Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| You try to shield Origen by falsely attributing the Apology for him to Pamphilus. PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
12. About the book of
Pamphilus, what happened to me was, not comical as you call it, but
perhaps ridiculous; 3173
3173 non ridiculosa ut tu scribis sed ridicula. Jerome seems to object to ridiculosus as bad
Latin. | namely that after I had
asserted it to be by Eusebius not by Pamphilus, I stated at the end of
the discussion that I had for many years believed that it was by
Pamphilus, and that I had borrowed a copy of this book from you. You may judge how
little I fear your derision from the fact that even now I make the same
statement. I took it from your manuscript as being a copy of a work of
Pamphilus. I trusted in you as a Christian and as a monk: I did not
imagine that you would be guilty of such a wicked imposture. But, after
that the question of Origen’s heresy was stirred throughout the
world on account of your translation of his work, I was more careful in
examining copies of the book, and in the library of Cæsarea I
found the six volumes of Eusebius’ Apology for Origen. As soon as
I had looked through them, I at once detected the book on the Son and
the Holy Spirit which you alone have published under the name of the
martyr, altering most of its blasphemies into words of a better
meaning. And this I saw must have been done either by Didymus or by you
or some other (it is quite clear that you did it in reference to
the Περὶ
᾽Αρχῶν) by this
decisive proof, that Eusebius tells us that Pamphilus published nothing
of his own. It is for you therefore to say from whence you obtained
your copy; and do not, for the sake of avoiding my accusation, say that
it was from some one who is dead, or, because you have no one to point
to, name one who cannot answer for himself. If this rivulet has its
source in your desk, the inference is plain enough, without my drawing
it. But, suppose that the title of this book and the name of the author
has been changed by some other lover of Origen, what motive had you for
turning it into Latin? Evidently this, that, through the testimony
given to him by a martyr, all should trust to the writings of Origen,
since they were guaranteed beforehand by a witness of such authority.
But the Apology of this most learned man was not sufficient for you;
you must write a treatise of your own in his defence, and, when these
two documents had been widely circulated, you felt secure in proceeding
to translate the Περὶ
᾽Αρχῶν itself
from the Greek, and commended it in a Preface, in which you said that
some things in it had been corrupted by the heretics, but that you had
corrected them from a study of others of Origen’s writings. Then
come in your praises of me for the purpose of preventing any of my
friends from speaking against you. You put me forward as the trumpeter
of Origen, you praise my eloquence to the skies, so that you may drag
down the faith into the mire; you call me colleague and brother, and
profess yourself the imitator of my works. Then, while on the one hand
you cry me up as having translated seventy homilies of Origen, and some
of his short treatises on the Apostle, in which you say that I so
smoothed things down that the Latin reader will find nothing in them
which is discrepant from the Catholic faith; now on the other hand you
brand these very books as heretical; and, obliterating your former
praise, you accuse the man whom you had preached up when you thought he
would figure as your ally, because you find that he is the enemy of
your perfidy. Which of us two is the calumniator of the martyr? I, who
say that he was no heretic, and that he did not write the book which is
condemned by every one; or you, who have published a book written by a
man who was an Arian and changed his name into that of the martyr? It
is not enough for you that Greece has been scandalized; you must press
the book upon the ears of the Latins, and dishonor an illustrious
martyr as far as in you lies by your translation. Your intention no
doubt was not this; it was not to accuse me but to make me serve for
the defence of Origen’s writings. But let me tell you that the
faith of Rome which was praised by the voice of an Apostle, does not
recognize tricks of this kind. A faith which has been guaranteed by the
authority of an Apostle cannot be changed though an Angel should
announce another gospel than that which he preached. Therefore, my
brother, whether the falsification of the book proceeds from you, as
many believe, or from another, as you will perhaps try to persuade us,
in which case you have only been guilty of rashness in believing the
composition of a heretic to be that of a martyr, change the title, and
free the innocence of the Romans from this great peril. It is of no
advantage to you to be the means of a most illustrious martyr being
condemned as a heretic: of one who shed his blood for Christ being
proud to be an enemy of the Christian faith. Take another course: say,
I found a book which I believed to be the work of a martyr. Do not fear
to be a penitent. I will not press you further. I will not ask from
whom you obtained it; you can name some dead man if you please, or say
you bought it from an unknown man in the street: for I do not wish to
see you condemned, but converted. It is better that it should appear
that you were in error than that the martyr was a heretic. At all
events, by some means or other, draw out your foot from its present
entanglement: consider what answer you will make in the judgment to
come to the complaints which the martyrs will bring against
you.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|