Letters & Polemics (CSEL) 37 part 15/28

But if he should wish to avoid this in such a way as to say that man was made even out of clay on the sixth day, but that this was mentioned afterward by way of recapitulation, let him consider what he says about the woman, since Scripture said: male and female He made them, and He blessed them. And if he answers that she too was made on that day out of the man's bone, let him attend to how he asserts that the birds were made on the sixth day — the birds which were brought to Adam — whereas Scripture intimates that every kind of bird was created out of the waters on the fifth day; likewise that on the sixth day the trees also were made which were planted in paradise, whereas that same Scripture assigned this kind of creature to the third day. Let him also consider the very words, what it means:

And God brought forth further out of the earth every tree beautiful to the sight and good for food — as though those which the earth had brought forth on the third day were not beautiful to the sight and good for food, when they were among those works which God made all exceedingly good; and also what this means: God formed further out of the earth all the beasts of the field and all the birds of heaven — as though all those which had first been produced were not, or rather as though none had been produced before. For it was not said: and God formed further out of the earth the rest of the beasts of the field and the rest of the birds of heaven, as if there were fewer which either the earth on the sixth day or the water on the fifth day had produced; but He said all the beasts, and all the birds.

Let him also consider how God made all things in six days: first the day itself, second the firmament, third the form of the sea and the land and out of the land the grass and the trees, fourth the luminaries and the stars, fifth the animals of the waters, sixth those of the land; and yet afterward it is said: when the day was made, God made heaven and earth and every green thing of the field — whereas, when the day was made, He made nothing but the day itself. And how did He make every green thing of the field before it was upon the earth, and all the hay before it sprang up? For then it was made when it sprang up, not before it sprang up. Who would say such a thing, unless the words of Scripture recalled him to it? Let him also remember that it is written:

He who lives forever created all things together; and let him see how those things can be said to be created together whose creation is separated by intervals of time — not merely of hours, but even of days. Let him also take care to show how both are true, though they may seem contrary: that God rested from all His works on the seventh day, which the book of Genesis says, and that until now He is working, which the Lord says. Let him also regard those things which are said to have been completed, how the same things are said to have been begun.

For by all these testimonies of divine Scripture — whose truthfulness no one doubts except the unbeliever or the impious — we have been led to that opinion, that we should say God from the beginning of the world first created all things together, some with their very natures already established, some with their causes established beforehand; just as the Almighty made not only present but also future things, and rested from those things He had made, so that thereafter, by their administration and governance, He might also create the orders of the ages and of temporal things — because He had both completed them for the sake of the setting of a limit to all kinds, and had begun them for the sake of the propagation of the ages, so that on account of the things completed He might rest, and on account of the things begun He might work until now.

But if these matters can be better understood, I not only do not resist, but even favor it. Now, however, concerning the soul which God breathed into man by blowing upon his face, I affirm nothing except that it is from God in such a way that it is not the substance of God and is incorporeal — that is, that it is not a body but a spirit; not begotten of the substance of God, nor proceeding from the substance of God, but made by God; yet not made in such a way that any nature of a body or of an irrational soul was turned into its nature, and thereby out of nothing; and that it is immortal according to a certain manner of life which it can in no way lose;

but according to a certain mutability, by which it can become either worse or better, it can not without reason also be understood as mortal, since true immortality He alone possesses, of whom it is properly said: who alone has immortality. As for the rest of the things I have said in this book by way of discussion, let them avail the reader for this: that he may either know how those things are to be sought, without the rashness of affirming, which Scripture does not openly declare; or, if this manner of seeking does not please him, I should like to know how he himself has sought them, so that, if he can teach me, I will not refuse, but if he cannot, he may seek together with me from Him from whom we may both learn. And God planted a paradise in Eden toward the east, and placed there the man whom He had formed.

I am not unaware that many have said many things about paradise; yet there are three, as it were, general opinions on this matter. One is of those who wish paradise to be understood only corporeally; another of those who wish it only spiritually; the third of those who take paradise in both ways, in some respects corporeally, in others spiritually. To speak briefly, then, I confess that the third opinion pleases me.

According to this I have now undertaken to speak about paradise, insofar as the Lord shall deign to grant, so that the man made out of clay — which is certainly the human body — may be understood as placed in a corporeal paradise; so that, just as Adam himself, although he signifies something else in that respect in which the Apostle said he was a figure of the one to come, is yet taken as expressed in his own proper nature — a man who lived a certain number of years and, having propagated numerous offspring, died, as other men also die, though not born of parents like the rest, but, as was fitting at the first, made out of the earth — so also paradise, in which when God had placed him, may be understood as nothing other than a certain place, namely of the earth, where the earthly man might dwell.

For the narrative in these books is not in a manner of speech about figurative things, as in the Song of Songs, but altogether about things done, as in the books of Kings and others of this sort. But because there the things spoken of are those which the most familiar experience of human life possesses, they are received without difficulty — indeed most readily — first according to the letter, so that thereupon it may be dug out from them what the very deeds done also signified concerning future things. Here, however, because the things spoken of are those which do not present themselves to those who observe the customary course of nature, certain people are unwilling to have them understood as spoken properly, but figuratively, and they wish history — that is, the narration of things properly done — to begin from that point where Adam and Eve, sent away from paradise, came together and begot offspring.

As though, forsooth, it were customary for us that they lived so many years, or that Enoch was translated, or that a woman both aged and barren gave birth, and other things of this kind. But they say: the narrative of miraculous deeds is one thing, that of created natures another; for there those very unusual events show that there are, as it were, some natural modes of things, others of miracles — which are called mighty works — whereas here the very institution of natures is intimated. To these it is replied: but they are unusual for this very reason, because they are first. For what is so without example and without an equal deed in the constitution of worldly things as the world itself? Surely one must not on that account refuse to believe that God made the world, because He now no longer makes worlds; or that He did not make the sun, because He now no longer makes suns?

And this indeed ought to have been the reply to those who were disturbed, not about paradise, but about man himself. But now, since they believe that man himself was made by God in such a way as no other was made, why are they unwilling to believe that paradise was made in such a way as they now see forests come to be? For I speak to those who follow the authority of these Scriptures; for certain of them wish paradise to be understood not properly but figuratively. As for those who are altogether opposed to these Scriptures, we have dealt with them elsewhere and in another way — though even here, in this our very work, let us, as far as we are able, so defend it according to the letter that those who, moved not reasonably but on account of an obstinate or dull mind, refuse to believe these things, may yet find no reason by which they might prove them false.

But as for these fellow-believers of ours, who have faith in these divine books and yet are unwilling to have paradise understood according to the property of the letter — namely, as a most delightful place, shaded by fruitful groves, and both large and made fertile by a great spring — since they see that no human labor causes so many and so great green thickets to grow wild by the hidden work of God, I marvel how they can believe that man himself was made in a way they have never seen. Or if he too is to be understood figuratively, who begot Cain and Abel and Seth? Were they too only figuratively real, and not also men born of men? Let them therefore attend closely to where this presumption tends, and let them try, together with us, to receive all the things first narrated as done in an expression of their proper meaning.

For who would not thereafter favor those who understand what these things also admonish by a figurative signification — whether of those spiritual natures or affections themselves, or of things even to come? Certainly, if in no way could those things which are here named corporeally be also taken corporeally with the truth of faith preserved, what else would remain but that we should rather understand them as spoken figuratively, than impiously find fault with Holy Scripture?

But furthermore, if these things, understood also corporeally, not only do not hinder but even more solidly confirm the narrative of the divine word, then there will be no one, I think, so unfaithfully obstinate as to prefer, when he has seen them expounded properly according to the rule of faith, to remain in his former opinion, if perchance they had seemed to him capable of being taken only figuratively. For I too, against the Manichaeans — who err with regard to these writings of the Old Testament, not by receiving them otherwise than they ought, but by not receiving them at all and by blaspheming them with detestation — wrote two books at the recent time of my conversion, wishing quickly either to refute their ravings or to rouse men's attention to seeking in the writings which they hate the Christian and evangelical faith.

And because at that time it did not occur to me how everything could be taken properly, and it rather seemed that it could not, or scarcely and with difficulty could — lest I be delayed — I explained, with as much brevity and clarity as I could, what those things which I could not find according to the letter might signify figuratively; lest men, deterred either by much reading or by the obscurity of the disputation, should not trouble to take them in hand. Yet mindful of what I chiefly wished but could not achieve — that all things should be understood first not figuratively but properly — and not altogether despairing that they could be so understood, I put this very point in the first part of the second book, thus:

Assuredly, I say, whoever wishes to take everything that has been said according to the letter — that is, to understand it no otherwise than the letter sounds — and can avoid blasphemies and proclaim all things agreeable to the Catholic faith, not only is he not to be envied, but he is to be held an outstanding and highly praiseworthy interpreter.

But if no way out is given whereby the things that are written may be understood piously and worthily of God, unless we believe them set forth figuratively and in enigmas, then, having apostolic authority — by which so many enigmas of the books of the Old Testament are unravelled — let us keep to the method we intend, with the help of Him who exhorts us to ask, to seek, and to knock, so that we may explain all these figures of things according to the Catholic faith, whether they pertain to history or to prophecy, not prejudging a better and more diligent treatment, whether by ourselves or by others to whom the Lord deigns to reveal it. This I said then.

But now, because the Lord has willed that, by observing and considering these things more diligently, I should reckon — not in vain, as I think — that it can be shown even by me that these things were written according to a proper and not an allegorical manner of speech, let us, just as we wished to show above, so also examine what follows concerning paradise. God therefore planted a paradise in delights — for this is what Eden means — toward the east, and placed there the man whom He had formed. For thus it is written, because thus it was done. Then He recapitulates, so as to show, concerning this very thing which He set forth briefly, how it was done — that is, how God planted paradise and there established the man whom He had formed. For thus it follows:

And God brought forth further out of the earth every tree beautiful to the sight and good for food. He did not say: and God brought forth out of the earth another tree or the rest of the trees, but: He brought forth, he says, further out of the earth every tree beautiful to the sight and good for food. Already then, therefore, the earth had produced every tree both beautiful to the sight and good for food — that is, on the third day; for on the sixth day He had said: behold, I have given you every seed-bearing herbage sowing seed, which is over all the earth, and every fruit-bearing tree which has in itself the fruit of sowable seed, which shall be for you for food. Did He then give them one thing at that time, and now wish to give another? I think not.

But since these trees established in paradise are of those kinds which the earth had already produced on the third day, He brought them forth further in their own time, because at that former time — when it is written that the earth produced them — it had been done in the earth causally; that is, because then the earth had latently received the power of producing them, by which power it comes about that even now the earth begets such things openly and in their own time. Therefore the words of God saying on the sixth day: behold, I have given you every seed-bearing herbage sowing seed, which is over all the earth, and the rest, are words uttered not with a sounding or temporal voice, but such as the power of creating is in His word.

but it could not be told to men what God said without temporal sounds, except through temporal sounds. For it was to come to pass that man, now formed out of clay and animated by His breath, and whatever of the human race should have arisen from him, would use for food those things which were to spring up over the earth out of that power of generating which the earth had already received. Founding the causal reasons of this future thing in the creature, He spoke — as though it had already come to be — by an inner and inmost truth, which neither eye has seen nor ear has heard, but His Spirit assuredly revealed to the writer. That plainly which follows:

and the tree of life in the midst of paradise, and the tree of the knowledge of discerning good and evil — this is to be considered more diligently, lest it force us into allegory, so that these were not trees, but signified something else by the name of tree. For it was said of wisdom: it is a tree of life to all who embrace it. Yet, although Jerusalem is eternal in the heavens, a city was founded also on earth by which that one was signified; and although Sarah and Hagar signified the two testaments, they were nevertheless also two certain women; and although Christ waters us with a spiritual stream through the passion of the wood, there was nevertheless also a rock which, struck by wood, poured out water for the thirsting people, of which it was said: and the rock was Christ.

They signified something other than all those things were, yet nevertheless they themselves also existed corporeally. And when they were mentioned by the narrator, that was not a figurative manner of speech, but the express narration of those things whose foreshadowing was figurative. There was therefore a tree of life just as the rock was Christ; nor without mysteries of spiritual things corporeally presented did God will man to live in paradise. There was therefore for him nourishment in the other trees, but in that one a sacrament — signifying what, if not wisdom, of which it was thus said: it is a tree of life to those who embrace it, just as it was said of Christ: He is a rock flowing for those who thirst for Him? For rightly is that called by the name whereby it went before to signify Him.

He Himself is the lamb which is sacrificed at the Passover; yet that too was figured not only by being spoken of, but also by being done. For that lamb was indeed a lamb; plainly it was a lamb, and it was slain and eaten. And yet by that true deed something else too was figured — not like that fatted calf which was slain for a feast when the younger son returned. For there the narration itself is of figures, not of things done with a figurative signification. For it was not the Evangelist who narrated this, but the Lord Himself; the Evangelist, however, narrated that the Lord had narrated this. Accordingly, then, what the Evangelist narrated also happened — namely, that the Lord spoke such things;

but the Lord's narration was a parable, of which it is never required that the things brought forth in speech should be shown to have been done even to the letter. Christ is both the stone anointed by Jacob and the stone rejected by the builders, which has become the head of the corner; but the former was also done among things actually done, whereas the latter was only foretold in figures. For the former the narrator of past events wrote, the latter only the foreteller of things to come. So also wisdom, that same Christ, is the tree of life in the spiritual paradise, into which He sent the thief from the cross;

but that which signified it was also created — the tree of life even in the corporeal paradise, because this that Scripture said, which, narrating things done in their own times, narrated both that man was made corporeally and that, living in a body, he was established there. But if anyone thinks that souls, when they have departed from the body, are contained in corporeally visible places, though they are without a body, let him assert his own opinion; there will be no lack of those who so favor it as to contend that that rich man also, thirsting, was in a corporeal place, and who do not hesitate to declare that the soul itself is altogether corporeal on account of the parched tongue and the drop of water desired from Lazarus's finger — with whom I contend, on so great a question, with no rashness.

For it is better to doubt about hidden things than to quarrel about uncertain ones. That the rich man is to be understood as being in the burning of punishments, and that poor man in the refreshment of joys, I do not doubt. But how that flame of hell, that bosom of Abraham, that tongue of the rich man, that finger of the poor man, that thirst of torment, that drop of refreshment are to be understood, is scarcely perhaps found by those who gently seek, and never by those who contentiously wrangle. Certainly a quick answer must be given, lest this deep question, needing much discourse, delay us.

If souls are contained in corporeal places even when they have gone out of their bodies, that thief could have been brought into that paradise where the body of the first man had been, so that, in a more fitting passage of the Scriptures, if any necessity should demand it, we might in some way bring forth what we either ask or judge concerning this matter also. But now — that wisdom is not a body and therefore not a tree either, I neither doubt nor think it is doubted by anyone;

but that wisdom could have been signified, through a tree — that is, through a corporeal creature, as through a kind of sacrament — in the corporeal paradise, he does not think this to be believed who either does not see so many corporeal sacraments of spiritual things in the Scriptures, or contends that the first man ought not to have lived with some sacrament of this kind, though the Apostle says even this — which he said of the woman, whom it is agreed was made for him from his side: for this cause a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife, and the two shall be in one flesh — that this is a great sacrament in Christ and in the Church. But it is strange, and scarcely to be borne, how men are willing that paradise was spoken of figuratively, and yet unwilling that it was also made figuratively.

But if they concede — as concerning Hagar and Sarah, as concerning Ishmael and Isaac — that these things too were both done and yet also figurative, I do not see why they should not likewise admit that the tree of life was both truly some tree and yet figured wisdom. This too I add: that although it furnished corporeal food, that tree nevertheless furnished such food whereby the body of man might be strengthened with stable health — not as from other food, but by some hidden inspiration of healthfulness. For assuredly, though ordinary, the bread had nevertheless something more, of which by a single small loaf God delivered a man from the want of hunger over a span of forty days.

Or shall we perhaps doubt to believe that God furnished to man, through the food of some tree, for the sake of a certain higher signification, that his body should not be changed for the worse either by infirmity or by age, nor slip even into its setting — He who furnished to human food itself so marvelous a state that in earthen little vessels He renewed the failing flour and oil, and it did not fail? Now here let someone from the class of contentious men arise and say that God ought to have done such miracles in our earth, but ought not to have done them in paradise — as though, forsooth, He did not do a greater miracle there, either in making man out of dust or woman out of the man's side, than that here He raised the dead. It follows that we should look at the tree of the knowledge of discerning good and evil.

Assuredly this tree too was visible and corporeal, like the other trees. That it was a tree, therefore, is not to be doubted; but why it received this name is to be inquired. To me, however, considering it again and again, it cannot be told how greatly that opinion pleases me: that that tree was not harmful in its food — for He who had made all things exceedingly good would not have established anything evil in paradise — but that the evil for man was the transgression of the precept.

But it was fitting that man, placed under the Lord God, should be forbidden from something, so that for him the very virtue of meriting his Lord might be obedience — which I can most truly say is the sole virtue for every rational creature acting under God's power; and that the first and greatest vice of pride, unto ruin, is to wish to use one's own power, the name of which vice is disobedience. There would therefore be nothing whence man might think and perceive that he had a Lord, unless something were commanded him.

That tree, therefore, was not evil, but was called the tree of the knowledge of discerning good and evil, because, if after the prohibition man should eat of it, in it there would be the future transgression of the precept, in which man would learn, through the experience of punishment, what difference there is between the good of obedience and the evil of disobedience. Accordingly, this too was said not figuratively, but is to be taken as truly some tree, upon which a name was imposed not from the fruit or apple that would be born from it, but from the very thing which was going to follow when it was touched contrary to the prohibition. And a river went out of Eden, which watered paradise, and from there it was divided into four parts. Of these, the name of one is Phison — this is the one that encircles the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;

and the gold of that land is good, and there is carbuncle and the green stone. And the name of the second river is Geon — this is the one that encircles the whole land of Ethiopia. And the third river is the Tigris — this is the one that flows toward the Assyrians. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. Concerning these rivers, why should I take further pains to affirm that they are true rivers and not spoken figuratively, as though they did not exist, as if the names themselves signified merely something, when they are most well known to the regions through which they flow and are famed among almost all nations? Nay rather, since it is established from these that they most certainly exist — for antiquity has changed the names of two of them, as the river is called Tiber which formerly was called Albula; for Geon is that very one which is now called the Nile;

and Phison was that one which they now call the Ganges; while the other two, the Tigris and the Euphrates, have retained even their ancient names — we ought to be admonished to receive the rest also, first of all, according to the property of the letter, and not to suppose a figurative manner of speech in them, but that the very things which are thus narrated both exist and also signify something; not because a parable of speech could not take up something from a thing which it was also agreed did not exist properly. As the Lord speaks of that man who was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho and fell among robbers. Who would not perceive, and plainly see, that it is a parable and that the whole of that speech is figurative? Yet the two cities which are there named are even today pointed out in their own places.

But we would understand these four rivers in this way only if some necessity compelled us to take the rest of what is told about paradise not literally but figuratively. As it is, however, since no reason forbids us from the outset to understand the very things literally, why do we not rather simply follow the authority of Scripture in its narration of the deeds done, first understanding things that were truly done, and only then investigating whatever else they may signify? Or shall we be moved by what is said about these rivers—that the sources of some are known, but those of others are altogether unknown, and that therefore it cannot be taken literally that they are divided from the single river of paradise?

Rather we should believe that, since the very place of paradise is most remote from the knowledge of men, from there the four branches of waters are divided, just as the most trustworthy Scripture testifies; but that those rivers whose sources are said to be known ran somewhere beneath the earth, and after the courses of vast regions burst forth in other places, where they are held to be known as if in their own sources. For who does not know that some waters are wont to do this? But this is known where they do not run long beneath the earth. Therefore a river went out from Eden, that is, from the place of delights, and watered paradise, that is, all the beautiful and fruitful trees which shaded the whole land of that region.

And the Lord God took the man whom he had made and placed him in paradise, to work it and to keep it. And the Lord God commanded Adam, saying: Of every tree that is in paradise you shall eat for food; but of the tree of knowing good and evil you shall not eat of it; and on whatever day you eat of it, you shall die the death. Since above he had briefly said that God planted paradise and set there the man whom he had formed, he now recapitulates in order to relate how paradise was established. Now therefore, by way of recapitulation, he also recalls how God placed the man there whom he had made. Let us then see what is meant by what is said: to work it and to keep it. What was he to work, and what was he to keep?