|
Objection 1: It would seem that it was not fitting for man to be
tempted by the devil. For the same final punishment is appointed to
the angels' sin and to man's, according to Mt. 25:41, "Go
you cursed into everlasting fire, which was prepared for the devil and
his angels." Now the angels' first sin did not follow a temptation
from without. Therefore neither should man's first sin have resulted
from an outward temptation.
Objection 2: Further, God, Who foreknows the future, knew that
through the demon's temptation man would fall into sin, and thus He
knew full well that it was not expedient for man to be tempted.
Therefore it would seem unfitting for God to allow him to be tempted.
Objection 3: Further, it seems to savor of punishment that anyone
should have an assailant, just as on the other hand the cessation of an
assault is akin to a reward. Now punishment should not precede fault.
Therefore it was unfitting for man to be tempted before he sinned.
On the contrary, It is written (Ecclus. 34:11): "He that
hath not been tempted, what manner of things doth he know?"
I answer that, God's wisdom "orders all things sweetly" (Wis.
8:1), inasmuch as His providence appoints to each one that which
is befitting it according to its nature. For as Dionysius says
(Div. Nom. iv), "it belongs to providence not to destroy, but
to maintain, nature." Now it is a condition attaching to human
nature that one creature can be helped or impeded by another.
Wherefore it was fitting that God should both allow man in the state
of innocence to be tempted by evil angels, and should cause him to be
helped by good angels. And by a special favor of grace, it was
granted him that no creature outside himself could harm him against his
own will, whereby he was able even to resist the temptation of the
demon.
Reply to Objection 1: Above the human nature there is another that
admits of the possibility of the evil of fault: but there is not above
the angelic nature. Now only one that is already become evil through
sin can tempt by leading another into evil. Hence it was fitting that
by an evil angel man should be tempted to sin, even as according to the
order of nature he is moved forward to perfection by means of a good
angel. An angel could be perfected in good by something above him,
namely by God, but he could not thus be led into sin, because
according to James 1:13, "God is not a tempter of evils."
Reply to Objection 2: Just as God knew that man, through being
tempted, would fall into sin, so too He knew that man was able, by
his free will, to resist the tempter. Now the condition attaching to
man's nature required that he should be left to his own will,
according to Ecclus. 15:14, "God left" man "in the hand of
his own counsel." Hence Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. xi, 4):
"It seems to me that man would have had no prospect of any special
praise, if he were able to lead a good life simply because there was
none to persuade him to lead an evil life; since both by nature he had
the power, and in his power he had the will, not to consent to the
persuader."
Reply to Objection 3: An assault is penal if it be difficult to
resist it: but, in the state of innocence, man was able, without any
difficulty, to resist temptation. Consequently the tempter's assault
was not a punishment to man.
|
|