This past week I was told (and have been told before by others) that Augustine viewed the scriptural book of Genesis as “allegorical” and never as history or as literal events. My gut sent up a red flag.
Now, in all honesty, I personally am not a big fan of Augustine and some Orthodox have even incorrectly labeled him as the “father of all western heresy.” The fact is, he is commemorated in the Orthodox Church and has been defended by Orthodox individuals such as Fr Seraphim Rose in his The Place of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church. Nevertheless, I decided to check out the claim about Genesis.
So I ordered a book which has all three of his works on Genesis. I post a summary of what Augustine believed in the first, and earliest, of his works : On Genesis: The Refutation of the Manichees
[emphasis in bolds and underlines added by me – RAS]
2.3 "If the Manichees were willing to discuss the hidden meaning of these words in a spirit of reverent inquiry rather than of captious fault-finding, then they would of course not be Manachees, but as they ask it would be given them, and as they sought they would find, as they knocked it would be opened up to them. The fact is, you see, people who have a genuine religious interest in learning put far more questions about this text than these irreligious wretches; but the difference between them is that the former seek in order to find, while the latter are at no pains at all to do anything except not to find what they are seeking.
So then, this whole text must first be discussed in terms of history, and then in terms of prophecy. In terms of history deeds and events are being related, in terms of prophecy future events are being foretold. One should not look with a jaundiced eye, to be sure, on anyone who wants to take everything that is said here absolutely literally, and who can avoid blasphemy in doing so, and present everything as in accordance with Catholic faith; on the contrary one should hold up such a person as an outstanding and holy admirable understander of the text."
[He then discusses the "history of the events in Genesis – He does not even deny that Eve was "literally" taken from Adam's side but even states WHY God did it that way –RAS] Then he concludes :
24.37 "But I promised that in this book I would consider FIRST the account of things that have happened, which I think has now been unfolded, and go on to consider NEXT what they prophesy; and this still remains to be considered briefly. I don’t reckon, you see, that this will take us very long once we have set up a kind of clear sign post which will direct us through everything else. The apostle, you see, says that there is a great sacrament in the text which says: “for this reason a man shall leave father and mother and stick to his wife; and they shall be two in one flesh.” He explains what he means by adding: “but I mean in Christ and the Church.” So then, what as a matter of history was fulfilled in Adam, as a matter of prophecy signifies Christ, Who left His Father when He said: “I came out from the Father and have come into this world.”
Conclusion : Therefore, it is clear here that Augustine held to Genesis as historical FIRST and an allegorical view (which he calls Prophetic) also, BUT NOT in spite of or denial of the historical and literalness of the text . . . . anyone can see this at least from his first work. I will post more on this from his other two works at a later time. Lesson, check out the primary source for yourself. It is not always exactly the way you have been told.
PDF 
Thanks for this.
Augustine’s view of Genesis is of interest to me also. As you say, we always here that he viewed Genesis in a non-literal sense, but I have never yet seen the evidence.
Of course, it’s not just Augustine who is held to not adhere to a literal interpretation, as I always hear folk saying the same of other Church Father’s. Again little or no evidence is put forward, I don’t say this to deny the truth of this, but I would like to see more eveidence from folk that claim this.
Just so you know, I used to be a “literalist” and have since moved toward an “allegorical” position, having said this, recently I have become convinced once again of the literal existence of Adam and Eve, albeit in a new sense.
Thank you Stuart for visiting. I have updated the post from “City of God.” It is clear that an “allegorical” “prophetic” sense is primarily on his mind, but certainly he did not deny the historical literalness of the text in favor of the prophetic. It is a both/and approach – history pointing to Christ. That is Orthodox. In his second (or was it third – don’t have it in my hand) work on Genesis, Augustine lays out “four” hermeneutics he uses in his approach to Genesis. I will be posting articles on that soon. Regardless, it is a fact that Augustine is not a priority commentator or highly esteemed as other Orthodox Saints like St. Chrysostom and St. Basil in the Orthodox Church. As one person said to be lately, “there is not one Orthodox Augustine Scholar.” That is that way for a reason, obviously.
Nice, RAS! In your studies into this issue have you come across any saint in the Church who holds that Genesis is only an allegorical tale?
I have found no Orthodox Father/Saint who denies the literal historicity of Genesis and holding to a sole allegorical interpretation only. The Orthodox Fathers consistently took Genesis at face value, but also (properly) saw the Christological deeper meanings in the text.
RAS: I think that you are correct with the “both/and” approach. In Augustine’s interpretation of Scripture, the allegorical interpretation of an event doesn’t usually nullify that it actually happened (just that it happened a different way than it is presented).
There is a lot of helpful info about A’s position on Creation in an article that was written by Rowan Williams in “Augustine Through the Ages: An Encyclopedia” (1999, ed. Allen D. Fitzgerald). It should be available at your local theological library. I can’t recommend the work highly enough.
Anyhow, it’s an exemplary work for searching themes in Augustine’s thought. The article is called “Creation”, and Williams does a masterful job of exploring Neoplatonic and Stoic backgrounds to A’s thought on Creation, as well A’s how he subordinates that thought to the Scriptures. Thanks for a good post!
Thanks, I haven’t either. Not a single one…
Thank you for visiting my site. And thanks for the link to Williams on “Creation.” I will look at getting my hands on it.
great post! might i ask what is this book that has all of Augustine’s writings on Genesis?
i have also never come across a single Orthodox Father, Saint, or modern holy elder who denies the historicity of Genesis.
Thanks for visiting, Jesse. This book linked below has all three of Augustine’s works on Genesis. Most people who use Augustine as their support for an “allegorical only” hermeneutic usually only quote his second work. All three works need to be read together to get the whole picture. It is overall pretty good reading but caution, at least as an Orthodox, is needed when reading anything of Augustine’s and should also be read along Orthodox Fathers St Basil, St Chrysostom, and St. Ephrem the Syrian on Genesis – all wrote commentaries on Genesis.
http://www.amazon.com/Genesis-Refutation-Unfinished-Commentary-Translation/dp/1565482018/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1315258840&sr=8-1