A letter from Jerome (387-388)

Translated letter:

Those who do not wish to accept among the epistles of Paul the one he writes to Philemon say that the apostle did not always or in all things say what Christ spoke to him, since human weakness could not bear an uninterrupted connection to the holy spirit. Nor could the necessities of this little body be carried out always in the presence of the lord, like preparing a meal, taking food, being hungry, being full, digesting, emptying out. I do not mention other things which they repeat fully and accurately so they can assert that there is a time in which Paul would not dare to say "it is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me" [Gal.2:20] and "do you desire proof that Christ is speaking in me?" [2Cor.13:3]. What proof does it give of Christ, they say, to hear "when you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas" [2Tim.4:13]? And in Galatians: [Gal.5:12] and in this letter "one more thing, prepare a guest room for me" [Phil.22]. This however and similar happened not only to the apostles but to the prophets, whence it is often written: "the word of the lord came to [me]," Ezechiel [Ezek.22:1, 17, 23] or to another of the prophets, because after the prophesying is over he comes back to himself and becomes a common man from a prophet and the holy spirit did not remain [permanently] in anyone except our lord Jesus Christ. Which sign John the Baptist accepted, recognizing him when he saw the holy spirit descend on him and remain in him [cf. John 1:33]. Which shows that the holy spirit descends on many but it is a sign of the saviour alone that it remains in him. For these and other things of the kind they want the epistle which was written to Philemon not to be Paul's, but even if it is Paul's it can have nothing to edify us and it is rejected by many and of old as written to charge [Philemon] with a service to perform not to teach. On the contrary, those who defend it as of genuine authority say that it would never have been received in the whole world by all the churches if it had not been believed to be the apostle Paul's. And by this law, they should accept the second to Timothy and to Galatians, in which he also gave examples of human weakness: "when you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas" [2Tim.4:13] and "I wish those who unsettle you would castrate themselves" [Gal.5:12]. Many can be found to Romans and to other churches and especially to Corinthians, more relaxed and dictated almost daily, in which the apostle says: "to the rest I say, I and not the lord" [1Cor.7:11]. Since they have the same thing, either they should not be considered Paul's or if they are accepted as his, then the one to Philemon should be similarly judged accepted. For they are simply wrong if they think that eating food, preparing a room, asking for clothes, is a sin and that the holy spirit is involved if we serve the needs of the body for a short time. "Do not," the apostle says, "grieve the holy spirit of God, with which you were marked with a seal for the day of redemption" [Ephes.4:30]. The prophet calls to mind what deeds can grieve the holy spirit, with many vices and sins arranged in order, saying at the end "in all these you have given me sorrow" [?]. Otherwise to offer a vessel of cold water, to wash feet, to slaughter a calf, to prepare a meal, would be a sin — how should we know from these things which sons are chosen by God? This is not the time to answer them all, since we did not cover all the things they usually put forth. For if they do not consider some things small and others great, then there should be one creator, according to Valentinus, Marcion, and Apelles, for ants, worms, gnats, and locusts, and another for heaven, earth, the sea and the angels. Or do you deny that the mind you describe acting in great things also acts in little things? And since we mentioned Marcion, on his authority at least the letter to Philemon is shown to be Paul's. Who did not accept other letters or changed or mutilated them, but this one alone he did not dare to set his hand to, since its brevity prevented him. But they seem to me in affirming the letter's simplicity to assert its ignorance, not understanding what wisdom and virtue is concealed in individual words. Which, with your prayers and the holy spirit's prompting, we shall attempt to explain in their places as they are written. If however it is condemned for its brevity, then one must condemn Abdia, Nahum, Zephaniah, and the others of the twelve [minor] prophets in whom there are such wondrous and great things that you do not know whether to admire the brevity of speech or the magnitude of meaning. If those who reject the letter to Philemon understood this, they would not despise its brevity, which is written with evangelical beauty in place of the complicated burdens of the law, as the lord spoke on earth succinctly and completely [Rom.9:28]. But now the words of the apostle should be put forth, which begin thus. [...] Bk.I, verses 1-3. "Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus and Timothy our brother, to Philemon our dear friend and coworker, to Apphia our sister, to Archippus our fellow soldier, and to the church in your house, grace to you and peace from God our father, and our lord Jesus Christ." It pleased you that I discourse on the epistles of Paul in a reverse and inverted order. For since you asked repeatedly, o Paula and Eustochium, that I do it and I stubbornly refused, you compelled me to speak at least a little on what seemed to you last from the number of verses as well as the sense and order. So I shall attempt the thing of the origin at the end and what another would ask of the apostle immediately in the beginning, why, or at what time, or with whom furnishing the name, he took the name of Paul from Saul, this I am compelled to do now.

Original letter:

Qui nolunt inter Epistolas Pauli eam recipere quae ad Philemonem scribitur, aiunt, non semper Apostolum, nec omnia, Christo in se loquente, dixisse: quia nec humana imbecillitas unum tenorem sancti Spiritus ferre potuisset: nec hujus corpusculi necessitates [Al. necessitas] sub praesentia Domini semper complerentur: velut disponere prandium, cibum capere, esurire, saturari, ingesta digerere, exhausta complere; taceo de caeteris, quae exquisite et coacte [Al. coacta] replicant: ut affirment fuisse aliquod tempus in quo Paulus dicere non auderet: Vivo, jam non ego, vivit vero in me Christus (Galat. II, 20); et illud: An experimentum quaeritis ejus qui in me loquitur Christus (II Cor. XIII, 3)? Quale, inquiunt, experimentum Christi est, audire: Penulam quam reliqui Troade apud Carpum, veniens tecum affer (II Tim. IV, 13). Et illud ad Galatas: Utinam et excidantur qui vos conturbant (Gal. V, 12). Et in hac ipsa Epistola: Simul autem et praepara mihi hospitium. Hoc autem non solum apostolis, sed prophetis quoque similiter accidisse: unde saepius scriptum feratur: Factum est verbum Domini ad Ezechiel (Ezech. XXII), sive ad quemlibet alium prophetarum: quia post expletum vaticinium, rursum in semet revertens, homo communis fieret e propheta; et excepto Domino nostro Jesu Christo in nullo sanctum Spiritum permansisse [Al. remansisse]. Quod signum et Joannes Baptista acceperat, ut super quem vidisset Spiritum sanctum descendentem et manentem in eo, ipsum esse cognosceret (Joan. I). Ex quo ostendit [Al. ostenditur] super multos quidem descendere Spiritum sanctum; sed proprium hoc esse Salvatoris insigne, quia permaneat in eo. His et caeteris istiusmodi, volunt aut Epistolam non esse Pauli, quae ad Philemonem scribitur: aut etiam si Pauli sit, nihil habere quod aedificare nos possit; et a plerisque veteribus repudiatam, dum commendandi tantum scribatur officio, non docendi. At econtrario qui germanae auctoritatis eam esse defendunt, dicunt numquam in toto orbe a cunctis Ecclesiis fuisse susceptam, nisi Pauli apostoli crederetur: et hac lege ne secundam quidem ad Timotheum, et ad Galatas eos debere suscipere, de quibus et ipse humanae imbecillitatis exempla protulerit: Penulam quam reliqui Troade apud Carpum, veniens tecum affer; et: Utinam excidantur qui vos conturbant. Inveniri plurima et ad Romanos, et ad caeteras Ecclesias maximeque ad Corinthios remissius et quotidiano pene sermone dictata, in quibus Apostolus loquatur: Caeteris autem ego dico, non Dominus. Quas et ipsas quia aliquid tale habent, aut Pauli epistolas non putandas: aut si istae recipiuntur, recipiendam esse et ad Philemonem, ex praejudicio similium receptarum. Valde autem eos et simpliciter errare, si putent cibum emere, hospitium praeparare, vestimenta conquirere, esse peccatum, et asserere fugari Spiritum sanctum, si corpusculi paulisper necessitatibus serviamus. Nolite, inquit Apostolus, contristare Spiritum sanctum, in quo signati estis in die redemptionis (Ephes. IV, 30). Quibus operibus Spiritus sanctus contristetur propheta commemorat, multis in ordine vitiis peccatisque digestis, ad extremum inferens: In omnibus istis contristabas me. Alioqui calicem aquae frigidae porrigere, pedes lavare, immolare vitulum, prandium praeparare, peccatum sit: cum sciamus ex his rebus in Dei quosdam filios adoptari? Non est hujus temporis ad omnia respondere: quia nec omnia, quae illi proponere solent, intulimus. Quod si non putant eorum esse parva quorum et magna sunt, alterum mihi Conditorem, juxta Valentinum, Marcionem et Apellen, formicae, vermium, culicum, locustarum: alterum coeli, terrae, maris, et angelorum debent introducere. An potius ejusdem potentiae est, ingenium quod in majoribus exercueris, etiam in minoribus non negare? Et quoniam Marcionis fecimus mentionem, Pauli esse Epistolam ad Philemonem saltem Marcione auctore doceantur. Qui cum caeteras Epistolas ejusdem vel non susceperit, vel quaedam in his mutaverit atque corroserit, in hanc solam manus non est ausus mittere: quia sua illam brevitas defendebat. Sed mihi videntur, dum epistolam simplicitatis arguunt, suam imperitiam prodere, non intelligentes quid in singulis sermonibus virtutis ac sapientiae lateat. Quae, orantibus vobis, et ipso nobis sancto Spiritu suggerente, quo scripta sunt, suis locis explanare conabimur. Si autem brevitas habetur contemptui, contemnatur Abdias, Naum, Sophonias, et alii duodecim prophetarum [Al. prophetae], in quibus tam mira et tam grandia sunt quae feruntur, ut nescias utrum brevitatem sermonum in illis admirari debeas, an magnitudinem sensuum. Quod si intelligerent hi, qui Epistolam ad Philemonem repudiant, numquam brevitatem despicerent: quae pro laciniosis Legis oneribus, evangelico decore conscripta est, dum breviatum consummatumque sermonem facit Dominus super terram. Sed jam ipsa Apostoli verba ponenda sunt, quae ita incipiunt. [...] Liber primus: Paulus vinctus Christi Jesu, et Timotheus frater, Philemoni dilecto et cooperatori nostro, et Apphiae sorori, et Archippo commilitoni nostro, et Ecclesiae quae in domo tua est, gratia vobis et pax a Deo Patre nostro, et Domino nostro Jesu Christo. Praepostero ordine atque perverso, in Epistolas Pauli dictari a me vobis placuit. Nam cum id crebro, o Paula et Eustochium, peteretis ut facerem; et ego obnixe ne facerem recusarem, saltem parvam, et quae vobis ut numero versuum, ita sensu quoque et ordine videbatur extrema, ut dissererem coegistis. Rem itaque principii in fine tentabo, et quod alius in exordio statim Apostoli quaereret, quare, aut quo tempore, vel quo cognominante, e Saulo Pauli nomen acceperit, hoc ego nunc facere compellor.

Historical context:

Jerome wrote this commentary on Paul's epistle before he wrote the other three (see Kelly, Jerome, His Life, Writings, and Controversies, 145) at the request of Paula and her daughter Eustochium following, as he says at the beginning of the first book, the order they imposed. In the prologue, he argues for the authenticity of the epistle against those who reject it because it deals with less than highly spiritual matters.

Printed source:

Commentarius in Epistolam ad Philemonem, Prologus, PL26 c.599-602, and Book I, c.603a.

Date:

387-388