Adam & Eve Prior to the Fall

[Anima_Christi]

Did Adam and Eve have sexual relations prior to the Fall? The reason I wonder about this is because I recently had to read Milton’s Paradise Lost for one of my classes and in it Adam and Eve are described as having pure sexual relations prior to the fall when it was corrupted by sin and lust. I found this interesting because I had always assumed that Adam and Eve were virgins before the Fall. What is the teaching of the Catholic Church, or at least the opinion of most Catholic theologians (not modernist ones) concerning Adam and Eve’s life in Paradise prior to the Fall?

 

[Kristina_P]

Anima Christi:

Did Adam and Eve have sexual relations prior to the Fall? The reason I wonder about this is because I recently had to read Milton’s Paradise Lost for one of my classes and in it Adam and Eve are described as having pure sexual relations prior to the fall when it was corrupted by sin and lust. I found this interesting because I had always assumed that Adam and Eve were virgins before the Fall. What is the teaching of the Catholic Church, or at least the opinion of most Catholic theologians (not modernist ones) concerning Adam and Eve’s life in Paradise prior to the Fall?

I wasn’t able to find anything in the catechism concerning whether or not Adam and Eve had relations prior to the Fall. I know that some past theologians have assumed that they didn’t, but this doesn’t seem to fit with the Catholic understanding of the “theology of the body.” Human sexuality is not sinful. Genesis 3:16 makes it pretty clear that, without the fall, Eve still would have had children. It’s kind of silly to assume that this would have happened without sex. Besides, all that talk of leaving your father and mother and cleaving to your wife… sounds like there’s sexual involvement there somewhere.

 

[wisdom_3_5]

Here is what St. Irenaeus say in Against Heresies:

1. In accordance with this design, Mary the Virgin is found obedient, saying, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word.” But Eve was disobedient; for she did not obey when as yet she was a virgin. And even as she, having indeed a husband, Adam, but being nevertheless as yet a virgin (for in Paradise “they were both naked, and were not ashamed,” inasmuch as they, having been created a short time previously, had no understanding of the procreation of children: for it was necessary that they should first come to adult age, and then multiply from that time onward), having become disobedient, was made the cause of death, both to herself and to the entire human race; so also did Mary, having a man betrothed [to her], and being nevertheless a virgin, by yielding obedience, become the cause of salvation, both to herself and the whole human race. And on this account does the law term a woman betrothed to a man, the wife of him who had betrothed her, although she was as yet a virgin; thus indicating the back-reference from Mary to Eve, because what is joined together could not otherwise be put asunder than by inversion of the process by which these bonds of union had arisen; s so that the former ties be cancelled by the latter, that the latter may set the former again at liberty. And it has, in fact, happened that the first compact looses from the second tie, but that the second tie takes the position of the first which has been cancelled. For this reason did the Lord declare that the first should in truth be last, and the last first. And the prophet, too, indicates the same, saying, “instead of fathers, children have been born unto thee.” For the Lord, having been born “the First-begotten of the dead,” and receiving into His bosom the ancient fathers, has regenerated them into the life of God, He having been made Himself the beginning of those that live, as Adam became the beginning of those who die. Wherefore also Luke, commencing the genealogy with the Lord, carried it back to Adam, indicating that it was He who regenerated them into the Gospel of life, and not they Him. And thus also it was that the knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. For what the virgin Eve had bound fast through unbelief, this did the virgin Mary set free through faith.

 

[wisdom_3_5]

And St. John Chrysostom in his “Homilies on Genesis”:

Their intercourse took place after the transgression; until then they had behaved in Paradise like the angels, not burning with desire, not beset by other passions, not subject to the necessities of nature, but, created entirely incorruptible and immortal, there they had no need even for the protective covering of garments. "The two were naked,’ it says, “and were not ashamed.” For when sin and disobedience had not yet entered upon the scene they were clothed with glory from above, which is why they were not ashamed. But after their transgression of the command shame did enter in, and knowledge of their nakedness.

 

[Verbum]

Hi Wisdom,

This is beautiful speculation but speculation all the same. Following that logic, if our first parents had not fallen, then they would have been the only ones to enjoy the earth for ever and ever. (Amen… not!)

Verbum

 

[dkward2]

One of the first commands to human beings was to go forth and multiply. Also, as already mentioned, Gen 3:16 says that G-d will multiply her birth pains. Eve would have known what he was talking about.

Even without the fall, there would have been sex. Who knows? Maybe that is where the woman that Cain married came from. Who knows how long Adam and Eve were in the garden “going forth and multiplying”?

 

[Dandelion_Wine]

I’ll agree - it seems like speculation. And it almost seems like those writers are taking the viewpoint that sex isn’t good.

If as Catholics we believe that sex is procreative and unitive, wouldn’t it make sense for Adam & Eve to have had intercourse - without all of the hang-ups (lust, disordered desires, etc) that we have? It must have been perfect sex. Imagine that!!

Now if one wants to argue that perhaps they weren’t old enough yet, that’s fine. But to say that they didn’t have sex yet because they were naked and not ashamed - that’s pretty weak proof and makes NO SENSE unless you take the flesh as something bad.

 

[Anima_Christi]

dkward2:

One of the first commands to human beings was to go forth and multiply. Also, as already mentioned, Gen 3:16 says that G-d will multiply her birth pains. Eve would have known what he was talking about.

Even without the fall, there would have been sex. Who knows? Maybe that is where the woman that Cain married came from. Who knows how long Adam and Eve were in the garden “going forth and multiplying”?

Wait a second. If that is true, wouldn’t Cain’s children be born without original sin?? Is original sin transmitted by the father, the mother, or both? If one parent has original sin and the other doesn’t, does the child have original sin? (This is just theoretical speculation–I know no one but Jesus and Mary are without original sin).

 

[Kristina_P]

Anima Christi:

Wait a second. If that is true, wouldn’t Cain’s children be born without original sin?? Is original sin transmitted by the father, the mother, or both? If one parent has original sin and the other doesn’t, does the child have original sin? (This is just theoretical speculation–I know no one but Jesus and Mary are without original sin).

Yeah, I find the same problem here. I’m inclined to say that Adam didn’t have children prior to the fall.

Also, I don’t want to start a new discussion or anything (discussions on this can be found in other threads), but the Church’s official permission to believe in evolution sort of changes the way we view this kind of question.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Is sex in marriage good?

Was “be fruitful and multiply” before or after the fall?

answers, Yes and before, thus there is no reason to believe that they did not have marital relations before the fall.

 

[Dorothy]

Daniel Marsh:

Is sex in marriage good?

Was “be fruitful and multiply” before or after the fall?

answers, Yes and before, thus there is no reason to believe that they did not have marital relations before the fall.

Yes, sex in marriage is good and right.

I believe that the opinions of the Church fathers with regard to no sexual union having taken place before the fall are just their opinions, (speculation), and are not the same as the teaching authority of the Church. It seems there would have to be agreement with the Pope and the Bishops before something is declared authentic teaching.

So, I do agree with you with regard to marital relations before the fall. And, in accepting this I also believe that their giving of self to each other was without any taint of selfishness and that is what makes it different from after the fall from grace.