of the body, obeying the belly and its lower parts, thou art compared to the foolish beasts, and made like unto them. To whom St. Bernard consents, on the Canticles, serm. 21: God gave man, he says, an upright stature of body, perhaps that that uprightness of the exterior body, a figure of spiritual uprightness, might admonish that man, who was made to the image of God, concerning spiritual things, of his second uprightness: and that the comeliness of the body might argue the deformity of the soul. For what is more unseemly than to bear a perverse mind in an upright body? Perverse is the way, and sordid, to be mire, which the body is, of the earth, and to have the eyes upward. Freely to look up at the heavens, and to delight the sight in the lights of heaven, while on the contrary the spiritual and heavenly creature, that is, the inward sense and affection, draws its equals down to the earth: and that which ought to have been nourished in heavenly things, to cling to the mire as one of the swine, and to embrace the dung.

Lastly, this erect disposition of the human body affords some trace of the future glory: for it implants in man a twofold contemplation; namely of heavenly things, and of earthly. For, as St. Augustine says, book 83 Questions, The body of man alone among the bodies of earthly animals is not prone, prostrated upon the ground, though it be discernible, and erect for beholding Heaven. And further on: Such is it, that it is the more apt for contemplating Heaven: in this it can deservedly be judged more to the image and likeness of God than the other bodies of animals. Whence St. Bernard in the place praised subjoins: Blush, O my soul, to have exchanged the divine likeness for the worse: Blush, to wallow in the mire, thou who art of Heaven. Blush, saith the body, O soul, in the consideration of me. A creature like unto a creature upright, thou hast received me also as a help like unto thee, assuredly according to the lineaments of the uprightness of the body, whithersoever thou bearest thyself, whether upward toward God, or downward toward me. For no one ever hated his own flesh: everywhere there meets thee the semblance of thy beauty, everywhere according to the state of thy dignity thou hast from the teaching of the wise a familiar admonition. Wherefore, since I have not retained, while beholding, the prerogative which I received for thy sake, how is it that thou art not confounded to have lost thine?

You will say 1. That which is inborn and from nature is not worthy of praise or blame, according to Aristotle, 3 Ethics, chap. 5; nor consequently does it confer any dignity: but the uprightness of the human body is inborn in man from nature: therefore from it no dignity accrues to him. Alexander of Hales answers, that a good worthy of praise is of a twofold kind: namely in the genus of morals, and by respect to acts elicited according to the dictate of right reason: or in the genus of nature, and according to the perfection indited by nature to each thing. Of the former the Philosopher speaks: not indeed of the latter, of which our discourse is. For although natural perfection more allures to the praise of the Creator than of the creature; nevertheless on account of that perfection the creature itself also is worthy of praise, inasmuch as it is referred to the good of the Universe, namely insofar as it concurs to the decor and splendor of the Universe itself, so that that which has the greater perfection confers also in a more perfect manner upon the beauty of the Universe; and therefore on account of its more excellent excellencies it may seem worthy of greater praise.

You will say 2. By sin the soul fell from its inborn uprightness: therefore it was likewise fitting that the human body should lose its uprightness, and consequently on account of it man is not to be judged worthy of praise. The consequence is evident; for the uprightness of the body was granted for the illustrating of the uprightness of the soul, as we have said. It is confirmed. from Psal. 48¹ Man when he was in honor did not understand: he is compared to the foolish beasts, and made like unto them: chiefly in the crookedness of the soul, which appears by the goads of concupiscence, ever seeking what is noxious and earthly; for, as St. Augustine says, two things have been inflicted upon us by sin, namely ignorance of what is to be done, and concupiscence of what is noxious: therefore much more ought the body, which was the instrument of sin, to be despoiled of its uprightness, and this in no wise redounds to glory.

I answer, that on account of the loss of the uprightness of the soul the uprightness of the body ought not to be lost: nay rather, therefore the soul comes the more heavily to the goads of penance, because the body subjected to it has preserved its corporeal uprightness; whereas it has voluntarily lost its spiritual tendency toward God by its dejection toward creatures, as we said above from St. Bernard. To the confirmation. They say that man by sin is likened to the beasts on account of the unbridled motions of concupiscence, by which he is driven toward base things, namely those which please the flesh and in which the sinful soul delights: but this likeness is not made as regards the state and disposition of the body itself; for it is evident that it always stands upright, as it was from the beginning, while indeed the state of innocence flourished.