Wow! I come onto this page and there is mud flying everywhere!
I guess I’m personally against a mechanistic sort of approach to the theological enterprise. Like “There was a certain quantum of disobedience in Eve but it was insufficient to put the real bad mojo on things; it took Adam to push it over the top (or under the bottom) on account of his being of the guy persuasion.”
Oh Jeez! Who wants to go there, and if he does go there, what does he expect to come back with?
We have the story. Whatever HAD to be, what we are told is that the serpent approached Eve. Eve ate and persuaded Adam to eat.
It’s like the tempter approaches my wife and persuades her to move a chair. Then she comes to me and persuades ME to move a couch. And in the end, the room is different.
How much the sequence of events is due to femaleness, maleness, or interior-decorating-ness is hard to nail down. It’s enough for me that both were involved, and now when I go to sit down the chair isn’t where it was.
BUT since Eve was the first human in the process it’s kind of neat that the obedience of Mary can be, at least artistically and devotionally opposed too her disobedience.
It’s fruitless to talk about what would have happened if Eve didn’t do this or Mary didn’t say that. What we have before us is that Eve did, and that Mary, did and what happened after that.
And besides it would interfere with the stupid argument that because the Shah of Iran was called the King of Kings, anyone who calls Jesus that is secretly an Iranian monarchist. Or since the variety of female pagan deities were considered “queen of heaven” the very words are contaminated, and it is impossible even to consider that there might be someone to whom they properly apply. The pagans evidently get first dibs.
Have a nice Labor Day. It is interesting that the Marian devotion of Catholics is more of a peril than the apostasy of a congress-critter.
Eve was deceived. She was the weaker vessel being a woman. It was Adam's responsibility to protect her and he didn't. Therefore the blame is his.
And nowhere does it say that Eve PERSUADED him to eat. She gave to him, as he was with her, and then he ate.
He was with her. He watched the whole conversation with Satan and did NOTHING to stop it. He listened to the conversation, heard her misquote what God told him, and he watched her eat. What on earth kind of husband would watch his wife be tempted by Satan and not stop it and then watch her eat to see if anything happened to her before deciding to eat himself. He let her be the guinea pig. When nothing happened to her, he no doubt thought it would be safe to partake himself.
Nice guy.
I just never knew that sin came through Eve according to the RCC. This is new to me. Thank you for the info. BTW I do not agree FWIW. Have a Nice Labor day remainder as well. :)
INDEED.
Much agree. Well put.