Monday, March 15, 2010

No authority before the Fall, except that of God?

The Thinking Housewife makes the following claims in On Equality and Chastity:

Let’s start with revealed truth. Here we know that God sees men and women as absolutely equal in dignity. They are both made in His image and have free will. This is what makes human nature partly divine, what distinguishes a human being from the rest of creation: the human soul and free will. Genesis makes this equality unshakably clear from the beginning of our sacred history, which is why the Judeo-Christian view is so momentous and superior to that of cultures that do not explicitly define male and female or that view either women or men as spiritually inferior.

Some argue that the symbolism of Genesis implies male superiority. There is no basis for this claim. It is feminist gobbledy-gook. The fact that Eve was made last could more reasonably indicate her superiority than her inferiority (in light of the whole, it obviously indicates neither). After all, Adam was made after lower forms of creation. That Eve was made from Adam’s rib could also point to her superiority; after all, Adam was made from the dust of the earth. That she is a “help meet” does not signify servitude but worthiness. No, in the most important sense they are the same, of equal status, created to love and to know God, to rule over the rest of creation, to choose obedience to God or rebellion.

Eve’s rebellion is not less significant than Adam’s; it is more. Look at this. See what it says of the power of women, about the implications of their freedom. She succumbed to evil first and must take on a heavy share of suffering, more so than man:

”I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

God did not make Eve to be ruled. It is only when we grasp this essential idea, that the necessary submission of women to men is not what God intended and not what He wished, nor is it in accord with their ultimate destiny, that we can make sense of human history.


The first claim is that Eve's rebellion is more significant because she suffers more as a result of her disobedience. But Adam's rebellion is more significant because he is the head of the human race, and as a result of his disobedience, all are deprived of the gift of original justice.

As for the second claim, some may interpret Pope John Paul II as supporting this position, that Adam had no authority over Eve before the Fall, or that she was not subordinate to his authority. I do not think this is a tenable understanding of John Paul II's writings: see The Authority of the Husband according to the Magisterium, by Paul N. Check. It may be that some Christian personalists make this claim, however. Just as St. Augustine argued that government was an artifact of the Fall and not an institution that existed before it, so some would claim that the authority of the husband over the wife is a result of the Fall, and is not ordained by God through the very nature of things.

However, if we follow St. Thomas's reasoning, then just as government is natural to man living in a group with other men, since there must be some principle which directs them to the common good, so there must be some authority which directs the family to its proper good.

Since Genesis does not speak of civil government, it could be argued that there is a greater scriptural foundation for the claim that the husband has no authority over the wife in the Garden of Eden: Genesis 3. But what is translated by the English "rule" is dominare, not imperare or regere, and we see that various authorities, including Pope John Paul II (see Fr. Check's essay), have understood this to mean "dominate," not "rule." As a result of sin, the husband is prone to lording his authority over the wife, just as the Gentiles lord their authority over others (in this passage dominare is used once again).

A more feasible claim might be that this authority was shared equally between husband and wife, but there is nothing within Tradition to indicate that this is the case, and I do not believe that any Church Father ever supported this position.

In a response to her original post, the Thinking Housewife adds: "The temptation of Eve, this legendary event that symbolizes a real moment in history, does speak of the greater impulsiveness of women as well as their immense influence over men. Face it. Men are less often taken in. Women tend to be more trusting."

But Eve's problem wasn't that she was trusting or impulsive -- rather, it was the sin of pride. Concupiscence was not a factor since this was before the Fall, not after. From the Genesis account we do read that Eve sought the forbidden fruit not for herself, but also for her husband, sharing it with him, thus acting as the helpmate and wife, even if in a disordered and sinful way.

Latin Dictionary
Verbix

No comments: