Summa summae S. Thomae sive compendium theologiae

[I say: The first sin of our first parents was pride¹.

Proof 1° from Sacred Scripture². Eccli., X, 14 and 15, it is said: The beginning of the pride of man, that is, the first act of man's pride

to fall off from God, because his heart is departed from him who made him; for pride is the beginning of all sin. In which it is manifest that the discourse is about the first sin of man, and not of the angel. Likewise, Tob., IV, 14, Tobias, near to death, exhorts his son with these words: Never allow pride to reign in your mind or in your words; for from it all ruin took its beginning; namely, as is clear, among men.

Proof 2° from the Fathers. St. Augustine, book XI de Genes. ad litt., c. 5, n. 7: « It is not to be thought that this tempter would have cast man down, had there not first preceded in man's soul a certain elation needing to be checked, so that through the humbling of sin he might learn what he had falsely presumed about himself. » And book XIV de Civit., c. 13, n. 1: « They began to be evil in secret, that they might fall into open disobedience. For they would not have arrived at the evil deed, unless an evil will had gone before. Now what could be the beginning of an evil will, but pride? For pride is the beginning of all sin. »

St. Ambrose, serm. 14 on Psal. cxviii: « Pride first cast man down. » St. Prosper, book II de Vita contemplat., c. 19, says of the first parents: « They would not have forsaken God, had they not been proud and miserably desired the likeness of God. » St. Leo, serm. 5 de Nativ., calls the wounds of pride those things which were inflicted on the human race through Adam. St. Gregory, book XXXIV Moral., c. 17, after citing that passage of Eccli.: Pride is the beginning of all sin, adds: « For by this he himself [the devil] fell, and by this he laid low the man who followed him. »

Proof 3° from reason³. The first parents could not have sinned from affection for some sensible object, toward which concupiscence would be immediately borne. Since at that time the lower appetite was perfectly subject to reason, and reason to God, the lower appetite could not be disordered, unless the higher had first failed from God. Therefore the first parents first sinned from a desire of a spiritual good which they desired to attain beyond

the measure fitting to them, and this is an excessive love of one's own excellence, which is the same as pride.

You will say: The first parents did not desire the likeness of God, except because they believed to be true what the serpent said, Genes., III, 4 and 5: You shall not die the death..., but you shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. But this is an error against the faith. Therefore the first sin of our first parents is infidelity. — Proof of the minor. 1° They could not believe to be true what the serpent said: You shall not die, unless they believed to be false what God had said: You shall die the death, and this is an error against the faith. 2° They could not, without error in faith, believe that the likeness of God could be acquired by them. Therefore.

I answer. I deny the minor. To the proof, I distinguish the antecedent, for each part. As to the first, from the serpent's words: You shall not die, the first parents could not believe that God had lied, but they believed or doubted whether the penalty was absolutely and irremissibly fixed, or only a remissible threat. This appears true especially on Adam's part, who saw Eve still alive after eating the forbidden fruit: and this error is not against the faith. As to the second part, from the following words: You shall be as gods, etc., they did not believe that they could attain the likeness of God unto equality: which would be against the faith; but they desired only a likeness according to a certain imitation or participation in knowledge, which is not impossible, nor therefore against the faith.

Moreover it must be observed that, although pride was man's first sin, it was not however the only one, but several were joined to it. Thus

Eve's second sin was infidelity or the error by which she believed the serpent's words to be true, namely that God had forbidden the first parents to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, lest they should attain to his likeness, « as though the Creator had grudged his creature this one good, » as St. Augustine says, book XII de Genes. ad litt., c. 42, n. 60.

The third was gluttony, as is clear from these words of Genes., III, 6: *The woman 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.

The fourth was the actual eating of this fruit, and thus a special disobedience, which was the consummation of the transgression of the positive precept.

The fifth was scandal, inasmuch namely as she induced her husband to sin.

Adam's second sin was an inordinate love of his wife. This is gathered from the fact that, by way of excuse, he answered God as he reproached him with his fault, Genes., III, 12: The woman, whom you gave me as a companion, gave me of the tree, and I ate.

The third was gluttony, or an excessive appetite for eating the forbidden fruit, which he saw to be most beautiful and heard to be most sweet.

The fourth was a special disobedience, or the actual eating of the forbidden fruit, which was the consummation of the transgression of the positive precept, as in Eve.

There remains, however, a difficulty of no small weight: namely, whether Adam was seduced.

On the one hand the Apostle denies it, I Tim., II, 13 and 14, where, wishing to show that the man and not the woman ought to teach, he brings forward this twofold reason: For Adam was first formed, then Eve: and Adam was not seduced, but the woman being seduced was in the transgression, indicating by these words that, since the woman does not have the same strength of judgment and vigor of mind as the man — which is clear because the man was not seduced, and she was seduced — she would more easily than the man be led into error, and thus is not fit to teach.

On the other hand, the holy Fathers commonly hold that Adam was seduced, whose testimonies it would take too long to recount, and it is not necessary to do so. And indeed, that Adam, no less than Eve, believed the serpent saying: You shall not die the death..., but you shall be as gods, knowing good and evil; and therefore was likewise seduced, is gathered from God's ironic rebuke. For if Adam had not believed these words of the serpent, God, in reproaching him for his disobedience, would not ironically have said, Genes., III, 22: *Behold Adam is become as one of

us, knowing good and evil; for these words allude to the words of the serpent.

To reconcile these, setting aside various explanations which do not fully resolve the difficulty, it seems that seductions must be distinguished thus. One is a seduction into an error formally against the faith; another is a seduction into sin, or even into an error which is not formally against the faith, but only materially. Adam, then, was seduced into sin, or even into error, either because he doubted whether the penalty of death was irremissibly fixed, or was only a remissible threat, or because he believed that the eating of the forbidden tree, by reason of the lightness of the matter, was a light sin, or because he believed that by this eating he would acquire some imperfect likeness of God in the knowledge of good and evil. But these errors are not formally and openly against the faith, but only materially. But Eve was seduced into an error formally and openly against the faith, inasmuch as, reflecting on the serpent's words: Why did God command you? etc., she believed, according to St. Augustine, book XI de Genes. ad litt., c. 42, n. 58, and St. Thomas, hic ad 4 et expressius a. 4, o, that God out of envy had forbidden her and Adam to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, lest they should attain to his likeness, and thus she wished to have something against the will of God; which is to err formally and openly against the faith. But Adam did not believe this, and thus it is true what the Apostle says, in keeping with his purpose, that Adam was not seduced, and Eve was seduced. For he who is easily seduced into an error formally against the faith is more unfit to teach the things that are of the faith, than he who is seduced only into sin or into a material error. Hence, when certain Fathers accuse Adam of infidelity, or say that he lost the faith, they are to be understood of infidelity and faith taken materially.]