CHAPTER 3

(Genesis 3)

ALCUIN OF YORK. WHY IS THE ANGEL'S SIN CONCEALED IN SILENCE IN GENESIS, WHILE MAN'S IS REVEALED? — Answer. Because God has not predestined that he will cure the angel's wound, whereas he has predestined that he will cure man's. [Question 3]

WHY WAS THE SIN OF THE HIGHEST ANGEL INCURABLE, AND THAT OF MAN CURABLE? — Answer. Because the angel was the inventor of his own crime, whereas man was seduced by another's deceit. Also, as much as the angel was higher in glory, so much greater was his fall, whereas as much as man is weaker in nature, so much easier is it for him to obtain forgiveness. (Greg. Mor. L. XXX, PL 76, col. 571.) [Question 4]

WHY DID THE CREATOR WANT TO EXPIATE THE SIN OF MAN BY HIMSELF AND NOT THROUGH AN ANGEL? — Answer. Because the merit of one angel did not suffice for the redemption of all mankind, and the Devil would not have committed so great a crime with the murder of an angel as he did with the murder of the Creator. [Question 12]

WHY DID GOD ALLOW MAN TO BE TEMPTED, IF HE FOREKNEW THAT HE WOULD AGREE TO THE SIN? — Answer. Because it would have been no great merit for man not to have sinned if the reason he had not had been a lack of occasion to do ill. Indeed, still today men throughout mankind are tempted without intermission by the snares of the Devil, in order that the virtue of a person tempted may be proven through this, and that the palm of the one who does not agree to sin may appear the more glorious. [Question 61]

WHY WAS MAN MADE WITH FREE WILL? — Answer. Because the Creator did not want to create man, whom he made in his own image, as anyone's slave; he wanted him to prove worthy of praise for voluntary good or worthy of damnation for evil desire. [Question 64]

WHAT IS TRUE FREEDOM? — Answer. The greatest freedom is to serve justice and to be free from sin. [Question 65]

WHAT IS EVIL? — Answer. Evil is in fact nothing per se but the privation of good, as darkness is nothing but the absence of light. [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 94]

(Genesis 3)

AMBROSIASTER. THE SIN OF ADAM AND EVE. — It is no doubt, no doubt, that this world was created for man; although it is composed of varied substances, it nevertheless forms but one body having several members, the combined action of which is intended to produce all the things necessary to man. It was like a house built for man with the provisions he needed, provisions that the earth had to produce each according to its kind, that is to say, that by the fact of their creation they had been able to reproduce each according to its species. God created the primitive types whose seed was to serve in turn the multiplication of species on earth. This is the result of these words of the Scripture: "And God blessed them, saying, Be multiplied and multiply on earth (Gen. 1:28)." He also blesses the human race, and we see the same meaning reproduced in the book of the law. We read in it: "The people grew and multiplied in Egypt (Acts 7:17).” The blessing which God had given to the things he had created for the benefit of man was also given to man, so that mankind grew and multiplied the union of man and woman. And just as culture had to improve the seeds, so the human race had to do all its care so that the knowledge of God would help her to lead her life, to render pleasing to God and to relate all things to admiration and praise the glory of his Creator. Whether it is the meaning of these words, the facts themselves attest, for all things which have been created multiply and improve upon the earth by the will of God. Indeed, one cannot suppose any other mode of development than that which God has established for his seeds. How, then, can we attribute an evil origin, or an illicit character, to that which develops only under the influence of the blessings of God and of his will? The tradition of this blessing has always remained in the synagogue and is still in use today in the Church which consecrates by the blessing of God the union of its creatures. And there is no presumption here on his part since the form of this blessing comes from the Creator himself. If it is thought that this blessing must cease one day, it can only be when the things which multiply under this blessing cease to exist, for if the generation of men ceases, what would be the usefulness of creatures who have received the blessing of God to multiply on the earth? The world cannot be partly in action, partly in rest; or it acts wholly, or it remains wholly in rest. What utility would be a body, some of whose members would have life, while others would be struck with apathy? How then do some go so far as to represent as profane and unclean the work which has been consecrated by the blessing of God, except that they wish to attack God Himself? They would find nothing to be recaptured in the work if the false and evil ideas of the artisan were not formed. They do not dare openly to God, they find the means of accusing him in his works. When the work displeases, the blame falls on its author. If these critical spirits read or rather received the Scriptures, they would recall the saying of Balaam: "Can I curse him whom God has blessed (Num. 23:8)?” There is no charge against the approval of the judge, and one condemns oneself when one wants to accuse as guilty the one whom the laws themselves protect. Who, then, are you who believe that you can condemn what God has blessed as the Scriptures teach you? You must either deny that he is God, or that you should be contrary to Scripture. Indeed, it is under the pretext that they receive the New Testament that they ought to reject the ancient Scriptures. Now the new precepts which Jesus Christ imposes on the faithful are not in contradiction with the ancients. The Savior himself has not disdained to reply to the invitation which he was made to attend a wedding; and not only did he honor them with his presence, but he even gave the spouses what was lacking in the joy of the feast (Jn. 2:1), for it is written that wine rejoices the heart of man (Ps. 103:15). And to show that he did nothing but the will of his Father, the Jews having asked him whether it was permissible for a man to return his father, He said to them, "From the beginning of the world God made man and woman, and said unto them, For this cause a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh (Matt. 19:3-6). Therefore they are no longer two, but one flesh. So let not man separate what God adds. This was why he gladly surrendered to the invitation to attend the meetings, he would not appear to condemn what God his Father had instituted. Wishing, on the contrary, to show the harmony of the old law and of the new law, he not only did not proscribe marriage, but deigned to honor it by his presence, to render him the testimony of his divine institution, and by a most salutary commandment declared that they should neither defend nor separate what God had united. It is also to raise the utility of the birth of man, that on the point of leaving this world, he confided his mother to his disciple John (Jn. 19:26). It is for the same reason that the precepts of the old law and of the new law agree to recommend that we honor our parents under pain of curses if we breach this commandment. What then is this presumption, and on what law is it based to proscribe the marriage so clearly authorized by the old as by the new law? We may apply to him these words of the Savior: "That which is without is from evil (Matt. 5:37).” Thus the Apostle reproaches himself with having a cauterized conscience to those men who forbid marriage, and the use of the foods that God created to be eaten with actions of graces. (I Tim. 4:2.) It is an act on their part, both of hypocrisy and of hostility, whose object is to accuse the law of which God is the author. Others seem to receive the precepts of salvation with eagerness only to support the prescriptions of their doctrine of falsehood, and this is why the Apostle reproaches them for having a closed conscience. Indeed, the corruption of their hearts makes them manifest outside feelings different from what they think internally: they resemble the Jews who knew that the miracles of the Savior were works of the Holy Spirit and that they did not say a feeling of jealousy that it was in the name of Beelzebub that he cast out demons (Matt. 12:24, Lk. 11:15), to divert the people from believing in him. Such is also the deceit of those of whom we have spoken; in the name of the holiness and chastity with which they boast of being the partisans, they maintain that marriage must be condemned, seeking to make itself valued and to divert the people from truth; It is thus also that they recommend the abstinence of certain foods to give themselves falsely as models of temperance which, strangers to the world, hasten to reach the kingdom of heaven. After they have thus seduced the spirits of men, they preach the legitimacy of the most reprehensible acts and condemn the use of permissible things. Such are the wiles of Satan, he inverts the roles and in the form of a novelty he excludes truth which is nothing new because it is wholly eternal. Who does not notice that such is the conduct adopted by our enemies? Who, moreover, would dare to condemn a divine institution which has never been injurious to anyone but the enemy of truth? In order to cover his disorders, he preaches the sanctity which he dislikes, and when he has thus become a zealous supporter of good, he teaches that the most culpable acts are permitted. It makes itself worth to deceive more easily and to suggest to the imprudent ones who fall into its traps more enormous sins. It is a remedy, it seems to his own evils, to incite men to excess crimes; he regards it as a great consolation to have many accomplices, and regards his punishment as lighter and more tolerable if he succeeds in drawing a large number with him into hell blind men who are overcome by their vices excuse themselves for their weakness or ignorance, and do not think of punishing the faults on which concupiscence deceives them. Or what is this cloud that conceals from them the knowledge of truth? For the letters appear to have a different signification, when they are badly pronounced, or are not properly distinguished; but when one reads: God has done, and again: God has blessed what he has done, can it remain matter either to the discussion or to the slightest doubt? Who will dare to see the curse instead of the blessing, unless animated by a hostile spirit? If these words were the words of man, perhaps one might fear some ploy, but it is God who speaks, and you doubt? It is God blessed, and you condemn? But was not Moses under the name of God the author of this error? The miracles and wonders which Moses made in Egypt are an answer to this question, and the wonders he has done in the Red Sea for the deliverance of the children of Israel must suffice to persuade you. Listen to the confession made by the magicians: "The finger of God is here (Exod. 8:19).” Believe in the testimony of the Apostle, who said to you, "I do not want you to be ignorant, my brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, that they all passed through and they were all baptized under the guidance of Moses in the cloud and in the sea, that they all ate the same mysterious meat, and that they drank the same mysterious drink, for they drank the water of the spiritual stone, the water which followed them, and this stone was Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 10:1, 4).” And how did the Apostle speak in this way? The answer is in the Scriptures, where we read that Our Lord Jesus Christ said to the Jews, "If you believed in Moses, you would doubtless believe me too, for it is from me that he wrote (Jn. 5:46)." Who could not believe in such a beautiful harmony, who would dare to see contradiction in such a perfect unity, who would be badly inspired to accuse of hostility so close a union? The testimony of the words, and the examples of the miracles which must submit your mind to the truth, and prevent you from considering as true any doctrine which is not contained in the books of the Catholic Church of the Old Testament is the same as ours, and that a thousand brilliant signs proclaim that it is the only true one, its authority must be so great to us that even if a thing should appear to us too harsh or even absurd, accept, reform on this our personal ideas before the judgment of God who apprehends it, for we must believe in God rather than ourselves. Indeed, our weakness and inexperience often regard as useful what is most injurious to us, and takes the false for truth, which we cannot even suspect of God; its nature is inaccessible to error; it is not permissible for us to doubt the legitimacy of marriage before these words of God: "Let not man divide what God has united (Matt. 19:6: Mk. 10:9).” This is a thing as clear as it is simple. It is certain that every man has reason to rejoice at having been the object of the goodness of God, and that he thinks he is better when he learns to know the sacrament of his Creator, which he would not be able to achieve if he had not been born. Why, then, deplore what makes the subject of his joy, and condemn what he glories of having learned?  If he rejoices at having learned, and if, moreover, he could not learn unless he was born; no doubt it is good to be born, since the fruit of birth is the knowledge of the truth. If, on the contrary, it is an evil to be born, knowledge cannot be good. To what purpose can this knowledge be used if the birth is condemned? If it is neither useful nor necessary to be born, why should he who is condemned seek to learn? But as there is no mind stupid enough to deny that knowledge of God is useful to men, it is necessary to recognize its goodness, its utility. It is she who adds a new perfection to birth, so that she deserves more than Adam had received, for it is in heaven and not on earth that the faithful are called to reign, the paradise of God the Father, and not in that where Adam had been ordered to engage in bodily labor. In Jerusalem there was celebrated the feast called encaenia, that is to say, the dedication of the temple of God, how much more must we celebrate the birth of man, who is much more appropriately called the temple of God, and who has himself constructed with his hands to God the temples to give him thanksgiving? Our body is a much more excellent temple, because it is the work of God, and the material temples are the work of man, that one has the hope of eternity, while the others are destined for a certain ruin. He who acknowledges that it was God who gave birth to him to give thanks, and who has come to know his mysteries, must rejoice on the anniversary of his birth by seeing the precious fruits which he has produced. As for those who abandon their Creator and offer to others the glory which is due to them, it would have been better for them never to be born, for their birth can only turn to their misfortune, and yet the fault is not with birth, but to their will. But who are you, you who pretend to forbid marriage? You may be, Marcion, who maintain that the body is not the work of God but of the devil, and that it is in consequence of some fault that the soul fell from its first state descended into this region of darkness where the world is. Now how could it attain its deliverance if the generation is forbidden to it? It is after your birth that you experienced your downfall and that you have taken the means to return to the fatherland and resume your original destiny. You give thanks to Jesus Christ, by whom you are glad to have obtained this knowledge. Now, if you were not born, all knowledge would have been impossible, and consequently all deliverance. If you rejoice in the deliverance of your soul, be favorable to your birth, for if you condemn it, you are the enemy of souls. Or are you a Manichean, who rejects the marriages as evil? I will then ask you if there was no generation of bodies, how could the soul, which you say is spread in a dark region and closely united to the material elements, be delivered? The book you wrote say that it is by birth that the soul is delivered, that is to say that the souls received by the moon are coming out of their bodies transmitted to the sun which you claim to be the God of your souls. And is it not fortunate for you to bear the name of Manicheans? Indeed, it is in this capacity that you solicit your deliverance, which you would not know if you were not born. It is therefore evident that you condemn marriage by hypocrisy. You make an outward profession of chastity, and you give yourself up in secret to all kinds of impurities, which have not been hidden, but which have been revealed by the very edicts of the emperors. Listen now, you who are a Catholic, and learn from the Gospel how useful it is to the man of valor. When the righteous Simeon wished to leave this life, convinced that it was enough for him to know his Creator without knowing the mystery of his incarnation, God did not accede to his desire until he had arrived at this perfect state for to obtain the full and entire reward of his faith. It was then that he took in his arms the Savior who had just been born and blessed God in these terms: "Lord, you will now let your servant go in peace according to your word, for my eyes have seen your salvation (Lk. 2:29).” It was clear to God that it was good for man to be born, since it was answered to that righteous man who desired death that he would not die before he had seen the Christ of the Lord; for he had made such great progress here below, that he was worthy to see in this life the man he hoped for as his deliverer after his death. Now, how can we say that birth was not a useful thing for this man to whom God extended his life and allowed him to die only when he had seen the fruit of his hope, and which he would be sure to see for himself life to succeed him? If it were an evil for us to be born, it is neither paradise, nor eternal life, nor the kingdom of heaven promised us, but the punishments and chastisements of hell that we should expect. The man who knew that he was born for his loss would fear to transmit life to another, and he who knew that his birth was a guilty act would not seek to revive in his children. They will say to me, "Yes, the kingdom of heaven is promised, but to the faithful men who have done good." Perfectly, therefore, you see that men are not guilty by the sole fact of their birth, but because they have done evil; for it is not to those who are not born that the kingdom of heaven is promised, which would make birth a cause of exclusion, but to those who after their birth do good; that is to say, birth cannot be useful to the child he that does evil, and hurts him that does good. The faithful and the good men add to the perfection of their birth, the infidels and the unbelievers make their lose her. Birth is like a tree that is grafted; if the graft is good, the tree will become better and be called a good tree; if the graft is bad, it will become worse than it was and deserve to be called a bad tree. Thus, if a sound doctrine is joined at birth, it will produce good fruits, but if the doctrine is bad, the fruits will be equally bad. Just as the tree must exist beforehand so that it can be grafted, birth is also necessary in order to make progress good. But we are made of this body: If it is good and useful to be born, why do we need to be reborn? This rebirth would not take place if birth was not useful. The soul is to be renewed, and those that are renewed are completely repaired. This rebirth is not, therefore, opposed to birth, it is reform, and what is reformed proves by the same the perfection of its first state. This rebirth is a transformation which is the effect of a voluntary resolution, and which purifies the defilements of the body to restore us to the primitive state in which Adam was created. The soul has communicated to the body the defilements of his sin, but faith repairs it, renders it more perfect and cleanses it in the waters of baptism; the contempt of God had tainted him, obedience purified him, he thus avoided the sentence pronounced against Adam and acquired the right to the glorious resurrection. If, then, it is by the soul that sin began, why should we accuse the nature of the body, since in the sin of Adam it is not the body that has desired, but the soul seduced by hope of the divinity, who transgressed the precept, cast the body into the bondage of sin, and condemned all men to be born slaves to sin? Now this sin does not harm the man who obeys the law of God, except that he is subject to death; but here again the goodness of God has promised him a reward proportionate with that punishment, that is, those who will be found faithful to their Creator, and whom the sins of Adam condemn to corruption and death, will receive in return from the righteous judge more than God had granted to Adam; they will be covered with glory in heaven and will possess eternal life, and will be called the adopted sons of God, so that it is truly a gain for them to be born. I now follow the passage from which we read: "God said to man, You may eat of all the fruit of the garden, but you do not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:16-17).” All the trees of which God speaks here are the fruits destined to be made the food of the creatures. They are given here the general name of trees, but there is a great variety in the fruits. They are all, however, trees and plants, and there is only one kind of food in spite of the diversity of fruits used to the food of man. When God had created this multitude of fruit trees for the nourishment of man, he forbade him, as I have said, to eat the fruit of a single tree. As our first parents had been empowered over all things, it was fitting that they should give God on one point a testimony of submission and respect. He had therefore reserved a single tree to which he had forbidden them to touch, to remind them of their condition. How can the sentence pronounced against them make us understand what was the nature of their fault? This sentence, in fact, can be pronounced both against a homicide, against a malefactor, an adulteress, an infamous one. (Josh. 17:1, etc.). How, then, to judge according to this sentence of the nature of sin, is to be condemned after his sin to be consumed by fire, and all his family. It can be assumed that sin was great, but not what its nature was, for we know that others were condemned to the same punishment, although their fault was different. Amorites and the inhabitants of Sodom perished, and their children, and we see men guilty of the same crime, punished with various punishments, with one and the same sentence pronounced against those whose crimes are quite different, and of Eve cannot be known by the sentence pronounced against them. The sin of man and woman is the same, it is true, yet both were condemned to a particular and individual punishment, as was the serpent. Not only did they not preserve the prerogatives of their former state, but God imposed upon them labor as the punishment of their crime. God, as the book of Genesis tells us, had subjected all animals and all living beings to man (Gen. 1:26). The serpent rose up against this order, and so much by his cunning and his artifices that he enslaved man to his empire. No doubt, indeed, he who makes someone fall into his traps, submits him to his dominion. But God did not wish that he should receive the fruits of his deceit; he humbled and shamed him below his first condition, that he might not rise above man, leaves him only the pain, not only of not having succeeded in his designs, but of having lost the perfection of his creation. It was, says the sacred author, the most of all the animals God had placed on earth; but after he had deceived the man, he was cursed among all the beasts and creatures of the earth. After the sentence pronounced against man, against woman, against the serpent, the woman, who had been the accomplice of man in contempt of the divine command, was to be subjected to a particular punishment. God said to her, "I will multiply your calamities, your childbirth, you will give birth in sorrow, your desires will turn to your husband, and he will rule over you (Gen. 3:16.).” No one confirms himself what he condemns. If children were granted to the woman because she had united herself to the man against the order of God, then a guilty act must be recognized as having wonderful effects. But if you believe that the principle of the generation of men is in these words: "You will be grieved in sorrow," what did these words mean: "Increase and multiply”? This sentence, "Ye shall bear in sorrow," is therefore only a punishment, that is to say, that what had previously been granted to him as a cause of joy will become a sin source of sorrows; and that this punishment should cease to weigh upon the woman, God adds that her desires will turn to her husband, and will be for her a principle of ever-new sorrows. If God condemned the union of man and woman, why did he say to her: "Will your desires turn to your husband?” No one establishes as punishment what he condemns as reprehensible, since punishment must always be opposed to the crime he punishes, and that it must come from a very different principle. If the fault and the punishment come from the same principle, no one would be afraid of being condemned. One might even say that the transgression of the law becomes a laudable act. Far from punishing sin, God would have confirmed it, if the desires of the woman had turned to her husband only because of her sin. But no, the truth is that this union of woman with man, which had been merely permissible before sin, was then imposed upon her with the bondage of childbirth as a punishment, because man had been left to rule by the woman whom God had given her as companion. It is evident that he had been subject by the woman whose counsels had led her to believe in the hopes she had given him, and which were intended only to destroy the work of God by the ploys of the devil. God, by his sentence, therefore returns the wife to the condition of subjugation which subjects her to her husband, according to the first institution, and adds, as a punishment: "I will multiply your calamities and your movements; you will turn to your husband, and he will rule over you." Had God established the woman in a state which was not a state of submission to her husband? The woman is therefore recalled here to this first state with the addition we have pointed out. That is why God said to her, "I will set the height of your sorrows and your groans.” Putting the end is adding to what is incomplete, not establishing or doing what does not. The words of God that precede: "Rise and multiply," (Gen. 1:22, 28) are not for creation but for the loss of creatures to whom God conceded existence. After sin, God adds to the pain and difficulties of woman's birth, but does not establish a new form of procreation. If these words have really been the principle of generation, it must be attributed rather to the will of the devil than to that of the Lord, for there is, as the Savior declares, a race of vipers. (Matt. 3:7) Now, if anyone thinks he was born in this way, let him consider what he deserved. It was because of her sin that she saw the pangs of childbirth increase, and that this grief, which was at first sight, increased in punishment for the sins of her children; for it is in the groans and tears that she gives birth to them, and scarcely have they been born, that they become for her a permanent cause of sadness. Thirdly, let us see the sentence pronounced against the man: "Because you have listened to your wife's voice, and have eaten the fruit of the tree which I have forbidden you to eat, the earth will be cursed because of what you have done, and you will not eat of its fruits, in all the days of your life but with great labor, it will produce for you only thorns and thistles (Gen. 3:17-18).” Adam is also recalled to the state in which he was created, but with a decrease of his privileges. God had first placed him in the earthly paradise to simply cultivate the earth and see at once the fruit of his work. But scarcely has he despised the divine commandment, in the hope of finding in the council of the serpent a fate more fortunate than that which God had given him, God recalls him to his first condition, but by adding to it sweat and fatigue; the earth will no longer respond to his labors, it will be cursed not for it, but because of its works. God thus shows that His designs cannot be destroyed and that no one can show greater providence. No one, in fact, can love the work of another more strongly than the one who is the author of it, to the apostle's testimony: "Never has anyone hated his own flesh; nourishes and cares for her, like Jesus Christ the Church (Eph. 5:29).” Let us now see whether the continuation of the historical facts of the law agrees with its beginnings. Abraham having been pleasing to God, among other rewards of his faith, was judged worthy to beget a son in his old age. How, then, can we attack and condemn what God grants as a reward? That is to say, that Abraham having obeyed the divine will, sees God fulfill his own will, which could not have been done if this will was not innocent, for God would not have granted a request or bad or unintelligent, especially in with respect to him who was pleasing to him; a man himself would not act in this way. A man who was barren and loved God with all his heart, asked for a son and obtained it. Now, if this request were guilty, the God whom he loved should have warned him not to make a request contrary to the good. (I Kgs. 1:2) Samuel, his son, of such eminent sanctity, had children in his turn, but the merit of his justice was not diminished. On the contrary, his virtue never ceased to increase since his first years, and he received from God in his old age the most striking testimony. The priest Zechariah, a righteous man, also had in his old age, by the will of God, a son who had the gift of prophecy even before his birth (Lk. 1:5). What is the reason why we are accused of what everyone agrees to present as advantageous? How can one deny that one must call good and useful something that does not harm anyone? And to speak here a little of the apostles and to make them serve for the direct defense of this cause, St. John was certainly a faithful observer of chastity; but we know that his colleague in the apostolate, that is, St. Peter, had a wife, and that the children she gave him were not an obstacle to the primacy he received from the other apostles. How then can we condemn what can be reconciled with the greatest merits? Thus the apostle St. Paul teaches that he who has a wife, if he observes the commandments, can and must be raised to the priesthood. If marriage were unlawful, he would not have declared that a sinner should receive the priesthood. And what is more evident? Is it not the same Apostle who says: "As for the virgins, I have not received a commandment from the Lord (1 Cor. 7:25)?” The heretics notice trouble and agitation among the Corinthians, by hypocritically teaching that marriage should be condemned; they therefore consulted the Apostle by letters, to ascertain whether it was lawful to marry, or whether to send his wife away. It is then that St. Paul commands the woman not to separate herself from her husband, although it would have been the occasion, if he had been convinced that this was the true doctrine, to say that it was forbidden to marry, just as he declares that he cannot impose as a precept what he has received no command from the Lord. Who, on the contrary, does not hear him preach loudly: ‘I want young widows to marry and have children?’ But, I am told, if it is lawful, if it is advantageous to marry, why is it not permissible for priests to have their wives, that is to say, why is it forbidden for them to have relations with her after their ordination? Who knows that each state has its own laws? There are things that are generally prohibited at all; there are some who are permitted to one and forbidden to others; there are some which are sometimes defended and sometimes permitted. Fornication is forbidden to all without exception; but trade is sometimes permitted and sometimes defended. Before entering the ecclesiastical state, a man is permitted to trade, but he can no longer do so as soon as he is a part of it. In the same way, it is sometimes permissible, sometimes forbidden for a Christian to have relations with his wife. Thus, in the days of public supplication, it is his duty to separate from his wife, because he must abstain even from the things permitted to obtain more easily what he asks of God. For this reason the Apostle recommends abstaining for one time from the use of the marriage of the consent of one and the other, in order to attend to prayer. According to the law, wars and lawsuits are prohibited on fasting days, and are permitted on other days to show greater respect for the things of God. Is all that is permitted before other men equally before the person of the sovereign? How much more must we observe this rule in the things of God? The priest consecrated to him must therefore be purer than other men; he represents him, he is his vicar, and what is permitted to others is forbidden to him, because he must fulfill every day the functions of Jesus Christ himself, that is to say pray for the people, offer the sacrifice, or administer baptism. It is not only to the priest that the use of marriage is forbidden, but also to his minister, for he must be all the purer as the mysteries of which he is the minister are more holy. Just as in the presence of a torch darkness appears not only obscure, but hideous, as compared with the stars the flame itself loses its brightness, the stars compared to the sun become dark, the sun compared to God is more than a dark night; thus things which are lawful and pure to us become illicit and impure in the presence of the dignity of God, for all the good they are, they are not suitable to the divine majesty. Would not the tunic of an obscure man, no matter how clean, be a scoundrel unbecoming the person of the emperor? Is it not the same with the tunic of the Saxons for a senator? For the same reason the priests of God must be more chaste than other men, because they represent the person of Jesus Christ, and the purity of the ministers of God must be greater. Nobody comes to fulfill his office near the emperor, except in a perfectly neat exterior, with clothes of brilliant cleanliness. Now, God, who by his nature is light itself, demands that his ministers be pure in their conscience rather than in their garments; to him praise and glory for ever and ever. Amen. [Questions on the Old and New Testaments]

3:1-5 Now the serpent was the most crafty of all the brutes on the earth, which the Lord God made, and the serpent said to the woman, Wherefore has God said, Eat not of every tree of the garden?2 And the woman said to the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden, 3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. 4 And the serpent said to the woman, Ye shall not surely die. 5 For God knew that in whatever day ye should eat of it your eyes would be opened, and ye would be as gods, knowing good and evil.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 3:1). WHY IS THE SERPENT SAID TO BE MORE SUBTLE THAN ANY OF THE BEASTS OF THE EARTH? — Answer. Not because of his own nature, but because of the inspiration of the diabolical spirit. For the Devil was using the serpent as an instrument to perpetrate the malice of his cunning. [Question 60]

WAS THE SERPENT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE SOUND OF THE WORDS OF THE ONE WHO WAS SPEAKING THROUGH HIM? — Answer. It is unlikely that he was able to understand what the Devil was doing through him, but as a demoniac or madman speaks things that he does not know, so did the serpent utter words that he did not understand. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 210-211. Bed. Hexm. I, PL 91, col. 54.) [Question 62]

WHERE DID THE DEVIL'S BAD WILL FIRST COME FROM? — Answer. When someone asks about the reason for the misery of evil angels, the reason that naturally presents itself is, because they would not keep their strength for him who is the highest good, but turned away from him and turned towards themselves, delighting in their own power. This is the first failure and the first deficiency of a rational creature; and what else is this vice called, but pride? [Question 93]

(Gen. 3:2). WHY DID THE WOMAN ANSWER THE SERPENT'S QUESTIONS? — Answer. So that her transgression might be inexcusable, as she could not possibly say that she had forgotten the commandment which she revealed to the serpent. [Question 63]

HOW COULD THE WOMAN BELIEVE THE SERPENT'S WORDS WHEN HE SAID SHE HAD BEEN DIVINELY PROHIBITED FROM ENJOYING A GOOD THING? — Answer. Because, perhaps, there already was in her mind a certain love of her own power and a certain proud presumption concerning herself, which needed to be overcome and humbled through that temptation. [Question 66]

(Gen. 3:3-6). WHY DID THE WOMAN INSPECT THE TREE AFTER THE SERPENT'S PERSUASION? — Answer. To examine if there was anything deadly in it, and, as she found nothing of the sort in it, she tasted it with excessive confidence. [Questions and Answers on the Old and New Testaments, 67]

AMBROSE OF MILAN. As the serpent sets his snares, he pretends to give utterance to the words of God, for God had already said: ‘From every tree of the garden you may eat, but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you must not eat, for the day you eat of it you must die. (Gen. 2:16) The serpent inserted a falsehood in questioning the woman thus: ‘Did God say, you shall not eat of any tree?’ Whereas God had actually said: From every tree of the garden you may eat, but from one tree you must not eat, meaning, by that, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil which was not to be tasted. We need not wonder at the manner of deception. Deceit accompanies any effort at ensnaring an individual. The serpent’s question was not without its purpose. But the woman’s reply will indicate that there was nothing questionable in the command of God: ‘Of the fruit of all the trees in the garden we may eat, but of the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden, God said, you shall not eat of it neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’ There was nothing inexact about the command itself. The error lay in the report of the command. The Scriptural passage under discussion is self-explanatory. We realize that we ought not to make any addition to a command even by way of instruction. Any addition or qualification of a command is in the nature of a falsification. The simple, original form of a command should be preserved or the facts should be duly set before us. It frequently happens that a witness adds something of himself to a relation of facts. In this way, by the injection of an untruth, confidence in his testimony is wholly shattered. No addition therefore–not even a good one–is called for. What is, therefore, at first sight objectionable in the addition made by the woman: ‘Neither shall you touch anything of it’? God did not say this, but, rather: ‘you must not eat.’ Still, we have here something which leads to error. There are two possibilities to the addition she made: Either it is superfluous or because of this personal contribution she has made God’s command only partly intelligible. John in his writings has made this clear: ‘If anyone shall add to them, God will add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. And if anyone shall take away from these words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his portion from the tree of life.’ (Rev. 22:18,19) If this is true in this case, how much truer is it that nothing should be taken away from the commands laid down by God! From this springs the primary violation of the command. And many believe that this was Adam’s fault-not the woman’s. They reason that Adam in his desire to make her more cautious had said to the woman that God had given the additional instruction: ‘Neither shall you touch it.’ We know that it was not Eve, but Adam, who received the command from God, because the woman had not yet been created. Scripture does not reveal the exact words that Adam used when he disclosed to her the nature and content of the command. At all events, we understand that the substance of the command was given to the woman by the man. What opinions others have offered on this subject should be taken into consideration. It seems to me, however, that the initial violation and deceit was due to the woman. Although there may appear to be an element of uncertainty in deciding which of the two was guilty, we can discern the sex which was liable first to do wrong. [On Paradise 48]

AMBROSIASTER. (Genesis 3:1) IS IT TRUE THAT IT WAS A SERPENT WHO SPOKE WITH THE WOMAN, OR IS IT THE VERY ACT OF THE DEVIL WHO HAS SEDUCED IT, WHO HAS GIVEN ITS THE NAME OF SERPENT? — If we keep to the historical narrative, it is true that the serpent was the finest of all the animals that the Lord God had formed on earth. Besides, it is against the serpent that God has pronounced his sentence. What, indeed, would it be astonishing that the devil was finer than the animals, the Apostle of whom said, "Do you not know the depths of Satan (2 Cor. 2:11)?” Another proof that it was a true serpent is that God said to him, "You shall crawl on your stomach, and you shall eat of the earth all the days of your life (Gen. 3:14).” This punishment is in no way suited to the nature of Satan, since he is neither clothed in body nor subject to death. If we examine things more closely, we shall see that this sentence did not aggravate the condition of the serpent, and that it was condemned to remain in the state in which God had created it. He had been the instrument of Satan to subdue the man to whom God had subjected everything; for this reason God represses the pride of the serpent by that subjugation in which he had placed all creatures before man, because he had been a minister of pride to man. The man appeared to have submitted to the serpent, following the advice which he gave him of transgressing the law which he had imposed upon him. The Lord Himself testifies to the prudence of serpents, when he says, "Be careful as serpents (Matt. 10:16)." It is therefore well established that the serpent truly spoke with Eve; it now remains for us to examine whether he has been sufficiently sly and cunning enough to deceive her. For if it were finer than other animals, it could be no more than men, since no animal is endowed with reason, except man. It is impossible, therefore, that the serpent should be the author of these subtle insinuations; let him be in good health, but his finesse cannot go beyond his nature. It cannot deliberate, reflect, or take advice. It is therefore certain that it was the devil, who in the form of the serpent, sought to seduce the woman. By slipping into the form of the serpent, he used it as an instrument, so that the woman, who knew the serpent's fineness, could not suspect the cunning of the demon hiding in this form. Hence the sentence of condemnation carried out against the serpent, falls spiritually upon Satan, because the sentence must reach the true culprit. This sentence does not come from man, who by error or malice might condemn an ​​innocent man; it comes from God who is infallible, and whose judgment reaches only the one guilty. Satan, though invisible, makes his snares outwardly; the sentence of condemnation is pronounced externally, but it falls spiritually upon him whose crime has necessitated the sentence. Indeed, Satan, that audacious and impure spirit, has been thrown from the sacred dwelling of heaven and condemned to crawl and groan on earth. I may be asked in what language the serpent spoke to the woman; I answer, in the language of the serpent. If there are any, who now understand the signification of the barking of dogs, the howling of wolves, the cries of elephants, the chanting of cocks, why the woman who then had no less intelligence, could not she have understood the snake's throat, when we know many who understand the signification of the song of the birds? It is certain that the devil used the tongue of the one in whose body he had entered, otherwise he could not have deceived the woman. He therefore spoke the language of the serpent which he had chosen as his instrument. [Questions on the Old and New Testament]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. THE CRAFTIEST OF THE SNAKE: WHERE DOES IT COME FROM? Now, "the serpent was the most prudent," unquestionably "of all the animals that were on the earth, and which the Lord God had made.” The word prudence, or wisdom, according to the Latin version of some manuscripts, is used here by extension: it can not be taken in its own right and on the other hand, as happens when one applies it to God, to angels, to the reasonable soul: so much would then be wise to call the bees or even the ants, whose works offer a semblance of wisdom. However, to consider in the serpent, not the animal without reason, but the spirit of Satan who had intro, shine, we can call you the wisest of animals. So low indeed as the rebellious angels have fallen, precipitated from the celestial heights by their pride, they preserve not less by the privilege of reason the superiority over all the animals. What would be surprising then if the devil, by communicating his inspiration to the serpent and animating it with his genius, as he does to the diviners who are consecrated to him, would have made this animal the wisest of beings who have here below, life without reason! However the word wisdom can not apply to one. wicked only by abuse; it is as if one were saying of the good man that he is cunning. Now, in our language, the word wisdom always contains a eulogy, that of cunning implies the perversity of the heart. Hence it is that in several Latin editions, where the propriety of the language has been consulted, we have become attached to meaning rather than expression, and we have preferred to call the most cunning serpent of animals. As for the precise meaning of the Hebrew word, those who are fully conversant with this language will examine whether it can rigorously and without impropriety designate wisdom in evil. Scripture offers us this meaning in another passage (Jeremiah IV, 22), and the Lord says that the children of the age are dirtier than the children of light in the conduct of their affairs, though they employ fraud and not justice (Luke, XVI, 8).

IT WAS ALLOWED TO REVEAL TO MAN ONLY UNDER THE FIGURE OF THE SERPENT. Let us not believe, moreover, that the devil has chosen the serpent to tempt man and commit him to sin; his perverse and jealous desire inspired him with the desire to deceive, but he could not execute his designs except through the medium of the animal whose face God had allowed him to take. The guilty intention depends on the will of the beings; as to being able to realize it, it comes from God, who only grants it by a mysterious judgment of his deep justice, while remaining himself inaccessible to iniquity (Romans III, 5).

The tempter could not have succeeded in triumphing over the man, if he had not previously let himself be carried away by a movement of pride, which had to be repressed in order to make him feel by the humiliation of his fault how much he had been wrong to presume on his own. For truth itself expresses itself like this. "The heart is exalted before the fall, it humbles itself before glory (Prov.xvi, 18). Perhaps we find the accent of this sinner in these words of the Psalmist: "When I was in prosperity, I said:" I will never be shaken. But, after having experienced the fatal effects of pride, who is intoxicated with his power, and felt the benefits of divine protection, he exclaims: "Lord, it was out of pure goodness that you had me. established in this flourishing state; you have hidden your face, and I have been utterly bewildered (Ps. XXIX, 7, 8). "But whatever the personage in question, it was necessary to teach the soul a lesson who exalts himself and relies too much on his own strength, and makes him feel, by the sad consequences of sin, all the misfortune which awaits the creature, when it separates itself from the Creator. We discover better that God is the sovereign good, sending that far from him there is no good: for those who taste the mortal poison of pleasure can not help but fear the severity of punishment; as for those who, all stunned by pride, no longer feel how desperate their desertion is, they are still more unhappy than those who are conscious of their condition: repulsing the remedy which would cure them of their errors, they do not to serve as an example to others to inspire them with disgust. "Everyone is tempted," says the Apostle James, "by the attraction and the beginnings of his own lust. When concupiscence has conceived, it gives birth to sin, and sin, being consumed, causes death” (James 1:14-15). But, the swelling of pride healed, one is reborn to life, when, after the ordeal, one finds, to return to God, the will that had failed before trial to remain faithful to it.

WHY HAS GOD ALLOWED TEMPTATION? It is sometimes astonished that God allowed the first man to be tempted: but do not we see that even today the human race is. constantly facing the tricks of the devil? Why does God allow it? Is it not to put virtue to the test? Is it not a triumph more glorious to resist temptation than to be exempt from the possibility of being tempted? Even those who renounce the Creator to follow in the footsteps of the tempter, only multiply the temptations for the faithful souls, at the same time that they take away from them the desire to flee with them, and inspire them with a salutary fear. of pride. Hence the word of the Apostle: "Looking to yourself, lest you also be tempted (Gal. VI, 1). For the humility which binds us to the Creator, and which prevents us from presuming enough of our strength to believe, that we can do without his help, is recommended to us throughout the whole of Scripture with striking attention. Then, then, that pious and just souls are perfected by the very example of impiety and injustice, we are no longer justified in saying that God should not have created the men whose existence he foresaw criminal. Why not create them, since they must serve, as God has foreseen, to test, to keep the right hearts awake, and that besides they must suffer the punishment that their bad will deserves?

WHY HAS THE MAN BEEN CREATED WITH THE WILL TO NEVER PLEASE? Well! One adds, God had to create man by giving him the will never to sin. Either I grant that a being incapable of consenting to sin is more perfect; but I must be allowed at the same time that a created being can not be called evil, with the faculty of never sinning, if he will, nor finding it unjust, that he be punished, since he has sinned by choice and not out of necessity. If, then, reason clearly demonstrates the superiority of a being who experiences only legitimate desires, it also clearly demonstrates the relative excellence of a being who has the power to subdue guilty desires, and to be sensitive to joy that accompanies, not only the permitted acts, but also the victory over a disorderly passion. Of these two beings, one is good, the other is better: why would God have created only the latter, instead of creating them both? Those who are willing to praise the first creation, must find in both a subject of praise even richer. The holy angels represent the first, the holy men, the second: As for those who chose the cause of iniquity, and who corrupted by a guilty will the benefits of their nature, God was not obliged not to create them, by that alone that he foresaw their existence. They too have their role in the world and they fill it for the sake of the saints. As for God, if he can do without the virtues of the righteous man, much less does he not need the vices of the corrupted man.

WHY HAS GOD CREATED THE WICKED WHILE PREDICTING THEIR MALICE? Who would dare to say in cold blood: God would have done better not to create those to whom the malice of others was to serve as a salutary example, than to create with them the wretches whom their iniquity was to lead to damnation; because he knows everything eternally? This reasoning, in fact, amounts to saying that it would be better to have refused existence to him who, taking advantage of the faults of others, receives by divine grace the immortal crown, than to have given it to the wicked at whose faults attract a just punishment. Now, when invincible reasoning proves that two goods are not equal among themselves, and that one is more perfect than the other, the unphilosophical minds wish to identify them, without perceiving that they are cutting off one; consequently, they diminish the number of goods, by confounding their varieties: the exaggerated importance they give to one species causes them to suppress the other, which might prevent themselves from exploding, if they came to say seriously : The sight is greater than hearing: so the man should have four eyes and no ears? Well ! being established that there is an intelligent creature submitted to God, without fear of pride or punishment, while the human creature needs, in order to appreciate the benefits of God, "so as not to swell with pride and to live in fear (Rom. xi, 20), "to see the punishment; Is he a sensible man who wishes to confound these two classes of beings, without perceiving immediately that he suppresses the second and preserves only the first? Such reasoning would imply an absolute lack of logic and common sense. Therefore, why should not God have created the men of whom he foresaw the mischief "if, wishing to show his righteous anger and to burst his power, he allowed the vases of anger that were prepared for destruction to remain in his great patience? in order to show all the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy which he has prepared for his glory (Ibid., 22, 23)? It is for this reason that the one who glorifies himself glorifies himself in the Lord (II Corinthians X, 17): »he indeed recognizes that it is not of him, but of the Lord, that depend both on his to be and his happiness.

It would be too strange, therefore, to say those to whom God gives so striking proof of his mercy, should not exist, if it were necessary that at the same time the victims destined to shine the justice of his vengeance should be born.

REFUTATION OF THE SAME OBJECTION. By what title, in fact, would these two classes of men not exist, since they break up the yawn and the justice of God? But the wicked would be good too, God willing. - Ah! the plan of God is much wiser! he wanted all to become what they would like; that the good could not remain without reward, nor the wicked enjoy impunity, and that vice should thus profit by virtue. He foresaw, however, that their will would bring them to evil. - Without a doubt, and as his prescience is infallible, it is their will, and not his, that is bad. Why did he create them, knowing in advance their malice? Because he foresaw everything wrong that they would do and the advantage that the righteous would derive. For in creating them he has left them the power to perform certain acts, and to understand that he makes the very guilty use of their liberty serve the good; for they owe to themselves only their perverse will; they owe to God the goodness of their being and their just punishment; it is they who make their place, and who at the same time support others in their trials by offering them a formidable example.

GOD COULD TURN THE WISH OF THE WICKED; WHY DOES IT NOT? But God could, it is said, turn their bad wills to good, since he is almighty. - Yes, he could. - Hey! why does not he do it? - Because he did not want to - Why did not he want it? That's his secret. Let us not "aim for wisdom beyond our strength" (Rom 12: 3). I think I have sufficiently demonstrated, just now, that the rational creature, even when it finds in the example of evil a motive for avoiding it, is a rather elevated expression of good; but this species of creature would not exist, if God turned to good all the bad wills and did not inflict on sin the punishment he deserves: hence reasonable beings would merge into one class, the class of those who do not need to see the faults and punishment of the wicked to perfect themselves; in other words, the number of good species in themselves would be diminished under the pretext of multiplying a more perfect species.

WHY HAS GOD ALLOWED THE TEMPTER TO BE MADE BY THE SNAKE'S BODY? One may wonder why the demon was allowed to tempt the man through the serpent. That there is a symbol there, does not the Scripture reveal it with its imposing authority, and with all the proofs of the divinity of its prophecies which fill the universe? I do not mean to say that the devil has thought of offering us a symbol for our instruction; but since he could undertake to tempt the man only with the permission of God, could he employ any other means than that which was permitted him? Therefore, whatever may be the teachings of the serpent, we must see in it a plan of Providence, which dominates even the passion that the devil has to harm. As for the power to do evil, it is only granted to break and lose the vessels of wrath, or to humble and put to the test the vessels of mercy. We already know what is the origin of the snake; the earth produced, at the command of God, domestic animals, beasts, and reptiles; Now every creature, having life without reason, has been subordinated by a law of the divine order to intelligent creatures, whether their will is good or bad (Gen. I, 20-26). Why then wonder that God allowed the devil to act through the serpent? Did not Christ Himself allow demons to enter into the body of swine (Matt VIII, 32).

DID THE SERPENT UNDERSTAND THE MEANING OF THE WORDS HE PREACHED? So the serpent heard nothing of the words that came out of him and addressed the woman. It should not be believed that he was transformed into an intelligent being. The men themselves, who are naturally reasonable, do not know what they say when they are possessed of the devil; for all the more reason was the serpent incapable of understanding the words of which the devil formed the sounds in him and by his organ, he who would be incapable of understanding the words of a man, if he came to listen to him without being possesses. We imagine that snakes listen to and understand the magical formulas of the Marses, who succeed by their enchantment in bringing them out of their retreats; but all these movements have the devil for cause and make all together recognize the natural role that Providence has assigned to beings and the one that can make them play, with his very wise permission, a malicious will. This is how the snake has become the most sensitive of all animals to the operations of magic. This fact is a considerable proof that the human species has been primitively seduced by an interview with the serpent. Demons applaud themselves for being powerful enough to move serpents in incantations; it is a means for them to deceive. But, if God gives them this power, it is to recall the primitive temptation by the very trade they continue to maintain with this species of animals. If even the primitive temptation was permitted, it was to offer the man, to whom this event was to be told for his instruction, an image of all the seductions of the devil under the figure of the serpent: this point will clear up when we arrive to the curse that God made fall on this beast.

CAUTION OF THE SERPENT. If the serpent has been called the most prudent, that is to say, the most cunning of all animals, he owes this epithet to the very cunning of the demon who had made it an instrument to triumph. the same title, fine and cunning the language used by a fine and crafty spirit to seduce. These qualities, in fact, do not belong to the organ called language, but to the intelligence that makes it move. It is. by the same figure that is described as lying the pen of a writer; the lie supposes an animated and reasonable being, but as the pen is the instrument of the lie, it is called lying. In the same way, we could call the snake, which has become the hand of the devil, like a pen in the hands of a writer without faith, an instrument of falsehood.

I have thought it my duty to silence these observations, in order to prevent the spirits from believing that animals without reason can ever acquire the gift of human reason, or conversely that a reasonable being may suddenly be transformed into a beast; and thus to remove them from the ridiculous and criminal opinion that the souls of animals pass into the bodies of men or the souls of men into the bodies of animals. The serpent spoke to the man, as did the ass on which Balaam was mounted (Num. XXII, 28); with this difference that one was the organ of the devil and the other an angel. The works of good and bad angels are sometimes similar, like those of Moses and the magicians of Pharaoh (Exod VII, 10, 11), but here again the good angels have a higher power, or rather the bad angels can not produce these effects, as much as God allows them through the good angels, so that each one receives a salary commensurate with his intentions or the grace of God, always just, always good, "in the abyss of the treasures of his wisdom (Rom XI, 33)."

NEGOTIATION OF THE SERPENT WITH THE WOMAN. The snake said to the woman, "What! why did God say to you, You will not eat of all the trees that are in Paradise? The woman answered the serpent: We eat of the fruit of every tree that is in Paradise; As for the tree in the middle, God said to us, You will not touch it, and you will not eat it, or you will die. Thus the serpent addressed himself first to the woman, who gave him this answer; so that her fault was without excuse, and it could not be said that she had forgotten the divine commandment. The neglect of a single and important commandment would already be a reprehensible negligence; however, the offense is all the more flagrant, since Eve remembers the order of God and despises it in some way before his eyes. The Psalmist after saying, "They keep the remembrance of his commandments," so is right to add: "in order to observe them. Often, in fact, one remembers the commandment only to brave it, and the sin is all the more serious because one has not forgiven for excuse.

The serpent said to the woman, "You will not die. God indeed knew that the day you eat from this tree, your eyes will be open and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil. Could the woman have been persuaded by these words that God had forbidden them a good and useful thing, if she had not already conceived with her own strength a secret love and a high idea, which the temptation was to unveil and Moreover, not content to listen to the snake, she casts her eyes on the tree, "she sees that the fruit was good to eat and pleasant to see. Imagining that he was not capable of killing him, and that, doubtless, God had attached only an allegorical meaning to this threat: "You will die of death, if you eat it," she took the fruit, ate it, and gave it to her husband, doubtless adding some engaging words, which the scriptural silence would suggest, unless the man, seeing that his wife was dead, did not would need more encouragement. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. (Gen. 3:1) Serpens erat prudentissimus omnium bestiarum (The serpent was the finest of all animals). This is how a large number of Latin interpreters express themselves. We read in Greek phronimotatos the most understood, and not sophotatos the wisest. [Locutions]

GREGORY I OF ROME. For our ancient enemy ceases not daily to do the very same thing which he did in Paradise. For he endeavors to pluck out the words of God from the hearts of men, and to plant therein the false blandishments of his own promising. He day by day softens down the threatenings of God, and invites to the belief of his false promises. For he falsely promises temporal blessings, to soften down in men’s minds those eternal punishments which God threatens. For when he promises the glory of this life, what else does he do but say, Taste, and ye shall be as gods? As if he said plainly, Lay hold on worldly desires, and appear lofty in this world. And when he endeavors to remove the fear of the Divine sentence, what else does he say but the very words he used to our first parents, Why hath God commanded you that ye should not eat of every tree of paradise? (verse 3:1)

They fell, therefore, both of them, because they desired to be like God, not by righteousness, but by power. But man who had fallen, by perversely aiming at the likeness of God, discerning, when freed by grace, that he was very different from God. [Morals on Job 24.14]

JEROME OF STRIDON. 3:1 THE SERPENT WAS THE WISEST OF ALL BEASTS ON EARTH. — For ‘wise’, the Hebrew says AROM, panouron, after Aquila and Theodotion, that is to say, wicked and double. The meaning of this word is therefore closer to deceit and cunning than to wise. [Hebrew Questions on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. (Gen. 3:1-3) Here perhaps I will be asked if the snake was endowed with reason. Assuredly not, and the sense of Scripture is that it was the devil who borrowed his organ, and who deceived the man by an effect of his black jealousy. The serpent, then, was only the docile instrument of his malice, and he used it to tempt the woman first, as being weaker, and then to lead, through her, the first man. So he pitched his ambushes through the serpent, and through his organ he entered into conversation with the woman: Why did he ask him, God did he say to you: do not eat the fruit of all the trees that are in paradise? But, consider the malice of this artificial spirit. It seems as though he only wishes to insinuate a good thought, and to question the woman on this defense only by the motive of a tender interest. This is what this word shows: Why did God tell you: Do not eat the fruit of the roofs of the trees that are in paradise? This evil spirit seems to say to him: Why did God forbid you so sweet enjoyment? and why did he not grant you the use of all the fruits produced by this garden? he has only allowed you to see it to make your privation more painful and bitter. Why did God tell you? What! he added, "is it really to your advantage to live in this garden, since you can not enjoy his productions? Or rather, is it not a real torture to see these beautiful fruits, and to be unable to eat them?

Observe as words insinuated the poison in the heart of the woman. From the beginning she must have suspected the mischief of her interlocutor, for he lied to her knowingly, and seemed interested only in knowing the command of the Lord, and then urging him to transgress it. Eve could easily see the imposture; and she must suddenly repulse the words of the evil spirit and not become the plaything of her mischief, but she would not do it. It was necessary, I say, that from the beginning she should break the interview, and henceforth confine herself to speaking to the man for whom alone she had been formed, and of which she was the companion and the equal, no less than help and consolation. But she allowed herself, I do not know how, to engage in this fatal colloquy, and she listened to the insidious words which the devil addressed to her through the organ of the serpent. At least it was easy for him to admit that these words were only deception and lies, since they affirmed the very opposite of what God had commanded them. That is why at the moment she must have fled, broken all relations and cursed that evil spirit who dared to censure the Lord's orders. But Eve was so light and so thoughtless that, far from escaping, she revealed to the devil the divine precept, and, according to the expression of the Gospel, she threw precious stones before a hog. Thus she acts against this commandment of the Savior: Do not throw your pearls before swine, lest they (89) trample them underfoot, and turning, they do not tear you. (Matt VII, 6.)

This is what happened then: Eve threw before the devil, that filthy pig and that fierce beast, the pearls of the divine precept; and this evil spirit, which acted by the organ of the serpent, trampled them unworthily by its daring lies; then again, turning against the woman, he made her and the man fall into the abyss of disobedience, so dangerous is it to reveal the divine secrets indistinctly! Notice to those who talk of religion indifferently with all! For Jesus Christ, in this place of the Gospel, designates much less true swine than those men whose manners are depraved, and who plunge themselves, like real pigs, into the mire of sin. He teaches us, therefore, to observe the persons and morals of those to whom we explain the teachings of religion, lest these conversations be mutually harmful. For, besides that spirits of this character do not profit by our words, they often drag into the abyss those who, without any discretion, spread before them these divine pearls. So, let us be cautious and reserved, so as not to be seduced like our first parents. For if the woman had not thrown the pearls before this swine, she would not have disobeyed God himself, nor would he have dragged the man into his sin.

But let's listen to the woman's answer. The tempter asks: Why did God tell you: Do not eat all the fruits of the trees of Paradise? and the woman answers, We eat the fruit of all the trees of this garden; but for the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God said to us, Do not eat of it, nor touch it, lest you die. Do you see the malice of the devil? he had made a lie to engage in conversation and learn what the command of the Lord was. And, indeed, the woman, too confident in her supposed benevolence, discovered to her, with precept, all the economy of the divine decrees; but it thus removed all means of defense. Eh! What could you, O woman, answer to such a word: The Lord said: Do not eat all the fruits of the trees of Paradise? you must suddenly drive out that insolent man, who dared to speak other than God, and say to him, "Get away, you deceiver; you do not know the importance of the commandment that is given to us, and you know neither the goods we enjoy nor the abundance where we are of all things. You dare to say that God has forbidden us the use of the fruits of this garden! but, on the contrary, the Creator God has deigned, in His immense goodness, to allow us to enjoy all things and to eat of all fruits, except for one whom he has excepted in our interest, lest we die.

(Gen. 3:4-5) It was thus that the woman had to repel the tempter, and the slightest prudence advised him to break up the interview and not to prolong it. But, not content with having revealed to the devil the precept and divine command, she listened to her treacherous and dangerous counsels; The woman said, We eat the fruit of the trees of this garden, but for the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, God said to us, Do not eat this fruit and touch it, out of fear that you do not die; and now the evil spirit is blowing on him a counsel quite opposite to that of God. It was by a trait of providence towards man, and to protect him from death, that the Lord had made him this defense; but the devil said to Eve, You will not die. How to excuse such imprudence? and how could Eve listen to such a daring language? God said, Do not eat this fruit, lest you die; and the demon dares to say to him: No, you will not die. Moreover, it is not enough for him to contradict the divine word, he still accuses the Creator of acting in a spirit of jealousy, and he leads his deceit with so much skill that he seduces the woman and realizes her iniquitous projects. No, you will not die, he says, but God knows that the day you eat this fruit, your eyes will open and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil. (Gen. III, 5.)

Here, then, is the fatal bait and the mortal poison that the demon presents to the woman, and the latter does not suspect the danger, although, from the beginning, it is very easy for her to recognize it. But learning that God's defense was because he knew that their eyes would be open, and that they themselves would be gods, knowing good and evil, she prides herself on this flattering hope and conceived great thoughts. (90) Such is still today the artifice of the devil he raises us by his deceptive suggestions and then lets us fall into a deep abyss. [Homilies on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. See the villainy of the Devil. He said that which was not spoken, in order that he might learn what was spoken. What then did the woman? She ought to have silenced him, she ought not to have exchanged a word with him. In foolishness she declared the judgment of the Master. Thereby she afforded the Devil a powerful handle. See what an evil it is to commit ourselves rashly to our enemies, and to conspirators against us. On this account Christ used to say, ‘Give not holy things to the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before the swine, lest they turn and rend you.’ (Mt. 7:6) And this happened in the case of Eve. She gave the holy things to the dog, to the swine. [Hom. 3.3-4 on the Devil NPNF s.1 v. 9]

JUSTIN MARTYR. For among us the prince of the wicked spirits is called the serpent, and Satan, and the devil, as you can learn by looking into our Scriptures. [The First Apology 28, ANF v.1]

THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH. This Eve, on account of her having been in the beginning deceived by the serpent, and become the author of sin, the wicked demon, who also is called Satan, who then spoke to her through the serpent, and who works even to this day in those men that are possessed by him, invokes as Eve. And he is called “demon” and “dragon,” on account of his revolting from God. For at first he was an angel. [To Autolycus 2.28 ANF v.2]

3:6-7 And the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes to look upon and beautiful to contemplate, and having taken of its fruit she ate, and she gave to her husband also with her, and they ate. 7 And the eyes of both were opened, and they perceived that they were naked, and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons to go round them.

ALCUIN OF YORK. BUT WHY DID THE MAN FOLLOW THE WOMAN? — Answer. Because, perhaps, he saw that she had not died from that food; and it is possible that they thought the Creator had said, "If you eat of it, you shall die the death" (Gen. 2:17) in order to convey something symbolically. [Question 68]

(Gen. 3:7). TO WHAT WERE THEIR EYES OPENED? — Answer. To what but to mutual concupiscence? Which befell them as a punishment soon after the sin. [Question 69]

WHY DID THEY, WHEN THEY WERE TROUBLED, HAVE RECOURSE TO FIG LEAVES? — Answer. Because they lost the glory of simple chastity, they took refuge in the double excitement of lust. That is why the Lord Jesus said to Nathanael, "when you were under the fig tree, I saw you" (John 1:48), that is, "when you were under the fig tree of original sin, I saw you through mercy, and therefore I came down to deliver you." [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 70]

AMBROSE OF MILAN. The eyes of their mind were opened and they realized the shame of being naked. For that reason, when the woman ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil she certainly sinned and realized that she had sinned. On realizing this, she should not have invited her husband to share in her sin. By enticing him and by giving him what she herself had tasted she did not nullify her sin; rather, she repeated it. Certainly it stands to reason that she did intend to lure the person whom she loved to share in her punishment. She should be expected to ward off from one who was unaware of it the danger of falling into a sin of which she had knowledge. Yet this woman, knowing that she could not remain in Paradise after the Fall, seems to have had a fear that she alone would be ejected from the Garden. Hence, after the Fall, they both went into hiding. Being aware, therefore, that she would have to be separated from the man she loved, she had no desire to be deceived. [On Paradise 33]

AMBROSIASTER. WAS ADAM'S BODY, WHEN IT WAS CREATED, IMMORTAL OR SUBJECT TO DEATH? — God in creating man had given him the privilege of immortality supposed that he would not sin. He had to be for himself the author of life or death. If he avoided sin, he would enjoy immortality as the fruit of his labor; but if he was unfaithful to his duty, he could only blame himself for being subject to death. As long as he persevered in obedience to the Creator's mind, he was worthy to feed on the fruit of the tree of life, which preserved him from death; for his body was not by its nature immune to dissolution, it was the virtue of the tree of life which preserved it from corruption. I will say that even after sin he could have remained incorruptible if it had been allowed to eat from the tree of life. But how to admit an immortal body for whom food is a necessary support? An immortal being does not need to eat or drink. Food gave him strength, but the tree of life, by a kind of medicinal virtue, removed from him any element of corruption. Thus, it was for man an impenetrable wall to death. [Questions on the Old and New Testament]

ATHANASIUS OF ALEXANDRIA. As long as he kept his mind to God, and the contemplation of God, he turned away from the contemplation of the body. But when, by counsel of the serpent, he departed from the consideration of God, and began to regard himself, then they not only fell to bodily lust, but knew that they were naked, and knowing, were ashamed. But they knew that they were naked, not so much of clothing as that they had become stripped of the contemplation of divine things, and had transferred their understanding to the contraries. For having departed from the consideration of the one and the true, namely, God, and from desire of Him, they had thenceforward embarked in various lusts and in those of the several bodily senses. [Against the Heathen 1.3 NPNF s.2 v.4]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. HOW AND ON WHAT THEIR EYES ARE THEY OPENING? "So they ate it and their eyes opened," but on what? It was alas! to test the fires of concupiscence and to suffer the pain of sin which, with death, had been insinuated into their flesh. This was no longer just that animal body, which could be transformed, if they had persevered in obedience, into a more perfect and spiritual body without passing through death; it became a flesh of death and a law now fought in the members "against the law of the spirit" (Rom. VII, 23). For they had not been created with eyes closed; they had not groped their way in Eden, exposed, without knowing it, the forbidden tree and reaped its fruits in spite of themselves. Besides, how could the animals have been brought to Adam to see how he would name them, if he had not seen? How could the woman have been presented to man and would she have said to him: "Here is the bone of my bones and the flesh of my flesh (Gen. II, 19, 22, 23)," s' he had been blind? Finally, how could Eve herself have seen that the forbidden fruit "was beautiful to see and pleasant to eat," had their eyes been really closed?

It would not be necessary, however, by taking a single word in the metaphorical sense, to change this passage into an allegory. It is up to us to examine in what sense the serpent said, "Your eyes will open. No doubt the serpent has held this language, the sacred writer recounts it; but we can examine what is the meaning of it. These expressions: "Their eyes were opened and they realized that they were naked," are the narrative of a historical fact; nothing authorizes us to see an allegory. The Evangelist apparently did not introduce in his story the metaphorical words of any character, but recalled in his name what had happened when he said of the two disciples of Emmaus, one of whom was called Cleophas, that their eyes were opened, when the Lord broke the bread, and they knew him; these disciples indeed had not walked with their eyes closed, but their sight was at first impotent to recognize the Savior (Luke XXIV, 13-31). In these two stories there is no allegory, although the Scriptures say figuratively that their eyes were opened. They were not closed indeed, but they opened in the sense that they fixed on objects that had not attracted their attention until then. When, therefore, Adam and Eve had been led to break the precept by a criminal curiosity, eager to recognize the mysterious consequences they would have to suffer if they touched the forbidden fruit, and, having seen this fruit very similar to those of which they had eaten without experiencing any harm, they had more inclination to believe that God would easily excuse their fault, to resist the temptation to discover the properties of this fruit, as well as the motive which had decided God to defend them ; when they had transgressed the commandment and were stripped inwardly of the grace which they had offended by their pride and the fumes of their vanity; then they cast their eyes upon their bodies and experienced, by a hitherto unknown movement, the disorders of concupiscence. Consequently, their eyes opened on a point which had hitherto escaped their attention, although they had previously been open to other objects.

THE PRINCIPLE OF MORTALITY AND CONCUPISCENCE. Death thus entered their organs during the day, even where the defense of God was violated. Their body no longer had that marvelous state in which the mysterious virtue of the tree of life maintained it, which would have protected it from disease as an attack on old age, for although it was still animal and it was to be transformed only later, the effect of the tree of life already represented the all-spiritual effect of wisdom which makes the Angels participate in eternity apart from all decay. Thus deteriorated, their body contracted the principles of sickness and death which are equally peculiar to animals, and like them it felt the appetite of the sexes destined to fill the voids of death. However, the nobility of the reasonable soul, bursting forth even in its punishment, made it blush with the brutal movement that was going on in the limbs; shame was born in her, of the strange sensation she had not yet felt, and especially of the idea that sin was the cause of this gross inclination. This was the exact application of the word of the prophet: "Lord, you have in your will given brilliance to my power; you then turned your face and I was quite disturbed (Ps. XXIX, 8). In this confusion they had recourse to fig leaves, made themselves belts, and, for renouncing a glorious state, concealed their shameful nakedness. These leaves doubtless had in their eyes no relation to the revolted organs which were to be veiled; they resorted to it only under the secret impulse of shame which disturbed them, so as to reveal, without their knowledge, their true punishment. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. It is written of Adam and Eve, "Their eyes were opened.” But it would be absurd to believe that until then they were blind, or had wandered, eyes closed, in the earthly paradise. So this is a phrase, the same we find in this passage where it says of Hagar: "She opened her eyes and saw a well” (Gen. XXI, 19); She certainly had not sat there until then, eyes closed. Neither did they walk with closed eyes, following with Jesus the path of Emmaus, those disciples who recognized the Lord after his resurrection, and yet it is said that their eyes were opened to the breaking of bread (Luke XXIV, 31). [Locutions]

GREGORY I OF ROME. So then that we may not deal with things lascivious in thought we have need to take precaution because it is not befitting to look at what is not lawful to be lusted after. For that the mind may be preserved pure in thought, the eyes must be forced away from the wantonness of their pleasure, like a kind of ravishing unto sin. For neither would Eve have touched the forbidden free, except she had looked on it first without taking heed; since it is written, And the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree delightful to look upon, and she took of the fruit thereof and did eat. [Gen. 3, 6] Hence, therefore, it is to be estimated with, what great control we who are living a mortal life ought to restrain our sight towards forbidden objects; if the very mother of the living came to death through means of the eyes. [Morals on Job 21.1]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Thus Eve, already dreaming of equality with God, hastened to gather the forbidden fruit; her eyes, her mind and her heart stopped there, fixedly, and she thought only of exhausting the poisoned cup which the devil had prepared for her. Such were certainly her dispositions from the moment she listened to the pernicious counsels of the devil, and Scripture testifies to it. For the woman, she says, saw that the fruit was good to eat, and beautiful to see, and of a delectable aspect; and she took some and ate it.

Truly, as the Apostle says, bad conversations corrupt good morals. (I Corinthians XV, 33.) Eh! Whence comes it that before the counsel of the devil the woman had not had such thoughts, and that she had neither fixed this tree particularly, nor considered the beauty of her fruit? it was because she respected the defense of the Lord, and feared the punishment of which he threatened his disobedience. But as soon as she had listened to this perverse and evil spirit, she believed and had nothing to fear from eating the forbidden fruit, and that even they would become equal to God. This hope thus excited her to pluck fruit, and, flattering herself to rise above humanity, she added more faith to the perfidious insinuations of the enemy of our salvation than to the words of God. But his experience soon taught him the fatal consequences of this pernicious advice and the terrible misfortunes that were about to envelop him. For as soon as she saw, says the Scripture, that the fruit was good to eat, and beautiful to see, and of a delectable aspect, she followed the impulse of the evil spirit that spoke to her through the organ of the serpent, and reasoned thus in itself: If this fruit seems good to eat, if it charms the eye and if it is of a delectable aspect, and if it must, moreover, raise us to the supreme honors and make us as great as the Creator, why should I hesitate to pick him?

(Gen. 3:6-7) Do you see how the Devil captivated the woman, and how he troubled her reason? She ventured to carry her hopes above her condition, and the proud hope of obtaining imaginary goods made her lose those she really possessed. So she took that fruit and ate it, and she gave it to her husband, and they ate it, and their eyes were open, and they knew they were naked. What have you done, O woman! Yielding to treacherous counsel, you have trampled on the law of the Lord and despised His commandments! What! by an excess of intemperance, the use of all these fruits so numerous and varied has not sufficed for you, and you have dared to pluck the very one of which God had forbidden you to eat! At last, you have believed the words of the serpent, and you have esteemed his advice more salutary than the orders of the Creator! Alas! your presumption renders this crime irreparable. But whoever spoke to you was he your equal? No, no doubt; it was one of your subjects: he was subject to you and he was your slave. Why then degrade yourself to the point of abandoning the man for whom you have been formed and whose help and consolation you have been created? You share the dignity of his nature and the nobility of his word, and you may have conversed familiarly with the serpent, which has become the organ of the devil, has insinuated you with advice that is manifestly contrary to the Lord's command. You had to push him away; but, flattered by his empty promises, you have picked the forbidden fruit.

Well, be it! you wished to rush into the abyss and descend from the summit of honors; but why drag your spouse into the same misfortune? You must be his help, and you give him some pitfalls. What! for a miserable fruit, you lose both the grace and the friendship of God! What strange madness has inspired you this audacity? Was not it enough for you to lead a sweet life and to be clothed in a body, without experiencing its weaknesses? You enjoyed all the fruits of earthly paradise, with the exception of one, and, queen of the universe, you command all creatures; and now, seduced by vain promises, you flatter yourself to rise to the highest honors of divinity! Alas! you will learn from a harsh experience that, far from obtaining these much envied goods, you will lose, you and your spouse, all those whom the Lord has filled you with. But when repentance has made your grief deep and bitter, the evil spirit who has suggested this fatal counsel will laugh at your ills; he will insult your fall and congratulate himself for having dragged you into his misfortune. For it is because, swollen with pride, he wanted to rise above his condition, (91) that he was stripped of his dignity and precipitated from heaven on earth; and in the same way he wished to make you incur, by your disobedience, the anathema of death, and thus to satisfy his black jealousy, according to this word of the Wise One: By the envy of Satan, death entered the universe. (Sag II, 24.)

The woman therefore took fruit and gave it to her husband; and they ate, and their eyes were opened. How man was guilty! for although the woman was a portion of her substance, and even her wife, he must have preferred the precept of the Lord to his vain desires, and not be made an accomplice to his disobedience. Did such a frivolous pleasure deserve that he deprived himself of the most excellent advantages, and that he offended the Master who had enriched him with so many goods, and who had granted him an existence exempt from pains and fatigues? Was he not allowed to enjoy abundantly all the fruits of earthly paradise? Why then, O man! Did you not want to, and you too, observe this slight defense? Because, no doubt, you have known by your wife the promise of the tempting spirit; and suddenly, swelled with the same presumption, you ate forbidden fruit. So both of you will be cruelly punished and learn from hard experience that it was better to obey God than to follow the advice of the devil.

So the woman took the fruit and gave it to her husband, and they ate it; and their eyes were opened, and they knew they were naked. Here is the important question I was talking about yesterday; for it is right to ask what virtue this tree had, whose fruit opened the eyes of those who ate it, and why it is called the tree of the science of good and evil. Wait a little, please, and I will satisfy your just curiosity. And first, let us observe that a right and enlightened study of the Holy Scriptures easily resolves the difficulties. Thus it is not precisely because Adam and Eve ate this fruit that their eyes were opened, since before they had the use of sight; but because this act of intemperance was at the same time an act of disobedience to the Lord's orders, it is attributed to him the privation of the glory which surrounded them, and of which they themselves had made themselves unworthy.

This is why Scripture says, according to its ordinary language, that they ate it, and that their eyes were opened, and that they knew that they were naked. Yes, sin, by stripping them of heavenly grace, gave them the feeling of their nakedness; so that this shame which seizes them suddenly made them see in what abyss their disobedience had precipitated them. Before this disobedience, they lived in perfect security and did not suspect that they were naked; but they were not so, since celestial glory covered them better than any garment. But when they had eaten forbidden fruit and thus violated the precept of the Lord, they were reduced to such deep humiliation that the feeling of shame led them to seek a veil over their nakedness. It was because the transgression of the divine precept had stripped them of the glory and celestial grace which clothed them as a splendid garment; and, by making them know their nakedness, she had penetrated them with a strong feeling of shame.

And they intertwined fig leaves and made themselves belts. Measure, my dear brother, I invite you to the depths of the abyss where, from the height of glory, the demon made our first parents fall. Formerly they were clothed with a celestial luster, and now they are forced to intertwine fig leaves and make sashes. Such was the result of the deceits of the devil and the pitfalls he offered them. Of course, he did not propose to give them any new advantages, but he only wanted to strip them of those they possessed, and thus reduce them to a shameful nakedness. And because their disobedience had the opportunity of the forbidden fruit, Scripture says that they ate it and that their eyes were opened, which must be understood as the perception of the mind rather than the organ of view; for, after their sin, God made them feel impressions which, by an effect of his extreme goodness, they had previously ignored. This expression their eyes were open means that God made them feel the shame of their nakedness and the privation of the glory they enjoyed. Moreover, this language is ordinary in Scripture, as is proved by this passage in Genesis: Hagar, a fugitive slave, wandered in the wilderness, and, having placed his child under a palm tree, she went away not to to see die. So, God opened his eyes. (Genesis XXI, 19.) It is not (92) that she saw before, but that God enlightened her understanding; so that this word opens must be understood rather of the mind than of the organ of sight.

I will give the same solution to a second difficulty. For some say, why is this tree called the tree of the science of good and evil? And we even see some who oppose the argument that Adam had discernment of good and evil only after eating the fruit of this tree, but it is pure extravagance. Already, and as if to answer in advance, I spoke at length about science. infused by Adam; now this science was revealed by the correctness of the names which it imposed on all birds and all animals, and by the gift of prophecy which was its glorious coronation. It can not be said, therefore, that he who named all the animals, and who uttered so admirable a prophecy about the woman, knew nothing of good and evil. Besides, such an assumption would do, what God forbid! to pour on God even a horrible blasphemy. For could he have given orders to man if he had invincibly ignored disobedience as an evil? But it was not so; and Adam knew perfectly well what he was doing, since from the beginning he possessed free will. In the contrary case, his disobedience would not have been more worthy of punishment than his submission of praise. On the contrary, it is evident from the very words of the precept, and subsequently from events, that the act of their disobedience alone subjected our first parents to death. This is what the woman herself says to the serpent: For the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God said: Did not eat it, lest you die. Thus before their sin they were immortal, otherwise their prevarication could not have been punished by the punishment of death.

Can we therefore maintain that it is by eating the forbidden fruit that man acquires the knowledge of good and evil? But did not he already have this knowledge, he who was full of wisdom and adorned with the gift of prophecy? and how can it be reasonably supposed that goats, sheep, and other herbivorous animals can distinguish between useful plants and weeds, in order to graze some and move away from one another, and that man, endowed with reason, does not know to discern good from evil? But it is no less true, you say, that this tree is called in Scripture the tree of the science of good and evil. I agree with that; and yet it is enough to be a little familiar with the style of Scripture to realize this expression. He was so called, not that he gave man the knowledge of good and evil, but because he was the occasion of his disobedience and he introduced the knowledge and shame of sin. . And in fact. Scripture often designates facts by the circumstances that accompany them; and as this tree was to be for man an occasion of sin or merit, she called it the tree of the science of good and evil.

The Lord wanted from the beginning to make known to man that the God who created the universe had also given him being. He therefore gave him this little commandment so that he might recognize his title of Master and Lord. Thus a generous proprietor who grants to his steward the usufruct of a magnificent palace, demands a fee, as a proof of his right of property. The steward thus knows that this palace does not belong to him, and that he enjoys it only by the goodness and liberality of his master. And so was the Creator, who had made man king of nature; and who had placed him in the terrestrial paradise of which he fully enjoyed, wished to avoid that, seduced by his own thoughts, he could believe that the universe existed by itself, and that he did not pride himself on his superiority. Therefore he forbade him the fruit of a single tree, and threatened him in case of disobedience; the most severe punishment, to oblige him to recognize a Master, and to proclaim that he had all his advantages from his pure liberality. But the presumptuous temerity of Adam precipitated him with Eve into a frightful ruin; they transgressed the commandment, and ate forbidden fruit. This is why this tree has been called the tree of the science of good and evil. It is not that they did not know beforehand the good and the bad, as the words of the woman to the serpent prove: God said to us: Do not eat this fruit, lest you die. They knew, therefore, that death would be the punishment for their disobedience; so it is after having eaten forbidden fruit that they were stripped of their garment of glory, and that they felt the shame of their nakedness. This tree is therefore called the tree of the science of good and evil, because it was destined to test their obedience.

Now you understand how Scripture says that their eyes were opened, and that they knew they were naked. You also understand why this tree was called the tree of the science of good and evil. But appreciate, if it is possible, what was their shame, when after eating the forbidden fruit, and transgressing the precept of the Lord, they intertwined fig leaves and made themselves belts. See how from the summit of glory they were precipitated in the deepest humiliation! Those who previously lived on earth as angels, are reduced to cover themselves with fig leaves, so sin is a great evil! For it deprives us first of all of God's grace and friendship, and then covers us with shame and confusion. Moreover, after having stripped us of the possessions we possessed, he robs us of the hope of recovering them.

But I reproach myself for ending this conversation with the sad considerations which the intemperance of man, his disobedience and his fall, furnish me with. That is why, please, on the occasion of this tree, I will speak of the tree of the cross, and to the evils that the first has produced, I will oppose the goods that the second has produced to us. However, it is not properly the tree that caused these disasters, but the will of the sinful man and his contempt for the divine precept. I will say, then, that the first tree brought death into the world, for death followed sin, and the second brought us back to immortality. One chased us out of paradise, and the other opened the entrance to heaven. He has weighed on Adam, for one fault, the hard burden of human misery, and this one has delivered us from the weight of our sins, and has given us a sweet and full confidence in the Lord. [Homilies on Genesis]

3:8 And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the afternoon; and both Adam and his wife hid themselves from the face of the Lord God in the midst of the trees of the garden.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 3:8) WHAT DOES IT MEAN THAT ADAM AND HIS WIFE HID THEMSELVES AFTER NOON? — Answer. It means that after the blessed light of paradisiacal happiness [variant: after the light of blessed paradisiacal happiness], they hid themselves in the dark misery of this world [variant: they hid themselves from misery in the darkness of this world]. [Question 71]

WHY DID HE IMAGINE THAT HE COULD HIDE FROM THE PRESENCE OF THE LORD? — Answer. This folly seized him as part of the punishment for his sin, to imagine that it could be hidden [variant: to seek to hide] from him from whom nothing can be hidden. [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 73]

AMBROSE OF MILAN. What does ‘walking’ mean in reference to God, who is everywhere? In my opinion God may be said to walk wherever throughout Scripture the presence of God is implied, when we hear that He sees all things and ‘the eyes of the Lord are upon the just.’ (Ps. 33:16) We read, too, that Jesus knew their thoughts and we read: ‘Why do you harbor evil thoughts in your hearts?’ (Lk. 6:8: Matt. 9:4) When we reflect, therefore, on these statements, we have a knowledge of God in the act of walking. The sinner, in fact, had tried to hide away from the sight of God. He wished to conceal himself in his thoughts and was unwilling that his works appear in the light of day.’ (Matt. 5:16) [On Paradise 68]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. THE VOICE OF GOD, WHEN HE WENT OUT IN THE GARDEN. "And they heard the voice of the Lord walking in the garden in the evening." It was indeed the time when they should be visited, they who had gone away from the light of truth. It is possible that God spoke to them beforehand by addressing their intelligence with, or without language, as He is still speaking to the Angels, enlightening their minds with its immutable light and making them understand at one and the same moment what develops in the following times. God, I say, could maintain them in the same way, without, however, communicating wisdom to them as fully as to the Angels. Whatever distance he placed between them and man, according to the scope of his intelligence, he did not fail to visit them and speak to them; and perhaps he employed physical means, such as the images which delight the spirit in ecstasy; appearances that strike the eyes or the ears, like those where God is under. the cover of an angel or sound his word in a cloud. As for the sound they heard, at the moment when God was walking towards evening, he was formed by the organ of a creature: it would be a mistake to believe that the invisible and immense essence of the Trinity was shown to them in a sensible way, in a certain place and at a certain moment.

"And Adam and his wife hid themselves from the face of the Lord in the midst of the trees of Paradise. When God turns his face from the soul and is troubled, it is naturally acts of madness, under the influence of shame and fear: it should not be surprising that, still feeling this confusion, they had, without their knowledge, done acts of instructing posterity, which was to one day learn them in a story composed for her. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

JEROME OF STRIDON. 3:8 AND THEY HEARD THE VOICE OF THE LORD GOD WALKING IN PARADISE TOWARD EVENING. — In most of the Latin collections, in place of these words towards the evening, one reads after noon. The Greek expression to deilinon can not be read to the letter. There, the Hebrew text says LARUE AIOM, which Aquila translates as en tōi anemōi tēs hēmeras, that is to say 'in the wind of the day.' Symmachus says dia pneumatos hēmeras, that is to say 'during the wind of the day.' Theodotion is clearer; tōi pneumati pros katapsuxin tēs hēmeras, 'during the breath of the day's cooling'; it shows that, the heat of noon having fallen, the breath of the breeze is refreshed. [Hebrew Questions on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. (Gen. 3:8) And they heard the voice of the Lord God coming in the garden after the middle of the day; and Adam and his wife hid among the trees of the garden to avoid the presence of God. Here, my dear brothers, we must neither pass lightly on these words, nor stop as at the bark of words; but we must consider with what condescension Scripture is proportioned to our weakness, and give to these words a meaning worthy of God and of our salvation. And indeed, these words taken literally would be unworthy of God, and would they not offer, I ask you, an absurd meaning? For what do we read in this passage of Genesis? They heard the voice of the Lord, who went into the garden after the middle of the day, and they hid themselves. What do you say, O Moses? does God walk? will we believe that he has feet, and will we have no more sublime idea of ​​him? but how would the One who fills the universe of his presence walk? and how He, whose heaven is the throne and the earth, would the footstool be shut up in the garden? It would be foolish to say it. What do these words mean: They heard the voice of the Lord, who was coming into the garden about the middle of the day? They teach us that the Lord wanted to make them feel their fault by bringing them to extreme anguish of mind and heart. This is what happened; for they were so ashamed that at the approach of God they hid themselves. As a result of their sin and disobedience, they had experienced remorse and confusion.

And indeed, this incorruptible judge, whom we call consciousness, rises up against man and accuses him aloud; he puts his sins before his eyes, and represents to him all the clumsiness. That is why God, in creating man, establishes within himself that censor that never stops and that can not be deceived. No doubt, one can steal one's faults and crimes from the knowledge of men, but it is impossible to hide them from consciousness; and in whatever place the guilty man transports himself, he carries within himself that consciousness which accuses him, disturbs him, tears him up, and never rests. She attacks him in the intimacy of the domestic hearth, on the forum and in the public meetings, and pursues him during feasts, during his sleep and when he wakes up. She never ceases to ask him to account for her faults, and to bring to her before her eyes the graver and the punishment. Such, a charitable physician, assiduously accompanies a patient, and, in spite of his rejections, persists in offering him his remedies and his good offices.

Besides, the main duty of the conscience is to remind us of our faults and to protest against their culpable forgetfulness; she presents us with the picture, if only to restrain us and prevent us from falling back into it. And yet, in spite of the support and the help of the conscience, and in spite of its violent reproaches and the remorse which rends our killer, and which are for our soul as cruel executioners, most men can not overcome their passions; also in what abyss would we fall, if it did not exist? It was therefore the reproaches of conscience that revealed to our first parents the approach of the Lord; and suddenly they hid themselves. Why did they do it? I’m asking you. Because the conscience, like a harsh accuser, reproached them for their crime. And indeed, they had no other censor, nor any other witness of their sin than that which they carried within themselves; yet to the reproaches of conscience was added the privation of the glory which clothed them. Thus, the feeling of their nakedness warned them of the fault of their fault, and because they were ashamed of their grave disobedience, they tried to hide themselves. They heard, says the Scripture, the voice of the Lord God, who was coming into the garden after the middle of the day; and Adam and his wife hid among the trees of paradise to avoid the presence of God.

Nothing, then, is more sinister than sin, my dearest brethren, for as soon as man commits it, he fills him with confusion, and renders foolish those who shone before by the solidity of judgment. Hey! see Adam! it is the conduct of a fool; and yet he was endowed with the gift of prophecy and that high wisdom which had broken out in his works. But he hears the voice of the Lord advancing in the garden, and hides, like his wife, among the trees of paradise, to avoid the presence of God. Is not this a real trait of madness? What! God is present everywhere, he has drawn all creatures from nothing, and none is hidden from his eyes; he has formed the heart of man, and he knows all the secret affections of it; he scrutinizes the loins and the hearts, and he penetrates to the most intimate thoughts of the soul. And this is the one in whose eyes Adam and Eve are trying to hide. But do not be surprised, my dear brother, such is the sinner's method. He knows (96) that he can not avoid the presence of God, and yet he tries to avoid it.

The conduct of our first parents also had as its principle the shame which seized them, when sin had stripped them of their glorious immortality. This is proven by the very choice of their retreat, since they hid among the trees of earthly paradise. The rogue or lazy servants seek, under the impression of fear and chastisement, to hide themselves in every corner of the house, although they know well that they will not avoid the eye of an irritated master. And likewise Adam and Eve, not knowing where to take refuge, ran here and there in the terrestrial paradise. Nor is it without reason that Scripture designates the hour: They heard, she said, the voice of the Lord God who was coming into the garden after the middle of the day. She wants to make us know the extreme goodness of the Lord. He did not differ, therefore, for a moment in helping the sinful man, and as soon as he saw him fall, he hastened to run. at the first glance he sounded the depth of his wound, and to prevent its consequences and progress, he hastened to bring a beneficent device to it. Thus his goodness did not allow him to leave, even for a moment, the man deprived of all help.

The enemy of our salvation had given free rein to his rage; and because he envied the man the property he possessed, he had given him snares to make him fall from this happy state. But the Lord, whose providence and wisdom regulate our destinies, has seen both the malignancy of the devil and the weakness of man, it is this weakness which made him yield to the insinuations of his wife and fall into the shameful abyss. of sin. So the Lord suddenly appears, and, like a good and indulgent judge, he sits down on his tribunal, surrounded by fear and horror, and hears the affair with the greatest attention. He thus teaches us not to condemn our brothers without having thoroughly examined their conduct.

So let us listen, please, to this solemn questioning of the Judge's requests and the answers of the guilty, the sentence that strikes them, and the condemnation of the tempter who handed them these treacherous snares. But bring all your attention here, and shudder while attending to this judgment. When a mortal judge places himself on his court, quotes the culprits and subjects them to torture, a thrill of terror seizes the spectators. All want to hear the judge's requests and the defendants' answers. What will be our thoughts when, in our presence, God, creator of the universe, will come to trial with his creatures! And yet you will observe how, even here, divine clemency prevails over the severity of the judges of the earth. [Homilies on Genesis]

3:9-11 And the Lord God called Adam and said to him, Adam, where are you? 10 And he said to him, I heard thy voice as thou walkedst in the garden, and I feared because I was naked and I hid myself. 11 And God said to him, Who told thee that thou wast naked, unless thou hast eaten of the tree concerning which I charged thee of it alone not to eat?

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 3:9) WHY DID GOD ASK WHERE ADAM WAS AS IF HE DID NOT KNOW? — Answer. He certainly did not ask Adam out of ignorance, but, scolding him, he told him to note where he was and where he had fallen from. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 213. Bed. Hexm. I, PL 91, col. 56.) [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 72]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. OF THE INTERROGATORY THAT GOD FITS ADAM (Gen. 3:9) The Lord God called Adam and said to him, Where are you? The reproach and not the ignorance breaks out in this question. Let us remark that the command having been made to the man to transmit it to the woman, it is the man who is interrogated first. The commandment is communicated from the Lord to the woman through the medium of man; sin passes from the devil to man through the woman. All these facts are full of lessons; it is not the characters who give them to us, it is the all-powerful wisdom of God that makes them come out of their actions. But we have not here to discover the stubborn sense of events; let us limit ourselves to showing the truth.

(Gen. 3:10) Adam answered, I heard your voice in Paradise, and I was afraid because I was naked and hid. It is very likely that God usually showed himself to these first humans under the cover of a creature having the human form and disposed for this purpose; and as he kept his mind turned towards supernatural things, he had never allowed them to perceive their nakedness, before the moment when sin made them feel by a just punishment a shameful movement in their limbs. So they felt the impression of a man in the presence of another man, and this impression, punishment of their fault, led them to try to hide from the one to whom nothing can be hidden, and to steal their bodies from the sight of Him who reads in hearts. But is it any wonder that, having wished in their pride to become like gods, they have fainted in their own thoughts and have seen their foolish heart covered with darkness? In their prosperity they are. are given the name of sages, and the Lord having turned away his face, they became stupid men (Romans II, 21, 22) .But the subject of their shame, the motive that had made them take belts, became more still frightful, when it was necessary to appear in this accoutrement before Him who familiarly lowered himself to visit them and borrowed, so to speak, the eyes of a human creature. And if he appeared to them in the same form as he showed himself to Abraham, at the foot of the oak of Mamre (Gen. xviii. 1), in order to speak to them as a man to a man, they last after their sin to find a a new subject of shame in that tenderness close to friendship which, before sin, inspired them with so much confidence. So they dared not show these divine eyes a nakedness that their own view was unable to bear.

(Gen. 3:11) The Lord who wanted to interrogate the guilty, as justice demands, and to punish them more severely than the shame they felt, said to Adam, "And how do you know that you were naked, except for having eaten the only tree I had forbidden you to eat? This fault, indeed, had communicated to them a principle of death, according to the judgment of the Lord, who, fulfilling his threat, had made them feel the disturbance of concupiscence at the moment when their eyes were opened, and the confusion which was the sequel. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. (Gen. 3:9) So the Lord God called Adam, and said to him, Adam, where are you? In this interrogation itself, we find an astonishing mark of the supreme goodness of God; not only does he call Adam, but he himself calls him, in person: this is what the judges of the earth disdain for the guilty who are men like them and of the same nature as they are. You know that when sitting on their court, our judges report to the perpetrators of their conduct, they do not address them directly, but they use an intermediary who communicates to the accused the questions of the tried and the. judge the answers of the accused; it is used almost everywhere to make the criminals understand how much they have been damaged by committing the crime. God does not act the same, he questions directly: The Lord God therefore called Adam and. said Adam, where are you? These few words contain a great energy of thoughts. Because. first, it was in God an immense and ineffable goodness to call himself that great culprit who blushed with shame, and who dared neither open his mouth nor articulate a single word. Yes, to question him, and thus to give him the opportunity to implore his forgiveness, attests an infinite mercy. Adam, where are you? Oh! that this question alone is at once full of strength and gentleness! It is as if God had said to him: What has happened? I left you in one state, and I find you in another. I had left you clothed in glory, and I find you in shameful nakedness. Adam, where are you? what is the cause of your misfortune? and who has plunged you into this abyss of evils? who is the scoundrel or thief who has taken away all your goods from you, and who has reduced you to this extreme indigence? who made you known nakedness, and who stripped you of that splendid garment of which I had clothed you? what sudden change! and what storm has suddenly engulfed all your riches? What have you done, that you wish to avoid him who has showered you with the greatest benefits, and who has raised you to so much honor? and what are you afraid to seek to hide yourself? is an accuser chasing you, and witnesses are confusing you? finally, where does this fear and terror come from?

(Gen. 3:10) But Adam answered, I heard your voice in the garden, and being naked, I was afraid, and I was hidden. (Gen. III, 10.) Then God said to him, "Eh! who taught you that you were naked? what is this new and unheard language? and who would have made known to you your state, if you yourself were not the author of this ignominy? you have eaten the fruit of the only tree of which I forbade you to eat. "Do you see what is the goodness and patience of the Lord?" He could, without addressing a single word to this great culprit, punish him on the spot as he had threatened; but he acts patiently, questions him, and listens to his answer. Moreover, he questions her a second time, as if to facilitate a defense which would enable him to use mercy and mercy. Great lesson! who teaches the judges that, in the exercise of their functions, they must neither speak inhumanly to the guilty, nor treat them with a cruelty that is only suitable for ferocious beasts. We must then show them some indulgence and some kindness, and in pronouncing on their fate, do not forget that they are our brothers. This thought that our origin is common will soften our hearts and soften the rigors of justice. It is therefore not without motive that the saint, Scripture, is proportioned here to our weakness, and employs this simple and familiar language. It invites us to imitate, according to our strength, the ineffable goodness of the Lord.

(Gen. 3:11) And the Lord said of Adam: Who taught you that you were naked except that you ate the fruit of the only tree I forbid you to eat? Yes, how would you have known your nakedness, and would you be ashamed if, by intemperance, you had transgressed my command? Appreciate, my dear brother, all the excellence of divine goodness. The Lord speaks to Adam as to a friend, and he treats this great culprit with gentle familiarity.

Who told you that you were naked, except that you ate the fruit of the only tree I had forbidden you to eat? Let us also observe the emphasis, and the secret irony of this expression: the fruit of the only tree, it is as if he had told him: did I narrowly restrict the use of the fruits of this garden? ? did I not place you in a rich abundance? and did not I forsake you all the fruits of earthly paradise except one? This defense was only meant to remind you that you had a Master, and that you had to obey him. Is it insatiable, therefore, that intemperance, which, unhappy with so many goods, has not abstained from this fruit alone? And how could you run to a disobedience that was to precipitate you into such an abyss of evil? What is it now of your sin? Did I not warn you both, and did not I want to restrain you by the fear of punishment? I have foretold all the consequences of your sin, and I have made you this defense to guard you against the seductive spirit. And today, such a black ingratitude does not make your fault irreparable? As a good father teaches a darling son, I have clearly told you my orders; and by allowing you the use of all the other fruits, I have formally excepted that one, so that you may retain all the goods I have given you. But you thought the advice of another better and more respectable than my command. That's why you despised it, and you ate forbidden fruit. Well! What happened to you? Today a hard experience reveals all the malice of this pernicious advice. [Homilies on Genesis]

TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE. God calls out to Adam, Genesis 3:9, 11 Where are you? as if ignorant where he was; and when he alleged that the shame of his nakedness was the cause (of his hiding himself), He inquired whether he had eaten of the tree, as if He were in doubt. By no means; God was neither uncertain about the commission of the sin, nor ignorant of Adam's whereabouts. It was certainly proper to summon the offender, who was concealing himself from the consciousness of his sin, and to bring him forth into the presence of his Lord, not merely by the calling out of his name, but with a home-thrust blow at the sin which he had at that moment committed. For the question ought not to be read in a merely interrogative tone, Where are you, Adam? but with an impressive and earnest voice, and with an air of imputation, Oh, Adam, where are you?—as much as to intimate: you are no longer here, you are in perdition—so that the voice is the utterance of One who is at once rebuking and sorrowing. God put the question with an appearance of uncertainty, in order that even here He might prove man to be the subject of a free will in the alternative of either a denial or a confession, and give to him the opportunity of freely acknowledging his transgression, and, so far, of lightening it. In like manner He inquires of Cain where his brother was, just as if He had not yet heard the blood of Abel crying from the ground, in order that he too might have the opportunity from the same power of the will of spontaneously denying, and to this degree aggravating, his crime; and that thus there might be supplied to us examples of confessing sins rather than of denying them: so that even then was initiated the evangelic doctrine, "By your words you shall be justified, and by your words you shall be condemned." Matthew 12:37 Now, although Adam was by reason of his condition under law subject to death, yet was hope preserved to him by the Lord's saying, "Behold, Adam is become as one of us;" that is, in consequence of the future taking of the man into the divine nature. Then what follows? "And now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, (and eat), and live for ever." Inserting thus the particle of present time, "And now," He shows that He had made for a time, and at present, a prolongation of man's life. Therefore He did not actually curse Adam and Eve, for they were candidates for restoration, and they had been relieved by confession. [Against Marcion 2.25]

THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH. The God and Father, indeed, of all cannot be contained, and is not found in a place, for there is no place of His rest; but His Word, through whom He made all things, being His power and His wisdom… went to the garden in the person of God, and conversed with Adam. For the divine writing itself teaches us that Adam said that he had heard the voice. But what else is this voice but the Word of God, who is also His Son? [To Autolycus 2.13 ANF v.2]

3:12 And Adam said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me—she gave me of the tree and I ate.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 3:12) WHY DID ADAM SHIFT THE BLAME FOR THE SIN ON THE WOMAN? — Answer. To the aggravation of his sin, he replied proudly rather than humbly, as if directing a complaint at God as to why he had given him a companion of the sort that would give him an occasion for sin. Similarly, the woman too attributes the cause of her own fault to the Creator because he created in paradise the serpent by which she would be deceived. [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 74]

AMBROSE OF MILAN. Perhaps you are disturbed by the fact that Adam is the first to be rebuked, although the woman was the first to eat the fruit. But the weaker sex begins by an act of disobedience, whereas the stronger sex is more liable to feelings of shame and forgiveness. The female furnished the occasion for wrongdoing; the male, the opportunity to feel ashamed. [On Paradise 70]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. And Adam said, The woman that you put with me, brought me this fruit, and I ate it. What pride! He said: I sinned? No. He experiences confusion in all his ugliness, he does not have enough humility to admit his fault. These words have been passed on to us, because these. requests were made to report to us faithfully and to serve as lessons, because if they were false, they could not be instructive: they were therefore intended to show us how far pride goes in the man who, even today, makes God responsible for his crimes by attributing to himself all his virtues. "The woman you put with me," that is to say, you gave me for a companion, introduced me to this fruit and I ate it; it would seem to hear him, that she had been given him to disobey him and make him unfaithful to God with her. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. (Gen. 3:12) And Adam said, The woman you gave me for a companion, brought me fruit from that tree, and I ate it. This answer is in itself In cry of distress and pain; and it seems at first sight that it is a call to that divine mercy which always surpasses in kindness and indulgence the malice of our sins. And indeed, the Lord came, by his ineffable patience, to touch the heart of Adam and make him feel the scorn of his fault; and now he seeks to apologize, saying, "The woman you gave me as a companion brought me fruit from that tree and I ate it. It is as if he had said: I have sinned, I know it, but the woman whom you gave me for a companion, and of whom you have said yourself: give to the man an aid which is like, was the cause of my fall. Could I suspect that this woman whom you had given me for a companion would be a subject of shame and ignominy? I only knew that you had formed it to be my consolation. You have given it to me, you have brought it to me, and I do not know what motive has led her to introduce me to the fruit I have eaten.

This answer seems at first sight to justify Adam; but in reality his fault was inexcusable. For how can you excuse me, could the Lord leave him again, the forgetfulness of my command, and the assent given to the woman rather than to my words? She offered you the fruit; either, but the memory of my defense, and the fear of punishment, were enough to distract you from eating it. Did you not know my orders, and did not you know my threats? In my provident tenderness I warned you both to avoid these misfortunes. So even though woman is the instigator of sin to you, you can not be innocent. Hey! Did not you have to be faithful to my command, repel the fatal present, and even represent to the woman the enormity of her fault. You are the head of the woman; and she was formed only for you. But you have reversed the order, and instead of holding it back, you let yourself be carried away by it. The members had to obey the head, and, by a guilty reversal, it was the members who commanded, so that ranks and order were overthrown. And that's how you fell into this deep humiliation, you who were clothed with glory and splendor.

Who could lament your misfortune and the loss of such valuable possessions? However, only you have done your misfortune, and you can only attribute the cause to your own weakness. For if you had not consented to it, the woman would never have dragged herself into this immense disaster. Did she use your prayers, reasoning, or seduction? It was enough for him to present you the fruit, and suddenly with extreme complacency you ate it, without remembering my defense. So you thought that I had deceived you, and that I had forbidden you the use of this fruit only to deprive you, by jealousy, of a still more glorious state. But how could I have deceived you, I who had filled you with so many goods! and was it not already a great goodness to have warned you in advance of the consequences of your disobedience? So I wanted you to avoid the misfortune where you fell. But you have despised everything, and today, that a hard experience makes you feel the enormity of your fault, it remains for you to find guilty, without accusing your wife. [Homilies on Genesis]

3:13 And the Lord God said to the woman, Why hast thou done this? And the woman said, The serpent deceived me and I ate.

AMBROSE OF MILAN. And the woman said: 'The serpent deceived me and I ate.' (Gen 3:13) That fault is pardonable which is followed by an admission of guilt. The woman, therefore, is not to be despaired of, who did not keep silent before God, but who preferred to admit her sin-.the woman on whom was passed a sentence that was salutary. It is good to suffer condemnation for our sins and to be scourged for our crimes, provided we are scourged along with other men. Hence, Cain, because he wanted to deny his guilt, was judged unworthy to be punished in his sin. He was forgiven without prescribed penalty, not, perhaps, for having committed such a serious crime as parricide-he was responsible for his brother's death-as one of sacrilege, in that he thought he had deceived God when he said: ' I do not know. Am I my brother's keeper?' [ Gen 4:9 ] And so the accusation is reserved for his accuser, the Devil, prescribing that he be scourged along with his angels, since he did not wish to be scourged with men. Of such, therefore, has it been said: ' There is no regard for their death and they shall not be scourged like other men.' [ Ps 72:4,5 ] The woman's case is, accordingly, of a different character. Although she incurred the sin of disobedience, she still possessed in the tree of Paradise food for virtue. And so she admitted her sin and was considered worthy of pardon. ' The just is first accuser of  himself in the beginning of his speech.' [ Prov 18:17 ] No one can be justified from sin unless he has first made confession of his sin. Wherefore the Lord says: ' Tell if thou hast anything to justify thyself.' (Isa 43:26) [On Paradise]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. "And the Lord said to the woman, Why did you do this? The woman answered: The snake seduced me and I ate fruit. Eve, too, does not recognize her fault and rejects her on another: it is the same pride in both sexes. Yet these are the ancestors of the man who, overcome by a great deal of disgrace, exclaimed, without imitating their pride, and exclaimed until the end of time: "I said, Lord, have mercy on me; heal my soul, for I have sinned against you (Ps. That it would have been better for them to have this language! But God had not yet broken the heads of sinners (Ibid, CXXVIII, 4). It was necessary to wait for the afflictions, the horrors of death, the anxieties of the generations, the grace that at the opportune moment God would send to the men, after having taught them in the sufferings not to presume of their forces. "The snake seduced me. Must he therefore prefer to the command of God the advice of any one? [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

GREGORY I OF ROME. The woman likewise on being asked, answered, saying, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. For to this end they were enquired of, that the sin, which by transgressing they had been guilty of, they might by confessing wipe out. Whence too the serpent, that prompter, inasmuch as he was not to be brought back to pardon, was not asked concerning the sin. Thus man was asked the question ‘where he was,’ that he might review the offence committed, and by confessing it take knowledge how far he had departed from the face of his Creator. But both preferred to take to themselves the cordials of defense rather than of confession. And while the man was minded to alleviate the sin through the woman, and the woman through the serpent, they added to the sin, which they endeavored to vindicate; Adam by indirectly glancing at the Lord, how that he had Himself proved the author of their sin, in that He had made the woman; and Eve in referring the sin to the Lord, Who had placed the serpent in Paradise. For they who had heard from the mouth of the devil deceiving them, Ye shall be as Gods; (v. 5) because they were not able to be like to God in Godhead, for the heightening of their error endeavored to make God like to themselves in transgression. In this way then, whilst they set themselves to defend their guilt, they made the addition that the sin should be rendered more heinous when examined, than it had been when committed. [Morals on Job 1.53]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. And God, adds the Scripture, said to the woman, Why did you do that? You have heard your husband who accuses you of all this disobedience, and who puts the blame on you who had been given him to help him, and who had been drawn from his own substance only to be his consolation. Why then, O woman, did you commit this sin, and why did you draw on him and on you this profound humiliation? What advantages does this criminal intemperance give you today, and what fruits do you derive from this guilty error? You have been seduced by your fault, and you have made your husband an accomplice to your sin.

But what does the woman answer? The snake deceived me, and I ate the fruit. Do you see how she, too, seeks in her dread to excuse her disobedience? Adam had rejected his fault on the woman, saying: she picked the fruit and presented it to me, and I ate it. And so she confesses her sin, and finds no excuse except to say: the snake deceived me, and I ate fruit. This cursed animal was the cause of my fall, and it was his pernicious counsels that dragged me into this deep humiliation. He deceived me, and I ate fruit.

Let us not pass lightly on these words, my dearest brothers; for a careful examination will show us useful instructions. The judgments of the Lord are terrible and frightening; but if we meditate carefully, they will be beneficial to our souls. Let us listen to Adam, who says to God: The woman you gave me as a companion introduced me to the fruit, and I ate it. Thus he acknowledges that there has been no compulsion or violence against him, and that he has acted voluntarily and with complete freedom. Eve only presented the fruit to her, and she exercised no pressure or violence on him. And in the same way she does not say, to excuse herself, that the snake has been inclined to eat the forbidden fruit in spite of herself. It limits itself to saying: the snake deceived me. Now it depended on her to reject seduction as to succumb to it: the snake deceived me, she said. It is therefore true that the enemy of our salvation, speaking by the organ of this accursed animal, gave a fatal advice, and deceived the woman. But he did not violate it, nor compel it: he used only fraud to accomplish his pernicious designs, and if he preferred the woman, it was because he thought she was more likely to be seduced. and to commit an irreparable fault.

The snake deceived me, and I ate fruit. See how good the Lord is. He is satisfied with this only admission, and he does not press Adam or Eve for new questions. And certainly, when he questioned them, it was not that he did not know their crime: he knew him and knew all the circumstances; He did not lower himself to enter into discussion with them, than in order to make his mercy better manifest, and to engage them to a humble and sincere confession; therefore he does not ask them new questions. No doubt it was fitting that God should make known to us the kind of seduction which had been presented to our first parents; but to show that he did not question them by ignorance of the fact, he is satisfied with a first answer. And indeed, in saying that the serpent had deceived her, and that she had eaten forbidden fruit, the woman easily allowed to guess the fatal hope of which the demon had flattered her by the organ of the serpent, promising her that they would become gods. [Homilies on Genesis]

3:14 And the Lord God said to the serpent, Because thou hast done this thou art cursed above all cattle and all the brutes of the earth, on thy breast and belly thou shalt go, and thou shalt eat earth all the days of thy life.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (3:14) WHY ARE TERRESTRIAL ANIMALS MORE CURSED THAN AQUATIC ONES? — Answer. Because they live off the cursed earth more than the aquatic ones do, and that is why Christ, after the Resurrection, wanted to eat fish and not of some terrestrial animal (Luke 24:43). [Question 11]

WHY WAS THE SERPENT NOT ASKED WHY HE HAD DONE THAT? — Answer. Because, perhaps, he had not done it by his own nature or will, but the Devil had worked from him and through him. That is why it is said to him, "upon thy breast shalt thou go, and earth shalt thou eat": the cunning of his wicked actions are denoted by the breast, and he devours the earth, too, when he is fed and delighted [variant: made bigger] by the excesses and lust of sinners. In fact, just as the Devil spoke through the serpent, so is he cursed in the serpent. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 214. Bed. Hexm. I, PL 91, col. 57.) [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 75]

AMBROSE OF MILAN. He says that the serpent crawls on his breast and belly. This is due not so much to the shape of his body as to the fact that he has fallen from celestial happiness because of his thoughts of earth. The breast, in fact, is frequently referred to as the seat of wisdom. And so the Apostle leans his head, not on the ground, but on Christ’s breast. (Jn. 13:25; 21:20) If, therefore, the wisdom of the Devil is compared to that of the most cruel of animals whose breast is between its legs, if men, too, who, ‘minding the things of the earth’ (Phil. 3:20) and without the inner urge to rise towards heaven, have the appearance of crawling on their bellies, then we surely ought to fill the belly of our souls with the Word of God rather than with the corruptible things of this world. [On Paradise 74]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. CURSE OF THE SERPENT. And the Lord God said to the serpent, Because you have done this, you shall be cursed among all the animals and all the beasts that are on the earth. You will walk on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the woman, between her seed and yours. She will spine you to the head and you will try to bite at the heel. This judgment must be heard figuratively; it has been pronounced, but this is all that the historian's sincerity and the infallible truth of his story obliges us to believe. The words: "The Lord God says to the serpent," belong to the narrator, it must be taken literally, in other words, the judgment was actually pronounced against the serpent. As for the very words of God, the reader has every liberty to consider whether to hear them literally or figuratively, according to the principle we have laid down at the beginning of this book. Thus, therefore, the serpent was not subjected to interrogation; perhaps he had not acted freely according to his instincts; he had only been the blind instrument of the devil who was already destined for everlasting fire, following the sin which impiety and pride had made him commit. But all that is addressed to the serpent and consequently to the one who has made it an instrument, can only be taken figuratively: it is the very portrait of the tempter, as it was to be shown one day to the human race, whose origin goes back to the very time when this judgment was pronounced against the demon under the figure of the serpent. What meaning should be attached to these prophetic words? it is a question which I have endeavored to solve in the two books on Genesis, published against the Manicheans, and if I find elsewhere the occasion of deepening it, God will lend me his help to develop it further; but right now I have to continue my plan without being distracted. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

JEROME OF STRIDON. 3:14 YOU WILL WALK ON YOUR CHEST AND ON YOUR BELLY. — The Septuagint have added the word belly, the Hebrew has only that of breast. His walk will show the cunning and the trick of his thoughts and will show that all his steps tend to malice and deceit. Let us read the words that follow: "Thou shalt eat the earth." To the word earth corresponds as APAR, which we can render by ashes, dust. [Hebrew Questions on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. The woman said: The snake deceived me, and I ate forbidden fruit; and yet the Lord did not deign to interrogate this animal, nor to give it cause to defend itself. He did not ask him any questions, as he had done to the man and to the woman; but as soon as these presented their justification, he vented all his anger on the serpent, as on the author of the sin. For the Lord, in whose eyes nothing is hidden, was not unaware that the serpent had been the instrument of the trap where the black jealousy of the devil had brought down our first parents. See how he uses mercy and kindness towards them. He knew everything, yet he said to Adam, Where are you? and who taught you that you were naked? He also tells Eve: Why did you do that? But he holds a very different language to the serpent: And the Lord God said to the serpent, Because you did this. Do you see the difference? God said to the woman, Why did you do that? And, to the snake: Because you did that. Yes, because you have lent yourself to this crime, and you have insinuated this perfidious advice; because you have favored the jealousy of the devil, and you have seconded his malice against my creature, you are cursed among all the animals and all the beasts of the earth; you will crawl on your belly, and you will eat dust all the days of your life.

Notice, I pray you, the order and arrangement of this passage, and you will find in it a precious witness of the goodness of God. The Lord first asked Adam, and then Eve; and when the latter had appointed his seducer, he disdained to listen to his defense, and fulminated against him a punishment which will last as long as his life. Henceforth, therefore, the sight alone of the serpent will remind men that they must repulse his perfidious counsels and avoid his misleading pitfalls. But perhaps you will ask why the serpent is punished, while it was only the instrument of the demon who alone caused all this disaster? Here again the ineffable goodness of the Lord breaks out. For just as a good father, not content with pursuing the murderer of his son, breaks and shatters the sword or dagger that was used for the crime, the Lord punishes the serpent that was the instrument of the malice of the devil, and wants the sight of this punishment (100) to proclaim the severity with which he treated the of my own. For if the instrument was punished so rigorously, what torture was not inflicted on him who put it into action!

Moreover, Jesus Christ reveals something to us in his Gospel, when he tells us that in the day of judgment he will say to those on his left, "Depart from me, you cursed; go to the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. (Matt XXV, 41.) It is therefore for the devil that this fire has been prepared, which will never be extinguished; and what a more frightful destiny than that of those unfortunates who neglect their salvation, and thus expose themselves to share the tortures reserved for the devil and his angels! If, on the contrary, we wish to embrace virtue and observe the laws of Jesus Christ, we will secure this kingdom, of which he says: Come, my Father's beloved, possess the kingdom prepared for you from the beginning of the world. . On one side are the eternal fires of hell, and on the other, if we are pious and fervent, the kingdom of heaven. May these thoughts encourage us to work for the salvation of our soul, to flee sin, and to avoid the pitfalls of the devil!

But if you are not too tired, I will speak again of the punishment inflicted on the serpent, in order to show you more and more how the divine mercy is exercised towards us. Besides, every day, a numerous competition surrounds the court of a judge who investigates the cause of some criminals; we spend whole days there, and we do not retire before the meeting is adjourned. For all the more reason, it is fitting for us to wait with holy readiness for the statement of the judgment which the Lord will pronounce against the serpent. He will inflict terrible punishment on him, because he has been the instrument of crime; and the sight of this sorrow will make us understand what eternal tortures the same God reserves for the devil. We will also see with what mercy he chastises Adam and Eve, to whom he addresses a severe remonstrance rather than inflicts a severe punishment; and we will conclude that we can not sufficiently admire the goodness of God nor praise his indulgent providence for us. Let us listen to the sacred writer: And the Lord God said to the serpent Because you have that, you are cursed among all the animals and all the beasts of the earth; you will crawl on your belly, and you will eat dust all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your offspring and hers: she will break your head, and you will insidiously wound her in the heel.

There is anger and indignation in these words, but the sin in which the devil, through the serpent's organ, carried our first parents, is great and enormous. Now the Lord God said to the serpent, Because you did this; because you have been the minister of the demon in his homicidal projects, and you have seconded his malice by serving as an organ to his bad counsels and poisoned flatteries; because you did that, and you helped to disinherit my creatures from my graces and benevolence, by lending you to the perfidious designs of the rebellious angel who, in punishment for his pride and his black jealousy, was precipitated from heaven on earth; because in all these horrible machinations you have shown yourself his docile instrument, I inflict on you a punishment that will last forever. So it will be enough for the devil to see you, so that he knows what tortures are reserved to him, and to the men, so that they learn to avoid his traps and to guarantee himself of his pitfalls, if they do not want one day to share his torments. Thus you are cursed among all animals, because you have made a treacherous use of the delicacy which distinguishes you from all of them, and you have used this gift only to cause the greatest evils.

Let us not forget this word of Scripture: The serpent was the most cunning of all the animals that were on the earth. Therefore the Lord said to him, 'You shall be cursed among all the animals and all the beasts of the earth. But as this curse had escaped our senses and our eyes, God wished to inflict upon him a visible punishment which constantly reminded us of his crime and his punishment. So he adds: You will crawl on your stomach, and you will eat dust all the days of your life. You have abused your natural qualities, and you have dared to enter into conversation with the reasonable man I had created: you have thus imitated the demon, to which you have served as a compliant minister, and who has been expelled from heaven, because he affected thoughts above his condition. And in the same way I inflict upon you a punishment that will change your nature. You will crawl on the earth, and you will feed (101) dust. So, you will never be able to rise to the sky, rush you will always remain in this state of humiliation, and only of all the animals, you will feed you of the dust. More: I will put enmity between you and the woman; between your posterity and his. For little pleased to see you crawling on the earth, I will make woman your irreconcilable enemy, so that war will always subsist between your posterity and his. At last she will crush your head, and you will insidiously wound her in the heel. Yes, I will give him the strength to walk on your head, and you will shake in vain under his feet.

This punishment of the serpent manifests to us, my dear brother, the great goodness of the Lord with regard to man. But what Scripture says here about the material serpent can, above all, and in a true sense, be understood as the spiritual serpent, and apply to the devil. And indeed, to humble this superb spirit, God compels him to crawl under our feet, and he gives us the power to walk on his head. Is not this what these words of Jesus Christ mean: Flee with snakes and scorpions? And lest we hear them of a material serpent, he adds: And all the power of the enemy. (Luke, X, 19.) [Homilies on Genesis]

3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman and between thy seed and her seed, he shall watch against thy head, and thou shalt watch against his heel.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 3:15) WHY IS THE DEVIL SO HOSTILE TO MAN'S SALVATION? — Answer. Because of hate towards the Creator, envy towards man, and despair of his own salvation. (Greg. Mor. L. XXX, PL 76, col. 571.) [Question 13]

WHAT IS THE WOMAN'S SEED, OR THE SERPENT'S SEED? — Answer. The woman's seed is all mankind; the serpent's seed is the source of original sin. These two seeds, according to the divine commandment, must bear continual hatred to each other, so that we should not do what the Devil wants, because he never wants anything that will be beneficial to us. [Question 76]

WHAT ARE THE SERPENT'S HEAD AND THE WOMAN'S HEEL? — Answer. The serpent's head means thought about forbidden incitement, which we must with all determination crush and dash against the stone that is Christ. The woman's heel is the endmost time of our life, during which the Devil strives to attack us more fiercely; but if we resist him bravely, we shall obtain the victory of perseverance along with our salvation. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 214-15. Bed. Hexm. I, PL 91, col. 58. Greg. Mor. L. XXX1I. PL 76, col. 655-666. Greg. Hm. XL, PL 76, col. 1299.) [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 77]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. Instead of these words, which are found in many manuscripts: Inimicitiam ponam inter and mulierem (And I will put enmity between you and the woman), the Greek bears: In medio tui and in medio mulieris. (in the midst between you and in midst between the woman) It is obviously a phrase, since the meaning is absolutely the same, as when one says: Inter te and mulierem. (between you and the woman) The same applies to the following words: In medio seminis tui and in medio seminis ejus (in the midst of your seed and in the midst of her seed). [Locutions]

GREGORY I OF ROME. For to mark the serpent’s head is to keep an eye upon the beginnings of his suggestions, and with the hand of needful consideration wholly to eradicate them from the avenues of the heart; yet when he is caught at the commencement, he busies himself to smite the heel, in that though he does not strike the intention with his suggestion at the first, he strives to ensnare at the end. Now if the heart be once corrupted in the intention, the middle and the end of the action that follows is held in secure possession by the cunning adversary, since he sees that that whole tree bears fruit to himself, which he has poisoned at the root with his baleful tooth. [Morals on Job 1.53]

JEROME OF STRIDON. 3:15 HE WILL WATCH YOUR HEAD, AND YOU WILL WATCH HIS HEEL. — The Hebrew text says better: "He will crush your head, and you will crush his heel." Our steps are indeed uncomfortable by the serpent, and the Lord will quickly crush Satan under our feet. [Hebrew Questions on Genesis]

JOHN CASSIAN THE ROMAN. For the subtle serpent is ever “watching our heel,” that is, is lying in wait for the close, and endeavoring to trip us up right to the end of our life. And therefore it will not be of any use to have made a good beginning and to have eagerly taken the first step towards renouncing the world with all fervor, if a corresponding end does not likewise set it off and conclude it, and if the humility and poverty of Christ, of which you have now made profession in His sight, are not preserved by you even to the close of your life, as they were first secured. And that you may succeed in doing this, do you ever “watch his head,” i.e. the first rise of thoughts, by bringing them at once to your superior. For thus you will learn to “bruise” his dangerous beginnings, if you are not ashamed to disclose any of them to your superior. [Institutes 4.37 NPNF s.2 v.11]

For it is an impossibility for him who, overcome in the matter of a small possession, has once admitted into his heart a root of evil desire, not to be inflamed presently with the heat of a still greater desire. For the soldier of Christ will be victorious and in safety, and free from all the attacks of desire, so long as this most evil spirit does not implant in his heart a seed of this desire. Wherefore, though in the matter of all kinds of sins we ought ordinarily to watch the serpent’s head, yet in this above all we should be more keenly on our guard. For if it has been admitted it will grow by feeding on itself, and will kindle for itself a worse fire. [John Cassian, Institutes 7.21 NPNF s.2 v.11]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. More: I will put enmity between you and the woman; between your posterity and his. For little pleased to see you crawling on the earth, I will make woman your irreconcilable enemy, so that war will always subsist between your posterity and his. At last she will crush your head, and you will insidiously wound her in the heel. Yes, I will give him the strength to walk on your head, and you will shake in vain under his feet.

This punishment of the serpent manifests to us, my dear brother, the great goodness of the Lord with regard to man. But what Scripture says here about the material serpent can, above all, and in a true sense, be understood as the spiritual serpent, and apply to the devil. And indeed, to humble this superb spirit, God compels him to crawl under our feet, and he gives us the power to walk on his head. Is not this what these words of Jesus Christ mean: Flee with snakes and scorpions? And lest we hear them of a material serpent, he adds: And all the power of the enemy. (Luke, X, 19.) [Homilies on Genesis]

3:16 And to the woman he said, I will greatly multiply your pains and your groanings; in pain you shall bring forth children, and your submission shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 3:16) THERE IS A QUESTION WHEN IT IS SAID, "AND THOU SHALT BE UNDER THY HUSBAND'S POWER": WAS THE WOMAN UNDER HER HUSBAND'S POWER EVEN BEFORE THE SIN? — Answer. She doubtless was, but with the subjection that works by love (Gal. 5:6) and casts out fear (1 John 4:18), whereas afterwards it was with the servile fear of subjection, which works by discipline. [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 78]

AMBROSE OF MILAN. She was to serve under her husband’s power, first, that she might not be inclined to do wrong, and, secondly, that, being in a position subject to a stronger vessel, she might not dishonor her husband, but on the contrary, might be governed by his counsel. (1 Pet. 3:7) I see clearly here the mystery of Christ and His Church. The Church’s turning toward Christ in times to come and a religious servitude submissive to the Word of God, these are conditions far better than the liberty of this world. Hence it is written: ‘Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God and shall serve him only.’ (Deut. 6:13; Lk. 4:8) Servitude, therefore, of this sort is a gift of God. Wherefore, compliance with this servitude is to be reckoned among blessings. [On Paradise 14:72]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. OF THE STRUCTURE IMPOSED ON THE WOMAN. And he said to the woman, I will multiply your pains and your groans: you will give birth to sorrow; you will be turned towards your husband and he will rule over you. It was also easier to hear figuratively and prophetically this judgment that God pronounces on the woman. But let us observe that the woman had not yet been a mother, and that the pangs of childbirth were attached to that body where sin had brought death, to this body, which was probably animal, but destined never to perish if man had sinned, and to transform gloriously after a virtuous existence, as I have often said; we can therefore hear this punishment to the letter. However, it remains to be seen how one can literally explain these words: "You will be turned towards your husband and he will rule over you. Indeed, it is natural to believe that a woman, even before sin, was made to be submissive to man and to be turned to him by virtue of his subordination. But it may well be admitted that this is a question of condition rather than attachment, so that slavery, which later put one man to the service of another, would be a punishment of sin. The Apostle no doubt says, "Subject one to another by charity" (Gal.5: 43); But he would never have said, "Dominate one another. The spouses may therefore submit to one another by charity; but the Apostle does not allow the woman to dominate (I Tim II, 12). It is a right which the judgment of the Lord has consecrated for man; the woman has been condemned by her fault rather than by nature to find a master in her husband; however, she must remain submissive, on pain of further deterioration and increase her fault. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

JEROME OF STRIDON. 3:16 I WILL MULTIPLY AND MULTIPLY YOUR SADNESS AND YOUR GROANING. — Instead of sadness and moaning, the Hebrew reads pains and conceptions. [Hebrew Questions on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. I will greatly multiply your pains and your groanings. See the Lord’s goodness, how much mildness he employs despite such a terrible fall.  As if he is saying, for you have a life free of trouble and distress, rid of all pain and grief, filled with every pleasure and with no sense of bodily needs despite your body condition.  But since you misused such indulgence, and the abundance of good things led you into such ingratitude, accordingly I impose this curb on you to prevent your further running riot, and I sentence you to painful labor… I will ensure, he is saying, that the generation of children, a reason for great satisfaction, for you will begin with pain so that each time without fail you will personally have a reminder, through the distress and the pain of each birth, of the magnitude of this sin of disobedience.  [Homilies on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. your submission shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you. For the woman taught the man once, and made him guilty of disobedience, and wrought our ruin. Therefore because she made a bad use of her power over the man, or rather her equality with him, God made her subject to her husband. “Your desire shall be to your husband?” This had not been said to her before. But how was Adam not deceived? If he was not deceived, he did not then transgress? Attend carefully. The woman said, “The serpent beguiled me.” But the man did not say, The woman deceived me, but, “she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.” Now it is not the same thing to be deceived by a fellow-creature, one of the same kind, as by an inferior and subordinate animal. This is truly to be deceived. Compared therefore with the woman, he is spoken of as “not deceived.” For she was beguiled by an inferior and subject, he by an equal. Again, it is not said of the man, that he “saw the tree was good for food,” but of the woman, and that she “did eat, and gave it to her husband”:  so that he transgressed, not captivated by appetite, but merely from the persuasion of his wife. [Hom. 9 on 1 Timothy NPNF s.1 v.13]

3:17 And to Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and eaten of the tree concerning which I charged thee of it only not to eat—of that thou hast eaten, cursed is the ground in thy labors, in pain shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 3:17) WHY DID THE CREATOR, IN THE CURSE AGAINST ADAM, CURSE THE EARTH AND NOT THE WATERS? — Answer. Because man ate of a fruit of the earth against the prohibition, not drank of waters; and because God has predestined that he will wash away in waters the sin that man has contracted from a fruit of the earth. [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 10]

AMBROSE OF MILAN. For it is written: 'Cursed is the earth in thy works; in sadness shall you eat thereof all the days of your life.' (Gen 3:17) The two sentences seem to have a certain similarity, yet in that similarity there is a great difference. There is a difference in the way a person eats of the earth, as the serpent is related to have done and the manner in which this is recorded of the man: 'In sadness shall you eat.' That very phrase 'in sadness' makes the precise difference. Note how important this difference is. It is for my benefit that I should eat the earth in sadness rather than with delight, that is to say, that I should appear to feel a certain sadness in my bodily acts and senses rather than experience pleasure in sin. Many, in fact, because of their manifold iniquities have no awareness of sin. But he who says: ' I chastise my body and bring it into subjection,' [ 1 Cor 9:27 ] feels sadness because of regret for the sins to which we are subject. He himself did not have such serious faults for which he ought to feel sorrow. Hence he teaches us that that kind of sorrow is of value which has, not this world, but God, as its end. It is right, he says, that you become sorrowful, so as to feel repentance in the face of God: ' For the sorrow that is according to God produces salvation, whereas the sorrow that is according to the world produces death.' [ 2 Cor 7:9,10 ] Take note of those who in the Old Testament were sorrowful in the midst of their bodily labors and who attained grace, while those who found delight in such pleasures continued to be punished. Hence the Hebrews, who groaned in the works of Egypt, [ Exod 2:23 ] attained the grace of the just and those ' who ate bread with mourning and fear,' (Tob 2:5) were supplied with spiritual good. The Egyptians, on the other hand, who, in their service to a detestable king, carried out such works with joy, received no favor. (Exod 16:14-18) [On Paradise]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. When God made man, although he made him very good, nevertheless he did not make him what He Himself is. But that man is better who is good freely and willingly than the man who is good by necessity. Accordingly, free will was fitting and appropriate gift for man. [83 different questions, Question 2]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. We read in several Latin versions Quia audisti vocem mulieris tuae, and edisti de ligno de quo proeceperam tibi de eo solo non edere (Because you listened to the voice of your wife, and you ate the fruit of the tree, the only one I had forbidden you to eat.); and in the Greek: Edisti de ligno de quo proeperam, tibi eo solo non edere ex eo (You ate of the tree of which I had commanded you of it alone not to eat of it.). But other Greek interpreters complete the sentence by the word manducasti, or edisti (chewed or you ate); so that, according to them, the meaning would be: Because you listened to the voice of your wife, and you ate the fruit of the tree, the only one I had forbidden you to eat, you ate. [Locutions]

GREGORY I OF ROME. But because the merciful Creator forsakes not His own work, He both bears with the sins of men, by His wisdom, and at last remits them by their conversion. But, when He beholds hard and insensible minds, He scares them at one time with threats, at another with blows, at another with revelations: in order that those which had become hardened by most fatal security may be softened by wholesome fear, so that they may, though at last, return, and blush at least at this, that they have long been waited for. For thus the Lord, because He judges more severely the ends of our life, therefore purges also His Elect more carefully at the close. [Morals on Job 1.53]

JEROME OF STRIDON. 3:17 THE EARTH CURSED IN YOUR WORKS. — Works do not signify here the works of the earth, as many believe, but sins, a word which is in Hebrew. Aquila does not contradict this sense: ‘the ground will be cursed for your sake.’ Theodotion also: ‘The virgin earth (adama) will be cursed because of your transgression.’ [Hebrew Questions on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. These words contain many traits of kindness and providence towards us: but to appreciate them properly, it is necessary to deepen each word. And God said to Adam, You have heard the voice of your wife, and have eaten the only fruit of which I commanded you not to eat; so, listening to his voice and eating this fruit, you preferred his insinuations to my command, and you did not want to abstain from the only fruit of which I had ordered not to eat, for my defense was but you have not respected it, and you have broken my orders to obey your wife; so you will know all the enormity of your fault.

Listen, O men! Listen, O women! that they do not suffer from similar insinuations, and that they do not allow themselves to do so! For if Adam could not justify himself by rejecting his sin against woman, it would be of little use to a husband to say: I have committed this fault out of complaisance for my wife. The woman was placed under the power of man, and the master was made to obey him. Feet should not control the head. And yet we too often see that whoever by his rank should be the head, lowers himself to become the feet, and that which should be the feet, attributes to himself the functions of the head. It is this confusion which the great Apostle, the Doctor of the nations, foresaw when he exclaimed: "Woman, do you know if you will save your husband? and you, husband, do you know if you will save your wife? (1 Corinthians 7:15.) However, it is up to man to reject all bad counsel that the woman would allow herself to give him; and this one must never forget the punishment of which Eve was punished for having suggested to Adam this fatal disobedience. She must still, far from imitating Eve, and reproduce her criminal insinuations, learn her misery, and never give her husband any advice which would not be salutary and useful to both. But back to our subject.

But God said to Adam, Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten the only fruit of which I commanded you not to eat; because you neglected to keep my commandment, and neither the fear nor the threats of the chastisements that followed your sin could hold you back, and because you made the enormous mistake of touching the only fruit that I had excepted, by abandoning you the use of all the others, the earth is cursed in your work. Here we recognize the divine goodness in the different way in which he punishes the serpent, an unreasonable animal, and man, to be endowed with reason. He said to the first, You are cursed on the earth; and the second: the earth is cursed in your work. And rightly so: for it was created for man, that he might enjoy his productions. But because man has sinned, she is cursed; and the effect of this curse will be to disturb the rest and the tranquility of the man.

So, says the Lord, the earth is cursed in your work; and to teach us the effects of this curse, he adds: and you will only eat fruit, during all the days of your life, with a great work. Do you not see this chastisement go through all ages, and after having been useful to the first man, still learn from his descendants what is the origin of their misfortunes? But let us listen to the following words which better specify the kind of this curse, and the cause of this painful work. And God says, the earth will produce you thorns and thistles only. These will be like the monuments of my curse; and you will not make the earth fruitful except through care and toil. So all your life will flow in sadness and work, so that they will be a brake that represses the arrogance of your pride, and brings you back to the thought of your nothingness; you will no longer be tempted to rock yourself with guilty illusions, for you will feed on the grass of the earth, and you will eat bread from the sweat of your brow.

But before explaining these words, let us observe how the sin of man has changed for him all the first conditions of life. For it is as if God were saying to him: I had prepared for you, creating you, a life free from pain, work, fatigue and worry. You would have enjoyed perfect happiness, and without knowing any of the sad subjugations of the body, you would have fully tasted all the delights of life. But you did not know how to appreciate this happy state, and here I curse the earth. From now on, if you do not sow it and if you do not cultivate it, it will not give you, as before, its various productions; I will even join these labors, and these painful labors, with diseases and continual fatigues, so that you will not succeed in anything except at the price of your sweats, and so this hard existence will be a constant lesson of humility. , and a memory of your nothingness.

In addition, this curse will not be limited to a few years, but it will extend throughout the course of your life; and you will eat your bread by the sweat of your brow until you return to the earth from which you were drawn, for you are dust, and you will return to dust. Yes, that will be your destiny, until the end of your days, and until you return to the earth from which you were fired. For it is from the mud of the earth that the body that I gave you in my goodness was formed, and it is in this same mud that it will be solved. You are dust, and you will return to dust. In vain to make you avoid all these evils, I said: Do not eat this fruit, and the day you eat it, you will certainly die; I did not want your death, and I did not neglect anything I could do. (104) But you have thrown yourself into this abyss of evil, and you must only accuse your own negligence.

Here is a question that I will solve in a few words, and that will end this interview. God says to our first parents: The day you eat forbidden fruit, you will certainly die. But it is unmistakable that after their sin and their disobedience, they lived a great many years. This difficulty is only one for those who read the scripture superficially; for an attentive reader explains it easily, and easily discovers the meaning of this passage. Doubtless Adam and Eve lived many years, and yet the day they heard this saying: You are earth, and you will return to the earth, a sentence of death was pronounced to them, so that it can be said that from that moment they died. Thus the meaning of this passage: The day when you will eat fruit, forbidden, you will certainly die, is that from that moment they know that they were subject to death. Hey! do not we see that in the courts the convicted murderer is sent back to prison, and that he stays there long enough? However, it is already regarded as dead, because a capital punishment has been rendered against him. And since the day when the Lord pronounced a death sentence against our first parents, they were subject to this judgment, although the execution was postponed for many years. [Homilies on Genesis]

3:18-19 Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee, and thou shalt eat the herb of the field. 19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat thy bread until thou return to the earth out of which thou wast taken, for earth thou art and to earth thou shalt return.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 3:18) WHY DID THE EARTH BRING FORTH THORNS AND THISTLES? — Answer. The earth was cursed because of man's sin, to produce thorns and poisonous plants so as to cause torment or trouble to mortals, so that man might always have original sin before his eyes and might, at least when thus reminded, turn away from sins at last. [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 79]

AMBROSE OF MILAN. The earth is cursed if your works are earthly, that is of this world. It is not cursed as a whole. It will merely bring forth thorns and thistles, if it is not diligently cared for by the labor of human hands. If we do not toil over it in labor and sweat we shall not eat bread. The law of the flesh wars against the law of the mind. We must labor and sweat so as to chastise the body and bring it into subjection and sow the seeds of spiritual things. If we sow what is carnal, we shall reap fruit that is carnal. If, however, we sow what is spiritual, we shall reap the fruit of the spirit. [On Paradise 14:72]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. These are the sorrows of man here below, who does not know? They would never have existed, if we still enjoyed the happiness that reigned in Eden, we can not doubt; therefore do not hesitate to take these expressions literally. However, they contain a prophetic meaning that must be kept as a principle of hope, because it is the goal of the words of the Lord. Moreover, it is not in vain that Adam, guided by a sublime inspiration, gave his wife the name of life, adding "that she would be the mother of all the living. For these last words are not a narrative, an assertion of the historian: these are the very words which the man has used to explain to what title he had given this name to his wife. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. See how after his disobedience everything is imposed on him in an opposite way to his former life style: My intention in bringing you into the world, he is saying, was that you should live your life without pain or toil, difficulty or sweat, and that you should be in a state of enjoyment and prosperity, and not be subject to the needs of the body but be free from all such and have the good fortune to experience complete freedom. Since, however, such indulgence was of no benefit to you, accordingly I curse the ground so that it will not in future yield its harvest as before without tilling and ploughing; instead, I invest you with great labor, toil and difficulty, and with unremitting pain and despair, and I am ensuring that everything you do is achieved only by sweat so that under pressure from these you may have continual guidance in keeping to limits and recognizing your own makeup. Nor will this continue for a short period or a brief space of time: it will last all your life. [Homilies on Genesis]

TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE. We say, therefore, that the body falls to the ground by death, as indeed facts themselves show, in accordance with the law of God. For to the body it was said, ("Till you return to the ground, for out of it were you taken; for) dust you are, and unto dust shall you return." That, therefore, which came from the ground shall return to the ground. Now that falls down which returns to the ground; and that rises again which falls down. "Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection." 1 Corinthians 15:21 Here in the word man, who consists of bodily substance, as we have often shown already. [Against Marcion 5.9]

Now, although the clay is offensive (for its poorness), it is now something else. What I possess is flesh, not earth, even although of the flesh it is said: "Dust you are, and unto dust shall you return." In these words there is the mention of the origin, not a recalling of the substance. The privilege has been granted to the flesh to be nobler than its origin, and to have happiness aggrandized by the change wrought in it. Now, even gold is earth, because of the earth; but it remains earth no longer after it becomes gold, but is a far different substance, more splendid and more noble, though coming from a source which is comparatively faded and obscure. In like manner, it was quite allowable for God that He should clear the gold of our flesh from all the taints, as you deem them, of its native clay, by purging the original substance of its dross. [On the Resurrection of the Flesh 6]

3:20-21 And Adam called the name of his wife Life, because she was the mother of all living. 21 And the Lord God made for Adam and his wife garments of skin, and clothed them.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 3:20-21). WHY DID GOD MAKE GARMENTS OF SKIN FOR MAN? — Answer. To show that Adam and Eve were mortal. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 215. Bed. Hexm. I, PL 91, col. 60.) [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 80]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. And the Lord God made dresses of skins for Adam and his wife, and clothed them. This is a real fact, though it is at the same time allegorical; just as the preceding words, while hiding a prophecy, had really been pronounced. As I have said, I never tire of saying it again: the duty of a historian consists in telling the facts, as they have occurred, in quoting the words as they have been pronounced. If one examines both in fact its authenticity and its meaning, one must see in words and words and their meaning. Whether one hears literally or figuratively words that the story reproduces as true, it matters not a fact, and not a figure, that they have been uttered. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

JEROME OF STRIDON. 3:20 AND ADAM GAVE HIS WIFE THE NAME OF LIFE, BECAUSE SHE IS THE MOTHER OF ALL LIVING. Why was she called Eve, that is, life because the text says, she is the mother of all living, EVE, in fact, means life. [Hebrew Questions on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. But let us explain the passage just read. And Adam gave his wife the name of Eve, which means life, because she is the mother of all living. Observe here the care taken by the sacred writer to transmit these details to us. Thus we learn that Adam gave a name to his wife, and that he called her Eve, that is life, because she is the mother of all living. It is indeed the stem of the human race and the root and principle of all generations. But after telling us how Adam gave a name to his wife, Moses again tells us of the goodness of God, who did not abandon his creatures in the shameful nakedness in which they had fallen. And the Lord God, he said, gave Adam and his wife coats of skin, and clothed them. The Lord then acts as a good father behaves to a prodigal son. This son of a family was endowed with a good naturalness and had been brought up with care. He enjoyed in the paternal house a rich abundance, wore silk clothes, and had at his disposal an opulent heritage. But now the very excess of prosperity hurls him into evil; and then his father cuts off all these various advantages, keeps him more closely under his control, and replaces his sumptuous clothes with a simple and common habit which hides only his nakedness. So Adam and Eve went unworthy of that glorious glory that covered them and freed them from all the needs of the body. God took away from them this brilliance and the possession of all the goods they enjoyed before that time. dreadful fall. However, he had compassion on so great a misfortune, and seeing them ashamed of a nakedness which they could neither cover nor hide, he made tunics of skin and clothed them.

So where are the artifices of the devil? As soon as we listen to his suggestions, he seduces us with the love of some passing pleasure, and draws us into the abyss of sin. Then he abandons us, all covered with shame and confusion, to the pity and the eyes of all. But the Lord, who is always interested in the salvation of our souls, did not turn away his eyes from the sad state in which our first parents were reduced, and he gave them a garment whose simplicity alone was a memory of their fall. And the Lord God made Adam and his wife with tunics of skin, and clothed them. Observe here, I ask you, with what condescension the Scripture is proportioned to our weakness. But, I said it, and I repeat it, one must always give it a sense worthy of God. Thus this word: God made tunics, must be taken in this sense that he commanded that these tunics existed; and he wanted our first parents to cover them, so that this garment would constantly remind them of their disobedience.

Listen, O rich ones! O you who pride yourself on the work of silkworms, and who adorn you with the most beautiful fabrics! listen to this lesson of modesty that the Lord gave us from the first days of creation. Man had deserved death by his sin, and he needed a garment to hide his nakedness; and now God only puts on him a tunic of skin. He wanted to teach us to flee a soft and voluptuous life, and to embrace preferably a hard and austere life. But perhaps the rich, repelled by this severe morality, will tell me what! do you want us to dress with animal skins? I do not say that; and our first parents themselves have not always worn this kind of clothing, for divine goodness never ceases to be generous and beneficent. Thus, from the day Adam and Eve were subjected to the needs of nature, and lost the sweet and angelic existence in which they were created, the Lord allowed them to weave the wool to make clothing. It was proper, indeed, that man, being reasonable, should be clothed, and that he should not live like an animal in shame and nakedness. Our clothes thus remind us of the possessions we have lost, and the chastisement which, by their disobedience, Adam and Eve, have attracted to all mankind.

But how can one excuse this frenzied luxury which rejects the use of wool, to wear nothing but silk, and which even drives extravagance to embellish it with gold embroidery. It is mainly women who indulge in these vanities; and I say to them: why do you parry your body? and why do you (107) pride yourself on this pompous paraphernalia? So you forget that the clothes are a continuation of the punishment inflicted on our first parents. So the Apostle tells us: Having enough to feed ourselves and cover ourselves with, we must be happy. (I Tim.6, 8.) Thus we must limit our solicitude to the bare necessities; and it is enough for our body to be covered without worrying about the beauty or variety of the clothes. [Homilies on Genesis]

3:22-24 And God said, Behold, Adam is become as one of us, to know good and evil, and now lest at any time he stretch forth his hand, and take of the tree of life and eat, and so he shall live forever— 23 So the Lord God sent him forth out of the garden of Delight to cultivate the ground out of which he was taken. 24 And he cast out Adam and caused him to dwell over against the garden of Delight, and stationed the cherubs and the fiery sword that turns about to keep the way of the tree of life.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 3:22) WHY DID THE LORD GOD SAY ABOUT MAN AFTER THE SIN, "BEHOLD, ADAM IS BECOME AS ONE OF US"? — Answer. He said "of us" in the plural because of the holy Trinity, just as he said in man's creation, "Let us make man to our image" (Gen. 1:26). Here he used the words of one deterring, to inspire fear in others so that they should not sin; or he used the meaning of one upbraiding, because not only had man not become what he wanted to become, but he had even failed to retain what he was when he was made. [Question 81]

(Gen. 3:23). WHY WAS MAN CREATED RESPONSIBLE OF HIS OWN POWER? — Answer. So that he might be responsible either for his own life or for his own death. If he had been subjected by necessity, then he would obtain neither glory for a good work nor punishment for an evil one, but he would be as one of the beasts. [Question 4]

(Gen. 3:24). WHAT IS MEANT BY "HE PLACED CHERUBIMS, AND A FLAMING SWORD, TURNING EVERY WAY, TO KEEP THE WAY OF THE TREE OF LIFE"? — Answer. That is a sort of fiery guard kept by the service of angels; yet, since it is said to be turning every way, it aptly signifies that it must one day be removed from the gates of Paradise. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 215. Bed. Hexm. I, PL 91, col. 61.) [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 82]

AMBROSE OF MILAN. he cast out Adam and caused him to dwell over against the garden of Delight. Adam ought not to have opposed the penalty for misguided judgment. Nevertheless, God placed Adam in such a position outside Paradise that the recollection of it may never leave him. [On Paradise 11.52]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. And God said, Behold Adam become like one of us, knowing good and evil. God spoke these words, whatever means he employed; from then on we must see in the plural an allusion to the Trinity, analogous to that found in this passage: "Let us do man," or in this other: "We will come to him and live in him. As the Lord says of himself and his Father (Jn. 14:23). Thus the promise of the serpent has fallen on the head of the proud; that is where his aspirations end. "You will be like gods," said the serpent. Here Adam has become like one of us, "answers God. These divine words are less an insult, than a terrible warning intended to repress the pride of all men, in whose interest this story has been composed. Can we see-in fact, in these words: "He has become like one of us, knowing good and evil," another goal than to inspire a salutary terror, since, far from becoming what he had dreamed, Adam did not even keep his original grandeur?

ADAM AND EVE REMOVED FROM THE PARADISE. - EXCOMMUNICATION. And now, said God, take heed that he extends his hand, that he touches the tree of life, that he does not eat it, and lives forever. And God drove him out of Eden to go and work the land from which he had been drawn. In this passage we first reproduce the words of God; the expulsion of Adam is the rigorous consequence. Death to the life of the angels that would have been his reward, if he had been faithful to the command of God, what am I saying? to the happy life which the vigor of his organization assured him in paradise, he had to be separated from the tree of life, either because this visible object would have preserved him, by an invisible virtue, his happy organization, whether he were the visible sign of invisible wisdom. He was separated from it by his death sentence, or even by a kind of excommunication, analogous to that of which the Church, the Paradise of the earth, strikes the guilty according to the rule of his discipline and separates them from the sacraments. visible from the altar.

 And he cast out Adam, and set him on the opposite side of the garden of delight. This event is real, although it teaches us at the same time that the sinner is the opposite of the spiritual life, of which paradise was the symbol, and that he lives in misery. "Then he put a cherub and a flaming sword that moved, to keep the path that led to the tree of life. That the celestial powers have executed this order in the earthly paradise, and that a vigilant flame has been maintained by the ministry of angels, there can be no doubt: the fact born must not be disputed; but at the same time it represents what is happening in the spiritual paradise. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

JEROME OF STRIDON. 3:24 HE DROVE OUT ADAM, AND HAD HIM LIVE OVER AGAINST THE PARADISE OF PLEASURE; AND HE ESTABLISHED A CHERUB WITH A FLAMING SWORD, ALWAYS LIFTED UP TO KEEP GUARD OF THE TREE OF LIFE. There is in Hebrew a very different meaning: "He drove out Adam," is it written. No doubt that it is the Lord who is subject. "And he had to live before the paradise of pleasure a cherub, with a sword of fire, which would be turned so as to forbid the way of the tree of life. Not for him to live in the presence of the paradise of pleasure, which he had banished from Adam, and after having driven him out, he put at the door of paradise a cherub with a flanking sword, to guard the entrance of paradise in such a way that no one could cross it. [Hebrew Questions on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. (Gen. 3:22-23) And the Lord God said, Behold Adam become like one of us, knowing good and evil; now, therefore, let us fear that He will advance His hand, and take also of the tree of life, and that He may eat and live forever. And the Lord God put him out of the garden of delight, to cultivate the land from which he had been drawn. (Gen. III, 22, 23.) Here again the Lord uses expressions proportioned to our weakness: And the Lord God says: Behold Adam become like one of us, knowing good and evil. What simplicity of language! but let us understand it in a sense worthy of God. He reminds us, therefore, of how the devil, by the organ of the serpent, deceived our first parents. He said to them, "If you eat this fruit, you will be like gods; and they ate it in the foolish hope of being equal to divinity. This is why God, wishing to make them feel again the blemish of their fault, and the illusion of their hopes, says ironically: "Behold Adam become like one of us.

This bitter reproach was personal and could only throw Adam into extreme confusion. It is as if the Lord had said to him: You have transgressed my commandment to be equal to me. Well! what you desired happened, or rather what you did not want, but what you deserved. Because you have become like one of us, knowing good and evil. The devil had said to Eve, by the serpent's organ, "Your eyes will be opened, and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil. So the Lord added, "And now let us fear that he should lift up his hand, and take from the tree of life, and eat and live forever. Here again the divine mercy manifests itself; but we must deepen each of these words to lose nothing, and discover all the hidden riches. When God made a command to Adam, he allowed him the use of all the fruits, except for one, threatening him with death, if he dared to touch it. But in commanding and threatening him, he says nothing about the tree of life. Adam, created immortal, could, in my opinion, and as far as I understand this passage, eat the fruit of this tree, as of all the others; and so he could have ensured immortality, since he had received no defense touching this tree.

If I were curiously asked why this tree is called the tree of life, I would say that human reason is incapable of understanding all the works of God. We only know that it pleased the Lord that in the earthly paradise man had as a matter of the virtue of obedience and the sin of disobedience. That's why he planted these two trees, one of life and the other of death, so to speak. For it was because he had eaten the fruit of the latter against the command of God, that man was subjected to death. But from the moment that he touched the forbidden fruit, sin entered the world, and man became subject to death, and to all the infirmities of nature. Yet this death was in the divine counsels a grace even more than a punishment; so the Lord would not allow Adam to inhabit the earthly paradise. He drove him out of it, proving to him, by this very rigor, that he acted only out of kindness and in his interest. But this doctrine requires a deeper examination of this passage.

(Gen. 3:24) And now, says the Lord, let us fear that Adam advances his hand, and takes also the fruit of the tree of life, and that he does not eat and live forever. It is as if he had said: An excess of intemperance has led man to transgress my command, and his sin has subjected him to death. So today, if he dared to touch the fruit of the tree of life, he would acquire immortality and never stop sinning. That is why it is to him that I chase him from the earthly paradise; and I will give it rather a mark of goodness than anger and revenge. Thus spoke the Lord; and it is true to say that his chastisements, as well as his benefits, show his mercy. So this hard exile became for Adam a salutary lesson. For if God had not foreseen that impunity would make men more guilty, he would not have driven Adam out of earthly paradise. (108) But it was to prevent the progress of vice in them and to close the way to a mischief that could not stop, that he chastised Adam in a thought of mercy; and this is what he does every day with regard to sinners.

He therefore commanded, out of benevolence and goodness, that man was driven out of the earthly paradise. And the Lord God, says the Scripture, put Adam out of the garden of delight, to plow the land from which he had been drawn. Notice here the accuracy of the sacred writer. He tells us that the Lord God put Adam out of the garden of delights, to plow the land from which he had been drawn. The divine judgment then receives its execution, and the man, driven from the garden of delights, was forced to work the land. Nor is it without reason that Scripture adds: from whence he had been fired. For this work was to be for him a continual lesson of humility, reminding him that his body had been formed of the mud of the earth. So it is expressly said: That he should work the land from which he was drawn. It is still like the consequence of this other word of the Lord: You will eat your bread by the sweat of your brow, that Adam then received the order to work the land from which he had been drawn.

Scripture then tells us how far from the earthly paradise God establishes it, since it adds that the Lord God drove out Adam, and made him live in front of the garden of delights. But here, as in all his covers, God shows himself to be full of mercy, even when he chastises us. So it is out of kindness and mercy that he casts Adam out of earthly paradise; and if he then establishes it in the presence of this same residence, it is so that each day he may conceive a new regret for his former state, and a new grief for his present misfortunes. No doubt this view was very sad and bitter to him, and yet he found there a useful lesson; for it made him wiser and more vigilant, and prevented him from sinning. It is indeed all too common for man to abuse the goods he enjoys, and to correct himself only when he has lost them. For experience reveals to him his fault, and his misfortune makes him appreciate the happiness from which he has fallen and feel the evils that surround him. It was therefore on God's part a sign of providence and goodness to establish Adam in the face of earthly paradise, since the sight of this place was to sustain salutary remorse in him. Finally, to prevent him from becoming too attached to life, he would try to return to the garden of delights and eat the fruit of the tree of life, the Lord, according to the story of the Scripture, narrative proportioned to our weakness, the Lord placed a cherub with a flaming sword that was still moving, to keep the path of the tree of life.

The negligence of our first parents in observing the divine commandment caused the Lord to guard the entrance to paradise so carefully. And it is fair to observe that if his goodness and mercy had already appeared when he banished Adam, they did not burst any less when he placed a cherub with a flaming sword that kept moving to keep the entrance of the garden of delights. It is not without reason also that it is said of this sword that he was constantly agitating. For we understand by this that all the roads that could lead to this garden were closed, and that this blazing sword defended all approaches. But what memories he remembered, and what terror he inspired to Adam! [Homilies on Genesis]

TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE. (Gen. 3:20) Now, certainly nothing else is raised than that which is sown; and nothing else is sown than that which decays in the ground; and it is nothing else than the flesh which is decayed in the ground. For this was the substance which God's decree demolished, "Earth you are, and to earth shall you return;" Genesis 3:19 because it was taken out of the earth. And it was from this circumstance that the apostle borrowed his phrase of the flesh being "sown," since it returns to the ground, and the ground is the grand depository for seeds which are meant to be deposited in it, and again sought out of it. And therefore he confirms the passage afresh, by putting on it the impress (of his own inspired authority), saying, "For so it is written;" 1 Corinthians 15:45 that you may not suppose that the "being sown" means anything else than "you shall return to the ground, out of which you were taken;" nor that the phrase "for so it is written" refers to any other thing that the flesh.[On the Resurrection of the Flesh 52]

(Gen. 3:20) What I possess is flesh, not earth, even although of the flesh it is said: "Dust you are, and unto dust shall you return." In these words there is the mention of the origin, not a recalling of the substance. The privilege has been granted to the flesh to be nobler than its origin, and to have happiness aggrandized by the change wrought in it. [On the Resurrection of the Flesh 6]

(Gen. 3:22) "Behold the man is become as one of us," Genesis 3:22 He is either deceiving or amusing us in speaking plurally, if He is One only and singular. Or was it to the angels that He spoke, as the Jews interpret the passage, because these also acknowledge not the Son? Or was it because He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, that He spoke to Himself in plural terms, making Himself plural on that very account? Nay, it was because He had already His Son close at His side, as a second Person, His own Word, and a third Person also, the Spirit in the Word, that He purposely adopted the plural phrase, "Let us make;" and, "in our image;" and, "become as one of us." For with whom did He make man? and to whom did He make him like? (The answer must be), the Son on the one hand, who was one day to put on human nature; and the Spirit on the other, who was to sanctify man. With these did He then speak, in the Unity of the Trinity, as with His ministers and witnesses. [Against Praxeas 12]

(Gen. 3:22) Now, although Adam was by reason of his condition under law subject to death, yet was hope preserved to him by the Lord's saying, "Behold, Adam is become as one of us;" that is, in consequence of the future taking of the man into the divine nature. Then what follows? "And now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, (and eat), and live for ever." Inserting thus the particle of present time, "And now," He shows that He had made for a time, and at present, a prolongation of man's life. Therefore He did not actually curse Adam and Eve, for they were candidates for restoration, and they had been relieved by confession. [Against Marcion 2.25]