Life and Works of Rufinus with Jerome's Apology Against Rufinus.

Translated by ANF/NPNF editors

Public domainServed

Begin reading

About this edition

(English) · Translated by ANF/NPNF editors

Contents 266 sections

Title Page.Front matter
Preface to Book II.
Translation of Pamphilus' Defence of Origen.
Rufinus's Epilogue to Pamphilus the Martyr's Apology for Origen; otherwise The Book Concerning the Adulteration of the Works of Origen.
Preface to Book III. of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν.
Rufinus' Apology in Defence of Himself.
The Letter of Anastasius, Bishop of the Church of Rome to John Bishop of Jerusalem Concerning the Character of Rufinus.
Preface.
Epitome of Argument.
I must submit to the taunts of my adversary as Christ did to those of the Jews.
Yet the substantial charges must be answered.
I praised him but he has wounded me.
I am no heretic, but declare my faith, that of my baptism.
I give a further proof of my faith in the resurrection of the flesh.
Section 15 — The resurrection body is a spiritual body.
Section 16 — The resurrection body is a spiritual body.
Section 17 — The resurrection body is a spiritual body.
Section 18 — The resurrection body is a spiritual body.
Origen's doctrines in the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν.
What led to the translation.
Section 21 — Pamphilus Apology for Origen.
Section 22 — Pamphilus Apology for Origen.
Treatise on the Adulteration of the works of Origen.
The difficulties of translation.
Explanation of Origen's words “The Son does not see the Father.”
Difference between seeing and knowing.
The Translation interpolated by Eusebius of Cremona.
Eusebius, if acting honestly, should have shown me what he thought dangerous.
Jerome's method of translation was the same as mine.
Jerome's reference to his Commentary on the Ephesians.
Jerome has not really changed his mind about Origen.
Women turned into men and bodies into souls.
The foundation (καταβολή) of the world explained by Jerome as a casting down.
Jerome, under the name of “another,” gives his own views.
The fall of souls into human bodies is taught by Jerome.
Predestination.
“Another,” who gives strange views, is Jerome himself.
“Hopers” and “fore-hopers.”
Section 39 — Jerome has confessed these views to be his own.
Section 40 — Jerome has confessed these views to be his own.
Section 41 — Further identification of Jerome's views with Origen's.
Section 42 — Further identification of Jerome's views with Origen's.
The commentary on the Ephesians, selected by Jerome, is his condemnation.
Section 44 — Principalities and Powers.
Section 45 — Principalities and Powers.
Jerome's complaint of new doctrines may be retorted on himself.
Section 47 — Origin of men, angels, and heavenly bodies.
Section 48 — Origin of men, angels, and heavenly bodies.
Section 49 — The body as a prison.
Section 50 — The body as a prison.
All creatures, including the fallen angel, partaking in the final restoration.
Arrogance of Jerome's teaching.
If Origen is not to be pardoned, neither is Jerome.
Epitome of Argument.
Jerome says that the defenders of Origen are united in a federation of perjury.
Jerome's commentaries on Ephesians follow Origen's interpretation of the texts about a secret federation to whom higher truths are to be told.
But I follow Christ in condemning all falsehood.
Jerome has not only allowed perjury but has practised it.
His treatise on Virginity (Ep. xxii to Eustochium) defames all orders of Christians.
In his anti-Ciceronian dream he promised never to read or possess heathen books.
Yet his works are filled with quotations from them.
In his “Best mode of Translation” he relies on the opinions of Cicero and Horace.
He confesses his obligations to Porphyry.
Counsel
Jerome at Bethlehem had heathen books copied and taught them to boys.
He condemns as heathenish unobjectionable views which he himself holds.
He spoke of Paula impiously as the mother-in-law of God.
Such impiety is unpardonable.
Jerome's boast of his teachers, Didymus and the Jew Baranina.
His extravagant praises of Origen.
Preface to Origen on Canticles.
Preface to Commentary on Micah.
Book of Hebrew Names.
A story of Origen.
Pamphilus the Martyr and his Library.
Jerome praises Origen but condemns others for doing the same.
Jerome praises the dogmatic as well as the expository works of Origen.
Contrast of Jerome's earlier and later attitude towards Origen.
The Book of Hebrew Questions.
Jerome's attack upon Ambrose.
Preface to Didymus on the Holy Spirit.
Jerome attacks one Christian writer after another.
His treatment of Melania.
I never followed Jerome's errors, for which he should do penance.
But I followed his method of translation.
Jerome in condemning me condemns himself.
He says I shew Origen to be heretical, yet condemns me.
His pretence that the Apology for Origen is not by Pamphilus needs no answer.
Others did not translate the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν because they did not know Greek.
Jerome's translation of the Scriptures impugned.
Authority of the LXX.
Has the Church had spurious Scriptures?
Danger of altering the Versions of Scripture.
Origen's Hexapla--Its object.
St. Paul's method of dealing with erring brethren.
How Jerome should have replied to Pammachius.
The Books against Jovinian.
My translation of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν was meant to aid in a good cause.
Section 99 — Recapitulation of the Apology.
Section 100 — Recapitulation of the Apology.
Section 101 — Recapitulation of the Apology.
An appeal to Pammachius.
Section 103 — Why my translations of Origen had created offence, but Jerome's not.
Section 104 — Why my translations of Origen had created offence, but Jerome's not.
A Synod, if called on to condemn Origen, must condemn Jerome also.
Preface.
It is hard that an old friend with whom I had been reconciled should attack me in a book secretly circulated among his disciples.
Others have translated Origen. Why does he single me out?
He gave me fictitious praise in his Preface to the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν. Now, since I defend myself, he writes 3 books against me as an enemy.
Section 110 — He spoke of me as united in faith with him; but what is his faith? Why are his books kept secret? I can meet any attack.
Section 111 — He spoke of me as united in faith with him; but what is his faith? Why are his books kept secret? I can meet any attack.
I translated the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν because you demanded it, and because his translation slurred over Origen's heresies.
My translation put away ambiguities, and showed the real character of the book, and of the previous translation.
My translation of Origen's Commentaries created no excitement; his first translation, of Pamphilus' Apology, roused all Rome to indignation.
But the work was really Eusebius's, who tells us that Pamphilus wrote nothing.
After the condemnation of Origen by Theophilus and Anastasius, it would be wise in Rufinus to give up this pretended defence.
I had praised Eusebius as well as Origen only as writers; and was forced to condemn them as heretics. Why should this be taken amiss?
I wrote a friendly letter to Rufinus, which my friends kept back.
There is nothing to blame in my getting the help of a Jew in translating from the Hebrew.
There is nothing strange in my praising Origen before I knew the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν.
The accusations seem inconsistent, but I knew them only by report.
The office of a commentator.
We must distinguish methods of writing, and not expect a vulgar simplicity in the various compositions of cultured men.
My assertion was true, that Origen permitted the use of falsehood.
The accusation about a mistranslation of Ps. ii is easily explained.
In the difficulties of the translator and the commentator we must get help where we can.
In the Commentary on Ephesians I acted straightforwardly in giving the views of Origen and others.
As to the passage “He hath chosen us before the foundation of the world.”
As to the passage “Far above all rule and authority &c.”
As to the passage “That in the ages to come &c.“
As to “Paul the prisoner of Jesus Christ.”
As to “The body fitly framed &c.”
I quoted Origen's views as, “According to another heresy.”
Section 134 — As to “Men loving their wives as their own bodies.”
Section 135 — As to “Men loving their wives as their own bodies.”
To the charge of reading secular books I reply that I remember what I learned in youth.
Also, a promise given in a dream must not be pressed. Why should such things be raked up by old friends against one another?
I am right in my contention that all sins are remitted in baptism.
Summary of the Chapters.
Section 140 — A criticism on Rufinus' Apology to Anastasius. His excuses for not coming to Rome are absurd. His parents are dead and the journey is easy. No one ever heard before of his being imprisoned or exiled for the faith.
Section 141 — A criticism on Rufinus' Apology to Anastasius. His excuses for not coming to Rome are absurd. His parents are dead and the journey is easy. No one ever heard before of his being imprisoned or exiled for the faith.
Section 142 — A criticism on Rufinus' Apology to Anastasius. His excuses for not coming to Rome are absurd. His parents are dead and the journey is easy. No one ever heard before of his being imprisoned or exiled for the faith.
Section 143 — His confession of faith is unsatisfactory. No one asked him about the Trinity, but about Origen's doctrines of the Resurrection, the origin of souls, and the salvability of Satan. As to the Resurrection and to Satan he is ambiguous. As to souls he professes ignorance.
Section 144 — His confession of faith is unsatisfactory. No one asked him about the Trinity, but about Origen's doctrines of the Resurrection, the origin of souls, and the salvability of Satan. As to the Resurrection and to Satan he is ambiguous. As to souls he professes ignorance.
Section 145 — His confession of faith is unsatisfactory. No one asked him about the Trinity, but about Origen's doctrines of the Resurrection, the origin of souls, and the salvability of Satan. As to the Resurrection and to Satan he is ambiguous. As to souls he professes ignorance.
Section 146 — His confession of faith is unsatisfactory. No one asked him about the Trinity, but about Origen's doctrines of the Resurrection, the origin of souls, and the salvability of Satan. As to the Resurrection and to Satan he is ambiguous. As to souls he professes ignorance.
Section 147 — His confession of faith is unsatisfactory. No one asked him about the Trinity, but about Origen's doctrines of the Resurrection, the origin of souls, and the salvability of Satan. As to the Resurrection and to Satan he is ambiguous. As to souls he professes ignorance.
What Latin! The poor souls must be tormented by his barbarisms.
It is not permitted to you to be ignorant of such a matter which all the churches know.
As to translating the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, it is not a question, but a charge that you unjustifiably altered the book.
Section 151 — Origen asserts Christ to be a creature, and maintains universal restitution. Where has he contradicted this?
Section 152 — Origen asserts Christ to be a creature, and maintains universal restitution. Where has he contradicted this?
The question is, as Anastasius says to John of Jerusalem, with what motive you translated the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν.
You pretend not to be Origen's defender, but you publish and enlarge the Apology for him and allege the heretics' falsification of his works.
Your defence gains no support from Eusebius or Didymus, who, each for his own reason, defend the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν as it stands.
If we may allege falsification at every turn we make a chaos of all past literature.
The object of Origen's letter, of which he translates only a part, is not to shew the falsification of his writings but to vituperate the Bishops who condemned him.
It is only in reference to a particular point in his dispute with Candidus that Origen alleges this falsification. The story of Hilary's being condemned through his writings having been falsified has no foundation.
That which you tell about myself in Damasus' council is mere after-dinner gossip.
Section 160 — The attack on Epiphanius as a plagiarist of Origen is an outrage on the Bishops generally. Origen never wrote 6000 books.
Section 161 — The attack on Epiphanius as a plagiarist of Origen is an outrage on the Bishops generally. Origen never wrote 6000 books.
I ascertained at the library at Cæsarea that the Apology you quote as Pamphilus' is the work of Eusebius.
The letter falsely circulated in Africa as mine, and expressing regret for my translation of the Old Test. from the Hebrew bears the mark of your hand. I have always honoured the Seventy Translators.
In proof of this, I bring forward the prefaces to my Translation of the Books from Genesis to Isaiah.
As to Daniel, it was necessary to point out that Bel and the Dragon, and similar stories were not found in the Hebrew.
A vindication of the importance of the Hebrew Text of Scripture.
Though the LXX has been of great value, we should be grateful for fresh translations from the original.
Preface.
Your letter is full of falsehood and violence. I will try not to take the same tone.
Why cannot we differ as friends? Why do you, by threats of death, compel me to answer?
Section 171 — 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.
Section 172 — 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.
Eusebius should not have accused you; but your charges against him will not stand.
You taunt me with boasting of my eloquence. Will you boast of your illiteracy?
Section 175 — You wish first to praise, then to amend me, but both with fisticuffs; and make it impossible for me to keep silence.
Section 176 — You wish first to praise, then to amend me, but both with fisticuffs; and make it impossible for me to keep silence.
Why cannot you join with me in condemning Origen, and so put an end to our quarrel?
The assertion that you had only two days for your answer is a fiction.
Your translation, contrariwise to my Commentaries, vouches for the soundness of Origen.
You try to shield Origen by falsely attributing the Apology for him to Pamphilus.
In my Commentaries my quotation of opposite opinions shows that neither is mine.
Had you translated honestly, you would not have had Origen's heresies imputed to you.
You say the Bishops of Italy accept your views on the Resurrection. I doubt it.
You rashly say that you will agree to whatever Theophilus lays down. You have to consider your friendship for Isidore now his enemy.
Section 185 — 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.
Section 186 — 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.
Against Vigilantius I wrote only what was right. I knew who had stirred him up against me.
As to the letter of Pope Anastasius condemning you, you will find that it is genuine.
Siricius who is dead may have written in your favour; Anastasius who is living writes to the East against you.
My departure from Rome for the East had nothing blameable in it as you insinuate.
Epiphanius, it is true, gave you the kiss of peace; but he showed afterwards that he had come to distrust you.
When we parted as friends I believed you a true believer; no one was sent to Rome to injure you.
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.
You bid me beware of falsification and treachery. You warn me against yourself.
There is nothing inconsistent in praising a man for some things and blaming him in others. You have done it in my case.
Section 196 — 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.
Section 197 — 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.
Section 198 — 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.
Section 199 — 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.
Your dream was a boast: mine of which you accuse me humbled me.
It was not I who first disclosed your heresies, but Epiphanius long ago and Aterbius before him.
Section 202 — As to our translations of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, yours was doing harm, and mine was necessary in self-defence. You should be glad that heresy is exposed.
Section 203 — As to our translations of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, yours was doing harm, and mine was necessary in self-defence. You should be glad that heresy is exposed.
Section 204 — As to our translations of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, yours was doing harm, and mine was necessary in self-defence. You should be glad that heresy is exposed.
Your Apology for Origen did not save him but involved you in heresy.
My friendly letter was to prevent discord: the other to crush false opinions.
Section 207 — Pythagoras was rightly quoted by me. I produce some of his sayings.
Section 208 — Pythagoras was rightly quoted by me. I produce some of his sayings.
Section 209 — You threaten me with destruction. I will not reply in the same way. Personalities should be excluded from controversies of faith.
Section 210 — You threaten me with destruction. I will not reply in the same way. Personalities should be excluded from controversies of faith.
Section 211 — The way of peace is through the wisdom taught in the Book of Proverbs, and through unity in the faith.
Section 212 — The way of peace is through the wisdom taught in the Book of Proverbs, and through unity in the faith.
Preface.
Section 1
Section 2
I Believe in God the Father Almighty.
Section 4. I Believe in God the Father Almighty
Section 5
Section 6. And in Christ Jesus, His Only Son, Our Lord
Section 7
Section 8
Section 9. Who Was Born by (de) The Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary
Section 10
Section 11
Section 12
Section 13
Section 14. He Was Crucified Under Pontius Pilate and Was Buried: He Descended into Hell
Section 15
Section 16
Section 17
Section 18
Section 19
Section 20
Section 21
Section 22
Section 23
Section 24
Section 25
Section 26
Sectino 27
Section 28
Section 29. The Third Day He Rose Again from the Dead
Section 30
Section 31. He Ascended into Heaven, and Sitteth on the Right Hand of the Father: from Thence He Shall Come to Judge the Quick and the Dead
Section 32
Section 33
Section 34
Section 35. And in the Holy Ghost
Section 36. The Holy Church; The Forgiveness of Sin, the Resurrection of This Flesh
Section 37.
Section 38
Section 39
Section 40
Section 41
Section 42
Section 43
Section 44
Section 45
Section 46
Section 47
Section 48
The Preface to the Books of Recognitions of St. Clement.
Rufinus' Preface to the Translation of Origen's Commentary on Psalms 36, 37, and 38.
Rufinus' Preface to the Translation of Origen's Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans.
The Peroration of Rufinus Appended to His Translation of Origen's Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans.
Preface to Origen's Homilies on Numbers.

Available to read online.