JEROME
342
JEROME
from error, lie holds the traditional doctrine. Pos-
silily he has insisted more than others on the share
which belongs to the sacred writer in his collaboration
in the inspired work. His criticism is not without
originality. The controversy with the Jews and
with the Pagans had long since called the attention
of the Christians to certain difficulties in the Bible.
St. Jerome answers in various ways. Not to mention
his answers to this or that difficulty, he appeals above
all to the principle, that the original text of the Scrip-
tures is the only one inspired and free from error.
Therefore one must de-
termine if the text, in
which the difficulties
arise, has not been altered
liy the copjast. More-
over, when writers of the
New Testament quoted
the Old Testament, they
did so not according to
the letter but according
to the spirit. There are
many subtilties anil even
contradictions in the ex-
planations Jerome offers,
but we must bear in mind
his evident sincerity. He
tloes not try to cloak over
his ignorance; he admits
that there are many
difficulties in the Bible; at
times he seems quite em-
barrassed. Finally, he
proclaims a principle,
which, if recognized as
legitimate, might serve to
adjust the insufficiencies
of his criticism. He
asserts that in the Bible
there is no material error
due to the ignorance or
the heedlessness of the
sacred writer, but he adds:
" It is usual for the sacred
historian to conform him-
self to the generally ac-
cepted opinion of the
masses in his time " (P. L.,
XXVI, 98; XXIV, 855).
ilies or short treatises, and in these the Solitary of
Bethlehem appears in a new light. He is a monk
addressing monks, not without making very obvious
allusions to contemporary events. The orator is
lengthy and apologizes for it. He displays a won-
derful knowlpilge of the versions and contents of the
Bible. His allegory is excessive at times, and his
teaching on grace is Semipelagian. A censorious
s]iirit against authority, sympathy for the poor which
reaches the point of hostility against the rich, lack
of good taste, inferiority of style, and misquotation,
such are the most glaring
defects of these sermons.
I'A-idently they are notes
taken down by his
1 earers, and it is a
i|uestion whether they
were reviewed by the
I ■ r e a c h e r . The corre-
s|iondence of St. Jerome
is one of the best known
parts of his literary out^
I)ut. It comprises about
one hundred and twenty
letters from him, and
several from his corre-
spondents. Many of these
Utters were written with
\ \ lew to publication, and
some of them the author
e\ tn edited himself ; hence
the\ show evidence of
gieit care and skill in
their composition, and in
them St Jerome reveals
himself a master of style.
These letters, which had
already met with great
success with his con-
temporaries, have been,
with the ' Confes.sions " of
St Augustine, one of the
w orks most appreciated
b\ the humanists of the
Renaissance. Aside from
their literary interest
they have great historical
value. Relating to a period
covering half a century
Among the historical works of St. Jerome must be they touch upon most varied subjects; hence their
noted the translation and the continuation of the division into letters dealing with theology, polemics.
"Chronicon Eusebii Csesariensis", as the continua-
tion written by him, which extends from 325 to 378,
served as a model for the annals of the chroniclers
of the Middle Ages; hence the defects in such works:
dryness, superabundance of data of every description,
lack of proportion and of liistorical sense. The
" Vita S. Pauli Eremita* " is not a very reliable docu-
criticism, conduct, and liiography. In spite of their
turgid diction they are full of the man's personality.
It is in this correspondence that the temperament of
St. Jerome is most clearly seen: his waywardness,
his love of extremes, his exceeding sensitiveness; how
he was in turn exquisitely dainty and bitterly satir-
ical, unsparingly outspoken concerning others and
ment. The "Vita Malchi, monachi" is a eulogy of equally frank about himself,
chastity woven through a number of legendary The theological writings of St. Jerome are mainly
episodes. As to the "Vita S. Hilarionis", it has controversial works, one might almost say composed
suffered from contact with the preceding ones. It for the occasion. He missed being a theologian, by
has iDeen asserted that the journeys of St. Hilarion not applying himself in a consecutive and personal
are a plagiarism of some old tales of travel. But manner to doctrinal questions. _ In .his controversies
these objections are altogether misplaced, as it is
really a reliable work. The treatise "De Viris illus-
tribus" is a very excellent literary history. It was
written as an apologetic work to prove that the
Church had produced learned men. Contemporary
criticism has shown that for the first three centuries
he was simply the interpreter of the accepted eccle-
siastical doctrine. Compared with St. Augustine his
inferiority in breadth and originality of view is most
evident. His " Dialogue " against the Luciferians
deals with a schismatic sect whose founder was Luci-
fer, Bishop of Cagliari in Sardinia. The Luciferians
Jerome depends to a great extent on Eusebius, whose refused to approve of the measure of clemency by
statements he borrows, often distorting them, owing
to the rapidity with which he worked. His accounts
of the authors of the fourth century however are of
great value. Thanks to Dom G. Morin, the ora-
torical works of St. Jerome have recently become
which the Church, since the Council of Alexandria,
in 362, had allowed bishops, who had adhered to
Arianism, to continue to discharge their duties on
condition of professing the Nicene Creed. This rig-
orist sect had adherents almost everywhere, and even
known. They consist of about one hundred hom- in Rome it was very troublesome. Against it Jerome
