To Pammachius against John of Jerusalem 9

san Girolamo (345–420 d.C.) · Contra Joannem Hierosolymitanum · PL 23, 350–396

9 PL 23, 362

9. It is alleged that your master, whom you call a Catholic, and whom you resolutely defend, said, “the Son sees not the Father, and the Holy Spirit sees not the Son.” And you tell me that the Father is invisible, the Son invisible, the Holy Ghost invisible, as though the angels, both cherubim and seraphim, were not also, in accordance with their nature, invisible to our eyes. David was certainly in doubt even as regards the appearance of the heavens:“I shall see,” he says, “the heavens, the works of Thy fingers.” I shall see, not I see. I shall see when with unveiled face I shall behold the glory of the Lord: butnow we see in part, and we know in part. The question is whether the Son sees the Father, and you say “The Father is invisible.” It is disputed whether the Holy Spirit sees the Son, and you answer “The Son is invisible.” The point at issue is, whether the Trinity have mutually the vision of one another; human ears cannot endure such blasphemy, and you say the Trinity is invisible. You wander in the realms of praise in all other directions; you spend your eloquence on things which no one wants to hear about. You put your hearer off the scent, to avoid telling us what we ask for. But granted that all this is superfluous. We make you a present of the fact that you are not an Arian; nay, even more, that you never have been. We allow that in the explanation of the first section no suspicion rests upon you, and that all that you said was frank and free from error. We speak to you with equal frankness. Did our father in God, Epiphanius, accuse you of being an Arian? Did he fasten upon you the heresy ofEunomius, the Godless, or that ofAerius? The point of the whole letter is that you follow the erroneous doctrines of Origen, and are associated with others in this heresy. Why, when a question is put to you on one point, do you give an answer about another; and, as if you were speaking to fools, hide the charges contained in the letters, and tell us what you said in the church in the presence of Epiphanius? A confession of faith is demanded of you, and you inflict upon us your very eloquent dissertations. I beseech my readers to remember the judgment seat of the Lord, and as you know that you must be judged for the judgment you give, favour neither me nor my opponent, and consider not the persons of the arguers, but the case itself. Let us then continue what we began.

Invisibiles sunt angeli. Hieronymi pura fides ac sinceritas. --Objicitur tibi, quod magister tuus, quem catholicum vocas, quem defendis obnixe, dixerit: « Filius non videt Patrem; et Filium non videt Spiritus sanctus: Et tu mihi dicis: Invisibilis Pater, invisibilis Filius, invisibilis Spiritus sanctus: » quasi non et Angeli et Cherubim et Seraphim, secundum naturam suam oculis nostris invisibiles sint? Certe David etiam de aspectu coelorum dubitans: Videbo, inquit, coelos, opera digitorum tuorum . Videbo, non video. Videbo, quando facie revelata gloriam Domini fuero contemplatus: nunc autem ex parte videmus, et ex parte cognoscimus . Quaeritur 416 an Patrem videat Filius: et tu dicis: « Invisibilis Pater est. » Deliberatur an Filium videat Spiritus sanctus: et tu respondes, « Invisibilis est Filius. » Versatur in causa, an se invicem Trinitas videat, humanae aures tantam blasphemiam ferre non sustinent: et tu dicis, « Invisibilis Trinitas est. » In laudes caeteras evagaris: peroras in his, quae nullus inquirit. Auditorem aliorsum trahis, ut quod quaerimus, non loquaris. Verum haec ex superfluo dicta sint. Donamus tibi, ut non sis Arianus: immo plus, ut numquam fueris. Concedimus, ut in expositione primi capituli, adversum te nulla suspicio sit, et totum pure, totum simpliciter sis locutus, eadem simplicitate et nos tecum loquimur. Num papa Epiphanius accusavit te, quod Arianus esses? Num Eunomii ἀθέου, aut Aerii tibi impegit haeresim? Hoc per totam Epistolam quaeritur quod Origenis dogmatum sequaris errores, et quosdam habeas hujus haereseos socios. Cur aliud interrogatus, respondes aliud, et quasi cum stultis loquaris dissimulatis criminibus, quae in litteris continentur, replicas quid in Ecclesia praesenti Epiphanio dixeris? Confessionem fidei postularis, et disertissimos tractatus tuos nolentibus ingeris? quaeso, lector, ut memor tribunalis Domini, et de judicio tuo te intelligens judicandum, nec mihi, nec adversario faveas, neve personas loquentium, sed causam consideres. Dicamus ergo quod coepimus.

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.