|
Objection 1: It would seem that it was not fitting that the
gathering together of the waters should take place on the third day.
For what was made on the first and second days is expressly said to
have been "made" in the words, "God said: Be light made," and
"Let there be a firmament made."But the third day is
contradistinguished from the first and the second days. Therefore the
work of the third day should have been described as a making not as a
gathering together.
Objection 2: Further, the earth hitherto had been completely
covered by the waters, wherefore it was described as "invisible"
[Question 66, Article 1, Objection 1]. There was then no
place on the earth to which the waters could be gathered together.
Objection 3: Further, things which are not in continuous contact
cannot occupy one place. But not all the waters are in continuous
contact, and therefore all were not gathered together into one place.
Objection 4: Further, a gathering together is a mode of local
movement. But the waters flow naturally, and take their course
towards the sea. In their case, therefore, a Divine precept of this
kind was unnecessary.
Objection 5: Further, the earth is given its name at its first
creation by the words, "In the beginning God created heaven and
earth." Therefore the imposition of its name on the third day seems
to be recorded without necessity.
On the contrary, The authority of Scripture suffices.
I answer that, It is necessary to reply differently to this question
according to the different interpretations given by Augustine and other
holy writers. In all these works, according to Augustine (Gen. ad
lit. i, 15; iv, 22,34; De Gen. Contr. Manich. i,
5, 7), there is no order of duration, but only of origin and
nature. He says that the formless spiritual and formless corporeal
natures were created first of all, and that the latter are at first
indicated by the words "earth" and "water." Not that this
formlessness preceded formation, in time, but only in origin; nor yet
that one formation preceded another in duration, but merely in the
order of nature. Agreeably, then, to this order, the formation of
the highest or spiritual nature is recorded in the first place, where
it is said that light was made on the first day. For as the spiritual
nature is higher than the corporeal, so the higher bodies are nobler
than the lower. Hence the formation of the higher bodies is indicated
in the second place, by the words, "Let there be made a
firmament," by which is to be understood the impression of celestial
forms on formless matter, that preceded with priority not of time, but
of origin only. But in the third place the impression of elemental
forms on formless matter is recorded, also with a priority of origin
only. Therefore the words, "Let the waters be gathered together,
and the dry land appear," mean that corporeal matter was impressed
with the substantial form of water, so as to have such movement, and
with the substantial form of earth, so as to have such an appearance.
According, however, to other holy writers [Question 66, Article
1] an order of duration in the works is to be understood, by which is
meant that the formlessness of matter precedes its formation, and one
form another, in order of time. Nevertheless, they do not hold that
the formlessness of matter implies the total absence of form, since
heaven, earth, and water already existed, since these three are named
as already clearly perceptible to the senses; rather they understand by
formlessness the want of due distinction and of perfect beauty, and in
respect of these three Scripture mentions three kinds of formlessness.
Heaven, the highest of them, was without form so long as "darkness"
filled it, because it was the source of light. The formlessness of
water, which holds the middle place, is called the "deep,"
because, as Augustine says (Contr. Faust. xxii, 11), this
word signifies the mass of waters without order. Thirdly, the
formless state of the earth is touched upon when the earth is said to be
"void" or "invisible," because it was covered by the waters.
Thus, then, the formation of the highest body took place on the first
day. And since time results from the movement of the heaven, and is
the numerical measure of the movement of the highest body, from this
formation, resulted the distinction of time, namely, that of night
and day. On the second day the intermediate body, water, was
formed, receiving from the firmament a sort of distinction and order
(so that water be understood as including certain other things, as
explained above (Question 68, Article 3)). On the third day
the earth, the lowest body, received its form by the withdrawal of the
waters, and there resulted the distinction in the lowest body,
namely, of land and sea. Hence Scripture, having clearly expresses
the manner in which it received its form by the equally suitable words,
"Let the dry land appear."
Reply to Objection 1: According to Augustine [Gen. ad lit.
ii, 7,8; iii, 20], Scripture does not say of the work of the
third day, that it was made, as it says of those that precede, in
order to show that higher and spiritual forms, such as the angels and
the heavenly bodies, are perfect and stable in being, whereas inferior
forms are imperfect and mutable. Hence the impression of such forms is
signified by the gathering of the waters, and the appearing of the
land. For "water," to use Augustine's words, "glides and flows
away, the earth abides" (Gen. ad lit. ii, 11). Others,
again, hold that the work of the third day was perfected on that day
only as regards movement from place to place, and that for this reason
Scripture had no reason to speak of it as made.
Reply to Objection 2: This argument is easily solved, according to
Augustine's opinion (De Gen. Contr. Manich. i), because we
need not suppose that the earth was first covered by the waters, and
that these were afterwards gathered together, but that they were
produced in this very gathering together. But according to the other
writers there are three solutions, which Augustine gives (Gen. ad
lit. i, 12). The first supposes that the waters are heaped up to
a greater height at the place where they were gathered together, for it
has been proved in regard to the Red Sea, that the sea is higher than
the land, as Basil remarks (Hom. iv in Hexaem.). The second
explains the water that covered the earth as being rarefied or
nebulous, which was afterwards condensed when the waters were gathered
together. The third suggests the existence of hollows in the earth,
to receive the confluence of waters. Of the above the first seems the
most probable.
Reply to Objection 3: All the waters have the sea as their goal,
into which they flow by channels hidden or apparent, and this may be
the reason why they are said to be gathered together into one place.
Or, "one place" is to be understood not simply, but as contrasted
with the place of the dry land, so that the sense would be, "Let the
waters be gathered together in one place," that is, apart from the
dry land. That the waters occupied more places than one seems to be
implied by the words that follow, "The gathering together of the
waters He called Seas."
Reply to Objection 4: The Divine command gives bodies their
natural movement and by these natural movements they are said to
"fulfill His word." Or we may say that it was according to the
nature of water completely to cover the earth, just as the air
completely surrounds both water and earth; but as a necessary means
towards an end, namely, that plants and animals might be on the
earth, it was necessary for the waters to be withdrawn from a portion
of the earth. Some philosophers attribute this uncovering of the
earth's surface to the action of the sun lifting up the vapors and thus
drying the land. Scripture, however, attributes it to the Divine
power, not only in the Book of Genesis, but also Job 38:10
where in the person of the Lord it is said, "I set My bounds around
the sea," and Jer. 5:22, where it is written: "Will you not
then fear Me, saith the Lord, who have set the sand a bound for the
sea?"
Reply to Objection 5: According to Augustine (De Gen. Contr.
Manich. i), primary matter is meant by the word earth, where first
mentioned, but in the present passage it is to be taken for the element
itself. Again it may be said with Basil (Hom. iv in Hexaem.),
that the earth is mentioned in the first passage in respect of its
nature, but here in respect of its principal property, namely,
dryness. Wherefore it is written: "He called the dry land,
Earth." It may also be said with Rabbi Moses, that the
expression, "He called," denotes throughout an equivocal use of the
name imposed. Thus we find it said at first that "He called the
light Day": for the reason that later on a period of twenty-four
hours is also called day, where it is said that "there was evening and
morning, one day." In like manner it is said that "the
firmament," that is, the air, "He called heaven": for that which
was first created was also called "heaven." And here, again, it is
said that "the dry land," that is, the part from which the waters
had withdrawn, "He called, Earth," as distinct from the sea;
although the name earth is equally applied to that which is covered with
waters or not. So by the expression "He called" we are to
understand throughout that the nature or property He bestowed
corresponded to the name He gave.
|
|