God the Author of Nature and the Supernatural
Part Two: Creation as a Divine Fact
Section Two: Supernatural Anthropology
THESIS VII
Adam was an Individual Man, From Whom the Whole Human Race Derives Its Origin.
by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
The present thesis is a bridge which spans our investigation
of the first human being and the rest of mankind. Its importance, however, is
more than to state a historical fact, that the human race descended from one
man by natural generation. In fact we are not directly concerned with proving
monogenism from palaeontology or other scientific data, but rather to establish
the unitary origins of humanity on dogmatic grounds - and with dogmatic ends
in view.
Derivation of
all existing men from Adam has manifold implications in the social order. If
we are commonly descended from our first parents, we are natural brothers and
sisters in the flesh, with consequences that affect human relations on every
level of society.
In spite of superficial differences, then, we are not
only alike in sharing the same human nature but literally bound together by
ties of blood that natural instinct, elevated by grace, makes the basis of social
justice and charity.
Correspondingly
the sense of solidarity with the human family tends to break down the barriers
of race prejudice and national differences; it spans the obstacles of space
and time by making us not only feel but know that men of all periods in history
and in all places of geography are related to us in the most intimate way conceivable.
This in turn lays the foundation for that supernatural
communion of spirit which finds expression in the Mystical Body, so that here,
if anywhere, "grace builds upon nature," or better, grace sublimates
the common natural bond of the human species by elevating it to communion with
God under the headship of Jesus Christ.
From still another
viewpoint, our common descent from Adam affects and explains our inheritance
of original sin. It is just because we are naturally the offspring of the first
man who sinned, that what he contracted we receive by paternal generation. And
the importance of this thesis rests especially on the need for explaining the
transmission of sin from Adam to the human race.
Conversely,
even as we inherit sin from the father of mankind in the flesh, so we are redeemed
by the passion and death of Christ because He, too, was a descendant of Adam.
The human nature which Christ assumed was not by carnal generation, but through
Mary it was truly human and therefore like to Adam's and to ours in all things,
"sin alone excepted." He could thus redeem what Adam had lost. The
merits of salvation He gained were due to the operations of a human will, no
less than Adam's or ours; and the trials He suffered were endured in the same
kind of nature that Adam had and that we possess - by our derivation from the
first man and our relationship with Christ our Brother.
Terminology
Adam
is understood as that individual whom St. Paul describes in his epistle to the
Romans, and about whom Scripture often speaks elsewhere. We do not derive our
understanding of the term from its etymology, which is disputed, nor base our
knowledge for Adam exclusively on the account in Genesis, which is complex.
Rather the name and concept are taken in the sense understood in Christian tradition
and more than once imbedded in solemn documents of the Church.
Saying
that Adam was an individual man we mean that he was numerically one human
being, namely, one physical person and not a multitude of first parents.
The
whole human race signifies all those who were and are true human beings
and who existed on this earth since Adam. Therefore we prescind from any human
race which might have lived on earth before Adam, and also from possible human
beings who lived or may still live on other planets than earth.
Derivation
of origin is synonymous with descent and
means coming into being through natural generation, whether mediately or immediately
from Adam as the first parent. Although Eve is not mentioned in the statement
of the thesis, the latter might have read with equal validity that the whole
human race derives its origin from Adam and Eve, and many authors so state the
doctrine. Within the body of the thesis, Eve's partnership with Adam will be
duly recognized; but because of the documentation on the subject which stresses
and practically limits reference to Adam, it seemed more dogmatically sound
to mention only Adam in the title.
As
a statement of Monogenism, our thesis is opposed to Polygenism,
whether of the kind which claims that mankind derives from many original ancestors
or the type which says there were more than a single original pair. Historically
both forms of Polygenism speak of Adam as being merely a symbol for an indeterminate
number or kind of man's first progenitors.
Adversaries
In
general, the position adversative to Monogenism is called Polygenism
and may be of two kinds. It may either deny the specific or essential unity
of the human race, and then it is philosophic Polygenism; or deny the
unitary origin of mankind, and
then it is theological Polygenism because of its theological implications.
Both types of Polygenism may in turn be either pre-adamite
or co-adamite, depending on their relative attitude towards Adam as the
first man.
The
pre-adamite Polygenism may again be either absolute or relative. It is absolute
when it says that there were indeed men living before Adam came into the world
but the race had died out, before Adam. It is relative if it claims that
men who lived before Adam were not extinct by the time he came on the scene;
that these people continued to live along with Adam and procreated children
through Adam and his posterity.
Co-adamite
Polygenism simply holds that other human beings were formed simultaneously
with Adam, from both of whom the present human race is derived.
Among
those who taught Preadamism, Isaac de la Peyrere (1594-1676) is perhaps the
outstanding. Writing as a Calvinist (he later became Catholic), Peyrere argued
from the two creation accounts in Genesis. The first narrative, in Genesis
l:26sqq., he said deals with the formation of the father of the Gentiles; whereas
the second account, in Genesis 2:7, treats of the formation of Adam proper.
The latter, according to Peyrere, was father of the Jews, yet in such a way
that all men inherit original sin "through the imputation of Adam's fall."
In
the eighteenth century and later, Deists like Voltaire claimed that Polygenism
is necessary to explain the diversity among peoples of the human family. This
is still a theory in some circles, held by men like Klaatsch, Arldt, Sergi,
Sera and others. They say that the wide variety of differences - morphological,
physiological and intellectual - among existing and extinct human beings, cannot
be adequately explained except on the postulate of an origin from different
original ancestors. Proponents of this theory call it Polyphyletism.
A
more subtle form of Polygenism has arisen since the theory of evolution has
gained ground. No doubt the majority of modern anthropologists favor a monophyletic
origin of the human race, that is, admitting there was one original ancestry,
from which the present family of mankind with its different types of people
directly descended. However to admit monophyletism is not ipso facto
to grant our thesis, which declares not only that all men now living derive
from a common stock but that all men descend from a single human pair, Adam
and his partner Eve.
Scientists
rarely concern themselves with this further, theological Monogenism. And when
they do, not a few explicitly state that there were originally and simultaneously
many people appearing on the earth in different parts of the world. This is
a logical corollary to the evolutionary hypothesis, assuming the natural development
of man from brute animal and the species homo sapiens arising at different
places at the same time or in succession but without genetic relationship.
Dogmatic Value
It
is at least theologically certain or, as others prefer, proxima fidei,
that Adam was a single, physical individual. The evidence may be drawn either
by argumentation from the Council of Trent or by direct citation from Humani
Generis of Pius XII.
In the same way it is theologically certain or
proxima fidei that the whole human race descended from Adam by natural
generation. Again the evidence derives from papal documents, notably Trent,
and from Humani Generis.
Theological Proof
Part One: "Adam was an individual man."
Ecclesiastical Documents
In the Tridentine decree on justification, the Council
explicitly regards Adam as a single, physical individual. He is said to have
been "the first man Adam (who) immediately lost the justice and holiness
in which he was constituted when he disobeyed the command of God in the Garden
of Paradise;" also it is heretical to say that “it was for himself alone
that he lost the holiness and justice which he had received from God" (DB
788-789). Several times Adam is compared with Christ, as individual to individual,
for example, justification is defined as "a passing from the state in which
man is born of the first Adam, to the state of grace and adoption as sons of
God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ our Savior" (DB 796).
However the most direct text in Trent is the statement
that "this sin of Adam…is one by origin (hoc Adae peccatum quod origine
unum est)," where the sin of one person is contraposed to the multitude
of sinners who derive their origin from the first parent (DB 790). More recently Pius XII in Humani Generis directly treated the subject,
declaring that whereas in the matter of evolution Catholics enjoy a certain
freedom regarding the development of man's body from a lower organism, in the
question of Polygenism it is quite different. The following passage has probative
value for both parts of the thesis. Here the full text is quoted with the relevant
words underlined.
"As regards another theory, however, namely so-called
Polygenism, the sons of the Church by no means enjoy the same liberty. No Catholic
can hold that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take
their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of
all, or that Adam was merely a symbol for a number of first parents.
For it is unintelligible how such an opinion can be squared with what the sources
of revealed truth and the documents of the Magisterium of the Church teach on
original sin, which proceeds from sin actually committed by an individual Adam
(vere commisso ab uno Adamo), and which, passed on to all by way of generation,
is in everyone as his own” Weston College, parag. 38. Sacred Scripture
St.
Paul in his epistle to the Romans leaves no doubt that he is speaking of Adam
as an individual man from whom the human race derived its sinful state. "As
through one man," he says, "sin entered into the world and
through sin death…(and) as from the offense of one man the result was
unto the condemnation to all men, so from the justice of the one the result
is unto justification of life to all men" Romans 5:12, 18. Throughout
the chapter he repeats the same theme, comparing Adam as a single person with
Christ as one individual, the one who brought sin and death, and the other grace
and life to the human race. Practically the same idea is found again in I
Corinthians 15:22.
The
context of the creation narratives in Genesis points to Adam as the first man,
since the whole account proposes to deal with the beginnings of the world, including
mankind. No valid argument against Adam being a single, physical person can
be drawn from his name, which is a familiar biblical custom to give symbolic
names to leading personages. Here the name "Adam" should be a reminder
that man is derived from adamah (earth), since he is "the one born
of earth" (Genesis 3:19, Wisdom 7:l). When man dies his body
returns to earth because its constituents are "dust and ashes" (Genesis
18:27, Psalm 103:14, Wisdom 15:10). Patristic evidence is unanimous
in teaching that Adam was numerically one person from whom all of mankind descends
by natural procreation. Theological Reason
Given the facts of revelation, that there is original
sin, propagated by natural generation from one parent of the human race to the
whole of mankind, and that Christ, the second Adam, redeemed us from the sin
we contracted - it is inescapable that Adam must have been a real physical person
and a single individual. If he were merely symbolic, there would be no real
sin he committed and none he could transmit; if he were vaguely plural and not
one man, the Church's insistence on his unitary character and on our descent
from one man, contracting sin from the first progenitor of our nature, would
not stand.
Part Two: "The whole human race derives its origin
from Adam."
Ecclesiastical Documents
The Church's documentation reveals a constant tradition
that all men are descended from Adam, either in the context of original sin
or otherwise. For this reason we may say the whole thesis, including the present
part on the subject of Monogenism, is De Fide ex Jugi Magisterio.
Profession of faith of Pope Pelagius
I (556-561): "I confess that all men until the end of time, born of Adam
and dying with Adam and his wife, who themselves were not born of other parents...will
rise and stand before the judgment seat of Christ, to receive each one according
to his works" DB 228a. Anathemas of Trent:
"If anyone does not profess that the first man Adam
immediately lost the justice and holiness in which he was constituted...let
him be anathema" DB 788.
"If anyone asserts that Adam's sin was injurious
only to Adam… and not for us also; or that after his defilement by the sin
of disobedience, he transmitted to the whole human race only death and punishment
of the body but not sin itself which is the death of the soul: let him be anathema"
DB 789.
"If anyone says that this sin of Adam, which is
one by origin, and which is communicated to all men by propagation not by imitation,
and which is in all men and proper to each…let him be anathema” DB
790.
"If anyone denies that newly born infants are to
be baptized… or says…that they do not contract from Adam any original sin...let
him be anathema…In accordance with apostolic tradition, even infants, who
have not yet been able to commit any personal sins, are baptized for the remission
of sin in a true sense, that they may be cleansed by regeneration of what they
have contracted by generation" DB 791. In the Encyclical Humani Generis,
quoted above, Pius XII expressly declared that "No Catholic can hold that
after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin
through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all." II. Sacred Scripture
As explained before from the Pauline texts on original
sin, unless it were true that Adam was the parent of the human race, it could
not be held (as Paul insists) that all mankind derives its sin from Adam as
the father of the human race. Thus especially in the fifth chapter of Romans.
Of special value is the Apostle's studied comparison between "one
man" through whom "upon all men" came sin and consequent
death and condemnation, and Christ "the one man" by whom the
world was redeemed. Patristic Evidence
The Fathers of the Church are unanimous in teaching as
part of the deposit of faith that the human race derived from Adam as its common
father. In the Pelagian controversy, for example, it was precisely the unitary
origins of mankind on which they based the universality of original sin
and the absolute necessity of baptism for salvation.
Also in their homilies and non-controversial writings,
the Fathers appealed to man's common origin in Adam to urge the faithful to
the practice of charity and justice, and to emphasize the universality of Christ's
redemptive work. Even as Adam was the one father of all people, so Christ the
second Adam is the one Redeemer of the human race. Thus St. Augustine in a famous
passage, commenting on the Gospel according to John. "In the very beginning,"
he wrote, "Adam and Eve were the parents of all nations, not of the Jews
only. And whatever was represented in Adam concerning Christ, undoubtedly concerned
all nations, whose salvation is in Christ" In Joannem, 9: 10.
Kerygmatic Development
The Formation of Eve's Body. In the second
chapter of Genesis (18-25), we have a graphic description of the origin of the
first woman. The Lord judges that it is not well for man to be alone. After
giving him the world of animal creation to dominate, He gives Adam a companion
like to himself. Adam falls into a deep sleep, during which God takes one of
Adam's ribs (sela, rib, side, or part in general) and closes up its place
with flesh. Out of the rib the Lord made the body of Eve. Adam immediately recognized
in the woman "bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh," as one who
belonged to the same human family as he.
Using
this account as basis, the sacred writer (following a popular etymology) reflects
on the identity of nature between man and woman, the mutual coordinaticn of
the two sexes, and the indissolubility of marriage. Elsewhere in Scripture,
as in St. Paul's letter to the Corinthians, woman's origin from man is recognized.
From a theologian's standpoint, how should we appraise this narrative and its
implications - particularly in distinguishing the religious from historical
content and seeing the dogmatic truth beneath each?
Modern Catholic writers commonly hold that the use of
a rib to form the body of Eve need not be taken literally. When Cajetan (1469-1534)
suggested that the passage in Genesis could be taken metaphorically, he was
generally opposed. Yet Suarez (1548-1617), who did not follow Cajetan's interpretation,
felt it was a legitimate opinion. Since 1900 many exegetes followed Cajetan,
although in 1909 the Biblical Commission declared that "the literal historical
sense may not be questioned" as regards, among other things, "the
formation of the first woman from the first man" DB 2123. However
no reference was made to the manner of this formation.
Some
Catholic authors, like Chaine and Hauret, believe there is no need of postulating
any kind of physical dependence of Eve's body on Adam. The latter's priority
with respect to Eve, they say, would not be one of physical origin but due to
the fact that Adam was the "exemplary cause" of Eve. The first woman,
like the first man, was divinely made through the process of evolution from
a lower organism.
The Encyclical Humani Generis, they point out, is silent on the subject.
On
the other hand, theologians generally hold that there was some physical derivation
of Eve's body from Adam, without attempting to explain exactly what this dependence
consisted in. They argue that Humani Generis does not directly treat
the question, but yet cautions about evolution being taken as an established
fact or "as if there were nothing in the sources of revelation which demanded
the greatest reserve and care in this controversy." The origin of Eve from
Adam, in some physical manner, is said to belong to these fontes
of revelation.
Moreover,
as noted before with regard to evolution in general, Humani Generismakes direct reference to Pius XII's Allocution of 1941, in which he not
only states that the first man was not derived from a brute animal by strict
generation but also passes judgment on the formation of the first woman. "Only
from a man could another man descend whom he would call father and progenitor.
And the helpmate who was given by God to the first man also came from him and
was flesh of his flesh, formed into his companion and bearing the name of man,
because she was taken from him" Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 1941, P.
506.
Apart from the preceding, however, we know that the story
of Eve's origin is meant to teach certain profound spiritual truths. It was
intended to stress the identity of nature between man and woman, where both
sexes are immeasurably superior to the brute creation. Ancient history, contemporary
with the time Genesis was written, and pagan attitudes up to modern times are
eloquent testimony of the need for insistence on this fundamental postulate
of human society.
The
author of Genesis also wished to teach that in the divine mind man and woman
are complementary personalities. He created them both in His image, male and
female, and intended by Him as His cooperative instruments in the propagation
of the human race. Eve's derivation from Adam, therefore, no matter how explained,
emphasizes the natural correlation of the two sexes, even while we recognize
that in the Christian dispensation God gives grace to certain people to live
a life of virginity "for the sake of the Kingdom of God."
Finally,
as St. Paul later declared, the narrative of Eve's origin gives color to the
marked difference between men and women. Both share the same nature, yet in
many ways the Creator made women dependent on men. "For man is not from
woman, but woman from man. For man was not created for woman, but woman for
man" I Corinthians 11:8-9. Origin of various Races. Theologically we know
the human family is ultimately derived from one pair and in that sense are
related to one another not only in having the same nature but having the same
ancestors. Yet human beings are vastly different, both individually and collectively.
The latter difference is primarily racial.
According to anthropologists, race formation
depends on three factors especially: the degree of inbreeding or outbreeding
of people, the adaptation of the unstable human organism to the demands of physical
and cultural environments, and social selection. Inbreeding or outbreeding is
largely determined by such things as geographic isolation, the limits of technological
development which permits or deters migration or permits settlement, and by
cultural rules sanctioning or prohibiting intermixture. The human organism shows
itself capable of a wide range of adaptive physical changes to varied climatic
conditions, diets, and requirements of cultural adjustment. Social selection
is practiced usually within the limits of the cultural definitions of desirable
or undesirable matings, including the current concepts of beauty or ugliness.
Combine
the above factors in varying degrees and we have a natural explanation both
for the diversity of racial characteristics and for the relative stability
of racial stocks, as distinct one from the other. From the moral viewpoint we
are helped to recognize how ultimately superficial are even the greatest differences
among the various races, and how deeply unified is the race of mankind by reason
of its common nature and descendence from a common parent. Implications
of Monogenism for the Christian Life. The
conviction that all men are children of the same father, have the same blood,
and are members of the same family is calculated to inspire deep sentiments
of solidarity towards others, in whom we literally see a part of ourselves.
No
doubt Christian charity is not expected to stop here, since even pagans and
unbelievers can see a brother in their fellowman. Yet even the highest love
of neighbor may draw strength and added motivation from the revealed fact of
our unitary origin. Among the Jews the sense of community from ties of blood
was a powerful religious bond, and on occasion gave rise to the highest deeds
of heroism. Christians are asked to extend this affection towards all members
of the human race, guided by the truth that all are alike the children of one
heavenly Father. They can be helped to realize their ideal as they reflect that
men are also children of one father on earth.
Since
we are all members of the same family, the person of Christ in His humanity
takes on a new dimension. He died for all mankind not only because He wished
to redeem all but also because, united with all in sharing their common blood,
He could offer vicarious satisfaction for everyone. A restricted or limited
salvific will in Christ, given the Incarnation of the Word in the family of
Adam, is a contradiction in terms. The Savior could not be indifferent to the
destiny of His brethren in the flesh. Correspondingly the believing Christian
has more reason than ever for the practice of fraternal charity, seeing that
the ones he is bid to love are not only his own brothers but the brothers of
Jesus Christ.
Study Questions
- Briefly describe the etymology of the biblical word Adam.
- What do we mean when we say that Adam was "an individual man"? To what
is this concept opposed?
- How universal is the "whole human race" in the thesis: past, present, future?
- In what sense are all men said to derive their origin from Adam?
- Outline the various kinds of Polygenism, and briefly describe each type.
- What is the logical relationship between the first and second parts of
the thesis, i.e., between proving that Adam was a single individual and that
the whole human race is derived from Adam?
- What are the essential elements in Humani Generisto prove that Adam
was a single, physical individual?
- How do we prove from St. Paul that Adam was one physical person?
- What is there in the Council of Trent to show that the first man was one person
and not a glomerate multitude, or less still only symbolic?
- Quoting Humani Generis, prove that the whole human race was derived from Adam
as from its first parent.
- Prove the same dogma from the definitions of Trent on original sin.
- How do we argue from St. Paul, both to Adam’s individual
personality and to the unitary origin of mankind from Adam?
- What was the basic Patristic argument for the universal descent of men from Adam?
- Explain the dogmatic position on the origin of Eve's body from Adam, giving
the main lines of argumentation.
- What factors contribute to racial formation? Explain.
- How does Monogenism give motivation for the practice
of Christian charity?
Copyright © 1998 Inter Mirifica
|
