Question Six of Chapter Ten
Why the soul does not rule the body invincibly
It is doubted why, in the microcosm—that is, the small world which is called the human being—the soul, which is its more powerful and nobler part, does not govern and rule the body invincibly and irresistibly, just as in the macrocosm—that is, in the greater and wider world, which the philosophers called the great animal—the higher, more powerful, and subtler bodies govern these lower and weaker bodies irresistibly by a certain natural order.
To this the theologians, Aristotle, and the astronomers answer in different ways.
For the theologians say that this disobedience of the body toward the soul arose from sin.
For they say that in the state of innocence the body was subject to the soul irresistibly, which would also have happened in all of us if Adam had not sinned. But after sin and in fallen nature, the natural and animal powers resist the soul, because we all sinned in Adam and through him lost the gratuitous gift of original justice.
On account of this Ambrose says—and it is placed in the Gloss upon Romans, chapter 7—“It was properly done that the inferior part of one who did not obey his superior should not obey him. It was most justly done that, because reason withdrew itself from God, the lower powers should rebel and withdraw themselves from reason.”
On account of this Paul chastised his body and reduced it to servitude.
Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the first human being are nevertheless excepted from this disobedience.
For Christ was such in act and habit that none of his powers ever in any way wandered or declined from their lawful acts and dispositions, nor did he contract original sin producing any tinder which would cause nature to wander.
But although the Blessed Virgin Mary did not attain that primordial degree of purity of nature, nevertheless in her the tinder was so repressed by the fullness of grace that in her the lower powers obeyed the higher, and the higher powers obeyed God, more perfectly and firmly than they did in the first human beings before the fall.
The reason is that in the Virgin herself obedience of this kind occurred by the power of the grace of perfection—that is, sanctifying grace. But in the first parents obedience occurred by the power of original justice, which is held to have been only a certain grace freely given. Therefore.
There was therefore in those two mortals of different sexes a reduction of the powers of each to the rule of justice without error and deviation, so that they might be complete examples to the other mortals, to be looked upon continually for the correction and rectification of their fallen powers.
The Philosopher, however, says in Book I of the Politics that the soul does not fail to rule the body irresistibly merely because we sinned in Adam, but because the soul naturally rules the body by a twofold lordship or governance—namely, political and despotic.
For, on account of the proximity of this part to reason, it rules the sensual appetitive part—that is, the concupiscible and irascible powers—by a political or royal lordship. But it rules the sensitive and exterior part and its organs by a despotic and servile lordship.
That governance by which someone rules slaves who have no power in themselves to resist the command of the one giving orders is called despotic governance.
For slaves possess no right of their own, as is contained in the Authenticum, “The Oath Which Is Furnished by Those Who Are Admitted to an Administration,” collation 2, and in 22, question 5, chapter On the Form.
But that governance by which someone rules free persons who, although they are subjected to the rule of the one presiding, nevertheless possess something of their own by which they can resist the command of the one giving orders—for kings reign according to laws and statutes—is called political and royal governance.
Therefore, according to the Philosopher, the soul rules the exterior senses and their organs by a despotic lordship. For the exterior senses and the organs of the senses cannot resist the command of the soul in any respect, but are moved immediately at the command of the will.
But it rules sensuality itself—that is, the concupiscible and irascible powers—politically. Therefore, sensuality itself resists the command of reason, as Romans, chapter 7, said: “I see another law in my members fighting against the law of my mind.”
These things are Thomas’s in the disputed questions On Truth, question 25, and in the First Part, question 81, article 3.
The astrologers, however, answer this in another manner, saying that the reason why the soul does not rule the body by a despotic lordship is that in the present life the body is, as it were, in its own house, while the soul is in another’s house. Therefore, “the flesh lusts against the spirit,” in Galatians, chapter 5.
But in heaven after the resurrection, where the spirit will be as though in its own house, the flesh itself will be totally subjected to that spirit as to something more powerful.
And therefore the body is now called animal, but then it will be called spiritual, as is said in First Corinthians, chapter 15.
The astronomers give an example of the body’s dominion over the soul in this world, and conversely of the soul’s dominion in heaven, from the planets of heaven. For they say that every planet of heaven is stronger in its own house than in another’s. The houses of the planets are the signs of heaven.
For Albumasar says that the proper houses of Saturn are Capricorn and Aquarius; the houses of Jupiter, Pisces and Sagittarius; the houses of Mars, Aries and Scorpio; the houses of Venus, Libra and Taurus; the houses of Mercury, Virgo and Gemini; the house of the Sun, Leo; and the house of the Moon, Cancer.
And it is evident that the Sun in Leo, which is its proper house, is stronger than it is in another sign.
The case of the soul and the body is similar.
And let these things which have been said concerning the First Decade suffice.