Chapter 11. A person, what is a person?

A person, what is a person?

What makes a person a person?

Father, I know a soul needs a body to be a man, and a soul needs a body to be a woman. From this experience I now know I do not need a body to be a person. In this experience, without a body, I was neither male nor female yet, I was a person. A person is a soul. A human is a person with a soul and a body.

Further loving Father, many persons have lost an arm, or a leg, or two arms and two legs, and though they are without these bodily parts, they were still persons, complete persons. Why? Because their spirit and their soul remains.

A person is:

a. a spirit made in the image and likeness of God, with

b. a soul created by God, with

c. a body conceived by the parents, (now a human) and

d. is a spirit with a soul, but with no biological life and no body because of death, (no longer human) and

e. is a spirit with a soul and a glorified body at the resurrection.

A person is neither male nor female.

 A person is a spirit with a soul but without a body, and is, consequently, neither male nor female. Our soul proper has no sexuality. Indeed, spirits and souls without bodies are not even human. In our soul state, we are simply persons.

A man is a spirit and a soul with a male body and a woman is a spirit and a soul with a female body.

When I was hovering above my body, in that state being spirit and soul without a body, I was conscious Brothers that I was neither male nor female. I had no body, there was nothing sexual about me. This aspect of my personhood was a non-issue. Like all the other items I noted, everything was perfectly normal. [1]

I now wonder about arguments used by persons who claim they are either a male living in the body of a female or vice versa. Since our personhood (our spirit and our soul) has no sexual reference point how can this argument be put forward? Moreover, God who is Spirit is neither male nor female. Since we (our spirits) are made in God's image, how can we (spirits made in his image) claim to be a male person or a female person living in a body of the opposite sex, when our spirit and our soul has no sexual reference point? It is the body that determines one’s sex, not the spirit or the soul. Do these claims reflect a gender identity disorder that is psychological in nature?

“Brother Thomas, would you have a thought on this?”

-Yes Brother Raymond, in my reply to Question: 93 Article: 6, (Whether the image and likeness of God is in man as regards the mind only?) in my reply to Objection 2: I said,- “. . . we must understand that when Scripture had said, ‘to the image and likeness of God he created him,’ it added, ‘male and female he created them,’ not to imply that the image and likeness of God came through the distinction of sex, but that the image of God belongs to both sexes, since it is in the mind, wherein there is no sexual distinction of sex, but that the image of God belongs to both sexes, since it is in the mind, wherein there is no sexual distinction.[2] Wherefore the Apostle (Gal. 3:28 after saying, ‘According to the image of Him that created him,’ added, ‘Where there is neither male nor female.’”

"Brother Aurelius, what are your thoughts on this? Does a soul have a masculine or feminine identity?"

-Brother Raymond, Let us now look at the quotation from Genesis, where the woman was created out of the side of the man, and was brought to him, and he said:-

“This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh.”

“Our opponent thinks that Adam ought to have said, 'Soul of my soul, or spirit of my spirit,' if this, too, had been derived from him." But, in fact, they who maintain the opinion of the propagation of souls feel that they possess a more impregnable defense of their position in the fact that in the Scripture narrative which informs us that God took a rib out of the man's side and formed it into a woman, it is not added that he breathed into her face the breath of life; for this reason, as they say, because she had already been ensouled from the man. If, indeed, she had not, they say, the sacred Scripture would certainly not have kept us in ignorance of the circumstance.

With regard to the fact that Adam says, ‘This is now bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh,’ without adding, spirit or soul, from my spirit or soul, they may answer, just as it has been already shown, that the expression, ‘my flesh and bone,’ may be understood as indicating the whole by a part, only that the portion that was taken out of man was not dead, but ensouled; for no good ground for denying that the Almighty was able to do all this is furnished by the circumstance that not a human being could be found capable of cutting off a part of a man's flesh along with the soul. Adam went on, however, to say, ‘She shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man.’ Now, why does he not rather say (and thus confirm the opinion of our opponents ‘Since her flesh was taken out of man?’ As the case stands, indeed, they who hold the opposite view may well contend, from the fact that it is written, not woman's flesh, but the woman herself was taken out of man, that she must be considered in her entire nature endued with soul and spirit. For although the soul is undistinguished by sex, yet when women are mentioned it is not necessary to regard them apart from the soul.

On no other principle would they be thus admonished with respect to self-adornment. ‘Not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; but which (says the apostle) becometh women professing godliness with a good conversation.’ Now, godliness, of course, is an inner principle in the soul or spirit; and yet they are called women, although the ornamentation concerns that internal portion of their nature which has no sex."[3]  (Underline is the author’s.)

Are the souls of a man or a woman the same? Are the souls of every race the same?

The Catholic Church tells us, “The human[4] person, created in the image and likeness of God, is a being at once corporeal and spiritual. The biblical account expresses this reality in symbolic language  (1146, 2332) when it affirms that "then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being." Man, whole and entire, is therefore willed by God.”[5]

It is important to underline here, that each and every human, male or female, whether one was born 160,000,000 years ago[6] or 160,000,000 years hence, are all human persons, since they are bodies with a soul. They are all exactly the same where their spirits and souls are concerned. Consequently, any individual who foolishly tries to define another individual, or tries to typecast another person, simply by their sex, race, religion, ethnic background, the color of their skin, or their height, or the wholeness of their limbs, or their physical beauty, is truly lost in his or her own darkness.

All persons[7] are spirit with a soul, and in this regard we are absolutely positively all the same, all made in the image and likeness of God.[8]



[1] Summa Theologica Question 76 Of the Union of Body and Soul. Fourth article “Whether in Man There Is Another Form Besides the Intellectual Soul?”

[2] Underline is the author’s.

[3] Author Kreeft’s footnote: Cf. note 13. St. Thomas here refuses to compromise man's psychosomatic unity, any more than he would compromise the soul's substantial independence and immortality. He has the Augustinian habit of holding two apparently contradictory (but not really contradictory) teachings together without compromising either, without abandoning or weakening one for the other. There are many other examples: faith and reason, freedom and predestination, creatures' autonomy and total dependence on their Creator.

[4] The word “human” is key. As long as we carry this body around, we are human. But the moment we leave it, we are no longer human but are simply “persons.” In this regard, the faithful departed can no longer be said to be human since they have no bodies. But because they have their souls, they are and always will be “persons.”

[6] Scientists find oldest-known human skulls Updated Wed. Jun. 11 2003 9:50 AM ET Associated Press Scientists have unearthed three 160,000-year-old human skulls in Ethiopia that are the oldest known and best-preserved fossils of modern humans' immediate predecessors

[7] For a good resumé on different religious beliefs on the rational soul, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul

[8] One winter, Florence and I went to a concert. We were early and, since it was very cold out, we waited inside in the lobby. A number of persons began entering the building dressed in leather jackets, slacks, parkas, light sweaters etc. Some were chewing gum, some were smoking, others eating a hamburger or drinking a soft drink. Where did these individuals come from I wondered? Later, I recognized their faces in the orchestra. They were dressed in tuxedos and full gowns, each with their own instruments, dazzling our souls with Handel’s Concerti grossi Opus 6. This made me think a bit of what Heaven must be like. On this earth, each one of us is different, but together in Heaven together our voices will sing in unison, in glorious praise to the Lord our God. Never ought we demean or put down another, for that person, that voice, is essential for God’s choir to be complete.


Return to contents page.

Any questions? Help needed? Contact Deacon Raymond at: deaconraymond@magma.ca

Return to Home Page.