Letter 50028: Augustine to Jerome, his most beloved lord, brother, and fellow presbyter, worthy of being honored and embraced with...

Augustine of HippoJerome|c. 405 AD|Augustine of Hippo
illnessproperty economicswomen

Augustine to Jerome, his most beloved lord, brother, and fellow presbyter, worthy of being honored and embraced with the most sincere devotion -- Greetings.

1. No face was ever more familiar to another than the peaceful, joyful, and truly noble dedication of your studies in the Lord has become to me. For although I long greatly to know you personally, I feel that my knowledge of you is lacking in only one small respect -- your physical appearance. And even that gap I can hardly claim, since my most blessed brother Alypius (now invested with the office of bishop, of which he was already truly worthy) has seen you. When he returned and I saw him, his account of you imprinted your image almost completely on my mind. Indeed, I might say that while he was seeing you there, I was seeing you through his eyes. For anyone who knows us can say that in body alone -- not in mind -- are we two people, so great is our unity of heart, so firm the intimate friendship between us (though in merit we are not alike, for his far exceeds mine).

Since you love me -- both from long standing through our communion of spirit and more recently through what you know of me from my friend's report -- I feel it is not presumptuous (as it would be from a stranger) to commend to your brotherly regard our brother Profuturus. We trust that the happy omen of his name ("Good-speed") may be fulfilled through our efforts, furthered by your aid -- though it may actually be more fitting that I be commended to you by him than he by me. I ought perhaps to write no more if I were content with a formal letter of introduction. But my mind overflows into conversation with you about the studies we pursue in Christ Jesus our Lord, who is pleased to provide us generously, through your love, with many benefits and helps along the way he has marked out for his followers.

2. We -- and with us all who are devoted to study in the African churches -- ask you not to refuse the labor of translating into Latin the commentaries of the Greek writers on our Scriptures. You may thereby make these authors available to us as well, especially the one whose name you seem to take particular pleasure in sounding throughout your writings [Origen]. But I urge you: when you translate the canonical books of Scripture into Latin, please follow the method you used in your translation of Job -- adding notes to make it plain where your version differs from the Septuagint, whose authority deserves the highest respect. For my part, I cannot adequately express my surprise that anything should still be found in the Hebrew manuscripts that escaped so many translators who were perfectly fluent in the language.

I say nothing about the Septuagint translators -- regarding whose remarkable unity of mind and spirit, surpassing what is found even in a single individual, I dare not pronounce a definitive judgment, except that in my view extraordinarily high authority must be granted to them in this work. What perplexes me more are the later translators who, although they had the advantage of working after the Septuagint was complete, and were reportedly well acquainted with Hebrew vocabulary, syntax, and idiom, still failed to agree among themselves and left many things yet to be discovered. If those passages were obscure, you are as likely to have been mistaken as anyone else. If they were clear, it is hard to believe the Septuagint could have gotten them wrong. I lay out my perplexity and appeal to your kindness for an answer.

3. I have also been reading some writings attributed to you on the epistles of the Apostle Paul. In your commentary on Galatians, I came to the passage where the apostle calls Peter back from a course of dangerous pretense. To find there a defense of falsehood -- whether by a person of your stature or by any author -- causes me, I must confess, great sorrow. For it seems to me that the most disastrous consequences follow from believing that anything false is found in the sacred books -- that the men through whom Scripture was given to us put down anything untrue. Whether a good person may sometimes have a duty to deceive is one question. Whether a writer of Holy Scripture could ever have had such a duty is no question at all. For if you once admit into that high sanctuary of authority a single false statement made "as a duty," there will not be left a single sentence in those books that cannot, by the same fatal principle, be explained away whenever it strikes anyone as difficult to practice or hard to believe -- on the grounds that the author deliberately and dutifully wrote what was not true.

4. For if the Apostle Paul was not telling the truth when he rebuked Peter by saying, "If you, being a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, why do you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?" -- if Peter was actually doing the right thing, and Paul said and wrote otherwise merely to pacify troublesome opponents -- then what answer shall we give when perverse men arise, as Paul himself prophetically described, "forbidding marriage" (1 Timothy 4:3), and they defend themselves by claiming that Paul's statements affirming the lawfulness of marriage were likewise false -- written not because he believed them, but to appease those who, out of love for their wives, might have become troublesome? By this logic, even passages praising God could be dismissed as pious falsehoods designed to kindle love in slow hearts. Nowhere in the sacred books would the authority of pure truth remain secure.

We see how carefully the same apostle safeguards the truth when he writes: "If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ" (1 Corinthians 15:14-15). If someone said to him, "Why be so troubled by this falsehood, when what you said, even if untrue, greatly glorifies God?" -- would he not recoil in horror from such madness? Would he not open the depths of his heart to protest that speaking well of a lie told on God's behalf is a crime no less serious -- perhaps even greater -- than speaking ill of the truth about him?

5. For my part, I would devote all the strength the Lord gives me to showing that every text commonly cited in defense of the usefulness of falsehood ought to be understood differently, so that the sure truth of these passages may be consistently upheld. This, however, I leave to your judgment. If you bring more careful attention to the passage, you may see what I mean far more readily than I do. What should move you to this more careful study is the realization that the authority of Scripture becomes dangerously unstable -- everyone free to believe what they want and reject what they don't -- if we once concede that the men who delivered these writings to us could, out of a sense of duty, include statements they knew to be false.

Unless, perhaps, you propose to supply us with specific rules for knowing when falsehood might or might not be a duty. If this can be done, I ask you to set out those rules with reasoning that is neither ambiguous nor fragile. And I beg you, by our Lord in whom Truth was incarnate, not to consider me burdensome or presumptuous in making this request.

This brother carries some of my writings with him. If you are willing to read them, I implore you to review them with candid, brotherly rigor. For the scriptural words -- "The righteous will correct me in mercy and reprove me, but the oil of the sinner shall not anoint my head" -- I understand to mean that a truer friend is one who heals me by his criticism than one who flatters me with ointment. I find it extraordinarily difficult to judge my own work rightly, being either too cautious or too careless. Sometimes I see my own faults -- but I prefer to hear them pointed out by better judges, lest after rightly accusing myself of error, I begin to flatter myself again and conclude that my self-criticism arose merely from excessive self-doubt.

Modern English rendering for readability. See the 19th-century translation or original Latin/Greek for scholarly use.

Related Letters