Are Adam and Eve *Both* Dogma?

I know that the dogma of original sin requires us to believe in a first human being, “Adam”.

But is there some dogma that requires us to believe that the first’s man’s wife was also the first woman who commited original sin with him? (Eve)?

I think there isn’t any such dogma. Also the notion that the first human male and first human female existed at the same time is scientifically problematic. Science can trace our last common ancestor back to either one male or one female, but these last common ancestors did not live at the same time.

So, would I violate a Catholic Dogma by seeing Adam as representing the first human being, and Eve being just a mythological character?

Catholic dogma is that Adam and Eve were our first parents and real.

Thank you! Would you do me a favor and give the source? Is there a list of dogmas somewhere?

I found a list here but the only thing that came up when I searched on the word Eve was

  1. **Eve **if it be unworthily received, valid Baptism imprints on the soul of the recipient an indelible spiritual mark, the Baptismal Character, and for this reason, the Sacrament cannot be repeated. (De fide.)

Dogmas

[LIST=1]
*] The first man was created by God. (De fide.)
*] The whole human race stems from one single human pair. (Sent. certa.)
[/LIST]
[LIST=1]
*] Our first parents, before the Fall, were endowed with sanctifying grace. (De fide.)
*] The donum rectitudinis or integritatis in the narrower sense, i.e., the freedom from irregular desire. (Sent. fidei proxima.)
*] The donum immortalitatis, i.e., bodily immortality. (De fide.)
*] The donum impassibilitatis, i.e., the freedom from suffering. (Sent. communis.)
*] The donum scientiae, i.e., a knowledge of natural and supernatural truths infused by God. (Sent. communis.)
*] Adam received sanctifying grace not merely for himself, but for all his posterity. (Sent. certa.)
*] Our first parents in paradise sinned grievously through transgression of the Divine probationary commandment. (De fide.)
*] Through the sin our first parents lost sanctifying grace and provoked the anger and the indignation of God. (De fide.)
*] Our first parents became subject to death and to the dominion of the Devil. (De fide.) D788.
[/LIST]

Thanks, does Sent. Certa. mean that this hasn’t been formally defined, like the De Fide dogmas?

Maybe they will just mention Adam when they formally define it.

Sent certa means it is certain.

Has any sent. certa. thingy ever been changed?

Nope - never.

I just found this thingy:

[Finally, there are four types of THEOLOGICAL OPINIONS:

  1. SENTENTIA FIDEI PROXIMA (proximate to the Faith) like the Trinity can be known only through Revelation.
  1. SENTENTIA CERTA (theologically certain) like Monogenism, i.e., that the human race came from one set of parents.
  1. SENTENTIA COMMUNIA (common teaching) like the Church’s prohibition & proscription of artificial contraception.
  1. SENTENTIA PROBABILIS (probable teaching) like the premise that the Virgin Mary died before being Assumed into Heaven.](“http://www.ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/TRIGINFL.HTM”)

Here’s what Piux XII actually said:

Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.

So Piux XII just said Adam, not Eve. I suspect the Adam part is for certain but not anything about Eve. Sorry.

From the Catechism:\ 390 The account of the fall in *Genesis *3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man.264 Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.265
264 Cf. GS 13 § 1.
265 Cf. Council of Trent: DS 1513; Pius XII: DS 3897; Paul VI: AAS 58 (1966), 654.

399 Scripture portrays the tragic consequences of this first disobedience. Adam and Eve immediately lose the grace of original holiness.280 They become afraid of the God of whom they have conceived a distorted image - that of a God jealous of his prerogatives.281
400 The harmony in which they had found themselves, thanks to original justice, is now destroyed: the control of the soul’s spiritual faculties over the body is shattered; the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions, their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination.282 Harmony with creation is broken: visible creation has become alien and hostile to man.283 Because of man, creation is now subject “to its bondage to decay”.284 Finally, the consequence explicitly foretold for this disobedience will come true: man will “return to the ground”,285 for out of it he was taken. Death makes its entrance into human history.286
401 After that first sin, the world is virtually inundated by sin There is Cain’s murder of his brother Abel and the universal corruption which follows in the wake of sin. Likewise, sin frequently manifests itself in the history of Israel, especially as infidelity to the God of the Covenant and as transgression of the Law of Moses. And even after Christ’s atonement, sin raises its head in countless ways among Christians.287 Scripture and the Church’s Tradition continually recall the presence and universality of sin in man’s history:

What Revelation makes known to us is confirmed by our own experience. For when man looks into his own heart he finds that he is drawn towards what is wrong and sunk in many evils which cannot come from his good creator. Often refusing to acknowledge God as his source, man has also upset the relationship which should link him to his last end, and at the same time he has broken the right order that should reign within himself as well as between himself and other men and all creatures.288280 Cf. Rom 3:23.
281 Cf. Gen 3:5-10.
282 Cf. Gen 3:7-16.
283 Cf. Gen 3:17,19.
284 Rom 8:21.
285 Gen 3:19; cf. 2:17.
286 Cf. Rom 5:12.
287 Cf. Gen 4:3-15; 6:5,12; Rom 1:18-32; 1 Cor 1-6; Rev 2-3.
288 GS 13 § 1.

Neither are dogma, nor is monogenism. The latest document on the topic that I am aware of says:

Every individual human being as well as the whole human community are created in the image of God. In its original unity – of which Adam is the symbol – the human race is made in the image of the divine Trinity.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040723_communion-stewardship_en.html

Can you share with me document and the date it was overturned?

Read Humani Generis by Pope Pius XII.

papalencyclicals.net/Pius12/P12HUMAN.HTM

Extract from the above:

  1. When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which through generation is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.

Thank you, I see it only mentions Adam!

CCC 375 The Church, interpreting the symbolism of biblical language in an authentic way, in the light of the New Testament and Tradition, teaches that our first parents, Adam and Eve, were constituted in an original “state of holiness and justice”. This grace of original holiness was “to share in. . .divine life”.

CCC 489 Throughout the Old Covenant the mission of many holy women prepared for that of Mary. At the very beginning there was Eve; despite her disobedience, she receives the promise of a posterity that will be victorious over the evil one, as well as the promise that she will be the mother of all the living. By virtue of this promise, Sarah conceives a son in spite of her old age. Against all human expectation God chooses those who were considered powerless and weak to show forth his faithfulness to his promises: Hannah, the mother of Samuel; Deborah; Ruth; Judith and Esther; and many other women. Mary “stands out among the poor and humble of the Lord, who confidently hope for and receive salvation from him. After a long period of waiting the times are fulfilled in her, the exalted Daughter of Sion, and the new plan of salvation is established.”

CCC 417 **Adam and Eve **transmitted to their descendants human nature wounded by their own first sin and hence deprived of original holiness and justice; this deprivation is called “original sin”.

If by “it” you mean monogenism, I don’t think one can say it was ‘overturned.’ It was never dogma. Pius XII said “it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin… .” HG 37. But he did not forbid others from exploring the possibility that polygenism may be compatible with Church teaching on original sin. To the contrary, Pius XII said that the meaning of the creation accounts in Genesis “must be further studied and determined by exegetes.” HG 38. He also called for continuing “careful research.” HG 43.

In the years since Humani Generis, theologians, including the current Pope, have advanced ideas on renconciling original sin with polygenesis. That is not to say that the Church has adopted polygenesis, or denied monogenesis. The teaching of HG, and of the Church generally, is that whatever theory of creation is put forth, it must be reconiled with the Church’s teaching. That is what theologians are doing.

I’m rather puzzled by the whole OP question. If you have no problem accepting the concept of a specific man named Adam, why so much trouble with a specific woman named Eve? :confused:

Hi theistgal,

It’s because science can trace humanity back to a single male, or a single female, but not to a single couple. (Apparently humans were not monogamous back then). I’m asking this question to try to reconcile science with dogma in my mind.

(And i dont think that first man was named Adam, I think Adam is the hebrew word for “man” and Adam is symbolic of the first man, or perhaps even a first group of men)

Hi,
Can you name me somethign written about this by the current pope, so I can go find it and read it? I would appreicate it.
Neil

From “Communion and Stewardship,” a 2004 Curia document produced under Ratzinger’s watch by the International Theological Commission:

(Paragraph 70)
Catholic theology affirms that that the emergence of the first members of the human species (whether as individuals or in populations) represents an event that is not susceptible of a purely natural explanation and which can appropriately be attributed to divine intervention. Acting indirectly through causal chains operating from the beginning of cosmic history, God prepared the way for what Pope John Paul II has called “an ontological leap…the moment of transition to the spiritual.” While science can study these causal chains, it falls to theology to locate this account of the special creation of the human soul within the overarching plan of the triune God to share the communion of trinitarian life with human persons who are created out of nothing in the image and likeness of God, and who, in his name and according to his plan, exercise a creative stewardship and sovereignty over the physical universe. [italics mine]

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.