|
Objection 1: It would seem the Scripture does not use suitable
words to express the works of the six days. For as light, the
firmament, and other similar works were made by the Word of God, so
were the heaven and the earth. For "all things were made by Him"
(Jn. 1:3). Therefore in the creation of heaven and earth, as
in the other works, mention should have been made of the Word of
God.
Objection 2: Further, the water was created by God, yet its
creation is not mentioned. Therefore the creation of the world is not
sufficiently described.
Objection 3: Further, it is said (Gn. 1:31): "God saw
all the things that He had made, and they were very good." It
ought, then, to have been said of each work, "God saw that it was
good." The omission, therefore, of these words in the work of
creation and in that of the second day, is not fitting.
Objection 4: Further, the Spirit of God is God Himself. But
it does not befit God to move and to occupy place. Therefore the
words, "The Spirit of God moved over the waters," are
unbecoming.
Objection 5: Further, what is already made is not made over again.
Therefore to the words, "God said: Let the firmament be made . .
. and it was so," it is superfluous to add, "God made the
firmament." And the like is to be said of other works.
Objection 6: Further, evening and morning do not sufficiently
divide the day, since the day has many parts. Therefore the words,
"The evening and morning were the second day" or, "the third
day," are not suitable.
Objection 7: Further, "first," not "one," corresponds to
"second" and "third." It should therefore have been said that,
"The evening and the morning were the first day," rather than "one
day."
Reply to Objection 1: According to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. i,
4), the person of the Son is mentioned both in the first creation of
the world, and in its distinction and adornment, but differently in
either place. For distinction and adornment belong to the work by
which the world receives its form. But as the giving form to a work of
art is by means of the form of the art in the mind of the artist, which
may be called his intelligible word, so the giving form to every
creature is by the word of God; and for this reason in the works of
distinction and adornment the Word is mentioned. But in creation the
Son is mentioned as the beginning, by the words, "In the beginning
God created," since by creation is understood the production of
formless matter. But according to those who hold that the elements
were created from the first under their proper forms, another
explanation must be given; and therefore Basil says (Hom. ii, iii
in Hexaem.) that the words, "God said," signify a Divine
command. Such a command, however, could not have been given before
creatures had been produced that could obey it.
Reply to Objection 2: According to Augustine (De Civ. Dei
ix, 33), by the heaven is understood the formless spiritual
nature, and by the earth, the formless matter of all corporeal
things, and thus no creature is omitted. But, according to Basil
(Hom. i in Hexaem.), the heaven and the earth, as the two
extremes, are alone mentioned, the intervening things being left to be
understood, since all these move heavenwards, if light, or
earthwards, if heavy. And others say that under the word,
"earth," Scripture is accustomed to include all the four elements as
(Ps. 148:7,8) after the words, "Praise the Lord from the
earth," is added, "fire, hail, snow, and ice."
Reply to Objection 3: In the account of the creation there is found
something to correspond to the words, "God saw that it was good,"
used in the work of distinction and adornment, and this appears from
the consideration that the Holy Spirit is Love. Now, "there are
two things," says Augustine (Gen. ad lit. i, 8) which came
from God's love of His creatures, their existence and their
permanence. That they might then exist, and exist permanently, "the
Spirit of God," it is said, "moved over the waters"---that is
to say, over that formless matter, signified by water, even as the
love of the artist moves over the materials of his art, that out of
them he may form his work. And the words, "God saw that it was
good," signify that the things that He had made were to endure,
since they express a certain satisfaction taken by God in His works,
as of an artist in his art: not as though He knew the creature
otherwise, or that the creature was pleasing to Him otherwise, than
before He made it. Thus in either work, of creation and of
formation, the Trinity of Persons is implied. In creation the
Person of the Father is indicated by God the Creator, the Person
of the Son by the beginning, in which He created, and the Person of
the Holy Ghost by the Spirit that moved over the waters. But in the
formation, the Person of the Father is indicated by God that
speaks, and the Person of the Son by the Word in which He speaks,
and the Person of the Holy Spirit by the satisfaction with which God
saw that what was made was good. And if the words, "God saw that it
was good," are not said of the work of the second day, this is
because the work of distinguishing the waters was only begun on that
day, but perfected on the third. Hence these words, that are said of
the third day, refer also to the second. Or it may be that Scripture
does not use these words of approval of the second days' work, because
this is concerned with the distinction of things not evident to the
senses of mankind. Or, again, because by the firmament is simply
understood the cloudy region of the air, which is not one of the
permanent parts of the universe, nor of the principal divisions of the
world. The above three reasons are given by Rabbi Moses [Perplex.
ii.], and to these may be added a mystical one derived from numbers
and assigned by some writers, according to whom the work of the second
day is not marked with approval because the second number is an
imperfect number, as receding from the perfection of unity.
Reply to Objection 4: Rabbi Moses (Perplex. ii) understands by
the "Spirit of the Lord," the air or the wind, as Plato also
did, and says that it is so called according to the custom of
Scripture, in which these things are throughout attributed to God.
But according to the holy writers, the Spirit of the Lord signifies
the Holy Ghost, Who is said to "move over the water"---that is
to say, over what Augustine holds to mean formless matter, lest it
should be supposed that God loved of necessity the works He was to
produce, as though He stood in need of them. For love of that kind
is subject to, not superior to, the object of love. Moreover, it is
fittingly implied that the Spirit moved over that which was incomplete
and unfinished, since that movement is not one of place, but of
pre-eminent power, as Augustine says (Gen. ad lit. i, 7). It
is the opinion, however, of Basil (Hom. ii in Hexaem.) that the
Spirit moved over the element of water, "fostering and quickening its
nature and impressing vital power, as the hen broods over her
chickens." For water has especially a life-giving power, since many
animals are generated in water, and the seed of all animals is liquid.
Also the life of the soul is given by the water of baptism, according
to Jn. 3:5: "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy
Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
Reply to Objection 5: According to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. i,
8), these three phrases denote the threefold being of creatures;
first, their being in the Word, denoted by the command "Let . .
. be made"; secondly, their being in the angelic mind, signified by
the words, "It was . . . done"; thirdly, their being in their
proper nature, by the words, "He made." And because the formation
of the angels is recorded on the first day, it was not necessary there
to add, "He made." It may also be said, following other writers,
that the words, "He said," and "Let . . . be made," denote
God's command, and the words, "It was done," the fulfilment of
that command. But as it was necessary, for the sake of those
especially who have asserted that all visible things were made by the
angels, to mention how things were made, it is added, in order to
remove that error, that God Himself made them. Hence, in each
work, after the words, "It was done," some act of God is
expressed by some such words as, "He made," or, "He divided,"
or, "He called."
Reply to Objection 6: According to Augustine (Gen. ad lit.
iv, 22,30), by the "evening" and the "morning" are
understood the evening and the morning knowledge of the angels, which
has been explained (Question 58, Article 6,7). But,
according to Basil (Hom. ii in Hexaem.), the entire period takes
its name, as is customary, from its more important part, the day.
And instance of this is found in the words of Jacob, "The days of
my pilgrimage," where night is not mentioned at all. But the evening
and the morning are mentioned as being the ends of the day, since day
begins with morning and ends with evening, or because evening denotes
the beginning of night, and morning the beginning of day. It seems
fitting, also, that where the first distinction of creatures is
described, divisions of time should be denoted only by what marks their
beginning. And the reason for mentioning the evening first is that as
the evening ends the day, which begins with the light, the termination
of the light at evening precedes the termination of the darkness, which
ends with the morning. But Chrysostom's explanation is that thereby
it is intended to show that the natural day does not end with the
evening, but with the morning (Hom. v in Gen.).
Reply to Objection 7: The words "one day" are used when day is
first instituted, to denote that one day is made up of twenty-four
hours. Hence, by mentioning "one," the measure of a natural day is
fixed. Another reason may be to signify that a day is completed by the
return of the sun to the point from which it commenced its course. And
yet another, because at the completion of a week of seven days, the
first day returns which is one with the eighth day. The three reasons
assigned above are those given by Basil (Hom. ii in Hexaem.).
|
|