GENESIS 1

1:1 In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth.

ALCUIN OF YORK. WHAT IS MEANT BY "IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED HEAVEN AND EARTH”? — Answer. In the Son (that is, through the Son) God made heaven and earth. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 189. Bed. Hexm. I, PL 91, col. 13.) [Alcuin of York, Questions and Answers on Genesis, PL 100 Question 26]

WHAT IS MEANT BY THE NAMES OF HEAVEN AND EARTH WHEN IT IS SAID, IN THE BEGINNING GOD MADE HEAVEN AND EARTH? — Answer. The shapeless matter that God made out of nothing was first called heaven and earth; not because it was already this, but because it already had the potential to be this. For we read that this starry heaven was made on the second day, and that the earth appeared and began to be clothed in flowers on the third day. Alternatively, by the names of heaven and earth one may understand spiritual and earthly creatures. [Question 27]

OF WHAT NATURE IS HEAVEN SAID TO BE? — Answer. Fiery, round and whirling. (Bed. De Nat. R. cap.V, PL 90, col. 197.) [Question 23]

IF IT IS WHIRLING, WHY DOES IT NOT FALL? — Answer. It would indeed fall owing to excessive speed, as the wise of the world have said, if it were not controlled by the course of the planets. (Bed. De Nat. R. cap.V, pl 90, col. 198. Isid. Etym. I,. Ill, cap. XXXII ex Ambrose Hexm. cap. II, cf. Cicero. Isid. Etym. L. Ill, cap. XXXV. Isid. Etym. L. III. cap. LXIII De Cursu Stellarum.) [Question 24]

HOW MANY ELEMENTS IS THE WORLD MADE OF? — Answer. Four: fire, air, water, and ground. (Bed. De Nat. R. cap. Ill, PL 30, col. 192.) [Question 21]

WHAT IS THE NATURE OF EACH OF THE ELEMENTS? — Answer. Fire is of a hot and dry nature, air of a hot and wet one, water of a wet and cold one, and earth of a cold and dry one. (Bed. De Nat. R. cap. IV, PL 90, col. 195.) [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 22]

AMBROSIASTER. WHY DID GOD CREATE THE WORLD? — God made the world because he is the supreme craftsperson, or if he is challenged by this title, let it be said openly; but his works themselves show it clearly. Will I be asked: before he created them, were all things in nothingness, or what was there before creation? The correct ones answers this question in a few words: "It is in him that we have life, movement and being," (Acts 17:28), that is, all things are in God, because He is everywhere, and since He existed alone from all eternity before all things, in a manner invisible to every creature, and so as not to evade this mystery, or rather to ignore why the world was made. We say that the devil, by his apostasy, has led a great number of angels, that is to say, the spiritual powers in his prevarication, when he wished, in his proud impiety, to usurp the very throne of God. This is what the prophet is saying when he says, "How did you come down from heaven, shining star, son of the dawn?" (Isa. 14:12) that is to say, was more brilliant than all the stars. He was the leader of many legions which he surpassed all in splendor, and at the head of which he engaged this sacrilegious combat. He saw beneath him a multitude of spiritual powers, and as the knowledge of the mysteries of heaven raised him in paradise above all others, he wanted to be called God. Every day he finds imitators in the present life, who are proud to see a multitude of soldiers gathered around them, want to exploit this hearth of conspiracy which is offered to them by their followers, and seek to usurp the sovereign authority. It was then that God, willing to punish his presumption, not by his power, but by reason, created matter which was a confused mass of elements that served to create the world. In establishing the distinction in this confusion, God gave the world that order, that brightness which we admire. The elements having separated from each other, formed by their arrangement what we call the world, because each thing distinctly separated from each other, coincided with its formation. As for the man placed on this earth, he is a compound of two natures, one superior, the other inferior, one celestial, the other terrestrial, and his creation clearly establishes the sovereign authority of a single God who made man not only by his word, but in his image, and created him alone to be the source from which the human race was to emerge. God wanted to create only one man to establish that all things come from one principle, and that there is therefore only one God, so that the higher creature learns for its confusion the truth by example of the man who had been created from the earth. From that moment the devil became the enemy of man. He sensed that the man had been created to accuse him; so he put into action all the subtleties of his nature to drag him into the prevarication in which he had fallen himself, and thus share his condemnation with his accuser. He promised him, therefore, as the fruit of his disobedience, the divinity, who, by attempting to usurp him by his pride, was precipitated into the abyss. Now, as every nature is free by its creation of every evil principle, it takes its name from its accidents. The thing signified precedes the name which must signify it. Thus the composition of the names of Satan and devil come from his works, and are the expression not of his nature, but of his will. Now, that the eternal purposes and decrees of God in the creation of man would have, and that the devil had made the height of the crime that had precipitated man into ruin, Christ deigned to descend from heaven on earth, to deliver man from the penalty of his disobedience and to make known the punishments reserved for the devil, and to turn men away from imitating his conduct. This is why the apostle Saint John says: "The Son of God came into the world to destroy the works of the devil” (1 Jn. 3:8). Now, if he were evil by nature, it would be folly or injustice to predict punishment. Who dreams of condemning the one whom he sees acting only according to his nature? Who is angry at the fire, because it burns, against the water, because it cools, both acting in it only according to their nature and not by an act of their will? If, then, the devil were evil in his nature, he would not have a will here. He would be incapable of discernment and he would behave like a blind man to all things in one and the same way. On the contrary, he acts with a certain discernment; he spares those who do his will, he uses concealment and neophiles, he sows obstacles and impediments under the feet of those who want to resort to the protection of God; he pitches his servants with pitfalls, and he declares himself especially against those who obey more faithfully the divine wills. It is therefore obvious that his will is all in the wrong. This is why the Apostle St. Peter tells us: "Be sober and watch, for the demon your enemy surrounds you like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour." (2 Pet. 5:8) It is not the pagans, it is not the Jews, it is not the people of bad life and manners he attacks, it is the faithful servants of God and Jesus Christ that he knows how to be his enemies, because they condemn his enterprise and his pride. When the law was given, his jealousy became more ardent against those who lived under him, because he knew that the law taught men the existence of one God, and the rules of a pure and holy life. If therefore we believe that the devil acts only by virtue of his nature, we cannot admit that he is guilty, because he acts how he can act according to his nature, and that he does not do what he cannot do, because it is contrary to his nature. He deserves neither praise nor condemnation; his actions are harmful, nor condemnation, because he does not act voluntarily, but by the impulse of his nature. We know that men with sudden madness have wounded their fellows with sticks, swords, stones, or by their bites, and that they have killed even some of them. They have been taken with care by their persons to bring them before the tribunals. They declared them innocent because they had not acted knowingly and voluntarily, but under the impulse of some kind of force, trained. How indeed to establish the guilt of a man who does not know what he did? If therefore the devil does not know the good, why judge him worthy of condemnation, because he does not do what he does not know? On the contrary, if it were possible, he would be rather praiseworthy because he does what he does not know. For us, it is with all justification that we have become guilty because we do not do what we know we must do; or because we do what we know how to defend ourselves. Now all the Scriptures agree with declaring the devil guilty; that is why we read that the torment of hell is reserved to him, and that the divine law condemned him without return, because he did evil while knowing and being able to do good. God, indeed, justice itself, would not condemn him for not doing the good he did not know, but for doing the evil he knew. I therefore regard it as an incontestable truth, that no substance can be called bad, because all evil, as we have shown, derives from the will which has come to vitiate nature by means of the senses. [Questions on the Old and New Testament]

AMBROSIASTER. WHAT CAN WE SAY TO THOSE WHO CLAIM THAT THIS WORLD EXISTS NATURALLY FROM ALL ETERNITY, AND THAT IT HAS NEITHER BEGINNING NOR END? — That the world exists from eternity and that it is independent, is both implausible and impossible. We see him composed of a multitude of diverse bodies; Now, simplicity is the essential attribute of a divine and eternal being; it must present no diversity, but the most perfect unity. The world is not even uniform in the succession of times; not only are there differences of time and contrary substances, but the succession of times is not regular. Now an eternal substance is sovereignly removed from all diversity, it is not accessible to touch or sight, because it is incorporeal. The world on the contrary is subject to the alteration, the water is in opposition with the fire; if the fire becomes stronger, it triumphs over the water, and the earth, in its turn, dry and cold nature, flames up like a material thing. We cannot, therefore, admit the eternity of this world which we see subjected to so many changes and alterations, which wears and ages from century to century, and which we believe we must someday end. But what must we think of the man who believes the eternal world? Man certainly begins to exist in the world; Now, before it existed, what was the use of the annual fertility of the earth? Shall we say that this fertility existed without any design or as chance? And how could an eternal being produce corruptible and mortal beings, whereas an eternal being can only come out an eternal being? How yet dare to call eternal what is seen, what is felt, and what is touched? How is eternal to call what is subject to the succession of times, a succession itself which is not always uniform or regular? For eternity is not subject to no alteration, and has no change. [Questions on the Old and New Testament Q. 28.1]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. It is necessary to consider from the point of view of this faith what in the present book must be the object of our research and our discussions. In the beginning God made heaven and earth. According to some interpreters of the divine Scriptures, there are four ways of considering the holy word: history, allegory, analogy, and etiology. These names come from the Greek, but we can give in our language the definition and the explanation. History consists in retracing, either under divine inspiration or with the only resources of the human mind, the things accomplished; allegory, to hear texts in a figurative sense; analogy, to show the agreement of the Old and New Testaments; etiology to make known the motives of words and deeds.

Then on what was written: in the beginning God made heaven and earth, he may ask himself if it should be understood only according to the historical sense, or also if it means something figuratively; also in what way it agrees with the Gospel, and, finally, why this book begins like this. According to the historical sense it is asked what meaning it has in the beginning, namely: whether we should understand it as the beginning of time or the Beginning, that is, the Wisdom of God, because also the Son of God called himself Beginning when He was interrogated: Who are you? and he answered: the Beginning that spoke to you (Jn. 8:25). There is, then, a Beginning without a beginning, and a Beginning with another Beginning. Beginning without beginning is only the Father and by this we believe that all things exist because of a single Beginning; but the Son is in such a way Beginning that by generation comes from the Father. The same first intellectual creature can also call it a beginning, since it is the head of all those that God made. As the ruler is rightly called the principle, the Apostle does not say in this gradation that the woman is the head of someone. He calls man the head of the woman, Christ the head of man, and God the head of Christ; (1 Cor. 11:3) thus creature is related to the Creator.

Was it said at the beginning because it was the first thing that was done? Or is it that the first heaven and earth could not be made among the creatures, if the angels and all the intellectual powers were made in the first place? Because it is necessary that we believe that the angels are creatures of God and that they were made by Him, because also the angels listed the prophet among the creatures of God in Psalm 148, when he said: He commanded and they were made. He commanded it and they were created (Ps. 148:5); But if the angels were created before everything else, it may be asked: were they created in time or before time or at the beginning of time? If they were created in time, time existed before the angels were created; and since time is also a creature, we see ourselves in the precision of admitting that before the angels something began to exist; and if we say that they were created at the beginning of time in such a way that at the same moment that time began to exist, we will say that what some claim is false is that time began when heaven and earth were made.

But if the angels were created before time, it must be investigated in what sense and why it was said in the following verses: and God said to make the luminaries in the firmament of heaven so that they illuminate the earth and divide the day and the night and signal the times, the days and the years; because, according to this, it may seem that then began the times when the sky and the luminaries of heaven began to move in their determined orbits. If this is true, in what way could the days be before time existed, if the time had its origin at the beginning of the luminaries, which is said to have been done on the fourth day? Or is it that this distribution of days, according to the custom of speaking of human weakness, was ordered according to the norm or requirement of narrating and insinuating with simplicity the sublime things to the humble, for which it happens that the same discourse the speaker can not exist if they do not occupy some words at the beginning, others the middle and others the end? Or perhaps it was said that the luminaries were created in these times that men measure by the movement of bodies with intervals of duration? But these times would not exist, if there were no movement of bodies, but they are well known by men. If we admit this we see ourselves in the precision of asking whether out of the movement of bodies there can be time in a movement of disembodied creature, such as the soul or the mind; it moves in his thoughts and by this movement in it one thing is first and another final; which can not be understood without a time interval. If we admit this kind of time, it can also be understood that time was made before heaven and earth existed, if angels were created before heaven and earth, since there already existed a creature that constituted time with incorporeal movements, and clearly it will be understood that with it time existed, as in the soul, which is accustomed to notice the bodily movements through the senses of the body; but perhaps this does not happen in the higher and very eminent creatures. Whatever may be of this, since it is a very occult thing and impenetrable to human conjectures, the only certain thing that must be maintained as of faith, although it exceeds the lights of our intelligence, is that every creature has a beginning, and that time is a creature and therefore consists of beginning and is not coeternal to the Creator.

It may also seem that the words heaven and earth have been used to designate all creatures; that the ethereal vault which strikes our eyes, with the invisible world of the higher powers, has been called heaven, and that the name of earth has been given to all the lower part of the universe and to all the animated beings that it encloses. Or was it called heaven to every sublime and invisible creature, and earth to all the visible, in such a way that what was said could be understood: in the beginning God made heaven and earth by the universal creation? Perhaps properly and in comparison with the invisible creature is called earth to all the visible, and sky to the invisible, the soul is invisible, and yet when it has swelled from the love of visible things and prided upon their acquisition, has it not been called earth in these words of Scripture: why are you proud, earth and ashes? (Eccl. 10:9)

It may be asked if by chance heaven and earth were called all things already distinct and ordered, or the name of heaven and earth was given principally to that report which is the subject of all things, which was formed, commanded by God ineffably, in these natures that we see formed and beautiful; for although we read what is written: that you made the world of material matter (Wis. 11:17), however, we can not say that the same matter, in whatever method and form it exists, was not made by Him, from the moment we believe and confess that He comes from everything; and this is the world called this separation and ordering of each of the things formed and different, and is called heaven and earth to the same matter report, as if it said that it was the seed of heaven and earth; heaven and earth that being as mixed and disordered were fit to receive the forms from the Creator, God. It is enough with what we have investigated so far on what is written: in the beginning God made heaven and earth, since it is not advisable to recklessly affirm anything about these points. [Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. Where Scripture speaks of the world’s creation, it is not plainly said whether or when the angels were created; but if mention of them is made, it is implicitly under the name of “heaven,” when it is said, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” or perhaps rather under the name of “light,” of which presently. But that they were wholly omitted, I am unable to believe, because it is written that God on the seventh day rested from all His works which He made; and this very book itself begins, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” so that before heaven and earth God seems to have made nothing. Since, therefore, He began with the heavens and the earth—and the earth itself, as Scripture adds, was at first invisible and formless, light not being as yet made, and darkness covering the face of the deep (that is to say, covering an undefined chaos of earth and sea, for where light is not, darkness must needs be)—and then when all things, which are recorded to have been completed in six days, were created and arranged, how should the angels be omitted, as if they were not among the works of God, from which on the seventh day He rested? Yet, though the fact that the angels are the work of God is not omitted here, it is indeed not explicitly mentioned; but elsewhere Holy Scripture asserts it in the clearest manner. For in the Hymn of the Three Children in the Furnace it was said, “O all you works of the Lord bless the Lord (3:57);” and among these works mentioned afterwards in detail, the angels are named. And in the psalm it is said, “Praise the Lord from the heavens, praise Him in the heights. Praise Him, all His angels; praise Him, all His hosts. Praise Him, sun and moon; praise him, all you stars of light. Praise Him, you heaven of heavens; and you waters that be above the heavens. Let them praise the name of the Lord; for He commanded, and they were created (Ps. 148:1-3).”  Here the angels are most expressly and by divine authority said to have been made by God, for of them among the other heavenly things it is said, “He commanded, and they were created.” Who, then, will be bold enough to suggest that the angels were made after the six days’ creation? If anyone is so foolish, his folly is disposed of by a scripture of like authority, where God says, “When the stars were made, the angels praised me with a loud voice.” (Job 38:7) The angels therefore existed before the stars; and the stars were made the fourth day. Shall we then say that they were made the third day? Far from it; for we know what was made that day. There is no question, then, that if the angels are included in the works of God during these six days, they are that light which was called “Day,” and whose unity Scripture signalizes by calling that day not the “first day,” but “one day.”  For the second day, the third, and the rest are not other days; but the same “one” day is repeated to complete the number six or seven, so that there should be knowledge both of God’s works and of His rest…For when God said, “Let there be light, and there was light,” if we are justified in understanding in this light the creation of the angels, then certainly they were created partakers of the eternal light which is the unchangeable Wisdom of God, by which all things were made, and whom we call the only-begotten Son of God; so that they, being illumined by the Light that created them, might themselves become light and be called “Day,” in participation of that unchangeable Light and Day which is the Word of God, by whom both themselves and all else were made. “The true Light, which lights every man that comes into the world,” (Jn. 1:9) — this Light lights also every pure angel, that he may be light not in himself, but in God; from whom if an angel turn away, he becomes impure, as are all those who are called unclean spirits, and are no longer light in the Lord, but darkness in themselves, being deprived of the participation of Light eternal. [City of God 11.9, NPNF s.1 v.2]

BASIL OF CAESAREA. I stop struck with admiration at this thought. What shall I first say? Where shall I begin my story? Shall I show forth the vanity of the Gentiles? Shall I exalt the truth of our faith? The philosophers of Greece have made much ado to explain nature, and not one of their systems has remained firm and unshaken, each being overturned by its successor. It is vain to refute them; they are sufficient in themselves to destroy one another. Those who were too ignorant to rise to a knowledge of a God, could not allow that an intelligent cause presided at the birth of the Universe; a primary error that involved them in sad consequences. Some had recourse to material principles and attributed the origin of the Universe to the elements of the world. Others imagined that atoms, and indivisible bodies, molecules and ducts, form, by their union, the nature of the visible world. Atoms reuniting or separating, produce births and deaths and the most durable bodies only owe their consistency to the strength of their mutual adhesion: a true spider's web woven by these writers who give to heaven, to earth, and to sea so weak an origin and so little consistency! It is because they knew not how to say In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Deceived by their inherent atheism it appeared to them that nothing governed or ruled the universe, and that was all was given up to chance. To guard us against this error the writer on the creation, from the very first words, enlightens our understanding with the name of God; In the beginning God created. What a glorious order! He first establishes a beginning, so that it might not be supposed that the world never had a beginning. Then he adds Created to show that which was made was a very small part of the power of the Creator. In the same way that the potter, after having made with equal pains a great number of vessels, has not exhausted either his art or his talent; thus the Maker of the Universe, whose creative power, far from being bounded by one world, could extend to the infinite, needed only the impulse of His will to bring the immensities of the visible world into being. If then the world has a beginning, and if it has been created, enquire who gave it this beginning, and who was the Creator: or rather, in the fear that human reasonings may make you wander from the truth, Moses has anticipated enquiry by engraving in our hearts, as a seal and a safeguard, the awful name of God: In the beginning God created— It is He, beneficent Nature, Goodness without measure, a worthy object of love for all beings endowed with reason, the beauty the most to be desired, the origin of all that exists, the source of life, intellectual light, impenetrable wisdom, it is He who in the beginning created heaven and earth.

Do not then imagine, O man! That the visible world is without a beginning; and because the celestial bodies move in a circular course, and it is difficult for our senses to define the point where the circle begins, do not believe that bodies impelled by a circular movement are, from their nature, without a beginning. Without doubt the circle (I mean the plane figure described by a single line) is beyond our perception, and it is impossible for us to find out where it begins or where it ends; but we ought not on this account to believe it to be without a beginning. Although we are not sensible of it, it really begins at some point where the draughtsman has begun to draw it at a certain radius from the centre. Thus seeing that figures which move in a circle always return upon themselves, without for a single instant interrupting the regularity of their course, do not vainly imagine to yourselves that the world has neither beginning nor end. For the fashion of this world passes away 1 Corinthians 7:31 and Heaven and earth shall pass away. Matthew 24:35 The dogmas of the end, and of the renewing of the world, are announced beforehand in these short words put at the head of the inspired history. In the beginning God made. That which was begun in time is condemned to come to an end in time. If there has been a beginning do not doubt of the end. Of what use then are geometry— the calculations of arithmetic— the study of solids and far-famed astronomy, this laborious vanity, if those who pursue them imagine that this visible world is co-eternal with the Creator of all things, with God Himself; if they attribute to this limited world, which has a material body, the same glory as to the incomprehensible and invisible nature; if they cannot conceive that a whole, of which the parts are subject to corruption and change, must of necessity end by itself submitting to the fate of its parts? But they have become vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. Romans 1:21-22 Some have affirmed that heaven co-exists with God from all eternity; others that it is God Himself without beginning or end, and the cause of the particular arrangement of all things.

One day, doubtless, their terrible condemnation will be the greater for all this worldly wisdom, since, seeing so clearly into vain sciences, they have willfully shut their eyes to the knowledge of the truth. These men who measure the distances of the stars and describe them, both those of the North, always shining brilliantly in our view, and those of the southern pole visible to the inhabitants of the South, but unknown to us; who divide the Northern zone and the circle of the Zodiac into an infinity of parts, who observe with exactitude the course of the stars, their fixed places, their declensions, their return and the time that each takes to make its revolution; these men, I say, have discovered all except one thing: the fact that God is the Creator of the universe, and the just Judge who rewards all the actions of life according to their merit. They have not known how to raise themselves to the idea of the consummation of all things, the consequence of the doctrine of judgment, and to see that the world must change if souls pass from this life to a new life. In reality, as the nature of the present life presents an affinity to this world, so in the future life our souls will enjoy a lot conformable to their new condition. But they are so far from applying these truths, that they do but laugh when we announce to them the end of all things and the regeneration of the age. Since the beginning naturally precedes that which is derived from it, the writer, of necessity, when speaking to us of things which had their origin in time, puts at the head of his narrative these words— In the beginning God created.

It appears, indeed, that even before this world an order of things existed of which our mind can form an idea, but of which we can say nothing, because it is too lofty a subject for men who are but beginners and are still babes in knowledge. The birth of the world was preceded by a condition of things suitable for the exercise of supernatural powers, outstripping the limits of time, eternal and infinite. The Creator and Demiurge of the universe perfected His works in it, spiritual light for the happiness of all who love the Lord, intellectual and invisible natures, all the orderly arrangement of pure intelligences who are beyond the reach of our mind and of whom we cannot even discover the names. They fill the essence of this invisible world, as Paul teaches us. For by him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible whether they be thrones or dominions or principalities or powers Colossians 1:16 or virtues or hosts of angels or the dignities of archangels. To this world at last it was necessary to add a new world, both a school and training place where the souls of men should be taught and a home for beings destined to be born and to die. Thus was created, of a nature analogous to that of this world and the animals and plants which live thereon, the succession of time, for ever pressing on and passing away and never stopping in its course. Is not this the nature of time, where the past is no more, the future does not exist, and the present escapes before being recognised? And such also is the nature of the creature which lives in time,— condemned to grow or to perish without rest and without certain stability. It is therefore fit that the bodies of animals and plants, obliged to follow a sort of current, and carried away by the motion which leads them to birth or to death, should live in the midst of surroundings whose nature is in accord with beings subject to change. Thus the writer who wisely tells us of the birth of the Universe does not fail to put these words at the head of the narrative. In the beginning God created; that is to say, in the beginning of time. Therefore, if he makes the world appear in the beginning, it is not a proof that its birth has preceded that of all other things that were made. He only wishes to tell us that, after the invisible and intellectual world, the visible world, the world of the senses, began to exist.

The first movement is called beginning. To do right is the beginning of the good way. Just actions are truly the first steps towards a happy life. Again, we call beginning the essential and first part from which a thing proceeds, such as the foundation of a house, the keel of a vessel; it is in this sense that it is said, The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, Proverbs 9:10 that is to say that piety is, as it were, the groundwork and foundation of perfection. Art is also the beginning of the works of artists, the skill of Bezaleel began the adornment of the tabernacle. Often even the good which is the final cause is the beginning of actions. Thus the approbation of God is the beginning of almsgiving, and the end laid up for us in the promises the beginning of all virtuous efforts.

Such being the different senses of the word beginning, see if we have not all the meanings here. You may know the epoch when the formation of this world began, it, ascending into the past, you endeavour to discover the first day. You will thus find what was the first movement of time; then that the creation of the heavens and of the earth were like the foundation and the groundwork, and afterwards that an intelligent reason, as the word beginning indicates, presided in the order of visible things. You will finally discover that the world was not conceived by chance and without reason, but for an useful end and for the great advantage of all beings, since it is really the school where reasonable souls exercise themselves, the training ground where they learn to know God; since by the sight of visible and sensible things the mind is led, as by a hand, to the contemplation of invisible things. For, as the Apostle says, the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made. Romans 1:20 Perhaps these words In the beginning God created signify the rapid and imperceptible moment of creation. The beginning, in effect, is indivisible and instantaneous. The beginning of the road is not yet the road, and that of the house is not yet the house; so the beginning of time is not yet time and not even the least particle of it. If some objector tell us that the beginning is a time, he ought then, as he knows well, to submit it to the division of time— a beginning, a middle and an end. Now it is ridiculous to imagine a beginning of a beginning. Further, if we divide the beginning into two, we make two instead of one, or rather make several, we really make an infinity, for all that which is divided is divisible to the infinite. Thus then, if it is said, In the beginning God created, it is to teach us that at the will of God the world arose in less than an instant, and it is to convey this meaning more clearly that other interpreters have said: God made summarily that is to say all at once and in a moment. But enough concerning the beginning, if only to put a few points out of many.

Among arts, some have in view production, some practice, others theory. The object of the last is the exercise of thought, that of the second, the motion of the body. Should it cease, all stops; nothing more is to be seen. Thus dancing and music have nothing behind; they have no object but themselves. In creative arts on the contrary the work lasts after the operation. Such is architecture— such are the arts which work in wood and brass and weaving, all those indeed which, even when the artisan has disappeared, serve to show an industrious intelligence and to cause the architect, the worker in brass or the weaver, to be admired on account of his work. Thus, then, to show that the world is a work of art displayed for the beholding of all people; to make them know Him who created it, Moses does not use another word. In the beginning, he says God created. He does not say God worked, God formed, but God created. Among those who have imagined that the world co-existed with God from all eternity, many have denied that it was created by God, but say that it exists spontaneously, as the shadow of this power. God, they say, is the cause of it, but an involuntary cause, as the body is the cause of the shadow and the flame is the cause of the brightness. It is to correct this error that the prophet states, with so much precision, In the beginning God created. He did not make the thing itself the cause of its existence. Being good, He made it an useful work. Being wise, He made it everything that was most beautiful. Being powerful He made it very great. Moses almost shows us the finger of the supreme artisan taking possession of the substance of the universe, forming the different parts in one perfect accord, and making a harmonious symphony result from the whole.

In the beginning God made heaven and earth. By naming the two extremes, he suggests the substance of the whole world, according to heaven the privilege of seniority, and putting earth in the second rank. All intermediate beings were created at the same time as the extremities. Thus, although there is no mention of the elements, fire, water and air, imagine that they were all compounded together, and you will find water, air and fire, in the earth. For fire leaps out from stones; iron which is dug from the earth produces under friction fire in plentiful measure. A marvellous fact! Fire shut up in bodies lurks there hidden without harming them, but no sooner is it released than it consumes that which has hitherto preserved it. The earth contains water, as diggers of wells teach us. It contains air too, as is shown by the vapours that it exhales under the sun's warmth when it is damp. Now, as according to their nature, heaven occupies the higher and earth the lower position in space, (one sees, in fact, that all which is light ascends towards heaven, and heavy substances fall to the ground); as therefore height and depth are the points the most opposed to each other it is enough to mention the most distant parts to signify the inclusion of all which fills up intervening Space. Do not ask, then, for an enumeration of all the elements; guess, from what Holy Scripture indicates, all that is passed over in silence.

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. If we were to wish to discover the essence of each of the beings which are offered for our contemplation, or come under our senses, we should be drawn away into long digressions, and the solution of the problem would require more words than I possess, to examine fully the matter. To spend time on such points would not prove to be to the edification of the Church. Upon the essence of the heavens we are contented with what Isaiah says, for, in simple language, he gives us sufficient idea of their nature, The heaven was made like smoke, that is to say, He created a subtle substance, without solidity or density, from which to form the heavens. As to the form of them we also content ourselves with the language of the same prophet, when praising God that stretches out the heavens as a curtain and spreads them out as a tent to dwell in. In the same way, as concerns the earth, let us resolve not to torment ourselves by trying to find out its essence, not to tire our reason by seeking for the substance which it conceals. Do not let us seek for any nature devoid of qualities by the conditions of its existence, but let us know that all the phenomena with which we see it clothed regard the conditions of its existence and complete its essence. Try to take away by reason each of the qualities it possesses, and you will arrive at nothing. Take away black, cold, weight, density, the qualities which concern taste, in one word all these which we see in it, and the substance vanishes.

If I ask you to leave these vain questions, I will not expect you to try and find out the earth's point of support. The mind would reel on beholding its reasonings losing themselves without end. Do you say that the earth reposes on a bed of air? How, then, can this soft substance, without consistency, resist the enormous weight which presses upon it? How is it that it does not slip away in all directions, to avoid the sinking weight, and to spread itself over the mass which overwhelms it? Do you suppose that water is the foundation of the earth? You will then always have to ask yourself how it is that so heavy and opaque a body does not pass through the water; how a mass of such a weight is held up by a nature weaker than itself. Then you must seek a base for the waters, and you will be in much difficulty to say upon what the water itself rests.

Do you suppose that a heavier body prevents the earth from falling into the abyss? Then you must consider that this support needs itself a support to prevent it from falling. Can we imagine one? Our reason again demands yet another support, and thus we shall fall into the infinite, always imagining a base for the base which we have already found. And the further we advance in this reasoning the greater force we are obliged to give to this base, so that it may be able to support all the mass weighing upon it. Put then a limit to your thought, so that your curiosity in investigating the incomprehensible may not incur the reproaches of Job, and you be not asked by him, Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? Job 38:6 If ever you hear in the Psalms, I bear up the pillars of it; see in these pillars the power which sustains it. Because what means this other passage, He has founded it upon the sea, if not that the water is spread all around the earth? How then can water, the fluid element which flows down every declivity, remain suspended without ever flowing? You do not reflect that the idea of the earth suspended by itself throws your reason into a like but even greater difficulty, since from its nature it is heavier. But let us admit that the earth rests upon itself, or let us say that it rides the waters, we must still remain faithful to thought of true religion and recognise that all is sustained by the Creator's power. Let us then reply to ourselves, and let us reply to those who ask us upon what support this enormous mass rests, In His hands are the ends of the earth. It is a doctrine as infallible for our own information as profitable for our hearers.

There are inquirers into nature who with a great display of words give reasons for the immobility of the earth. Placed, they say, in the middle of the universe and not being able to incline more to one side than the other because its centre is everywhere the same distance from the surface, it necessarily rests upon itself; since a weight which is everywhere equal cannot lean to either side. It is not, they go on, without reason or by chance that the earth occupies the centre of the universe. It is its natural and necessary position. As the celestial body occupies the higher extremity of space all heavy bodies, they argue, that we may suppose to have fallen from these high regions, will be carried from all directions to the centre, and the point towards which the parts are tending will evidently be the one to which the whole mass will be thrust together. If stones, wood, all terrestrial bodies, fall from above downwards, this must be the proper and natural place of the whole earth. If, on the contrary, a light body is separated from the centre, it is evident that it will ascend towards the higher regions. Thus heavy bodies move from the top to the bottom, and following this reasoning, the bottom is none other than the centre of the world. Do not then be surprised that the world never falls: it occupies the centre of the universe, its natural place. By necessity it is obliged to remain in its place, unless a movement contrary to nature should displace it. If there is anything in this system which might appear probable to you, keep your admiration for the source of such perfect order, for the wisdom of God. Grand phenomena do not strike us the less when we have discovered something of their wonderful mechanism. Is it otherwise here? At all events let us prefer the simplicity of faith to the demonstrations of reason.

We might say the same thing of the heavens. With what a noise of words the sages of this world have discussed their nature! Some have said that heaven is composed of four elements as being tangible and visible, and is made up of earth on account of its power of resistance, with fire because it is striking to the eye, with air and water on account of the mixture. Others have rejected this system as improbable, and introduced into the world, to form the heavens, a fifth element after their own fashioning. There exists, they say, an æthereal body which is neither fire, air, earth, nor water, nor in one word any simple body. These simple bodies have their own natural motion in a straight line, light bodies upwards and heavy bodies downwards; now this motion upwards and downwards is not the same as circular motion; there is the greatest possible difference between straight and circular motion. It therefore follows that bodies whose motion is so various must vary also in their essence. But, it is not even possible to suppose that the heavens should be formed of primitive bodies which we call elements, because the reunion of contrary forces could not produce an even and spontaneous motion, when each of the simple bodies is receiving a different impulse from nature. Thus it is a labour to maintain composite bodies in continual movement, because it is impossible to put even a single one of their movements in accord and harmony with all those that are in discord; since what is proper to the light particle, is in warfare with that of a heavier one. If we attempt to rise we are stopped by the weight of the terrestrial element; if we throw ourselves down we violate the igneous part of our being in dragging it down contrary to its nature. Now this struggle of the elements effects their dissolution. A body to which violence is done and which is placed in opposition to nature, after a short but energetic resistance, is soon dissolved into as many parts as it had elements, each of the constituent parts returning to its natural place. It is the force of these reasons, say the inventors of the fifth kind of body for the genesis of heaven and the stars, which constrained them to reject the system of their predecessors and to have recourse to their own hypothesis. But yet another fine speaker arises and disperses and destroys this theory to give predominance to an idea of his own invention. [The Hexameron]

JEROME OF STRIDON. IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED HEAVEN AND EARTH. — Many believe, and this opinion is written in the Dispute of Jason and Papiscus, Tertullian the argument in his book against Praxeas, and Hilary records it in the commentary of a Psalm, which is in the Hebrew: "God made the heaven and earth in the Son.” It is an error, which the thing itself demonstrates. The version of the Septuagint, and Symmachus, and Theodotion translate it as In the beginning. The Hebrew text conveys BRESITH, at the head, according to Aquila; and not BABEN, which means in the chapter. It is, therefore, rather from the sense that, according to the translation of the word, we can understand it from Jesus Christ; on the forefront of Genesis, which is the head of all the Scriptures, that at the beginning of the Gospel according to St. John he is assuredly inscribed as Creator of heaven and earth. Thus in the Psalmist he says of himself: “At the head of the book it is written of me, (Psalm 39:9)”, that is to say, at the beginning of Genesis, and in the Gospel: "All things were made by him, and nothing was done without him (Jn. 1:3).” Let us also note that this book is called BRESITH among the Hebrews, who are accustomed to give the name of a book the name of the beginning. [Hebrew Questions on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. In the beginning, says Moses, God created heaven and earth. Here we ask with reason why this holy prophet, who lived only several centuries after the creation of the world, tells us the story. Certainly he does not do it by chance and without serious motives. It is true that in the early days the Lord, who created man, spoke to man himself in the way that he could hear it. Thus he conversed with Adam, that he took again Cain, that he gave his orders to Noah, and that he sat down under the hospitable tent of Abraham. And even when mankind had rushed into the abyss of all vices, God did not break any relationship with him, but he treated men with less familiarity because they had made them unworthy by their crimes; and when he condescended to renew with them relations of benevolence, and as to make a new covenant, he spoke to them by letters, as we do to an absent friend. Now Moses is the bearer of these letters, and this is the first line. In the beginning God created heaven and earth.

But consider, my dear brother, how great and admirable this holy prophet is. The other prophets predicted only events which were to be realized in a very distant time, or near enough; this one, on the contrary, who lived only several centuries after the creation of the world, was inspired from above to tell us the work of the Lord. This is why he thus enters into matter: In the beginning God created heaven and earth. Does he not seem to be saying to us loudly and intelligibly: Have men taught me what I am about to reveal to you? by no means, but He alone who has worked these wonders, leads and directs my tongue to teach them to you: I conjure you therefore to impose silence on all human reasoning, and not to listen to this narrative as if it were not as the word of Moses. For it is God himself who speaks to us, and Moses is only his interpreter. The reasoning of man, says the Scripture, is timid, and his thoughts uncertain. (Wis. 9:14.) Let us, then, accept the divine word with humble deference, without exceeding the limits of our intelligence, nor curiously seeking what it can not attain. But the enemies of the truth do not know these rules, and they want to appreciate all the works of the Lord according to only lights of reason. Insane! they forget that the mind of man is too narrow to probe these mysteries. And why speak here about the works of God, when we can not even understand the secrets of nature and the arts? for tell me how alchemy transforms metals into gold, and how sand becomes a shining crystal. You can not answer me; and when you can not explain the wonders that divine goodness allows man to operate under your eyes, you would presume, O man, to curiously scrutinize the works of the Lord!

What would be your defense, and what an excuse to say, if you foolishly flatter yourself to understand things that surpass all human intelligence? for to maintain that matter has given being to all creatures, and to deny that a creator God has drawn them from nothingness would be the height of madness. So the holy prophet, to close the mouth of the foolish, begins his book with these words In the beginning God created heaven and earth. God created: stop therefore any curious search, humble yourself, and add faith to him who speaks to you. But it is God who has done everything, who prepares all things and who disposes them according to his wisdom. And see how the sacred writer proportionates himself to your weakness; he omits the creation of invisible spirits, and he does not say: In the beginning God created angels and archangels. But he does so only for prudence, and to better dispose us to receive its doctrine. And indeed he spoke to the Jewish people, who attached themselves only to present and earthly goods, and who could conceive nothing invisible and spiritual. That is why he leads him by the sight of things sensitive to the knowledge of the Creator, and teaches him to contemplate the Supreme Worker in his coverings, so that he knows how to adore the Creator, and not to fix himself at the creature. In spite of this condescension, this same people has not allowed them to make themselves mortal gods, and to render divine honors to the most vile animals. But how far could he have borne his folly if the Lord had not warned him of so much kindness and care?

And do not be astonished, my dear brother, if Moses did so from the beginning, and from the first words, since he spoke to coarse and sensual Jews. For we see St. Paul, under the new era of grace, and even as the Gospel had made rapid progress, adopt the same method in his speech to the Athenians, and bring them to the knowledge of the true God through the spectacle of nature. God, he says, who made the world and all that is in the world, being the Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in the temples built by men. (Acts 17:24) He followed here this kind of teaching, because he adapted to the character of his listeners; and it was by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that he thus proposed to them the heavenly doctrine. But he also knew how to vary his word according to the diversity of people, and their more or less advanced education. Consider it indeed written to the Colossians: he no longer observes the same step, and his language is quite different ... In the Word, he says, everything was created in heaven and on earth, the visible things and invisible, thrones, dominations, principalities, powers; All was created by him and for him. (Col. 1:16)

John, the son of thunder, cries out, All things have been done by the Word, and without him nothing has been done. (Jn. 1:3) But Moses begins less solemnly, and he was right to do so. For it was not proper to offer solid meat to those who were yet to be fed with milk. The teachers explain first to the children who are entrusted to them, the first elements of knowledge; and then they gradually lead them to higher knowledge. It is also this method followed by Moses, the Doctor of the nations, and John, son of thunder. Moses, who in the order of time is the first teacher of humanity, has proposed to him only the first elements of the doctrine; John, on the contrary, and Paul, who succeeded him, were able to develop a more perfect teaching for their disciples.

We understand, then, the motives which led Moses to condescend to the weakness of his people. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he spoke to the Jews the language that suited them; but he suffocated with these words: In the beginning, God created heaven and earth, all heresies which, like a bad grain, were to swarm in the Church. Therefore, when a Manichean tells you that the matter pre-existed, and when Marcion, Valentine, or a Gentile support you the same opinion, answer them that in the beginning God created heaven and earth; but if they reject the authority of Scripture, treat them as extravagant and foolish. And, indeed, how can one excuse the one who refuses to believe the Creator of the universe and who taxes the Supreme Truth? He hides under beautiful appearances and pretends the outside of gentleness; but there is nothing less a wolf under a sheep's skin. Do not be seduced; and you must even hate him more than he does to a man with respectful conduct, and declare war on God, sovereign Master of the universe. Alas! he does not perceive that he exposes the salvation of his soul. For us, let us hold fast to the firm stone, and return to our subject: In the beginning God created heaven and earth. And first, observe how the divine Being is manifested in the very mode of creation; for, contrary to man, he begins with the crowning of the edifice: he first unrolls the heavens, and then places the earth beneath; he raises the top of the temple before having established the foundations. Has he ever seen anything like it? and who has ever heard such a story? But God commands, and everything yields to its orders. That is why, far from subjecting the covers of the Lord to the criticism of our reason, let us lead, by the sight of his works, to the admiration of the workman; for the perfections of God have become visible from the creation of the world by all that has been done. (Rom. 1:20)

But if the enemies of the truth persist in maintaining that nothingness can produce nothing, let us ask them: Has the first man been formed of the earth or of any other matter?  Earth, they will answer unanimously. Let them tell us how the flesh of man was formed from the earth! We knead it to shape bricks, tiles and vases; but is this how man was formed? And how, from one and the same matter, can you draw so many different substances: bones, nerves and arteries, flesh, skin, nails and hair? Here they can not give any reasonable answer. And if, from the body, I pass to the food that nourishes it, I will ask them how the bread that we eat every day, and which is a homogeneous substance, is converted into blood and chyle, into bile and various moods; for the bread preserves the whiteness of the flour, and the blood is red or purplish. But if our adversaries can not explain these phenomena which are daily being accomplished before their eyes, how much more difficult would they be to render reason for the other works of the Lord! Therefore, if they continue to reject these many demonstrations and if they persist in their unbelief, we will content ourselves with opposing them the same answer and saying again: In the beginning, God created the sky and the earth. This single word suffices us to overthrow all the entrenchments of our adversaries, and to ruin in their foundation all their vain reasonings. If they at least wanted to finally stop this stubborn resistance, they could return to the path of truth. [Homily 2 on Genesis]

JOHN OF DAMASCUS. Some, indeed, like Gregory the Theologian, say that angels were before the creation of other things. He thinks that the angelic and heavenly powers were first and that thought was their function. Others, again, hold that they were created after the first heaven was made. But all are agreed that it was before the foundation of man. For myself, I am in harmony with the theologian. For it was fitting that the mental essence should be the first created, and then that which can be perceived, and finally man himself, in whose being both parts are united. [Orthodox Faith, 2.3 NPNF s.2 v.9]

TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE. It is to the order of the works that the word beginning has reference, not to the origin of their substances. The Greek term for beginning, which is aρχh, admits the sense not only of priority of order, but of power as well; whence princes and magistrates are called aρχοντες . Therefore in this sense too, beginning may be taken for princely authority and power. It was, indeed, in His transcendent authority and power, that God made the heaven and the earth. [Against Hermogenes 19]

With respect to the heaven, it informs us first of its creation—"In the beginning God made the heaven:" Genesis 1:1 it then goes on to introduce its arrangement; how that God both separated "the water which was below the firmament from that which was above the firmament," Genesis 1:7 and called the firmament heaven,—the very thing He had created in the beginning. [Against Hermagenes 26]

THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH. The world created by God through the Word. And first, they taught us with one consent that God made all things out of nothing; for nothing was coeval with God: but He being His own place, and wanting nothing, and existing before the ages, willed to make man by whom He might be known; for him, therefore, He prepared the world. For he that is created is also needy; but he that is uncreated stands in need of nothing. God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bowels, begot Him, emitting Him along with His own wisdom before all things. He had this Word as a helper in the things that were created by Him, and by Him He made all things. He is called “governing principle” [ἁρκή], because He rules, and is Lord of all things fashioned by Him. He, then, being Spirit of God, and governing principle, and wisdom, and power of the highest, came down upon the prophets, and through them spoke of the creation of the world and of all other things. For the prophets were not when the world came into existence, but the wisdom of God which was in Him, and His holy Word which was always present with Him. Wherefore He speaks thus by the prophet Solomon: “When He prepared the heavens I was there, and when He appointed the foundations of the earth I was by Him as one brought up with Him.” And Moses, who lived many years before Solomon, or, rather, the Word of God by him as by an instrument, says, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” First he named the “beginning,” and “creation,” then he thus introduced God; for not lightly and on slight occasion is it right to name God. For the divine wisdom foreknew that some would trifle and name a multitude of gods that do not exist. In order, therefore, that the living God might be known by His works, and that [it might be known that] by His Word God created the heavens and the earth, and all that is therein, he said, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Then having spoken of their creation, he explains to us: “And the earth was without form, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God moved upon the water.” This, sacred Scripture teaches at the outset, to show that matter, from which God made and fashioned the world, was in some manner created, being produced by God. [To Autolycus, Book 2]

1:2 But the earth was unsightly and unfurnished, and darkness was over the deep, and the Spirit of God moved over the water.

ALCUIN OF YORK. WHAT IS MEANT BY "BUT THE EARTH WAS INVISIBLE AND DISORDERED"? — Answer. Invisible on account of darkness, disordered on account of shapelessness. [Question 30]

WHAT IS MEANT BY “THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD MOVED OVER THE WATERS”? — Answer. It did so not by wandering, but by might, and by a ruler's power, to give shape and life to the shapeless matter, which in this passage is signified by the name of water. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 193. Bed. Hexm. I, PL 91, col. 15.) [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 29]

AMBROSIASTER. WAS THE SPIRIT THAT WAS CARRIED ON THE WATERS THE HOLY SPIRIT, AS THESE WORDS WOULD SEEM TO INDICATE: "THE SPIRIT OF GOD WAS CARRIED ON THE WATERS?" —   If there is an error in this proposal, we should admit it. Some believe that it is a question of the Holy Spirit, because it is called the Spirit of God, an opinion devoid of all proof and all foundation. Not only do order and reason refuse the interpretation, but the text itself is powerless to establish it. For we frequently find the same words used by sacred writers in another sense. Thus, among other things, the Lord God said: "My spirit shall not abide in these men, because they are flesh; (Gen. 6:5), and he adds: "Exterminate every creature, from man to animals.” Will it be said that in these words, where the Lord predicts the deluge which he is to send on earth, it is a question of the Holy Spirit? Did he not wish to speak of souls? For the name of spirit is given not only to our souls, those of animals. Indeed, it is written: "And all flesh in which the spirit of life was found died in the waters." (Gen. 7:21) We also read in the prophet Ezekiel when God promises by his mouth the resurrection of the human race: "This is what the Lord says: I will stretch the skin upon you, and I will give you of my spirit, and you shall live (Ez. 37:5).” Is this the question of the Holy Spirit, or rather did he not wish to speak of the soul? All heavenly creatures are spirits, but they diverge from each other; God himself is spirit (Jn. 4:24), but of a very different nature. Every spirit, then, is of the spirit of God, but is not God, however, except the spirit which is of itself, and whose particular character is sanctity. Men are also called the sons of God, as Jesus Christ is called Himself the Son of God, but there is this difference that He is the true Son of God, and that men are only His adopted sons. The same difference exists in the use of this name of spirit of God. The Holy Spirit comes from God, it is consubstantial; the other spirits are called the spirits of God, but they are mere creatures. The order itself refuses to admit that it was the Holy Spirit who was carried on the waters. Reason teaches us that above the waters there exists a spiritual creature which has above itself a more excellent creature, because one creature differs in clarity from another creature (1 Cor. 15:41); for the more the heavenly creatures are near the throne of God, the more brilliant are their ministries. That is why the angel Raphael said to Tobit, "I am the angel Raphael, one of the seven holy angels who stand and spend their lives in the presence of the majesty of God. (Tob. 12:15) [Questions on the Old and New Testaments, Q.41.1]

AMBROSE OF MILAN. Although some consider this spirit as air, others think of it as the vital breath of the air which we take in and emit. However, in agreement with the saints and the faithful we consider this to be the Holy Spirit, so that the operation of the Holy Trinity clearly shines forth in the constitution of the world. Preceded by the statement that ‘In the beginning God created heaven and earth, that is, God created it in Christ or the Son of God had, as God, created it or God created it through the Son, since ‘all things were made through him and without him was made nothing that was made.’ (Jn. 1:3) [Hexameron 1.9]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. It is said, "the earth was invisible, without form, and the darkness was on the abyss," expressions which seem to indicate in the matter the absence of any form. Must we see in this passage the natural imperfection of the two substances; to the body, because the earth was invisible and without form; In the mind, because the darkness was on the abyss? The dark abyss would be in this case a metaphor for the primitive state of mind before it unites with its Creator; this union being the only means of putting order in it, to make the abyss disappear, and the light to polish away the darkness? In what sense should we also hear that darkness was on the abyss? Could not the light still exist? For if it had existed, it would be high and widespread in the higher regions: that which is done in souls when they cling to the immutable and all spiritual light which God is. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. The earth was, therefore, invisible and in disarray, and the darkness was over the abyss and the Spirit of God was carried on the waters. The heretics who oppose the Old Testament often criticize this passage when they say: how did God in the beginning make heaven and earth, if the earth already existed? They do not understand that this was added, in order to explain in what state was the land named above when saying: God made heaven and earth. Thus, in the beginning God made heaven and earth, it must be understood that this earth made by God was invisible and reportable until by the same Lord it was divided, and removing it from the confusion constituted it in an orderly state of visible things. Or perhaps it is better understood saying that it is remembered again in this execution, the same matter of things that it previously designated with the name of heaven and earth, so that by saying in the beginning God made heaven and earth he understands that what he called heaven and earth was a certain material matter from which the world would be made, which consists, ordered the elements and received the form, of two great parts, namely, of heaven and earth; and so this intelligence of matter could be made known to any intelligence, however rude, by calling it an invisible and unformed earth or without order and beauty, and saying that the darkness was over the abyss, that is, over the immense depth, which It was once again named, because it could not be understood by any intelligence because of its very information.

And the darkness was over the abyss. Was the abyss placed below and the darkness above, as if there were already different places? Or would it be said, since it is still about the materiality of matter, which in Greek is called chaos, that the darkness was over the abyss since light existed? If it had existed, it would certainly be on top, because it is more eminent, and would illuminate all the things that are placed beneath it. Indeed, the one who carefully investigates what darkness is does not find more than a lack of light. Then he said the darkness was over the abyss as if it had been said there was no light over the abyss. Therefore, this matter, which by the subsequent work of God is already distinguished by the formation of things, was called an invisible and reportless earth and depth lacking in light, which was previously designated with the name of heaven and earth, as if it were, as has been said, the seed of heaven and earth. Or perhaps he wanted, when he said heaven and earth, to give us first to know the universality of things, and then to insinuate the matter, to announce to us the work of the formation of the beings of the world.

And the Spirit of God was carried on the waters. Up to the present Scripture had not said that God had made the water, and yet, in no way can we believe that the water was not made by God and that it did not exist before He made something ordered, because He is of who, by whom and in whom are all things, as the Apostle affirms (Rom. 11:36); Then God made the water, and to believe otherwise is a big mistake. Why was not it said that God had already made the water? Was it because he wanted to call water the same matter that he called the name of heaven and earth, and also that of invisible and unformed earth, and abyss? Why, then, could it not be called water, if it could be called earth, being that until then it was not water, different and formed, neither earth, nor anything else? Perhaps it was first called heaven and earth, then invisible and unformed earth, and, finally, with all property water; in such a way that in the first place the matter of that universal creation was designated, under the name of heaven and earth, because it was made out of nothing; and in second term with the name of disordered earth and abyss, to insinuate the informidad, because between all the elements the earth is the grossest and the least noble of all; and thirdly with the name of water, in order to indicate the subject to the action of the artificer, since water is more formable than the earth, and thus by the ease of being worked and by allowing itself to be transformed more easily, by in the hands of the artificer, it was more properly called water than land.

Air is certainly more subtle than water. Ether with foundation is believed or judged to be more subtle than air, but air or ether would be called more improperly matter, because it is judged that these elements are more endowed with the power of action, and land and water of passion; but if this is still a secret, I judge very clearly that the wind moves water and many other earthly things; but the wind is the movement of the air and like its own restlessness. But it being evident that the air moves the water, however, the cause by which it is moved to be wind is hidden; Who will doubt then that the water to be moved receives with more property the name of matter, than the air that moves? Being moved is the same as receiving an action, and moving is doing something; from this it follows that the things that the earth begets are irrigated with water, so that they can be born and reach their perfect development; in such a way that it almost seems that water is transformed into things that are born, for which reason water is more rightly called, since it implies being subject to the work of the architect (because of its adaptability and convertibility in the bodies that are born), that air, in which only mobility can be noticed, lacking other qualities for which it would more accurately represent matter. Then the complete meaning is: in the beginning God made heaven and earth, that is, matter, which could receive the perfect form of heaven and earth, whose material was invisible and disordered earth, that is, report and immense abyss without light. Being subject to the action of modeling and the work of the artificer, it was also called water, by its own obedience to the operant.

Giving all these meanings to matter, the end of it is implied in the first place, that is, what it was made for; in the second term the same information, and lately the servitude and submission to the architect. Thus, by indicating to us that the matter had been made, he first called it heaven and earth; then, invisible and reportless earth and darkness over the abyss, that is to say, lack of light, for which reason it was called invisible earth; and, finally, he calls it water, subject to the spirit and apt to receive the forms and figures determined and visible. For this reason the Spirit of God was carried on the water, so that we understand that the Spirit was the one who worked; and the waters, that is, the fabricable material, the place where it worked. When we say, then, that these three names, matter of the world, matter report, manufacturable matter, are denominations of a single thing, we imply that the first of them fits very well the sky and earth, the second the dark , confusion, depth, darkness; and to the third the one of adaptability on which the Spirit of the artificer was brought to work.

And the Spirit of God was carried on the water. It was not borne in the way water supports oil; or earth to water, that is, as if it held him. If we are to take from the visible things examples to understand this, we will say that the Spirit of God was thus borne, as this light of the sun or the light of the moon, which illuminates the earth, is borne by the terrestrial bodies, not being contained or enclosed in them, but if the sky contains it, it is borne by them; we must also avoid believing that the Spirit of God was carried over matter occupying places. He was carried by a certain active and operative power in order that whatever he had to endure was made and manufactured; in such a way that the will of the craftsman on the wood or on any other material destined to make something of it, is endured, or also as the members of the body bear the will that mobilizes them to act. This resemblance, nevertheless, being as it is of greater excellence than any body, hardly takes place and almost does not serve at all to clarify to us the excelentísimo power of the Spirit of God, to whose virtue the matter of the world is subject to act in her; but we do not find a clearer and more appropriate similarity to evidence the subject matter than these things, which can in any case be understood by men. Therefore, in these intellectual investigations, we must take into account that precept of Scripture: those who bless God exalt him as much as you can, because he is still higher (Sir. 43:33). This was written so that we understand in this passage by the Spirit of God the Holy Spirit, whom we worship in the ineffable and immutable Trinity.

Spirit of God can also be understood in another sense; judging him as a vital creature, in which this visible world with all its bodies was contained and moved, to which Almighty God granted a certain power that would serve him to work in those things that were produced. This spirit with property would be called Spirit of God, being as it is more excellent than any ethereal body, since every invisible creature surpasses all that is corporal and visible. Are not things created by God from God? Certainly so, for when speaking of the earth it was said: God is the earth and all the things that it contains (Wis. 23:1); and speaking of the universal set of beings, it is said: O Lord, you love souls, you are all things! (Ps. 11:27) Then the word spirit can be understood in this way that I said, if we believe that what was said in God made heaven and earth in the beginning, only refers to the visible or material creature; and so, then, it was carried on the matter of visible things, at the beginning of its creation, the invisible spirit, which was also a creature, that is, it was not God, but nature made and formed by God. But if we believe that the matter announced under that word of "water" includes the universal creation, namely, the intellectual, animal and bodily creature, in no way can Spirit of God be understood in this place, but by that Immutable Spirit and Holy that was carried on the matter of all things, which God made and perfected.

A third opinion can be originated from this word spirit: to judge that under the name of spirit the air element is expressed, so that the four elements of which this visible world is composed, namely, heaven, earth, will be named here water and air; not because they existed apart and ordered, but because in the confusion still report of that matter, were, however, predetermined to be created from it, whose confusion and information was given the name of abyss and darkness. But whatever is true of these sentences, it must be believed that God is the author and creator of all the things that have appeared, both visible and invisible, not in terms of the vices they may have against nature, but insofar as it belongs to the same natures, for there is absolutely no creature that has not received from God the principle of being and the perfection of its own kind and substance. [Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis]

BASIL OF CAESAREA. The Earth was Invisible and Unfinished. 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 while 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. 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.

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. 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.

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. 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. 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.

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. 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: grain 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.  Genesis 1:2 Darkness was upon the face of the deep. 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, Acts 20:29 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, and the detestable heresy of the Manicheans, 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 yourself that which will cause your 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; 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; 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. 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.

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. 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. 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, did not live in darkness, but enjoyed a condition fitted for them in light and spiritual joy.

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, the light which made the Apostle say Giving thanks unto the Father, which has made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light. Colossians 1:12 Finally, if the condemned are sent into outer darkness 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.

And the Spirit of God was borne upon the face of the waters. 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, 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 cherished 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: a sufficient proof for those who ask if the Holy Spirit took an active part in the creation of the world. [The Hexameron]

JEROME OF STRIDON. AND THE SPIRIT OF GOD MOVED OVER THE WATERS. — In the place of the word “moved” was written from our manuscripts, the Hebrew said MEREFETH, which we can render as “was lying on” or “was maintained in its warmth,” in the likeness of a bird, vivifying the eggs by the warmth. By this we understand that this is not said of the soul of the world, as some think, but of the Holy Spirit, who is called the Vivifier of all things from the beginning. If he is a vivifier, he is consequently a creator, and if he is a creator, he is God. "Send," he said, "your Spirit, and they will be created (Ps. 103:30)." [Hebrew Questions on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Now the earth was invisible and unformed. Why did the Lord, I ask you, create the bright and perfect heaven, and the shapeless earth? Certainly, he did not act without reason, but he wanted to reveal to us, through this masterpiece of creation, that he also produced the other parts, and that it is not impotence on his part if they are less perfect. Another reason for creating the unformed earth is that it is the mother and nurse of the human race: we are born from its bosom and we live from its productions; it is the homeland and burial of all. men, the center that unites us all and the source that enriches us with a thousand goods. But, lest the feeling of need should lead men to worship him idolatrous, Moses shows us shapeless and naked, so that we do not attribute his fruitfulness to him, and that we bring back the glory to Him who from nothingness… Now the darkness, says Moses, covered the face of the abyss, and the Spirit of God was carried on the waters; but what does this word mean, the Spirit of God was carried on the waters? It seems to me that it reveals to us that the waters possessed an effective and vital virtue. They were therefore not stagnant and motionless, but they moved with a certain activity. For every body that rests in total immobility is completely useless, while the movement makes it fit for a thousand uses. Therefore the Holy Prophet said that the Spirit of God was carried on the waters, to show us that they possessed an energetic and secret force, and it is not for no reason that Scripture expresses thus; for it wants to dispose us to believe what it will tell us later that animals were produced from these waters by the command of God, creator of the universe. [Homilies on Genesis]

TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE. For the depth and the darkness underlay the earth. Since the deep was under the earth, and the darkness was over the deep, undoubtedly both the darkness and the deep were under the earth. For since the waters were over the earth, which they covered, while the spirit was over the waters, both the spirit and the waters were alike over the earth. Of darkness, indeed, the Lord Himself by Isaiah says, "I formed the light, and I created darkness." Isaiah 45:7 Of the wind also Amos says, "He that strengthens the thunder, and creates the wind, and declares His Christ unto men;" Amos 4:13 thus showing that that wind was created which was reckoned with the formation of the earth, which was wafted over the waters, balancing and refreshing and animating all things: not (as some suppose) meaning God Himself by the spirit, on the ground that "God is a Spirit," John 4:24 because the waters would not be able to bear up their Lord; but He speaks of that spirit of which the winds consist, as He says by Isaiah, "Because my spirit went forth from me, and I made every blast."[Against Hermogenes 31]

1:3 And God said, Let there be light, and there was light.

ALCUIN OF YORK. WHAT IS MEANT BY "GOD SAID: BE LIGHT MADE"? — Answer. The writer wrote "said" for "made" in order to show the speed or ease of God's work. [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 31]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. How did God say, Let there be light? Is it in the time or in the eternity of his Word? Now, time implies change; from that time God has been able to pronounce this word only through the medium of a creature, since it is without any change. But if God has used a creature to say, "Let there be light," how would light be the first to be created, since there would have existed previously a creature that he would have used to say that light is? Must it be, on the basis of the passage, "In the beginning God created heaven and earth," to admit that light was not created at the beginning, and that then a heavenly creature could be heard in the succession of the duration this word: "Let there be light? If it were so, it would be at the moment when the visible light was created in the eyes of the body, that God would have used a pure spirit, created earlier and at the very moment that he made heaven and earth, to pronounce the Fiat lux, as could be pronounced by an interior and mysterious movement, this kind of creature under divine inspiration.

Or again, when God says, "Let there be light," would he have sounded a material sound like that which broke out when he said, "You are my beloved Son?" And by means of the creature to whom he gave being when he made heaven and earth; and before the creation of the light intended to appear to the sound of that voice? And if it were so, in what language would that divine word have been pronounced? "Let there be light?" The tongues diversified only after the flood, when the Tower of Babel was raised (Gen. XI, 17). What, then, would be this simple, uniform language in which God would have uttered: "Let there be light? What would be the being who had to hear, understand this word and serve it as an echo? But is not this a hollow dream and a conjecture of the flesh?

What should I say? The idea hidden under these words, "fiat lux," is it not, instead of the very sound of words, the true voice of God? And is not this idea of ​​the very nature of the Word of which it is said: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was in God, and the Word was God? For if everything was done by him. It is clear that He also shed light, when God said, "Let there be light." According to this principle, the divine word, "Let there be light," is eternal; for the Word of good, God in the bosom of God, only begotten of good, is co-eternal with his Father. However, the divine word emitted in the eternal Word, produced the creatures only in time. Although indeed the human expressions of time, of day, have relation to the duration, the designation of the moment when a divine act is to be accomplished is eternal in the Word; as for the act, it is fulfilled at the moment when the conception of the Word must be realized, which remains outside of all time, because everything in it is eternal.

The light is created; but what is its essence? should we see an intelligent creature or physical agent? In the first case, she would be the first to be created and arrived at perfection by virtue of the sovereign word. For the name of heaven was first named, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth," she would have been called to the Creator by the word, "Let there be light," and this expression would mean how this creature is attached to God and has been enlightened by him.

Why was it said, "In the beginning did God create heaven and earth," and was it not written, "In the beginning God said, Let heaven and earth be, and heaven and earth were, in recounting this creation, the same form as that of light? Does Scripture want to embrace under the general expression of heaven and earth the entire creation, then to detail how God acted, repeating to each special creation: "God says," to express that God has done by his Word all his works?...

How could the being created before the origin of time have been able to pronounce in time: "What is light? It is a secret difficult to discover; for the sounding voice could not make this voice heard; since all sound of this kind is something physical. Could it be that God would have formed a still imperfect matter with a voice to express: "Let there be light? From then on, there would have existed a sound substance, created and shaped before the light. But, in this hypothesis, the time had to already exist to be traversed by the voice and to transmit the successive intervals of the sounds. Now, if to transmit the vibrations of these words: "Let there be light," the time precedes the creation of light, to what day must we attach it, since it has only been spoken of the first day, where was the light made? Must we see in this day all the time used either to form the sound substance or to create the light? But such a command must start from a being who speaks to strike the hearing: the ear, indeed, needs to hear that the air is set in motion. And how to attribute such a meaning to an invisible, inorganic matter, of which God would have echoed to say, "Let there be light? There is a contradiction there which must repel every serious mind.

Is it therefore by virtue of a spiritual movement, though temporal, that the "fiat lux," a movement from the eternal God, was pronounced and, thanks to the co-eternal Word, communicated to the spiritual being or to heaven from heaven already created as these words indicate: "In the beginning God created heaven and earth? Or should it be thought that this expression, without implying either a sound or even an intellectual movement, would have been fixed in some way by the word co-eternal to his Father, and engraved in the reason of the immaterial being to communicate the life and order to dark chaos, and to produce light? But if God did not command in time; if this commandment has not been heard in time by a creature called, outside of time, to contemplate the truth; if the role of this creature is limited to transmitting in the lower regions of the world, by a very spiritual activity, the ideas engraved in it by the immutable Wisdom and, so to speak, all intellectual words, it is very difficult to conceive how temporal movements occur to form beings and to govern them. As for the light, which first received the order to be molded and formed, if it is necessary to admit that it holds the first rank in the creation, it is confused with the life of the intelligence, the intelligence who must turn to the Creator to be enlightened, under pain of floating in uncertainty and disorder. Now, the moment when she turned to God and was enlightened, was when the word pronounced in the Word of God was fulfilled: "Let there be light. " [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. And God said: let there be light and light was made. We should not believe that by saying God let the light be said by a voice emitted by the lungs, teeth and tongue, but ineffably it was said let there be light. Carnales would be such thoughts, and to understand carnally, is a death (Rom. 8:6). We can ask (excluding this impiety, namely, that the Word of God, the only begotten Son is the voice that is uttered, like our verb), if this was said it was said by the Only Begotten Son, or the Only Begotten Son is that which was said, because the Word of God, by whom all things were created, is called Word (Jn. 1:1,3). The Word of God by whom all things were made, neither began to be, nor will it cease to be: begotten without beginning, coeternal to the Father. Therefore, if that which was said let there be light, it began to be said and finished to be said, we understand that this word was said by the Son before she herself is the Son, however, this was also ineffably said. Do not slip into the soul some carnal idea and torment the holy and spiritual thought; it is a reckless and dangerous opinion to understand, in the proper sense, that in the nature of God something begins and ceases to exist; tolerable opinion in children and carnal, not to remain in it, but to be like the beginning of a resurgence to the fullness of truth. Everything that is said of God, which begins or ends, in no way is to be understood what happens in the nature of God, but in his creature, which is subject to him in a wonderful way.

And God said: let there be light. Is it the light that hurts these carnal eyes or some other hidden one that we are not allowed to contemplate with the eyes of the body? And if it is hidden, will it be bodily and will it perhaps expand in the highest parts of the world? Or is it disembodied, as is the soul, to which belongs the examination of what is to be avoided and what is should it be desired by the bodily senses, of which the souls of the beasts are also lacking? Or is it the most excellent that manifests itself in reasoning and that is the beginning of everything that has been created? Whatever light is meant in this word we must believe that it has been made and created, and that it is not that light by which the same Wisdom of God shines, which is not created but begotten by Him. Do not believe that God was without light until He created this one that we are dealing with now; because of this, as the same words show, it is commanded to be done, for they say: and God said: let there be light, and the light was made, One is the light begotten by God and another made by Him; the birth of God is the same Wisdom of God, the one made by Him is any other changeable whether corporeal or incorporeal.

Difficult or perhaps absolutely impossible is that man can understand if there is any other light outside of heaven, which, however, diffuses and spills through space and encompasses the world. But as we are allowed here to understand a disembodied light, if we say that this book does not speak only of the visible creature, but of universal creation, why dwell on this controversy? Perhaps what men seek, when they ask when the angels were made, have meaning in this light, in a way that is certainly concise, but also very convenient and very rational. [Unfinished Commentary on Genesis]

BASIL OF CAESAREA. And God said, Let there be light. 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, 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.

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 air 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. [The Hexameron]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. Accordingly, God created the sun on the fourth day, lest you think it is the cause of the day. In other words, what we said about the plants we will say also about the day, namely, that three days occurred before the creation of the sun.  The Lord wanted to make daylight more brilliant by means of this heavenly body. [Homilies on Genesis]

JOHN OF DAMASCUS. Fire is one of the four elements, light and with a greater tendency to ascend than the others. It has the power of burning and also of giving light, and it was made by the Creator on the first day. For the divine Scripture says, And God said, Let there be light, and there was light. Genesis 1:3 Fire is not a different thing from what light is, as some maintain. Others again hold that this fire of the universe is above the air and call it ether. In the beginning, then, that is to say on the first day, God created light, the ornament and glory of the whole visible creation. For take away light and all things remain in undistinguishable darkness, incapable of displaying their native beauty. [The Orthodox Faith]

TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE. "And God said, Let there be light, and there was light." Genesis 1:3 Immediately there appears the Word, "that true light, which lights man on his coming into the world," John 1:9 and through Him also came light upon the world. From that moment God willed creation to be effected in the Word, Christ being present and ministering unto Him: and so God created. The Word also Himself assume His own form and glorious garb, His own sound and vocal utterance, when God says, "Let there be light." Genesis 1:3 This is the perfect nativity of the Word, when He proceeds forth from God. [Against Praxeas 7,12]

1:4-5 And God saw the light that it was good, and God divided between the light and the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night, and there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 1:4). WHAT IS MEANT BY "GOD SAW THAT IT WAS GOOD"? — Answer. He decided that what he had made should endure, because the same goodness on account of which he had decided that it should be made. [Question 35]

(Gen. 1:5). WHAT IS MEANT BY "GOD CALLED THE LIGHT DAY"? — Answer. That is, he caused it to be called that. [Question 32]

WHY DO WE READ THAT LIGHT WAS CREATED ON THE FIRST DAY? — Answer. It was consistent with God's works that the temporal light should first be made by [variant: from] the eternal light on the first day, in order for there to be a means by which the other things that he would create might be visible. (Bed. Hexm. II, PL 91, col. 16.) [Question 33]

WHAT IS MEANT BY "THERE WAS EVENING AND MORNING ONE DAY"? — Answer. The end of a completed work and the beginning of a work to be begun. [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 34]

AMBROSIASTER. SUCCESSION OF THE DAY AND NIGHT. — According to the order followed in the creation of the world, we see that the darkness preceded the light. In fact, the elements which were to serve the creation of the world, and which were created simultaneously, appear to us to be devoid of light (Gen. 1:2), that is to say, water, earth, darkness of which the world has been formed, that is, of an invisible or dark matter, as it is said in the book of Wisdom, whose author is Solomon. (Wis. 11:18.) The Holy Letters attest that darkness and water were created when they related these words of God in the prophet Isaiah: "I, God, have made light, I created the darkness (Isa. 45:47).” The Holy Spirit also teaches us by the mouth of David that the waters were created and the earth was established on the waters (Ps. 135:9), which is according to the authority of the Gospel (Jn. 1:3), and to the tradition of the apostles, who testify that all things have been done; and for nothing to be excepted, the Apostle takes care to say, "Let the things that are in heaven, or those that are on the earth (Col. 1:16)." As far as the earth is concerned, we read that the darkness existed before the light, as to the order followed in creation and not as to excellence, for the light is worth a thousand times better than the darkness. Now in the organization of the world the light receives the name of day, and the darkness the name of night; that is to say, when the light ceases to illuminate the darkness, the time which passes until the return of the light is called night, and the time when it penetrates the darkness of its light is called day. It is said, then, that it is night when one is in the hope of the day to come, and that it is day when one is waiting for the night to follow. When the succession of day and night has ceased with the end of the world, there will be nothing but darkness and light. Indeed, it can no longer be said that it is night when the darkness will be continuous, nor that it is day when the light will have no more decline. Eternity stops the use of those names that began with the world. Thus, before the creation of the light which received the name of day, it is not read that there is night, but darkness; and after the disappearance of the light which shines upon them, they have received the name of evening and night. As far as we can judge, night is subordinated to the day. From what we read that darkness existed before light, it does not follow that they are preferable to light; For heaven existed before the sun, and yet the sun is superior to it; the earth was created before man as well as the beasts of the fields and other animals, and yet they are subjected to man. The night, therefore, must not be above the day, because we read that the darkness has preceded, since light prevails much over darkness, and day is much preferable to night. As we said above, light was created when the darkness existed. "And God gave the light the name of day, and darkness the name of night, and evening and morning was the first day.” If there were not in the day, there would have been no night, for it was when the darkness ceased to be enlightened, when the day was gone reads that evening elapsed. And when the light came to shine after the evening, it formed the first day after the night, so that night came after the day. It is worthy, indeed, and in conformity with reason, that the inferior nature is in everything subject to a more excellent nature. Why then put the night before daybreak, since its name comes only after the name of day? For it had not received the name of night or evening, if the light had not shone for the space of a day, after which the evening was set at night. The day becomes evening to make you understand that night is a part of the day, for the day is complete only when the night is past. Thus we say, The year is three hundred and sixty-five days, and we do not separate from it the nights. In counting the days, we also count the nights which are included under the name of days. If, on the contrary, the night was preceding the day, the day would be understood under the name of night. Who ever thought of saying, "I will see you after five nights, and not after five days." Nowhere, if we have a good memory, we read that night is set before daylight. "Moses," says the Scriptures, "was on the mountain forty days and forty nights (24:18).” The Psalmist also says, "The sun shall not bother you during the day, nor the moon in the night.” And to borrow an example from the beginning of the world, we read in Genesis: "Let the bodies of light be made in the sky, and shine on the earth (Ps. 120:6), one bigger to start the day, the other less great to start the night. Now the moon cannot be placed above the sun, just as night cannot be placed above the light; but night is subordinate to the day as the moon is in the sun.  The Gospel also shows us the nights included under the name and in the enumeration of days. "There are some," says the Savior, "who are here present, who shall not die till they have seen the reign of God." And he adds: "And it came to pass about a week after, and so on (Jn. 1:28).” Are not the nights included in these eight days? And in another place: "This," says the Evangelist, "took place in Bethany beyond the Jordan, where John baptized. The next day, John saw Jesus coming to him (Jn. 1:28).” Did he say: The next night? Further on he says, "The next day Jesus wanted to go to Galilee," and in the following chapter: "Three days after that, a wedding was celebrated and Cana was celebrated in Galilee (Jn. 11:1).” Everywhere the day has pre-eminence over the night which is subordinate to it. If the day was understood under the name of night, night would precede the day. The Romans reign over the Spaniards, the Gauls, the Africans, and the other peoples who are subject to them, and by this very reason these people take the name of Romans; thus the night which is subordinate to the day is included under the name of day. The reason for this is that the Jews begin the celebration of the Sabbath in the evening, and they do not consider the reason for this commandment. The day before, they must buy and prepare their food for the sabbath day, and purify themselves according to the law. Now, can they do these things during the night and begin the Sabbath with the rising of the day? There is no doubt that the resurrection of our Lord took place at night; yet it is in the day that it is honored. It is in the day that this resurrection is celebrated, and that day is called the day of the Lord. Do you not read in the Psalms: "This is the day which the Lord hath made? (Ps. 117:24)” We do not say the night of the Lord, because the day has primacy here. Whether it be a matter of the past or of the day to come, night is always subordinate to it, because it is of an inferior nature, to the apostle's testimony: "You are the children of the day and the day light, and not of night and darkness (I Thess. 5:5).” If we wish to take an example in consuls, we shall see that the first named is the one who was the first chosen. Is it not customary to say, "Who will be consul with him?" If night was before daylight, it would be named first. It is so true that it is by day that we begin to count time, that if, for example, we say: tomorrow is the sixth of the calends, we mean all the space which flows from one morning to another and which is composed of one whole day and one night. So again the moon at the beginning of the world was created on the fourteenth day, for it must have gleamed all night, and the next morning was its fifteenth day. How, then, can any doubt remain about the pre-eminence of the day? The disputes of a certain number have compelled us to extend ourselves at length to an obvious matter, for the text of Scripture alone is sufficient to conclude the question, since it clearly shows us the day before the night. All the reasons we have explained are borrowed from the history of the origin of the world. But if we wish to elevate ourselves to higher considerations, by giving our spirit a spiritual vigor, we shall see that it is improper to affirm that darkness was created before light. If the nature of light is celestial and the nature of earthly darkness, it is absurd to think that light was made after the darkness. Moses says that light has been made, but for the part of the world that it illuminates, and it does not say that it only then began to exist. Indeed, all spiritual beings were created before material beings, and the light that already existed in the higher regions descended into the lower ones to shine like a flaming beam in a house. But for what reason is the darkness named before the light, since it always follow the light? Let us say that celestial and spiritual things are enlightened by their nature, whereas earthly and fleshly things are darkness, so that the nature of darkness appears to subsist only by the power of light, because all that is inferior depends on which is above. If we look carefully, we will find darkness even in the sun. Place yourself near it, it will appear to you so striking that you cannot look at it; move away a little, its radiance will be the same, but you can stop your gaze for a moment; but it is less brilliant, and its brilliance is always diminished by reason of your separation. There is in it, then, as a successive weakening which proclaims the darkness, and this point that the darkness appears to spring from the light. The one who made the light also created darkness, in the way that in creating the water he created the earth at the same time; and the darkness is the defect of light, as the earth is the solid part of the waters. God is the only one who has no decline, and although he is everywhere, and contains all things in himself, his splendor is so striking that he cannot be seen by anyone, does not consent to temper His brilliance. The Savior himself, when clothed in a body, was visible only when he wished, even without being shut up. The glorious glory in the midst of which he appeared on the mountain in his transfiguration, remained hidden in his body, and manifested itself externally only when he wished it (Matt. 17:1). One, how was he hidden without being shut up? If he could enter with his body in the place where his disciples were, and when the doors were closed, how could his divinity not penetrate all things? that is to say that its rays cannot be intercepted because it suffers no decline. God therefore fills everything with His presence, but we say, however, that He is the place where He appears and wants to manifest Himself to the gaze. All things are in God, because he is above all things, to the apostle's testimony: "It is in him that we have life, movement and being (Acts 17:28),” however, it is only in that which he wishes to be. He is in everything by the mystery of his immensity, and he manifests himself by an eloquence and his providence only in whatever he desires. [Questions on the Old and New Testaments]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. The Word that created the light having been eternal, since the Word co-eternal to his Father is outside time, we may be wondering if the act of creation was also eternal. But can we stop at this question, when the Scripture, after the creation of the light and its separation from the darkness, gives to one the name of day, to others that of night, and adds: "And there was evening and morning, an accomplished day. By this we see that this work of God was done in a day, at the end of which was the evening or the beginning of the night; when the night was over, the day's duration was complete, and the morning was the dawn of a second day when God was to perform a new work.

The real enigma is how God pronounces the fiat lux in the eternal intelligence of his Word without the slightest succession of syllables, the light is washed so slowly, in the space of a day until 'in the evening. Could it be that the light came in a moment, and that the duration of the day was devoted to separating it from the darkness and to naming both? But it would be strange that this act would have asked God for the time we put in talking about it. For the separation of light and darkness was the immediate consequence of the creation of light, since it could not happen without being distinguished from darkness.

"God called the light day, and the darkness, night; But even admitting that this act would have been accomplished with clearly articulated words, would it have taken more time than we would say: that light is called day, and darkness night? One will not push the extravagance without doubt to the point of imagining that, God surpassing everything by his greatness, the syllables that came out of his mouth, however few they were, had taken a volume capable of filling a whole day.  Let us add that God has named the light day, and the darkness night, in his word co-eternal, I mean, in the all interior thought of his immutable Wisdom, without resorting to under material. We still want to know in what language God spoke, assuming that he used a human language; and one wonders whether it was necessary to employ fugitive sounds, in the absence of any being able to hear them: to such a question impossible to answer.

Must we advance that, the divine work instantly accomplished, the light shone, before the arrival of the night, all the time necessary to form a day, that the darkness succeeded the light as long as it was necessary to form a night, and that, the first day elapsed, the dawn of the next day arose? By supporting this opinion, I would be very afraid to make people laugh, either those who know with full certainty or those who can notice that at the very moment when the night reigns in our country, the light illuminates the lands that the sun crosses to return from the west to the east, and therefore, therefore, in the twenty-four hours of the diurnal revolution, it is impassive not to see reign here at night, elsewhere in the day. Shall we, then, place God at a point in the space where the evening occurred, just as the light was leaving this region to illuminate another? No doubt it is said in the book of Ecclesiastes, "And the sun is rising, and the sun is falling, and it returns to its place," that is to say, to its point of departure; we read again: "When washing, he goes towards the south and describes a circle towards the aquilon. We therefore have the day when the sun illuminates the southern part of the globe, and we have the night when he has described the circle which brings him back to the north. But it is impossible at this moment that the day does not shine in another country where the sun is on the horizon. To admit this hypothesis, it would be necessary to abandon one's imagination to the fictions of poets, to imagine with them that the sun plunges into the sea, and that, after bathing there, he leaves it in the morning on the opposite side. Again, if it were so, the bottom of the ocean would be illuminated by the rays of the sun and the day would shine in its abysses. Why, indeed, should not the sun shed its light in the water, since it would not have the property of extinguishing it! But we feel how strange this hypothesis is; besides, the sun did not exist yet.

In short, is it a spiritual light that was created on the first day? How did she disappear to make way for the night? Is it a material light? What is the light that becomes invisible after sunset, since there was neither moon nor constellation? Is she always in the same region of the sky as the sun, so that, without being the radiation of this star, she serves him as an inseparable companion and remains confused with him? But we only reproduce the problem with all its difficulty. Light being, in this hypothesis; intimately united with the sun, executes the same revolution from the West to the East; it is therefore in the other hemisphere, when ours is enveloped in the darkness of the night; which leads to this ungodly consequence, that God was isolated in a certain region from which the light departs, to produce evening in his eyes. Finally, would God have created the light in the very place where he was soon to create man? Could it be when the light left this place that evening would have occurred? Would she have bet on another part of the world, to reappear in the morning, after having completed her revolution?

For what purpose has the sun been created, the king of the day (Ps. 136:8), the torch of the earth, if, to produce the day, all that is needed is the light, also called the day? Did it first illuminate the upper regions? Was the earth too remote to feel its effects, and was the sun necessary to communicate the blessing of the day to the lower regions of the universe? It could be further argued that the daylight was increased by the sun's radiance, and seen in the daylight less bright than that of today without an author claiming that light was the primitive agent , introduced by the Creator into his work, when it was said, "Let there be light, and light was," but that the use of light was not regulated until the luminaries appeared, in the order of days that it pleased God to adopt to compose his works. But what became of the light when it came in the evening to make the night reign? That's what he does not say, and it's a secret, in my opinion, difficult to penetrate. It can not be believed, indeed, that the light was extinguished, to give place to the darkness of the night, and that it revived, to give birth in the morning, before the sun was used to accomplish this revolution because the role of the sun does not begin, according to Scripture, until the fourth day.

But by virtue of what revolution was effected, before the creation of the sun, the alternating return of three days and three nights, without the light, to see in this word only a physical phenomenon, having changed nature? It is a difficult problem to solve. It might be said, perhaps, that God called darkness the mass formed by the earth and the waters, before their separation, which took place only on the third day, whether this thick matter was impenetrable to light, or that a mass as considerable, had to remain in the shadow, as it happens for bodies whose only face is illuminated. In any body, indeed, any side where light can not penetrate, remains in the shadow, since we call shadow, the face of a body inaccessible to the light that would spread there, if it did not meet an opaque material. Let us admit that this shade is proportionate to the extent of the earth and covers an area equal to that illuminated by day, night is explained. Darkness indeed does not always assume the night. In an immense cavern, the light of which can not pierce the depths, because of the mass which opposes its passage, there is certainly darkness, for the light is absent from it, and does not illuminate any part of it; however, darkness of this kind has never been called night: this term is reserved for the darkness which spreads over a part of the globe, when the day leaves it. In the same way every kind of light does not deserve the name of day, for example, that promised by the moon, the stars, the torches, the lightning, and in general any shining body: it is called day only as long as she periodically succeeds the night.

However, if the primitive light, motionless or rotated, enveloped the earth on all sides, we no longer see in which place it could admit the night in its place: because it never left a place to withdraw before the night. Had it been created only in one hemisphere, and, in describing its turn, did it allow the night to describe its own in the other hemisphere? In this case, as the earth was at this moment covered by the waters, this liquid globe could unimpededly produce, on one side, the day, thanks to the presence of the light, on the other, at night, thanks to the the disappearance of the light: the night reigned since the evening in one hemisphere, while the light went in the other. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. (Gen. 1:4) And God saw that the light was good. This sentence is not to be understood as an explosion of joy on the part of God before an unheard-of and strange good, but as an indication of the approval of the work. Because what more properly is said about God, insofar as it can be expressed by men, that when these three words are written, it was said, it was done, it pleased him, it is understood that in that word that was written, he said, the domain is insinuated of God; and in which it was consigned, it was done, its power declared; and in which he stamped himself, did he like to show his kindness? Since these ineffable things had to be communicated through man to men, so they must also express themselves so that they could take advantage of everyone.

And God divided the light of darkness. Here the clarity with which these things of the divine works were executed is clearly manifested, because there is no man to whom it occurs to him that in such a way the light was mixed with the darkness, and, therefore, it was necessary to separate them. after. For the same reason that light was made, the division between light and darkness was followed. Because what company can there be between them? (2 Cor. 6:14) Then God separated the light from the darkness when he made the light. The absence of this is called darkness. The difference between light and darkness is the same as between the one who is clothed and naked, or between what is full and empty, and other things like that.

We have already said how many ways the word light can be understood, and also that the privations of it can be called darkness. One is the light that is seen with the eyes of the body, which is also corporeal, as for example that of the sun, that of the moon, that of the stars and some other, if it exists, of the same gender. Opposed to this kind of light are the darknesses, which are where this is not found. There is a light by which we perceive life and it helps us to distinguish the things that are transmitted by the body to the judgment and criterion of the soul, such as white or black, melodious or hoarse, of pleasant or smelly smell, sweet or bitter, hot or cold, and others of the same species. One is the light that is perceived by the eyes and the other that makes us feel for them. It resides in bodies; This, although it perceives through the body the things that it feels, resides in the soul. The darkness, contrary to this, is the insensibility or, to put it better, the lack of the sensitive faculty, that is, they are not feeling, although the things that could be felt were introduced into the sense, if that being were to be given. , this light or this sensitive faculty, for which you feel. This sensitivity is not lacking when the body has no senses, as happens in the blind and deaf, since in their souls there is this light that we are dealing with now; what they only lack are the body's senses. Nor is this sensitivity lacking, just as the sound is lacking in silence when the voice is not heard; this light is found in the soul, and only the soul lacks the means of the body, not what the feeling produces; then although for these reasons he does not feel, he does not lack light for that reason. When the soul of this power lacks, it is no longer usually called this being, soul, but only life, as it is that which the trees, the vines and any other kind of plants manifest; unless we may come to believe that these plants have such a life, for not a few heretics disparaging to the extreme, grant them not only sensitivity through the body, that is, sight, hearing, the distinction between fire and the heat, but also the understanding; and they say they know our reason and distinguish our thoughts. But dealing with these things is another matter. Then the insensibility is the darkness of this light, and these take place when any living being lacks the faculty of feeling. Thus, it is granted that this faculty is properly called light, which grants that we can call light the faculty by which things are perceived. When we say "it is evident that this is pleasant, that this is sweet, that this is cold", and so of the other sensations that we perceive by the senses of the body, then the light by which we perceive these things is certainly inside the soul, although through the senses of the body are introduced into it the things that in this way feel. The third kind of light that exists in creatures can be said to be the one through which we reason; the darkness opposite to this light is the irracionabilidad, as they are the souls of the beasts.

The primordial meaning that the Scripture wishes to convey about light, whether it is the etheric, whether of the sensory of which the beasts participate, or of the rational one that is common to angels and man, it is that it was created by God in the nature of things; that God divided the light of darkness by the mere fact of having created the light; that it is also important not to forget that light is one thing and deprivation of light is another; that God ordained light and darkness. However, it was not said that God created darkness, because He made beings, but not the lack of being, which belongs to nothingness. Hence, by the Artificer God all things were made, which we also understand were arranged in order by Him, when it was said: and God separated the light from the darkness, not that regulating and administering God all things, not they had their order the same privations. As in the song some moderate intervals of silence intervene, and although they are privations of voice, nevertheless, they are admirably ordered by those who know how to sing, giving the whole song a certain melody; and as the shadows make the most important of them stand out in the painting, and they do not please for their beauty, but for the order in which they are placed, so God is not the author of our vices, but he orders them when he places the sinners in their own place and forces them to suffer the penalties deserved by them, applying to the effect the Gospel passage: the sheep will be placed on the right and the kids on the left (Mt. 25:33). Then certain things God creates and orders them, others just order them. God does and commands the righteous; to sinners, in how much they are sinners, God does not do them, he orders them only, since he places the first on the right, and the left on the second; by commanding these to go to eternal fire he does so taking into account the merits. Thus, He makes and orders the natures and forms of things and only orders, does not do, the privations of the forms and defects of the natures; therefore, let there be light and light was made, but it was not said to do darkness and darkness was made. Of these two things he did, then, one, the other not: but he ordered both to separate God from the light of darkness. In short, doing it, everything is beautiful; By ordering Him, everything is beautiful.

(Gen. 1:5) And God called the light day and the darkness night. Since the words, light and day, names of the same thing, and the words darkness and night, names of another, it was agreed to call each thing with these two names, so that the thing to which the name was imposed could also be called by another name, without being able to mean anything else. And so it was said: God called the light day so that indifferently it could also be said backwards, God called day light and night darkness. But what will we answer to the one who asks us? Did the name of day prevail or the name of light prevail? These two words, as soon as they are pronounced with a human voice in order to signify something, are names. In the same way you can ask about the other two, that is, did the name of night or of darkness have darkness been given? According to what Sacred Scripture narrates, it is clear that in the light the name of day was given and darkness was imposed the name of night, because by saying he did. God the light and divided the light of darkness, it was not yet a matter of assigning names; later, then, the names day and night were used. But being as they are without doubt the words light and darkness, also mean things, the same as day and night; It is evident that you can not enunciate otherwise a thing that has received a denomination, if not by some name. Or is it that this denomination is to be taken as if it were the same division that God made? Not all light is day nor all darkness is night, for it is designated by the names of oía and de noche to light and darkness, which are ordered and divided among themselves with certain alternations. Every word is used to designate a thing, for which the name that designates the object is called as denotante or sign. Denote, then, that is, point and continually help to discern. Perhaps the same having divided the light and the darkness, is the same as calling the light day and the darkness night, so that having ordered these things is having called them. Or is it that these words want to suggest to us what he called light and what darkness, as if he said God made light and divided the light of darkness; and in the light he called it day and the darkness he called night, so that you do not believe that it is another light that is not the day nor of other darknesses that are not the night? Because if all light could be understood by day and all the darkness under the name of roche, then perhaps there would have been no need to say: and God called day and night darkness.

You can also ask what day and night it is. If you want to understand this day that begins with the birth of the sun and ends with its hiding, and from this night that extends from sunset to the birth of the sun, I can not find how this could have been, before the luminaries of heaven. Or is it that perhaps these spaces of hours and times, without alteration of glare and shadow, could already be called that? But and in what way then does it agree with that rational or irrational light, if in these words is understood this change that by the names of day and night is meant? Or is it that, not according to what happens, but according to what can happen, these things are insinuated because error and a certain incapacity of sense can take over reason?

And the evening was made and the morning was made, one day. It is not called here day in the same way as when it was said and called God in the light of day, but in the same way that we say, for example, of thirty days the month consists, in these days we also include the nights, but previously it was said day to separate it from the night. Thus, as that work of creation implied what was done during the light of day, it is rightly said that the afternoon was made and the morning was done, which they completed one day; One day was completed from the beginning of one day until the beginning of the other, that is, from the morning of one day to the morning of the next day, to whose days, as I said, added the nights, we called days. But how was the evening made and how was the morning done? Did God need so much space to make light and separate it from darkness as it stretches out in the light of day, that is, not counting the night? And if God needs time to execute something, then how do you understand what is written: to you is subject, when you want, the power? (Ps. 12:8) Or is it that all things are finished in God, as Are they in reason and in art, not with extension of time, but in the same virtue by which it makes things stable, those that we contemplate but not permanent? It is not credible that as in our conversation, where some words come first and then the others follow each other, happens in art, which, working steadily in conversation, makes a speech beautiful. Then, although there is no need of time for God to work (to whom the power is subject, when he wants), however, the temporal natures temporarily execute their movements. Therefore perhaps it was said: and the larde was made and the morning was made one day, first as it understands the reason that it could or should have been done in this way, but not in the way it is done in time intervals. Who said: he who abideth eternally created all things at once, (Sir. 18:1) contemplated, in the same inspiration, the work in his mind, but very comfortably ordered in that book the narration of the things done by God in intervals of time, in order that the true disposition of created things, which could not be comprehended with a permanent gaze by the souls of less scope, exposed in this way of speaking, would see it as with the carnal eyes. [Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis]

BASIL OF CAESAREA. 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good. 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. 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: 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; Genesis 1:4 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.

Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day and the darkness he called Night. 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.

 Genesis 1:5 And the evening and the morning were the first day. 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. 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, says the Psalmist. Few and evil have the days of the years of my life been, Genesis 47:9 said Jacob, and elsewhere all the days of my life. 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. 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, Joel 2:11 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. Amos 5:18 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. 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. [The Hexameron]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. And God divided the light from the darkness, that is to say, he designated them a separate dwelling, and fixed a special and determined time for them. He then gave them a special name, for God, says Moses, called the light, day, and darkness, night. Observe as one word and a single commandment realize this happy separation, and do this admirable work that our reason can not understand! See how the Holy Prophet has adapted to the weakness of our intelligence! or rather, it is God himself who has deigned to speak by his mouth, in order to teach men what was the order of creation, who is the author of the universe and how did he produce it? all creatures. Humankind was still too rude to understand higher language. This is why Moses, whose Holy Spirit directed the word, was proportioned to the infirmity of his hearers; He has therefore explained all things to them with method, and it is so true that he only condescendingly uses this temperament of style and thought, that the Evangelist, the son of thunder, follows a very opposite course. He wrote at a time when men were more advanced in understanding the truth; so he raises them suddenly to the most sublime mysteries. For after saying, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, he adds: He was the true light that enlightens every man coming into the world. (John, I, 1, 9.) And, indeed, as in the creation that sensible light which occurred to the word of the Lord, dissipated material darkness, so spiritual light casts out the darkness of error and bring to the truth those who go astray.

Let us, then, receive with gratitude the instructions given to us by Holy Scripture, and do not oppose the truth, lest we remain in darkness. But on the contrary, let us come to the light, and make coverings worthy of day and light. St. Paul exhorts us when he says: Let us walk in decency as in the daytime, and do not act in darkness. (Rom XIII, 13.) And God, said Moses, called the light, day, and darkness, night. But I notice an omission and I repair it. After that God said, "Let there be light, and there was light," Moses added, and God saw that the light was good. Consider here, my dear brother, with what art the sacred writer tempers his expressions. What! Did God not know that the light was good before He created it; and did not her sight reveal to her the beauty of the moment when he had produced it? But what sensible man would admit such a doubt! for we see that no workman undertakes a work, does not work it, and does not polish it without knowing in advance the price and the usage; and you would want the Supreme Worker who pulled all the creatures out of nothing, did not know before producing it that the light was good! Why does Moses use this way of speaking? it is because this holy prophet humbles himself and adapts himself to the ordinary use of men. When they have worked with great care an important work, and they have happily completed it, they examine it closely and experience it in order to better know everything, merit. And so the Holy Scripture is proportioned to the weakness of our understanding, saying that God saw that the light was good.

And God divided the light from the darkness; and he called the light, day, and darkness, night. He marked them thus a definite time, and from the beginning he fixed in the light, and in the darkness, the limits which they were never to cross. It only takes a little good sense to convince oneself that from that moment until today, the light has not exceeded the limits God has marked for it, and that the darkness has also been contained within their limits, without bringing any trouble or confusion. But should not this simple observation compel all unbelievers to believe what Scripture tells us, and to practice what it commands us? They would at least imitate those elements which invariably pursue their course, without ever exceeding their limits, nor disregarding the limits of their nature. But after God separated the light from the darkness, and gave it a special name, he wished to unite it under a common denomination. So Moses adds that evening and morning was the first day. Thus the day, comprising the space alternately traversed by darkness and light, maintains order and harmony between them, and prevents confusion.

The Holy Spirit has thus revealed to us, through the intermediary of our illustrious prophet, the work of the first day of creation; and he will also reveal the covers of other days. Now, this successive creation is from God a proof of condescension and goodness; for his hand was strong enough, and his wisdom infinite enough to complete creation in one day. What did I say ? in a day ! a single moment sufficed for him; but since he could not, having need of anything, create the world for his own use, it must be said that he has produced so many creatures only by his extreme kindness. And it is this same goodness which has led him to produce these creations only successively, and to make known to us, by our holy prophet, the order and the continuation of his works. He wanted this knowledge to prevent us from being seduced by the errors of human reason. And, indeed, many still argue, despite such an explicit revelation, that chance has done everything. But if Moses had not taught us with so much condescension and clearness, that would not have dared those who have the boldness to advance such proposals, and to hold a conduct so prejudicial to their salvation! [Homilies on Genesis]

JOHN OF DAMASCUS. And God called the light day, but the darkness He called night. Genesis 1:5 Further, darkness is not any essence, but an accident: for it is simply absence of light. The air, indeed, has not light in its essence. It was, then, this very absence of light from the air that God called darkness: and it is not the essence of air that is darkness, but the absence of light which clearly is rather an accident than an essence. And, indeed, it was not night, but day, that was first named, so that day is first and after that comes night. Night, therefore, follows day. And from the beginning of day till the next day is one complete period of day and night. For the Scripture says, And the evening and the morning were one day. [The Orthodox Faith]

VICTORINUS OF PETTAU. In the beginning God made the light, and divided it in the exact measure of twelve hours by day and by night, for this reason, doubtless, that day might bring over the night as an occasion of rest for men’s labors; that, again, day might overcome, and thus that labor might be refreshed with this alternate change of rest, and that repose again might be tempered by the exercise of day. [On the Creation of the World, ANF v.7]

1:6-8 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the water, and let it be a division between water and water, and it was so. 7 And God made the firmament, and God divided between the water which was under the firmament and the water which was above the firmament. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven, and God saw that it was good, and there was evening and there was morning, the second day.

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. Now where did the waters gather, if it is true that they were formerly scattered all over the face of the earth? In what place, I say, did the waters gather that were scattered to make the earth appear? If there existed on the globe some dry place where the waters could gather, the soil was already discovered and the abyss did not cover all the surface. If they covered it all, what was the place where they met, to leave the land dry? Were they lifted into space, almost like a harvest that is being fought in the area and which, carried on the wind, piled up in a heap and left exposed the ground it hid before? But how can we not give up this thought, sending the sea to form a vast plain, and, after the storms which raise its waves like mountains, become once more united as ice? It happens that the sea discovers a little in the distance its shores; but it cannot be denied that by withdrawing on one side, it does not extend to another, and that it does not return to the edges it has left. Where could the sea withdraw to let the continents appear, since the waves covered the entire surface of the earth? Could the water which covered the globe have been like a slight vapor, and, in condensing itself to form a mass, would it have left the soil exposed in different places? One could say that the earth, lowering itself into broad and deep valleys, was able to offer vast reservoirs where the heaped up waves rushed, and that thus the ground appeared in the places left by the waters.

Matter is not absolutely formless, even when it appears under the appearance of a dark mass. So, how can God wonder at what time He gave the waters and the earth the forms that distinguish them, a creation of which there is no mention in the six days? Suppose for a moment that this work preceded the beginning of the day, and that it is she whose Scripture speaks when she says before the first six days: "In the beginning God made heaven and earth;” That the word earth here designates the earth itself with its specific properties, still buried under the waters which already appear with their definite form; that in these words: "The earth was invisible and without order, and the darkness was upon the abyss, and the Spirit of God was carried on the waters," one must see, not the imperfect matter, but the earth and water with their most famous properties, at the moment when they were not yet enlightened by the light; that, consequently, the earth was called invisible, because it was buried beneath the waters and could not be seen, even if there had existed a being able to see it; without order, because it was not yet separated from the sea, nor limited by its shores, nor peopled with animals; why, then, were these properties, which are definitely physical, created before the days? Why was it not written, God said, The earth be, and the earth made, and the water, and the water made? or, by embracing in one word two elements, placed under a common law in the lower regions, of space: that water and earth be made, and so it was?

Why did not we at once add these words: God saw that it was good? If one thinks about it, one will be convinced that, for every being who changes, progress supposes imperfection; that from then on, as the Catholic faith, united with an invincible logic, teaches, no being could have existed, if the God who creates and organizes all things in its completed or perfectible form; who, as the Scripture says, "made the world of a shapeless matter," would have created the very substance of beings, as Scripture defines it in terms sufficiently clear to be heard by the ears as intelligences. the most rebellious, when it represents to us that before the period of six days "God made heaven and earth in the beginning" and the rest until the passage: "God says, let there be light;” For it is only then that it reveals to us in what order things were successively formed. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. (Gen. 1:6-7) And God said: let the firmament be made in the midst of the water and divide the water and the water, and so it was done; And God made the firmament and divided the water that was under the firmament of the water that was above the firmament, were the waters that were above the firmament equal to those visible that were below the firmament? Or is it that in that water seems to be signified the one that carried the Spirit of God and, therefore, we must understand that it was the same matter of the world, in such a way that the inferior is the corporal matter and the superior the animal, since it was divided because the sky was interposed? Let's not forget that it calls firmament, to this that later is called heaven. Among the bodies there is no better than the celestial body, because although some are the celestial bodies and others the terrestrial ones, nevertheless, the best ones are the celestial ones; and everything that goes beyond the nature of the celestial bodies I do not know how it can be called a body. So perhaps it is a certain virtue or power subject to reason, by which is known God and the truth whose nature, because it is formable through virtue and prudence, with whose vigor is inhibited and moderates the fluctuation of it , appears as material; and, therefore, rightly it is called water by God, exceeding the sphere of corporeal heaven, not by its bodily magnitude, but by virtue of its disembodied nature. But by reason of having been called the firmament heaven, it is not an absurdity to understand that everything that is below the etheric sky, in which all things are calm and stable, is more dissoluble and changeable. There were those who believed that these visible and cold waters completely enveloped the surface of the sky and, therefore, also to this kind of corporeal matter formed before receiving distinction and species by what was called firmament. They put as proof the delay of one of the seven wandering stars (which is greater than the others, and it is called by the Greeks fainon (the brilliant one) and it takes thirty years to turn around its orbit), saying that it is slow march because it is closer to the cold waters, which are above the sky. I do not know how this opinion can be defended by those who ingeniously sought such reasons. Nothing, then, recklessly has to be affirmed in these things, but all of them must be treated with moderation and caution.

And God said: Let the firmament be made in the midst of the water and divide the water from the water, and so it was done. After he said and this was done, what need did he have to add again, and did God make the firmament and divide the water that was under the firmament and the water that was above the firmament? Why in saying up, and God said let there be light and light was made, did not add, and God made light; but here after saying, and God said; let it be done, and so it was done, it was added, and did God? Is it that there it manifests that it was not convenient to understand that that light was bodily light, so that it would not appear that God (and when I say here God understood the Trinity) did it through some creature? When it comes to this firmament of heaven, because it is bodily, it is believed perhaps that it has received beauty and form by means of the incorporeal creature, in such a way that the incorporeal nature was rationally imprinted by the Truth what it would physically imprint. to make the firmament of heaven, and for this reason it was written: and God said, let it be done, and so it was done. Perhaps, I repeat, the firmament was first made in the same rational nature, by which the form was later printed to the body.

But when he added: and God made the firmament and divided the water that was under the firmament and the water that was above the firmament, does he mean by these words the cooperation of that matter, so that the body of heaven could be made? Or perhaps it was not said above in the way that was said below, to express itself in another way, so that the narrative did not cause annoyance, and because it was not convenient to determine all things exactly? Choose each one what suits you; just do not say anything recklessly and do not give the hidden things by acquaintances; remember that he is a man and, therefore, he should seek in divine works only as much as he is allowed.

(Gen. 1:8) And God called firmament heaven. What was said above about the imposition of names, here too can be taken into account, because not every firmament is heaven.

And God saw that it was good. What I said above about this matter would reaffirm it, if it were not for the fact that now the narration does not follow the same order. Above (on the first day) he said: And God saw that the light was good, and immediately afterward he adds: and God divided the light from the darkness and called the light day and the darkness night. Here (on the second day), after he narrated the event, the quo was already finished, and after calling heaven heaven, it is said: And God saw that it was good. If the mode of expression was not changed to avoid disturbing the reader, we are forced to understand it in the sense that God did all things at the same time. Why, when speaking of light, first he saw that it was good, and then he named it, and here when he spoke of the firmament he named it first and then saw that it was good? Surely this difference shows that in the operation of God there are no time intervals, although these are found in the same works. According to these intervals of time, one thing is done first and another after and without them the narration of the facts can not be exposed, although without them God could have done these things. And the afternoon was done and the morning was done, the second day was completed. This was discussed above and I think the same reasons are valid here. [Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis]

BASIL OF CAESAREA. Upon the gathering together of the waters. There are towns where the inhabitants, from dawn to eve, feast their eyes on the tricks of innumerable conjurors. They are never tired of hearing dissolute songs which cause much impurity to spring up in their souls, and they are often called happy, because they neglect the cares of business and trades useful to life, and pass the time, which is assigned to them on this earth, in idleness and pleasure. They do not know that a theatre full of impure sights is, for those who sit there, a common school of vice; that these melodious and meretricious songs insinuate themselves into men's souls, and all who hear them, eager to imitate the notes of harpers and pipers, are filled with filthiness. Some others, who are wild after horses, think they are backing their horses in their dreams; they harness their chariots, change their drivers, and even in sleep are not free from the folly of the day. And shall we, whom the Lord, the great worker of marvels, calls to the contemplation of His own works, tire of looking at them, or be slow to hear the words of the Holy Spirit? Shall we not rather stand around the vast and varied workshop of divine creation and, carried back in mind to the times of old, shall we not view all the order of creation? Heaven, poised like a dome, to quote the words of the prophet; earth, this immense mass which rests upon itself; the air around it, of a soft and fluid nature, a true and continual nourishment for all who breathe it, of such tenuity that it yields and opens at the least movement of the body, opposing no resistance to our motions, while, in a moment, it streams back to its place, behind those who cleave it; water, finally, that supplies drink for man, or may be designed for our other needs, and the marvellous gathering together of it into definite places which have been assigned to it: such is the spectacle which the words which I have just read will show you. [The Hexameron]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. After telling us about the creation of light, he finished the work of the first day by saying that evening and morning was the first day. Then he added: And God said, Let the firmament be in the midst of the waters, and divide the waters with the waters. Consider here, my brethren, the continuation and the sequence of this doctrine. Moses first revealed to us the creation of heaven and earth; he then taught us that this one was invisible and unformed, and he gives us the reason. It was covered with darkness and water, for there was only water and darkness. Then the light came at the command of the Lord, who separated it from darkness, and who called the light, day, and darkness, night. And now Moses teaches us that just as the Lord, after creating the light, separated him from the darkness, and distinguished them by a special name, he here commands that the waters be divided.

(Gen. 1:7) But see how great is the divine power; and how far it surpasses all human intelligence! God commands, and suddenly a new element occurs and another withdraws ... And God says: that the firmament be made in the midst of the waters, and divide the waters from the waters. What, then, is this word, That the firmament be made? It is almost as if we say in our language: that a wall be established between two elements to serve as their separation. And in order to make us better understand and the prompt obedience of the elements, and the sovereign power of the Lord, Moses immediately adds: And it was done so. God spoke and the work was finished ... God made the firmament, and separated the waters that were under the firmament from those that were above the firmament. After that God had created the firmament, he commanded that one half of the waters would remain under the firmament, and the other half would remain suspended above. But what is the firmament? Shall we say that it is condensed water, an extended air, or some other element? No prudent man would dare to affirm it; and it is convenient for us to receive the words of Scripture with humble gratitude, without going beyond the natural limits of our knowledge, nor to deepen mysteries which surpass our intelligence. It is therefore sufficient for us to know and to believe that God, by his word, has created the firmament to separate the waters, and that indeed some are above and others below.

(Gen. 1:8) And God called the firmament, heaven. Consider the sequence and order of Scripture. Yesterday she spoke thus: Let there be light, and there was light; and God separated the light from the darkness, and he called the light, day. Today she tells us that the firmament was made in the midst of the waters; and just as she has revealed to us the use of light, she teaches us here that of the firmament. Let him separate, says she, the waters from the waters. Finally, as God, after having declared the purpose and functions of light, had given him a name, he also gave one to the firmament. And God called the firmament, heaven, that is, the ethereal vault we see. How can some, you say, argue that many heavens have been created? certainly such a doctrine does not rest on Scripture, it exists only in their imagination. For Moses teaches us only what we have just said; He said to us first, That in the beginning God created heaven and earth, and the earth was invisible, because it was hidden under darkness and water. He then told us about the creation of light; and then the rest of the story led him to tell us about the firmament. And God says, let the firmament be. But what use is it for? This is what Moses is careful to teach us, saying: Let him separate the waters from the waters. Finally, he makes us aware that this same firmament which separated the waters, was called heaven. Who could then, after such a clear and lucid explanation, endure those spirits who speak for themselves, and who, against the authority of Scripture, support the plurality of heaven? but they object that the holy prophet David said in his psalms: Praise the Lord, heavens of heaven. (Ps. CXLVIII, 4.) Well! Do not trouble yourself, my brethren, and do not believe that Scripture ever contradicts itself. On the contrary, recognize its veracity, cling to its doctrine, and close your ears to the cries of error.

Listen attentively to what I am about to say to you, and do not be easily shaken by those who give you all their dreams. All the sacred books of the Old Testament were originally composed in Hebrew, no one contradicts it. Now, a few years before the birth of Jesus Christ, King Ptolemy, curious to gather a rich library, wanted to join our Holy Books to all those of various kinds that he had already gathered. This is why he brought some Jews from Jerusalem to translate into Greek, which they did happily. And this is how it came about, by a particular disposition of Providence, that not only those who heard Hebrew, but generally all peoples, were able to profit from our holy books. Is it not equally surprising that this design was conceived by an idolatrous prince, who, far from following the religion of the Jews, observed an altogether opposite worship? But this is how the Lord disposes all things, so that the enemies of truth are the first to break it.

Moreover, this historical digression was necessary to remind you that the Old Testament was not written in Greek, but in Hebrew. Now the most distinguished Hebraists teach us that in this language we always use the word heaven in the plural. The Syrian doctors agree themselves; and so a Hebraist will never say heaven, but heaven. The psalmist was therefore right to say heaven of heavens. And it is not that there are many heavens, for. Moses does not tell you; but it is the genius of the Hebrew language that uses the singular for the plural.

If there were indeed many heavens, the Holy Spirit would have taught us through Moses the existence and the formation. Carefully remember this observation, so that you may close your mouth to all who advance doctrines contrary to the teaching of the Church, and that you remain convinced of the truthfulness of our holy Scriptures. For you do not meet here frequently, and we only give you ample instructions to put you in a position to give reason for your faith. (I Petr III, 115)

But back, please, about us. And God called the firmament, heaven; and he saw that it was good; observe how Moses was proportioned to our weakness. He said light, and God saw that it was good; and now he says of the firmament or heaven, and God saw that he was good. This word gives us a fair idea of ​​its beauty; and is there not reason to be astonished that for so many centuries it has preserved it in all its splendor? It even seems to increase with the course of years. Besides, what is not the splendor of the firmament, since God Himself praised it! When we are presented with some masterpiece of art, a statue, for example, we admire the features, the pose, the delicacy, the proportions, the elegance and the other qualities, but who could celebrate with dignity the covers of God, especially when he rented them himself? Moses, therefore, expresses himself only condescendingly for our weakness; and he repeats the same eulogy after each partial creation, in order to refute in advance those who, in the course of the centuries, were to criticize the divine work, and sharpening their tongue, to ask why the Lord did such and such a creature. He warns them and confounds them with this one word: and God saw that it was good. But when you are told that God lives and praised his work, it must be understood that he praised it in a manner worthy of him. For whoever created the sky knew its beauty before producing it; and yet, because we men are so unintelligent, that we can not understand things differently, he has proportioned the words of Moses to our weakness, and inspired him for our instruction in this imperfect and gross language.

When you therefore lift your gaze to heaven and contemplate its magnificence, breadth, and beauty, go back to the Creator, as the Sage says, that the greatness and beauty of the creature may make known and make the Creator visible. (Wis. XIX, 5.) Also understand, by the creation of so many different elements, what is the power of your Master. And, indeed, if man would apply his intelligence to the study of each of the wonders of nature, or even if he confined himself to the examination of his own formation, he would need no more to proclaim it. ineffable and (21) immense power of the Lord. But since visible creatures celebrate the greatness and power of the Creator, what will it be when you go up to the invisible creatures? Yes, attain in thought the celestial phalanges, the angels and the archangels, the virtues and the thrones, the dominions and the principalities, the powers, the cherubim and the seraphim, and tell me what genius, and what language could explain the ineffable magnificence of the works of the Lord!

The holy prophet David exclaimed, at the sight of the wonders of creation: O God, how magnificent are your works! you have accomplished everything with wisdom. (Ps. C, 24.) But if this prophet, filled with the Holy Spirit who revealed to him the mysteries of eternal wisdom, uttered those accents of admiration, what shall we say, we who are only ashes and dust! We can only hold our gaze humbly lowered, and our spirit continually delighted with the ineffable goodness of the Lord. And now, after the Psalmist, let's listen to Blessed Paul. This apostle, brought up in a mortal body to the highest heavens, and who on earth rivaled the angelic spirits with love, traversed the vast expanse of the heavens with great ardor of spirit, stopped on the secrets of divine predestination. They were Jews and Gentiles, some of whom were rejected and others substituted in their place; and as he hesitated, and his sight was troubled, he cried, "O depth of the treasures of the wisdom and knowledge of God! that his judgments are incomprehensible, and his ways impenetrable! (Rom II, 33.)

But here I would willingly question those who want curiously to deepen the generation of the Word, or who try to diminish the dignity of the Holy Spirit, and I would say to them: where does this audacious temerity come from, and who can inspire you extravagant madness? For if Paul, with all his genius and enlightenment, declared that the judgments of the Lord, that is to say the order and the economy of his providence, are impenetrable and incomprehensible, so that no one should allow himself to deepen them; and if he proclaims that his ways, that is to say, his commandments and his precepts, are shirking all our inquiries, how dare you curiously discuss the nature of the only-begotten Son of God, and belittle, as much as he is in you, the dignity of the Holy Spirit?

See, my dear brethren, how unhappy it is not to cling to the true meaning of the holy Scriptures! And indeed, if these heretics had received their divine teaching with a righteous mind and a good heart, they would not have gone astray in their own reasoning, and they would never have fallen into that extreme madness. However, we will not cease to oppose them with the testimonies of our holy books, nor to close our ears to their disastrous doctrines

I do not know how the impetuosity of thought and speech has dragged me far from my subject, so I hasten to return to it. And God, said Moses, called the firmament, heaven, and God saw that it was good; and evening and morning was the second day. So when God had given a name to the firmament and approved his work, He finished the second day of creation, and said, And in the evening and in the morning was the second day. Notice here what precision Moses puts in his teaching. He calls evening the end of the day, and morning, the end of the night, then he calls day the duration between one and the other; so that it prevents all error and does not allow us to consider the evening as the end of the day, because we obviously know that the day is composed of evening and morning. Thus one speaks exactly saying that the evening is the disappearance of the light, the morning that of the night, and that the duration of one and the other forms the day. This is what Scripture wanted us to hear by these words: And in the evening and said morning was the second day. [Homilies on Genesis]

JOHN OF DAMASCUS (verse 8) God called the firmament Heaven. The heaven of heaven, then, is the first heaven which is above the firmament.  So here we have two heavens, for God called the firmament also Heaven. And it is customary in the divine Scripture to speak of the air also as heavens, because we see it above us. [Orthodox Faith, 2.6 NPNF s.2 v.9]

TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE. What of the fact that waters were in some way the regulating powers by which the disposition of the world thenceforward was constituted by God? For the suspension of the celestial firmament in the midst He caused by "dividing the waters;" the suspension of "the dry land" He accomplished by "separating the waters." After the world had been hereupon set in order through its elements, when inhabitants were given it, "the waters" were the first to receive the precept "to bring forth living creatures." Water was the first to produce that which had life, that it might be no wonder in baptism if waters know how to give life. For was not the work of fashioning man himself also achieved with the aid of waters? Suitable material is found in the earth, yet not apt for the purpose unless it be moist and juicy; which (earth) "the waters," separated the fourth day before into their own place, temper with their remaining moisture to a clayey consistency. [On Baptism 3]

1:9-10 And God said, Let the water which is under the heaven be collected into one place, and let the dry land appear, and it was so. And the water which was under the heaven was collected into its places, and the dry land appeared. 10 And God called the dry land Earth, and the gatherings of the waters he called Seas, and God saw that it was good.

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. We have stretched ourselves a long time on this work of God, on a question intimately connected with it? It will suffice here to summarily remind the minds too high to be concerned about the time when the specific properties of the land and water were created, that the work of this day is simply to separate these two elements in the regions. lower space. Do we, on the contrary, ask ourselves why the creation of light and of the sky has a date, while that of the earth; and water was fulfilled outside the days or even preceded them? Does it seem surprising that the fiat command presided over the creation of light, while he made himself heard to separate the earth from the waters without presiding over their creation? A safe explanation for the faith can be found in the passage where Scripture, after establishing that "God first created heaven and earth," adds, to represent the earth in this state: "The earth was invisible and without order.” These words, indeed; only designate the formless state of matter, and Scripture has chosen the word earth as being more ordinary and less obscure. If this explanation is too difficult to grasp, at least try to separate in time the material and its modifications, as Scripture distinguishes them in his story: that we imagine that God first created the material, and after a while, enriched it with its properties. It is clear, however, that God created everything at once, and that he shaped the already formed matter, the word earth or water serving in Scripture only to designate the imperfection of matter, as I am have already noticed because of his frequent use. In fact, land and water, even in their present form, have a tendency to corrupt themselves. is much closer to primitive imperfection than celestial bodies. Now, in the period of the six days, one enumerates the works drawn from this shapeless matter, from which the sky had already come, if different from the earth; the sacred writer, in pronouncing the fiat, did not wish to rank among these other works of God the work which remained to be done in the lowest region of nature; the elements retained an imperfection too gross, to lend themselves to a work as perfect as the sky: they could only receive a lower form, less constant and more close to the primitive imperfection. The words: "Let the waters flush up, let the arid appear," would thus indicate that the earth and the water then received those forms so known and which allow us to bend them to so many uses: the water, its fluidity; the earth, its consistency. So it is written of waters: "what are gathered together," and of the earth: "let it show itself": one is current and fugitive, the other compact and motionless. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. (Gen. 1:9) And God said: Let the waters that are under the sky come together in their single aggregate and the dry land appear. And so it was done. Here, probably, we can believe, as we judge, that the water previously mentioned was the same matter of the world; because if the universe was completely covered with water, where or in what place could it be assembled? But if I had called with the name of water some material confusion of water, this meeting of now is to be understood as the same formation, so that it would be such a kind of water as we see now. Also that which was added, arid appears, can be understood by the formation of the earth, so that the earth would then acquire this form with which we see it now, because it was said that it was invisible and reportable, when the matter still lacked form . Therefore, God said: collect the water that is under the sky, that is, take body matter so that this water is what we perceive now. In a single set, here under the name of unity, the same power or energy of the form is proposed to us, since to form certainly is to gather something into a whole, and the highest unit is the beginning of all form. And the arid appears, that is, receives the earth visible, determined and without confusion; rightly the water gathers for the arid to appear, that is, the sea is forbidden to fluctuate so that the one that was hidden may be manifested. And so it was done, perhaps this was first done in the reasons of the intellectual nature, so that what was said later, and the water was gathered in a single set and the arid was discovered, it does not appear to have been added superfluously, when it had already been said and so it was done, but so that we understood that after the rational and disembodied operation, the corporeal one was also followed.

(Gen. 1:10) And God called the dry land earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. We still favor the quality of these words. Not all water is sea, nor all the arid earth; then by means of these words it was determined from what water and arid the segregation was made. Without being absurd, it can be understood that the imposition of names by God was the same distinction and formation. And God saw that it was good, here we observed the same order as above, so apply in this place the things that were said there. [Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis]

BASIL OF CAESAREA. Genesis 1:9-10 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear, and it was so. And the water which was under the heaven gathered together unto one place; And God called the dry land earth and the gathering together of the waters called He seas. What trouble you have given me in my previous discourses by asking me why the earth was invisible, why all bodies are naturally endued with colour, and why all colour comes under the sense of sight. And, perhaps, my reason did not appear sufficient to you, when I said that the earth, without being naturally invisible, was so to us, because of the mass of water that entirely covered it. Hear then how Scripture explains itself. Let the waters be gathered together, and let the dry land appear. The veil is lifted and allows the earth, hitherto invisible, to be seen. Perhaps you will ask me new questions. And first, is it not a law of nature that water flows downwards? Why, then, does Scripture refer this to the fiat of the Creator? As long as water is spread over a level surface, it does not flow; it is immovable. But when it finds any slope, immediately the foremost portion falls, then the one that follows takes its place, and that one is itself replaced by a third. Thus incessantly they flow, pressing the one on the other, and the rapidity of their course is in proportion to the mass of water that is being carried, and the declivity down which it is borne. If such is the nature of water, it was supererogatory to command it to gather into one place. It was bound, on account of its natural instability, to fall into the most hollow part of the earth and not to stop until the levelling of its surface. We see how there is nothing so level as the surface of water. Besides, they add, how did the waters receive an order to gather into one place, when we see several seas, separated from each other by the greatest distances? To the first question I reply: Since God's command, you know perfectly well the motion of water; you know that it is unsteady and unstable and falls naturally over declivities and into hollow places. But what was its nature before this command made it take its course? You do not know yourself, and you have heard from no eye-witness. Think, in reality, that a word of God makes the nature, and that this order is for the creature a direction for its future course. There was only one creation of day and night, and since that moment they have incessantly succeeded each other and divided time into equal parts.

Let the waters be gathered together. It was ordered that it should be the natural property of water to flow, and in obedience to this order, the waters are never weary in their course. In speaking thus, I have only in view the flowing property of waters. Some flow of their own accord like springs and rivers, others are collected and stationary. But I speak now of flowing waters. Let the waters be gathered together unto one place. Have you never thought, when standing near a spring which is sending forth water abundantly, Who makes this water spring from the bowels of the earth? Who forced it up? Where are the store-houses which send it forth? To what place is it hastening? How is it that it is never exhausted here, and never overflows there? All this comes from that first command; it was for the waters a signal for their course.

In all the story of the waters remember this first order, let the waters be gathered together. To take their assigned places they were obliged to flow, and, once arrived there, to remain in their place and not to go farther. Thus in the language of Ecclesiastes, All the waters run into the sea; yet the sea is not full. Ecclesiastes 1:6-7 Waters flow in virtue of God's order, and the sea is enclosed in limits according to this first law, Let the waters be gathered together unto one place. For fear the water should spread beyond its bed, and in its successive invasions cover one by one all countries, and end by flooding the whole earth, it received the order to gather unto one place. Thus we often see the furious sea raising mighty waves to the heaven, and, when once it has touched the shore, break its impetuosity in foam and retire. Fear ye not me, says the Lord....which have placed the sand for the bound of the sea. Jeremiah 5:22 A grain of sand, the weakest thing possible, curbs the violence of the ocean. For what would prevent the Red Sea from invading the whole of Egypt, which lies lower, and uniting itself to the other sea which bathes its shores, were it not fettered by the fiat of the Creator? And if I say that Egypt is lower than the Red Sea, it is because experience has convinced us of it every time that an attempt has been made to join the sea of Egypt to the Indian Ocean, of which the Red Sea is a part. Thus we have renounced this enterprise, as also have the Egyptian Sesostris, who conceived the idea, and Darius the Mede who afterwards wished to carry it out.

I report this fact to make you understand the full force of the command, Let the waters be gathered unto one place; that is to say, let there be no other gathering, and, once gathered, let them not disperse.

To say that the waters were gathered in one place indicates that previously they were scattered in many places. The mountains, intersected by deep ravines, accumulated water in their valleys, when from every direction the waters betook themselves to the one gathering place. What vast plains, in their extent resembling wide seas, what valleys, what cavities hollowed in many different ways, at that time full of water, must have been emptied by the command of God! But we must not therefore say, that if the water covered the face of the earth, all the basins which have since received the sea were originally full. Where can the gathering of the waters have come from if the basins were already full? These basins, we reply, were only prepared at the moment when the water had to unite in a single mass. At that time the sea which is beyond Gadeira and the vast ocean, so dreaded by navigators, which surrounds the isle of Britain and western Spain, did not exist. But, all of a sudden, God created this vast space, and the mass of waters flowed in.

Now if our explanation of the creation of the world may appear contrary to experience, (because it is evident that all the waters did not flow together in one place,) many answers may be made, all obvious as soon as they are stated. Perhaps it is even ridiculous to reply to such objections. Ought they to bring forward in opposition ponds and accumulations of rain water, and think that this is enough to upset our reasonings? Evidently the chief and most complete affluence of the waters was what received the name of gathering unto one place. For wells are also gathering places for water, made by the hand of man to receive the moisture diffused in the hollow of the earth. This name of gathering does not mean any chance massing of water, but the greatest and most important one, wherein the element is shown collected together. In the same way that fire, in spite of its being divided into minute particles which are sufficient for our needs here, is spread in a mass in the æther; in the same way that air, in spite of a like minute division, has occupied the region round the earth; so also water, in spite of the small amount spread abroad everywhere, only forms one gathering together, that which separates the whole element from the rest. Without doubt the lakes as well those of the northern regions and those that are to be found in Greece, in Macedonia, in Bithynia and in Palestine, are gatherings together of waters; but here it means the greatest of all, that gathering the extent of which equals that of the earth. The first contain a great quantity of water; no one will deny this. Nevertheless no one could reasonably give them the name of seas, not even if they are like the great sea, charged with salt and sand. They instance for example, the Lacus Asphaltitis in Judæa, and the Serbonian lake which extends between Egypt and Palestine in the Arabian desert. These are lakes, and there is only one sea, as those affirm who have travelled round the earth. Although some authorities think the Hyrcanian and Caspian Seas are enclosed in their own boundaries, if we are to believe the geographers, they communicate with each other and together discharge themselves into the Great Sea. It is thus that, according to their account, the Red Sea and that beyond Gadeira only form one. Then why did God call the different masses of water seas? This is the reason; the waters flowed into one place, and their different accumulations, that is to say, the gulfs that the earth embraced in her folds, received from the Lord the name of seas: North Sea, South Sea, Eastern Sea, and Western Sea. The seas have even their own names, the Euxine, the Propontis, the Hellespont, the Ægean, the Ionian, the Sardinian, the Sicilian, the Tyrrhene, and many other names of which an exact enumeration would now be too long, and quite out of place. See why God calls the gathering together of waters seas. But let us return to the point from which the course of my argument has diverted me.

And God said: Let the waters be gathered together unto one place and let the dry land appear. He did not say let the earth appear, so as not to show itself again without form, mud-like, and in combination with the water, nor yet endued with proper form and virtue. At the same time, lest we should attribute the drying of the earth to the sun, the Creator shows it to us dried before the creation of the sun. Let us follow the thought Scripture gives us. Not only the water which was covering the earth flowed off from it, but all that which had filtered into its depths withdrew in obedience to the irresistible order of the sovereign Master. And it was so. This is quite enough to show that the Creator's voice had effect: however, in several editions, there is added And the water which was under the heavens gathered itself unto one place and the dry land was seen; words that other interpreters have not given, and which do not appear conformable to Hebrew usage. In fact, after the assertion, and it was so, it is superfluous to repeat exactly the same thing. In accurate copies these words are marked with an obelus, which is the sign of rejection.

Genesis 1:10 And God called the dry land earth; and the gathering together of the waters called He seas. Why does Scripture say above that the waters were gathered together unto one place, and that the dry earth appeared? Why does it add here the dry land appeared, and God gave it the name of earth? It is that dryness is the property which appears to characterize the nature of the subject, while the word earth is only its simple name. Just as reason is the distinctive faculty of man, and the word man serves to designate the being gifted with this faculty, so dryness is the special and peculiar quality of the earth. The element essentially dry receives therefore the name of earth, as the animal who has a neigh for a characteristic cry is called a horse. The other elements, like the earth, have received some peculiar property which distinguishes them from the rest, and makes them known for what they are. Thus water has cold for its distinguishing property; air, moisture; fire, heat. But this theory really applies only to the primitive elements of the world. The elements which contribute to the formation of bodies, and come under our senses, show us these qualities in combination, and in the whole of nature our eyes and senses can find nothing which is completely singular, simple and pure. Earth is at the same time dry and cold; water, cold and moist; air, moist and warm; fire, warm and dry. It is by the combination of their qualities that the different elements can mingle. Thanks to a common quality each of them mixes with a neighbouring element, and this natural alliance attaches it to the contrary element. For example, earth, which is at the same time dry and cold, finds in cold a relationship which unites it to water, and by the means of water unites itself to air. Water placed between the two, appears to give each a hand, and, on account of its double quality, allies itself to earth by cold and to air by moisture. Air, in its turn, takes the middle place and plays the part of a mediator between the inimical natures of water and fire, united to the first by moisture, and to the second by heat. Finally fire, of a nature at the same time warm and dry, is linked to air by warmth, and by its dryness reunites itself to the earth. And from this accord and from this mutual mixture of elements, results a circle and an harmonious choir whence each of the elements deserves its name. I have said this in order to explain why God has given to the dry land the name of earth, without however calling the earth dry. It is because dryness is not one of those qualities which the earth acquired afterwards, but one of those which constituted its essence from the beginning. Now that which causes a body to exist, is naturally antecedent to its posterior qualities and has a pre-eminence over them. It is then with reason that God chose the most ancient characteristic of the earth whereby to designate it.

Genesis 1:10 And God saw that it was good. Scripture does not merely wish to say that a pleasing aspect of the sea presented itself to God. It is not with eyes that the Creator views the beauty of His works. He contemplates them in His ineffable wisdom. A fair sight is the sea all bright in a settled calm; fair too, when, ruffled by a light breeze of wind, its surface shows tints of purple and azure,— when, instead of lashing with violence the neighbouring shores, it seems to kiss them with peaceful caresses. However, it is not in this that Scripture makes God find the goodness and charm of the sea. Here it is the purpose of the work which makes the goodness.

In the first place sea water is the source of all the moisture of the earth. It filters through imperceptible conduits, as is proved by the subterranean openings and caves whither its waves penetrate; it is received in oblique and sinuous canals; then, driven out by the wind, it rises to the surface of the earth, and breaks it, having become drinkable and free from its bitterness by this long percolation. Often, moved by the same cause, it springs even from mines that it has crossed, deriving warmth from them, and rises boiling, and bursts forth of a burning heat, as may be seen in islands and on the sea coast; even inland in certain places, in the neighbourhood of rivers, to compare little things with great, almost the same phenomena occur. To what do these words tend? To prove that the earth is all undermined with invisible conduits, where the water travels everywhere underground from the sources of the sea.

Thus, in the eyes of God, the sea is good, because it makes the under current of moisture in the depths of the earth. It is good again, because from all sides it receives the rivers without exceeding its limits. It is good, because it is the origin and source of the waters in the air. Warmed by the rays of the sun, it escapes in vapour, is attracted into the high regions of the air, and is there cooled on account of its rising high above the refraction of the rays from the ground, and, the shade of the clouds adding to this refrigeration, it is changed into rain and fattens the earth. If people are incredulous, let them look at caldrons on the fire, which, though full of water, are often left empty because all the water is boiled and resolved into vapour. Sailors, too, boil even sea water, collecting the vapour in sponges, to quench their thirst in pressing need.

Finally the sea is good in the eyes of God, because it girdles the isles, of which it forms at the same time the rampart and the beauty, because it brings together the most distant parts of the earth, and facilitates the inter-communication of mariners. By this means it gives us the boon of general information, supplies the merchant with his wealth, and easily provides for the necessities of life, allowing the rich to export their superfluities, and blessing the poor with the supply of what they lack. [The Hexameron]

JEROME OF STRIDON. 1:10 AND HE CALLED THE WATERS TO THE SEA. — It should be noted that any combination of waters, whether salty or sweet, according to the idiom of the Hebrew language, is called seas. Vainly Porphyry writes in bad faith the Evangelists of having wished to build a miracle in the eyes of the ignorant, called Genesareth 'a sea' instead of 'a lake', so as to create a miracle for the ignorant to the effect that the Lord walked on the sea; for every lake and every gathering of waters is called 'seas'. [Hebrew Questions on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. And God said, Let the waters under heaven be gathered together in one place, and let the arid appear. And it was done so. Consider here, my dear brothers, the order and the continuation of the divine covers. Moses had told us from the beginning that the earth was invisible and unformed, because it was covered with darkness and water. Therefore in the second day God separated the waters by the firmament which he called heaven, and in the third he commanded that the waters which were under heaven, that is to say, the firmament, should gather in one place so that their retirement would leave the land uncovered. And this was so. It was because the waters covered the whole surface of the earth that the Lord commanded them to gather in one place; and then the arid could show itself. See how the sacred historian is gradually discovering the beauty of the universe! And it was done so, he says. How? According to the Lord's orders. He says, and nature obeys suddenly. For it belongs to God to regulate all creatures according to his will.

And the waters that were under heaven were gathered together in their pools, and the arid appeared. Moses had already said in speaking of the light that God created it when darkness covered all nature, and that separating it from the light he had assigned it to day, and darkness to night; and here he also says that God, after having created the firmament, placed above him a portion of the waters, and established the others below. He then adds that (command of the Lord these gathered in one place, so that the arid element appeared.) Then God gave a name to the arid element, as he for the light and the darkness, the waters that were under heaven, saith the scripture, were gathered together in one place, and the arid appeared, and God called the arid earth, so, my dear brothers, how God tore the veil that made the earth invisible and unformed, for it was covered by the waters, as by thick darkness, but as soon as it could show its face, it gave it a name.

(Gen. 1:10) And God called the meeting of waters, sea. The waters therefore have their name; and the Lord, like the potter who fashioned a vase, and gave him a name only after having finished it, would not impose a name upon the elements until he had distributed them in the places he assigned to them. The land, therefore, received its name as soon as it appeared in the form it was to take; and likewise the waters received a special denomination. For God, says the Scripture, called the meeting of waters, sea; and he saw that it was good. It is because man is too weak to praise the divine covers with dignity, which Scripture warns us, and teaches us that the Lord has praised them himself. [Homilies on Genesis]

JOHN OF DAMASCUS. God bade the waters be gathered together into one mass. (Gen. 1:9) But when the Scripture speaks of one mass it evidently does not mean that they were gathered together into one place: for immediately it goes on to say, And the gatherings of the waters He called seas (Gen. 1:10): but the words signify that the waters were separated off in a body from the earth into distinct groups. Thus the waters were gathered together into their special collections and the dry land was brought to view. [Orthodox Faith 2.9 NPNF s.2 v.9]

TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE. Then it forthwith becomes "visible," God saying, "Let the water be gathered together into one mass, and let the dry land appear." Genesis 1:9 "Appear," says He, not "be made." It had been already made, only in its invisible condition it was then waiting to appear. "Dry," because it was about to become such by its severance from the moisture, but yet "land." [Against Hermagenes 29]

1:11-13 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the herb of grass bearing seed according to its kind and according to its likeness, and the fruit-tree bearing fruit whose seed is in it, according to its kind on the earth, and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth the herb of grass bearing seed according to its kind and according to its likeness, and the fruit tree bearing fruit whose seed is in it, according to its kind on the earth, and God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. Here must be noted the measure which the eternal Ordinator puts into his works. Plants and trees, having properties very distinct from the earth and the waters, and not being able to rank among these elements, receive the special order to leave the bosom of the earth; especially again it is said of these productions "And it was so; and the earth produced, and God specially approved their formation. However, as they relate to the earth by their roots, God understood all the phases of this creation in the same day. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. And God said: Let the earth be the herb of food that bears seed according to its kind and likeness, and fruitful tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself after its likeness. After the earth and the sea were formed, and after they received the names and were found good by God, what I have often repeated that should not be understood at intervals of time so that there is no delay to the ineffable power of God operative, was not added immediately after, as in the two previous days, the afternoon was made and the morning was done and they completed the third day, but another work was added: germinate the ground food grass that carries seed according to its kind and likeness, and fruit tree that begets fruit whose seed is in itself according to its likeness. This was not said of that light, nor of the firmament, nor of the waters, nor of the arid, for the light has no children to succeed it, nor is the sky born from another heaven, or the earth and the sea beget other lands or seas that replace these; then here, where the likeness of those who are born perpetuates the likeness of those who die, it should be said that they bear seed according to their gender and whose seed is in itself according to their likeness.

All these beings are thus on the earth, which adhere to it by the roots, by it they are sustained, and from it in a certain way they separate; for this reason I judge that in the narrative the ordinary course of nature is observed, because on the same day that the earth appeared these things were created, and yet God said again that the earth should germinate: and it was also repeated, and so it was done; and then, according to the rule that we previously expounded, then it was said: and so it was done, the same execution was added, saying: and the earth produced grass of food, which bears seed according to its kind, and fruit tree that begets fruit, and his seed in him is according to his likeness. And again he says: and God saw that it was good. Thus, in one and the same day these things come together and are separated from each other by the repeated words of God. This I believe was not done when dealing with the land and the sea, because in a special way the nature of these things that are born and die and were propagated by the succession of seed must be discerned. Or will it be because the earth and the sea could have been made at the same time, not only in the reason of the spiritual creature, where all things were made at the same time, but also in their own bodily nature, but the trees and all class of terrestrial roots, they could not have been born without preceding the earth, in which they would germinate; and, therefore, God's command was to be repeated so that created things could point to intervals of time, not to be done on another day, since the plants take root in the earth through the roots and thus continue to adhere to her all her life? But it can also be asked: why did God not name the plants? Did he overlook it because so many of them did not allow it? We will study this question better later when we consider other works to which God did not name, as it was imposed on light, heaven, earth and sea: And the evening was made and the morning was made, the third day. [Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis]

BASIL OF CAESAREA. Genesis 1:11 And God said Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself.  It was deep wisdom that commanded the earth, when it rested after discharging the weight of the waters, first to bring forth grass, then wood as we see it doing still at this time. For the voice that was then heard and this command were as a natural and permanent law for it; it gave fertility and the power to produce fruit for all ages to come; Let the earth bring forth. The production of vegetables shows first germination. When the germs begin to sprout they form grass; this develops and becomes a plant, which insensibly receives its different articulations, and reaches its maturity in the seed. Thus all things which sprout and are green are developed. Let the earth bring forth green grass. Let the earth bring forth by itself without having any need of help from without. Some consider the sun as the source of all productiveness on the earth. It is, they say, the action of the sun's heat which attracts the vital force from the centre of the earth to the surface. The reason why the adornment of the earth was before the sun is the following; that those who worship the sun, as the source of life, may renounce their error. If they be well persuaded that the earth was adorned before the genesis of the sun, they will retract their unbounded admiration for it, because they see grass and plants vegetate before it rose. If then the food for the flocks was prepared, did our race appear less worthy of a like solicitude? He, who provided pasture for horses and cattle, thought before all of your riches and pleasures. If he fed your cattle, it was to provide for all the needs of your life. And what object was there in the bringing forth of grain, if not for your subsistence? Moreover, many grasses and vegetables serve for the food of man.

Let the earth bring forth grass yielding seed after his kind. So that although some kind of grass is of service to animals, even their gain is our gain too, and seeds are especially designed for our use. Such is the true meaning of the words that I have quoted. Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed after his kind. In this manner we can re-establish the order of the words, of which the construction seems faulty in the actual version, and the economy of nature will be rigorously observed. In fact, first comes germination, then verdure, then the growth of the plant, which after having attained its full growth arrives at perfection in seed.

How then, they say, can Scripture describe all the plants of the earth as seed-bearing, when the reed, couch-grass, mint, crocus, garlic, and the flowering rush and countless other species, produce no seed? To this we reply that many vegetables have their seminal virtue in the lower part and in the roots. The need, for example, after its annual growth sends forth a protuberance from its roots, which takes the place of seed for future trees. Numbers of other vegetables are the same and all over the earth reproduce by the roots. Nothing then is truer than that each plant produces its seed or contains some seminal virtue; this is what is meant by after its kind. So that the shoot of a reed does not produce an olive tree, but from a reed grows another reed, and from one sort of seed a plant of the same sort always germinates. Thus, all which sprang from the earth, in its first bringing forth, is kept the same to our time, thanks to the constant reproduction of kind.

Let the earth bring forth. See how, at this short word, at this brief command, the cold and sterile earth travailed and hastened to bring forth its fruit, as it cast away its sad and dismal covering to clothe itself in a more brilliant robe, proud of its proper adornment and displaying the infinite variety of plants.

I want creation to penetrate you with so much admiration that everywhere, wherever you may be, the least plant may bring to you the clear remembrance of the Creator. If you see the grass of the fields, think of human nature, and remember the comparison of the wise Isaiah. All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field. Truly the rapid flow of life, the short gratification and pleasure that an instant of happiness gives a man, all wonderfully suit the comparison of the prophet. Today he is vigorous in body, fattened by luxury, and in the prime of life, with complexion fair like the flowers, strong and powerful and of irresistible energy; tomorrow and he will be an object of pity, withered by age or exhausted by sickness. Another shines in all the splendour of a brilliant fortune, and around him are a multitude of flatterers, an escort of false friends on the track of his good graces; a crowd of kinsfolk, but of no true kin; a swarm of servants who crowd after him to provide for his food and for all his needs; and in his comings and goings this innumerable suite, which he drags after him, excites the envy of all whom he meets. To fortune may be added power in the State, honours bestowed by the imperial throne, the government of a province, or the command of armies; a herald who precedes him is crying in a loud voice; lictors right and left also fill his subjects with awe, blows, confiscations, banishments, imprisonments, and all the means by which he strikes intolerable terror into all whom he has to rule. And what then? One night, a fever, a pleurisy, or an inflammation of the lungs, snatches away this man from the midst of men, stripped in a moment of all his stage accessories, and all this, his glory, is proved a mere dream. Therefore the Prophet has compared human glory to the weakest flower.

Up to this point, the order in which plants shoot bears witness to their first arrangement. Every herb, every plant proceeds from a germ. If, like the couch-grass and the crocus, it throws out a shoot from its root and from this lower protuberance, it must always germinate and start outwards. If it proceeds from a seed, there is still, by necessity, first a germ, then the sprout, then green foliage, and finally the fruit which ripens upon a stalk hitherto dry and thick. Let the earth bring forth grass. When the seed falls into the earth, which contains the right combination of heat and moisture, it swells and becomes porous, and, grasping the surrounding earth, attracts to itself all that is suitable for it and that has affinity to it. These particles of earth, however small they may be, as they fall and insinuate themselves into all the pores of the seed, broaden its bulk and make it send forth roots below, and shoot upwards, sending forth stalks no less numerous than the roots. As the germ is always growing warm, the moisture, pumped up through the roots, and helped by the attraction of heat, draws a proper amount of nourishment from the soil, and distributes it to the stem, to the bark, to the husk, to the seed itself and to the beards with which it is armed. It is owing to these successive accretions that each plant attains its natural development, as well grain as vegetables, herbs or brushwood. A single plant, a blade of grass is sufficient to occupy all your intelligence in the contemplation of the skill which produced it. Why is the wheat stalk better with joints? Are they not like fastenings, which help it to bear easily the weight of the ear, when it is swollen with fruit and bends towards the earth? Thus, while oats, which have no weight to bear at the top, are without these supports, nature has provided them for wheat. It has hidden the grain in a case, so that it may not be exposed to birds' pillage, and has furnished it with a rampart of barbs, which, like darts, protect it against the attacks of tiny creatures.

What shall I say? What shall I leave unsaid? In the rich treasures of creation it is difficult to select what is most precious; the loss of what is omitted is too severe. Let the earth bring forth grass; and instantly, with useful plants, appear noxious plants; with grain, hemlock; with the other nutritious plants, hellebore, monkshood, mandrake and the juice of the poppy. What then? Shall we show no gratitude for so many beneficial gifts, and reproach the Creator for those which may be harmful to our life? And shall we not reflect that all has not been created in view of the wants of our bellies? The nourishing plants, which are destined for our use, are close at hand, and known by all the world. But in creation nothing exists without a reason. The blood of the bull is a poison: ought this animal then, whose strength is so serviceable to man, not to have been created, or, if created, to have been bloodless? But you have sense enough in yourself to keep you free from deadly things. What! Sheep and goats know how to turn away from what threatens their life, discerning danger by instinct alone: and you, who have reason and the art of medicine to supply what you need, and the experience of your forebears to tell you to avoid all that is dangerous, you tell me that you find it difficult to keep yourself from poisons! But not a single thing has been created without reason, not a single thing is useless. One serves as food to some animal; medicine has found in another a relief for one of our maladies. Thus the starling eats hemlock, its constitution rendering it insusceptible to the action of the poison. Thanks to the tenuity of the pores of its heart, the malignant juice is no sooner swallowed than it is digested, before its chill can attack the vital parts. The quail, thanks to its peculiar temperament, whereby it escapes the dangerous effects, feeds on hellebore. There are even circumstances where poisons are useful to men; with mandrake doctors give us sleep; with opium they lull violent pain. Hemlock has ere now been used to appease the rage of unruly diseases; and many times hellebore has taken away long standing disease. These plants, then, instead of making you accuse the Creator, give you a new subject for gratitude.

Let the earth bring forth grass. What spontaneous provision is included in these words—that which is present in the root, in the plant itself, and in the fruit, as well as that which our labour and husbandry add! God did not command the earth immediately to give forth seed and fruit, but to produce germs, to grow green, and to arrive at maturity in the seed; so that this first command teaches nature what she has to do in the course of ages. But, they ask, is it true that the earth produces seed after his kind, when often, after having sown wheat, we gather black grain? This is not a change of kind, but an alteration, a disease of the grain. It has not ceased to be wheat; it is on account of having been burnt that it is black, as one can learn from its name. If a severe frost had burnt it, it would have had another colour and a different flavour. They even pretend that, if it could find suitable earth and moderate temperature, it might return to its first form. Thus, you find nothing in nature contrary to the divine command. As to the darnel and all those bastard grains which mix themselves with the harvest, the tares of Scripture, far from being a variety of grain, have their own origin and their own kind; image of those who alter the doctrine of the Lord and, not being rightly instructed in the word, but, corrupted by the teaching of the evil one, mix themselves with the sound body of the Church to spread their pernicious errors secretly among purer souls. The Lord thus compares the perfection of those who believe in Him to the growth of seed, as if a man should cast seed into the ground; and should sleep and rise, night and day, and the seed should spring and grow up, he knows not how. For the earth brings forth fruit of herself; first the blade, then the ear, after that the full grain in the ear. Matthew 4:26-28 Let the earth bring forth grass. In a moment earth began by germination to obey the laws of the Creator, completed every stage of growth, and brought germs to perfection. The meadows were covered with deep grass, the fertile plains quivered with harvests, and the movement of the grain was like the waving of the sea. Every plant, every herb, the smallest shrub, the least vegetable, arose from the earth in all its luxuriance. There was no failure in this first vegetation: no husbandman's inexperience, no inclemency of the weather, nothing could injure it; then the sentence of condemnation was not fettering the earth's fertility. All this was before the sin which condemned us to eat our bread by the sweat of our brow.

Genesis 1:11 Let the earth, the Creator adds, bring forth the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself. At this command every copse was thickly planted; all the trees, fir, cedar, cypress, pine, rose to their greatest height, the shrubs were straightway clothed with thick foliage. The plants called crown-plants, roses, myrtles, laurels, did not exist; in one moment they came into being, each one with its distinctive peculiarities. Most marked differences separated them from other plants, and each one was distinguished by a character of its own. But then the rose was without thorns; since then the thorn has been added to its beauty, to make us feel that sorrow is very near to pleasure, and to remind us of our sin, which condemned the earth to produce thorns and caltrops. But, they say, the earth has received the command to produce trees yielding fruit whose seed was in itself, and we see many trees which have neither fruit, nor seed. What shall we reply? First, that only the more important trees are mentioned; and then, that a careful examination will show us that every tree has seed, or some property which takes the place of it. The black poplar, the willow, the elm, the white poplar, all the trees of this family, do not produce any apparent fruit; however, an attentive observer finds seed in each of them. This grain which is at the base of the leaf, and which those who busy themselves with inventing words call mischos, has the property of seed. And there are trees which reproduce by their branches, throwing out roots from them. Perhaps we ought even to consider as seeds the saplings which spring from the roots of a tree: for cultivators tear them out to multiply the species. But, we have already said, it is chiefly a question of the trees which contribute most to our life; which offer their various fruits to man and provide him with plentiful nourishment. Such is the vine, which produces wine to make glad the heart of man; such is the olive tree, whose fruit brightens his face with oil. How many things in nature are combined in the same plant! In a vine, roots, green and flexible branches, which spread themselves far over the earth, buds, tendrils, bunches of sour grapes and ripe grapes. The sight of a vine, when observed by an intelligent eye, serves to remind you of your nature. Without doubt you remember the parable where the Lord calls Himself a vine and His Father the husbandman, and every one of us who are grafted by faith into the Church the branches. He invites us to produce fruits in abundance, for fear lest our sterility should condemn us to the fire. cf.John 15:1-6 He constantly compares our souls to vines. My well beloved, says He, has a vineyard in a very fruitfull hill, Isaiah 5:1 and elsewhere, I have planted a vineyard and hedged it round about. Matthew 21:33 Evidently He calls human souls His vine, those souls whom He has surrounded with the authority of His precepts and a guard of angels. The angel of the Lord encamps round about them that fear him. And further: He has planted for us, so to say, props, in establishing in His Church apostles, prophets, teachers; and raising our thoughts by the example of the blessed in olden times, He has not allowed them to drag on the earth and be crushed under foot. He wishes that the claspings of love, like the tendrils of the vine, should attach us to our neighbours and make us rest on them, so that, in our continual aspirations towards heaven, we may imitate these vines, which raise themselves to the tops of the tallest trees. He also asks us to allow ourselves to be dug about; and that is what the soul does when it disembarrasses itself from the cares of the world, which are a weight on our hearts. He, then, who is freed from carnal affections and from the love of riches, and, far from being dazzled by them, disdains and despises this miserable vain glory, is, so to say, dug about and at length breathes, free from the useless weight of earthly thoughts. Nor must we, in the spirit of the parable, put forth too much wood, that is to say, live with ostentation, and gain the applause of the world; we must bring forth fruits, keeping the proof of our works for the husbandman. Be like a green olive tree in the house of God, never destitute of hope, but decked through faith with the bloom of salvation. Thus you will resemble the eternal verdure of this plant and will rival it in fruitfulness, if each day sees you giving abundantly in alms.

But let us return to the examination of the ingenious contrivances of creation. How many trees then arose, some to give us their fruits, others to roof our houses, others to build our ships, others to feed our fires! What a variety in the disposition of their several parts! And yet, how difficult is it to find the distinctive property of each of them, and to grasp the difference which separates them from other species. Some strike deep roots, others do not; some shoot straight up and have only one stem, others appear to love the earth and, from their root upwards, divide into several shoots. Those whose long branches stretch up afar into the air, have also deep roots which spread within a large circumference, a true foundation placed by nature to support the weight of the tree. What variety there is in bark! Some plants have smooth bark, others rough, some have only one layer, others several. What a marvellous thing! You may find in the youth and age of plants resemblances to those of man. Young and vigorous, their bark is distended; when they grow old, it is rough and wrinkled. Cut one, it sends forth new buds; the other remains henceforward sterile and as if struck with a mortal wound. But further, it has been observed that pines, cut down, or even submitted to the action of fire, are changed into a forest of oaks. We know besides that the industry of agriculturists remedies the natural defects of certain trees. Thus the sharp pomegranate and bitter almonds, if the trunk of the tree is pierced near the root to introduce into the middle of the pith a fat plug of pine, lose the acidity of their juice, and become delicious fruits. Let not the sinner then despair of himself, when he thinks, if agriculture can change the juices of plants, the efforts of the soul to arrive at virtue, can certainly triumph over all infirmities.

Now there is such a variety of fruits in fruit trees that it is beyond all expression; a variety not only in the fruits of trees of different families, but even in those of the same species, if it be true, as gardeners say, that the sex of a tree influences the character of its fruits. They distinguish male from female in palms; sometimes we see those which they call female lower their branches, as though with passionate desire, and invite the embraces of the male. Then, those who take care of these plants shake over these palms the fertilizing dust from the male palm-tree, the psen as they call it: the tree appears to share the pleasures of enjoyment; then it raises its branches, and its foliage resumes its usual form. The same is said of the fig tree. Some plant wild fig trees near cultivated fig trees, and there are others who, to remedy the weakness of the productive fig tree of our gardens, attach to the branches unripe figs and so retain the fruit which had already begun to drop and to be lost. What lesson does nature here give us? That we must often borrow, even from those who are strangers to the faith, a certain vigour to show forth good works. If you see outside the Church, in pagan life, or in the midst of a pernicious heresy, the example of virtue and fidelity to moral laws, redouble your efforts to resemble the productive fig tree, who by the side of the wild fig tree, gains strength, prevents the fruit from being shed, and nourishes it with more care.

Plants reproduce themselves in so many different ways, that we can only touch upon the chief among them. As to fruits themselves, who could review their varieties, their forms, their colours, the peculiar flavour, and the use of each of them? Why do some fruits ripen when exposed bare to the rays of the sun, while others fill out while encased in shells? Trees of which the fruit is tender have, like the fig tree, a thick shade of leaves; those, on the contrary, of which the fruits are stouter, like the nut, are only covered by a light shade. The delicacy of the first requires more care; if the latter had a thicker case, the shade of the leaves would be harmful. Why is the vine leaf serrated, if not that the bunches of grapes may at the same time resist the injuries of the air and receive through the openings all the rays of the sun? Nothing has been done without motive, nothing by chance. All shows ineffable wisdom.

What discourse can touch all? Can the human mind make an exact review, remark every distinctive property, exhibit all the differences, unveil with certainty so many mysterious causes? The same water, pumped up through the root, nourishes in a different way the root itself, the bark of the trunk, the wood and the pith. It becomes leaf, it distributes itself among the branches and twigs and makes the fruits swell— it gives to the plant its gum and its sap. Who will explain to us the difference between all these? There is a difference between the gum of the mastich and the juice of the balsam, a difference between that which distils in Egypt and Libya from the fennel. Amber is, they say, the crystallized sap of plants. And for a proof, see the bits of straws and little insects which have been caught in the sap while still liquid and imprisoned there. In one word, no one without long experience could find terms to express the virtue of it. How, again, does this water become wine in the vine, and oil in the olive tree? Yet what is marvellous is, not to see it become sweet in one fruit, fat and unctuous in another, but to see in sweet fruits an inexpressible variety of flavour. There is one sweetness of the grape, another of the apple, another of the fig, another of the date. I shall willingly give you the gratification of continuing this research. How is it that this same water has sometimes a sweet taste, softened by its remaining in certain plants, and at other times stings the palate because it has become acid by passing through others? How is it, again, that it attains extreme bitterness, and makes the mouth rough when it is found in wormwood and in scammony? That it has in acorns and dogwood a sharp and rough flavour? That in the turpentine tree and the walnut tree it is changed into a soft and oily matter?

But what need is there to continue, when in the same fig tree we have the most opposite flavours, as bitter in the sap as it is sweet in the fruit? And in the vine, is it not as sweet in the grapes as it is astringent in the branches? And what a variety of colour! Look how in a meadow this same water becomes red in one flower, purple in another, blue in this one, white in that. And this diversity of colours, is it to be compared to that of scents? But I perceive that an insatiable curiosity is drawing out my discourse beyond its limits. If I do not stop and recall it to the law of creation, day will fail me while making you see great wisdom in small things.

Let the earth bring forth the fruit tree yielding fruit. Immediately the tops of the mountains were covered with foliage: paradises were artfully laid out, and an infinitude of plants embellished the banks of the rivers. Some were for the adornment of man's table; some to nourish animals with their fruits and their leaves; some to provide medicinal help by giving us their sap, their juice, their chips, their bark or their fruit. In a word, the experience of ages, profiting from every chance, has not been able to discover anything useful, which the penetrating foresight of the Creator did not first perceive and call into existence. Therefore, when you see the trees in our gardens, or those of the forest, those which love the water or the land, those which bear flowers, or those which do not flower, I should like to see you recognising grandeur even in small objects, adding incessantly to your admiration of, and redoubling your love for the Creator. Ask yourself why He has made some trees evergreen and others deciduous; why, among the first, some lose their leaves, and others always keep them. Thus the olive and the pine shed their leaves, although they renew them insensibly and never appear to be despoiled of their verdure. The palm tree, on the contrary, from its birth to its death, is always adorned with the same foliage. Think again of the double life of the tamarisk; it is an aquatic plant, and yet it covers the desert. Thus, Jeremiah compares it to the worst of characters— the double character.

Let the earth bring forth. This short command was in a moment a vast nature, an elaborate system. Swifter than thought it produced the countless qualities of plants. It is this command which, still at this day, is imposed on the earth, and in the course of each year displays all the strength of its power to produce herbs, seeds and trees. Like tops, which after the first impulse, continue their evolutions, turning upon themselves when once fixed in their centre; thus nature, receiving the impulse of this first command, follows without interruption the course of ages, until the consummation of all things. Let us all hasten to attain to it, full of fruit and of good works; and thus, planted in the house of the Lord we shall flourish in the court of our God, in our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and power for ever and ever. Amen. [The Hexameron]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. (Gen. 1:11-12) Moreover, the Scripture, to render beforehand the ingratitude of men truly inexcusable, reveals to us carefully the order and continuation of the works of creation. It wants to suppress the temerity and extravagance of those who give us their dreams for realities, and who argue that the cooperation of the sun was necessary for the production of plants and fruits. Others attribute these effects to the influence of the stars; but the Holy Spirit teaches us that, long before the creation of the sun and the stars, the earth, obedient to the divine word, had, without any foreign concurrence, produced of itself plants and trees; it was enough for him to hear this saying: Let the earth produce lush plants. Let us then follow the footsteps of Holy Scripture, and highly condemn those who rise up against his divine teachings. Although men cultivate the land, and with the help of domestic animals, they apply to agriculture; although the seasons are favorable to them, and all things concur in satisfying their desires, if God does not spread his blessing, they will exhaust themselves in useless labors. Yes, neither the sweat nor the labor of the plowman become fruitful if the Lord, from heaven, extends his hand and gives them a happy increase. But who would be delighted with astonishment and admiration at seeing how this word: Let the earth produce verdant plants, penetrate into the depths of the earth and adorn it like a rich carpet by the variety of flowers that covered the surface. Thus the earth, which had formerly been raw and uneducated, suddenly clothed itself with a brilliant adornment, and rivaled beauty with the firmament. And indeed, just as this one was soon to shine forth from the fire of the stars, the earth was embellished by the variety of flowers; so that the Creator himself praised his own work. And God, says the Scripture, saw that it was good.

(Gen. 1:13) Moses takes care, as you may notice, to remind us, after each of the works of creation, that God praises His own work, in order to teach men to go up from the creature to the Creator. For if creatures are above all our praises, what of the Divine Worker who produced them? And God saw that it was good; and evening and morning was the third day. It is to better inculcate these things, that the sacred writer repeats them here. It was enough for him to state that the third day was done; but he uses the same terms he has already used, and he tells us that evening and morning was the third day. Of course, it is not from his forgetfulness or inadvertence; he wants us not to confuse the order of things and not to see the approach of the night as the end of the day; for the evening is only the end of the light and the beginning of the night, just as the morning is the end of the night and the complement of the day. This is what the holy prophet Moses teaches us when he says to us: And in the evening and in the morning was the third day. And do not be astonished, my dear brother, that the Holy Scriptures so often repeat the same things; for, in spite of his care and his precautions, some Jews persist in their error, and maintain, with the obstinacy of a blind mind, that the evening is the beginning of the next day. They deceive themselves, and are still seated in darkness, though the truth has been revealed to all eyes. They still seek the light, when the Sun of righteousness has risen on the world. But after Moses has informed us of all these details with such exactness, who could bear the obstinacy of these unruly spirits! [Homilies on Genesis]

TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE. (1:12) And to such a degree has the Holy Ghost made this the rule of His Scripture, that whenever anything is made out of anything, He mentions both the thing that is made and the thing of which it is made. "Let the earth," says He, "bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit-tree yielding fruit after its kind, whose seed is in itself, after its kind. And it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after its kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after its kind." [Against Hermagenes 22]

(1:13) For because ages consist of times, and times are made up of days, and months, and years; since also days, and months, and years are measured by suns, and moons, and stars, which He ordained for this purpose (for "they shall be," says He, "for signs of the months and the years"), it clearly follows that the ages belong to the Creator, and that nothing of what was fore-ordained before the ages can be said to be the property of any other being than Him who claims the ages also as His own. [Against Marcion 5.6]

1:14-16 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, to divide between day and night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and for years. 15 And let them be for light in the firmament of the heaven, so as to shine upon the earth, and it was so. 1:16 And God made the two great lights, the greater light for regulating the day and the lesser light for regulating the night, the stars also.

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. The first question which arises here is to know what is the reason of an order in which the creation of the earth and the waters, their separation, the productions of the ground precede the appearance of the stars in the sky. It can not be said, indeed, that the succession of days corresponds to the dignity of objects, and that the end and the medium are emphasized. Over a period of seven days the fourth forms the middle, and we know that the seventh was not marked by any creation. Shall we say that the light of the first day is in a proper relation with the repose of the seventh, and that we may thus form a harmonious series, where the beginning meets the end, where the medium emerges and shines again? clarity of the sky? But if the first day has a magnitude that brings it closer to the seventh, it must be that the second corresponds to the sixth. Now, what is the relation between the firmament and the man made in the image of God? Could the sky spread into the upper region of the world and man have the privilege of reigning over the lower region? But what about animals and beasts produced by the earth, according to their kind, on the sixth day? Can there be any relationship between animals and the sky?

This may be the explanation of this order. The intelligent creature having been formed in the beginning, under the name of light, it was natural that physical nature, in other words, the visible world was formed. This creation took place in two days, which correspond to the two principal parts of which the universe is composed, I mean the heavens and the earth, according to this analogy which often makes known as the sky and the earth the spirits and the body. This globe was the domain assigned to the most noisy and coarse part of the air: it condenses in fact by the emanations of the earth; on the contrary, the most tranquil part of the air, the one never agitated by winds or storms, had the sky to stay. The creation of the physical world completed, in the place which had been assigned to it in the expanse, it was necessary to fill it with organized beings, capable of moving from one place to another. Plants and trees do not fall into this category; they are rooted in the earth, and though the movement which makes them grow is in them, they are none the less incapable of moving by an effort of their own. clean: they feed and grow where they are chained. Consequently, they have a closer relationship with the earth than with beings moving on the ground or in the water. Two days have been devoted to organizing the material nature, I mean the sky and the earth: it is necessary that the three following days are consecrated to the visible beings and animated of movement, which are created on this theater. The sky having been formed first, must first receive the bodies destined to occupy it. It is therefore on the fourth day that the stars are formed, which shine on the earth, and which, by bringing light to the lowest regions of the universe, permit not to introduce its future inhabitants into a dark stay. As the weak organs of beings on earth are renewed by the passage of movement at rest, the revolution of the sun has established between the alternative of day and night and the passage from repose to the day before, a just correspondence; the night, far from being without beauty, has offered, in the soft glare of the moon and the stars, a consolation to men whom necessity often forces to work at night; this peaceful light is suitable for animals that can support the sun's radiance. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. (Gen. 1:14-15) And God said: let the luminaries be made in the firmament of heaven so that they may shine on the earth and divide the day and the night, and be in signs and times, and in days and years and shine in the firmament of heaven and shine on the earth. On the fourth day the luminaries were made, of which it is said to be in days. What do you want to indicate these past three days without luminaries, or why these stars were placed to mark the days, if the days could also exist without them? Was it perhaps because the movement of these luminaries can be distinguished more clearly that prolongation of time and intervals of duration? Or is it that this enumeration of days and nights lends itself better to distinguish between that nature that has not been made and those that were, in such a way as to be called tomorrow by the form of things formed and later by the privation of such shape? Because if we look at God by whom they are made, they are beautiful and hernious; but if we look at what they are, they can be diminished, because they were made out of nothing; if they do not annihilate, they do not owe it to their matter, which comes from nothing, but to the supreme Being that keeps them in their gender and order.

And God said: let the luminaries be made in the firmament of heaven so that they may shine. Was this said about the stars that are fixed or also those that move? The two luminaries, the largest and the smallest, are counted among the stars that wander. How, then, were all the stars created in the firmament of heaven, when in particular each one of these that move has its own zone or circle? Or was it said because we read in the divine Scripture that there are many heavens and a sky, and therefore in this place, when the firmament is called heaven, it is to be understood that it speaks of all this ethereal realm that contains all the stars, below which reigns the serenity of pure and tranquil air, as under such serenity Is this turbulent and stormy air stirred? So that they shine on the earth and divide day and night. Had not God already divided the light and the darkness, and had called the light day and the darkness night, where it appears to have already divided the day and the night before? What do you want, then, to tell us now with what is said of the luminaries, and divide the day and the night? Is this division now made by luminaries so that it is known by men who use only their fleshly eyes to contemplate these things? Thus, God would have made this division before moving the stars in their orbits, so that it could not be understood except by very few, by those who were endowed with healthy spirit and clear reason. Or perhaps God made another division between another kind of day and another kind of night, that is, between the form that imprinted that universal reportable mass, and the information that still remained to be formed? Different this day and different tonight, whose alternative is noticed moving the sky, and that can not occur if it is not with the sunrise and sunset.

(Gen. 1:14) And be in signs and times, and in days and years. It seems to me that what he said are in signs, they fully clarify the following words, and in time, so that thus one thing would not be taken by sign and another by time; because these times of which he now speaks and which are distinguished by their intervals, point out that on them there is immutable eternity, so that they are a sign of it, that is, time appears as a vestige of eternity. Also when he adds and in days and years he declares that he deals with the times when the days are completed by the return of the fixed stars; and the years are evident when the sun crosses the sidereal circle, because the years are less evident, if we count them when each of the planets crosses its orbit. He did not say "and be a sign of months", because perhaps the month is the year of the moon; just as the twelve moons of the year are the year of the star that the Greeks call gaezonta, the same as thirty solar years make up the year of the star called fainon; and perhaps this way also when the stars had returned to occupy the same position, the great year is completed of which not a few said many things. Or perhaps he said in signs, to show by them the true way to navigators; and in times, as to indicate the time of spring, summer, autumn and winter, since these seasons also vary and keep their place and order with the circular movement of the stars? They serve as a signal in days and years, we must understand it as it is already exposed.

(Gen. 1:15) And shine in the firmament of heaven and shine on the earth. It had already been said above make the luminaries in the firmament of heaven to illuminate the earth. Why do we believe that this was repeated? Is it the same that was said about the plants, that they carry seeds and that they are seeds according to their gender and similarity? And, therefore, here too, but in a different way, was it said of the luminaries, do and be, that is to say, do yourselves and not beget but be in themselves? And so it was done. The order of there is also observed here.

(Gen. 1:16) And God made two luminaries, the luminary greater beginning of the day, and the lesser luminary beginning of the night, and the stars. What the beginning of the day and night means, we will see immediately. What was added and the stars is ambiguous whether they belong or not at the beginning of the night. Some say that here it is implied that the full moon was first made because she gets up at the beginning of the night, that is, immediately after the sun sets. But it is absurd to start counting from the sixteenth and fifteenth fair of the moon, not from the first. And no one should say that the moon must have been perfect, for it is perfect, that is, full every day, but its perfection is only seen by men when it is opposite to the sun on the other side; when it is placed next to it, as it is under it, it seems that it is without light; but then it is also full because it is illuminated by the other part, although it can not be seen by those who are under it, that is, by those who inhabit the earth; this can not be demonstrated with few reasons, but with clever speeches and with the help of certain visible drawings. [Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. Et dividant inter medium diei, et inter medium noctis. (And that they divide the day from with the night.) [Locutions]

BASIL OF CAESAREA. The creation of luminous bodies. At the shows in the circus the spectator must join in the efforts of the athletes. This the laws of the show indicate, for they prescribe that all should have the head uncovered when present at the stadium. The object of this, in my opinion, is that each one there should not only be a spectator of the athletes, but be, in a certain measure, a true athlete himself. Thus, to investigate the great and prodigious show of creation, to understand supreme and ineffable wisdom, you must bring personal light for the contemplation of the wonders which I spread before your eyes, and help me, according to your power, in this struggle, where you are not so much judges as fellow combatants, for fear lest the truth might escape you, and lest my error might turn to your common prejudice. Why these words? It is because we propose to study the world as a whole, and to consider the universe, not by the light of worldly wisdom, but by that with which God wills to enlighten His servant, when He speaks to him in person and without enigmas. It is because it is absolutely necessary that all lovers of great and grand shows should bring a mind well prepared to study them. If sometimes, on a bright night, while gazing with watchful eyes on the inexpressible beauty of the stars, you have thought of the Creator of all things; if you have asked yourself who it is that has dotted heaven with such flowers, and why visible things are even more useful than beautiful; if sometimes, in the day, you have studied the marvels of light, if you have raised yourself by visible things to the invisible Being, then you are a well prepared auditor, and you can take your place in this august and blessed amphitheatre. Come in the same way that any one not knowing a town is taken by the hand and led through it; thus I am going to lead you, like strangers, through the mysterious marvels of this great city of the universe. Our first country was in this great city, whence the murderous dæmon whose enticements seduced man to slavery expelled us. There you will see man's first origin and his immediate seizure by death, brought forth by sin, the first born of the evil spirit. You will know that you are formed of earth, but the work of God's hands; much weaker than the brute, but ordained to command beings without reason and soul; inferior as regards natural advantages, but, thanks to the privilege of reason, capable of raising yourself to heaven. If we are penetrated by these truths, we shall know ourselves, we shall know God, we shall adore our Creator, we shall serve our Master, we shall glorify our Father, we shall love our Sustainer, we shall bless our Benefactor, we shall not cease to honour the Prince of present and future life, Who, by the riches that He showers upon us in this world, makes us believe in His promises and uses present good things to strengthen our expectation of the future. Truly, if such are the good things of time, what will be those of eternity? If such is the beauty of visible things, what shall we think of invisible things? If the grandeur of heaven exceeds the measure of human intelligence, what mind shall be able to trace the nature of the everlasting? If the sun, subject to corruption, is so beautiful, so grand, so rapid in its movement, so invariable in its course; if its grandeur is in such perfect harmony with and due proportion to the universe: if, by the beauty of its nature, it shines like a brilliant eye in the middle of creation; if finally, one cannot tire of contemplating it, what will be the beauty of the Sun of Righteousness? If the blind man suffers from not seeing the material sun, what a deprivation is it for the sinner not to enjoy the true light!

Genesis 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, and to divide the day from the night. Heaven and earth were the first; after them was created light; the day had been distinguished from the night, then had appeared the firmament and the dry element. The water had been gathered into the reservoir assigned to it, the earth displayed its productions, it had caused many kinds of herbs to germinate and it was adorned with all kinds of plants. However, the sun and the moon did not yet exist, in order that those who live in ignorance of God may not consider the sun as the origin and the father of light, or as the maker of all that grows out of the earth. That is why there was a fourth day, and then God said: Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven.

When once you have learned Who spoke, think immediately of the hearer. God said, Let there be lights...and God made two great lights. Who spoke? And Who made? Do you not see a double person? Everywhere, in mystic language, history is sown with the dogmas of theology.

The motive follows which caused the lights to be created. It was to illuminate the earth. Already light was created; why therefore say that the sun was created to give light? And, first, do not laugh at the strangeness of this expression. We do not follow your nicety about words, and we trouble ourselves but little to give them a harmonious turn. Our writers do not amuse themselves by polishing their periods, and everywhere we prefer clearness of words to sonorous expressions. See then if by this expression to light up, the sacred writer sufficiently made his thought understood. He has put to give light instead of illumination. Now there is nothing here contradictory to what has been said of light. Then the actual nature of light was produced: now the sun's body is constructed to be a vehicle for that original light. A lamp is not fire. Fire has the property of illuminating, and we have invented the lamp to light us in darkness. In the same way, the luminous bodies have been fashioned as a vehicle for that pure, clear, and immaterial light. The Apostle speaks to us of certain lights which shine in the world without being confounded with the true light of the world, the possession of which made the saints luminaries of the souls which they instructed and drew from the darkness of ignorance. This is why the Creator of all things, made the sun in addition to that glorious light, and placed it shining in the heavens.

And let no one suppose it to be a thing incredible that the brightness of the light is one thing, and the body which is its material vehicle is another. First, in all composite things, we distinguish substance susceptible of quality, and the quality which it receives. The nature of whiteness is one thing, another is that of the body which is whitened; thus the natures differ which we have just seen reunited by the power of the Creator. And do not tell me that it is impossible to separate them. Even I do not pretend to be able to separate light from the body of the sun; but I maintain that that which we separate in thought, may be separated in reality by the Creator of nature. You cannot, moreover, separate the brightness of fire from the virtue of burning which it possesses; but God, who wished to attract His servant by a wonderful sight, set a fire in the burning bush, which displayed all the brilliancy of flame while its devouring property was dormant. It is that which the Psalmist affirms in saying The voice of the Lord divides the flames of fire. Thus, in the requital which awaits us after this life, a mysterious voice seems to tell us that the double nature of fire will be divided; the just will enjoy its light, and the torment of its heat will be the torture of the wicked.

In the revolutions of the moon we find anew proof of what we have advanced. When it stops and grows less it does not consume itself in all its body, but in the measure that it deposits or absorbs the light which surrounds it, it presents to us the image of its decrease or of its increase. If we wish an evident proof that the moon does not consume its body when at rest, we have only to open our eyes. If you look at it in a cloudless and clear sky, you observe, when it has taken the complete form of a crescent, that the part, which is dark and not lighted up, describes a circle equal to that which the full moon forms. Thus the eye can take in the whole circle, if it adds to the illuminated part this obscure and dark curve. And do not tell me that the light of the moon is borrowed, diminishing or increasing in proportion as it approaches or recedes from the sun. That is not now the object of our research; we only wish to prove that its body differs from the light which makes it shine. I wish you to have the same idea of the sun; except however that the one, after having once received light and having mixed it with its substance, does not lay it down again, while the other, turn by turn, putting off and reclothing itself again with light, proves by that which takes place in itself what we have said of the sun.

The sun and moon thus received the command to divide the day from the night. God had already separated light from darkness; then He placed their natures in opposition, so that they could not mingle, and that there could never be anything in common between darkness and light. You see what a shadow is during the day; that is precisely the nature of darkness during the night. If, at the appearance of a light, the shadow always falls on the opposite side; if in the morning it extends towards the setting sun; if in the evening it inclines towards the rising sun, and at mid-day turns towards the north; night retires into the regions opposed to the rays of the sun, since it is by nature only the shadow of the earth. Because, in the same way that, during the day, shadow is produced by a body which intercepts the light, night comes naturally when the air which surrounds the earth is in shadow. And this is precisely what Scripture says, God divided the light from the darkness. Thus darkness fled at the approach of light, the two being at their first creation divided by a natural antipathy. Now God commanded the sun to measure the day, and the moon, whenever she rounds her disc, to rule the night. For then these two luminaries are almost diametrically opposed; when the sun rises, the full moon disappears from the horizon, to re-appear in the east at the moment the sun sets. It matters little to our subject if in other phases the light of the moon does not correspond exactly with night. It is none the less true, that when at its perfection it makes the stars to turn pale and lightens up the earth with the splendour of its light, it reigns over the night, and in concert with the sun divides the duration of it in equal parts.

Genesis 1:14 And let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years. The signs which the luminaries give are necessary to human life. In fact what useful observations will long experience make us discover, if we ask without undue curiosity! What signs of rain, of drought, or of the rising of the wind, partial or general, violent or moderate! Our Lord indicates to us one of the signs given by the sun when He says, It will be foul weather today; for the sky is red and lowering. Matthew 16:3 In fact, when the sun rises through a fog, its rays are darkened, but the disc appears burning like a coal and of a bloody red colour. It is the thickness of the air which causes this appearance; as the rays of the sun do not disperse such amassed and condensed air, it cannot certainly be retained by the waves of vapour which exhale from the earth, and it will cause from superabundance of moisture a storm in the countries over which it accumulates. In the same way, when the moon is surrounded with moisture, or when the sun is encircled with what is called a halo, it is the sign of heavy rain or of a violent storm; again, in the same way, if mock suns accompany the sun in its course they foretell certain celestial phenomena. Finally, those straight lines, like the colours of the rainbow, which are seen on the clouds, announce rain, extraordinary tempests, or, in one word, a complete change in the weather.

Those who devote themselves to the observation of these bodies find signs in the different phases of the moon, as if the air, by which the earth is enveloped, were obliged to vary to correspond with its change of form. Towards the third day of the new moon, if it is sharp and clear, it is a sign of fixed fine weather. If its horns appear thick and reddish it threatens us either with heavy rain or with a gale from the South. Who does not know how useful are these signs in life? Thanks to them, the sailor keeps back his vessel in the harbour, foreseeing the perils with which the winds threaten him, and the traveller beforehand takes shelter from harm, waiting until the weather has become fairer. Thanks to them, husbandmen, busy with sowing seed or cultivating plants, are able to know which seasons are favourable to their labours. Further, the Lord has announced to us that at the dissolution of the universe, signs will appear in the sun, in the moon and in the stars. The sun shall be turned into blood and the moon shall not give her light, signs of the consummation of all things.

But those who overstep the borders, making the words of Scripture their apology for the art of casting nativities, pretend that our lives depend upon the motion of the heavenly bodies, and that thus the Chaldæans read in the planets that which will happen to us. By these very simple words let them be for signs, they understand neither the variations of the weather, nor the change of seasons; they only see in them, at the will of their imagination, the distribution of human destinies. What do they say in reality? When the planets cross in the signs of the Zodiac, certain figures formed by their meeting give birth to certain destinies, and others produce different destinies.

Perhaps for clearness sake it is not useless to enter into more detail about this vain science. I will say nothing of my own to refute them; I will use their words, bringing a remedy for the infected, and for others a preservative from falling. The inventors of astrology seeing that in the extent of time many signs escaped them, divided it and enclosed each part in narrow limits, as if in the least and shortest interval, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, 1 Corinthians 15:52 to speak with the Apostle, the greatest difference should be found between one birth and another. Such an one is born in this moment; he will be a prince over cities and will govern the people, in the fullness of riches and power. Another is born the instant after; he will be poor, miserable, and will wander daily from door to door begging his bread. Consequently they divide the Zodiac into twelve parts, and, as the sun takes thirty days to traverse each of the twelve divisions of this unerring circle, they divide them into thirty more. Each of them forms sixty new ones, and these last are again divided into sixty. Let us see then if, in determining the birth of an infant, it will be possible to observe this rigorous division of time. The child is born. The nurse ascertains the sex; then she awaits the wail which is a sign of its life. Until then how many moments have passed do you think? The nurse announces the birth of the child to the Chaldæan: how many minutes would you count before she opens her mouth, especially if he who records the hour is outside the women's apartments? And we know that he who consults the dial, ought, whether by day or by night, to mark the hour with the most precise exactitude. What a swarm of seconds passes during this time! For the planet of nativity ought to be found, not only in one of the twelve divisions of the Zodiac, and even in one of its first subdivisions, but again in one of the sixtieth parts which divide this last, and even, to arrive at the exact truth, in one of the sixtieth subdivisions that this contains in its turn. And to obtain such minute knowledge, so impossible to grasp from this moment, each planet must be questioned to find its position as regards the signs of the Zodiac and the figures that the planets form at the moment of the child's birth. Thus, if it is impossible to find exactly the hour of birth, and if the least change can upset all, then both those who give themselves up to this imaginary science and those who listen to them open-mouthed, as if they could learn from them the future, are supremely ridiculous.

But what effects are produced? Such an one will have curly hair and bright eyes, because he is born under the Ram; such is the appearance of a ram. He will have noble feelings; because the Ram is born to command. He will be liberal and fertile in resources, because this animal gets rid of its fleece without trouble, and nature immediately hastens to reclothe it. Another is born under the Bull: he will be enured to hardship and of a slavish character, because the bull bows under the yoke. Another is born under the Scorpion; like to this venomous reptile he will be a striker. He who is born under the Balance will be just, thanks to the justness of our balances. Is not this the height of folly? This Ram, from whence you draw the nativity of man, is the twelfth part of the heaven, and in entering into it the sun reaches the spring. The Balance and the Bull are likewise twelfth parts of the Zodiac. How can you see there the principal causes which influence the life of man? And why do you take animals to characterize the manners of men who enter this world? He who is born under the Ram will be liberal, not because this part of heaven gives this characteristic, but because such is the nature of the beast. Why then should we frighten ourselves by the names of these stars and undertake to persuade ourselves with these bleatings? If heaven has different characteristics derived from these animals, it is then itself subject to external influences since its causes depend on the brutes who graze in our fields. A ridiculous assertion; but how much more ridiculous the pretence of arriving at the influence on each other of things which have not the least connection! This pretended science is a true spider's web; if a gnat or a fly, or some insect equally feeble falls into it it is held entangled; if a stronger animal approaches, it passes through without trouble, carrying the weak tissue away with it.

They do not, however, stop here; even our acts, where each one feels his will ruling, I mean, the practice of virtue or of vice, depend, according to them, on the influence of celestial bodies. It would be ridiculous seriously to refute such an error, but, as it holds a great many in its nets, perhaps it is better not to pass it over in silence. I would first ask them if the figures which the stars describe do not change a thousand times a day. In the perpetual motion of planets, some meet in a more rapid course, others make slower revolutions, and often in an hour we see them look at each other and then hide themselves. Now, at the hour of birth, it is very important whether one is looked upon by a beneficent star or by an evil one, to speak their language. Often then the astrologers do not seize the moment when a good star shows itself, and, on account of having let this fugitive moment escape, they enrol the newborn under the influence of a bad genius. I am compelled to use their own words. What madness! But, above all, what impiety! For the evil stars throw the blame of their wickedness upon Him Who made them. If evil is inherent in their nature, the Creator is the author of evil. If they make it themselves, they are animals endowed with the power of choice, whose acts will be free and voluntary. Is it not the height of folly to tell these lies about beings without souls? Again, what a want of sense does it show to distribute good and evil without regard to personal merit; to say that a star is beneficent because it occupies a certain place; that it becomes evil, because it is viewed by another star; and that if it moves ever so little from this figure it loses its malign influence.

But let us pass on. If, at every instant of duration, the stars vary their figures, then in these thousand changes, many times a day, there ought to be reproduced the configuration of royal births. Why then does not every day see the birth of a king? Why is there a succession on the throne from father to son? Without doubt there has never been a king who has taken measures to have his son born under the star of royalty. For what man possesses such a power? How then did Uzziah beget Jotham, Jotham Ahaz, Ahaz Hezekiah? And by what chance did the birth of none of them happen in an hour of slavery? If the origin of our virtues and of our vices is not in ourselves, but is the fatal consequence of our birth, it is useless for legislators to prescribe for us what we ought to do, and what we ought to avoid; it is useless for judges to honour virtue and to punish vice. The guilt is not in the robber, not in the assassin: it was willed for him; it was impossible for him to hold back his hand, urged to evil by inevitable necessity. Those who laboriously cultivate the arts are the maddest of men. The labourer will make an abundant harvest without sowing seed and without sharpening his sickle. Whether he wishes it or not, the merchant will make his fortune, and will be flooded with riches by fate. As for us Christians, we shall see our great hopes vanish, since from the moment that man does not act with freedom, there is neither reward for justice, nor punishment for sin. Under the reign of necessity and of fatality there is no place for merit, the first condition of all righteous judgment. But let us stop. You who are sound in yourselves have no need to hear more, and time does not allow us to make attacks without limit against these unhappy men.

Genesis 1:14  Let us return to the words which follow. Let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years. We have spoken about signs. By times, we understand the succession of seasons, winter, spring, summer and autumn, which we see follow each other in so regular a course, thanks to the regularity of the movement of the luminaries. It is winter when the sun sojourns in the south and produces in abundance the shades of night in our region. The air spread over the earth is chilly, and the damp exhalations, which gather over our heads, give rise to rains, to frosts, to innumerable flakes of snow. When, returning from the southern regions, the sun is in the middle of the heavens and divides day and night into equal parts, the more it sojourns above the earth the more it brings back a mild temperature to us. Then comes spring, which makes all the plants germinate, and gives to the greater part of the trees their new life, and, by successive generation, perpetuates all the land and water animals. From thence the sun, returning to the summer solstice, in the direction of the North, gives us the longest days. And, as it travels farther in the air, it burns that which is over our heads, dries up the earth, ripens the grains and hastens the maturity of the fruits of the trees. At the epoch of its greatest heat, the shadows which the sun makes at mid-day are short, because it shines from above, from the air over our heads. Thus the longest days are those when the shadows are shortest, in the same way that the shortest days are those when the shadows are longest. It is this which happens to all of us Hetero-skii (shadowed-on-one-side) who inhabit the northern regions of the earth. But there are people who, two days in the year, are completely without shade at mid-day, because the sun, being perpendicularly over their heads, lights them so equally from all sides, that it could through a narrow opening shine at the bottom of a well. Thus there are some who call them askii (shadowless). For those who live beyond the land of spices see their shadow now on one side, now on another, the only inhabitants of this land of which the shade falls at mid-day; thus they are given the name of amphiskii, (shadowed-on-both-sides). All these phenomena happen while the sun is passing into northern regions: they give us an idea of the heat thrown on the air, by the rays of the sun and of the effects that they produce. Next we pass to autumn, which breaks up the excessive heat, lessening the warmth little by little, and by a moderate temperature brings us back without suffering to winter, to the time when the sun returns from the northern regions to the southern. It is thus that seasons, following the course of the sun, succeed each other to rule our life.

Genesis 1:14 Let them be for days says Scripture, not to produce them but to rule them; because day and night are older than the creation of the luminaries and it is this that the psalm declares to us. The sun to rule by day...the moon and stars to rule by night. How does the sun rule by day? Because carrying everywhere light with it, it is no sooner risen above the horizon than it drives away darkness and brings us day. Thus we might, without self deception, define day as air lighted by the sun, or as the space of time that the sun passes in our hemisphere. The functions of the sun and moon serve further to mark years. The moon, after having twelve times run her course, forms a year which sometimes needs an intercalary month to make it exactly agree with the seasons. Such was formerly the year of the Hebrews and of the early Greeks. As to the solar year, it is the time that the sun, having started from a certain sign, takes to return to it in its normal progress.

Genesis 1:16 And God made two great lights. The word great, if, for example we say it of the heaven of the earth or of the sea, may have an absolute sense; but ordinarily it has only a relative meaning, as a great horse, or a great ox. It is not that these animals are of an immoderate size, but that in comparison with their like they deserve the title of great. What idea shall we ourselves form here of greatness? Shall it be the idea that we have of it in the ant and in all the little creatures of nature, which we call great in comparison with those like themselves, and to show their superiority over them? Or shall we predicate greatness of the luminaries, as of the natural greatness inherent in them? As for me, I think so. If the sun and moon are great, it is not in comparison with the smaller stars, but because they have such a circumference that the splendour which they diffuse lights up the heavens and the air, embracing at the same time earth and sea. In whatever part of heaven they may be, whether rising, or setting, or in mid heaven, they appear always the same in the eyes of men, a manifest proof of their prodigious size. For the whole extent of heaven cannot make them appear greater in one place and smaller in another. Objects which we see afar off appear dwarfed to our eyes, and in measure as they approach us we can form a juster idea of their size. But there is no one who can be nearer or more distant from the sun. All the inhabitants of the earth see it at the same distance. Indians and Britons see it of the same size. The people of the East do not see it decrease in magnitude when it sets; those of the West do not find it smaller when it rises. If it is in the middle of the heavens it does not vary in either aspect. Do not be deceived by mere appearance, and because it looks a cubit's breadth, imagine it to be no bigger. At a very great distance objects always lose size in our eyes; sight, not being able to clear the intermediary space, is as it were exhausted in the middle of its course, and only a small part of it reaches the visible object. Our power of sight is small and makes all we see seem small, affecting what it sees by its own condition. Thus, then, if sight is mistaken its testimony is fallible. Recall your own impressions and you will find in yourself the proof of my words. If you have ever from the top of a high mountain looked at a large and level plain, how big did the yokes of oxen appear to you? How big were the ploughmen themselves? Did they not look like ants? If from the top of a commanding rock, looking over the wide sea, you cast your eyes over the vast extent how big did the greatest islands appear to you? How large did one of those barks of great tonnage, which unfurl their white sails to the blue sea, appear to you. Did it not look smaller than a dove? It is because sight, as I have just told you, loses itself in the air, becomes weak and cannot seize with exactness the object which it sees. And further: your sight shows you high mountains intersected by valleys as rounded and smooth, because it reaches only to the salient parts, and is not able, on account of its weakness, to penetrate into the valleys which separate them. It does not even preserve the form of objects, and thinks that all square towers are round. Thus all proves that at a great distance sight only presents to us obscure and confused objects. The luminary is then great, according to the witness of Scripture, and infinitely greater than it appears.

See again another evident proof of its greatness. Although the heaven may be full of stars without number, the light contributed by them all could not disperse the gloom of night. The sun alone, from the time that it appeared on the horizon, while it was still expected and had not yet risen completely above the earth, dispersed the darkness, outshone the stars, dissolved and diffused the air, which was hitherto thick and condensed over our heads, and produced thus the morning breeze and the dew which in fine weather streams over the earth. Could the earth with such a wide extent be lighted up entirely in one moment if an immense disc were not pouring forth its light over it? Recognise here the wisdom of the Artificer. See how He made the heat of the sun proportionate to this distance. Its heat is so regulated that it neither consumes the earth by excess, nor lets it grow cold and sterile by defect.

To all this the properties of the moon are near akin; she, too, has an immense body, whose splendour only yields to that of the sun. Our eyes, however, do not always see her in her full size. Now she presents a perfectly rounded disc, now when diminished and lessened she shows a deficiency on one side. When waxing she is shadowed on one side, and when she is waning another side is hidden. Now it is not without a secret reason of the divine Maker of the universe, that the moon appears from time to time under such different forms. It presents a striking example of our nature. Nothing is stable in man; here from nothingness he raises himself to perfection; there after having hasted to put forth his strength to attain his full greatness he suddenly is subject to gradual deterioration, and is destroyed by diminution. Thus, the sight of the moon, making us think of the rapid vicissitudes of human things, ought to teach us not to pride ourselves on the good things of this life, and not to glory in our power, not to be carried away by uncertain riches, to despise our flesh which is subject to change, and to take care of the soul, for its good is unmoved. If you cannot behold without sadness the moon losing its splendour by gradual and imperceptible decrease, how much more distressed should you be at the sight of a soul, who, after having possessed virtue, loses its beauty by neglect, and does not remain constant to its affections, but is agitated and constantly changes because its purposes are unstable. What Scripture says is very true, As for a fool he changes as the moon. Sirach 27:11

I believe also that the variations of the moon do not take place without exerting great influence upon the organization of animals and of all living things. This is because bodies are differently disposed at its waxing and waning. When she wanes they lose their density and become void. When she waxes and is approaching her fullness they appear to fill themselves at the same time with her, thanks to an imperceptible moisture that she emits mixed with heat, which penetrates everywhere. For proof, see how those who sleep under the moon feel abundant moisture filling their heads; see how fresh meat is quickly turned under the action of the moon; see the brain of animals, the moistest part of marine animals, the pith of trees. Evidently the moon must be, as Scripture says, of enormous size and power to make all nature thus participate in her changes.

On its variations depends also the condition of the air, as is proved by sudden disturbances which often come after the new moon, in the midst of a calm and of a stillness in the winds, to agitate the clouds and to hurl them against each other; as the flux and reflux in straits, and the ebb and flow of the ocean prove, so that those who live on its shores see it regularly following the revolutions of the moon. The waters of straits approach and retreat from one shore to the other during the different phases of the moon; but, when she is new, they have not an instant of rest, and move in perpetual swaying to and fro, until the moon, reappearing, regulates their reflux. As to the Western sea, we see it in its ebb and flow now return into its bed, and now overflow, as the moon draws it back by her respiration and then, by her expiration, urges it to its own boundaries.

I have entered into these details, to show you the grandeur of the luminaries, and to make you see that, in the inspired words, there is not one idle syllable. And yet my sermon has scarcely touched on any important point; there are many other discoveries about the size and distance of the sun and moon to which any one who will make a serious study of their action and of their characteristics may arrive by the aid of reason. Let me then ingenuously make an avowal of my weakness, for fear that you should measure the mighty works of the Creator by my words. The little that I have said ought the rather to make you conjecture the marvels on which I have omitted to dwell. We must not then measure the moon with the eye, but with the reason. Reason, for the discovery of truth, is much surer than the eye.

Everywhere ridiculous old women's tales, imagined in the delirium of drunkenness, have been circulated; such as that enchantments can remove the moon from its place and make it descend to the earth. How could a magician's charm shake that of which the Most High has laid the foundations? And if once torn out what place could hold it?

Do you wish from slight indications to have a proof of the moon's size? All the towns in the world, however distant from each other, equally receive the light from the moon in those streets that are turned towards its rising. If she did not look on all face to face, those only would be entirely lighted up which were exactly opposite; as to those beyond the extremities of her disc, they would only receive diverted and oblique rays. It is this effect which the light of lamps produces in houses; if a lamp is surrounded by several persons, only the shadow of the person who is directly opposite to it is cast in a straight line, the others follow inclined lines on each side. In the same way, if the body of the moon were not of an immense and prodigious size she could not extend herself alike to all. In reality, when the moon rises in the equinoctial regions, all equally enjoy her light, both those who inhabit the icy zone, under the revolutions of the Bear, and those who dwell in the extreme south in the neighbourhood of the torrid zone. She gives us an idea of her size by appearing to be face to face with all people. Who then can deny the immensity of a body which divides itself equally over such a wide extent?

But enough on the greatness of the sun and moon. May He Who has given us intelligence to recognise in the smallest objects of creation the great wisdom of the Contriver make us find in great bodies a still higher idea of their Creator. However, compared with their Author, the sun and moon are but a fly and an ant. The whole universe cannot give us a right idea of the greatness of God; and it is only by signs, weak and slight in themselves, often by the help of the smallest insects and of the least plants, that we raise ourselves to Him. Content with these words let us offer our thanks, I to Him who has given me the ministry of the Word, you to Him who feeds you with spiritual food; Who, even at this moment, makes you find in my weak voice the strength of barley bread. May He feed you for ever, and in proportion to your faith grant you the manifestation of the Spirit in Jesus Christ our Lord, to whom be glory and power for ever and ever. Amen. [The Hexameron]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. (Gen. 1:14-16) And first you have to remember what has just been read. And God said, Let bodies of light be made in heaven, and let them light the earth, that they may separate day and night, and that they be signs to mark the times and the seasons, the days, and the seasons. the years, that they shine in the firmament says heaven and that they illuminate the earth. And this was done so. (Gen. I, 14, 15.) Yesterday the holy prophet Moses told us how the Creator of the universe embellished the earth, which at first was gross and unformed. He describes it with an infinity of plants, flowers, and trees; and today the sacred writer will tell us about the decoration of the sky. For as the earth beautifies itself with its own productions, the Lord has given the firmament a brighter and more brilliant brilliance by the variety of the stars with which it has sprinkled it, and especially by the creation of two great luminous bodies. , the sun and the moon. And God did, says the Scripture, two great luminous bodies, one greater to preside over the day, and the other lesser to preside over the night; and he made the stars too. (Gen. I, 16.) Admire here the wisdom of the divine Worker. He says a word, and suddenly the sun is created; the sun, that admirable star which Moses calls a great light, and which he says he was made to preside over in the day. It is indeed from this star that the day borrows its brightness, and it is from its rays and its splendor that it streams itself of brightness and light. Every day he displays to our eyes his beautiful beauty, and as soon as he appears on the horizon, he invites all men to resume their work.

The holy king David, speaking of this beauty of the sun, compares this star to a husband who comes out of his nuptial bed. He springs, he says, like a giant in his career; it starts from the extremities of dawn and falls below the limits of the sunset. (Ps. XVIII, 6, 7.) What a sublime image of the splendor of the sun and the speed of its course! For when he tells us that he starts from the extremities of dawn and falls to the limits of the sunset, the Psalmist points out that he travels the universe as in a moment and that he spreads his light and his benefits from one border of the world to another. Sometimes it warms the earth and dissipates moisture, and sometimes it dries and burns it; in a word, the services it renders us are as numerous as they are varied, and such is the excellence of this celestial body that we can not praise it with dignity. But neither my words nor this pompous eulogy are intended to concentrate your admiration on this star. I want, on the contrary, my dear brothers, that you rise higher, and that creature you go back to the Creator. For the brighter the sun is, the more excellent is He who created the sun.

But the Gentiles, who admired us like this star, did not bring their views higher and did not praise the Creator; they stopped at the creature and gave him divine honors. This is why the Apostle said: They worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator. (Romans I, 25.) They were real fools who could not recognize the Creator in his creatures, and who fell into such a strange misguidance that they put the creature in the place of the Creator.

This is why the Holy Spirit, who knew how much man is prone to error, teaches you that the sun was created only on the third day; but already the earth had sprouted its various productions and clothed itself with its rich ornaments: and God had ordained it, that it could not be said later that harvest and fruit could not ripen without the sun. Thus Scripture teaches you that before the creation of the sun, plants and fruits existed, lest you attribute to it this happy fruitfulness; it belongs wholly to the Divine Worker who, from the beginning, pronounced this word: May the earth produce lush plants. Do you agree that the cooperation of the sun promotes the maturity of fruits and harvests? I do not deny it. For although the plowman helps the fertility of the earth, it does not follow that he is the author of this fecundity; On the contrary, when he multiplies even his cares and his labors, he would wear himself out unnecessarily, if the Lord, whose word from the beginning made the land suitable for producing the fruits, did not continue this marvelous disposition to him; yes, neither the work of the plowman, nor the influence of the sun and the moon, nor the concurrence of the seasons, would be of any use to us if the hand of the Lord did not lend them his mighty assistance. But when God gives them his blessing, the elements themselves contribute a lot to the fertility of the earth. So print deeply these truths in your memory, and retaining those who would like to go astray, do not allow them to return to the creatures the honor which belongs only to the Creator.

Observe, indeed, that the Holy Scripture, which depicts to us the beauty of the sun, its grandeur and its usefulness under this beautiful image: Like a husband, he springs like a giant in his career, also speaks of his weakness and of her failings: What is brighter than the sun, she says, and yet the sun will be extinguished. (Eccl. 17:30) It is as if she were telling us: Do not be seduced by this admirable spectacle; for if the Creator ordained it, this beautiful star would disappear at once and return to nothingness. The knowledge of these truths would have preserved the pagans from their monstrous errors, and they had understood that the sight of creatures was to elevate them to the Creator. The sun was also created only on the fourth day, so that man should not regard him as the author and the principle of light. Because, what I said about the production of plants, I can say it again of the light, to know that three days preceded the creation of the sun. The Lord only wanted this star to increase the brightness of the day; the same must be said of the moon, which is a luminous body less large, for three nights passed before it was created. It is not that it is not marvelously useful to us; since it dispels the darkness of the night and fulfills, almost the same functions as the sun: this one was created to preside over the day and the moon, to preside over the night. But what does this expression mean: to preside over the day and preside over the night? it marks, according to Scripture, that the sun illuminates the day of fire with its brightness, and that the moon, by dissipating the darkness of the night, helps men by its soft light in the accomplishment of their labors. And indeed the traveler pursues his route with more confidence, the pilot directs his ship better on the immensity of the seas, and each goes without fear to his works and his occupations. [Homilies on Genesis]

THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH. On the fourth day the luminaries were made; because God, who possesses foreknowledge, knew the follies of the vain philosophers, that they were going to say, that the things which grow on the earth are produced from the heavenly bodies, so as to exclude God. In order, therefore, that the truth might be obvious, the plants and seeds were produced prior to the heavenly bodies, for what is posterior cannot produce that which is prior. And these contain the pattern and type of a great mystery. For the sun is a type of God, and the moon of man. And as the sun far surpasses the moon in power and glory, so far does God surpass man. And as the sun remains ever full, never becoming less, so does God always abide perfect, being full of all power, and understanding, and wisdom, and immortality, and all good. But the moon wanes monthly, and in a manner dies, being a type of man; then it is born again, and is crescent, for a pattern of the future resurrection. In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His wisdom. And the fourth is the type of man, who needs light, that so there may be God, the Word, wisdom, man. Wherefore also on the fourth day the lights were made. The disposition of the stars, too, contains a type of the arrangement and order of the righteous and pious, and of those who keep the law and commandments of God. For the brilliant and bright stars are an imitation of the prophets, and therefore they remain fixed, not declining, nor passing from place to place. And those which hold the second place in brightness, are types of the people of the righteous. And those, again, which change their position, and flee from place to place, which also are called planets, they too are a type of the men who have wandered from God, abandoning His law and commandments. [To Autolycus]

1:17-19 And God placed them in the firmament of the heaven, so as to shine upon the earth, 18 and to regulate day and night, and to divide between the light and the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day.

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. The passage where Scripture says that "the lightings of heaven serve to give signs, to mark times, days, years," offers a great difficulty. If the course of time did not begin until the fourth day, then the three preceding days have gone out of time? Who can understand how these three days passed before the regular course of time, since it dates only from the fourth day? Have they even passed? Do the day and the night serve here only to designate, the one, the substance with its distinctive qualities, the other, the substance without its modifications? The night, say, would it only represent the still shapeless matter from which beings were to emerge with their special properties? Even in a trained being, the possibility of change implies the imperfection of the background; Now, this imperfection is measured neither by space nor by time; it implies neither distance nor anteriority. Could it be this possibility of change, which supposes the possibility of being defectible, which has been called night even among creatures all formed, the change being possible in beings, even when they do not change? In the evening and the morning, instead of indicating a flow and a periodic return in duration, would they only designate a limit, the one where the development of one substance stops and the development of another begins again? Should we not rather seek in another order of ideas the exact meaning of these words?

How to penetrate this secret and to define what Scripture calls signs, when it says celestial bodies: "that they serve as signs? By this she means, not the conjectures of an insane art, but the prognostics so useful in human life, the observations which guide the pilot on the seas, the predictions of time according to the various seasons. It calls, time, not any duration, but that which is regulated on the course of the stars and the periodic movements of the sky. Suppose indeed that there existed a movement, either physical or intellectual, prior to the arrangement of the stars in the sky, and that, by thought, this movement was transported from the future into the past through the present. act is impossible outside time; and how to prove that such an act occurred only from the creation of the stars? As for the known divisions of time in hours, days, years, they necessarily originate in the movements of the stars. Indeed, what do we mean by time, by days and by years? Time is for us only certain divisions in space, marked on the dials or on the vault of the sky; where the sun rises from the east, reaches the meridian, and descends to the west; where we then observe either the moon or a star rising on the horizon. After sunset, at the highest point of its course mark midnight, and go to bed, with the sunrise, to mark the morning. The day measures the total revolution of the sun from east to west. As for the year, it includes the circular revolution that brings back the sun, not to the east, as every day, but at the same point of the sky compared to other stars: this revolution ends in 365 days 6 hours or the a quarter of a day, the one at the end of four years, produces an intercalary day, called leap in the year Romaine, in order to match the calendar with the march of the sun. We also call years longer and less known cycles: a great year begins with the return of all the stars to the same point of the sky. If, therefore, we mean time, days, and years in this sense, it is indisputable that they are determined by the movements of the stars and great luminaries, for we can not decide too much whether in these words of Scripture. : "Let them serve as signs and mark the times, the days and the years," the days and the years relate to the sun, the times and the signs, to the rest of the stars.

In what form has the moon been created? This is a question which has provoked an inexhaustible flow of questions, and would have pleased heaven that we had limited ourselves to examining without trying to convince! Some want, indeed, that the moon was created in its fullness, for the reason that an unfinished work would have been unworthy of God, on that day when he made the stars, according to the terms of Scripture. On this account, answer the others, it would have been necessary to say the new moon, and not the moon aged fourteen days. What is this countdown calendar? For me, I remain neutral; all I affirm is that God created the moon in a completed form, whatever the phase was. Indeed God creates both the bottom and the form. Now whatever may be the development that a being acquires successively, it contains the principle of it at least in the activity of its nature. Would one find that a tree is incomplete, because it has neither foliage nor fruit? Would it seem that he lacks the essential germs because he has not produced anything yet? Not for sure: the tree, even the germs conceal in an invisible way what time must develop in them. However, if one limits oneself to saying that God left an imperfect work to finish it later, this thought would not be condemnable; it would shock only so much as one would like to maintain that an unfinished work of God has received its final perfection.

It is not surprising that the earth, invisible, without order, when God first created heaven and earth, appears and is organized on the third day; why then cram on the moon like a cloud of questions? I said about earth that between the creation of the bottom and the form there was no interval, and that this distinction was made for the convenience of the narrative. Is this thought approved? Why not see with your own eyes, as it is so easy to do, that the moon is a complete globe, of perfect roundness, even in the form of a crescent, at the beginning as at the end of its course? Does its light come from a fire that increases, shines in all its strength and diminishes? It is not the lighting, but the fire that undergoes these alternatives. Does she keep a small portion of her perpetually lit record? While it presents this face to the earth, until the moment when its total conversion ends, which takes place at the end of 14 days, it increases in appearance, in reality it is always in its fullness; only his greatness, seen from the earth, is not always equal. Does it borrow its light in the sun? The explanation remains the same. When it is closest to the sun, it is only illuminated at one end: the rest of the globe, which is entirely in full light, is visible from the earth only when the sun is opposite to the earth and offers him his bright face.

However, there is no lack of scholars to argue that it is not the full moon that makes them believe that this star was created in the fourteenth day phase, but these words of Scripture: "The moon was created to mark the beginning of the night; Indeed, the moon appears at the beginning of the night only when it is in its fullness; otherwise, it appears in the day on the horizon, or rises at an hour all the more advanced from the night as its crescent is smaller. But if we understand that the moon is the principle, that is to say, the dominatrix of nights, as the Greek term arke indicates, and even more clearly the passage where the Psalmist exclaims: "That the sun commands the day, and the moon, the night (Ps. CXXXV, 8, 9); It is no longer necessary to calculate the age of the moon or to believe that the formation of this star supposes the first phase.

There is still a question as to whether the visible luminaries of the sky, that is to say, the sun, the moon, and the stars, project the same quantity of light, and whether their increasingly dim light is an illusion that is explained by their relative distance from the earth. For the moon in particular, there is no doubt that it gives a brightness less bright than the sun, it is even believed that it borrows its light. As for the stars, we do not fear to maintain that a large number equal or even surpass the sun in size, and that their distance alone makes them look smaller. Perhaps it should be enough for us to know that these stars, whatever their nature, have had God as creator. However, let us remember these infallible words of the Apostle: "The brightness of the sun is not the same as that of the moon and the stars: one star differs from another in clarity (I Cor. XV, 41). Proponents of this system may object, without contradicting the Apostle, that the stars have a different brilliance no doubt, but on the condition of being seen from the earth they may observe that the Apostle sought an analogy to explain the resurrection. bodies, which will not doubtless have such visible quality, such another intrinsic quality; that in this respect, since the stars have in themselves a different brilliancy, there may be some larger than the sun. However, it is up to them to explain how, in their own system, the sun exerts such a preponderant influence that it stops with its rays and forces it to demote the most considerable stars and to those which they honor more, for if they equal or surpass the sun in size, it is not probable that they yield to the influence of its rays. If they attribute superiority to the constellations of the Zodiac or the Chariot, which are outside the action of the sun, why do they bestow particular worship on these constellations? why do they make them the queens of the zodiac? This is a contradiction: indeed, although it may be argued that the retrograde movement or perhaps the delay of these constellations does not depend on the sun, but on less known causes, it is in the sun that they attribute the principal influence in the insane calculations where they stray in search of the decrees of fate, as can be verified in their books.

But let them speak of heaven as they please: they do not know the Father who reigns in heaven. For us, it is neither useful nor convenient to lose ourselves in deep researches on the distance or size of the stars, and to devote to such problems the time required for more serious and fruitful questions. We have every reason to believe, on the faith of Scripture, that there are two luminaries greater than the stars, though they are not of equal magnitude. So the Scripture, after having granted them pre-eminence, adds: "He made the greatest light to mark the beginning of the day, the smallest, to mark the beginning of the night. No doubt we shall be allowed, not to contradict the testimony of our eyes, that these two stars illuminate our globe more than all the others together, that the brightness of the day is due only to the light of the sun, and that the night, in spite of all the stars, would be very bright month without the rays of the moon. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. (Gen. 1:17) And God placed these two luminaries in the firmament of heaven so that they would shine on the earth. How is it that it was previously said to be done in the firmament, and why now it says, did God the luminaries and placed them in the firmament, as if they had first been made out of it, and then they were placed in it, so that Had he already told them to do it there? Was it meant to mean once and for all that God does not work as men usually do, but that men were narrated as much as possible? For men it is one thing to do and another to place, but for God both things are the same, for acting puts and places work.

(Gen. 1:18) And preside over day and night and divide day and night. What he now expounds saying "preside over the day and the night" was already said by saying that they were the beginning of the day and the night. Then that principle must be understood by presidency, because in the day there is nothing, among the things we see, more excellent than the sun, and in the night nothing more than the moon and the stars. Then we are not disturbed by that ambiguity anymore, and we believe that the stars were placed so that they also belong to the initiation of the night, that is, they have the presidency of it. And God saw that it was good. The same order is observed as before. Let us also remember that God did not name these things, so that it could be said: and God called the luminous stars, because not every luminary is a star.

(Gen. 1:19) And the evening was made and the morning was made, fourth day. If we consider these days that are distinguished by the birth and sunset, this day is not the fourth, but perhaps the first, since we judge that at that time the sun was born when it was made, and that it was hidden while the other stars They were created. But whoever understands that the sun is in another place when it is nighttime for us, and the night occupies another region when the sun is with us, will better investigate the enumeration of all these days. [Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. After making you aware of the usefulness of these two great lights, the sacred writer adds that God also made the stars and he placed them in the sky to shine on the earth, to preside over the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. (Gen. I, 17, 18.) These words make us know what God's purpose was in creating the stars. He has placed them, says Moses, in the firmament of heaven. What to say? Did he nail them there? Not certainly; since we see them in an instant pass over immense spaces, and accomplish with incessant motion the various revolutions which the Lord has traced to them. What is the meaning of this expression: he placed them? It means that he assigned them heaven for dwelling. This is how Scripture will also tell us that God placed Adam in the earthly paradise. (Gen. II, 8.) He did not fix it immutably, but he placed it there for him to live in it; and so we say that the Lord wanted the stars to be as attached to the vault of the firmament, so that from the height of heaven they could light the earth. Now, I ask you, my dear brother, the enamel of our meadows, and the flowers of our gardens are they as beautiful as the sky, when in the middle of the night it sparkles with the fire of the stars. The brilliant variety of these stars embellishes it and the parsimony of sparkling flowers which send us an abundant light. For the stars were created to light the earth, and to preside over the day and the night. This observation has already been made especially concerning the sun and the moon; but here Moses, after revealing to us the creation of these two great bodies of light, and that of the stars, adds, in. speaking of all, that God made them to preside over the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. If the stars do not appear during the day, it is because the brightness of the sun veils them to our eyes; and likewise the sun does not shine during the night, because the light of the moon is enough to dispel the darkness. Moreover, all the stars remain within the limits which are traced to them; they do not depart from it, and each of them obediently obeys the Lord's orders, and fulfills his ministry.

But who would explain all the other benefits that the sun, the moon and the stars provide to man? They serve as signs, says the Scripture, to mark and times, and days, and years. What do these words mean: and the times, and the days, and the years? The sacred writer wished to teach us that the course of the stars regulates for us that of the times, or seasons, which their daily revolution brings to us day and night, and that their periodicity designates that of the years. These observations are sufficient for our needs. And indeed, the pilot, who knows the course of the stars and observes the sky, embarks on the faith of his calculations, crosses the seas, and in a deep night is guided by the sight of the stars, so that by they drive his ship and all the passengers safely. Thus still the course of the stars indicates to the plowman the favorable season of its labors. He knows when he must sow the land, give it various plowing, and prepare his sickle to harvest his grain. Let us also add that the knowledge of the times, the calculation of the days and the cycle of the years are of a daily and infinite use to us, and the relief that we withdraw for our well-being are so numerous that it would be impossible to list exactly. The little I have said is enough to give us a high idea of ​​it; and having admired creatures, do not neglect to worship and celebrate the Creator. Yes, let us praise his ineffable kindness to us, since he created the world only for man, and soon he will introduce him as the king and master of all creatures.

(Gen. 1:19) And God saw, says the scripture, that it was good. Every day of creation, the sacred writer observes that God approved his cover, in order to remove any pretext for those who dare to (34) criticize it. This is, as the context proves, the purpose of Moses; otherwise it would have been enough to say in general that God saw that all he had done was good. But because the Lord knows the infirmity of the human spirit, he wanted to praise separately each of his works, in order to make known to us the sovereign wisdom and ineffable goodness that presided over their creation. And in the evening and the morning was the fourth day. God, who had first placed two great bodies of light in the sky, completed the ornamentation by decorating it with the fire of the stars. This was the work of the fourth day, as Moses tells us, saying that evening and morning was the fourth day. But if he repeats himself thus every day of creation, it is to better engrave in our minds his divine instructions.

It is therefore important for us to engrave them, in the depths of our hearts, and to shake off our habitual negligence, so that, better informed by the dogmas of our religion, we may in every spirit of gentleness, enlighten the Gentiles, and dispel their errors. Let us prevent them from confounding the order of things, and worshiping instead of the Creator, creatures that have been made only for our salvation and our utility. Yes, had my word raised all the Gentiles, I will publish in a loud voice that the world was created only for man. For God is self-sufficient, and he needs none of these external goods. But the creation of the universe manifests us his goodness; and he has surrounded man with so much honor and esteem that he has given him creatures to lead him to the knowledge and worship of the Creator. And indeed, is it not absurd to rave about and to prostrate oneself before such beautiful creatures, and not to raise one's thought to the One who made them! Why should we not believe this word of the Apostle: The invisible perfections of God have become visible since the creation of the world, by all that has been done? (Romans I, 20.) Answer me, O man! When you contemplate the sky, do not you admire this beauty which results from the variety, the elevation and the splendor of the stars? But do not stop at these sensitive objects, and reach by the thought of the Author of so many wonders. The brilliancy of the sun delights you with astonishment, the various phenomena of its light surprise you, and the splendor of its rays, which dazzles your eyes, transports you with admiration. But do not stop there; seeing that a simple creature is so excellent that it escapes all human appreciation, understand how great and powerful is He who has produced it by one word. Apply the same reasoning to the earth. When you see it enamelled with a thousand flowers, as with a garment dotted with embroidery, and covered with fruits and harvests, do not attribute to it this admirable fertility, and be careful also to pay tribute to the cooperation of the sun and the moon; but remember that before the creation of these two stars the Lord had said that the earth produces the green plants, and that suddenly the earth took on its rich ornaments.

If we were doing these reflections every day, we would be grateful to the Lord, and we would praise him as much as he deserves, or at least as much as our strength would allow. But the best way to glorify Him is to lead a holy life, and not to fall back into our old sins. Therefore, let us not be deceived by the illusions of the devil, and deserve divine grace and mercy through vigilant attention to ourselves, great zeal, and diligence in the duties of public prayer. For the Lord is so merciful to us, that he is satisfied with our efforts to avoid sin, and makes the practice of good works himself. Let none of you, I implore you, appear gilded in circus games, and consume part of the day in meetings and useless talks; let none of you devote yourself to the passion of games of chance, and mingle with the indecent cries and the thousand disorders which accompany them. Hey! what does it serve you for, I ask you; to fast and to take no food until evening, if you spend the whole day playing dice, if you allow yourself to be amusing amusements, and if at last you pronounce swearings and blasphemies? Ah! Let us not be so indolent for all that concerns our salvation, and that all our conversations are on spiritual matters. It would even be good if everyone had in their hands some of our holy books, and who, uniting his friends, could be edified with them by a pious reading. These practices will powerfully help us to avoid the traps of the devil, and to gather from our fast abundant fruits. They will also deserve the grace of the Lord through ineffable goodness; from God the Son, to whom be, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, glory, empire and honor, now, and in all ages and ages. Amen. [Homilies on Genesis]

1:20-22 And God said, Let the waters bring forth reptiles having life, and winged creatures flying above the earth in the firmament of heaven, and it was so. 21 And God made great whales, and every living reptile, which the waters brought forth according to their kinds, and every creature that flies with wings according to its kind, and God saw that they were good. 22 And God blessed them saying, Increase and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let the creatures that fly be multiplied on the earth. 23 And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day.

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. It is generally thought that fish have been called, not living animals, but "reptiles to living souls," because their senses are undeveloped. If this explanation were correct, the birds would have been expressly called live animals. But since they were called "those who fly,” volatilia, as the fish were named "those who crawl," reptilia, "we must admit an ellipse and translate: those of the living animals that crawl and those who fly. It is by an analogous turn that one says in Latin ignobilia hominum, the unknown men. There are no doubt other animals crawling on the ground; however, most have feet to move, and the number of animals crawling on the ground is perhaps as limited as that of animals walking in the water.

Others have rigged the fish had been qualified as well as because they have neither memory nor life that denotes any intelligence. intelligence. This opinion comes from a lack of experience. Some scientists tell surprising things about fish, and they have been able to observe their habits in fish ponds. I wish they were mistaken, but I assure that fish have the gift of memory; I know it from experience and can observe it like me. At Bulle-Royale there is a magnificent pond filled with fish. Walkers scarcely fail to throw something at them, and fish immediately to seize the prey and flee or dispute it. Accustomed to receive the grazing ground, they perceive with difficulty somebody circulating along the basin, that they gather, go and come to swim, spying the place from where they throw something. I therefore find that the epithet of reptile characterizes fish as well as that of bird birds: for if the lack of memory or the little development of the senses had been a sufficient reason to take away from them the name of animals that live It should also be removed from the birds, yet the existence of these, which is happening before our eyes, reveals their memory, their varied songs, their admirable industry to build nests and raise their broods.

I am not unaware that some philosophers have classified beings according to the elements of their own: they call terrestrial, not only animals that crawl or walk on the earth, but also birds because they fall on the ground when they are tired of flying. In their system, the demons inhabit the air, the Gods, the sky where we place luminaries and angels. They also assign to the fishes, to the marine monsters the waters for stay, so that each element has its own species. But the earth apparently forms the bottom of the water, and they would have some difficulty to prove that the fish will never rest there and regain strength to swim, as birds do to fly. I do not want fish to do it often, but it comes from the fact that water is more capable than the air of supporting them; so it bears terrestrial animals, whether they have learned to swim, like the man, or whether they swim naturally, like the quadrupeds. Are they hiding on this fact, that the fish are devoid of legs? But then seals are no longer sea animals, snakes, snails are no longer terrestrial animals, for the former belong to the class of animals. quadrupeds, and the latter, though they have no legs, rest on the earth, what am I saying? they leave it little or never. The dragons, though without feet, rest, it is said, in the caves, or even rise in the air. They are animals difficult to observe, no doubt, but they are unknown neither in secular letters nor in Scripture. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. (Gen. 1:20) And God said, Let the waters produce living reptiles, and beings that fly on the earth, under the firmament of heaven. And that was done so. Those animals that swim are called reptiles because they do not walk with feet. Or were they called so because there are others who crawl under water on the earth? Or maybe because there are winged ones in the waters like fish, that have scales and others that do not read them, but are adorned with wings? It can be doubted if in this place they should be counted among the birds. There is a small problem here: why do you attribute to the waters, and not to the air, the animals that are perfect volatile? We can not understand that here we are dealing only with waterfowl, such as the sea crow, the duck and others, because if I had only talked about these, I would not have stopped talking about the other birds, among which very many are so far away from the water that they do not even drink; perhaps it called water to this air contiguous to the earth, since it testifies to be humid, by the dew that in the calm nights falls in the earth and because it also turns into clouds; and the clouds are water, as all those who walk on the mountains among the clouds, or through the flat field in the fog. Certainly, in this air it is said that birds fly; in that other higher and purer, which without a doubt is called air, can not fly, since it is so subtle that it does not bear the weight of them. In it the clouds can not condense, nor the tempest be unleashed; because the wind is totally absent, as seen on the top of Mount Olympus, which they say exceeds in height this humid air. As those who, by custom, climbed the aforementioned mountain on the solemnities of their sacrifices, it happened to write certain letters in the dust and after a year they found them intact and intact.

For this reason, with just reason, it can be believed that in the divine Scriptures the space that is up to this point is called the firmament of heaven, and that the most tranquil and serene air belongs to the firmament. Under this name of firmament such serenity and a great part of things can be understood. For which reason I also judge that the following is said in many places of the psalms: and your truth even to the clouds, 16 because nothing is more firm and serene than the truth; but the clouds form below this very tranquil region of the air. Although what has been said is figuratively taken, however, these things have been written as having a certain resemblance to what they represent; in such a way that there seems in reality to exist a certain image of the truth in this most unalterable and pure bodily creature, which extends from the highest part of the sky to the clouds, that is, to the caliginous, stormy and humid air; then rightly they are attributed to the waters, the birds, that fly over the earth under the firmament of the sky, because water is rightly called this air. By this it is to be understood that nothing was spoken of the air; that is, what mode or when it was made, because this low air bears the name of water, and that high, the firmament. And so, no element was overlooked.

​​But perhaps one will say: if by what was said congréguese the water we understand that the water was made of that matter report, and that this congregation God called sea, how do we understand that this air was made there, Well, it's not called the sea, although it can be called water? It seems to me that when arid appears, not only is the formation of the earth insinuated, but also that of this dense air, because through this air the earth is illuminated to make itself visible to us; then in the same and only word that was said to appear are included all the operations, without which the earth could not be manifested, that is, its form, its liberation from water, and being aerated, because through the air the light is transmitted to the earth from the top of the world. Or perhaps, in what was written: congréguese water, rather emphasizes the formation of air, because when it condenses this air seems to form water. So, perhaps, to the condensation in a dense mass, so that the sea would form from it, he called it a congregation of water, so that what is not gathered, that is, that is not condensed and flows over the land, be the water that can hold the birds, but with these two names, subtle water and dense air. But if you ask why this air was made, it is not said there. Or is it perhaps true that some say that the aqueous evaporation of the sea and the earth forms these much denser auras, than the superior and pure air, and so conditions them so that they can withstand the flight of the birds? Such auras are more subtle than the waters with which we wash our bodies, so that in comparison to them, we perceive them as dry and aerial. But as we had already talked about the land and the sea, what need was there to mention its evaporations, that is, the waters where the birds fly, once it has been understood that the pure and tranquil air is assigned to the sky?

Nor was it stated how the rivers and springs were made. Those who with great diligence investigate and discuss these things and say that with the superficial movement of air the vapor of fresh water is invisibly extracted from the sea, and from these evaporations, which we can not feel, the clouds form; moistened the earth with the rains, the water seeps drop by drop gathering in the most hidden caverns; and after the earth transpires as much water as it has gathered, it lets it pass through different conduits, sprouting in small or large springs, apt to form the rivers. From which fact they want to indicate the steam collected from the boiling seawater in a serpentine, whose vapor constitutes fresh water for those who drink it. It is evident to almost all men that, as the scarcity of rain makes itself felt, the sources diminish their flow. Also the divine history testifies: Elías requested the rain in time of dryness and while he prayed he sent to his servant directed the sight towards the sea; and when from that part there appeared a tiny little cloud, then he announced to the King, who was uneasy, that the rain was imminent, with which, even when he was marching from there to run, he got wet. David also says: O Lord, you who draw water from the sea and pour it on the surface of the earth (Amos 5:8; 9:6). Therefore, having been named the sea, there was no need to speak of the remaining waters, either of those that produce the dew and lend by their subtlety to the birds their breezes, or of the waters of the rivers and springs, if the first ones are produced by evaporation and the last ones by reciprocal rains, to which it first absorbs the earth and then makes them sprout.

Produce the reptilian waters of living souls: Why was it added living? Can there be souls who do not live? Or is it that they wanted to highlight this more ostensible life, which animals have that they feel, but which plants lack? And produce birds that fly over the earth below the firmament of heaven. If the birds do not fly in that pure air, where no cloud forms, it is evident that he belongs to the firmament, because it was said that the birds will fly above the earth beneath the sky. And so it was done, the same order is observed here as in the past works and, therefore, it is added the same as in the others, except in that of light, which was made the first of all.

(Gen. 1:21) And God made the great fishes and all the souls of the creeping creatures, to whom he produced the water according to their kind, and all volatile according to their kind. Let us remember the time that, according to its genre, it speaks of the creatures that substitute each other for the seminal propagation, as already discussed when talking about herbs and trees. And all volatile wings, why did you add wings? Can a volatile exist without them? Given that such a species may exist, God really created it, although it is not known where it was made. No being can fly without wings, because bats, locusts, flies and if there is any other animal of this kind that lacks feathers, nevertheless it does not lack wings. It was added wings so that we understood that birds were not only talked about, since the fish also have wings and fly over the earth in the middle of the water. For this reason birds were not said, but volatile in general, and volatile of wings. And God saw that it was good. This is to be understood as stated in the other places where the same was said.

(Gen. 1:22) And God blessed them, saying, Increase and multiply and fill the waters of the sea, and the volatiles multiply, upon the earth. God wanted the blessing to have the force of fecundity, which manifests itself in the succession of the offspring, so that because of this blessing, since they were created weak and mortal, others being born, they perpetuated their gender. But having as they do also the plants in the birth resemblance with the expired animals, I ask: why did not these bless them? Is it because they lack meaning which is closer to reason? Perhaps it is not without reason that God uses the second person in the blessing, and he does so to induce the generation of these animals, as if in a certain way they understood by saying, "Grow and multiply and fill the waters of the sea." However, he does not continue speaking until the end of the blessing in the second person, but he continues saying: and the volatiles multiply on earth. He did not say, then, multiply on earth. Perhaps for this very reason it is evident that the faculty of sense in animals is not so close to reason that they could perfectly understand the invitation to generate, as can be understood by those who pass and use reason.

And so it was done. Here you must completely awaken from your ignorance any rude and understand what days it is. For having given God to the animals determined gestation times, those who keep within a certain order an admirable firmness so that during predetermined number of days each, according to their gender, carry in their womb what they have conceived or incubate the eggs positions, whose law imposed on nature is preserved by the wisdom of God, which embraces all things firmly from one end of the world to the other and orders them with gentleness19. I ask: in what way in a single day could you conceive and conceive in the uterus, incubate and nourish what was born and populate the waters and multiply on the earth? Why was it added before the earth appeared and it was done, but it is because without a doubt when it was said the afternoon indicates the matter report, and when it says it was done the morning indicates the form that was printed on the subject in the same God's work, because with the morning, when the work is finished, the day ends. God did not say the afternoon or the morning, because all this is a very brief account of things already done, understood in the words afternoon and tomorrow, meaning the first word the material report, and the second the form; of those that had already been said that God had made them. Moreover, when we pay attention to something imperfect, that is, when we go from shape to formless matter and from it to nothingness, if we believe that the imperfect in this name is insinuated by night or by night, I would not say that it was done, but only ordained by God, as it says above: God divided light and darkness. Therefore, when the afternoon was said, the word "report" was designated by the word "afternoon", which, despite having been made out of nothing, nevertheless exists and is capable of forms and beauty. It can also be taken under the name of darkness absolute nothingness, which God does not do because nothing is, and which made everything that He deigned to do Omnipotent for his ineffable goodness, because out of nothing he did all things.

(Gen. 1:23) And the evening was made and the morning was made the fifth day. Now after he said, and this was done, he did not add, as usual, the enumeration of the execution of the works, as if they were again made, since he had already enumerated them before. Not even for that blessing that he gave to generate the offspring was some other new creature, fine that through it the already made were conserved by the succession. And for this reason he did not say "and God saw that it was good", because already the same The creature had been pleasing to him and, therefore, only had to be preserved in the seeds. Nothing, then, was repeated, unless what was said and so it was done. After this he immediately speaks of the afternoon and the morning, in whose names we explain that the work executed by God of the material matter and of the form given to it was signified. This is what I understand, although perhaps something better and more excellent discover the scholars. [Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. (Gen. 1:20) Volatilia volantia super ground secundum fermamentunt coeli (Birds flying on the earth according to the firmament of the sky.) How does it mean secundum fermamentum “according to the firmament?” [Locutions]

BASIL OF CAESAREA. Genesis 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that has life after their kind, and fowl that may fly above the earth after their kind. After the creation of the luminaries the waters are now filled with living beings and its own adornment is given to this part of the world. Earth had received hers from her own plants, the heavens had received the flowers of the stars, and, like two eyes, the great luminaries beautified them in concert. It still remained for the waters to receive their adornment. The command was given, and immediately the rivers and lakes becoming fruitful brought forth their natural broods; the sea travailed with all kinds of swimming creatures; not even in mud and marshes did the water remain idle; it took its part in creation. Everywhere from its ebullition frogs, gnats and flies came forth. For that which we see today is the sign of the past. Thus everywhere the water hastened to obey the Creator's command. Who could count the species which the great and ineffable power of God caused to be suddenly seen living and moving, when this command had empowered the waters to bring forth life? Let the waters bring forth moving creatures that have life. Then for the first time is made a being with life and feeling. For though plants and trees be said to live, seeing that they share the power of being nourished and growing; nevertheless they are neither living beings, nor have they life. To create these last God said, Let the water produce moving creatures.

Every creature that swims, whether it skims on the surface of the waters, or cleaves the depths, is of the nature of a moving creature, since it drags itself on the body of the water. Certain aquatic animals have feet and walk; especially amphibia, such as seals, crabs, crocodiles, river horses and frogs; but they are above all gifted with the power of swimming. Thus it is said, Let the waters produce moving creatures. In these few words what species is omitted? Which is not included in the command of the Creator? Do we not see viviparous animals, seals, dolphins, rays and all cartilaginous animals? Do we not see oviparous animals comprising every sort of fish, those which have a skin and those which have scales, those which have fins and those which have not? This command has only required one word, even less than a word, a sign, a motion of the divine will, and it has such a wide sense that it includes all the varieties and all the families of fish. To review them all would be to undertake to count the waves of the ocean or to measure its waters in the hollow of the hand. Let the waters produce moving creatures. That is to say, those which people the high seas and those which love the shores; those which inhabit the depths and those which attach themselves to rocks; those which are gregarious and those which live dispersed, the cetaceous, the huge, and the tiny. It is from the same power, the same command, that all, small and great receive their existence. Let the waters bring forth. These words show you the natural affinity of animals which swim in the water; thus, fish, when drawn out of the water, quickly die, because they have no respiration such as could attract our air and water is their element, as air is that of terrestrial animals. The reason for it is clear. With us the lung, that porous and spongy portion of the inward parts which receives air by the dilatation of the chest, disperses and cools interior warmth; in fish the motion of the gills, which open and shut by turns to take in and to eject the water, takes the place of respiration. Fish have a peculiar lot, a special nature, a nourishment of their own, a life apart. Thus they cannot be tamed and cannot bear the touch of a man's hand.

Genesis 1:20 Let the waters bring forth moving creatures after their kind. God caused to be born the firstlings of each species to serve as seeds for nature. Their multitudinous numbers are kept up in subsequent succession, when it is necessary for them to grow and multiply. Of another kind is the species of testacea, as muscles, scallops, sea snails, conches, and the infinite variety of oysters. Another kind is that of the crustacea, as crabs and lobsters; another of fish without shells, with soft and tender flesh, like polypi and cuttle fish. And amidst these last what an innumerable variety! There are weevers, lampreys and eels, produced in the mud of rivers and ponds, which more resemble venomous reptiles than fish in their nature. Of another kind is the species of the ovipara; of another, that of the vivipara. Among the latter are sword-fish, cod, in one word, all cartilaginous fish, and even the greater part of the cetacea, as dolphins, seals, which, it is said, if they see their little ones, still quite young, frightened, take them back into their belly to protect them.

Let the waters bring forth after their kind. The species of the cetacean is one; another is that of small fish. What infinite variety in the different kinds! All have their own names, different food, different form, shape, and quality of flesh. All present infinite variety, and are divided into innumerable classes. Is there a tunny fisher who can enumerate to us the different varieties of that fish? And yet they tell us that at the sight of great swarms of fish they can almost tell the number of the individual ones which compose it. What man is there of all that have spent their long lives by coasts and shores, who can inform us with exactness of the history of all fish?

Some are known to the fishermen of the Indian ocean, others to the toilers of the Egyptian gulf, others to the islanders, others to the men of Mauretania. Great and small were all alike created by this first command, by this ineffable power. What a difference in their food! What a variety in the manner in which each species reproduces itself! Most fish do not hatch eggs like birds; they do not build nests; they do not feed their young with toil; it is the water which receives and vivifies the egg dropped into it. With them the reproduction of each species is invariable, and natures are not mixed. There are none of those unions which, on the earth, produce mules and certain birds contrary to the nature of their species. With fish there is no variety which, like the ox and the sheep, is armed with a half-equipment of teeth, none which ruminates except, according to certain writers, the scar. All have serried and very sharp teeth, for fear their food should escape them if they masticate it for too long a time. In fact, if it were not crushed and swallowed as soon as divided, it would be carried away by the water.

The food of fish differs according to their species. Some feed on mud; others eat sea weed; others content themselves with the herbs that grow in water. But the greater part devour each other, and the smaller is food for the larger, and if one which has possessed itself of a fish weaker than itself becomes a prey to another, the conqueror and the conquered are both swallowed up in the belly of the last. And we mortals, do we act otherwise when we press our inferiors? What difference is there between the last fish and the man who, impelled by devouring greed, swallows the weak in the folds of his insatiable avarice? Yon fellow possessed the goods of the poor; you caught him and made him a part of your abundance. You have shown yourself more unjust than the unjust, and more miserly than the miser. Look to it lest you end like the fish, by hook, by weel, or by net. Surely we too, when we have done the deeds of the wicked, shall not escape punishment at the last.

Now see what tricks, what cunning, are to be found in a weak animal, and learn not to imitate wicked doers. The crab loves the flesh of the oyster; but, sheltered by its shell, a solid rampart with which nature has furnished its soft and delicate flesh, it is a difficult prey to seize. Thus they call the oyster sherd-hide. Thanks to the two shells with which it is enveloped, and which adapt themselves perfectly the one to the other, the claws of the crab are quite powerless. What does he do? When he sees it, sheltered from the wind, warming itself with pleasure, and half opening its shells to the sun, he secretly throws in a pebble, prevents them from closing, and takes by cunning what force had lost. Such is the malice of these animals, deprived as they are of reason and of speech. But I would that you should at once rival the crab in cunning and industry, and abstain from harming your neighbour; this animal is the image of him who craftily approaches his brother, takes advantage of his neighbour's misfortunes, and finds his delight in other men's troubles. O copy not the damned! Content yourself with your own lot. Poverty, with what is necessary, is of more value in the eyes of the wise than all pleasures.

I will not pass in silence the cunning and trickery of the squid, which takes the colour of the rock to which it attaches itself. Most fish swim idly up to the squid as they might to a rock, and become themselves the prey of the crafty creature. Such are men who court ruling powers, bending themselves to all circumstances and not remaining for a moment in the same purpose; who praise self-restraint in the company of the self-restrained, and license in that of the licentious, accommodating their feelings to the pleasure of each. It is difficult to escape them and to put ourselves on guard against their mischief; because it is under the mask of friendship that they hide their clever wickedness. Men like this are ravening wolves covered with sheep's clothing, as the Lord calls them. Flee then fickleness and pliability; seek truth, sincerity, simplicity. The serpent is shifty; so he has been condemned to crawl. The just is an honest man, like Job. Wherefore God sets the solitary in families. So is this great and wide sea, wherein are things creeping innumerable, both small and great beasts. Yet a wise and marvellous order reigns among these animals. Fish do not always deserve our reproaches; often they offer us useful examples. How is it that each sort of fish, content with the region that has been assigned to it, never travels over its own limits to pass into foreign seas? No surveyor has ever distributed to them their habitations, nor enclosed them in walls, nor assigned limits to them; each kind has been naturally assigned its own home. One gulf nourishes one kind of fish, another other sorts; those which swarm here are absent elsewhere. No mountain raises its sharp peaks between them; no rivers bar the passage to them; it is a law of nature, which according to the needs of each kind, has allotted to them their dwelling places with equality and justice.

It is not thus with us. Why? Because we incessantly move the ancient landmarks which our fathers have set. We encroach, we add house to house, field to field, to enrich ourselves at the expense of our neighbour. The great fish know the sojourning place that nature has assigned to them; they occupy the sea far from the haunts of men, where no islands lie, and where are no continents rising to confront them, because it has never been crossed and neither curiosity nor need has persuaded sailors to tempt it. The monsters that dwell in this sea are in size like high mountains, so witnesses who have seen tell us, and never cross their boundaries to ravage islands and seaboard towns. Thus each kind is as if it were stationed in towns, in villages, in an ancient country, and has for its dwelling place the regions of the sea which have been assigned to it.

Instances have, however, been known of migratory fish, who, as if common deliberation transported them into strange regions, all start on their march at a given sign. When the time marked for breeding arrives, they, as if awakened by a common law of nature, migrate from gulf to gulf, directing their course toward the North Sea. And at the epoch of their return you may see all these fish streaming like a torrent across the Propontis towards the Euxine Sea. Who puts them in marching array? Where is the prince's order? Has an edict affixed in the public place indicated to them their day of departure? Who serves them as a guide? See how the divine order embraces all and extends to the smallest object. A fish does not resist God's law, and we men cannot endure His precepts of salvation! Do not despise fish because they are dumb and quite unreasoning; rather fear lest, in your resistance to the disposition of the Creator, you have even less reason than they. Listen to the fish, who by their actions all but speak and say: it is for the perpetuation of our race that we undertake this long voyage. They have not the gift of reason, but they have the law of nature firmly seated within them, to show them what they have to do. Let us go, they say, to the North Sea. Its water is sweeter than that of the rest of the sea; for the sun does not remain long there, and its rays do not draw up all the drinkable portions. Even sea creatures love fresh water. Thus one often sees them enter into rivers and swim far up them from the sea. This is the reason which makes them prefer the Euxine Sea to other gulfs, as the most fit for breeding and for bringing up their young. When they have obtained their object the whole tribe returns home. Let us hear these dumb creatures tell us the reason. The Northern sea, they say, is shallow and its surface is exposed to the violence of the wind, and it has few shores and retreats. Thus the winds easily agitate it to its bottom and mingle the sands of its bed with its waves. Besides, it is cold in winter, filled as it is from all directions by large rivers. Wherefore after a moderate enjoyment of its waters, during the summer, when the winter comes they hasten to reach warmer depths and places heated by the sun, and after fleeing from the stormy tracts of the North, they seek a haven in less agitated seas.

I myself have seen these marvels, and I have admired the wisdom of God in all things. If beings deprived of reason are capable of thinking and of providing for their own preservation; if a fish knows what it ought to seek and what to shun, what shall we say, who are honoured with reason, instructed by law, encouraged by the promises, made wise by the Spirit, and are nevertheless less reasonable about our own affairs than the fish? They know how to provide for the future, but we renounce our hope of the future and spend our life in brutal indulgence. A fish traverses the extent of the sea to find what is good for it; what will you say then— you who live in idleness, the mother of all vices? Do not let any one make his ignorance an excuse. There has been implanted in us natural reason which tells us to identify ourselves with good, and to avoid all that is harmful. I need not go far from the sea to find examples, as that is the object of our researches. I have heard it said by one living near the sea, that the sea urchin, a little contemptible creature, often foretells calm and tempest to sailors. When it foresees a disturbance of the winds, it gets under a great pebble, and clinging to it as to an anchor, it tosses about in safety, retained by the weight which prevents it from becoming the plaything of the waves. It is a certain sign for sailors that they are threatened with a violent agitation of the winds. No astrologer, no Chaldæan, reading in the rising of the stars the disturbances of the air, has ever communicated his secret to the urchin: it is the Lord of the sea and of the winds who has impressed on this little animal a manifest proof of His great wisdom. God has foreseen all, He has neglected nothing. His eye, which never sleeps, watches over all. He is present everywhere and gives to each being the means of preservation. If God has not left the sea urchin outside His providence, is He without care for you?

Husbands love your wives. Ephesians 5:25 Although formed of two bodies you are united to live in the communion of wedlock. May this natural link, may this yoke imposed by the blessing, reunite those who are divided. The viper, the cruelest of reptiles, unites itself with the sea lamprey, and, announcing its presence by a hiss, it calls it from the depths to conjugal union. The lamprey obeys, and is united to this venomous animal. What does this mean? However hard, however fierce a husband may be, the wife ought to bear with him, and not wish to find any pretext for breaking the union. He strikes you, but he is your husband. He is a drunkard, but he is united to you by nature. He is brutal and cross, but he is henceforth one of your members, and the most precious of all.

Let husbands listen as well: here is a lesson for them. The viper vomits forth its venom in respect for marriage; and you, will you not put aside the barbarity and the inhumanity of your soul, out of respect for your union? Perhaps the example of the viper contains another meaning. The union of the viper and of the lamprey is an adulterous violation of nature. You, who are plotting against other men's wedlock, learn what creeping creature you are like. I have only one object, to make all I say turn to the edification of the Church. Let then libertines put a restraint on their passions, for they are taught by the examples set by creatures of earth and sea.

My bodily infirmity and the lateness of the hour force me to end my discourse. However, I have still many observations to make on the products of the sea, for the admiration of my attentive audience. To speak of the sea itself, how does its water change into salt? How is it that coral, a stone so much esteemed, is a plant in the midst of the sea, and when once exposed to the air becomes hard as a rock? Why has nature enclosed in the meanest of animals, in an oyster, so precious an object as a pearl? For these pearls, which are coveted by the caskets of kings, are cast upon the shores, upon the coasts, upon sharp rocks, and enclosed in oyster shells. How can the sea pinna produce her fleece of gold, which no dye has ever imitated? How can shells give kings purple of a brilliancy not surpassed by the flowers of the field?

Genesis 1:21 Let the waters bring forth. What necessary object was there that did not immediately appear? What object of luxury was not given to man? Some to supply his needs, some to make him contemplate the marvels of creation. Some are terrible, so as to take our idleness to school. God created great whales. Genesis 1:21 Scripture gives them the name of great not because they are greater than a shrimp and a sprat, but because the size of their bodies equals that of great hills. Thus when they swim on the surface of the waters one often sees them appear like islands. But these monstrous creatures do not frequent our coasts and shores; they inhabit the Atlantic ocean. Such are these animals created to strike us with terror and awe. If now you hear say that the greatest vessels, sailing with full sails, are easily stopped by a very small fish, by the remora, and so forcibly that the ship remains motionless for a long time, as if it had taken root in the middle of the sea, do you not see in this little creature a like proof of the power of the Creator? Sword fish, saw fish, dog fish, whales, and sharks, are not therefore the only things to be dreaded; we have to fear no less the spike of the stingray even after its death, and the sea-hare, whose mortal blows are as rapid as they are inevitable. Thus the Creator wishes that all may keep you awake, so that full of hope in Him you may avoid the evils with which all these creatures threaten you.

But let us come out of the depths of the sea and take refuge upon the shore. For the marvels of creation, coming one after the other in constant succession like the waves, have submerged my discourse. However, I should not be surprised if, after finding greater wonders upon the earth, my spirit seeks like Jonah's to flee to the sea. But it seems to me, that meeting with these innumerable marvels has made me forget all measure, and experience the fate of those who navigate the high seas without a fixed point to mark their progress, and are often ignorant of the space which they have traversed. This is what has happened to me; while my words glanced at creation, I have not been sensible of the multitude of beings of which I spoke to you. But although this honourable assembly is pleased by my speech, and the recital of the marvels of the Master is grateful to the ears of His servants, let me here bring the ship of my discourse to anchor, and await the day to deliver you the rest. Let us, therefore, all arise, and, giving thanks for what has been said, let us ask for strength to hear the rest. Whilst taking your food may the conversation at your table turn upon what has occupied us this morning and this evening. Filled with these thoughts may you, even in sleep, enjoy the pleasure of the day, so that you may be permitted to say, I sleep but my heart wakes, Song of Songs 5:2 meditating day and night upon the law of the Lord, to Whom be glory and power world without end. Amen. [The Hexameron]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. And God says, The waters produce living creatures that swim in the water, and birds flying on the earth under the firmament of heaven; and it was done so. Admire here with what kindness the Lord makes known to us the order and the continuation of the works of creation. At first he revealed to us how, at his order, the earth had effected from his bosom his various productions; then he told us of the formation of these two great luminous bodies, to which he added the variety of stars which adorn the sky with their brilliant brilliancy; and today, passing on to the element of waters, he teaches us that, by his word and command, they themselves produce living animals: That the waters, he says, produce living animals that swim in the water. water, and birds flying on the earth, under the skies of heaven. But what word, I ask you, could worthily tell this prodigy! and what language would suffice to praise this work of a creator God! he had only said: that the earth produces plants, and suddenly the earth was covered with the richest productions; and today he says that the waters produce. These two commandments were followed by the same effects; there he had said: let the earth produce plants; and here he says that the waters produce living animals. But as with his first order: that the earth should produce, the earth had given birth to plants and flowers, harvests, and all other productions so varied and numerous; thus to this second order: that the waters produce living animals that swim in the water, and birds flying on the earth, under the firmament of the sky, we saw appear fish and birds in so many numbers that can not count them. But as much as the word of the Lord is brief and concise, so are the species of fish and birds numerous and varied. And do not be surprised, my dear brother, since it was the word of God, and this word is always effective and creative.

Now you see how all creatures have been drawn from nothingness; you also see with what goodness God reveals to us the result of his works, and with what condescension he is proportioned to our weakness. And, in fact, could we have known all these details of creation, if the Lord had not deigned to reveal them to men by the mouth of his prophet? So today we know what order God has observed in creation, we see the effects of his power, and we admire that creative word which commands nothingness, and which gives being to so many different creatures.

And yet there are some fools who, after these fine instructions, still dare to say they are incredulous, and who do not want to acknowledge that God created the world! they say, some that chance has done everything, and others that a pre-existing matter has produced everything. But see how dangerous this illusion of the devil is, and how he abuses the simplicity of those who let themselves be seduced! it is to preserve us from such a misfortune that the holy prophet, inspired by the Holy Spirit, tells us so exactly the whole of creation, so that we obviously know the order and we know how each creature was produced. But God would not have had such a special care for our salvation, and if he had not himself directed the language of his prophet, he would have contented himself with saying: God created heaven and earth, the sea and animals; and he would not have judged it necessary to distinguish the days of creation, or to mark separately the works of each of them. But to remove all excuses from ungrateful men blinded by their prejudices, Moses clearly distinguishes the order of facts and the number of days; and he instructs us so carefully that it is impossible for us to disregard the truth, and to fall into the error of the Gentiles. They only utter the dreams of their imagination, while we know how great and powerful the Lord our God is.

(Gen. 1:21-22) He said, Let the waters produce living creatures that swim in the water, and birds flying on the earth, under the firmament of heaven; and suddenly the element, docile to the Word of the Creator, fulfills its command. So Moses adds: And it was done according as God had commanded. And God created the great fishes, and all the animals that have life and motion, that the waters produced each one according to his kind; and he also created birds, each according to his kind. And God saw that it was good; and he blessed them, saying, Grow and multiply, fill the sea, and let the birds multiply on the earth. (Gen. I, 21, 22.) Consider, I pray you, what is the wisdom of the Holy Spirit. Moses had already said, and it was done so; and here he inspires him to reveal to us all the details of this work. And God created the great fishes, and all the animals that have life and motion, that the waters produce each one according to his kind; and he also created birds, each according to his kind; and God saw that it was good. These words again repress a reckless critic. And indeed, so that no one can say: why sea monsters? what is their usefulness, and what advantages can man derive from their creation? Moses first tells us that God created, with the big fish, all the animals that have life and movement, as well as the birds; and then he adds: God saw that it was good.

It is as if he were telling us: because you do not know the reason for divine works, do not hurry to blame the Creator. You have heard the word of the Lord, which proclaims that they are good; and, full of a mad recklessness, you dare to ask why they exist, as if they were in the creation only a superfluity? And yet if you had a righteous sense, they would show you the power and the ineffable goodness of the Lord. Its power appears in that it has sufficed for a word and a command. to produce these sea monsters, and his goodness in that after having created them, he has relegated them to the vast abyss of the ocean, so that they can not harm the man. Thus these giants of the seas make us admire the overpowering power of the Creator, and they are harmless. Is not this double utility a great proof of divine goodness, since the sight of these monsters leads every wise spirit to the knowledge of the Lord, and which, by a prodigy of benevolence, prevents them from us? to do no harm? For all creatures have not been produced for the sole benefit of man; and some are intended to publish the magnificence of the Creator. Yes, some have been made for our use, and others to manifest the greatness of God, and to proclaim His power. So when you hear the sacred writer telling you that God saw that all this was good, (39) do not have the temerity to contradict the Scripture, nor to curiously emit this imprudent word: why did God does this or that creature? And God blessed them, saying, Grow and multiply, fill the sea; and that birds multiply on the earth.

(Gen. 1:23) The effect of this blessing has been the prodigious growth of fish and birds. And because God wanted them to be perpetuated in their generations, He blessed them, saying, Grow and multiply. It is thus that they have been preserved till today, and that through so many ages no species has perished. For by the blessing of God, and by this word: Grow and multiply, they have been given to multiply and to subsist forever. And in the evening and in the morning was the fifth day. Scripture thus teaches us which species among animals were created on the fifth day. But wait a little, and you will see the goodness of the Lord burst again. For he not only made the waters fecund to produce fish and birds, but he also commanded the earth to give birth to terrestrial animals. This is why the continuation of the narrative commits us to addressing the work of the sixth day. [Homilies on Genesis]

TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE. Therefore God, when producing other things out of things which had been already made, indicates them by the prophet, and tells us what He has produced from such and such a source (although we might ourselves suppose them to be derived from some source or other, short of nothing; since there had already been created certain things, from which they might easily seem to have been made). [Against Hermagenes 22]

Out of Matter, evil though it be—nay, very evil—good things have been created, nay, "very good" ones: "And God saw that they were good, and God blessed them" Genesis 1:21-22 —because, of course, of their very great goodness; certainly not because they were evil, or very evil. Change is therefore admissible in Matter; and this being the case, it has lost its condition of eternity; in short, its beauty is decayed in death. [Against Hermagenes 12]

THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH. On the fifth day the living creatures which proceed from the waters were produced, through which also is revealed the manifold wisdom of God in these things; for who could count their multitude and very various kinds? Moreover, the things proceeding from the waters were blessed by God, that this also might be a sign of men's being destined to receive repentance and remission of sins, through the water and laver of regeneration — as many as come to the truth, and are born again, and receive blessing from God. But the monsters of the deep and the birds of prey are a similitude of covetous men and transgressors. For as the fish and the fowls are of one nature, — some indeed abide in their natural state, and do no harm to those weaker than themselves, but keep the law of God, and eat of the seeds of the earth; others of them, again, transgress the law of God, and eat flesh, and injure those weaker than themselves: thus, too, the righteous, keeping the law of God, bite and injure none, but live holily and righteously. But robbers, and murderers, and godless persons are like monsters of the deep, and wild beasts, and birds of prey; for they virtually devour those weaker than themselves. The race, then, of fishes and of creeping things, though partaking of God's blessing, received no very distinguishing property. [To Autolycus]

1:24-25 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind, quadrupeds and reptiles and wild beasts of the earth according to their kind, and it was so. 25 And God made the wild beasts of the earth according to their kind, and cattle according to their kind, and all the reptiles of the earth according to their kind, and God saw that they were good.

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. "And God said, Let the earth produce living creatures after their kind, quadrupeds, and creeping things, beasts of the earth after their kind, and domestic animals after their kind. "And that was done. So God made the beasts of the earth according to their kind, the domestic animals according to their kind, and all the reptiles of the earth according to their kind. And God saw that it was good. It was in order to populate at this mount the second part of this low region in which Scripture understands under the name of earth the atmosphere and all abysses, in other words, the land properly so called. We recognize the species of animals that the earth produced by the order of God. However, as animals are often referred to by the generic name of beings deprived of reason, it is necessary to distinguish here their specific character. Animals that crawl or reptiles are snakes; although this qualification also applies to other animals. The name of beasts. especially applies to wild animals, lions, leopards, tigers, wolves, foxes: even dogs and monkeys fall into this category. As for the word pecora, cattle, it represents in the ordinary language the domestic animals, either that they help the man in his works, like the ox and the horse, or that they serve to clothe or to feed him, as sheep and pigs.

As for the word quadrupeds, what does it mean? All the animals I have named, except for a few, the serpents, have four legs to walk, yet Scripture did not use this term, although it suppresses it in the next verse, without attaching a particular meaning to it. Did she then hear deer, fallow deer, evening primroses, wild boars, animals which do not belong to the class of lions, and which approach the cattle without being domestic? Would the number of their legs have earned them the generic name which has since become that of a species? Could the expression according to their species, repeated three times, warn us to think of three species of animals? First of all, we name quadrupeds and reptiles, according to their kind: to this class are, in my opinion, all reptiles with legs, such as lizards and stellions. The word quadruped is therefore not repeated in the following verse, because it is included in that of reptile: note indeed that it does not say "the reptiles," but, "all the reptiles of the earth From the earth, since they belong to the earth and the waters; all, since we attach to it the quadrupeds specially named above. As to the second species, that of animals; it includes all animals armed with mouths and claws, excluding snakes. The third species, that of cattle, includes animals that are not carnivorous and that have only their horns as defense when they still have them. I have warned that the word quadruped has a very extensive meaning; the number of paws serves to characterize this whole class; and that, under the name of beasts or cattle, all animals are sometimes understood without reason. The word will in Latin have a similar meaning. It was useful to point out that all the terms used in Scripture have not been thrown to chance, but are taken in their precise meaning, as can easily be seen in ordinary language.

A question must still be of concern to the reader: whether the formula, according to their species, was thrown randomly here and there, or whether it is intended to indicate that the animal kingdom had been created as early as origin and only divided into species at that time; if, I say, he pre-existed as an ideal in the superior intelligences previously created. In this hypothesis, Scripture should have used this expression to mark the formation of light, of heaven, of water and earth, of the torches of heaven. For has not their reason of existence pre-existed eternally and immutably in the wisdom of God, "which stretches out from one end to the other, and which disposes everything with gentleness?" However, the use of this formula only begins with the creation of plants and ceases with the creation of terrestrial animals. Expression indeed, though it is not used in the verse where God commands. to the waters of producing the beings that suit them, is found again in the following verse: "And God made the big fish, all the animals that live and crawl and that the waters had produced according to their kind; then, all the birds according to their species. "

As animals are destined to reproduce and to transmit to one another their original qualities, must the sacred expression be interpreted as the law which secures perpetuity to species? But then why is it said of the trees and plants that God made them, not only according to their kind, but again, according to their likeness? Do not terrestrial or aquatic animals produce beings like them? Could it be; the analogy of the terms species and likeness prevented the sacred author from repeating the second? The word seed is not repeated everywhere; however, there are germs deposited in most animals, as in plants; I say most of the animals, because it has been recognized that sprouts or bodies of the earth were born without organs of reproduction, which indicates that the germs are not deposited in their bodies, but in the very elements of which it comes from. The formula "according to the species," therefore applies to beings who reproduce with the same germs and properties before disappearing to their turn: none of them, in fact, was created to contain in itself all its existence, or to keep it perpetually, or finally to die before having reproduced itself. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. (Gen. 1:24) And God said let the earth produce a living soul, according to its kind, of four-footed animals, and of snakes, and of beasts of the earth after their kind, and so it was done. In the way above, we must consider and understand why it was added alive, having said soul; and what it means according to its gender; and how is understood the customary conclusion by which it is said, and thus it was done. Although the Latin language under the name of beast generally includes all irrational animals, here, however, species must be distinguished so that we understand all the animals of charge by quadrupeds, by snakes all the living creatures that crawl, by beasts or wild beasts all the unruly quadrupeds and animals all quadrupeds that do not help working, but provide some benefit to those who graze them.

(Gen. 1:25) And God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the animals after their kind, and all the serpents of the earth after their kind. This repetition that was made when God said and did when it had already been said and was done, must be understood according to the norm exposed above. Here, under the name of animals, I believe all the quadrupeds that live in the care of man are meant. And God saw that it was good, it must be understood as usual. [Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis]

BASIL OF CAESAREA. Genesis 1:24 And God said Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle and creeping things, and beast of the earth after his kind; and it was so.  The command of God advanced step by step and earth thus received her adornment. Yesterday it was said, Let the waters produce moving things, and today let the earth bring forth the living creature. Is the earth then alive? And are the mad-minded Manichæans right in giving it a soul? At these words Let the earth bring forth, it did not produce a germ contained in it, but He who gave the order at the same time gifted it with the grace and power to bring forth. When the earth had heard this command Let the earth bring forth grass and the tree yielding fruit, it was not grass that it had hidden in it that it caused to spring forth, it did not bring to the surface a palm tree, an oak, a cypress, hitherto kept back in its depths. It is the word of God which forms the nature of things created. Let the earth bring forth; that is to say not that she may bring forth that which she has but that she may acquire that which she lacks, when God gives her the power. Even so now, Let the earth bring forth the living creature, not the living creature that is contained in herself, but that which the command of God gives her. Further, the Manichæans contradict themselves, because if the earth has brought forth the life, she has left herself despoiled of life. Their execrable doctrine needs no demonstration.

But why did the waters receive the command to bring forth the moving creature that has life and the earth to bring forth the living creature? We conclude that, by their nature, swimming creatures appear only to have an imperfect life, because they live in the thick element of water. They are hard of hearing, and their sight is dull because they see through the water; they have no memory, no imagination, no idea of social intercourse. Thus divine language appears to indicate that, in aquatic animals, the carnal life originates their psychic movements, while in terrestrial animals, gifted with a more perfect life, the soul enjoys supreme authority. In fact the greater part of quadrupeds have more power of penetration in their senses; their apprehension of present objects is keen, and they keep all exact remembrance of the past. It seems therefore, that God, after the command given to the waters to bring forth moving creatures that have life, created simply living bodies for aquatic animals, while for terrestrial animals He commanded the soul to exist and to direct the body, showing thus that the inhabitants of the earth are gifted with greater vital force. Without doubt terrestrial animals are devoid of reason. At the same time how many affections of the soul each one of them expresses by the voice of nature! They express by cries their joy and sadness, recognition of what is familiar to them, the need of food, regret at being separated from their companions, and numberless emotions. Aquatic animals, on the contrary, are not only dumb; it is impossible to tame them, to teach them, to train them for man's society. The ox knows his owner, and the ass his master's crib. Isaiah 1:3 But the fish does not know who feeds him. The ass knows a familiar voice, he knows the road which he has often trodden, and even, if man loses his way, he sometimes serves him as a guide. His hearing is more acute than that of any other terrestrial animal. What animal of the sea can show so much rancour and resentment as the camel? The camel conceals its resentment for a long time after it has been struck, until it finds an opportunity, and then repays the wrong. Listen, you whose heart does not pardon, you who practise vengeance as a virtue; see what you resemble when you keep your anger for so long against your neighbour like a spark, hidden in the ashes, and only waiting for fuel to set your heart ablaze!

Let the earth bring forth a living soul. Why did the earth produce a living soul? So that you may make a difference between the soul of cattle and that of man. You will soon learn how the human soul was formed; hear now about the soul of creatures devoid of reason. Since, according to Scripture, the life of every creature is in the blood, as the blood when thickened changes into flesh, and flesh when corrupted decomposes into earth, so the soul of beasts is naturally an earthy substance. Let the earth bring forth a living soul. See the affinity of the soul with blood, of blood with flesh, of flesh with earth; and remounting in an inverse sense from the earth to the flesh, from the flesh to the blood, from the blood to the soul, you will find that the soul of beasts is earth. Do not suppose that it is older than the essence of their body, nor that it survives the dissolution of the flesh; avoid the nonsense of those arrogant philosophers who do not blush to liken their soul to that of a dog; who say that they have been formerly themselves women, shrubs, fish. Have they ever been fish? I do not know; but I do not fear to affirm that in their writings they show less sense than fish. Let the earth bring forth the living creature. Perhaps many of you ask why there is such a long silence in the middle of the rapid rush of my discourse. The more studious among my auditors will not be ignorant of the reason why words fail me. What! Have I not seen them look at each other, and make signs to make me look at them, and to remind me of what I have passed over? I have forgotten a part of the creation, and that one of the most considerable, and my discourse was almost finished without touching upon it. Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that has life and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament, of heaven. Genesis 1:20 I spoke of fish as long as eventide allowed: today we have passed to the examination of terrestrial animals; between the two, birds have escaped us. We are forgetful like travellers who unmindful of some important object, are obliged, although they be far on their road, to retrace their steps, punished for their negligence by the weariness of the journey. So we have to turn back. That which we have omitted is not to be despised. It is the third part of the animal creation, if indeed there are three kinds of animals, land, winged and water.

Genesis 1:24 Let the earth bring forth the living creature.  Behold the word of God pervading creation, beginning even then the efficacy which is seen displayed today, and will be displayed to the end of the world! As a ball, which one pushes, if it meet a declivity, descends, carried by its form and the nature of the ground and does not stop until it has reached a level surface; so nature, once put in motion by the Divine command, traverses creation with an equal step, through birth and death, and keeps up the succession of kinds through resemblance, to the last. Nature always makes a horse succeed to a horse, a lion to a lion, an eagle to an eagle, and preserving each animal by these uninterrupted successions she transmits it to the end of all things. Animals do not see their peculiarities destroyed or effaced by any length of time; their nature, as though it had been just constituted, follows the course of ages, for ever young. Let the earth bring forth the living creature. This command has continued and earth does not cease to obey the Creator. For, if there are creatures which are successively produced by their predecessors, there are others that even today we see born from the earth itself. In wet weather she brings forth grasshoppers and an immense number of insects which fly in the air and have no names because they are so small; she also produces mice and frogs. In the environs of Thebes in Egypt, after abundant rain in hot weather, the country is covered with field mice. We see mud alone produce eels; they do not proceed from an egg, nor in any other manner; it is the earth alone which gives them birth. Let the earth produce a living creature.

Cattle are terrestrial and bent towards the earth. Man, a celestial growth, rises superior to them as much by the mould of his bodily conformation as by the dignity of his soul. What is the form of quadrupeds? Their head is bent towards the earth and looks towards their belly, and only pursues their belly's good. Your head, O man! Is turned towards heaven; your eyes look up. When therefore you degrade yourself by the passions of the flesh, slave of your belly, and your lowest parts, you approach animals without reason and becomest like one of them. You are called to more noble cares; seek those things which are above where Christ sits. Colossians 3:1 Raise your soul above the earth; draw from its natural conformation the rule of your conduct; fix your conversation in heaven. Your true country is the heavenly Jerusalem; your fellow citizens and your compatriots are the first-born which are written in heaven. Hebrews 12:23

Let the earth bring forth the living creature. Thus when the soul of brutes appeared it was not concealed in the earth, but it was born by the command of God. Brutes have one and the same soul of which the common characteristic is absence of reason. But each animal is distinguished by peculiar qualities. The ox is steady, the ass is lazy, the horse has strong passions, the wolf cannot be tamed, the fox is deceitful, the stag timid, the ant industrious, the dog grateful and faithful in his friendships. As each animal was created the distinctive character of his nature appeared in him in due measure; in the lion spirit, taste for solitary life, an unsociable character. True tyrant of animals, he, in his natural arrogance, admits but few to share his honours. He disdains his yesterday's food and never returns to the remains of the prey. Nature has provided his organs of voice with such great force that often much swifter animals are caught by his roaring alone. The panther, violent and impetuous in his leaps, has a body fitted for his activity and lightness, in accord with the movements of his soul. The bear has a sluggish nature, ways of its own, a sly character, and is very secret; therefore it has an analogous body, heavy, thick, without articulations such as are necessary for a cold dweller in dens.

When we consider the natural and innate care that these creatures without reason take of their lives we shall be induced to watch over ourselves and to think of the salvation of our souls; or rather we shall be the more condemned when we are found falling short even of the imitation of brutes. The bear, which often gets severely wounded, cares for himself and cleverly fills the wounds with mullein, a plant whose nature is very astringent. You will also see the fox heal his wounds with droppings from the pine tree; the tortoise, gorged with the flesh of the viper, finds in the virtue of marjoram a specific against this venomous animal and the serpent heals sore eyes by eating fennel.

And is not reasoning intelligence eclipsed by animals in their provision for atmospheric changes? Do we not see sheep, when winter is approaching, devouring grass with avidity as if to make provision for future scarcity? Do we not also see oxen, long confined in the winter season, recognise the return of spring by a natural sensation, and look to the end of their stables towards the doors, all turning their heads there by common consent? Studious observers have remarked that the hedgehog makes an opening at the two extremities of his hole. If the wind from the north is going to blow he shuts up the aperture which looks towards the north; if the south wind succeeds it the animal passes to the northern door. What lesson do these animals teach man? They not only show us in our Creator a care which extends to all beings, but a certain presentiment of future even in brutes. Then we ought not to attach ourselves to this present life and ought to give all heed to that which is to come. Will you not be industrious for yourself, O man? And will you not lay up in the present age rest in that which is to come, after having seen the example of the ant? The ant during summer collects treasures for winter. Far from giving itself up to idleness, before this season has made it feel its severity, it hastens to work with an invincible zeal until it has abundantly filled its storehouses. Here again, how far it is from being negligent! With what wise foresight it manages so as to keep its provisions as long as possible! With its pincers it cuts the grains in half, for fear lest they should germinate and not serve for its food. If they are damp it dries them; and it does not spread them out in all weathers, but when it feels that the air will keep of a mild temperature. Be sure that you will never see rain fall from the clouds so long as the ant has left the grain out.

What language can attain to the marvels of the Creator? What ear could understand them? And what time would be sufficient to relate them? Let us say, then, with the prophet, O Lord, how manifold are your works! In wisdom have you made them all. We shall not be able to say in self-justification, that we have learned useful knowledge in books, since the untaught law of nature makes us choose that which is advantageous to us. Do you know what good you ought to do your neighbour? The good that you expect from him yourself. Do you know what is evil? That which you would not wish another to do to you. Neither botanical researches nor the experience of simples have made animals discover those which are useful to them; but each knows naturally what is salutary and marvellously appropriates what suits its nature.

Virtues exist in us also by nature, and the soul has affinity with them not by education, but by nature herself. We do not need lessons to hate illness, but by ourselves we repel what afflicts us, the soul has no need of a master to teach us to avoid vice. Now all vice is a sickness of the soul as virtue is its health. Thus those have defined health well who have called it a regularity in the discharge of natural functions; a definition that can be applied without fear to the good condition of the soul. Thus, without having need of lessons, the soul can attain by herself to what is fit and conformable to nature. Hence it comes that temperance everywhere is praised, justice is in honour, courage admired, and prudence the object of all aims; virtues which concern the soul more than health concerns the body. Children love your parents, and you, parents provoke not your children to wrath. Does not nature say the same? Paul teaches us nothing new; he only tightens the links of nature. If the lioness loves her cubs, if the she wolf fights to defend her little ones, what shall man say who is unfaithful to the precept and violates nature herself; or the son who insults the old age of his father; or the father whose second marriage has made him forget his first children?

With animals invincible affection unites parents with children. It is the Creator, God Himself, who substitutes the strength of feeling for reason in them. From whence it comes that a lamb as it bounds from the fold, in the midst of a thousand sheep recognises the colour and the voice of its mother, runs to her, and seeks its own sources of milk. If its mother's udders are dry, it is content, and, without stopping, passes by more abundant ones. And how does the mother recognise it among the many lambs? All have the same voice, the same colour, the same smell, as far at least as regards our sense of smell. Yet there is in these animals a more subtle sense than our perception which makes them recognise their own. The little dog has as yet no teeth, nevertheless he defends himself with his mouth against any one who teases him. The calf has as yet no horns, nevertheless he already knows where his weapons will grow. Here we have evident proof that the instinct of animals is innate, and that in all beings there is nothing disorderly, nothing unforeseen. All bear the marks of the wisdom of the Creator, and show that they have come to life with the means of assuring their preservation.

The dog is not gifted with a share of reason; but with him instinct has the power of reason. The dog has learned by nature the secret of elaborate inferences, which sages of the world, after long years of study, have hardly been able to disentangle. When the dog is on the track of game, if he sees it divide in different directions, he examines these different paths, and speech alone fails him to announce his reasoning. The creature, he says, is gone here or there or in another direction. It is neither here nor there; it is therefore in the third direction. And thus, neglecting the false tracks, he discovers the true one. What more is done by those who, gravely occupied in demonstrating theories, trace lines upon the dust and reject two propositions to show that the third is the true one?

Does not the gratitude of the dog shame all who are ungrateful to their benefactors? Many are said to have fallen dead by their murdered masters in lonely places. Others, when a crime has just been committed, have led those who were searching for the murderers, and have caused the criminals to be brought to justice. What will those say who, not content with not loving the Master who has created them and nourished them, have for their friends men whose mouth attacks the Lord, sitting at the same table with them, and, while partaking of their food, blaspheme Him who has given it to them?

But let us return to the spectacle of creation. The easiest animals to catch are the most productive. It is on account of this that hares and wild goats produce many little ones, and that wild sheep have twins, for fear lest these species should disappear, consumed by carnivorous animals. Beasts of prey, on the contrary, produce only a few and a lioness with difficulty gives birth to one lion; because, if they say truly, the cub issues from its mother by tearing her with its claws; and vipers are only born by gnawing through the womb, inflicting a proper punishment on their mother. Thus in nature all has been foreseen, all is the object of continual care. If you examine the members even of animals, you will find that the Creator has given them nothing superfluous, that He has omitted nothing that is necessary. To carnivorous animals He has given pointed teeth which their nature requires for their support. Those that are only half furnished with teeth have received several distinct receptacles for their food. As it is not broken up enough in the first, they are gifted with the power of returning it after it has been swallowed, and it does not assimilate until it has been crushed by rumination. The first, second, third, and fourth stomachs of ruminating animals do not remain idle; each one of them fulfils a necessary function. The neck of the camel is long so that it may lower it to its feet and reach the grass on which it feeds. Bears, lions, tigers, all animals of this sort, have short necks buried in their shoulders; it is because they do not live upon grass and have no need to bend down to the earth; they are carnivorous and eat the animals upon whom they prey.

Why has the elephant a trunk? This enormous creature, the greatest of terrestrial animals, created for the terror of those who meet it, is naturally huge and fleshy. If its neck was large and in proportion to its feet it would be difficult to direct, and would be of such an excessive weight that it would make it lean towards the earth. As it is, its head is attached to the spine of the back by short vertebrae and it has its trunk to take the place of a neck, and with it it picks up its food and draws up its drink. Its feet, without joints, like united columns, support the weight of its body. If it were supported on lax and flexible legs, its joints would constantly give way, equally incapable of supporting its weight, should it wish either to kneel or rise. But it has under the foot a little ankle joint which takes the place of the leg and knee joints whose mobility would never have resisted this enormous and swaying mass. Thus it had need of this nose which nearly touches its feet. Have you seen them in war marching at the head of the phalanx, like living towers, or breaking the enemies' battalions like mountains of flesh with their irresistible charge? If their lower parts were not in accordance with their size they would never have been able to hold their own. Now we are told that the elephant lives three hundred years and more, another reason for him to have solid and unjointed feet. But, as we have said, his trunk, which has the form and the flexibility of a serpent, takes its food from the earth and raises it up. Thus we are right in saying that it is impossible to find anything superfluous or wanting in creation. Well! God has subdued this monstrous animal to us to such a point that he understands the lessons and endures the blows we give him; a manifest proof that the Creator has submitted all to our rule, because we have been made in His image. It is not in great animals only that we see unapproachable wisdom; no less wonders are seen in the smallest. The high tops of the mountains which, near to the clouds and continually beaten by the winds, keep up a perpetual winter, do not arouse more admiration in me than the hollow valleys, which escape the storms of lofty peaks and preserve a constant mild temperature. In the same way in the constitution of animals I am not more astonished at the size of the elephant, than at the mouse, who is feared by the elephant, or at the scorpion's delicate sting, which has been hollowed like a pipe by the supreme artificer to throw venom into the wounds it makes. And let nobody accuse the Creator of having produced venomous animals, destroyers and enemies of our life. Else let them consider it a crime in the schoolmaster when he disciplines the restlessness of youth by the use of the rod and whip to maintain order.

Beasts bear witness to the faith. Have you confidence in the Lord? Thou shall walk upon the asp and the basilisk and you shall trample under feet the lion and the dragon. With faith you have the power to walk upon serpents and scorpions. Do you not see that the viper which attached itself to the hand of Paul, while he gathered sticks, did not injure him, because it found the saint full of faith? If you have not faith, do not fear beasts so much as your faithlessness, which renders you susceptible of all corruption. But I see that for a long time you have been asking me for an account of the creation of man, and I think I can hear you all cry in your hearts, We are being taught the nature of our belongings, but we are ignorant of ourselves. Let me then speak of it, since it is necessary, and let me put an end to my hesitation. In truth the most difficult of sciences is to know one's self. Not only our eye, from which nothing outside us escapes, cannot see itself; but our mind, so piercing to discover the sins of others, is slow to recognise its own faults. Thus my speech, after eagerly investigating what is external to myself, is slow and hesitating in exploring my own nature. Yet the beholding of heaven and earth does not make us know God better than the attentive study of our being does; I am, says the Prophet, fearfully and wonderfully made; that is to say, in observing myself I have known Your infinite wisdom.  [The Hexameron]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. (Gen. 1:24) And God said, Let the earth produce living creatures, every man after his kind: the domestic animals, the reptiles, and the wild beasts of the earth according to their different kinds. And this was so. (Gen. I, 24.) Consider then what new service makes us earth, and how it obeys this second order of the Lord. At first she had produced the seeds of all plants, and now she gives birth to living animals, quadrupeds and reptiles, domestic animals, and wild beasts. But here is confirmed what I had already told you, namely, that in the works of creation, the Lord offered us our utility and sometimes his own glory: he wanted the sight of so many creatures to make us to admire the power of the Creator, and to reveal to us that his infinite goodness and wisdom made them for man, whom he was soon to create.

(Gen. 1:25) God made the beasts of the earth according to their kind; domestic animals and all those who crawl on the earth, each according to. his kind. And he saw that it was good. (Gen. I, 25.) Where are today those who dare to ask why God created wild beasts and dangerous reptiles? Let them hear this word of Scripture: And God saw that it was good. What! the Creator Himself praises His work, and you would dare to blame it! But is not this an extreme madness? All the trees that the earth nourishes do not produce fruit, and we count among them wild and barren species; all the plants themselves are not useful: there are some who are unknown to us, and others who are evil. And yet who would dare to condemn them? for they were not created by chance and without intention. Yes, they would not have been praised by the Creator himself, if they should have been entirely useless. In addition to the fruit trees, we possess a large number of them which, although sterile, are as useful as the first, because they serve the different uses of life and the needs of man. And, indeed, we employ them either in the construction of buildings, or in the making of necessary and convenient furniture. Thus, no creature has been made without reason, although the mind of man can not discover all its utility. But what I say about trees also applies to animals, some of which are used for our food, and others for our work. It is not even ferocious beasts and reptiles that are not useful to us; and although since the disobedience of our first parents we have lost the empire and authority over them, whoever thinks of it seriously will convince himself that we still derive valuable benefits from it. And, indeed, the doctors draw several remedies for the cure of our diseases. Besides, how could the creation of ferocious animals be blameworthy, since they, like domestic animals, had to submit to the man whom God was about to create? And that's what I'm talking about.

But first, let us consider as a whole the goodness of the Lord with regard to man. He stretched out the heavens, created the earth, and placed the firmament to divide the upper waters from the lower waters; he then joins the waters in a basin which he calls sea; he called the arid element earth, and adorned it with trees and plants; he then passed to the formation of these two great bodies of light, and of that multitude of stars which embellish the sky; finally, he completed the work of the fifth day by commanding the waters to produce the fish that swim in their bosom, and the birds that fly on the earth, below the firmament. But because it was fitting that the earth itself was populated, it created the various animals, both those who serve our food and those who help us in our labors, and even reptiles and ferocious beasts. Thus God, after having produced all creatures, each in his rank and perfection, set the universe as a great table loaded with all kinds of dishes and resplendent with princely luxury and truly royal magnificence. It was then that he created the man, who was to enjoy all these riches. He gave him authority over all visible creation; and, to show how much he surpassed all other creatures in dignity, he submitted them to his empire and his power. [Homilies on Genesis]

1:26-28 And God said, Let us make man according to our image and likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the flying creatures of heaven, and over the cattle and all the earth, and over all the reptiles that creep on the earth. 27 And God made man, according to the image of God he made him, male and female he made them. 28 And God blessed them, saying, Increase and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the seas and flying creatures of heaven, and all the cattle and all the earth, and all the reptiles that creep on the earth.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 1:26). WHY WAS IT SAID ABOUT MAN ALONE, "LET US MAKE MAN", WHEREAS ABOUT OTHER CREATURES WE READ "GOD SAID"? — Answer. In order that, of course, the creature that was created rational should seem to have been made with purpose, and in order to show that creature's excellence. (Bed. Hexm. I, chap. I, PL 91, col. 28.) [Question 36]

WHY DID HE SAY "LET US MAKE" IN THE PLURAL? — Answer. To show the one work of the three persons. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 200.) [Question 37]

IN WHAT IS MAN THE IMAGE OF HIS MAKER? — Answer. In the inner man. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 200.)  [Question 38]

WHY BOTH "IMAGE" AND "LIKENESS"? —Answer. Image in eternity, likeness in conduct. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 201.) [Question 39]

(Gen. 1:27). WHY DID HE SAY AGAIN, "GOD CREATED MAN TO HIS OWN IMAGE" WHEN HE HAD PREVIOUSLY SAID "TO OUR IMAGE"? — Answer. In order to convey both the plurality of the persons and the unity of the substance. [Question 40]

ALCUIN OF YORK. WHY IS MAN THE ONLY ONE ABOUT WHOM IT IS NOT SAID SINGLY, AFTER HIS CREATION, "GOD SAW THAT IT WAS GOOD", AS IT WAS SAID ABOUT THE OTHER CREATURES? — Answer. Because, after man was created, it was said that all things were very good, as if they had previously been each individually good, but because of man all were now very good, because all things were created for the ornament of man, but man was made for the glory and praise of his Maker. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 201.) [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 41]

AMBROSIASTER. (Genesis 1:26) WHY, SINCE MAN AND WOMAN ARE ONE FLESH, IS MAN THE IMAGE OF GOD AND NOT WOMAN? — Man and woman, it is true, have the same substance in their souls as in their bodies, but man is superior in dignity to woman, as the Apostle says: "The husband is the head of the wife (Eph. 5:27; I Cor. 11:3).” It is by the will of God, and not by his nature, that man is superior to woman. Thus, in the same body, there are members more or less considerable, not by their nature, but by the rank which has been given them.

(Genesis 1:26) HOW WAS MAN MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD, CREATED TO COMMAND, AND SO IS WOMAN? —  "Let us,” says God, “make man in our image and likeness.” There are some who want to hear these words in the same way as those others where God says again: "Come, go down and let us confuse their tongues.” (Gen. 11:17) To see only the mark of the letter, these words are similar, it is the voice of one who speaks in the plural; but the meaning is far from the same, because the circumstances are quite different. On one side is the creation of man, whom God wants to create in his image and likeness. These words, on the contrary, "come, go down, and let us confuse their tongues," were intended to prevent men from coming to an understanding. We can therefore admit that God speaks here to his angels, like a general to his army. He speaks here in the plural and collectively, because it is through them that he must act as their Creator, and that is why he says: Let us confuse their languages. When he says: Let us make man in our image and likeness, we cannot say that he is speaking to angels, for we cannot say that angels have the same image with God, as a general with his soldiers. Those who have the same image cannot have a different dignity, a different nature. Besides, the sacred writer adds: "And God has made man, and has appointed him in his image," that is, it is God who speaks, and God who acts, he is not another God, a different God, it is one and the same God. This language from one subject to another does not imply another nature, but another person. For although there is only one God, there are three persons, and there is only one God, because in the Son, as in the Holy Spirit, there is only one God, only one and the same nature, for everything that comes out of this nature can only be what God is himself. It is therefore the person of the Father who says, "Let us make," and the person of the Son who makes man in the image of God, either in the image of the Father or in his own, does not matter, since they have one and the same image. Now, the Son has made man by the Holy Spirit, for just as Scripture represents the Father acting through the Son, so the Son acts by the Holy Spirit, as He declares Himself: It is through the Spirit of God that I cast out demons. (Matt. 12) The image of the three divine persons is therefore the same, since, whether we consider the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit, it is one God. Thus one man was made in the image of one God. Now, man is made in the image of God in the sense that just as there is in the heavens only one God, through whom all the heavenly spirits subsist, there was also on the earth only one man of God, which all others would derive their origin according to the flesh. There are, however, some who think that man was made in the image of God in the power he received to command, because God said to him, "Let him rule over the fish of the sea, birds of heaven and all over the earth," as we see all these things subject not only to the man, but to the woman, who is certainly not made in the image of God. This view is false for two reasons, firstly because it would follow that it was not to the Son that God would have said, "Let us make man in our image and likeness," but to the celestial powers that the Apostle enumerates, if the image of God stamped on man is the power of command; and secondly because the woman would be made herself in the image of God, which is an absurdity. For how can one say of the woman that she is in the image of God, whom we see subject to the empire of man without having any authority? For she can neither teach nor lay in justice, nor commit her word, nor judge, how much less can she command?

(Genesis 1:27) IN WHAT SENSE IS IT TO BE UNDERSTOOD THAT GOD MADE MAN IN HIS IMAGE AND LIKENESS, AND IS WOMAN ALSO THE IMAGE OF GOD? — Man was made in the image of God in the sense that the one and only God made one man, and that just as all things come from one God, all mankind also descends from one only man. It was created in its likeness, because, just as the Son comes from the Father, so woman is formed of man to consecrate the authority of a single principle. But the Son was born of God the Father in an incomprehensible and unintelligible manner; the woman, on the contrary, as we read, was formed outwardly of man (Gen. 2:21) to give birth to other men. The Son of God was born so that all things were created by him. This is the difference. The Son was born God of God the Father, whereas woman was formed of man, for simplicity is one of the attributes of the divine nature, and a simple being can only emerge from a simple nature, a spirit, a God of a God. Man is therefore the image of God, as it is written, God created man, and created him in the image of God (Gen. 1:27). This is why the Apostle says: "Man should not cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God; the woman, to the contrary; must put a veil over his head. (I Cor. 11:7) Why? Because she is not the image of God. It is for the same reason that he says elsewhere: "I do not allow women to teach or take authority over their husbands (1 Tim. 2:12).” [Questions on the Old and New Testaments]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. And it was evening, and in the morning the sixth day was fulfilled. The nature of man will soon offer a vast subject for our reflections. Let us now only remark, to conclude our considerations on the works of the six days, that God has hitherto employed the expression of the commandment "fiat," and that he says in speaking of the man, "Let us make man in our image and our likeness.” This turn is not indifferent: it marks the plurality of the divine persons, Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Unity immediately reappears in the expression: "And God made man in the image of God," in other words, the Father did not do it in the image of the Son, or the Son to the image of the Father; otherwise the collective expression "in our image," would not have been exact; but God did it in the image of God, that is to say, in his own image. Thus the two expressions, "in the image of God" and "in our image," compared with each other, do not designate the intervention of the three Persons as if they formed several divinities: the first makes us hear one God, the second, the three persons.

An essential point which must also be remarked is that after having said, "Let us make man in our image," God immediately adds "And that he commands the fish of the sea and "the birds from heaven, in a word, to all beings deprived of reason. It was to show us that the trait of resemblance between man and God consists in the very privilege which raises him above the animals deprived of reason. Thus this resemblance consists in the gift of reason, of intelligence, no matter the word. This is why the Apostle says: "Renew in the interior of your soul and put on the new man (Ephesians IV, 13,24), who, by the knowledge of the truth, renews himself according to the image of He who created it (Colossians III, 10); And by this he clearly indicates that, if man was made in the image of God, the point of resemblance is not in the form of the body, but in the intangible essence of a spirit which the truth illuminates.

So the Scripture has not used the usual formulas here: "It was done," and "God did; It has suppressed them as it had already done for the primitive light, if it is permissible to understand by this expression the light of the intellect, in communication with the eternal and immutable wisdom of God: it is a point that I have already developed extensively. Then, in fact, the Word was revealed to no primitive creature; the eternal type was not reflected in an intelligence and then realized in a being of a lower order: for it was a question of creating the light or the first intelligence to which the idea of ​​its Creator should be revealed, and this revelation was intended to remove it from its imperfection and direct it to God, the principle of its being and perfection. In subsequent creations Scripture uses the formula: "It was done; Which signifies that the design of the Word was first produced in the light or the primitive intelligence; then she adds: "God did so" this or that work, to teach us the realization in a certain form of the being who had been called to existence in the divine Word. Now, the creation of man is told as that of light. "Let us make man in our image and likeness," says God; then the Scripture immediately adds: "God made man in his own image," without stopping at the formula: "It was done. It is because man is, like the primitive light, an intelligence, and that, for intelligence, to exist, is at bottom only to become aware of the Word Creator.

If Scripture preserved here this double formula, one would imagine that the ideal of man was first reflected in the intelligence of a reasonable creature, then realized in a being who would not have had the privilege of reason: now, man being an intelligent being, needed, in order to be created with all his perfection, to be aware of his Creator. Just as man after his fall is renewed according to the image of the One who created him, by the knowledge of the truth; in the same way he was created by the very knowledge that he had of his Creator, before falling, by the effect of sin, into degradation from which the same light was to draw it by renewing it. As for the beings to whom this revelation was refused, because they were all material or had life without reason, their existence was first revealed to the intelligent creature by the Word which commanded them to happen, and it is to show that the design of the Word was known to this creature, who had the privilege of discovering it first, that it was said: "And it was done; "Then the bodies, the animals deprived of reason, were formed: it is in this sense that we add the words:" God did so "this or that work.

By what mystery has man been created immortal, and together has he received the order to feed himself, like other animals, on herbs bearing seed, fruit trees, vegetables? If sin alone robbed him of his prerogative, he did not need such foods in the state of innocence, hunger was unable to exhaust his organs. It might further be remarked, that the order to grow, to multiply, and to fill the earth, could only be fulfilled by the union of man and woman, and that this union supposed mortal bodies. However, there would be no improbability in saying that immortal bodies could be reproduced by a pure sentiment of pious tenderness, apart from the corruption of concupiscence, without the children having to replace their dead parents or to die themselves; that thus the earth would be filled with immortal men, and that it would have seen the birth of a people of saints and righteous, similar to the one who, according to faith, will appear after the resurrection. This opinion can be sustained, we shall see, soon how; but it would be too bold to pretend that an organism may need food to repair itself without being condemned to perish.

Some people have thought that the inner man may have been created first and received a body only when, according to the Scripture, "God fashioned man from the mud of the earth. In this way, the word to create would have relation to the soul, the word to shape to the body. But we do not think that man was created male and female, and that the soul has no sex. It may well be argued, however, that intelligence, which forms the line of resemblance between God and man, is at bottom reasonable life, with the double function of contemplating the eternal truth and regulating temporal things, and We thus find man in the master faculty, the woman, in obedient matter; this distinction removes the likeness of man to God, or leaves it to subsist only in the faculty of contemplating the truth. The Apostle has represented this relationship between two sexes: "Man," he says, "is the image and glory of God; woman is the glory of man (I Cor. Xi. 7). It is very true that the faculties which constitute the inner man have taken from outside the double form which characterizes man according to the sexes; but the woman is only such by her organization: she renews herself in the interior of her soul, by the knowledge of God, according to the image of her Creator, and sex has nothing to do with this regeneration. Therefore, just as the woman is indistinctly called together with the graceful man to regenerate and reform in her the image of the Creator, and her special organization alone prevents her from being proclaimed, as the man , the image and the glory of God; likewise, in the first days of creation, she had the prerogative of human nature, intelligence, and, as such, had been made in the image of God. It is to mark the relationship between the two sexes that Scripture says: "God made man in the image of God. And lest we live in this act only the creation of the intelligence, formed alone in the image of God, she adds, "He made him male and female," which implies the creation of the body. Scripture also knows how to put an end to the opinion that would make of the first man a monster uniting the two sexes, a hermaphrodite as it sometimes happens: it makes us feel, by employing the singular, that it designates the union of sex, and the birth of the woman from the body of man, as she will soon explain; so she immediately adds to the plural: "And God created them and he blessed them. But we will go deeper into this subject, when we will deal with the creation of man in the aftermath of Genesis. [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. (Gen. 1:26) And God said, let us make man in our image and likeness. In this work of God a certain union and separation of the other living beings must be noted, for it says that man was made on the same day as the beasts and that they are all equally earthly animals; but, nevertheless, by the excellence of reason, according to which man is made in the image and likeness of God, man is separately spoken after, according to custom, the formation of the other animals has ended, saying and seeing God that It was good.

We must also consider here what was not said in the formation of other beings, let us do, as if in this way the Holy Spirit wanted to highlight the excellence of human nature; For what did he say now we do, but who was said in the other formations? All things were made for Him and without Him nothing was done20. But why do we judge it to have been said in a different way, and do another, but it is because there He did it at the Father's command and now together they did it? Or perhaps it was spoken in this way because all the things that the Father does are done through the Son and, consequently, it was said here that we do it so that he himself, for whom the divine books were written, would see in this way himself that all those things that the Son does speaking the Father, also the Father makes them, so that what was said in the other creatures separately (indicating the Father), and was made (pointing to the Son), here is He states that the narration of the work and its work were not made separately, but that both took place at the same time when it was said here: Let us do.

And God said: Let us make man in our image and likeness. Every image is similar to that of who is image, but, nevertheless, not everything that is similar to something, is also an image of it. This is seen in the mirror and in the painting; the represented in them are images, and therefore, similar; but if one of the other is not born, neither can be said to be the image of the other; there is, then, an image when there is expression of something. Why, then, when it was said to the image was it added and likeness, as if there could be an unlike image? Suffice it to say "to image." Or is it that one thing is similar and another similarity, as one thing is chaste and another is chastity, one strong and the other different strength, so that all who are strong are strong and all who are chaste Are they because of chastity, and so all who are similar are by similarity? In the same way that where chastity is, by it all chaste things are chaste, where similarity is, by it all things that are similar are similar; for that reason it is not said with all property that our image is our similarity; nevertheless, it is said with complete accuracy that he is similar to us. Chastity, then, is chaste without the participation of anyone, but by the participation of it are chaste things that are chaste; the same happens with God, in whom is the same Wisdom, which, without the participation of anything or anyone, is Wise, but with whose participation every soul is wise. Wherefore also the likeness of God (the Son) by whom all things were made, is properly called likeness, because it is similar not by participation of some other likeness, but rather it is the first likeness, by whose participation they are alike. all the things that God did for her.

Then perhaps the exposition will be that the addition, likeness, after saying the image, was added to show that the one that was called image is not similar to God, as if it participated in some other similarity, but that she herself is the similarity, of which all the things that are said to be similar participate; as she herself is chastity, for whose participation the souls are chaste; and wisdom, by whose participation the souls are wise; and beauty, by whose participation all things that are beautiful are beautiful. If, then, he only named the similarity it would not indicate that it was by Him begotten; and if he only made mention of the image, he would certainly make known that by him he was begotten, but he would not manifest that in such a way he was similar, that not only was he, but that he was the same likeness. Just as there is nothing more chaste than chastity itself, and nothing is more wise than wisdom itself, and nothing more beautiful than beauty itself, so nothing can be said or thought or exist more similar than the same resemblance; whereby it is understood that in such a way is similarity to the Father his Semejanza, that fills his nature fully and perfectly.

If we consider that all nature, whether it is perceived by the senses or by reason, retains the seal of the unit due to the similarity between the parties, we are allowed to ponder in some way, although it transcends in eminent way human thoughts, to what extent the likeness of God, by which all things were made, has virtue, to imprint the form of creatures. Certainly by the Wisdom of God rational souls are called wise, and this name does not extend beyond beings endowed with reason, because to no animal, much less to trees, or fire, or air, or water, or to the earth, we can call them wise, although as soon as they are, all these things exist by the Wisdom of God. But, nevertheless, we say that the stones are similar to each other the same as the animals, and also the men, and the angels. Well, of each of the things, because they have their parts similar to each other, we say that they have determined their being, and this makes the earth is land and the water is water and would stop being water if any of its parts is not similar to the other parts of it; likewise any part of the air, if it were unlike the rest, could in no way be air; in the same way the particle of fire and light, because it is not unlike the other parts, reaches to be what it is. The same can be seen and understood in each of the stones, or in any of the trees, or in all the animated bodies; for in no way would they exist with the other beings of their kind, nor each of them in itself, if they did not have similar parts to each other. A body is more beautiful, the more similar the parts are to each other. Finally, not only the friendship of some souls with others is based on similar customs, but also in each soul the happy life indicates the similar actions and virtues, without which the permanence can not exist. Of all these things we can say that they are similar, but not that they are the same similarity. Therefore, although the universe is made up of things similar to each other, so that each one by this similarity is itself what it is, and together they constitute the universe, which God created and governs, however, by the most excellent similarity immutable and uncontaminable of Him, who created all things, were made such, that they are beautiful by like parts of each other. But not all have been made in the likeness of Her, but only the rational substance; therefore, all things by It were made, but in His likeness only the soul.

Thus, the rational substance was made without interposition of any nature by the same Likeness of God and like Her; since the human mind to any thing unites if it is not to the Truth itself, which is called Image and Likeness and Wisdom of the Father, which does not perceive it if it is not pure and blissful; then with all rectitude, according to what man has of principal and internal, that is to say, according to the mind, it is taken to make man in our image and likeness, since precisely the whole man must be appreciated for that which exists in man as principal, what separates him from the beasts. The other things that are in man, although they are beautiful in their kind, are common to him with the beasts and that is why in man they should be esteemed little, unless the upright figure of the human body, raised to look at the sky, have also some courage to believe that the same body was made in the likeness of God, so that as the likeness does not depart from the Father, so the body of man is not in opposition to heaven, as are the bodies of the other animals, since inclined to the earth lie on the belly. This property and likeness should not be taken in a rigorous sense, because our body is very different from heaven; but in that Resemblance, which is the Son, nothing can have unlike Him to Whom it is similar. All things that are similar, also by some part are unlike each other, but the same resemblance is by no means unlike itself. The Father, then, is Father, and the Son is nothing other than Son, but when it is said to be the Likeness of the Father, even though it is revealed that there is no dissimilarity between the two, nevertheless, it is not only the Father who is It has similarity.

And God said: Let us make man in our image and likeness. With the above, we have more brings enough; and according to this, these words of the divine Scripture, in which we read to have said God we wounded the man in our image and likeness, express that we can understand that the likeness of God according to which man was made is the same Word of God, that is, the one and only Son; but not that man is the same image and likeness to the Father. E «, then, the man image of God as the Apostle clearly demonstrates saying: man should not cover his head being as it is the image and glory of God. But this image, made in the image of God, is not equal and coeternal to the one of whom it is an image, nor would it become so, although it never would have sinned. The sense that we should rather choose in these words, let us make man in our image and likeness, is that we do not understand them as spoken in the singular, but in the plural, because man was not made in the image of only the Father or of only the Son or only of the Holy Spirit, but in the image of this Trinity; whose Trinity is thus Trinity that is one God, and in such a way is one God who is Trinity. Therefore, the Father does not say by the Son, let us make man in your image or in my image, but plurally he says in our image and likeness; and who will dare to separate the Holy Spirit from this plurality? This plurality is not three gods, but only one God; that is why it is to be understood that later the Scripture introduced the singular saying: And God made man in the image of God, so that it would not be taken as if God the Father made man in the image of God, that is, of his Son, otherwise, how true is what was said, in our image, if man was made only in the image of the Son? Because what God said is true, in our image, that is why it was said thus: God made man in the image of God, as if saying in his image that it is the same Trinity.

Many believe that the similar word is not repeated here, that is, God was not said and made man in the image and "likeness" of God, because at that time he was only made in the image; but the likeness of Him was reserved for after the resurrection of the dead; they say as if there could be an image in which there is no resemblance, if it is not completely similar, no doubt there is no image either. However, in order that it does not seem that we treat this matter solely according to the reason, we will adduce the authority of the apostle James, who, speaking of the language of man, says: with it we will bless God and with it we will curse men, those who they were made to "likeness" of God. [Unfinished Literal Commentary on Genesis]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. Among the many ways in which it can be shown that man is superior to animals by virtue of his reason, this is clear to all: animals can be domesticated and tamed by man, but men not at all by animals. [Different Questions, Question 13]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. (Gen. 1:26) Same question (as verse 20) on these other words: Faciamus hominem secundum imaginem and secundum similitudinem (Let us make man according to the image and according to the likeness), which many Latin manuscripts present thus, ad imaginem and similitudinem (to the image and likeness).

(Gen. 1:28) Implete terram, and dominamini ejus (Fill the earth and rule over it). Many Latin manuscripts present: dominamini ei (rule it). [Locutions]

BASIL OF CAESAREA. Genesis 1:26 And God said Let us make man. Does not the light of theology shine, in these words, as through windows; and does not the second Person show Himself in a mystical way, without yet manifesting Himself until the great day? Where is the Jew who resisted the truth and pretended that God was speaking to Himself? It is He who spoke, it is said, and it is He who made. Let there be light and there was light. But then their words contain a manifest absurdity. Where is the smith, the carpenter, the shoemaker, who, without help and alone before the instruments of his trade, would say to himself; let us make the sword, let us put together the plough, let us make the boot? Does he not perform the work of his craft in silence? Strange folly, to say that any one has seated himself to command himself, to watch over himself, to constrain himself, to hurry himself, with the tones of a master! But the unhappy creatures are not afraid to calumniate the Lord Himself. What will they not say with a tongue so well practised in lying? Here, however, words stop their mouth; And God said let us make man. Tell me; is there then only one Person? It is not written Let man be made, but, Let us make man. The preaching of theology remains enveloped in shadow before the appearance of him who was to be instructed, but, now, the creation of man is expected, that faith unveils herself and the dogma of truth appears in all its light. Let us make man. O enemy of Christ, hear God speaking to His Co-operator, to Him by Whom also He made the worlds, Who upholds all things by the word of His power. But He does not leave the voice of true religion without answer. Thus the Jews, race hostile to truth, when they find themselves pressed, act like beasts enraged against man, who roar at the bars of their cage and show the cruelty and the ferocity of their nature, without being able to assuage their fury. God, they say, addresses Himself to several persons; it is to the angels before Him that He says, Let us make man. Jewish fiction! A fable whose frivolity shows whence it has come. To reject one person, they admit many. To reject the Son, they raise servants to the dignity of counsellors; they make of our fellow slaves the agents in our creation. The perfect man attains the dignity of an angel; but what creature can be like the Creator? Listen to the continuation. In our image. What have you to reply? Is there one image of God and the angels? Father and Son have by absolute necessity the same form, but the form is here understood as becomes the divine, not in bodily shape, but in the proper qualities of Godhead. Hear also, you who belong to the new concision Philippians 3:2 and who, under the appearance of Christianity, strengthen the error of the Jews. To Whom does He say, in our image, to whom if it is not to Him who is the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, Hebrews 1:3 the image of the invisible God? Colossians 1:15 It is then to His living image, to Him Who has said I and my Father are one, John 10:30 He that has seen me has seen the Father, John 14:9 that God says Let us make man in our image. Where is the unlikeness in these Beings who have only one image?

Genesis 1:27 So God created man. It is not They made. Here Scripture avoids the plurality of the Persons. After having enlightened the Jew, it dissipates the error of the Gentiles in putting itself under the shelter of unity, to make you understand that the Son is with the Father, and guarding you from the danger of polytheism. He created him in the image of God. God still shows us His co-operator, because He does not say, in His image, but in the image of God.

If God permits, we will say later in what way man was created in the image of God, and how he shares this resemblance. Today we say but only one word. If there is one image, from whence comes the intolerable blasphemy of pretending that the Son is unlike the Father? What ingratitude! You have yourself received this likeness and you refuse it to your Benefactor! You pretend to keep personally that which is in you a gift of grace, and you do not wish that the Son should keep His natural likeness to Him who begot Him.

But evening, which long ago sent the sun to the west, imposes silence upon me. Here, then, let me be content with what I have said, and put my discourse to bed. I have told you enough up to this point to excite your zeal; with the help of the Holy Spirit I will make for you a deeper investigation into the truths which follow. Retire, then, I beg you, with joy, O Christ-loving congregation, and, instead of sumptuous dishes of various delicacies, adorn and sanctify your tables with the remembrance of my words. May the Anomœan be confounded, the Jew covered with shame, the faithful exultant in the dogmas of truth, and the Lord glorified, the Lord to Whom be glory and power, world without end. Amen. [The Hexameron]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. But to make my word more intelligible, it is useful to begin this conversation by recalling the end of the preceding and completing it. So I explained to you these verses of Genesis: And God said, Let us make man in our image and likeness, and let them rule over the fishes of the sea and the birds of the sky. This matter is so vast and gives me such an abundance of thoughts that it was impossible for me to ignore it. So I stopped at this passage, without touching the one immediately following. This is why it is necessary to read it again, so that you can better understand its development. Now the Scripture adds: And God created man; he created it in the image of God, and he created it male and female. God blessed them, saying, Grow and multiply; fill the earth, and subjugate it; control the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the roofs of the animals, all the earth, and all the creeping reptiles on the earth. (Gen. I, 27, 28.)

These words are short, but they contain a rich treasure, and the divine spirit that spoke through the mouth of Moses, wants to reveal to us great secrets. The Creator, after having said: Let us make man, seems to recollect and take counsel as to show us the dignity of man in the very act of his creation. For man did not exist yet; but already God revealed all the eminence of the empire that he would give him: Therefore, having said, Let us make man in our image and likeness, he adds, speaking in the plural, that they dominate on the fishes of the sea. So see as from the beginning a rich treasure is open to us! The holy prophet, enlightened by a divine light, speaks of a fact not yet existing, as if it were realized. For why here this word in the singular, let us make man, and there this word in the plural, which they dominate? Obviously, there is a secret and a mystery, and this way of speaking indicates in advance the formation of the woman. Thus everything in our holy Scriptures has its reason and its motive, and a word which seems to be random contains a precious instruction.

And do not be astonished, my dear brother, of this language, for all the prophets speak of future events as if they were already accomplished: they see in the spirit what must happen only in the course of centuries, and they tell it as if it were realizing before their eyes. To convince yourself of this, listen to this prophecy of the Savior's passion, a prophecy that so many centuries in advance pronounced the holy King David. They pierced my feet and my hands, and they divided my clothes. (Ps. XXI, 17, 19.) He speaks of a future and distant event, as if already accomplished.

This is how Moses first insinuates, under the veil of enigma and mystery, the formation of the woman, when he says: that they dominate over the fish of the sea. But soon he speaks about it. more clearly, and he adds: and God created man; he created it in the image of God; he created them male and female. And observe (55) here how carefully the sacred writer repeats the same fact twice to better engrave it in the memory of his readers. If this had not been his intention, he would have contented himself with saying: and God created man. But he adds: He created it in his image. Previously he had explained to us the meaning of this word image, and here he repeats it on purpose, and he tells us: and God created it in his image. He also wished to leave no excuse for excuses for those who attack the dogmas of the Church; that is why he explained above the meaning of this word image, which he means of the empire which man should exercise over all animals. But let's continue the story of Genesis. And God created man; he created it in the image of God; he created them male and female. What he had previously insinuated, by saying in the plural: that they dominate, Moses announces it here more clearly, and yet still under the veil of mystery, because he did not speak of the formation of the woman, and he did not indicate where she was drawn from. So he is content to say, and God created them male and female.

The woman has not yet been formed, and already Moses speaks of it as a fait accompli. This is the privilege of the spiritual vision; and the eyes of the body have less force to seize sensible objects than those of the soul to fix persons and facts that do not yet exist. After saying that God created them male and female, Moses records in these terms the common blessing that God gave them. And the Lord, he says, blessed them, saying, Grow and multiply; Fill the earth, and subjugate it, and rule over the fishes of the sea. What an eminent blessing! This order: grow, multiply, and fill the earth had been intimated, it is true, to animals and reptiles; but it has been said that the man and the woman command and dominate. Admire, then, the goodness of the Lord! The woman does not yet exist, and it makes her enter into the participation of the authority of the man, and the privileges of the divine blessing. Dominate, he said to them, on the fishes of the sea, and on the birds of the sky, and on all the animals, and on all the earth, and on all the reptiles that move on the earth.

But who could measure the extent of this power, and appreciate the grandeur of this empire! Hey! do you not see that all creation has been subject to the scepter of man? So you must not have this reasonable animal any small and mediocre idea. For his honors are great, the goodness of the Lord to him is immense, and his benefits as amazing as they are unspeakable. And God said, Behold, I have given you all the plants scattered on the face of the earth, and which bear their seed, and all the fruit-trees, which have their seed in themselves, to serve your food. And it was done so. (Gen. XXIX, 30.) Consider, my dear brothers, the sovereign goodness of the Lord, carefully weigh the words of Scripture, and do not lose a syllable. And God says, lo, I have given you all plants. He continues thus to address the man and the woman, although this one has not yet been formed. Admire, too, the excellence of this kindness which shows itself to be eminently liberal and generous not only to man, and to the woman who did not exist, but also to all animals. Because after having. Saying, I have given you the plants of the earth to serve your food, and the Lord adds: and to all the animals of the earth. Here is another abyss of goodness, since the same God who provides for the needs of the animals who serve our needs, our labors, and our food, does not exclude wild and ferocious animals. [Homilies on Genesis]

TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE. If the number of the Trinity also offends you, as if it were not connected in the simple Unity, I ask you how it is possible for a Being who is merely and absolutely One and Singular, to speak in plural phrase, saying, "Let us make man in our own image, and after our own likeness;" Genesis 1:26 whereas He ought to have said, "Let me make man in my own image, and after my own likeness," as being a unique and singular Being? In the following passage, however, "Behold the man is become as one of us," Genesis 3:22 He is either deceiving or amusing us in speaking plurally, if He is One only and singular. Or was it to the angels that He spoke, as the Jews interpret the passage, because these also acknowledge not the Son? Or was it because He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, that He spoke to Himself in plural terms, making Himself plural on that very account? Nay, it was because He had already His Son close at His side, as a second Person, His own Word, and a third Person also, the Spirit in the Word, that He purposely adopted the plural phrase, "Let us make;" and, "in our image;" and, "become as one of us." For with whom did He make man? and to whom did He make him like? (The answer must be), the Son on the one hand, who was one day to put on human nature; and the Spirit on the other, who was to sanctify man. With these did He then speak, in the Unity of the Trinity, as with His ministers and witnesses. [Against Praxeas 12]

Since then he is the image of the Creator (for He, when looking on Christ His Word, who was to become man, said, "Let us make man in our own image, after our likeness" Genesis 1:26), how can I possibly have another head but Him whose image I am? For if I am the image of the Creator there is no room in me for another head. [Against Maricon 5.7]

He distinguishes among the Persons: "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God created He him." Genesis 1:27 Why say "image of God?" Why not "His own image" merely, if He was only one who was the Maker, and if there was not also One in whose image He made man? But there was One in whose image God was making man, that is to say, Christ's image, who, being one day about to become Man (more surely and more truly so), had already caused the man to be called His image, who was then going to be formed of clay—the image and similitude of the true and perfect Man. [Against Praxeas 12]

And from that time, ever since the blessing which was pronounced upon man's generation, Genesis 1:28 the flesh and the soul have had a simultaneous birth, without any calculable difference in time; so that the two have been even generated together in the womb, as we have shown in our Treatise on the Soul. Contemporaneous in the womb, they are also temporally identical in their birth. The two are no doubt produced by human parents of two substances, but not at two different periods; rather they are so entirely one, that neither is before the other in point of time. [On the Resurrection of the Flesh 45]

1:29-31 And God said, Behold I have given to you every seed-bearing herb sowing seed which is upon all the earth, and every tree which has in itself the fruit of seed that is sown, to you it shall be for food. 30 And to all the wild beasts of the earth, and to all the flying creatures of heaven, and to every reptile creeping on the earth, which has in itself the breath of life, even every green plant for food; and it was so. 31 And God saw all the things that he had made, and, behold, they were very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

ALCUIN OF YORK. (Gen. 1:29-31). WHY WAS MAN CREATED ON THE SIXTH DAY, WHILE HE WAS, ON ACCOUNT OF REASON, MORE NOBLE THAN THE OTHER CREATURES, WHICH WERE MADE BEFORE HIM IN THE SIX DAYS? — Answer. So that the Creator might first prepare the world, like a house, and then introduce the inhabitant, that is, the master of the house. (Bed. in Pent., PL 91, col. 201.) [Question 9]

WHY DID GOD COMPLETE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD WITHIN THE NUMBER SIX? — Answer. Because we read that that number is perfect according to the laws of arithmetic, and God wanted to show that he had made all things perfect and very good. [Questions and Answers on Genesis, 25]

AMBROSIASTER. (Genesis 1:31) IF ALL THE CREATURES THAT GOD MADE WERE GOOD AND VERY GOOD, WHY DID HE SAY TO NOAH, "BRING WITH YOU INTO THE ARK OF PURE AND UNCLEAN ANIMALS, SINCE NO ONE CAN CALL GOOD WHAT IS UNCLEAN?” (GEN. 1:31; 7:2) — These words only make a question because they have several meanings.  If we consider the circumstance in question, they give rise to no difficulty, because things are themselves explained by the rank which they occupy. We call common what is not divided, sometimes that which is unclean. Thus the apostle St. Peter says: "I have never eaten anything common or unclean (Acts 10:14),” and St. Paul: "All that does not come from faith is sin (Rom. 14:23),” and elsewhere, "The law does not come from faith (Gal. 3:12),” and yet it is not a sin. You see, therefore, that the same expression does not always have the same meaning. When, therefore, a thing is qualified as impure, it is necessary to consider in what sense, for it is sometimes given this qualification only by comparison with a more perfect thing, sometimes, on the contrary, they wish to express by impure and truly evil works. No substance is evil in its nature, and things which are naturally called evil are only evil by comparison with more excellent natures. Thus, a dog is said to be impure in comparison with a sheep, lead is unclean if compared with gold, the raven when compared to the peacock. In the same body there are members more honorable than the others, and we know that they are not bad. All things therefore are good in their nature, because all are useful. [Questions on the Old and New Testament]

AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO. It remains for us to consider why the Scripture after saying, "This was done," immediately adds: "And God saw all that he had done: and these works were good.” This passage would have the power left to the human species to make use of plants and fruit trees for its food: the expression "it was done," sums up the sacred narrative from the words "And God says, I gave you the grass bearing his seed. Indeed, if this formula had a wider application, it should be rigorously concluded that, in the space of the sixth day, the human species had increased, multiplied to the point of populating the earth, which did not take place to the testimony of Scripture, only long after. Therefore, this expression only means that God gave man the ability to feed himself, and that man was conscious of the divine word: it has no other meaning. Suppose, in fact, that the man had then executed this order and that he had taken the food which was assigned to him, the Scripture according to the usual form of his narrative, would have added to the expression which reveals that the order is understood, the expression which indicates that the order is accomplished; the formula: "It was so," would have been followed by the words: And they took it, and they ate it. This is the trick she uses to relate the work of the second day: "Let the water under the sky gather in one place, and let the bare earth show itself. It was so: the water gathered in one place."

It must be remarked that it was not said for man as for other creatures: "God saw that he was good. After creating the man, giving him the right to command, to nourish himself, God embraces the whole of his work "God saw all that he had done, and these works were perfectly good. This is a question worth discussing. In fact, it would have been possible to expressly grant man the favor granted to each species of beings, and then to give the whole group the approval marked by these words: "God saw that all he had done and these Works were perfectly good. Shall we say that the work of the Creator having been completed on the sixth day, the divine approval was to bear on the whole of creation and not on the special creation accomplished that day? Why then qualify as good domestic or wild animals and reptiles, which the Scripture enumerates in the passage relating to the sixth day? These animals would have had the privilege of being approved both in particular and in general, and man, created in the image of God, would have pleased only in the whole of nature? Could it not have reached its perfection yet, because it was not yet placed in Paradise? But the Scripture does not think of repairing this omission, when the man is introduced into this stay.

How then to explain this exception? Is it not likely that God, foreseeing the fall of man and his degradation, judged him good, not in himself, but as part of creation, and in a way revealed his decay? The beings who have kept the relative perfection where they were created, and who have not sinned either by choice or by impotence, are perfectly good in themselves as in the whole of creation. Notice here the form of the superlative. The members each have their beauty, and the whole gives them a new beauty. The eye, for instance, is admirable and pleases in itself; Isolated from the body, he would no longer have the beauty that was his place in the whole, thirsty role in the concert of organs. But by losing its first dignity by the effect of sin, the creature does not cease to be subject to order: it is good, if we consider it in all beings. Thus the man before his fault was good in himself; but the Scripture has passed over this goodness to make it felt its future degradation, it has placed it in its place: for, if a being is good in himself, he is better still in the whole of which he is a part; but, although it is good in the whole, it does not follow that it is good in itself. The sacred expressions unite, therefore, by a just temperament, the present truth with the foreknowledge of the future. God is not only the excellent Creator of beings, he is also the just ruler who rules the fate of sinners: consequently a being can be degraded by his faults, without ceasing to be a beauty in the universal order. But let's continue our subject and start a new book.

"So the heavens and the earth were finished with all that beautifies them. And God finished the sixth day the works that he had withered. And he rested on the seventh day from all the works that he had done. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified him, because in that day he rested from all the works that he had done from the beginning.” In spite of all the efforts of the attention, it is difficult and almost impossible to discover by, the thought which is the idea of ​​the sacred writer in this enumeration of the six days and to solve the problem which is: These six days with the seventh have they really elapsed and resemble those which the march of time brings back, since the days follow and never return? Or, far from having passed away, like the days of which they bear the name, in a regular time, are they only an ideal inherent in the very essence of things? Must we see not only in the three days preceding the formation of the luminaries, but also in the three following, the movements operated in the beings, so that the word day designates their forms, the night, the absence of these forms or their defectibility? Take any other expression, if you will, to express the change that takes place in a being, when it loses its qualities by an insensible degradation and that it is stripped of its forms; for every creature is subject to this change, even though it is not actually subject to it, as it happens to the beings who are in heaven: and this is the very condition of the passing beauty of the creatures of an order inferior, succeeding each other in turn from birth to death, a daily phenomenon here below. In the evening would it be only the limit where perfection stops for each being, in the morning, the limit where it begins? For every created being is enclosed between a beginning and an end. This, I say, is a difficult problem to solve. Whatever may be the case of these two explanations, which do not exclude a third, perhaps better, as we will be able to see later, we will examine the perfection of the number 6 according to the properties of the numbers which allow us to count the material objects and to give them a harmonious disposition. This question is not foreign to us.

The number 6 is the first perfect number, in that it is equal to the sum of its aliquots: there are indeed other perfect numbers, but in other respects. The number 6 is therefore perfect in that it is equal to the sum of its aliquots, such, in other words, that their product is equal to the number they compose. This aliquot can always be expressed by a fraction: thus the number 3 is a fraction glu number 6 which it forms half, and of all the numbers greater than 3. For example, it forms the most considerable homeland of the numbers 4, 5, since 4 breaks down into 3 and 1, 5 into 3 and 2. As for the numbers 7, 8, 9 etc., 3 goes into it for the smallest part. Indeed, 7 is decomposed into (182) 3 and 4; 8, in 3 and 5; 9 in 3 and 6. But 3 does not form the homeland aliquot of any of these numbers, with the exception however of 9 of which he is the third and of 6 of which, he is half. Therefore, of all the numbers mentioned, 9 and 6 are the only ones of which 3 is an aliquot, since 9 is 3 multiplied by 3, and 6 to 3 multiplied by 2.

The number 6 is therefore equal, as I told you at the beginning, to the sum of its aliquots. There are other numbers whose parts multiplied among them form a product inferior or superior to the number itself; but there are few that break down into parts whose sum is rigorously equal to them: among these the number 6 is the first. Indeed unity has no parts, because here we mean by unity, the number which has neither half nor any part, but is strictly one, without any rest. Now the number 2 has only one part that forms half of it, I mean, unity. The number 3 has two, one that divides it exactly, it is 1 or the third, the other irrational, or 2: it does not therefore consist of aliquots. The number 4 is divided into two parts, each of which divides it, 1 or quarter, 2 or half; but the sum of these parts is equal to 3 and not to 4, and consequently lower. The number 5 has only one part which divides it, namely the unit or the fifth; 2 is too weak, 3 is too strong and none of these numbers divide it exactly. As for the number 6, it is divided into three aliquots, the sixth or one, the third or two, half or three, and these numbers added together, that is to say, 1, 2, 3, form an amount equal to 6.

The number 7 does not have this property: it is only divisible by 1. The number 8 is divisible by 1, 2, 4: but the sum of its aliquots gives 7; so it's not a perfect number. The number 9 is divisible by 1 and by 3: but these added numbers are only 4, a number much smaller than 9. The number 10 is divisible by 1, 2, 5: the sum of these parts, or 8, therefore remains at below 10. The number 11 is a prime number in the same way as 7, 5, 3, 2: it is only divisible by the unit. The sum of the parts of the number 12 is greater than 12: it goes up to 16: because it is divisible by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, whose sum is 16.

Thus, in order not to pursue this analysis further, the indefinite series of numbers gives us some which are divisible only by unity, such as 3, 5, or whose aliquots summed together make a sum sometimes smaller than the number itself, like 8, 9, sometimes stronger, like 12, 18. The species of these numbers is therefore much more considerable than that of perfect numbers. The first one found after 6, is 28: because it is divisible by 1, 2, 4, 7,14 and the sum of these parts is just 28. The higher one is in the scale of the numbers, the less we find some that have the property of decomposing into aliquots whose sum reproduces them. They are called perfect: those whose added parts form too small a sum, are called imperfect; if the sum is too great, they are called perfect-than-perfect.

God has thus completed the series of his works in a perfect number of days. "God," says the Scripture, "finished all his works on the sixth day. My attention doubles for the number 6, when I come to consider the following divine creations. The aliquots of the number 6 form a series ending in the triangle: they are 1, 2, 3, in other words the sixth, the third, the half no other number separates them and interrupts their sequence. Well ! the light was made in a day; the next two were devoted to forming the immense machine of the universe; one was used to create the upper part or the firmament, the other, the lower part, or the earth and the waters. The upper region is not destined to be peopled with beings who need food to renew their forces, God has placed no nutritive substance on the contrary, it has enriched the lower region, where he had to place the animals, of all the substances proper to repair their organs. The next three days, he created all the visible beings that were to move, according to the laws of their nature, in the space contained in the visible universe, with all the elements; the first day, he placed in the firmament created the first, the luminaries; the next two days he created the animals, first those of the waters, then those of the earth, as the order required. Does this mean that God, if he wanted to, would have been unable to create the world in one day, or to use two days, one to form the bodies, the other to form the spirits, or even to create in one day the sky with the beings that it contains, and in the other, the earth with the beings which are its own? Who would be foolish enough to support such an opinion? Who would dare to say that the will of God meets obstacles? [Literal Commentary on Genesis]

JOHN CHRYSOSTOM OF CONSTANTINOPLE. (Gen. 1:29-31) And God said, Behold, I have given you all the plants scattered on the face of the earth, and which bear their seed, and all the fruit-trees, which have their seed in themselves, to serve your food. And it was done so. (Gen. 29:30) Consider, my dear brothers, the sovereign goodness of the Lord, carefully weigh the words of Scripture, and do not lose a syllable. And God says, lo, I have given you all plants. He continues thus to address the man and the woman, although this one has not yet been formed. Admire, too, the excellence of this kindness which shows itself to be eminently liberal and generous not only to man, and to the woman who did not exist, but also to all animals. Because after having. Saying, I have given you the plants of the earth to serve your food, and the Lord adds: and to all the animals of the earth. Here is another abyss of goodness, since the same God who provides for the needs of the animals who serve our needs, our labors, and our food, does not exclude wild and ferocious animals.

Hey! who would speak worthily of this infinite goodness! Behold, says the Lord, that all plants will serve your food, and that of all the animals of the earth, of all the birds of the sky, and. of all the reptiles that crawl on the earth, and all that is alive and animated. (Gen. I, 30.) These words show us the paternal providence of the Lord with regard to the man whom he has just created. For after having created him, he gives him a sovereign power over all animals, and lest he be frightened at the sight of so great a multitude that he would have to feed, he warns even . thought of this worry, and tells him. that he ordered the land to provide, by its fertility, for its food and that of all animals. So, he says, these plants will serve your food, and that of all the animals of the earth, and the birds of the sky, and the creeping reptiles on the earth, and all that is alive and animated . And it was done so. Now all the commandments of the Lord were immediately executed, and all the creatures were disposed in the rank and order that had been assigned to them. It is (56) why Moses immediately adds: and God saw all his works, and they were very good.

6. We can not praise enough the accuracy of the Holy Scripture. For by this word alone: ​​and God lives all his works, she closes her mouth to all the contradictors. God saw all his works, and they were very good: and in the evening and in the morning was the sixth day. Moses said after every particular creation: and God saw that it was good. But. when the whole of creation was finished, and the work of the sixth day completed by the formation of, the man for whom the universe was made, he observes that God saw all his works, and that they were very -good. This word all his works includes the universality of creatures, and encloses them all in the same eulogy. And observe that here Moses expressly says all the works of God, and not only all things; just as he does not say that they were good, but very good, that is, they were eminently good. But since the Lord, who has drawn all creatures from nothingness, finds them very good, and eminently good, what is the fool who dares to open his mouth to contradict him!

It is he who among the visible creatures has created the light and the darkness, which are opposed to him, the day and the night which is the negation. It was he who commanded the land to produce beneficial plants and poisonous herbs, fruit trees, and barren trees, sweet and familiar animals, and wild and feral animals. It was he who peopled the waters of the smallest fish, no less than whales and sea monsters, which rendered some parts of the earth habitable, and others inhospitable; who spread the plains, and who raised the hills and the mountains; it is he who among the birds has created the domestic species which serve our food, and the wild and filthy species, like the vulture and the kite; and among the terrestrial animals he has produced and those who are useful to us, and those who are harmful to us, the serpents, the vipers and the dragons, the lions and the leopards. Finally it is he who, in the regions of the atmosphere, also gives birth to the rain and the beneficial winds, the snow and the hail. Thus, in going through the entire order of creation, we always find the bad beside the good, and yet we are not allowed to blame any creature, and to say: why such a creature, and for what purpose? This is well done, and it is badly done. For Scripture warns and represses all these criticisms by saying that at the end of the sixth day, God having completed creation, lives all his works, and that they were very good.

What reasoning, I ask you, could counterbalance a testimony of such authority? For it is the Creator himself who states his appreciation and declares that all his works are good and very good. So when you hear someone blame the creation, and rise up against the Holy Scripture, flee him like a fool; or rather, do not run away from him, but take pity on his ignorance, and quote to him the words of our holy books: God saw all his works, and they were very good. Perhaps you will be able to correct the indiscretion of his language. For in human affairs we refer to the opinion of wise and wise men, so that, far from contradicting them, we subscribe to their judgment, and subject them to our own enlightenment. But all the more must we do so with God, Creator of the universe. As soon as he has spoken, all that remains is to repress all criticism and to keep quiet; for it is enough for us to know and to be certain, to adorn his wisdom and goodness, to preside over all his works, and that nothing in creation has been done without reason and without motive. Doubtless our intelligence is too feeble for us to penetrate the utility of every creature, and yet there is not one that is not the work of infinite wisdom and ineffable goodness. [Homilies on Genesis]