Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| “The Earth was Invisible and Unfinished.”
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Homily
II.
“The Earth was Invisible and
Unfinished.”1412
1. In the few words
which have occupied us this morning we have found such a depth of
thought that we despair of penetrating further. If such is the
fore court of the sanctuary, if the portico of the temple is so grand
and magnificent, if the splendour of its beauty thus dazzles the eyes
of the soul, what will be the holy of holies? Who will dare to
try to gain access to the innermost shrine? Who will look into
its secrets? To gaze into it is indeed forbidden us, and language
is powerless to express what the mind conceives. However, since
there are rewards, and most desirable ones, reserved by the just Judge
for the intention alone of doing good, do not let us hesitate to
continue our researches. Although we may not attain to the truth,
if, with the help of the Spirit, we do not fall away from the meaning of
Holy Scripture we shall not deserve to be rejected, and, with the help
of grace, we shall contribute to the edification of the Church of
God.
“The earth,” says Holy Scripture,
“was invisible and unfinished.” The heavens and the
earth were created without distinction. How then is it that the
heavens are perfect whilst the earth is still unformed and
incomplete? In one word, what was the unfinished condition of the
earth? And for what reason was it invisible? The fertility
of the earth is its perfect finishing; growth of all kinds of plants,
the upspringing of tall trees, both productive and sterile,
flowers’ sweet scents and fair colours, and all that which, a
little later, at the voice of God came forth from the earth to beautify
her, their universal Mother. As nothing of all this yet existed,
Scripture is right in calling the earth “without
form.” We could also say of the heavens that they were
still imperfect and had not received their natural adornment, since at
that time they did not shine with the glory of the sun and of the moon
and were not crowned by the choirs of the stars.1413
| 1413
cf. Hom., Il. xviii. 485, ἐν
δὲ τὰ τείρεα
πάντα τά τ᾽
οὐρανὸς
ἐστεφάνωται, and Tennyson’s “When young night divine crowned dying day
with stars.” (Palace of Art.) | These bodies were not yet
created. Thus you will not diverge from the truth in saying
that the heavens also were “without form.” The
earth was invisible for two reasons: it may be because man,
the spectator, did not yet exist, or because being submerged under
the waters which over-flowed the surface, it could not be seen,
since the waters had not yet been gathered together into their own
places, where God afterwards collected them, and gave them the name
of seas. What is invisible? First of all that which our
fleshly eye cannot perceive; our mind, for example; then that which,
visible in its nature, is hidden by some body which conceals it,
like iron in the depths of the earth. It is in this sense,
because it was hidden under the waters, that the earth was still
invisible. However, as light did not yet exist, and as the
earth lay in darkness, because of the obscurity of the air above it,
it should not astonish us that for this reason Scripture calls it
“invisible.”
2. But the corrupters of the truth, who,
incapable of submitting their reason to Holy Scripture, distort at will
the meaning of the Holy Scriptures, pretend that these words mean
matter. For it is matter, they say, which from its nature is
without form and invisible,—being by the conditions of its
existence without quality and without form and figure.1414
| 1414 On prime
matter and its being ἄσωματος and
ἄμορφος vide
Cudworth, Int. Syst. v. ii. § 27, and
Mosheim’s note. “Ingens vero quondam
summorum et inclytorum virorum numerus ab eorum semper stetit
partibus, quibus ex qua dixi ratione, materiam placuit decernere
ἀσώματον
εσσε,
σίε χορπορε
χαρερε
Χιχερο ομνεσ
ποστ
Πλατονεμ
πηιλοσοπηοσ
ηοχ δογμα
περηιβετ
τενυισσε,
Αχαδ. Θυͅστ. ι. 7,
‘σεδ
συβ̓εχταμ
πυταντ
ομνιβυσ σινε
υλλα σπεχιε,
ατθυε
χαρεντεμ
ομνι ιλλα
θυαλιτατε
ματεριαμ
θυανδαμ εξ
θυα ομνια
εξπρεσσα
ατθυε
εφφεχτα
σιντ.’ Σεδ
̓αμ διυ αντε
Πλατονεμ
Πψτηαγορͅορυμ
μυλτι ει
αδδιχτι
φυερυντ, θυοδ
εξTimæi Locri, nobilis hujus
scholæ et perantiqui philosophi, De Anima Mundi libello (Cap.
i. p. 544, Ed. Galei) intelligitur: τὰν ὕλαν
ἄμορφον δὲ
καθ' αὐτὰν
καὶ
ἀχρημάτιστον
δεχόμενον
δὲ πᾶσαν
μορφάν.” | The Artificer submitting it to the
working of His wisdom clothed it with a form, organized it, and thus
gave being to the visible world.
If matter is uncreated, it has a claim to the same
honours as God, since it must be of equal rank with Him. Is this
not the summit of wickedness, that an extreme deformity, without
quality, without form, shape, ugliness without configuration, to use
their own expression, should enjoy the same prerogatives with Him, Who
is wisdom, power and beauty itself, the Creator and the Demiurge of the
universe? This is not all. If matter is so great as to be
capable of being acted on by the whole wisdom of God, it would in a way
raise its hypostasis to an equality with the inaccessible power of God,
since it would be able to measure by itself all the extent of the
divine intelligence. If it is insufficient for the operations of
God, then we fall into a more absurd blasphemy, since we condemn God
for not being able, on account of the want of matter, to finish His own
works. The poverty of human nature has deceived these
reasoners. Each of our crafts is exercised upon some special
matter—the art of the smith upon iron, that of the carpenter on
wood. In all, there is the subject, the form and the work which
results from the form. Matter is taken from without—art
gives the form—and the work is composed at the same time of form
and of matter.1415
| 1415
cf. Arist., Met. vi. 7, πάντα δὲ
τὰ
γιγνόμενα
ὑπό τέ τινος
γίγνεται,
καὶ ἔκ τινος,
καὶ τί…τὸ
δὲ ἐξ οὗ
γίγνεται, ἣν
λέγομεν
ὕλην…τὸ
δὲ ὑφ᾽ οὗ,
τῶν φύσει τι
ὄντων…εἶδος δὲ
λέγω τὸ τί ἦν
εἶναι
ἑκάστον, καὶ
τὴν πρώτην
οὐσίαν. |
Such is the idea that they make for themselves of
the divine work. The form of the world is due to the wisdom of
the supreme Artificer; matter came to the Creator from without; and
thus the world results from a double origin. It has received from
outside its matter and its essence, and from God its form and
figure.1416
| 1416
cf. Cudworth, Int. Syst. iv. 6, and remarks
there on Cic., Acad Quæst. i. 6. Arist.
(Metaph. i. 2) says Θεὸς γὰρ
δοκει τὸ
αἴτιον πασιν
εἰναι καὶ
ἀρχή τις, but does this
refer only to form? | They thus
come to deny that the mighty God has presided at the formation of the
universe, and pretend that He has only brought a crowning contribution
to a common work, that He has only contributed some small portion to
the genesis of beings: they are incapable from the
debasement of their
reasonings of raising their glances to the height of truth. Here
below arts are subsequent to matter—introduced into life by the
indispensable need of them. Wool existed before weaving made it
supply one of nature’s imperfections. Wood existed before
carpentering took possession of it, and transformed it each day to
supply new wants, and made us see all the advantages derived from it,
giving the oar to the sailor, the winnowing fan to the labourer, the
lance to the soldier. But God, before all those things which now
attract our notice existed, after casting about in His mind and
determining to bring into being time which had no being, imagined the
world such as it ought to be, and created matter in harmony with the
form which He wished to give it.1417
He
assigned to the heavens the nature adapted for the heavens, and gave to
the earth an essence in accordance with its form. He formed, as
He wished, fire, air and water, and gave to each the essence which the
object of its existence required. Finally, He welded all the
diverse parts of the universe by links of indissoluble attachment and
established between them so perfect a fellowship and harmony that the
most distant, in spite of their distance, appeared united in one
universal sympathy. Let those men therefore renounce their
fabulous imaginations, who, in spite of the weakness of their argument,
pretend to measure a power as incomprehensible to man’s reason as
it is unutterable by man’s voice.
3. God created the heavens and the earth,
but not only half;—He created all the heavens and all the earth,
creating the essence with the form. For He is not an inventor of
figures, but the Creator even of the essence of beings. Further
let them tell us how the efficient power of God could deal with the
passive nature of matter, the latter furnishing the matter without
form, the former possessing the science of the form without matter,
both being in need of each other; the Creator in order to display His
art, matter in order to cease to be without form and to receive a
form.1418
| 1418 Fialon quotes
Bossuet: “Je ne trouve point que
Dieu, qui a créé toutes choses, ait eu besoin, comme un
ouvrier vulgaire, de trouver une matiére préparée
sur laquelle il travaillât, et de laquelle il dît son
ouvrage. Mais, n’ayant besoin pour agir que de
lui-même et de sa propre puissance il a fait tout son
ouvrage. Il n’est point un simple faiseur de formes et
de figures dans une matière préexistante; il a fait et
la matière et la forme, c’est-à-dire son ouvrage
dans son tout: autrement son ouvrage ne lui doit pas tout, et dans
son fond il est indépendamment de son
ouvrier.…
“O Dieu quelle a été
l’ignorance des sages du monde, qu’on a appelés
philosophes d’avoir cru que vous, parfait architecte et absolu
formateur de tout ce qui est, vous aviez trouvé sous vos mains une
matière qui vous ótait co-éternelle, informe
néamoins, et qui attendait de vous sa perfection! Aveugles,
qui n’entendaient pas que d’être capable de forme,
c’est deja quelque forme; c’est quelque perfection, que
d’être capable de perfection; et si la matière avail
d’elle-même ce commencement de perfection et de forme, elle
en pouvait aussitôt avoir d’ellemême l’entier
accomplissement.
“Aveugles,
conducteurs d’aveugles, qui tombez dans le prêcipice, et y
jetez ceux qui vous suivent (St. Matthieu xv. 14), dites-mois qui a
assujeti à Dieu ce qu’il n’a pas fait, ce qui est de
soi aussi bien que Dieu, ce qui est indépendamment de Dieu
même? Par où a-t-il trouvé prise sur ce qui lui
est étranger et independant et sa puissance; et par quel art ou
quel pouvoir se l’est-il soumis?…Mais qu’est-ce
après tout que cette matière si parfait, qu’elle ait
elle-même ce fond de son être; et si imparfaite,
qu’elle attende sa perfection d’un autre? Dieu aura
fait l’accident et n’aura pas fait la substance?
(Bossuet, Elévations sur les mystères, 3e semaine, 2e
elevat.) | But let
us stop here and return to our subject.
“The earth was invisible and
unfinished.” In saying “In the beginning God
created the heavens and the earth,” the sacred writer passed over
many things in silence, water, air, fire and the results from them,
which, all forming in reality the true complement of the world, were,
without doubt, made at the same time as the universe. By this
silence, history wishes to train the activity or our intelligence,
giving it a weak point for starting, to impel it to the discovery of
the truth. Thus, we are not told of the creation of water; but,
as we are told that the earth was invisible, ask yourself what could
have covered it, and prevented it from being seen? Fire could not
conceal it. Fire brightens all about it, and spreads light rather
than darkness around. No more was it air that enveloped the
earth. Air by nature is of little density and transparent.
It receives all kinds of visible object, and transmits them to the
spectators. Only one supposition remains; that which floated on
the surface of the earth was water—the fluid essence which had
not yet been confined to its own place. Thus the earth was not
only invisible; it was still incomplete. Even today excessive
damp is a hindrance to the productiveness of the earth. The same
cause at the same time prevents it from being seen, and from being
complete, for the proper and natural adornment of the earth is its
completion: corn waving in the valleys—meadows green with
grass and rich with many coloured flowers—fertile glades and
hill-tops shaded by forests. Of all this nothing was yet
produced; the earth was in travail with it in virtue of the power that
she had received from the Creator. But she was waiting for the
appointed time and the divine order to bring forth.
4. “Darkness was upon the face of the
deep.”1419
A new source
for fables and most impious imaginations if one distorts the sense of
these words at the will of one’s fancies. By
“darkness” these wicked men do not understand what is meant
in reality—air not illumined, the shadow produced by the
interposition of a
body, or finally a place for some reason deprived of light. For
them “darkness” is an evil power, or rather the
personification of evil, having his origin in himself in opposition to,
and in perpetual struggle with, the goodness of God. If God is
light, they say, without any doubt the power which struggles against
Him must be darkness, “Darkness” not owing its existence to
a foreign origin, but an evil existing by itself.
“Darkness” is the enemy of souls, the primary cause of
death, the adversary of virtue. The words of the Prophet, they
say in their error, show that it exists and that it does not proceed
from God. From this what perverse and impious dogmas have been
imagined! What grievous wolves,1420
tearing the flock of the Lord, have sprung from these words to cast
themselves upon souls! Is it not from hence that have come forth
Marcions and Valentini,1421
| 1421 Marcion
and Valentinus are roughly lumped together as types of gnostic
dualism. On the distinction between their systems see Dr.
Salmon in D.C.B. iii. 820. Marcion, said to have been
the son of a bishop of Sinope, is the most Christian of the
gnostics, and “tries to fit in his dualism with the Christian
creed and with the scriptures.” But he expressly
“asserted the existence of two Gods.” The
Valentinian ideas and emanations travelled farther
afield. | and the detestable
heresy of the Manicheans,1422
| 1422 On Manicheism,
videBeausobre’s Critical History of
Manicheism, and Walch, Hist. Ketz. i. 770. With its
theory of two principles it spread widely over the empire in the 4th
c., was vigorous in Armenia in the 9th, and is said to have appeared
in France in the 12th. (cf. Bayle, Dict.
s.v.) On the view taken of the heresy in Basil’s
time cf. Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius i. §
35. | which you may
without going far wrong call the putrid humour of the
churches.
O man, why wander thus from the truth, and imagine
for thyself that which will cause thy perdition? The word is
simple and within the comprehension of all. “The earth was
invisible.” Why? Because the “deep” was
spread over its surface. What is “the deep”? A
mass of water of extreme depth. But we know that we can see many
bodies through clear and transparent water. How then was it that
no part of the earth appeared through the water? Because the air
which surrounded it was still without light and in darkness. The
rays of the sun, penetrating the water, often allow us to see the
pebbles which form the bed of the river, but in a dark night it is
impossible for our glance to penetrate under the water. Thus,
these words “the earth was invisible” are explained by
those that follow; “the deep” covered it and itself was in
darkness. Thus, the deep is not a multitude of hostile powers, as
has been imagined;1423
nor
“darkness” an evil sovereign force in enmity with
good. In reality two rival principles of equal power, if engaged
without ceasing in a war of mutual attacks, will end in self
destruction. But if one should gain the mastery it would
completely annihilate the conquered. Thus, to maintain the
balance in the struggle between good and evil is to represent them as
engaged in a war without end and in perpetual destruction, where the
opponents are at the same time conquerors and conquered. If good
is the stronger, what is there to prevent evil being completely
annihilated? But if that be the case, the very utterance of which
is impious, I ask myself how it is that they themselves are not filled
with horror to think that they have imagined such abominable
blasphemies.
It is equally impious to say that evil has its
origin from God;1424
| 1424 With this view
Plutarch charges the Stoics. Αὐτοὶ τῶν
κακῶν ἀρχὴν
ἀγαθὸν ὄντα
τὸν Θεον
ποιοῦσι. (c.
Stoicos, 1976.) But it is his deduction from their
statements—not their own statements. cf.
Mosheim’s note on Cudworth iv. § 13. Origen (c.
Celsum vi.) distinguishes between την
κακίαν καὶ
τὰς ἀπ᾽
αὐτῆς
πράξεις, and
κακόν as punitive
and remedial; if the latter can rightly be called evil in any
sense, God is the author of it. cf.
Amos iii. 6. Vide, also,
Basil’s treatment of this question in his Treatise
ὅτι οὐκ
ἔστιν
αἰτιος τῶν
κακῶν ὁ
θεος. cf.
Schroeck. Kirchengeschichte xiii. 194. | because the
contrary cannot proceed from its contrary. Life does not engender
death; darkness is not the origin of light; sickness is not the maker
of health.1425
| 1425 Fialon points
out the correspondence with Plat. Phæd. § 119,
καί τίς
εἰπε τῶν
παρόντων
ἀκούσας…πρὸς Θεν,
οὐκ ἐν τοῖς
πρόσθεν
ἡμῖν λόγοις
αὐτὸ τὸ
ἐναντίον
τῶν νυνὶ
λεγομένων
ὡμολογεῖτο,
ἐκ τοῦ
ἐλάττονος
τὸ μεῖζον
γίγνεσθαι,
καὶ ἐκ τοῦ
μείζονος τὸ
ἔλαττον, καὶ
ἀτεχνῶς
αὕτη εἶναι ἡ
γένεσις
τοῖς
ἐναντίοις
ἐκ τῶν
ἐναντίων
; νῦν δέ
μοι δοκεῖ
λέγεσθαι ὅτι
τοῦτο οὐκ ἄν
ποτε γένοιτο.
Καὶ ὁ
Σωκράτης
…ἔφη…οὐκ
ἐννοεῖς τὸ
διαφέρον
τοῦ τι νῦν
λεγομένου
καί τοῦ
τότε· τότε·
μὲν γὰρ
ἐλέγετο ἐκ
τοῦ
ἐναντίου
πράγματος
τὸ ἐναντίον
πρᾶγμα
γίγνεσθαι,
νῦν δὲ ὅτι
αὐτὸ τὸ
ἐναντίον
ἑαυτῷ
ἐναντίον
οὐκ ἄν ποτε
γένοιτο,
οὔτε τὸ ἐν
ἡμῖν οὔτε
τὸ ἐν φύσει·
τότε μὲν γὰρ
περὶ τῶν
ἐχόντων τῶν
ἐναντίων
ἐλέγομεν,
ἐπονομάζοντες
αὐτὰ τῇ
ἐκείνων
ἐπωνυμί& 139·,
νῦν δὲ περὶ
ἐκείνων
αὐτῶν ὧν
ἐνόντων,
ἔχει τὴν
ἐπωνυμίαν
τὰ
ὀνομαζόμενα,
αὐτὰ δ᾽
ἐκείνα οὐκ
ἄν ποτέ
φαμεν
ἐθεγῆσαι
γένεσιν
ἀλλήλων
δέξασθαι. | In the
changes of conditions there are transitions from one condition to the
contrary; but in genesis each being proceeds from its like, and not
from its contrary. If then evil is neither uncreate nor created
by God, from whence comes its nature? Certainly that evil exists,
no one living in the world will deny. What shall we say
then? Evil is not a living animated essence; it is the condition
of the soul opposed to virtue, developed in the careless on account of
their falling away from good.1426
| 1426
“Cette phrase est prise textuellement
dans Denys l’Aréopagite, ou du moins dans
l’ouvrage qui lui est attribué. (De Div. Nom. iv.
18. Laur. Lyd. de mensib. ed. Rœth. 186,
28.).” Fialon. In the Treatise
referred to, περὶ
Θείων
᾽Ονομάτων, “evil” is said to be
“nothing real and positive, but a defect, a negation
only. Στέρησις
ἄρα ἐστὶ τὸ
κακὸν, καὶ
ἔλλειψις,
και
ἀσθένεια,
καὶ
ἀσυμμετρία.” D.C.B. i. 846.
cf. “Evil is
null, is nought, is silence implying sound.”
Browning. Abt. Vogler. |
5. Do not then go beyond yourself to seek for
evil, and imagine that there is an original nature of wickedness.
Each of us, let us
acknowledge it, is the first author of his own vice. Among the
ordinary events of life, some come naturally, like old age and
sickness, others by chance like unforeseen occurrences, of which the
origin is beyond ourselves, often sad, sometimes fortunate, as for
instance the discovery of a treasure when digging a well, or the
meeting of a mad dog when going to the market place. Others
depend upon ourselves, such as ruling one’s passions, or not
putting a bridle on one’s pleasures, to be master of our anger,
or to raise the hand against him who irritates us, to tell the truth,
or to lie, to have a sweet and well-regulated disposition, or to be
fierce and swollen and exalted with pride.1427
| 1427
cf. Epictetus, Ench. i. ἐφ᾽
ἡμῖν μὲν
ὑπόληψις,
ὁρμὴ, ὄρεξις,
ἔκκλισις,
καὶ ἑνὶ λόγῳ
ὁσα ἡμέτερα
ἔργα. | Here you are the master of your
actions. Do not look for the guiding cause beyond yourself, but
recognise that evil, rightly so called, has no other origin than our
voluntary falls. If it were involuntary, and did not depend upon
ourselves, the laws would not have so much terror for the guilty, and
the tribunals would not be so without pity when they condemn wretches
according to the measure of their crimes. But enough concerning
evil rightly so called. Sickness, poverty, obscurity, death,
finally all human afflictions, ought not to be ranked as evils; since
we do not count among the greatest boons things which are their
opposites.1428
| 1428 cf. M.
Aurelius II. xi. ὃ
γὰρ
χείρω μὴ
ποιεῖ
ἄνθρωπον,
πῶς δη τοῦτο
βίον
ἀνθρώπου
χείρω
ποιήσειεν;…θάνατος
δέ γε καὶ
ζωὴ δόξα καὶ
ἀδοξία,
πόνος καὶ
ἡδονὴ,
πλοῦτος καὶ
πενία, πάντα
ταῦτα
ἐπίσης
συμβαίνει
ἀνθρώπων
τοῖς τε
ἀγαθοῖς καὶ
τοῖς κακοῖς,
οὔτε καλὰ
ὄντα οὔτε
αἰσχρά·
οὐτ᾽ ἀρ᾽
ἀγαθὰ οὔτε
κακά ἐστι.
Also Greg. Nyss. Orat. Cat. and Aug., De Civ. Dei.
i. 8. Ista vero temporalia bona et mala utrisque voluit
esse communia, ut nec bona cupidius appetantur, quæ mali
quoque habere cernuntur, nec mala turpiter evitentur, quibus et
boni plerumque afficiuntur. | Among these
afflictions, some are the effect of nature, others have obviously been
for many a source of advantage. Let us then be silent for the
moment about these metaphors and allegories, and, simply following
without vain curiosity the words of Holy Scripture, let us take from
darkness the idea which it gives us.
But reason asks, was darkness created with the
world? Is it older than light? Why in spite of its
inferiority has it preceded it? Darkness, we reply, did not exist
in essence; it is a condition produced in the air by the withdrawal of
light. What then is that light which disappeared suddenly from
the world, so that darkness should cover the face of the deep? If
anything had existed before the formation of this sensible and
perishable world, no doubt we conclude it would have been in
light. The orders of angels, the heavenly hosts, all intellectual
natures named or unnamed, all the ministering spirits,1429
did not live in darkness, but enjoyed a
condition fitted for them in light and spiritual joy.1430
| 1430 cf.
Theod. (Quæst. in Gen. vi.) who is ready to
accept the creation of angels before the creation of the
world. Origen, Hom. i. in Gen. Hom. iv. in Is.
taught the existence of angels “before the
æons.” Greg. Naz., Orat.
xxxviii. The lxx. Trans. of Job xxxviii. 7, ᾔνεσάν με
πάντες
ἄγγελοί
μου may have aided in the formation of
the general opinion of the Greek Fathers. The systematization
of the hierarchies is due to the pseudo, Dionysius, and was
transmitted to the west through John Erigena. cf.
Milman, Lat. Christ. ix. 59. |
No one will contradict this; least of all he who
looks for celestial light as one of the rewards promised to virtue, the
light which, as Solomon says, is always a light to the
righteous,1431
the light which
made the Apostle say “Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath
made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in
light.”1432
Finally, if
the condemned are sent into outer darkness1433
evidently those who are made worthy of God’s approval, are at
rest in heavenly light. When then, according to the order of God,
the heaven appeared, enveloping all that its circumference included, a
vast and unbroken body separating outer things from those which it
enclosed, it necessarily kept the space inside in darkness for want of
communication with the outer light. Three things are, indeed,
needed to form a shadow, light, a body, a dark place. The shadow
of heaven forms the darkness of the world. Understand, I pray
you, what I mean, by a simple example; by raising for yourself at
mid-day a tent of some compact and impenetrable material, and shutting
yourself up in it in sudden darkness. Suppose that original
darkness was like this, not subsisting directly by itself, but
resulting from some external causes. If it is said that it rested
upon the deep, it is because the extremity of air naturally touches the
surface of bodies; and as at that time the water covered everything, we
are obliged to say that darkness was upon the face of the
deep.
6. And the Spirit of God was borne upon
the face of the waters.1434
Does this
spirit mean the diffusion of air? The sacred writer wishes to
enumerate to you the elements of the world, to tell you that God
created the heavens, the earth, water, and air and that the last was
now diffused and in motion; or rather, that which is truer and
confirmed by the authority of the ancients, by the Spirit of God, he
means the Holy Spirit. It is, as has been remarked, the special
name, the name above all others that Scripture delights to give to the
Holy Spirit, and always by the spirit of God the Holy Spirit is
meant, the Spirit
which completes the divine and blessed Trinity. You will find it
better therefore to take it in this sense. How then did the
Spirit of God move upon the waters? The explanation that I am
about to give you is not an original one, but that of a
Syrian,1435
| 1435 Tillemont
understands Eusebius of Samosata. The Ben. note prefers Ephrem
Syrus, and compares Jerome, Quæst. Heb. Col.
508. | who was as
ignorant in the wisdom of this world as he was versed in the
knowledge of the Truth. He said, then, that the Syriac word
was more expressive, and that being more analogous to the Hebrew
term it was a nearer approach to the scriptural sense. This is
the meaning of the word; by “was borne” the Syrians, he
says, understand: it cherished1436
| 1436 Gen. i. 2. Vide R.V.
margin. The word rachaph, “brood,” is not
used of wind, and itself appears to fix the meaning of the Spirit
in the place. An old interpretation of the Orphic Poem
Argonautica would identify the brooding Spirit of Genesis
with the All Wise Love of the Greek poet:
πρῶτα μὲν
ἀρχαίου
χάεος
μεγαλήφατον
ὕμνον,
ὡς
ἐπάμειψε
φύσεις, ὥς
τ᾽ οὐρανος
ἐς πέρας
ἦλθεν,
γῆς
τ᾽
εὐρυστέρνου
γένεσιν,
πυθμένας τε
θαλάσσης
,
πρεσβύτατόν
τε καὶ
αὐτοτελῆ πολ
μητιν
῎Ερωτα,
ὅσσα τ᾽
ἔφυσεν
ἅπαντα, τὰ
δ᾽ ἔ?οιθεν
ἄλλου ἄπ᾽
ἄλλο.
Orph., Argon. 423–427.
On the translation of rachaph by
“brooding,” cf. Milton, P. Lost,
vii.:
“darkness profound
Covered the abyss; but on the watery calm
His brooding wings the Spirit of God outspread,
And vital virtue infused, and vital warmth,
Throughout the fluid
mass.” |
the nature of the waters as one sees a bird cover the eggs with her
body and impart to them vital force from her own warmth. Such
is, as nearly as possible, the meaning of these words—the
Spirit was borne: let us understand, that is, prepared the
nature of water to produce living beings:1437
| 1437 ζωογονία.
cf. De Sp. S.§ 56, and Bp. Pearson,
on the Creed, Art. V. | a sufficient proof for those who
ask if the Holy Spirit took an active part in the creation of the
world.
7. And God said, Let there be
light.1438
The first
word of God created the nature of light; it made darkness vanish,
dispelled gloom, illuminated the world, and gave to all beings at the
same time a sweet and gracious aspect. The heavens, until then
enveloped in darkness, appeared with that beauty which they still
present to our eyes. The air was lighted up, or rather made the
light circulate mixed with its substance, and, distributing its
splendour rapidly in every direction, so dispersed itself to its
extreme limits. Up it sprang to the very æther and
heaven. In an instant it lighted up the whole extent of the
world, the North and the South, the East and the West. For the
æther also is such a subtle substance and so transparent that it
needs not the space of a moment for light to pass through it.
Just as it carries our sight instantaneously to the object of
vision,1439
| 1439 Light is said
to travel straight at the rate of about 195,000 English miles a
second; a velocity estimated by observations on the eclipses of
Jupiter’s satellites. The modern undulatory theory of
light, of which Huyghens († 1695) is generally regarded as the
author, describes light as propagated by the vibrations of the
imponderable matter termed Ether or
Æther. | so without the
least interval, with a rapidity that thought cannot conceive, it
receives these rays of light in its uttermost limits. With light
the æther becomes more pleasing and the waters more limpid.
These last, not content with receiving its splendour, return it by the
reflection of light and in all directions send forth quivering
flashes. The divine word gives every object a more cheerful and a
more attractive appearance, just as when men in deep sea pour in oil
they make the place about them clear. So, with a single word and
in one instant, the Creator of all things gave the boon of light to the
world.1440
| 1440 The simile
seems hardly worthy of the topic. The practice is referred to
by Plutarch, Symp. Quæst. i. 9, and by Pliny,
Hist. Nat. ii. 106. “Omne oleo
tranquillari; et ob id urinantes ore spargere, quoniam mitiget
naturam asperam lucemque deportet.”
“gerere” says the Delph. note,
“tum credas oleum vicem
conspiciliorum. |
Let there be light. The order was
itself an operation, and a state of things was brought into being, than
which man’s mind cannot even imagine a pleasanter one for our
enjoyment. It must be well understood that when we speak of the
voice, of the word, of the command of God, this divine language does
not mean to us a sound which escapes from the organs of speech, a
collision of air1441
| 1441 A statement
not unlike the “Vibrations of the elastic medium,” to
which sound might now be referred. “Sed vocem Stoici
corpus esse contendunt: eamque esse dicunt ictum aera:
Plato autem non esse vocem corpus esse putat. Non enim
percussus, inquit, aer, sed plaga ipsa atque percussio, vox
est: οὐκ
ἁπλως πληγὴ
αέρος ἐστὶν
ἡ φωνή·
πλήττει γὰρ
τὸν ἀερα καὶ
δάκτυλος
παραγόμενος,
καὶ οὐδέπω
ποιεῖ
φωνήν· ἀλλ᾽
ἡ πόση πληγὴ,
καὶ σφοδρὰ,
καὶ τόση δὲ
ὥστε
ἀκουστὴν
γενέσθαι.”
Aul. Gell., N.A. v. 15. So Diog. Laert. in
Vita Zenonis; ἔστι
φωνὴ αὴρ
πεπληγμένος. | struck by the
tongue; it is a simple sign of the will of God, and, if we give it the
form of an order, it is only the better to impress the souls whom we
instruct.1442
| 1442 Fialon quotes
Bossuet 4me élév. 3me sem.:
“Le roi dit Qu’on marche; et
l’armée marche; qu’on fasse telle évolution,
et elle se fait; toute une armée se remue au seul commandement
d’un prince, c’est à dire, à un seul petit
mouvment de ces livres, c’est, parmi les choses humaines,
l’image la plus excellente de la puissance de Dieu; mais au
fond que c’est image est dèfectueuse! Dieu
n’a point de lèvres à remuer; Dieu ne frappe point
l’air pour en tirer quelque son; Dieu n’a
qu’à vouloir en lui même; et tout ce qu’il
veut éternellement s’accomplit comme il l’a voulu,
et au temps qu’il a marqué. |
And God saw the light, that it was
good.1443
How can we
worthily praise light after the testimony given by the Creator to its
goodness? The word, even among us, refers the judgment to the
eyes, incapable of raising itself to the idea that the senses have
already received.1444
| 1444 St. Basil
dwells rather on the sense of “beautiful” in the lxx.
καλόν. The Vulgate has
pulchra. | But, if
beauty in bodies results from symmetry of parts, and the
harmonious appearance of
colours, how in a simple and homogeneous essence like light, can this
idea of beauty be preserved? Would not the symmetry in light be
less shown in its parts than in the pleasure and delight at the sight
of it? Such is also the beauty of gold, which it owes not to the
happy mingling of its parts, but only to its beautiful colour which has
a charm attractive to the eyes.
Thus again, the evening star is the most beautiful
of the stars:1445
| 1445 cf. Bion.
xvi. 1:
῞Εσπερε,
κυανέας
ἱερὸν, φίλε,
νυκτὸς
ἄγαλμα,
Τόσσον
ἀφαυρότερος
μήνας ὅσον
ἔξοχος
ἄστρων,
and Milton, P.L. iv. 605:
“Hesperus, that led
The starry host, rode
brightest.” | not that the
parts of which it is composed form a harmonious whole; but thanks to
the unalloyed and beautiful brightness which meets our eyes. And
further, when God proclaimed the goodness of light, it was not in
regard to the charm of the eye but as a provision for future advantage,
because at that time there were as yet no eyes to judge of its
beauty. “And God divided the light from the
darkness;”1446
that is to say, God
gave them natures incapable of mixing, perpetually in opposition to
each other, and put between them the widest space and
distance.
8. “And God called the light Day
and the darkness he called Night.”1447
Since the birth of the sun, the light
that it diffuses in the air, when shining on our hemisphere, is day;
and the shadow produced by its disappearance is night. But at
that time it was not after the movement of the sun, but following this
primitive light spread abroad in the air or withdrawn in a measure
determined by God, that day came and was followed by night.
“And the evening and the morning were the
first day.”1448
Evening is
then the boundary common to day and night; and in the same way morning
constitutes the approach of night to day. It was to give day the
privileges of seniority that Scripture put the end of the first day
before that of the first night, because night follows day: for,
before the creation of light, the world was not in night, but in
darkness. It is the opposite of day which was called night, and
it did not receive its name until after day. Thus were created
the evening and the morning.1449
| 1449
lxx. The Heb.=literally “And evening happened and
morning happened, one day.” On the unique reckoning of
the day from evening to morning, see the late Dr. McCaul in
Replies to Essays and Reviews. |
Scripture means the space of a day and a night, and afterwards no
more says day and night, but calls them both under the name of the
more important: a custom which you will find throughout
Scripture. Everywhere the measure of time is counted by days,
without mention of nights. “The days of our
years,”1450
says the
Psalmist. “Few and evil have the days of the years of my
life been,”1451
said Jacob, and
elsewhere “all the days of my life.”1452
Thus under the form of history the
law is laid down for what is to follow. And the evening and
the morning were one day.1453
Why does
Scripture say “one day the first day”? Before
speaking to us of the second, the third, and the fourth days, would
it not have been more natural to call that one the first which began
the series? If it therefore says “one day,” it is
from a wish to determine the measure of day and night, and to
combine the time that they contain. Now twenty-four hours fill
up the space of one day—we mean of a day and of a night; and
if, at the time of the solstices, they have not both an equal
length, the time marked by Scripture does not the less circumscribe
their duration. It is as though it said: twenty-four
hours measure the space of a day, or that, in reality a day is the
time that the heavens starting from one point take to return
there. Thus, every time that, in the revolution of the sun,
evening and morning occupy the world, their periodical succession
never exceeds the space of one day. But must we believe in a
mysterious reason for this? God who made the nature of time
measured it out and determined it by intervals of days; and, wishing
to give it a week as a measure, he ordered the week to revolve from
period to period upon itself, to count the movement of time, forming
the week of one day revolving seven times upon itself: a
proper circle begins and ends with itself. Such is also the
character of eternity, to revolve upon itself and to end
nowhere. If then the beginning of time is called “one
day” rather than “the first day,” it is because
Scripture wishes to establish its relationship with eternity.
It was, in reality, fit and natural to call “one” the
day whose character is to be one wholly separated and isolated from
all the others. If Scripture speaks to us of many ages, saying
everywhere, “age of age, and ages of ages,” we do not
see it enumerate them as first, second, and third. It follows
that we are hereby shown not so much limits, ends and succession of
ages, as distinctions between various states and modes of
action. “The day of the Lord,” Scripture says,
“is great and very terrible,”1454
and elsewhere “Woe unto you that desire the day of the Lord:
to what end is it for you? The day of the Lord is darkness and
not light.”1455
A day of
darkness for those who are worthy of darkness. No; this day
without evening, without succession and without end is not unknown
to Scripture, and it is the day that the Psalmist calls the eighth
day, because it is outside this time of weeks.1456
| 1456 The
argument here is due to a misapprehension of the meaning of the term
eighth in Psalm vi. and xi. title. cf. n. on
De Sp. S. § 66. | Thus whether you call it day, or
whether you call it eternity, you express the same idea. Give
this state the name of day; there are not several, but only
one. If you call it eternity still it is unique and not
manifold. Thus it is in order that you may carry your thoughts
forward towards a future life, that Scripture marks by the word
“one” the day which is the type of eternity, the first
fruits of days, the contemporary of light, the holy Lord’s day
honoured by the Resurrection of our Lord. And the evening
and the morning were one day.”
But, whilst I am conversing with you about the
first evening of the world, evening takes me by surprise, and puts an
end to my discourse. May the Father of the true light, Who has
adorned day with celestial light, Who has made the fire to shine which
illuminates us during the night, Who reserves for us in the peace of a
future age a spiritual and everlasting light, enlighten your hearts in
the knowledge of truth, keep you from stumbling, and grant that
“you may walk honestly as in the day.”1457
Thus shall you shine as the sun in the
midst of the glory of the saints, and I shall glory in you in the day
of Christ, to Whom belong all glory and power for ever and ever.
Amen.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
