But it is much more surprising that some even of those who, with
ourselves, believe that there is one only source of all things,
and that no nature which is not divine can exist unless originated
by that Creator, have yet refused to accept with a good and simple
faith this so good and simple a reason of the world's creation,
that a good God made it good; and that the things created, being
different from God, were inferior to Him, and yet were good, being
created by none other than He. But they say that souls, though not,
indeed, parts of God, but created by Him, sinned by abandoning God;
that, in proportion to their various sins, they merited different
degrees of debasement from heaven to earth, and diverse bodies as
prison-houses; and that this is the world, and this the cause of its
creation, not the production of good things, but the restraining
of evil. Origen is justly blamed for holding this opinion. For in
the books which he entitles περὶ ἀρχῶν, that is, _Of origins_, this
is his sentiment, this his utterance. And I cannot sufficiently
express my astonishment, that a man so erudite and well versed in
ecclesiastical literature, should not have observed, in the first
place, how opposed this is to the meaning of this authoritative
Scripture, which, in recounting all the works of God, regularly
adds, "And God saw that it was good;" and, when all were completed,
inserts the words, "And God saw everything that He had made, and,
behold, it was very good."[491] Was it not obviously meant to be
understood that there was no other cause of the world's creation than
that good creatures should be made by a good God? In this creation,
had no one sinned, the world would have been filled and beautified
with natures good without exception; and though there is sin, all
things are not therefore full of sin, for the great majority of the
heavenly inhabitants preserve their nature's integrity. And the
sinful will, though it violated the order of its own nature, did not
on that account escape the laws of God, who justly orders all things
for good. For as the beauty of a picture is increased by well-managed
shadows, so, to the eye that has skill to discern it, the universe is
beautified even by sinners, though, considered by themselves, their
deformity is a sad blemish.
In the second place, Origen, and all who think with him, ought to
have seen that if it were the true opinion that the world was created
in order that souls might, for their sins, be accommodated with
bodies in which they should be shut up as in houses of correction,
the more venial sinners receiving lighter and more ethereal bodies,
while the grosser and graver sinners received bodies more crass and
grovelling, then it would follow that the devils, who are deepest
in wickedness, ought, rather than even wicked men, to have earthly
bodies, since these are the grossest and least ethereal of all. But
in point of fact, that we might see that the deserts of souls are
not to be estimated by the qualities of bodies, the wickedest devil
possesses an ethereal body, while man, wicked, it is true, but with
a wickedness small and venial in comparison with his, received even
before his sin a body of clay. And what more foolish assertion can
be advanced than that God, by this sun of ours, did not design to
benefit the material creation, or lend lustre to its loveliness,
and therefore created one single sun for this single world, but
that it so happened that one soul only had so sinned as to deserve
to be enclosed in such a body as it is? On this principle, if it
had chanced that not one, but two, yea, or ten, or a hundred had
sinned similarly, and with a like degree of guilt, then this world
would have one hundred suns. And that such is not the case, is due
not to the considerate foresight of the Creator, contriving the
safety and beauty of things material, but rather to the fact that
so fine a quality of sinning was hit upon by only one soul, so that
it alone has merited such a body. Manifestly persons holding such
opinions should aim at confining, not souls of which they know not
what they say, but themselves, lest they fall, and deservedly, far
indeed from the truth. And as to these three answers which I formerly
recommended when in the case of any creature the questions are put,
Who made it? By what means? Why? that it should be replied, God, By
the Word, Because it was good,--as to these three answers, it is very
questionable whether the Trinity itself is thus mystically indicated,
that is, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, or whether
there is some good reason for this acceptation in this passage of
Scripture,--this, I say, is questionable, and one can't be expected
to explain everything in one volume.