In the Garden of Eden

[Benedict]

Here I go again on my own, goin' down the only road I've ever known . . .

Enough of that.

Recently, I have been dealing with several people who hold firm the belief that Satan did not tempt Eve. It was just a plain, old, everyday, talking serpent that did it.

So I am compiling some of our arguments and have plenty of Biblical evidence to the contrary. Their argument is "the text does not say the serpent is Satan." Nothing beyond that. The typological significance of Genesis 3, the parallel of Revelation 20, and the strong witness of Wisdom 2:24 are more than enough to show that Satan was involved in tempting Eve.

But what I need is some Church Fathers and some Magisterium.

You see, I think one of these guys is Catholic because during a chat he kept making fun of anti-Catholic claims like Constantine was the first Pope and we worship Mary.

So if there is a Magisterial statement concerning whether Satan tempted Eve, that would come in quite handy. They deny that Satan tempted Eve rather than just denying that Satan was the serpent (I could see an argument for the serpent being his agent, but not a flat-out denial of the devil's involvement).

[Technicoid]

[quote name='Benedict' date='Aug 25 2005, 10:39 AM']So if there is a Magisterial statement concerning whether Satan tempted Eve, that would come in quite handy.  They deny that Satan tempted Eve rather than just denying that Satan was the serpent (I could see an argument for the serpent being his agent, but not a flat-out denial of the devil's involvement).
[/quote]

I don't know about the Church Fathers, but at least one pontifical council on scripture has noted that this is an article of the faith (that Satan, in the form of a serpent, which could very well be symbolic, tempted Eve). I had a debate with LittleLes on this point a few months back.

You might actually want to go back further. The Church really gets this belief from Judaism.

[phatcatholic]

in the [url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/LATERAN4.HTM#1"][b]first constitution[/b][/url] of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) we read:[list]The devil and other demons were created by God naturally good, but they became evil by their own doing. Man, however, sinned at the prompting of the devil.
[/list]in the Summa, First Part, Question 63, [url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/106302.htm"][b]Article 2[/b][/url], we read:[list][b]I answer that[/b], Sin can exist in a subject in two ways: first of all by actual guilt, and secondly by affection. As to guilt, all sins are in the demons; since by leading men to sin they incur the guilt of all sins.
[/list]i'll try to find some more later......

[Benedict]

Thanks Phatcatholic.

I recently acquired the first volume of Jurgens' "The Faith of the Early Fathers" and it is wonderful. There is no end to the beauty of the doctrinal index.

St. Irenaeus, Against All Heresies (5:24),

"As therefore the devil lied at the beginning, so did he also in the end . . . The devil, however, as he is the apostate angel, can only go to this length, as he did at the beginning, [namely] to deceive and lead astray the mind of man into disobeying the commandments of God, and gradually to darken the hearts of those who would endeavour to serve him, to the forgetting of the true God, but to the adoration of himself as God."

Tertullian, The Soul's Testimony (3),

"In expressing vexation, contempt, or abhorrence, thou hast Satan constantly upon thy lips; the very same we hold to be the angel of evil, the source of error, the corrupter of the whole world, [u]by whom in the beginning man was deceived into breaking the commandment of God[/u]. And (the man) being given over to death on account of his sin, the entire human race, tainted in their descent from him, were made a channel for transmitting his condemnation. Thou seest, then, thy destroyer; and though he is fully known only to Christians, or to whatever sect confesses the Lord, yet, even thou hast some acquaintance with him while yet thou abhorrest him!"

Tertullian, Apology (22:4),

"We are instructed, moreover, by our sacred books how from certain angels, who fell of their own free-will, there sprang a more wicked demon-brood, condemned of God along with the authors of their race, and that chief we have referred to. It will for the present be enough, however, that some account is given of their work. Their great business is the ruin of mankind. So, [u]from the very first[/u], spiritual wickedness sought our destruction. They inflict, accordingly, upon our bodies diseases and other grievous calamities, while by violent assaults they hurry the soul into sudden and extraordinary excesses. Their marvellous subtleness and tenuity give them access to both parts of our nature."

St. Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word (47:2),

"And whereas formerly demons used to deceive men’s fancy, occupying springs or rivers, trees or stones, and thus imposed upon the simple by their juggleries; now, after the divine visitation of the Word, their deception has ceased. For by the Sign of the Cross, though a man but use it, he drives out their deceits."

I find it unusual that the further you go in time, the less specific are the Fathers. Usually one finds the opposite. Obviously, the presentation needs to be in reverse, to show the possibility and hintings of temptation through St. Athanasius to the bold and explicit declaration by St. Irenaeus.