A having discarded the arguments, were in need of their own hypothesis, postulating a fifth nature of body for the generation of the heaven and the stars within it. But some other one of those vigorous in the art of persuasion, having risen up against these in turn, refuted and dissolved these things, and introduced his own opinion in place of them. If we should now undertake to speak about these, we would fall into the same futility as they. But let us leave them to overthrow and refute one another, and now, dropping the discourse about substance, let us put faith in Moses, that "God created the heaven and the earth," and let us glorify the Master Craftsman for the things which were wisely and skillfully made, and from the beauty of the things that are seen, let us conceive in our mind Him who surpasses all beauty, and from the magnitude of these sensible and circumscribed bodies, let us understand Him who is infinite and immense, and who exceeds every thought in the multitude of His own power. For even if we are ignorant of the nature of the things that have been made, yet that which falls under our sense in a general way holds such wonder that even the most acute mind appears less than the least of the things in the world, to be able either to express it according to its worth, or to fulfill the praise owed to the Creator; to whom be all glory, honor, B and power, unto the ages of ages. Amen.
HOMILY II. On the fact that "the earth was invisible and unformed."
1. Having lingered in the morning over the explanation of a few words, we have found such a hidden depth of meaning that we might despair altogether of the things that follow. For if the outer courts of the saints are such, and the vestibules of the temple are so venerable and magnificent, that the excellence of their beauty dazzles the eyes of our mind, what must the Holy of Holies be? And who will be found fit C to dare to enter the innermost shrines? Or who will behold the secret things? For even the mere sight of them is inaccessible, and the things that are conceived by the mind can hardly be explained in words at all. Nevertheless, since with a just judge there is a set reward, even for the sole fact of having proposed to oneself the duty that ought to be done—and that is a reward not to be despised—let us not be slothful D toward the investigation. For even if we fall short of the worthiness, yet if we do not fall away from the intention of the Scripture,
Homily II
A With the help of the Spirit, we ourselves shall not be judged altogether reprobate, and with the cooperation of grace, we shall provide some edification to the Church of God. "The earth," he says, "was invisible and unformed." How is it that, whereas both heaven and earth were created with equal honor, the heaven was perfected, while the earth remained incomplete and unworked? B Or generally, what is the "unformed" state of the earth? And for what reason was it invisible? Now, the perfect formation of the earth is its fruitfulness: the sprouting of all kinds of plants, the pushing forth of trees both fruit-bearing and sterile, the bright colors and fragrances of flowers, and all that, a little later, is destined by the command of God to spring up and adorn the earth that gave it birth. Since none of these things existed yet, reason quite rightly called it "unformed." We might say the same things regarding the heaven: that it, too, was not yet fully worked out, nor had it received its own proper adornment, inasmuch as it was not yet illuminated by the sun or moon, nor crowned by the choirs of the stars. For these things had not yet come into being. So you will not be straying from the truth if you say the heaven was also "unformed." He called the earth "invisible" for two reasons: either because man, its witness, did not yet exist, or because, being submerged, it could not be seen on account of the water floating upon its surface. For the waters had not yet been gathered into their own proper places, which God later gathered and called seas. What, then, is "invisible"? On one hand, it is that which by nature cannot be seen by the eyes of flesh, such as our mind. On the other hand, it is that which is C visible by nature but is hidden by the interposition of a body placed over it, like iron lying in the depths of a pool. It is according to this meaning that we now consider the earth to have been termed invisible, as it was hidden by the waters. Moreover, since light had not yet been made, it was nothing wonderful that, being situated in darkness, the earth was also called invisible by Scripture on account of the air above it being unilluminated.
2. But the adulterators of the truth, who do not teach their mind to follow the Scripture, but rather distort the sense of the Scriptures towards their own whim, say that matter is signified by these words. For this, they say, D is in its own nature both invisible and unformed, being without quality.
A and separated from every form and shape, which the Artificer took, fashioned by His own wisdom, brought into order, and so through it gave subsistence to the things that are seen.
If, then, it is unbegotten, it is, in the first place, equal in honor to God and deemed worthy of the same prerogatives. What could be more impious than for that which is without quality, without shape, the ultimate deformity, an unformed disgrace (for I use their very own terms) to be deemed worthy of the same rank as the wise, powerful, and supremely beautiful Artificer and Creator of all? Next, if it is so great B that it can receive the whole knowledge of God, then in some way they set its substance against the unsearchable power of God, if it suffices to contain within itself the whole understanding of God. But if matter is inferior to God’s activity, then their reasoning will be turned toward an even more absurd blasphemy, as they would represent God as inactive and idle in the completion and fulfillment of His own works owing to a lack of matter.
But it is the poverty of human nature that has deceived them. And because each craft among us is confined to some specific material—the blacksmith’s craft, for instance, to iron, and carpentry to wood—and in these things the subject is one thing, the form another, and what is produced from the form is yet another; and since the material is taken from outside, the form is applied by [the] art, and the result is what is composed of both, of the form and of the material—so they think it is also with the divine creation, that the design of the world was brought forth C by the wisdom of the Maker of all, but that the matter was provided from the outside to the Creator, and that the world was created as a composite, having its subject and essence from elsewhere, but having received its design and form from God. And from this it follows for them to deny that the great God was the one who presided over the constitution of existing things; they speak as though He were merely the provider of some contribution, having contributed some small share of His own to the generation of existing things, not being able, because of the lowliness of their own reasonings, to look up to the height D of the truth: that in our world, the crafts are secondary to the materials, having been introduced into life because of the necessity of need. For wool existed beforehand, and the art of weaving came after, fulfilling what was lacking in nature from itself. And wood existed, and carpentry, having taken it up, by shaping the material to the need sought for each time, revealed to us the usefulness of wood—the oar...
A to sailors, the shovel to farmers, and the spear to armed soldiers. But God, before anything of the things now seen had come into being, having turned his mind to it and having set out to bring into existence the things that were not, at once both conceived what kind of world it was necessary for there to be, and together with its form brought forth the matter suitable to it. To the heaven, indeed, he assigned the nature suitable to the heaven; but to the shape of the earth, he submitted the substance proper and owed to it. Fire, and water, and air he also fashioned as he willed, and he brought them into substance as the reason of each of the things coming into being demanded. And the whole world, being composed of unlike parts, he bound together into one fellowship and harmony by a certain unbreakable bond of friendship; so that even the things that are most distant from one another in position seem to be united through sympathy. Let those, therefore, cease from their mythical fabrications, who, in the weakness of their own reasoning, B measure out the power of the mind, which is incomprehensible and altogether inexpressible by human voice.
3. God made the heaven and the earth; not out of a half portion of each, but the whole heaven and the whole earth, the substance itself being joined with the form. For he is not an inventor of shapes, but the creator of the very nature of things that exist. Otherwise, let them answer us, how the active power of God and the passive nature of matter came together with one another: the one providing the subject matter without form, and the other, having the knowledge of shapes without the matter, so that what was lacking to each might be supplied by the other; to the creator, the having where he might display his craft, and to the matter, the laying aside of its formlessness and the privation of form. But enough of these things for now; let us return to the starting point. *The earth was invisible and unorganized.* C Having said, *In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth*, he remained silent about many things—water, air, fire, and the conditions born out of these—all of which, clearly, as things filling out the universe, subsisted together with the whole. But history passed them over, exercising our mind toward alertness, providing from a few starting points that we might infer what was left out. Since, therefore, it is not stated concerning the water that God made it, but it is stated that the earth was invisible, consider for yourself by what veil it was covered that it did not appear. Neither, therefore, was fire able to cover
it. For fire is illuminating and provides clarity to those things to which it is present, rather than casting darkness. Nor yet was air a covering for the earth at that time. For the nature of air is rare and transparent, receiving all the forms of visible things and transmitting them to the eyes of those who behold them. It remains, therefore, for us to understand A that water rested upon the surface of the earth, when this liquid substance had not yet been separated into its own proper place. From this, therefore, the earth was not only invisible, but also unadorned. For the redundancy of moisture even now hinders the birth of fruits. The cause, therefore, is the same why it was both invisible and unadorned. For the apparatus of the earth is that very adornment which is proper and natural to it, such as crops waving in the valleys, meadows green and burgeoning with various flowers, lush glens, and mountain peaks shaded by forests: none of which it yet possessed, although it was laboring with the generation of all things because of the power deposited in it by the Creator, yet awaiting the appropriate times, so that at the divine command it might bring forth its offspring into the open. B
4. "But darkness," he says, "was upon the abyss." Again there are other occasions for myths and beginnings of more impious inventions for those who twist these words to their own opinions. For they do not explain darkness, as is customary, as a certain lightless air, or a place shaded by the interposition of a body, or in any way at all as a place deprived of light, but they explain darkness as an evil power, or rather as evil itself, having its origin from itself, opposed and contrary to the goodness of God. For if God is light, they say, it is evident that the power waging war against Him would be darkness, C according to the consequence of their reasoning. Darkness, they say, does not have its being from another, but is evil self-begotten. Darkness is an enemy of souls, a producer of death, an opposition to virtue: and they are deceived by the words of the prophet, thinking that it is indicated by these things both that it exists and that it was not created by God. From this, indeed, what has not been fashioned of evil and impious dogmas? What grievous wolves D tearing apart the flock of God have not, taking their beginning from this small saying, overrun souls? Are not the Marcionites from here? Are not the Valentinians from here? Is not the abominable heresy of the Manichæans—which if one were to call the rot of the Churches, he will not err from what is proper—from here? What...
Why dost thou wander far from the truth, O man, devising for thyself pretexts for perdition? The statement is simple and easily comprehended by all. The earth was invisible, he says. What is the cause? Because it had an abyss A overlying it. And what is the meaning of abyss? Much water, having its limit downward difficult to attain. But we know many things are often seen through thinner and clearer water. How, then, was no part of the earth made visible through the waters? Because the air poured out over it was still dark and wrapped in shadows. For when a sunbeam penetrates through waters, it often reveals pebbles in the depths; but in the deep of night, no one could in any way see what is beneath the water. So that the statement which follows, that the abyss was overlying it, and this [abyss] was darkened, is the cause of the earth having been invisible. Neither, therefore, is the abyss a multitude of opposing powers, as some have imagined, nor is darkness some primal and evil power arrayed against the good. For two things equal to each other in contrariety will necessarily be destructive to each other's constitution; and theythey will have trouble continually and will cause trouble ceaselessly to each other, joined in war. And if one of the opposing things surpasses the other in power, it becomes a consumer of all that is conquered. So if they say the contrariety of evil to good is balanced, they introduce a ceaseless war and perpetual corruption, with [them] partly winning and partly being overcome; but if the good excels in power, what is the cause of the nature of evil not being utterly destroyed? But if—it is not lawful to say—I wonder how they do not recoil from themselves, having fallen into such impious blasphemies. Furthermore, it is not pious to say that evil has its genesis from God, because nothing of what is contrary is born from its contrary. For neither does life generate death, nor is darkness the principle of light, nor is disease the maker of health; C but in the changes of states there are transitions from opposites to opposites; in generations, however, each of the things that come into being comes forth not from opposites, but from things of the same kind. If, therefore, [they] say, it is neither unbegotten nor made by God, whence does it have its nature? For no one who participates in life will deny that evils exist. What, then, do we say? That evil is not a living and animate substance, but a disposition in the soul, having a contrary relation to virtue, coming to pass in the slothful D because of their falling away from the good.
5. Do not, therefore, look for evil from without, nor
A imagine some primigenial nature of malice; but let everyone recognize himself as the author of the wickedness that is in him. For of the things that occur, some always come to us by nature, such as old age and infirmities; others happen by chance, such as irrational occurrences that befall us from other causes, often resulting in things dismal or even more cheerful; as the discovery of a treasure to one digging a well, or the encounter with a rabid dog to one hastening to the marketplace. Still others depend upon us, such as to master desires or not to curb pleasures; such as to control anger, or to lay hands on one who has provoked; to speak truth, or to lie; to be of a gentle and moderate character, or to be puffed up and boastful. Of these things, therefore, over which thou art master, do not seek the principles B elsewhere; but recognize that evil, properly so called, has taken its beginning from the lapses of the will. For if evil were not voluntary and not in our power, such great fear of the laws would not hang over the unjust, nor would the punishments of the courts be so inexorable, determining for the evildoers a retribution according to their desert. Let this be said by me concerning evil—properly so called. For disease, and poverty, and ignominy, and death, and whatever is burdensome to men, it is not proper to reckon among the number of evils, because we do not even count the things opposed to them among the greatest goods; some of which exist by nature, while others appear to have happened beneficially to many. Therefore, C putting aside for the present every interpretation consisting in tropes and allegories, let us receive the notion of darkness simply and without curiosity, following the intent of Scripture. Reason asks, however, whether darkness was created along with the world, and whether it is older than light, and why that which is worse existed first. We say, therefore, that this darkness did not subsist in substance, but was an affection in the air produced by the privation of light. Of what light, then, was the place in the world suddenly found destitute, so that darkness should be upon the face of the waters? We judge, then, that if anything existed [(31)] before the constitution of this sensible and corruptible world, it evidently was in light. For neither the orders of angels, nor all the heavenly hosts, nor in general whatever is named or unnamed among intellectual natures and ministering spirits, lived in darkness; D [marginal apparatus omitted]
A but they had the state befitting them in light and in every spiritual joy. And no one will gainsay this, certainly not he who awaits the supercelestial light in the promises of good things, concerning which Solomon says: *Light for the righteous for all time* (Prov. XIII, 9); and the Apostle: *Giving thanks to God and the Father, who has made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in the light* (Coloss. I, 12). For if those who are condemned are sent into the *outer darkness* (Matth. XXII, 13), clearly those who have wrought things worthy of acceptance possess their rest in the supercosmic light. Since, therefore, the heaven was made by the command of God, suddenly surrounding those within, it was comprised by its own circumference, having a continuous body capable of separating the things within from the things without; of necessity it rendered the region B left behind in it lightless, by cutting off the radiance from without. For three things must concur for a shadow: light, the body, and the dark space. Thus, the inner-cosmic darkness came into existence alongside the shadow of the heavenly body. Understand what I say by a clear example: imagine, at high noon, you have placed around yourself a tent made of dense and impenetrable material, and enclosed yourself in an improvised darkness. Conceive of that darkness in the same way, not having existed primarily, but having followed upon other things. This darkness, indeed, is said to *be upon the abyss* (Gen. I, 2), because the extremities of the air are wont to be joined to the surfaces of bodies. At that time, water was overspreading all things. Wherefore it is with good reason said that the darkness was upon the abyss. C
6. *And the Spirit of God*, he says, *was moving over the waters.*
A Or if you understand this Spirit to be the diffusion of the air, take the parts of the world as the writer enumerates them to you, that God made heaven, earth, water, and air, and that this was already being poured out and flowing. Or, what is even truer B and approved by our predecessors, let it be called the Spirit of God, the Holy Spirit; because it is observed that Scripture specifically and especially honors him with such an appellation, and that no other is called the Spirit of God save that holy one who completes the divine and blessed Trinity. And if you accept this understanding, you will find a greater benefit from it. How, then, was this C moving over the water? I will tell you not my own account, but the account of a Syrian man, who was as far removed from worldly wisdom as he was close to the knowledge of the truth. He said, therefore, that the language of the Syrians is more expressive and, by reason of its kinship with the Hebrew tongue, approaches in some way closer to the meaning of the Scriptures. The meaning of the statement, therefore, he said, was这样的. He said that the word "moved" is interpreted by them as "warmed" and "gave life to the nature of the waters," after the likeness of a brooding bird, and imparting a certain vital power to the things being fostered. They say that such a meaning is indicated by this word, as of the Spirit moving over; that is, preparing the nature of the water for the animation of life; so that from this, it is sufficiently shown that D the Holy Spirit is not absent from the creative operation.
7. *And God said, Let there be light.* The first nature of God’s light created, dissipated the darkness, dispelled the gloom, brightened the world, and all at once imparted a charming and pleasant appearance to all things. For the heaven, having been covered hitherto by darkness, was made visible, and its beauty was such as eyes even now attest. And the air was illuminated; or rather, it held light mixed within it throughout its whole extent.
A sending forth the swift distributions of its brilliance to its own boundaries. For upwards it reached unto the ether itself and the heaven; while in breadth it illuminated all the regions of the world—northern and southern, eastern and western—in a swift moment of time. For such is its nature, thin and transparent, that light traveling through it needs no extension of time. Just as it transmits our vision instantly to the objects seen, so too does it receive the impacts of light instantaneously, and indeed with a speed such that no one could conceive of a shorter moment of time, reaching all its own ends. And the ether became more pleasant after the light, and the waters more clear, not only receiving the brightness, but also themselves sending it back by the reflection B of the light, with shimmers of sparkle cast off from the water from every side. The divine voice transformed all things toward that which is most pleasant and most precious. For just as those who pour oil into the depths cause clarity in that place, so the Creator of all things, by speaking, suddenly infused the grace of light into the world. Let there be light. And the command was a work; and a nature came into being, than which it is impossible for human reason to conceive of anything more delightful to enjoy. But when we speak of a voice, word, and command in God, we do not understand a sound sent forth by vocal organs, nor air shaped by a tongue, as the divine Word, but we consider the inclination of the will to be fashioned in the form of a command for the sake of C what is easily grasped by those being taught. And God saw the light, that it was good. What praise could we ourselves find worthy of light, which already possesses the testimony from the Creator that it is good? And for us, the discourse refers the judgment to the eyes, for it has nothing greater to say than that which the sense of sight already testifies in advance. But if that which is in the body of—
A part-to-part symmetry and the appearing beauty of color originates, how—given that light is simple in nature and consists of uniform parts—is the principle of beauty preserved? Is it because the tempering of light is not considered to exist in its own parts, but in a certain cheerfulness and gentleness offered to the view? For thus gold also is beautiful, not from the symmetry of its parts, but from the good quality of color alone, possessing an allure and pleasure to exhilarate the sight. Hesperus, too, is the most beautiful of stars, not because there exists in the parts of which it consists a proportion or symmetry, but because a certain pleasant and sweet splendor from it reaches the eyes. Furthermore, this judgment of God concerning beauty was made not only with a view toward the delight of sight, but also looking forward to its future utility. For the eyes were not yet judges of the beauty that is in light. B And God divided between the light and between the darkness (Gen. 1, 4). That is to say, God rendered the nature of both incapable of any mixture, and set one against the other in opposition. For he distinguished and separated them by a very great interval.
8. And God called the light day, and the darkness he called night (Gen. 1, 5). Now, in the time remaining after the generation of the sun, day is the very air illuminated by the sun while it shines in the hemisphere that is above the earth; night, however, is the darkening of the earth which occurs when the sun hides itself. But at that time, not according to solar motion, but as that primordial light was poured out and again contracted according to the measure defined by God, day came to be, and night succeeded it. C And there was evening, and there was morning, one day. Evening, therefore, is the common boundary of day and night; and morning likewise is the proximity of night to the day. Therefore, in order that he might attribute the prerogative of priority of generation to the day, he mentioned first the end of the day, then that of the night, as if the night followed the day. For that state which was in the world before the generation of light was not night, but darkness; yet that which was distinguished from the day and set in opposition to it, this was named night; which same thing obtained a more recent appellation than the day. There was, therefore, evening, and there was morning. D The day-and-night [period]...
A has been allotted the universal designation by the prevailing element. This custom you may find in all of Scripture: in the measurement of time, days are enumerated, but not nights along with the days. "The days of our years," the Psalmist says. And again Jacob: "The days of the years of my life are few and evil." And again: "All the days of my life." So that the things now delivered in the form of a history are a legislation for what follows. "And there was evening, and there was morning, one day." Why did He not say "the first," but "one"? And yet it would have been more sequential for someone who was going to introduce a second, a third, and a fourth day, to call the one initiating those that follow "the first." But He said "one," either as defining the measure of day and night, and joining together the time of the day-and-night period, as twenty-four hours fill the interval of one day, with it being understood, of course, that the night is included B along with the day, so that even if it happens during the solstices that one of them exceeds the other, yet by the fixed time the intervals of both are altogether circumscribed—as if He were to say: "the measure of twenty-four hours is the interval of one day"—or because the restoration of the heavens from the same sign to the same point again occurs in one day; so that as often as evening and morning by the revolution of the sun lay hold of the world, the circuit is completed not in a longer time, but in the interval of one day. Or, there is a more authoritative account handed down in the mysteries, that God, who established the nature of time, assigned to it as measures and signs the intervals of days, and by measuring it out with a week, He commands the week, by which the movement of time is enumerated, to be always revolving into itself, and again for one day, when it has returned seven times into itself, to make up a week. This is an orbicular shape C which begins from itself and ends in itself. Which indeed is also the property of the age (aion), to turn back into itself and nowhere be terminated. For this reason He called the head of time not "the first day," but "one," in order that, even from the appellation, it might have a kinship with the age. For the day that exhibits a character solitary and unsociable toward another has been properly and appositely named "one." And if Scripture sets many ages before us, saying in many places "age of the age" and "ages of ages," yet even there no "first," nor "second," nor "third age" is enumerated to us. Therefore, [it is] rather for us [as a mark] of differences of states and of various things D