attracts me. From the priest I demand the safe-keeping of the victim, from the shepherd the protection due to the sheep.7 Away with the envied glory; let the pride of Roman majesty withdraw. My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross. As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the Church is built. This is the house where alone the paschal lamb can be rightly eaten. This is the ark of Noah, and he who is not found in it shall perish when the flood prevails. But since by reason of my sins I have betaken myself to this desert which lies between Syria and the uncivilized waste, I cannot, owing to the great distance between us, always ask of your sanctity the holy thing of the Lord.10 Consequently I here follow the Egyptian confessors who share your faith, and hide my frail craft in the wake of their great argosies.11 I know nothing of Vitalis; I reject Meletius; I have nothing to do with Paulinus. 12 He that gathers not with you scatters; he that is not of Christ is of Antichrist.13

3. Just now, I am sorry to say, those offspring of Arians, the Campenses, 14 are trying to extort from me, a Roman, their 7 Sacerdos, pastor, both as bishop.

8 Matt. 16:18. In Ep. 16, to Damasus, Jerome says: "He who is joined my man."

to the chair of Peter is

9 Ex. 12:22; Gen. 7:23, cf. Cyprian, De Unitate, 8 and 6. 10 Sanctum Domini, the eucharist.

11 In A.D. 373 the eastern emperor Valens, an Arian, banished some orthodox Egyptians to Syria. Some were at Heliopolis (Baalbek). Jerome mentions a group of them, visited by an Alexandrian presbyter, in Ep. 3. Damasus was in communion with Alexandria, so Jerome was safe in communicating with them.

12 In Ep. 16, these three claim to be adhering to Damasus. For Meletius and Paulinus see the Introduction. Vitalis had been a presbyter of Meletius, but became a disciple of Apollinarius, whose lectures Jerome attended in Antioch. As such, Vitalis was orthodox as to the homoousion, but unorthodox as to the Incarnation. He went to Rome, and was sent back to Antioch with a letter which charged Paulinus to look into his orthodoxy. This implied that Damasus recognized Paulinus, not Meletius. The date is usually given as 375. About this time Apollinarius consecrated Vitalis as bishop, and so he too claimed to be Bishop of Antioch. Had this happened when Jerome wrote? The chronology is not clear. Epiphanius does not mention Vitalis in his Ancoratus, written in 374. 13 Luke 11:23.

14 The origin of the nickname Campenses is uncertain. Some think it goes back to the time when the Meletian party had lost possession of the city churches to the Arian bishop Euzoius, and were compelled to worship in the fields; others connect it with the plain (campus) of Cilicia

unheard-of formula of three hypostases. And this, too, after the definition of Nicaea and the decree of Alexandria, in which the West has joined. 15 Where, I should like to know, are the apostles of these doctrines? Where is their Paul, their new doctor of the Gentiles? I ask them what three hypostases are supposed to mean. They reply three Persons subsisting. I rejoin that this is my belief. They are not satisfied with the meaning, they demand the term. Surely some secret venom lurks in the words. "If any man refuse," I cry, "to acknowledge three hypostases in the sense of three things hypostatized, that is three Persons subsisting, let him be anathema." Yet, because I do not enounce their words, I am counted a heretic. "But, if any one, understanding by hypostasis ousia, deny that in the three persons there is one hypostasis, he has no part in Christ." Because this is my confession I, like you, am branded with the stigma of Sabellianism.16

4. Give a decision, I beg you. If you so decide, I shall not hesitate to speak of three hypostases. Order a new creed to supersede the Nicene; and then, whether we are Arians or orthodox, one confession will do for us all. In the whole range of secular learning hypostasis never means anything but ousia.17 And can any one, I ask, be so profane as to speak of three substances in the Godhead? There is one nature of God and one only; and this, and this alone, truly is. For it derives its being from no other source but is all its own. All other things, that is all things created, although they appear to be, are not. For there was a time when they were not, and that which once was not, may again cease to be. God alone who is eternal, that is to say, who has no beginning, really deserves to be called an essence. Therefore also he says to Moses from the bush: "I AM THAT I AM," and Moses says of him: "I AM hath sent

and the alliance between the Meletians and the theologians of Tarsus, for which see § 5 and note.

15 Jerome will not face the fact that the "decree" of the Council of Alexandria, 362, was entirely against the line he was taking. But he has right on his side to the extent that, according to this decree, he could not be compelled to accept the three hypostases as a mark of his own orthodoxy. Presumably there were supporters of Meletius among the monks of Chalcis, as well as in Antioch.

16 Cauterio unionis, that is, the doctrine that God is one Person in three aspects or modes. This was taught by Sabellius early in the third century, and the East suspected that the West used the homoousion in a Sabellian or modalist sense.

17 This is not true. For hypostasis see Prestige, God in Patristic Thought, pp. 162-190.

me." 18 As the angels, the sky, the earth, the seas, all existed at the time, how could God claim for himself that name of essence which was common to all? But because his nature alone is uncreated, and because in the three Persons there subsists but one Godhead, there is only one nature which truly is; whosoever in the name of religion declares that there are in the Godhead three elements, that is three hypostases, is trying to predicate three natures of God. And if this is true, why are we severed by walls from Arius, when in unbelief we are one with him? Let Ursinus be made the colleague of your blessedness; let Auxentius be associated with Ambrose. 19 But may the faith of Rome never come to such a pass! May the devout hearts of your people never be infected with such sacrilege! Let us be satisfied to speak of one substance and of three subsisting Persons-perfect, equal, coeternal. Let us keep to one hypostasis, if such be your pleasure, and say nothing of three. It is a bad sign when those who mean the same thing use different words. Let us be satisfied with the form of creed which I have mentioned. Or, if you think it correct, write and explain how we should speak of three hypostases. I am ready to submit. But, believe me, there is poison hidden under their honey; the angel of Satan has transformed himself into an angel of light.20 They give a plausible explanation of the term hypostasis; yet when I profess to hold the doctrine which they expound, they count me a heretic. Why are they so tenacious of a word? Why do they shelter themselves under ambiguous language? If their belief corresponds to their explanation of it, I do not condemn them for keeping it. On the other hand, if my belief corresponds to their alleged opinions, they should allow me to set forth their meaning in my own words.

6. I implore your blessedness, therefore, by the crucified, the salvation of the world, and by the consubstantial Trinity, to authorize me by letter either to use or to refuse this formula of three hypostases. And lest the obscurity of my present abode may baffle the bearers of your letter, I pray you to address it 18 Ex. 3:14.

19 Ursinus was the rival of Pope Damasus ever since their disputed election of A.D. 366. Auxentius is either Ambrose's Arian predecessor or, less probably, Auxentius of Durostorum, for whom see Ambrose, Letters, 20, 21 (pp. 199-217). If the latter, Jerome had unexpectedly good information about Milan, perhaps through Evagrius; though his own home was in the orbit of Milan.

20 II Cor. 11:14.

to Evagrius, 21 the presbyter, with whom you are well acquainted. I beg you also to signify with whom I am to communicate at Antioch. For the Campenses, with their allies the heretics of Tarsus, 22 desire nothing more than, with the support and authority of communion with you, to preach the three hypostases in the old sense of the word. 23

21 Evagrius was a presbyter of Antioch, an adherent of Paulinus. He went to Italy with Eusebius of Vercellae when the latter returned from exile, was respected in the West as a man of letters and an ardent "Nicene", and used his influence on behalf of Paulinus, whom he succeeded in 388. There is a valuable appendix on Evagrius, the "Little Church" at Antioch and Jerome, in Labourt's edition of the Letters, vol. III, 248259.

22 Silvanus, Bishop of Tarsus, and Theophilus, Bishop of Castabala, came to orthodoxy through the "homœousian" party, in which they were prominent. They were in communion with Meletius, and Jerome, who does not accept their orthodoxy, regards Meletius as tarred with the same Arian brush. But they were in communion with Pope Liberius according to Socrates, H.E., IV, 12.

23 The old sense was, at least to Jerome, three different hypostases of different quality. The Council of Constantinople of A.D. 381 accepted the three hypostases, and so has the West, despite Jerome.

N

Letter 52: To

52: To Nepotianus

INTRODUCTION

EPOTIAN WAS THE NEPHEW OF HELIODORUS OF

Altinum, to whom Letter 14 had been sent in or about

A.D. 376. One of Heliodorus' reasons for returning to Italy had been the claims of his widowed sister and her small (parvulus) son. Nepotian was brought up by his uncle, joined the army, as he had done, and like him left it with a desire for the ascetic life. Like him again, he decided to enter the ministry of the Church. Most of what we know about Nepotian comes from the letter which Jerome wrote to Heliodorus in A.D. 396 when the young man died, not long after his ordination as presbyter. The present letter gives an indication of its own date in the last section. It was written ten years-not, perhaps, an exact figure-after the famous letter to Eustochium on Virginity (22), which can be dated fairly closely to the end of 383 or the beginning of 384.

Nepotian, we are told in Letter 60 (§§ 9-13 give the biographical details), had served in the army in order to have means for charity, a kindly way of putting it. When he left the service, he gave all his savings to the poor, desiring to be perfect. He burned to visit the monasteries of Egypt or Mesopotamia, or at least the hermits of the Dalmatian islands, but he could not bring himself to leave his uncle, who had brought him up and educated him in holiness. So passing through the usual grades of ministry, he was ordained presbyter,1 making the expected protestations of unwillingness and unworthiness. It was for him not an honour, but a burden, non honor sed onus.

1 He was still young, and there was some grumbling about his youth (Ep. 60:10). The question of canonical age at this date is obscure. The early Council of Neocaesarea had given thirty as the minimum age for a presbyter, Pope Siricius thirty-five. Presumably Nepotian was younger than this.