Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume III/Rufinus/Jerome's Apology/Book II/Summary of the Chapters

1&#8211;3. A criticism on Rufinus&#8217; Apology to Anastasius. His excuses for not coming to Rome are absurd. His parents are dead and the journey is easy. No one ever heard before of his being imprisoned or exiled for the faith.

4&#8211;8. His confession of faith is unsatisfactory. No one asked him about the Trinity, but about Origen&#8217;s doctrines of the Resurrection, the origin of souls, and the salvability of Satan. As to the Resurrection and to Satan he is ambiguous. As to souls he professes ignorance.

9. What Latin! The poor souls must be tormented by his barbarisms.

10. It is not permitted to you to be ignorant of such a matter which all the churches know.

11. As to translating the &#928;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#8125;&#913;&#961;&#967;&#8182;&#957;, it is not a question, but a charge that you unjustifiably altered the book.

12, 13. Origen asserts Christ to be a creature, and maintains universal restitution. Where has he contradicted this?

14. The question is, as Anastasius says to John of Jerusalem, with what motive you translated the &#928;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#8125;&#913;&#961;&#967;&#8182;&#957;

15. You pretend not to be Origen&#8217;s defender, but you publish and enlarge the Apology for him and allege the heretics&#8217; falsification of his works.

16. Your defence gains no support from Eusebius or Didymus, who, each for his own reason, defend the &#928;&#949;&#961;&#8054; &#8125;&#913;&#961;&#967;&#8182;&#957; as it stands.

17. If we may allege falsification at every turn we make a chaos of all past literature.

18. The object of Origen&#8217;s letter, of which he translates only a part, is not to shew the falsification of his writings but to vituperate the Bishops who condemned him.

19. It is only in reference to a particular point in his dispute with Candidus that Origen alleges this falsification. The story of Hilary&#8217;s being condemned through his writings having been falsified has no foundation.

20. That which you tell about myself in Damasus&#8217; council is mere after-dinner gossip.

21&#8211;2. The attack on Epiphanius as a plagiarist of Origen is an outrage on the Bishops generally. Origen never wrote 6000 books.

23. I ascertained at the library at C&#230;sarea that the Apology you quote as Pamphilus&#8217; is the work of Eusebius.

24. The letter falsely circulated in Africa as mine, and expressing regret for my translation of the Old Test. from the Hebrew bears the mark of your hand. I have always honoured the Seventy Translators.

25&#8211;32. In proof of this, I bring forward the prefaces to my Translation of the Books from Genesis to Isaiah.

33. As to Daniel, it was necessary to point out that Bel and the Dragon, and similar stories were not found in the Hebrew.

34. A vindication of the importance of the Hebrew Text of Scripture.

35. Though the LXX has been of great value, we should be grateful for fresh translations from the original.