Historical Factors Contributing to Augustine's Devotion to Genesis

Regent College Historical Factors Contributing to Augustine’s Devotion to Genesis An essay in HIST 501: History of Christianity I Fall 2017 Prepared for Bruce Hindmarsh By David A. Miller Vancouver, British Columbia November 27, 2017  Saint Augustine of Hippo wrote about the biblical book of Genesis with great regularity and depth over the full course of his life as a Christian. This pattern of writing focused on Genesis 1-3. “Over a period of almost thirty years Augustine composed five commentaries on the biblical creation stories.” Hill, 13-14. These commentaries include three works focused solely on the creation stories while significant portions of Confessions and The City of God also address these biblical chapters. Augustine also dealt with Genesis 1-3 and creation in many letters, pastoral instructions and other writings. Ibid. Given Augustine’s devotion to writing about Genesis, it is natural to ask what historical factors contributed to Augustine’s devotion. This paper will pursue this question primarily by considering the evidence in Augustine’s three exegetical works on Genesis. These works demonstrate both continuity and development. They include De Genesi contra Manichaeos (AD 389, DGnM), De Genesi ad litteram liber imperfectus (AD 393, DGnI), and De Genesi ad litteram (AD 404-415 DGnL). As Augustine’s more mature and settled thinking on Genesis 1-3, DGnL is several times longer than the first two and lasts over 300 pages in English translation. DGnL is Augustine’s “only completed major work” focused on the exegetical study of a biblical book. Schnaubelt et al., 17-18. The former two represent his thinking just after his Christian conversion in 386. Chadwick, 27. These two “have been quite neglected” and were not translated into English until the late 20th century. Teske, On Genesis, 36. Through a study of these three works, this paper will identify three major historical factors behind Augustine’s extensive writing on Genesis. The paper will argue for their significance but not their completeness as historical considerations. First, Augustine was driven to find a fully satisfactory refutation to the Manichean criticisms of Catholic belief on creation. Second, Augustine was in pursuit of an ever more consonant relationship between ancient science and Genesis 1-3. Finally, Augustine’s constitution as an indefatigable pursuer of truth kept him addressing creation. The headwinds of his North African childhood and his time with the Manichees strengthened his resolve. The title of DGnM, the fullness of explicit references to the Manichees, the targeted nature of its content, and Augustine’s reflections on it in the Retractiones all clearly indicate that this work on Genesis was written to counter the Manichees. The religion of Mani (216-276) offered an ontological dualism comprising “equal powers of light and darkness” as the explanation for the problem of evil. Chadwick, 13. “The bodies of men and beasts” represent prisons for “fragments of the divine light”, the creation is not good, and the Old Testament is rejected. Ibid., 13-14. In DGnM, Augustine begins by expressing his great desire to reach those being deceived by the Manichees and particularly to reach the unlearned. DGnM, I,1,1. Perhaps like Paul of Tarsus, Augustine’s efforts were “not only intellectual and spiritual” but “above all, personal”, recognizing “the wreckage he left behind in his Manichean years.” Cameron, 44. Augustine quickly gets to work in DGnM undercutting the alternative biblical interpretations and logical problems proposed by the Manichees in the service of their divergent theology. God did create from nothing and not from pre-existing material. DGnM, I,3,5; I,6,10. Darkness is “just the absence of light” and so the text does not need to say that God made darkness to be clear about the created nature of all things. DGnM, I,4,7; I,9,15. The creation is good and things that may seem not good like poisonous plants or pernicious animals are either the result of human sin or can be seen as good as part of a larger system. DGnM, I,13,19; I,16,25. Augustine calls to attention two particular matters within Genesis 1 which the Manichees are in the “habit” of raising, man made in the image of God and God resting on the 7th day. DGnM, I,17,27; I,22,33. In both cases, Augustine criticizes the Manichees for not recognizing figures of speech of a kind also present in the New Testament (parts of which they accept) and for being “over-literal.” Ibid. While this critique might be well founded and Augustine’s exegesis remain defensibly literal to this point, Augustine then moves well beyond the literal as he completes Genesis 1 and moves to address Genesis 2. Considering further God’s day of rest and the meaning of the preceding six days, Augustine interprets the structure allegorically as representing the six ages of the world from creation to Jesus Christ and as the six periods of our personal lives. DGnM, I,25,35; I,25,43. He begins the story of the garden in Book II by indicating explicitly that the account will be “in figurative, not literal terms”. He notes that he would view an “absolutely” literal approach as ”wholly admirable” but that he could find “no other way” than “a figurative sense and in riddles.” DGnM, II,2,3. Augustine proceeds from here as promised in a manner often quite untethered from the text as he draws out meanings otherwise quite hidden. Some scholars suggest that the garden account in DGnM is so figurative that in this commentary “Augustine regarded the Paradise story as a parable without historical basis.” Teske, Augustine as Exegete, 127. Regarding this figurative approach, Augustine may have “adopted and adapted many elements of Ambrose’s interpretation”, for example, “the four rivers as virtues.” Schnaubelt et al., 92. Though the Manichees are not mentioned in DGnI and only rarely in DGnL, they remain a major influence on these subsequent works. DGnI is an incomplete work which describes itself as being foundationally grounded in the Catholic faith and thus in contrast with the expositions of “many heretics” who twist the divine scriptures. DGnI, 1,1. It covers much the same ground in Genesis 1 as DGnM but stops around Genesis 1:26 before the completion of the sixth day. DGnI, 16. Augustine’s reflection on DGnI in the later Retractiones indicates that he intended to see whether he was capable of pursuing the literal meaning or historical character of the text while in DGnM he had settled for the allegorical meaning. R, 18. It is important to observe that where Augustine falters and stops entirely with DGnI is precisely where his efforts departed so dramatically from the historical sense in the prior DGnM. At this point in DGnM, Augustine had anticipated that the Manichees would reject his approach: “if the Manichees were willing to discuss the hidden meaning of these words … they would of course not be Manichees.” DGnM, II,1,1; II,2,3. The conclusion thus becomes fairly obvious that the Manichees are at least in substantial measure the heretics referred to in DGnI. The Manichees demanded a literal interpretation of the Catholic scriptures and “boasted that their books presented the bare and proper truth without figures.” Teske, Augustine as Exegete, 117; Hill, 26. As we have seen, for the Manichees, “even the common human ability to understand simple metaphors had atrophied.” Cameron, 65. DGnL is finally where the Manichee concerns about days, the garden, and for a literal account receive their fullest address. Books IV and V (of XII) are almost entirely focused on the six days. The address focuses on how to reconcile the six days of Genesis 1 with the one day of Genesis 2:4 and the simultaneous creation of Sirach 18:1. DGnL, IV,33,52; V,1,1. There are no allegorical ages. The approach to the garden story is also dramatically different. A few representative examples include that “the greenery of the field” is no longer the soul but an indicator of the kind of day DGnM II,3,4; DGnL V,2,4., the spring is not a spiritual watering of the soul but a part of creation being made DGnM II,5,6; DGnL V,7,20., the rivers are not four virtues but real rivers DGnM II,10,13; DGnL VIII,7,13. , and being clothed with animal skins is not the loss of immortality but something that was done DGnM II,21,32; DGnL XI,39,52.. Augustine states explicitly that Adam was a human being who “lived a definite number of years”, who “died just as other human beings die”, and who was placed in a paradise which was “quite simply a particular place on earth.” DGnL VIII,1,1. Van Fleteren thus describes this exegesis of the garden story as “scrupulously literal.” Schnaubelt et al., 19. Even so, Augustine makes a point to note figurative language he might still address more literally in the future. DGnL XI,36,49. In summary, in contrast to Chadwick’s characterization, Augustine’s “anti-Manichee polemic” has not simply yielded to neoplatonic concerns in DGnL. Chadwick, 56. Instead, while recognizing other concerns may also exist, DGnL importantly represents “a more refined attempt” to address the Manichees. Greene-McCreight, 34. Moving on to consider ancient science, Augustine’s words in Book I of DGnL regarding his method of relating Genesis 1-3 to what modern people call science are notable and perhaps among the words of DGnL most recognized today. Augustine recognizes that, even at that time, there is a knowledge available to all people concerning the earth, the sky, and animals etc. and that it is embarrassing and highly detrimental to evangelism when Christians obstinately claim Genesis conflicts with this knowledge. DGnL, I,19,39. However, Augustine’s concern is not to keep separate two non-overlapping magisteria. Instead, as Augustine pursues a more literal reading subsequent to DGnM, engagement with ancient science becomes a common feature of his Genesis commentaries. In DGnM, he touches on winds and moistness at altitude. DGnM, I,15,24. In the subsequent and shorter DGnI, Augustine engages scientific considerations concerning the four elements, the phase of the moon at creation, scientific details around spring and river formation, and the naturally regulated lengths of time animals spend in a womb or egg. DGnI, 4,13; 13,40; 14,47; 15,51. In the full-length DGnL, he engages more deeply including with the theory of vision that rays dart from human eyes, extensive scientific concerns about the firmament and how the waters above can be sustained, how the four elements convert into one another and relate to the five senses, how the six days might relate to the maturation rates of plants and animals, how ancient neuroscience might relate to the soul, and even how dispassionate bee sex might model a creational ideal. DGnL, I,15,31; II,1,2; III,3,4; IV,33,52; VII,13,20; IX,10,18; Faith and science was “a special concern” for Augustine and he used “the physical science of his day.” Hill, 156; Schnaubelt et al., 18. This concern led him to write more over time about Genesis and its relationship to an increasing number of areas of natural investigation. This second historical factor relates both to the first and third. Regarding the first, “gnawing doubts” concerning “the reconciliation of Mani and science” contributed to Augustine’s departure from the Manichees. Chadwick, 16. Connecting to the third factor, the matter of ancient science and Genesis was not simply about evangelism but instead “Augustine’s entire life is a radical search for truth.” Schnaubelt et al., 5. Contrary to some popular expectation, Augustine does not give the impression of someone who simply conveys what “sound faith prescribes” or who is the authority. DGnL, I,21,41. In DGnL, Augustine presents “a great variety of possible meanings to the words of the book of Genesis” and avoids “affirming anything hastily” in order to safeguard the trustworthiness of scripture and to accommodate ancient science. DGnL, I,20,40. Capon also sees evidence of a roomy mind. Capon, xvi. Augustine repeatedly advises patience and moderation relative to obscure matters in DGnL. DGnL, I,18,38; II,18,38. He refuses to choose whether the moon was made at first phase or full. DGnL, II,15,30. No one can persuade him that a full grasp of the soul is possible and Book VII on the soul concludes that the only certain value in this book is its unwillingness to make rash assertions. DGnL, VI,29,40; VII,28,43. Why did an immortal man need food? Augustine answers that “it is difficult to say.” DGnL, III,21,33. What did the writer mean with the six days? “It is indeed an arduous and extremely difficult task for us.” DGnL, IV,1,1. Why did God allow the man to be tempted? “I have to confess that I am quite unable to plumb the depths of his purpose and plan.” DGnL, XI,4,6. He is even known to indicate “in my opinion” when proposing an idea. DGnL, XI,30,39. Exegeting Genesis exercised Augustine’s “intellectual drive” but also confirmed in him a humility. Hill, 16. Augustine’s history as a youth in North Africa and as an adult with the Manichees prepared him. As a youth, Augustine’s pursuit of reason struggled against an anti-intellectual spirit in the church in North Africa which may be traced to Tertullian’s appreciation for the absurd. Teske, Augustine as Exegete, 112; Teske, On Genesis, 9-12. The Manichean tendency to aggrandize “human reason’s power” was then quite attractive in contrast. Cameron, 37. However, the Manichees oversold their answers, Faustus could not solve all the problems, and Augustine left them. North Africa could not deter his truth seeking and his work in rhetoric only confirmed the emptiness of technique alone. Augustine moved forward not wanting to overstate the truth he could offer as the Manichees had to him. “Hear the other side” is one of his famous remarks. Chadwick, 57. Augustine’s truth-seeking constitution only strengthened. Partly for this reason, Augustine was a man who changed. Peter Brown has observed and valued this as an attractive feature of Augustine. Cameron, 13. The personality of Augustine and the weightiness of Genesis 1-3 combined to keep Augustine in process at the exegesis of Genesis. Considering DGnL alone, Augustine kept it to himself, despite the urging of friends, as he worked on it for as many as fifteen years. Hill, 164. A careful reading of De Genesi contra Manichaeos, De Genesi ad litteram liber imperfectus, and De Genesi ad litteram strongly supports the identification and importance of the three historical factors described in this paper as driving Augustine’s ongoing devotion to Genesis 1-3. The Manichee perspective on creation was deeply discordant and a decade as a Manichee “hearer” left an impression on Augustine. Coming to grips, then, with the creation account in Genesis, it is natural to consider not only logic but science. Finally, Augustine’s personality and historical formation established him as a seeker of truth. Bibliography Cameron, Michael. Christ Meets Me Everywhere: Augustine’s Early Figurative Exegesis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Capon, Robert Farrar. Genesis: The Movie. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003. Chadwick, Henry. Augustine of Hippo: A Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Greene-McCreight, K.E. Ad Litteram: How Augustine, Calvin, and Barth Read the “Plain Sense” of Genesis 1-3. New York: Peter Lang, 1999. Hill, Edmund. The Works of Saint Augustine: On Genesis. Hyde Park: New City Press, 2002. Ramsey, Boniface. The Works of Saint Augustine: Revisions. Hyde Park: New City Press, 2010. Schnaubelt, Joseph C., and Frederick Van Fleteren. ed. Augustine: Biblical Exegete. New York: Peter Lang, 2001. Teske, Roland J. Saint Augustine: On Genesis. Washington: Catholic University of American Press, 1991. Teske, Roland J. Augustine of Hippo: Philosopher, Exegete, and Theologion. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 2009. 10