So far we have examined the beliefs of the patristic church (4th century) and the modern church (1990 -) and their disagreement with each other as far as the subjection of the woman to the man is concerned. The modern church believes God subjected the woman to the man before sin; the patristic church said God subjected the woman to the man after sin.
The reason the patristic and the modern centuries do not agree is because Thomas Aquinas added the creation-based subjection of the woman to the 4th-century sin-based subjection in the 13th century, erasing equality from theology.
Because Thomas Aquinas by necessity used Jerome’s interpretation of Genesis 3:16 in the thirteenth century, he believed that the subjection which began after the Fall was a proper punishment for the woman’s sin. In the Summa, Thomas wrote, “As regards family life she was punished by being subjected to her husband's authority, and this is conveyed in the words, "Thou shalt be under thy husband's power." (Gen. 3:16)”
In the thirteenth century, equality as a created order was still recognized, wherefore Thomas had to answer the argument whether the woman should have been created before sin, because her subjection begun after the Fall.
“Further, subjection and limitation were a result of sin, for to the woman was it said after sin (Genesis 3:16): "Thou shalt be under the man's power"; and Gregory says that, "Where there is no sin, there is no inequality." But woman is naturally of less strength and dignity than man; "for the agent is always more honorable than the patient," as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xii, 16). Therefore woman should not have been made in the first production of things before sin.”
Thomas answered, “as regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten [i.e. an impotent male].” But “as regards human nature in general, woman is not misbegotten, but is included in nature's intention as directed to the work of generation.” He concluded that the woman’s subjection is twofold: sin causes a subjection which is “servile, by virtue of which a superior makes use of a subject for his own benefit,” but the subjection from creation is based on reason which predominates in the man, for good order can only be preserved if people are governed by those who are wiser. In other words, because the woman is a defective human being, she cannot possess the man’s reason, wherefore her subjection from Creation is due to her body, while the subjection which begun after the Fall was caused by her sin.
In the 1970s the twofold subjection created by Thomas was challenged, and hierarchialists began to teach a creation-based subjection without a sin-based subjection, whereas egalitarians began to teach a creation-based equality.
However, now the church had to also deal with the word changes created by the Reformation. The 16th-century English translations of the Bible used the word "desire," communicating the idea that the woman desire the man sexually as a result of sin.
It appears that the first translator to insert the concept of “desire” into Genesis 3.16 was Myles Coverdale (1535).
“And vnto the woman he sayde: I will increase thy sorow, whan thou art with childe: with payne shalt thou beare thy childre, and thy lust shal pertayne vnto yi hußbande, and he shal rule the.”
All English translations follow Coverdale’s translation, although they favor the word “desire” instead of “lust.”
As a result of this change, modern hierachialsists had to find an alternative interpretation for Genesis 3.16. The only option available was to return the verse to its original meaning – a consequence of sin instead of a commandment of God - but with this change came also the puzzling question why only a few women actually chase every shirt they see if women desire men as a result of sin? There was obviously something wrong with the word “desire,” but since it was what they had to work with, hierarchical theologers changed the meaning of the word from a sexual desire to a desire to control. But even with this change, precisely the same problem remained: if women desire to control men, why have men always controlled women? The problem is yet to be solved.
Sources:
Summa Theologica, First Part, Question 92, Objection 1
Ibid., Question 92, Answer to Objection 2
No comments:
Post a Comment