Mind of the Church

The mind of the Church, faithfully rendered into English

Library / Commentaries and Disputations on Genesis, Volume I

Book Four — the creation of the first human beings

And they shall be two in one flesh

LatineEnglish

And they shall be two in one flesh.1

Et erunt duo in carne vna.

NEc Hebraicè nec Chaldaicè est vox illa, Duo, & est in accusatiuo nomen carnis, ad hunc scilicet modú, Erunt in carnem vnam. Septuaginta tamen addiderunt illud Duo: & ita commemoratur à Domino nostro, vt est apud Matt. cap. 19. quapropter bene illud Duo addit Latinus Interpres. Illud porro, In carne vna, dictum est phrasi Hebraica pro eo quod est, erunt duo vna caro, vt patet ex conclusione Domini in praedicto Euangelij loco: nam cùm dixisset, Et erunt duo in carne vna, infert illud, Itaque iam non sunt duo, sed vna caro. Sicut igitur suprà dictum est Adam factum esse in animam viuentem, pro eo quod est Adam factum esse hominem viuentem: ita dictum est hoc loco, Erunt duo in carne vna, vel in carnem vnam, pro eo quod est, Erunt duo vna caro. Quatuor autem de causis coniuges intelligi possunt esse vna caro. Primò quidem propterea quòd inuicem coniunguntur ad agendam vnam vi-[tam...]
Neither in Hebrew nor in Chaldee is that word, “Two,” and the noun “flesh” is in the accusative, in this manner, namely: “They shall be into one flesh.” The Seventy, however, added that “Two”; and so it is recorded by our Lord, as it is in Matthew chapter 19: wherefore the Latin Interpreter rightly adds that “Two.” Furthermore, that “In one flesh” is said by a Hebrew idiom for what is, “they shall be two one flesh,” as appears from the conclusion of the Lord in the aforesaid Gospel place: for when He had said, “And they shall be two in one flesh,” He infers this: “Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh.” As, therefore, it was said above that Adam was made into a living soul, for that which is, Adam was made a living man, so it is said in this place, “They shall be two in one flesh,” or “into one flesh,” for that which is, “They shall be two one flesh.” And for four causes the spouses can be understood to be one flesh. First, indeed, because they are joined to one another to lead one li[fe...] [continues]2
[...ad agendam vnam vi]tam communem, externam, carnalem seu corporalem, cum inter illos sit omnium rerum communitas. Deinde, propter copulam carnalem, propter quam solam dixit Paulus 1. Corinth. 6. Qui adhaeret meretrici, vnum corpus efficitur. Adhaec, propter vnius carnis, id est, prolis generationem: vna enim caro, id est, vna carnalis proles ab vtrisque efficitur, à foemina quidem materialiter, à viro autem efficienter. Denique, propter vnam & communem ac mutuam vtriusque coniugis potestatem corporis. Caro enim mulieris est etiam viri, & caro viri est etiam mulieris. Mulier enim, vt Paulus scribit ad Corinthios prioris epistolae capite septimo, sui corporis potestatem non habet sed vir; similiter autem & vir sui corporis potestatem non habet, sed mulier.
[...to lead one] common, external, carnal or corporal life, since between them there is a community of all things. Next, on account of carnal union — on account of which alone Paul said, 1 Corinthians 6, “He who cleaves to a harlot is made one body.” Besides, on account of the generation of one flesh, that is, of offspring: for one flesh, that is, one carnal offspring, is produced by both — by the woman, indeed, materially, but by the man efficiently. Finally, on account of the one and common and mutual power of each spouse over the body. For the flesh of the woman is also the man's, and the flesh of the man is also the woman's. For the woman, as Paul writes to the Corinthians in the seventh chapter of the former epistle, has not power of her own body, but the man; and likewise the man has not power of his own body, but the woman.3

St. Thomas, on the fifth chapter of the epistle to the Ephesians, lecture 10, treating this very place of Moses, “Wherefore a man shall leave his father and his mother,” etc., writes thus: “By these words a threefold conjunction of man and woman is designated: the first, by the affection of love, because so great is the affection of both between themselves, that they leave their own parents. For although, as to reverence, obedience, and support, each ought to love his father more than his wife, yet, as to domestic society, adhesion, and cohabitation, he ought to love his wife more.” The things which the same Thomas luminously disputes on this very matter, in the second part of the second part, question 26, should be read. Hither also pertains what is written in the fourth chapter of the third book of Esdras, in these words: [A man...] [continues]4

SANCTVS THOMAS, super quintum caput epistolae ad Ephes. lection. 10. tractans hunc ipsum locum Mosis, Quamobré relinquet homo patrem suum & matrem, &c. ita scribit: His verbis triplex coniunctio viri & mulieris designatur: prima per affectum dilectionis, quia tantus est affectus vtriusque inter ipsos, vt parentes suos relinquant. Nam licèt quoad reuerentiam, obedientiá, & subuentionem plus debeat quisque diligere patrem quàm vxorem, attamen quoad domesticam societatem, adhaesionem, & cohabitationé, plus debet diligere vxorem. Legenda sunt quae hac ipsa de re luculenter disputat idem Thomas, in secunda secundae quaestione 26. Huc etiam facit quod scriptum est in quarto capite libri tertij Esdrae, his verbis: [Homo...]

[...A man] leaves his father who nourished him, and his own region, and joins himself to a woman. And with the woman he releases his soul. And he remembers neither father, nor mother, nor region. And a man loves his wife more than his father or mother. And many have been made demented because of their wives, and have become servants because of them, and many have perished and been slaughtered, and have sinned because of women. Thus it is in that place.5

[...Homo] patrem suú relinquit qui enutriit illum, & suam regioné, & ad mulierem se cóiungit. Et cú muliere remittit animam. Et neque patrem meminit, neque matrem, neque regioné. Et diligit homo vxorem suam magis quàm patrem aut matré. Et multi dementes facti sunt propter vxores suas, & serui facti sunt propter illas, & multi perierunt & iugulati sunt, & peccarút propter mulieres. Sic est eo loci.

Peccasse autem multos propter nimium atque immoderatum erga vxores amorem, exemplo suo rex Salomon abundè comprobauit. Altera coniunctio viri & vxoris est in arctissima eorú conuersatione, vnde dicitur, Et adhaerebit vxori sua. In singulari auté numero dicitur, Vxori sua, vt intelligatur pluralitas vxorú per se nó esse bona, nec congruens perfecte rationi matrimonij, vti fuit à Deo primitus institutú. Tertia cóiunctio est per carnalé copulá, quod significatur illis verbis, Et erút duo in carne vna, id est, in carnali opere. In qualibet enim generatione est virtus actiua & passiua: sed in plantis vtraque simul est in eodem subiecto, in perfectis auté viuentibus distinguútur; quapropter eo tépore quo animalia sunt in actu generationis, ita sunt vnum sicut omni tépore sunt plantae. Hactenus ex Beato Thoma.
That many have sinned because of an excessive and immoderate love toward their wives, king Solomon abundantly proved by his own example. The second conjunction of man and wife is in their closest converse, whence it is said, “And he shall cleave to his wife.” It is said in the singular number, “his wife,” that it may be understood that a plurality of wives is not of itself good, nor congruous to the perfect reason of matrimony, as it was first instituted by God. The third conjunction is by carnal union, which is signified by those words, “And they shall be two in one flesh,” that is, in the carnal work. For in every generation there is an active and a passive power; but in plants both are together in the same subject, while in perfect living things they are distinguished; wherefore at the time when animals are in the act of generation, they are one just as plants are at every time. Thus far from Blessed Thomas.6
Obseruandum est, quae hactenus narrata sunt à Mose de generatione Adami & Euae eorumáque coniunctione, ea pulchrè à Patribus & interpretibus per allegoriam ad Christum & Ecclesiam accommodari, cuius allegoriae tractationem videre poterit lector in Catena Lippomani in Genesim, & in Ioannis Feri Commentariis in librum Geneseos super hunc ipsum locum. Eadem quoque per interpretationem tropologicam possunt commodè ad rationem & sensum, spiritum & carnem, vel ad superiorem hominis rationem atque inferiorem applicari. Quae quidem nos, tum breuitati studentes, tum obscuriorum grauiorúmque rerum curae tractationíque insistentes, consultò praetermittimus.
It is to be observed that the things hitherto narrated by Moses concerning the generation of Adam and Eve and their conjunction are beautifully accommodated by the Fathers and interpreters, through allegory, to Christ and the Church — the treatment of which allegory the reader will be able to see in the Catena of Lippomani on Genesis, and in the Commentaries of John Ferus (Wild) on the book of Genesis upon this very place. The same things, too, can fittingly, through tropological interpretation, be applied to reason and sense, spirit and flesh, or to the higher reason of man and the lower. Which things, indeed, we — both studying brevity, and insisting on the care and treatment of more obscure and weighty matters — deliberately pass over.7

Translator’s notes

  1. Sub-lemma (the close of Gen 2:24). ↩
  2. Decorated initial 'N.' The Hebrew/Targum lack 'Two' and put 'flesh' in the accusative ('into one flesh'); the LXX (and Christ, Matt 19:5-6) add 'Two,' so the Vulgate rightly does too. 'In one flesh' = 'they shall be two, one flesh' (cf. the idiom 'made into a living soul'). Introduces the four senses in which spouses are 'one flesh.' ↩
  3. The four senses of 'one flesh': (1) one shared bodily life (all things common); (2) carnal union (1 Cor 6:16, the harlot); (3) one offspring of both (woman material, man efficient cause); (4) mutual power over each other's body (1 Cor 7:4). Marginal gloss: 'Ob quatuor causas coniuges dicuntur una caro.' ↩
  4. Aquinas block-quote (on Eph 5, lect. 10): the words mark a threefold man–woman union; the first is the affection of love (so strong they leave parents) — though parents are owed more reverence/obedience, the wife more domestic society and cohabitation. Cf. Aquinas, ST II-II q.26. Introduces a citation of 3 Esdras 4 (continues on next page). Page breaks at catchword 'Homo.' ↩
  5. Block-quote, 3 Esdras (1 Esdras LXX) 4:20-27 — on the power of woman over man (from Zerubbabel's speech): a man leaves all and cleaves to a woman, loving her above his parents; and many have been ruined through women. ↩
  6. Solomon proved by his own fall how excessive uxoriousness ruins men. Aquinas resumes (second union: 'cleave to his wife' — singular, so polygamy is not of itself good; third union: 'one flesh,' carnal generation — in plants active/passive powers coincide, in animals they unite only in the act). End of the Aquinas material. Marginal gloss: '3. Reg. 11.' (1 Kings 11, Solomon's wives). ↩
  7. The Adam/Eve narrative is allegorized to Christ-and-Church (see Lippomani's Catena; John Ferus' Commentary) and tropologically to reason/sense, spirit/flesh, higher/lower reason — which Pererius deliberately omits for brevity and weightier matters. ↩