In Reference to Daniel My Answer Will be that I did not Say that He was not a Prophet; on the Contrary, I Confessed in the Very Beginning of the Preface that He was a Prophet. But I Wished to Show what was the Opinion Upheld by the Jews; and what were the Arguments on which they Relied for Its Proof. I Also Told the Reader that the Version Read in the Christian Churches was not that of the Septuagint Translators but that of Theodotion. It is True, I Said that the Septuagint Version was in this Book Very Different from the Original, and that it was Condemned by the Right Judgment of the Churches of Christ; but the Fault was not Mine who Only Stated the Fact, but that of those who Read the Version. We have Four Versions to Choose From: those of Aquila, Symmachus, the Seventy, and Theodotion. The Churches Choose to Read Daniel in the Version of Theodotion. What Sin have I Committed in Following the Judgment of the Churches? but when I Repeat what the Jews Say against the Story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the Fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not Contained in the Hebrew Bible, the Man who Makes this a Charge against Me Proves Himself to be a Fool and a Slanderer; for I Explained not what I Thought but what they Commonly Say against Us. I did not Reply to their Opinion in the Preface, Because I was Studying Brevity, and Feared that I Should Seem to be Writing not a Preface but a Book. I Said Therefore, "As to which this is not the Time to Enter into Discussion. " Otherwise from the Fact that I Stated that Porphyry had Said Many Things against this Prophet, and Called, as Witnesses of This, Methodius, Eusebius, and Apollinarius, who have Replied to his Folly in Many Thousand Lines, it Will be in his Power to Accuse Me for not Having Written in My Preface against the Books of Porphyry. If There is any one who Pays Attention to Silly Things Like This, I must Tell Him Loudly and Freely that no one is Compelled to Read what He Does not Want; that I Wrote for those who Asked Me, not for those who Would Scorn Me, for the Grateful not the Carping, for the Earnest not the Indifferent. Still, I Wonder that a Man Should Read the Version of Theodotion the Heretic and Judaizer, and Should Scorn that of a Christian, Simple and Sinful Though He May Be. CI Beg You, My Most Sweet Friend, who are So Curious that You Even Know My Dreams, and that You Scrutinize for Purposes of Accusations all that I have Written During These Many Years Without Fear of Future Calumny; Answer Me, How is it You do not Know the Prefaces of the Very Books on which You Ground Your Charges against Me? These Prefaces, as if by Some Prophetic Foresight, Gave the Answer to the Calumnies that were Coming, Thus Fulfilling the Proverb, "The Antidote Before the Poison. " what Harm Has Been done to the Churches by My Translation? You Bought Up, as I Knew, at Great Cost the Versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, and the Jewish Authors of the Fifth and Sixth Translations. Your Origen, Or, that I May not Seem to be Wounding You with Fictitious Praises, Our Origen, (For I May Call Him Ours for his Genius and Learning, Though not for the Truth of his Doctrines) in all his Books Explains and Expounds not Only the Septuagint but the Jewish Versions. Eusebius and Didymus do the Same. I do not Mention Apollinarius, Who, with a Laudable Zeal Though not According to Knowledge, Attempted to Patch up into one Garment the Rags of all the Translations, and to Weave a Consistent Text of Scripture at his Own Discretion, not According to any Sound Rule of Criticism. The Hebrew Scriptures are Used by Apostolic Men; they are Used, as is Evident, by the Apostles and Evangelists. Our Lord and Saviour Himself Whenever He Refers to the Scriptures, Takes his Quotations from the Hebrew; as in the Instance of the Words "He that Believeth on Me, as the Scripture Hath Said, Out of his Belly Shall Flow Rivers of Living Water," and in the Words Used on the Cross Itself, "Eli, Eli, Lama Sabachthani," which is by Interpretation "My God, My God, Why Hast Thou Forsaken Me?" Not, as it is Given by the Septuagint, "My God, My God, Look Upon Me, Why Hast Thou Forsaken Me?" and Many Similar Cases. I do not Say this in Order to Aim a Blow at the Seventy Translators; but I Assert that the Apostles of Christ have an Authority Superior to Theirs. Wherever the Seventy Agree with the Hebrew, the Apostles Took their Quotations from that Translation; But, Where they Disagree, they Set Down in Greek what they had Found in the Hebrew. And Further, I Give a Challenge to My Accuser. I have Shown that Many Things are Set Down in the New Testament as Coming from the Older Books, which are not to be Found in the Septuagint; and I have Pointed Out that These Exist in the Hebrew. Now Let Him Show that There is Anything in the New Testament which Comes from the Septuagint but which is not Found in the Hebrew, and Our Controversy is at an End. John vii. Supposed to be Taken from Prov. xviii. 4, or Is. Lviii. 11 CBy all this it is Made Clear, First that the Version of the Seventy Translators which Has Gained an Established Position by Having Been So Long in Use, was Profitable to the Churches, Because that by Its Means the Gentiles Heard of the Coming of Christ Before He Came; Secondly, that the Other Translators are not to be Reproved, Since it was not their Own Works that they Published but the Divine Books which they Translated; And, Thirdly, that My Own Familiar Friend Should Frankly Accept from a Christian and a Friend what He Has Taken Great Pains to Obtain from the Jews and Has Written Down for Him at Great Cost. I have Exceeded the Bounds of a Letter; And, Though I had Taken Pen in Hand to Contend against a Wicked Heresy, I have Been Compelled to Make Answer on My Own Behalf, While Waiting for My Friend's Three Books, and in a State of Constant Mental Suspense About the Charges He had Heaped up against Me. It is Easier to Guard against one who Professes Hostility than to Make Head against an Enemy who Lurks under the Guise of a Friend. Cbook iii.
33. In reference to Daniel my answer will be that I did not say that he was not a prophet; on the contrary, I confessed in the very beginning of the Preface that he was a prophet. But I wished to show what was the opinion upheld by the Jews; and what were the arguments on which they relied for its proof. I also told the reader that the version read in the Christian churches was not that of the Septuagint translators but that of Theodotion. It is true, I said that the Septuagint version was in this book very different from the original, and that it was condemned by the right judgment of the churches of Christ; but the fault was not mine who only stated the fact, but that of those who read the version. We have four versions to choose from: those of Aquila, Symmachus, the Seventy, and Theodotion. The churches choose to read Daniel in the version of Theodotion. What sin have I committed in following the judgment of the churches? But when I repeat what the Jews say against the Story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not contained in the Hebrew Bible, the man who makes this a charge against me proves himself to be a fool and a slanderer; for I explained not what I thought but what they commonly say against us. I did not reply to their opinion in the Preface, because I was studying brevity, and feared that I should seem to be writing not a Preface but a book. I said therefore, "As to which this is not the time to enter into discussion." Otherwise from the fact that I stated that Porphyry had said many things against this prophet, and called, as witnesses of this, Methodius, Eusebius, and Apollinarius, who have replied to his folly in many thousand lines, it will be in his power to accuse me for not having written in my Preface against the books of Porphyry. If there is any one who pays attention to silly things like this, I must tell him loudly and freely that no one is compelled to read what he does not want; that I wrote for those who asked me, not for those who would scorn me, for the grateful not the carping, for the earnest not the indifferent. Still, I wonder that a man should read the version of Theodotion the heretic and judaizer, and should scorn that of a Christian, simple and sinful though he may be. c34. I beg you, my most sweet friend, who are so curious that you even know my dreams, and that you scrutinize for purposes of accusations all that I have written during these many years without fear of future calumny; answer me, how is it you do not know the prefaces of the very books on which you ground your charges against me? These prefaces, as if by some prophetic foresight, gave the answer to the calumnies that were coming, thus fulfilling the proverb, "The antidote before the poison." What harm has been done to the churches by my translation? You bought up, as I knew, at great cost the versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, and the Jewish authors of the fifth and sixth translations. Your Origen, or, that I may not seem to be wounding you with fictitious praises, our Origen, (for I may call him ours for his genius and learning, though not for the truth of his doctrines) in all his books explains and expounds not only the Septuagint but the Jewish versions. Eusebius and Didymus do the same. I do not mention Apollinarius, who, with a laudable zeal though not according to knowledge, attempted to patch up into one garment the rags of all the translations, and to weave a consistent text of Scripture at his own discretion, not according to any sound rule of criticism. The Hebrew Scriptures are used by apostolic men; they are used, as is evident, by the apostles and evangelists. Our Lord and Saviour himself whenever he refers to the Scriptures, takes his quotations from the Hebrew; as in the instance of the words "He that believeth on me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water," and in the words used on the cross itself, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani," which is by interpretation "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" not, as it is given by the Septuagint, "My God, my God, look upon me, why hast thou forsaken me?" and many similar cases. I do not say this in order to aim a blow at the seventy translators; but I assert that the Apostles of Christ have an authority superior to theirs. Wherever the Seventy agree with the Hebrew, the apostles took their quotations from that translation; but, where they disagree, they set down in Greek what they had found in the Hebrew. And further, I give a challenge to my accuser. I have shown that many things are set down in the New Testament as coming from the older books, which are not to be found in the Septuagint; and I have pointed out that these exist in the Hebrew. Now let him show that there is anything in the New Testament which comes from the Septuagint but which is not found in the Hebrew, and our controversy is at an end.

John vii.38, supposed to be taken from Prov. xviii.4, or Is. lviii.11 c35. By all this it is made clear, first that the version of the Seventy translators which has gained an established position by having been so long in use, was profitable to the churches, because that by its means the Gentiles heard of the coming of Christ before he came; secondly, that the other translators are not to be reproved, since it was not their own works that they published but the divine books which they translated; and, thirdly, that my own familiar friend should frankly accept from a Christian and a friend what he has taken great pains to obtain from the Jews and has written down for him at great cost. I have exceeded the bounds of a letter; and, though I had taken pen in hand to contend against a wicked heresy, I have been compelled to make answer on my own behalf, while waiting for my friend's three books, and in a state of constant mental suspense about the charges he had heaped up against me. It is easier to guard against one who professes hostility than to make head against an enemy who lurks under the guise of a friend. cBook III.The two first books formed a complete whole, but it was intimated that there might be more to come when Jerome should have received Rufinus' work in full. The two first books were brought to Rufinus by the captain of a merchant-ship trading with Aquileia, together with a copy of Jerome's friendly letter which had been suppressed by Pammachius. The bearer had (as stated by Rufinus, though Jerome mocks at this as impossible) only two days to wait. Chromatius the Bishop of Aquileia urged that the strife should now cease, and prevailed so far as that Rufinus made no public reply. He wrote a private letter, however, to Jerome, which has not come down to us, and which does not seem, from the extracts given in c.4, 6, etc., to have been of a pacific tenor. Its details may be gathered from Jerome's reply. Jerome intimates that it sought to involve him in heresy, that it renewed and aggravated the former accusations, speaking of him in language fit only for the lowest characters on the stage; and that it declared that, if its writer had been so minded, he could have produced facts which would have been the destruction of his adversary. Jerome, though receiving some expressions of the desire of Chromatius that he should not reply (perhaps also the regretful expostulation of Augustin, -- Jer. Letter cx, 6, Aug. Letter 73) declared that it was impossible for him to yield. He could not refrain from defending himself from a capital charge, nor could he spare the heretics. Peace could only come by unity in the faith.

1. Your letter is full of falsehood and violence. I will try not to take the same tone.

2. Why cannot we differ as friends? Why do you, by threats of death, compel me to answer?

3, 4. Your shameful taunt that I wished to get copies of your Apology by bribing your Secretary is an imputation to me of practices which are your own.

5. Eusebius should not have accused you; but your charges against him will not stand.

6. You taunt me with boasting of my eloquence. Will you boast of your illiteracy?

7, 8. You wish first to praise, then to amend me, but both with fisticuffs; and make it impossible for me to keep silence.

9. Why cannot you join with me in condemning Origen, and so put an end to our quarrel?

10. The assertion that you had only two days for your answer is a fiction.

11. Your translation, contrariwise to my Commentaries, vouches for the soundness of Origen.

12. You try to shield Origen by falsely attributing the Apology for him to Pamphilus.

13. In my Commentaries my quotation of opposite opinions shows that neither is mine.

14. Had you translated honestly, you would not have had Origen's heresies imputed to you.

15. You say the Bishops of Italy accept your views on the Resurrection. I doubt it.

16. You rashly say that you will agree to whatever Theophilus lays down. You have to consider your friendship for Isidore now his enemy.

17, 18. You speak of the Egyptian Bishop Paul. We received him, though an Origenist, as a stranger; and he has united himself to the orthodox faith. Not only Theophilus but the Emperors condemn Origen.

19. Against Vigilantius I wrote only what was right. I knew who had stirred him up against me.

20. As to the letter of Pope Anastasius condemning you, you will find that it is genuine.

21. Siricius who is dead may have written in your favour; Anastasius who is living writes to the East against you.

22. My departure from Rome for the East had nothing blameable in it as you insinuate.

23. Epiphanius, it is true, gave you the kiss of peace; but he showed afterwards that he had come to distrust you.

24. When we parted as friends I believed you a true believer; no one was sent to Rome to injure you.

25. You swear that you did not write my pretended retractation. Your style betrays you, and I have given a full answer about my translations already.

26. You bid me beware of falsification and treachery. You warn me against yourself.

27. There is nothing inconsistent in praising a man for some things and blaming him in others. You have done it in my case.

28-31. My ignorance of many natural phenomena is no excuse for your ignorance as to the origin of souls. You ought, according to your boasting dream to know everything. The thing of most importance was forgotten in your cargo of Eastern wares.

32. Your dream was a boast: mine of which you accuse me humbled me.

33. It was not I who first disclosed your heresies, but Epiphanius long ago and Aterbius before him.

34-36. As to our translations of the Peri 'Archon, yours was doing harm, and mine was necessary in self-defence. You should be glad that heresy is exposed.

37. Your Apology for Origen did not save him but involved you in heresy.

38. My friendly letter was to prevent discord: the other to crush false opinions.

39, 40. Pythagoras was rightly quoted by me. I produce some of his sayings.

41, 42. You threaten me with destruction. I will not reply in the same way. Personalities should be excluded from controversies of faith.

43, 44. The way of peace is through the wisdom taught in the Book of Proverbs, and through unity in the faith.

25 all my prefaces to
Top of Page
Top of Page