LXXVIII. From the entative inequality of souls, nothing can be deduced, for it is a generally received opinion among philosophers, that all rational souls, in point of physical perfection, are equal. I well know, that some quote St. Austin as entertaining an opposite sentiment, in his 15th book, chap. 13, on the Trinity; but I can’t find, that St. Austin in that chapter, does even so much as touch upon the matter. I know likewise, that the faculty of Paris condemned a proposition, which affirmed the soul of our Lord Christ was not more perfect than the soul of the treacherous Judas. To this the great Scottish master answered, that, as the condemnation was not confirmed by the holy see, we are not bound to observe it. In strictness this is so; but I think it would be right that such a proposition should be blotted out of every book in which it is found, as dissonant, harsh, and offensive to weak people, who in souls, can’t distinguish the physical from the moral; but this does not in any manner affect the truth of the general opinion, which assents to a total physical equality of souls. LXXIX. But if we were to admit of an entative inequality of souls, how would they prove to us, or make us believe, that God chose the best for the men, and left the least-perfect for the women? We ought rather to believe in this matter, that the soul of holy Mary was the best which could be possessed by a pure creature; and, in fact, the famous Saurez affirms, that, physically speaking, it was most perfect; so that the women may be firm in asserting, that the soul is neither masculine nor feminine, because such an assertion is well founded.