A letter from Jerome (393?)

Translated letter:

1. You challenge us with large questions and, numbing our mind with ease/inactivity, you teach as you ask. Your first inquiry was "what are those things which the eye has not seen, the ear has not heard, what has not come into the heart of man, things which god prepared for those who love him" [1.Cor.2:9], and how again that apostle says "god revealed [them] however to us through his spirit" [1.Cor.2:10], and if it is revealed to the apostle we ought to understand how he might have revealed them to others. To which the brief answer is: we ought not ask what it is that the eye has not seen, the ear not heard, that has not come into the heart of man. For if he did not know them, how can they be known? What is promised in the future is not perceived in the present. For hope which is seen, is not hope [Rom.8:24], but certain possession, as if one were to say: "show me what is invisible, speak what can not be heard, set forth what human thought does not comprehend." Therefore the apostle must be believed to have said it with this meaning, that spiritual things can not be perceived by carnal eyes, or carnal ears, or by mortal thought. For "although we once knew Jesus according to the flesh, we no longer know him now" [2Cor.5:16]. And in the epistle of John, it is written: "beloved, we are god's children now but it is not yet revealed what we will be in the future, since we will see him as he is" [1John3:2]. And what he testifies was revealed to him and the saints through the spirit it does not immediately follow that he would have revealed it to others. He heard in another way ineffable words in paradise which he could not report to others; or if he reported them, they are in no way ineffable. 2. The second question was in what you say you read going through my little works, that lambs which are on the right and goats on the left are Christians and gentiles and not rather good and bad. I do not remember ever saying this but if I said it I would not be stubborn in the error. Much however comes suddenly on someone while dictating. I know I argued about this chapter in the second volume against Jovinian and not only about this but also about, which comes under the same question, where bad fish are separated from good.(1) What is fully said there, therefore, can be omitted here. 3. Third you asked what the apostle says about the advent of the lord saviour that certain of those living will be taken up into the clouds [1Thess.4:14-17] so they are not preceded by those who slept in Christ and you wish to know whether that happens in the body and not before they die, since our lord died and Enoch and Elijah, according to the Apocalypse of John, are going to die, nor is it clear that there is any who will not have known death. This can be known from the context of that passage, that to the saints who will be seized in the body at the advent of the saviour, it will happen in those bodies yet so the corrupt and mortal lack of glory will become incorruptable and immortal glory, so the bodies that are resurrected will be transformed into the same substance as the bodies of the living. Whence the apostle says in another place: "because of that we do not wish to be unclothed but to take on more clothes, so what is mortal may be swallowed up by life" [2Cor.5:4], so that the body will not be forsaken by the soul, but the soul living in the body may become illustrious. About Enoch and Elijah, however, who the Apocalypse says will come and will die, the argument is not of this time, since all that book is to be understood spiritually, as we think, or, if we follow a carnal/literal interpretation, we would be accepting Jewish fables, that Jerusalem will be built again and sacrifices offered in the temple and carnal ceremonies will be held with spiritual worship diminished. 4. The fourth is that you asked how it is in the gospel of John after the resurrection, that it is said to Mary Magdalene: "do not touch me because I have not yet ascended to my father" [20:17] and again in Matthew it is written that the women ran to the feet of the saviour,(2) when surely it is not the same to touch his feet after the resurrection and not to touch them. Mary Magdalene is the same one from whom he expelled seven demons so where sin had been abundant there grace was superabundant; when she thought the lord was a gardener and spoke with him as if with a man and sought the living among the dead, she rightly heard "do not touch me," and the sense is: "you do not deserve to cling to my feet nor adore the lord and hold his feet, when you did not think he had risen. For to you I had not yet ascended to my father." But the other women, who touch his feet, confess the lord and deserve to cling to his feet who were confident that he had ascended to the father. Even though the same woman is said in different gospels to have held the feet and not to have held them, the easy solution is that at first she did not believe and afterwards she was not repulsed because she had changed her error by confession/acknowledgment of belief, which can be understood about/from the thieves, when one evangelist recounts that both blasphemed, another that one confessed. 5. The last leaf contained [the question] whether the lord conversed with the disciples for forty days after the resurrection and was never elsewhere, or secretly ascended to heaven and descended, but nonetheless did not deny his presence to the apostles. If you consider that the son of god, about whom we speak, is god who said: "do I not fill heaven and earth says the lord" [Jer.23:24] and about whom another prophet testifies: "heaven is my throne and the earth my footstool" [Isa.66:1], and again elsewhere: "who holds heaven with his hand and the earth with his fist" [Isa.40:12], about whom David sings: "where shall I go from your spirit and where shall I flee from your sight? if I ascend to heaven you are there, if I descend to hell or live in the farthest limits of the sea, even there your hand will lead me and your right hand hold me" [Ps.138:7-10], surely you do not doubt that even before the resurrection god the word lived in the lord's body so that he was in the father and enclosed the circle of heaven and was infused in all things and surrounded them, that is, he penetrated all things within and contained them without. It is foolish therefore to limit his power within the smallness of one little body, whom heaven does not hold. And yet he who was everywhere was also complete in the son of man; indeed divine nature and god-speech can not be divided into parts or places but though he is everywhere, he is everywhere whole. He was therefore at one and the same time forty days with the apostles and with the angels and in the father and in the farthest limits of the sea. He is located in all places, with Thomas in India, with Peter in Rome, with Paul in Illyria, with Titus in Crete, with Andrew in Greece, with individual apostles and apostolic men in each and all regions. When it is said that he forsakes or does not forsake some, that is not a limit of his nature but describes the merits of those among whom he deigns to be.

Original letter:

1. Magnis nos prouocas quaestionibus et torpens otio ingenium, dum interrogas, doces. prima tua sciscitatio fuit, quae sint illa, quae nec oculus uidit nec auris audiuit nec in cor hominus ascenderunt quae praeparauit deus his, qui diligunt eum, et quomodo rursum idem apostolus inferat: nobis autem reuelauit deus per spiritum suum et, si reuelatum est apostolo, intellegere debeamus, quomodo et ille aliis reuelarit. ad quae breuis responsio est: non debere nos quaerere, quid sit illud, quod nec oculus uidit nec auris audiuit nec in cor hominis ascendit. si enim ignoratur, quomodo sciri potest? quod promittitur in futuro, non cernitur in praesenti. spes enim, quae uidetur, non est spes, sed iam certa possessio, quomodo si uelit quispiam dicere: 'ostende mihi, quod inuisibile est; loquere, quod audiri non potest; expone, quod cogitatio non conprehendit humana.' ergo hoc sensu apostolus dixisse credendus est, quod carnalibus oculis et aure carnali et cogitatione mortali non possint spiritalia conprehendi. etsi enim noueramus quondam Iesum secundum carnem, sed nunc iam non nouimus eum. et in Iohannis epistula scribitur: carissimi, nunc filii deisumus et necdum manifestatum est, quid futuri sumus, quoniam uidebimus eum, sicuti est. quodque reuelatum sibi et sanctis per spiritum esse testatur, non statim sequitur, ut ipse aliis reuelarit. alioquin audiuit et in paradiso uerba ineffabilia, quae aliis narrare non poterat; aut si narrauit, nequaquam ineffabilia sunt. 2. Secunda quaestio fuit, in qua dicis legisse te per transitum in opusculis meis, quod agni, qui stent a dextris, et haedi, qui a sinistris, Christiani sint atque gentiles et non potius boni et mali. non memini me hoc aliquando dixisse et, si dixissem, non essem in errore pertinax. quantum autem dictanti subito occurrit, in secundo uolumine contra Iouinianum super hoc capitulo disputasse me noui et non solum super hoc, sed et de eo, quod in eandem quaestionem cadit, ubi pisces mali a bonis piscibus separantur. quod ergo ibi plene dictum est, nunc omittendum uidetur. 3. Tertium interrogaueras, quod dicit apostolus in aduentu domini saluatoris rapi quosdam uiuentes obuiam in nubibus, ita ut non praeueniantur ab his, qui in Christo dormierunt, uisque nosse, utrum sic occurrant in corporibus et non ante moriantur, cum et dominus noster mortuus sit et Enoch atque Helias secundum Apocalypsin Iohannis morituri esse dicantur, ne scilicet ullus sit, qui non gustauerit mortem. hoc ex ipsius continentia loci sciri potest, quod sancti, qui in aduentu saluatoris in corpore fuerint deprebensi, in isdem corporibus occurrant ei. ita tamen. ut inglorium et corruptum et mortale gloria et incorrutione et inmortalitate mutetur, ut. qualia corpora surrectura sunt, in talem substantiam etiam uiuorum corpora transformentur. unde dicit alio loco apostolus: propter quod nolumus spoliari, sed superuestiri, ut absorbeatur morta1e hoc a uita. ne scilicet corpus ab anima deseratur. sed anima habitante in corpore fiat inclitum, quod ante inglorium fuit. de Enoch autem et Helia. quos uenturos Apocalypsis refert et esse morituros, non est istius temporis disputatio, cum omnis ille liber aut spiritaliter intellegendus sit, ut nos aestimamus. aut. si carnalem interpretationem sequimur, Iudaicis fabulis adquiescendum sit. ut rursum aedificetur Hierusalem et hostiae offeranttur in templo et spiritali cultu inminuto carnales obtineant caeremoniae. 4. Quartum est, quod quaesisti. quomodo in Iohannis euangelio post resurrectionem dicatur ad Mariam Magdalenen: noli me tangere ; nondum enim ascendi ad patrem meum, et rursum in Matheo scriptum sit, quod ad uestigia saluatoris mulieres corruerint, cum utique non sit id ipsum tangere post resurrectionem pedes eius et non tangere. Maria Magdalene ipsa est, a qua septem daemonia expulerat, ut, ubi abundauerat peccatum, superabundaret gratia; quae, quia dominum hortulanum putabat et quasi cum homine loquebatur et quaerebat uiueutem cum mortuis, recte audit: noli me tangere, et est sensus: 'non mereris meis haerere uestigiis nec adorare quasi dominum et eius tenere pedes, quem non aestimas surrexisse. tibi enim necdum ascendi ad patrem meum.’ ceterae uero mulieres, quae pedes tangunt, dominum confitentur et merentur eius haerere uestigiis, quem ad patrem ascendisse confidunt. quamquam, etiamsi eadem mulier in diuersis euangeliis et tenuisse pedes et non tenuisse referatur, facilis solutio sit, cum potuerit primum corripi quasi incredula et postea non repelli quasi ea, quae errorem confessione mutauerat, quod et de latronibus intellegi potest, cum alius euangelist utrumque blasphemasse, alius narret alterum esse confessum. 5. Extrema schedula continebat, utrum post resurrectionem quadraginta diebus cum discipulis dominus conuersatus sit et numquam alibi fuerit an latenter ad caelum ascenderit atque descenderit et nihilominus apostolis sui praesentiam non negarit. si deum dei filium consideres, de quo sermo est, et illum esse, qui loquitur: nonne caelum et terram ego repleo, dicit dominus. et de quo alius propheta testatur: caelum mihi thronus est, terra autem scabellum pedum meorum, et rursum alibi: qui tenet caelum palmo et terram pugillo, de quo Dauid canit: quo ibo ab spiritu tuo et a facie tua quo fugiam? si ascendero in caelum, tu ibi es; si descendero ad infernum et habitauero in extremis maris, etenim ibi manus tua deducet me et tenebit me dextera tua, profecto non ambiges etiam ante resurrectionem sic in dominico corpore habitasse deum uerbum, ut et in patrc esset et caeli circulum cluderet atque in omnibus infusus esset et circumfusus, id est, ut cuncta penetraret interior et contineret exterior. stultum est ergo illius potentiam unius corpusculi paruitate finire, quem non capit caelum. et tamen, qui ubique erat, etiam in filio hominis totus erat; diuina quippe natura et deus sermo in partes secari non potest nec locis diuidi, sed, cum ubique sit, totus ubique est. erat igitur uno eodemque tempore et cum apostolis quadraginta diebus et cum angelis et in patre et in extremis finibus maris erat. in omnibus locis uersabatur: cum Thoma in India, cum Petro Romae, cum Paulo in Illyrico, cum Tito in Creta. cum Andrea in Achaia, cum singulis apostolis et apostolicis uiris in singulis cunctisque regionibus. quod autem dicitur deserere quosdam uel non deserere, non naturae illius terminus ponitur, sed eorum merita describuntur, apud quos esse dignatur.

Historical context:

Jerome answers five questions Marcella has sent him about passages in the new testament, particularly after the resurrection, including one she found in a work of his which he does not recall. Note that Jerome does not identify biblical passages he cites, a common omission among Christian writers, but Jerome would have been certain that Marcella could identify the context.

Scholarly notes:

(1) The separation of lambs from goats occurs in Matth.25:33 and the fish in Matth.13:47-48, Jerome's discussion in Adversus Jovinianum 22.18.22. (2) In the authorized Matthew, the women the angel sends are Mary Magdalene and the other Mary; they follow Christ, he appears to them, and they take hold of his feet and worship him [Matth.28.1-9]. Mary Magdalene was not specifically mentioned in all versions of Matthew, as Jerome notes, but he also allows the possibility that she may have been in a higher spiritual state in the second instance.

Printed source:

Sancti Eusebii Hieronymi Epistulae, ed. Isidorus Hilberg, 3 v. (New York: Johnson, 1970, repr. CSEL, 1910-18), ep.59

Date:

393?