How St. Basil and Origen Interpret Genesis 1 in the Light of Philosophical Cosmology

Wessel, Susan (Advisor); Rasmussen, Adam David (Author); McCarthy, William (Other); Rousseau, Philip (Other)

Degree awarded: Ph.D. Historical Theology. The Catholic University of America

219 p.

http://hdl.handle.net/1961/14898

Wessel, Susan

McCarthy, William; Rousseau, Philip

Theology; Classical studies; Religious history; Cosmology; Early Christian Studies; Genesis 1; Origen; Religion and science; St. Basil

2013-06-25T14:59:05Z

2013-06-25T14:59:05Z

2013-01-01T00:00:00Z

2013-06-25T00:00:00Z

In the early Church, the interpretation of Genesis 1 was a locus for the interplay between natural philosophy and theology. St. Basil (d. 379), drawing upon the thought and works of Origen (d. 253/54), believes that Christians should use secular knowledge (paideia), including philosophical cosmology, in the service of the explication of Scripture and Christian doctrine. However, sometimes natural philosophy and Scripture are at odds. In this dissertation I examine three specific instances of apparent conflict between natural philosophy and Scripture that both Origen and Basil encounter in their exegeses of Genesis 1: the nature of matter (Gen 1:2b), the super-heavenly water (Gen 1:6-7), and astrology (Gen 1:14b). The purpose of this examination is to develop a hermeneutical framework from which such problems can be approached. Such a framework I find in Origen's famous metaphor, which Basil adopts, of philosophy as the handmaid of theology. In confronting all three apparent conflicts, they both draw upon the works of philosophers, even when attacking certain philosophical notions, such as that of uncreated, eternal matter or astrological fatalism.I conclude that the handmaid metaphor is ambiguous in that it operates on two principles. On the one hand, philosophy is subordinate to theology and as such must yield to its doctrines. On the other hand, philosophy, as handmaid, is also useful to theology, so its ideas are not to be rejected out of hand. Though both writers use philosophy, they disagree on its limits, and in this the tension between philosophy as helper and philosophy as subordinate is revealed. For Origen, philosophy's ability to judge what is and is not rational helps the interpreter of Scripture by ruling out irrational interpretations. Basil criticizes Origen for this and defends a literal interpretation of Genesis against philosophical objections in order to uphold the superiority of theology to philosophy.

Text; Dissertation

Rasmussen_cua_0043A_10396

The Catholic University of America

2013-06-25