The Letters of St. Jerome 85

san Girolamo (345–420 d.C.) · Epistolae · PL 22, 327–1224

85.0 To Paulinus PL 22, 752

Paulinus had asked Jerome two questions, (1) how can certain passages of scripture (Exod. vii. 13; Rom. ix. 16) be reconciled with Free Will? and (2) Why are the children of believers said to be holy (1 Cor. vii. 14) apart from baptismal grace? For the first of these questions Jerome refers Paulinus to his version (newly made) of Origen’s treatise, On First Principles. For the second he quotes the explanation of Tertullian. Written in 400 a.d.

85.1 To Paulinus PL 22, 752

1. Your words urge me to write to you but your eloquence deters me from doing so. For as a letter-writer you are almost as good as Tully. You complain that my letters are short and unpolished: this is not due to carelessness but to fear of you, lest writing to you at greater length I should but send you more sentences to find fault with. Moreover, to make a clean breast of it to a good man like you, just about the time the vessels sail for the west, so many letters are demanded of me at once that, if I were to reply to all my correspondents, I should be unable to accomplish my task. Hence it happens that, neglecting the niceties of composition and not revising the work of my secretaries, I dictate whatever first comes into my head. Thus when I write to you I regard you as a friend and not as a critic.

Voce me provocas ad scribendum, terres eloquentia; et in epistolari stylo prope Tullium repraesentas. Quod quereris, me parvas et incomptas litterulas mittere, non venit de incuria, sed timore tui, ne verbosius ad te loquens, plura reprehendenda transmittam: et ut sanctae menti tuae simpliciter fatear, uno ad Occidentem navigandi tempore, tantae a me simul epistolae flagitantur, ut si cuncta ad singulos velim rescribere, occurrere nequeam. Unde accidit, ut omisca compositione verborum et scribentium sollicitudine, dictem quidquid 534 in buccam venerit; et amicum te tantum meorum dictorum, non judicem considerem.

85.2 PL 22, 753

2. Your letter propounds two questions, the first, why God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and why the apostle said: “So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy;” and other things which appear to do away with free will: the second, how those are holy who are born of believing, that is, of baptized parents, seeing that without the gift of grace afterwards received and kept they cannot be saved.

Duas quaestiunculas tuae litterae praeferebant. Unam, Quare sit a Deo induratum cor Pharaonis ; et Apostolus dixerit: Non volentis, neque currentis; sed miserentis est Dei , et caetera, quae liberum videntur tollere arbitrium. Alteram, Quomodo sancti sint, qui de fidelibus, id est, baptizatis nascuntur: cum sine dono gratiae postea acceptae et custoditae, salvi esse non possint.

85.3 PL 22, 753

3. Your first question is most ably answered by Origen in his treatise on First Principles which, at the request of my friend Pammachius, I have recently translated. This task has occupied me so fully that I am unable to keep my word with you and must again postpone the sending my commentary on Daniel. Indeed, distinguished and devoted to me as Pammachius is, had he been alone in his request, I should have deferred it to another time, but, as it was, almost all our brothers at Rome urged the same demand declaring that many persons were in danger, and that some even accepted Origen’s heretical teaching. I have found myself forced therefore to translate a book in which there is more of bad than of good, and to keep to this rule that I should neither add nor subtract but should preserve in Latin in its integrity the true sense of the Greek. You will be able to borrow a copy of my version from the aforesaid brother, though in your case the Greek will serve quite as well; neither should you, who can drink from the fountain head, turn to the muddy streamlets supplied by my poor wits.

Libri περὶ Ἀρχῶν Latine redditi. --Primae in libris περὶ Ἀρχῶν, quos nuper, Pammachio nostro jubente, interpretatus sum, Origenes fortissime respondet: quo detentus opere, implere non potui quod promiseram tibi, et Danielem nostrum rursum comperendinavi. Et quidem quamvis mei amantissimi et egregii viri Pammachii, tamen unius voluntatem in tempus aliud distulissem, nisi omnis pene fraternitas de Urbe eadem postulasset, asserens multos periclitari, et perversis dogmatibus acquiescere. Unde necessitate compulsus sum transferre libros, in quibus mali plus, quam boni est: et hanc servare mensuram, ut nec adderem quid, nec demerem, Graecamque fidem Latina integritate servarem. Quorum exemplaria a supradicto fratre poteris mutuari: licet tibi Graeca sufficiant; et non debeas turbidos nostri ingenioli rivulos quaerere, qui de ipsis fontibus bibis.

85.4 PL 22, 753

4. Moreover, as I am speaking to an educated man, well versed both in the sacred scriptures and in secular literature, I desire to give your excellency this note of warning. Do not suppose that I am a clumsy buffoon who condemn everything that Origen has written,—as his injudicious friends falsely assert—or that I have changed my mind as suddenly as the philosopher Dionysius. The fact is that I repudiate merely his objectionable dogmas. For I know that one curse hangs over those who call evil good and over those who call good evil, over those who put bitter for sweet, and over those who put sweet for bitter. Who would go so far in praise of another man’s teaching as to acquiesce in blasphemy?

Quo animo legendus Origenes. --Praeterea quia docto viro loquor, et tam divinis Scripturis, quam saeculi litteris erudito, illud dignationem tuam admonitam volo, ne me putes in modum rustici Balatronis cuncta Origenis reprobare quae scripsit: quod in me criminantur ἀκαιροσπουδασταὶ ejus: et quasi Dionysium Philosophum arguant, subito mutasse sententiam: sed tantum prava dogmata repudiare. Scio enim aequali maledicto eos subjacere, qui bona mala dicunt; et illos qui mala bona judicant: qui faciunt amarum dulce, et dulce amarum . Aut quae est tanta pertinacia, sic laudare alicujus doctrinam, ut sequare blasphemiam?

85.5 PL 22, 753

5. Your second question is discussed by Tertullian in his books on Monogamywhere he declares that the children of believers are called holy because they are as it were candidates for the faith and have suffered no pollution from idolatry. Consider also that the vessels of which we read in the tabernacle are called holy and everything else required for the ceremonial worship: although in strictness of speech there can be nothing holy except creatures which know of and worship God. But it is a scriptural usage sometimes to give the name of holy to those who are clean, or who have been purified, or who have made expiation. For instance, it is written of Bathsheba that she was made holy from her uncleanness, and the temple itself is called the holy place.

De secundo problemate tuo, Tertullianus in libris de Monogamia disseruit, 535 asserens, sanctos dici fidelium filios, quod quasi candidati sint fidei, et nullis idololatriae sordibus polluantur. Simulque considera, quod et vasa sacra in tabernaculo legimus, et caetera quae ad ritum caeremoniarum pertinent: cum utique sancta esse non possint, nisi ea quae sentiunt et venerantur Deum. Idioma igitur Scripturarum est, ut interdum sanctos pro mundis et purificatis atque expiatis nominent: sicut et Bethsabee sanctificata scribitur ab immunditia sua: et ipsum Templum, Sanctuarium nominatur.

85.6 PL 22, 754

6. I beg that you will not silently in your mind accuse me either of vanity or of insincerity. God bears me witness in my conscience that the unavoidable circumstances mentioned above drew me back when I was just going to grapple with my commentary; and you know that what is done when the mind is pre-occupied is never well done. I gladly accept the cap that you have sent me, a mark, though small, of no small affection and just the thing to keep an old man’s head warm. I am delighted alike with the gift and with the giver.

Obsecro te, ne tacito mentis judicio, me aut vanitatis arguas, aut falsitatis. Testis est enim mihi conscientiae meae Deus, quod ab ipso procinctu et interpretationis exordio supradicta necessitas me retraxit; et scis ipse non bene fieri, quod occupato animo fiat. Pileolum textura breve, caritate latissimum, senili capiti confovendo, libenter accepi, et munere et muneris auctore laetatus.

Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (eds.), New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1890-1900. Public domain: English translation first published 1885-1900 (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series). Latin: Migne, Patrologia Latina (1844-1855), public domain; transcription from Corpus Corporum (University of Zurich).

Salva per dopo

Inserisci la tua email: ti invieremo un link per accedere. Nessuna password. Ciò che salvi (voci, versetti, capitoli, documenti) ti segue su ogni dispositivo.