Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume VIII/The Hexaemeron/Homily 1

by Philip Schaff et al.

Homily I.

In the Beginning God made the Heaven and the Earth.

1.  It is right that any one beginning to narrate the formation of the world should begin with the good order which reigns in visible things.  I am about to speak of the creation of heaven and earth, which was not spontaneous, as some have imagined, but drew its origin from God.  What ear is worthy to hear such a tale?  How earnestly the soul should prepare itself to receive such high lessons!  How pure it should be from carnal affections, how unclouded by worldly disquietudes, how active and ardent in its researches, how eager to find in its surroundings an idea of God which may be worthy of Him!

But before weighing the justice of these remarks, before examining all the sense contained in these few words, let us see who addresses them to us.  Because, if the weakness of our intelligence does not allow us to penetrate the depth of the thoughts of the writer, yet we shall be involuntarily drawn to give faith to his words by the force of his authority.  Now it is Moses who has composed this history; Moses, who, when still at the breast, is described as exceeding fair;^[1] Moses, whom the daughter of Pharaoh adopted; who received from her a royal education, and who had for his teachers the wise men of Egypt;^[2] Moses, who disdained the pomp of royalty, and, to share the humble condition of his compatriots, preferred to be persecuted with the people of God rather than to enjoy the fleeting delights of sin; Moses, who received from nature such a love of justice that, even before the leadership of the people of God was committed to him, he was impelled, by a natural horror of evil, to pursue malefactors even to the point of punishing them by death; Moses, who, banished by those whose benefactor he had been, hastened to escape from the tumults of Egypt and took refuge in Ethiopia, living there far from former pursuits, and passing forty years in the contemplation of nature; Moses, finally, who, at the age of eighty, saw God, as far as it is possible for man to see Him; or rather as it had not previously been granted to man to see Him, according to the testimony of God Himself, “If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.  My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house, with him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently and not in dark speeches.”^[3]  It is this man, whom God judged worthy to behold Him, face to face, like the angels, who imparts to us what he has learnt from God.  Let us listen then to these words of truth written without the help of the “enticing words of man’s wisdom”^[4] by the dictation of the Holy Spirit; words destined to produce not the applause of those who hear them, but the salvation of those who are instructed by them.

2.  “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”^[5]  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^[6] to the elements of the world.  Others imagined that atoms,^[7] 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.^[8]  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.”

3.  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.^[9]  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 passeth away”^[10] and “Heaven and earth shall pass away.”^[11]  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.^[12]  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.”^[13]  Some have affirmed that heaven co-exists with God from all eternity;^[14] others that it is God Himself without beginning or end, and the cause of the particular arrangement of all things.^[15]

4.  One day, doubtless, their terrible condemnation will be the greater for all this worldly wisdom, since, seeing so clearly into vain sciences, they have wilfully 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.”

5.  It appears, indeed, that even before this world an order of things^[16] 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^[17] 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”^[18] 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.^[19]  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.”^[20]  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,”^[21] 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.^[22]  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.

6.  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.^[23]  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.”^[24]  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.^[25]  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.^[26]  But enough concerning the beginning, if only to put a few points out of many.

7.  Among arts, some have in view production, some practice, others theory.^[27]  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.^[28]  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.^[29]  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.^[30]  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.^[31]

“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,^[32] 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^[33] 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.

8.  “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,”^[34] 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 stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in.”^[35]  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.^[36]

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?^[37]  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?^[38]  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.

9.  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.^[39]  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?”^[40]  If ever you hear in the Psalms, “I bear up the pillars of it;”^[41] see in these pillars the power which sustains it.  Because what means this other passage, “He hath founded it upon the sea,”^[42] 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.”^[43]  It is a doctrine as infallible for our own information as profitable for our hearers.

10.  There are inquirers into nature^[44] 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.^[45]  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.

11.  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.^[46]  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.^[47]  But yet another fine speaker arises and disperses and destroys this theory to give predominance to an idea of his own invention.

Do not let us undertake to follow them for fear of falling into like frivolities; let them refute each other, and, without disquieting ourselves about essence, let us say with Moses “God created the heavens and the earth.”  Let us glorify the supreme Artificer for all that was wisely and skillfully made; by the beauty of visible things let us raise ourselves to Him who is above all beauty; by the grandeur of bodies, sensible and limited in their nature, let us conceive of the infinite Being whose immensity and omnipotence surpass all the efforts of the imagination.  Because, although we ignore the nature of created things, the objects which on all sides attract our notice are so marvellous, that the most penetrating mind cannot attain to the knowledge of the least of the phenomena of the world, either to give a suitable explanation of it or to render due praise to the Creator, to Whom belong all glory, all honour and all power world without end.  Amen.

Footnotes

1. Acts vii. 20, A.V.
2. cf. Joseph. ii. x. 2.  So Justin M., Cohort. ad gent., Philio, Vit. Moys, and Clem. Al., Strom. i.  Vide Fialon, Et. Hist. 302.
3. Num. xii. 6, 7, 8.
4. 1 Cor. ii. 4.
5. Gen. i. 1.
6. cf. note on Letter viii. on the στοιχεῖα or elements which the Ionian philosophers made the ἀρχαι of the universe.  Vide Plato, Legg. x. § 4 and Arist., Met. i. 3.
7. Posidonius the Stoic names Moschus, or Mochus of Sidon, as the originator of the atomic theory “before the Trojan period.”  Vide Strabo, xvi. 757.  But the most famous Atomists, Leucippus and Democritus of Abdera, in the 5th c. b.c., arose in opposition to the Eleatic school, and were followed in the 3d by Epicurus.  Vide Diog. Laert. ix. § 30, sq. and Cicero, De Nat. Deor. i. 24–26.  Ista enim flagitia Democriti, sive etiam ante Leucippi, esse corpuscula quædam lævia, alia aspera, rotunda alia, partim autem angulata, curvata quædam, et quasi adunca; ex his effectum esse cœlum atque terram, nulla cogente natura, sed concursu quodam fortuito.  Atqui, si haec Democritea non audisset, quid audierat? quid est in physicis Epicuri non a Democrito?  Nam, etsi quædam commodavit, ut, quod paulo ante de inclinatione atomorum dixi:  tamen pleraque dixit eadem; atomos, inane, imagines, infinitatem locorum, innumerabilitatemque mundorum eorum ortus, interitus, omnia fere, quibus naturæ ratio continetur.
8. cf. the Fortuna gubernans of Lucretius (v. 108).
9. Fialon refers to Aristotle (De Cœlo. i. 5) on the non-infinitude of the circle.  The conclusion is ῞Οτι μὲν οὖν τὸ κύκλῳ κινούμενον οὐκ ἔστιν ἀτελεύτητον οὐδ᾽ ἄπειρον, ἀλλ᾽ ἔχει τέλος, φανερόν
10. 1 Cor. vii. 31.
11. Matt. xxiv. 35.
12. cf. Arist. De Cœlo. i. 12, 10.  Δῆλον δ᾽ ὅτι καὶ εἰ γενητὸν ἢ φθαρτόν, οὐκ ἀ& 188·διον.
13. Rom. i. 21, 22.
14. Arist., De Cœlo. ii. 1. 1. calls it εἷς καὶ ἀ& 188·διος.  cf. the end of the Timæus.
15. cf. Cic., De nat. Deo. i. 14, “Cleanthes” (of Assos, c. 264 b.c., a disciple of Zeno) “autem tum ipsum mundum Deum dicit esse; tum totius naturæ menti atque animo tribuit hoc nomen; tum ultimum, et altissimum, atque undique circumfusum, et extremum, omnia cingentem atque complexum, ardorem, qui æther nominetur, certissimum Deum judicat,” and id. 15, “Chrysippus” (of Tarsus, † c. 212 b.c.)…“ipsum mundum Deum dicit esse.”  Yet the Hymn of Cleanthes (apud Stobœum) begins: Κύδιστ᾽ ἀθανάτων, πολυώνομε, παγκρατὲς αἰεὶ, Ζεὺς, φύσεως ἀρχηγὲ, νόμον μέτα πάντα κυβερνῶν. cf. Orig., v. Celsum V. σαφῶς δὴ τὸν ὅλον κόσμον (῞Ελληνες) λέγουσιν εἶναι θεόν, Στωικοὶ μὲν τὸν πρῶτον. οἰ δ᾽ ἀπὸ Πλάτωνος τὸν δεύτερον, τινὲς δ᾽ αὐτῶν τὸν τρίτον; and Athan., De Incarn. § 2.
16. cf. Origen, De Principiis, ii. 1, 3.
17. διακόσμησις.  cf. Arist., Met. i. 5, 2.
18. Col. i. 16.
19. cf. Plato, Timæus, § 14, χρόνος δ᾽ οὖν μετ᾽ οὐρανοῦ γέγονεν ἵνα ἅμα γεννηθέντες ἅμα καὶ λυθῶσιν, ἄν ποτε λύσις τις αὐτῶν γἰγνηται καὶ κατὰ τὸ παρὰδειγμα τῆς αἰωνἰας φύσεως ἵν, ὡς ὁμοιότατος αὐτῷ κατὰ δύναμιν ᾖ   Fialon (p. 311) quotes Cousin’s translation at greater length, and refers also to Plotinus, Enn. II. vii. 10–12.  The parallel transistoriness of time and things has become the commonplace of poets.  “Immortalia ne speres monet annus et almun Quæ rapit hora diem.”  Hor.,Carm. iv. 7.
20. Prov. xvi. 5, LXX.
21. Prov. ix. 10.
22. cf. Arist., Met. iv. 1.  ῎Αρχη ἡ μὲν λέγεται ὅθεν ἄν τι τοῦ πράγματος κινηθείη πρῶτον· οἱον τοῦ μήκους, καὶ ὁδοῦ…ἡ δὲ ὅθεν ἂν κάλλιστα ἕκαστον γένοιτο· οἷον καὶ μαθήσεως, οὐκ ἀπὸ τοῦ πρώτου καὶ τῆς τοῦ πράγματος ἀρχῆς ἐνίοτε ἀρκτέον, ἀλλ᾽ ὅθεν ρᾷστ᾽ ἂν μάθοι, ἡ δὲ, ὅθεν πρῶτον γινεται ἐνυπάρχοντος· οἷον ὡς πλοίου τρόπις, καὶ οἰκίας θεμέλιος.
23. In the Homily of Origen extant in the Latin of Rufinus (Migne Pat. Gr. xii. 146) ἀρχή is used of the Divine Word, “In principio.  Quod est omnium principium nisi Dominus noster Christus Iesus?…In hoc ergo principio, hoc est in Verbo suo, Deus cœlum et terram fecit.”  An interpretation of John viii. 25, τὴν ἀρχὴν ὅτι καὶ λαλῶ ὑμιν widely prevalent at all events in the Latin church, was “Initium quod et loquor vobis;” “I am the Beginning, that which I am even saying to you.”  See note to Sp. Comment. on John viii. ad fin.
24. Rom. i. 20.
25. On the inconceivability either of an absolute minimum of space or of its infinite divisibility, cf. Sir Wm. Hamilton, Met. ii. 371.
26. Aquila’s version in the Hexapla of Origen for ἐν ἀρχᾐ has ἐν κεφαλαί& 251· ἔκτισεν.
27. ἡ ἅπασα διάνοια ἢ πρακτικὴ ἢ ποιητικὴ ἢ θεωρητική.  Arist., Met. v. i.
28. The one and the perfect continually overflows, and from it Being, Reason, and Life are perpetually derived, without deducting anything from its substance, inasmuch as it is simple in its nature, and not, like matter, compound.  (Enn. iv. ix. 9.)  This derivation of all things from unity does not resemble creation, which has reference to time, but takes place purely in conformity with the principles of causality and order, without volition, because to will is to change.  (Enn. iv. 5, i. 6)”  Tennemann on Plotinus, Hist. Phil. § 207.
29. The Ben. note is “neque idipsum in causa fuit cur esset, hoc est, non res cæca, non res coacta, non res invite et præter voluntatem agens in causa fuit cur mundus exstiterit.  Hoc igitur dicit Basilius Deum aliter agere atque corpora opaca aut lucida.  Nam corpus producit umbram vi atque necessitate, nec liberius agit corpus lucidum:  Deus vero omnia nutu conficit et voluntate.  Illud ἐποιησεν, etc., alio modo intellexit et interpretatus est Eustathius.  Illius subjicimus verba:  non causam præstitit ut esset solum, sed fecit ut bonus utilem.”
30. cf. Plat., Tim. § 10.  ᾽Αγαθὸς ἦν, ἀγαθῷ δὲ ουδεὶς περὶ οὐδενὸς οὐδέποτε ἐγγίγνεται φθόνος, τούτου δ᾽ ἐκτὸς ὢν πάντα ὅτι μάλιστα γενέσθαι ἐβουλήθη παραπλήσια ἑαυτῷ.
31. cf. Huxley, Lay Sermons, xii. p. 286, on the “delicate finger” of the “hidden artist” in the changes in an egg.
32. cf. note on Letter viii.
33. φαμὲν δὲ πῦρ καὶ ἀ& 153·ρα καὶ ὕδωρ γίγνεσθαι ἐξ ἀλλήλων καὶ ἕκαστον ἐν ἑκάστῳ ὑπάρχειν τούτων δυνάμει.  Arist., Meteor. i. 3.
34. Isa. li. 6, LXX.
35. Isa. xl. 22, LXX.
36. Fialon points to the coincidence with Arist., Met. vii. 3.  ᾽Αλλὰ μὴν ἀφαιρουμένου μήκους καὶ πλάτους καὶ βάθους, οὐδὲν ὁρῶμεν ὑπολειπόμενον πλὴν ἐ& 176· τι ἐστὶ τὸ ὁριζόμενον ὑπὸ τούτων, ὥστε τὴν ὕλην ἀνάγκη φαὶνεσθαι μόνην οὐσίαν οὕτω σκοπουμένοις.  Λέγω δ᾽ ὕλην ἢ καθ᾽ αὑτὴν μήτε τὶ, μήτε ποσὸν, μήτε ἄλλο μηδὲν λέγεται οἷς ὥρισται τὸ ὄν· ἔστι γὰρ τι καθ᾽ οὗ κατηγορεῖται τούτων ἕκαστον, ᾧ τὸ εἶναι ἕτερον, καὶ τῶν κατηγορεῶν ἑκάστῃ.  Τὰ μὲν γὰρ ἄλλα τῆς οὐσίας κατηγορεῖται· αὕτη δὲ, τῆς ὕλης.  & 169·Ωστε τὸ ἔσχατον, καθ᾽ αὑτὸ οὔτε τὶ, οὔτε ποσὸν, οὔτε ἄλλο οὐδέν ἐστιν· οὐδὲ δὴ αἰ ἀποφάσεις
37. cf. Arist., De Cœlo. ii. 13, 16.  ᾽Αναξιμένης δὲ καὶ ᾽Αναξάγο ρας καὶ Δημόκριτος τὸ πλάτος αἴτιον εἶναί φασι τοῦ μένειν αὐτήν· οὐ γὰρ τέμνειν ἀλλ᾽ ἐπιπωματίζειν (covers like a lid) τὸν ἀ& 153·ρα τὸν κάτωθεν, ὅπερ φαίνεται τὰ πλάτος ἔχοντα τῶν σωματων ποιεῖν
38. The theory of Thales.  cf. note on Letter viii. 2 and Arist., De Cœlo. ii. 13, 13 where he speaks of Thales describing the earth floating like wood on water.
39. cf. Arist., De Cœlo. ii. 13 (Grote’s tr.):  “The Kolophonian Xenophanes affirmed that the lower depths of the earth were rooted downwards to infinity, in order to escape the troublesome obligation of looking for a reason why it remained stationary.”  To this Empedokles objected, and suggested velocity of rotation for the cause of the earth’s maintaining its position.
40. Job xxxviii. 6.
41. Ps. lxxv. 3.
42. Ps. xxiv. 2.
43. Ps. xcv. 4, LXX.
44. οἱ φυσικοὶ was the name given to the Ionic and other philosophers who preceded Socrates.  Lucian (Ner. 4) calls Thales φυσικώτατος.
45. cf. De Cœlo. ii. 14, 4.  ῎Ετι δ᾽ ἡ φορὰ τῶν μορίων καὶ ὅλης αὐτῆς ἠ κατὰ φύσιν ἐπἰ τὸ μέσον τοῦ παντός ἐστιν, διὰ τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ τυγχάνει κειμένη νῦν ἐπὶ τοῦ κέντρου.
46. This is the doctrine of Plato vide Tim.  The Combef. mss. reads not μίξις, mixture, but μέθεξις, participation.
47. Here appears to be a reference to Arist., De Gen. Ann. ii. 3, 11, πάσης μὲν ουν ψυχῆς δύναμις ἑτέρον σώματος ἐ& 231·ικε κεκοινωνηκέναι καὶ θειοτέρου τῶν καλουμένων στοιχείων· ὡς δὲ διαφέρουσι τιμιότητι αἱ ψυχαὶ καὶ ἀτιμί& 139· ἀλλήλων οὕτω καὶ ἡ τοιαύτη διαφέρει φύσις, and again, πνεῦμα…ἀνάλογον οὖσα τῷ τῶν ἄστρων στοιχεί& 251·.  On the fifth element of Aristotle cf. Cic., Tusc. Disp. i. 10.  Aristoteles…cum quatuor illa genera principiorum erat complexus, equibus omnia orirentur, quintam quandam naturam censet esse, equa sit mens.  Aug., De Civ. Dei xxii. 11. 2, and Cudworth’s Int. Syst. (Harrison’s Ed. 1845) iii. p. 465.  Hence the word “quintessence,” for which the Dictionaries quote Howard’s Translation of Plutarch, “Aristoteles hath put…for elements foure; and for a fifth quintessence, the heavenly body which is immutable.”  Skeat s. v. points out that “the idea is older than Aristotle:  cf. the five Skt. bhútas, or elements, which were earth, air, fire, and water, and æther.  Thus the fifth essence is æther, the subtlest and highest.”  It is evident that Milton had these theories in mind when he wrote (Par. Lost, iii. 716): “Swift to their several quarters hasted then The cumbrous elements, earth, flood, air, fire; And this ethereal quintessence of heaven Flew upward, spirited with various forms, That rolled orbicular, and turned to stars Numberless.”