Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 8.djvu/401

 JEROME

341

JEROME

Jerome, Saint, h. at Striilon, a town on the confines of Daltnati.i ami I'aiiiionia, about the year 340-2; d. at Bethlehem, :;il Septeinher, 420. He went to Rome, probalily al)out lliO. where he was baptized, and be- came interested in ecclesiastical matters. From Rome he went to Trier, famous for its schools, and there be- gan his theological studies. Later he went to Aquileia, and towards 373 he set out on a journey to the East. He settled first at .\ntioch, where he heard Apollinaris of Laodicea, one of the first exegetes of that time and not yet separated from the Church. From 374-9 Jerome led an ascetical life in the desert of Chalcis, south-west of Antioch. Ordained priest at Antioch, he went to Constantinople (380-81), where a friendship sprang up between him and St. Gregory Nazianzus. From 382 to August 385 he made another sojourn in Rome, not far from Pope Damasus. When the latter died (11 Dec, 384) his position became a very difficult one. His harsh criticisms had made him bitter ene- mies, who tried to ruin him. After a few months he was compelled to leave Rome. By way of .'Antioch and Alexandria he reached Bethlehem, in 386. He settled there in a monastery near a convent founded by two Roman ladies, Paula and Eustochium, who fol- lowed him to Palestine. Henceforth he led a life of asceticism and study; but even then he was troubled by controversies which will be mentioned later, one with Rufinus and the other with the Pelagians.

Chronology. — The literary activity of St. Jerome, although very prolific, may be summed up under a few principal heads: works on the Bible; theological controversies; historical works; various letters; trans- lations. But perhaps the chronology of his more important writings will enable us to follow more easily the development of his studies. A first period extends to his sojourn in Rome (382), a period of preparation. From this period we have the trans- lation of the homilies of Origen on Jeremias, Ezechiel, and Isaias (379-81), and about the same time the translation of the Chronicle of Eusebius; then the "Vita S. Pauli, primi cremita;" (374-379). A second period extends from his sojourn in Rome to the be- ginning of the translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew (382-390). During this period the exe- getical vocation of St. Jerome asserted itself under the influence of Pope Damasus, and took definite shape when the opposition of the ecclesiastics of Rome compelled the caustic Dalmatian to renounce eccle- siastical advancement and retire to Bethlehem. In 384 we have the correction of the Latin version of the Four Gospels; in 385, the Epistles of St. Paul; in 384, a first revision of the Latin Psalms according to the accepted text of the Septuagint (Roman Psalter); in 384, the revision of the Latin \'ersion of the Book of Job, after the accepted version of the Septuagint; between 386 and 391 a second revision of the Latin Psalter, this time according to the text of the " Hexapla " of Origen (Gallican Psalter, embodied in the Vulgate). It is doubtful whether he revised the entire version of the Old Testament according to the Greek of the Septuagint. In 382-383 "Altercatio Luciferiani et Orthodox! " and "De perpetua Vir- ginitate B. Mariae; adversus Helvidium". In .387- 388, commentaries on the Epistles to Philemon, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to Titus; and in 389-390, on Ecclesiastes. Between 390 and 405, St. Jerome gave all his attention to the translation of the Old Testament according to the Hebrew, but this work alternated with many others. Between 390-394 he translated the Books of Samuel and of Kings, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Esdras, and Paralipomena. In 390 he translated the treatise " De Spiritu Sancto " of Didy- mus of Alexandria; in 389-90, he drew up his "Qua>- stiones hebraica; in Genesim " and " De interpreta- tione nominum hebraicorum. " In 391-92 he wrote the "Vita S. Hilarionis", the "Vita Malchi, monachi

captivi", and commentaries on Xahum, Micheas, Sophonias, Aggeus, Habacuc. In 392-93, "De viris illustribus", and "Adversus Jovinianum"; in 395, commentaries on Jonas and ,\bdias; in 398, revi- sion of the remainder of the Latin version of the New Testament, and about that time commentaries on chapters xiii-xxiii of Isaias; in 398, an unfinished work "Contra Joannem Hierosolymitanum " ; in 401, " Apologeticum adversus Rufinum"; between 403- 406, "Contra Vigilantium"; finally from 398 to 405, completion of the version of the Old Testament according to the Hebrew. In the last period of his life, from 405 to 420, St. Jerome took up the series of his commentaries interrupted for seven years. In 406, he commented on Osee, Joel, Amos, Zacharias, Malachias; in 408, on Daniel; from 408 to 410, on the remainder of Isaias; from 410 to 415, on Ezechiel; from 415-420, on Jeremias. From 401 to 410 date what is left of his sermons; treatises on St. Mark, homilies on the Psalms, on various subjects, and on the Gospels; in 415, "Dialogi contra Pelagianos".

Char.\cteristics of St. Jerome's Work. — St. Jerome owes his place in the history of exegetical studies chiefly to his revisions and translations of the Bible. Until about 391-2, he considered t he Septuagint translation as inspired. But the progress of his Hebraistic studies and his intercourse with the rabbis made him give up that idea, and he recognized as inspiretl the original text only. It was about this period that he undertook the translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew. But he went too far in this reaction against the ideas of his time, and is open to reproach for not having sufficiently appre- ciated the Septuagint. This latter version was made from a much older, and at times much purer, Hebrew text than the one in use at the end of the fourth century. Hence the necessity of taking the Septua- gint into consideration in any attempt to restore the text of the Old Testament. With this exception we must admit the excellence of the translation made by St. Jerome. His commentaries represent a vast amount of work but of very unequal value. Very often he worked exceedingly rapidly; besides, he considered a commentary a work of compilation, and his chief care was to accumulate the interpretations of his predecessors, rather than to pass judgment on them. The "Quaestiones hebraicie in (ienesim" is one of his best works. It is a philological inquiry concerning the original text. It is to be regretted that he was unable to continue, as had been his in- tention, a style of work entirely new at the time. Although he often asserted his desire to avoid exces- sive allegory, his efi'orts in that respect were far from successful, and in later years he was ashamed of some of his earlier allegorical explanations. He himself says that he had recourse to the allegorical meaning only when unable to discover the literal meaning. His treatise, "De Interpretatione nominum hebrai- corum ", is but a collection of mystical anti symljolical meanings. Excepting the " Commentarius in ep. ad Galatas", which is one of his best, his explanations of the New Testament have no great value. Among his commentaries on the Old Testament must be mentioned those on Amos, Isaias, and Jeremias. There are some that are frankly bad, for instance those on Zacharias, Osee, and Joel.

To sum up, the Biblical knowledge of St. Jerome makes him rank first among ancient exegetes. In the first place, he was very careful as to the sources of his information. He required of the exegete a very extensive knowledge of sacred and profane history, and also of the linguistics and geography of Palestine. He never either categorically acknowl- edged or rejected the deutero-canonical books as part of the Canon of Scripture, and he repeatedly made use of them. On the inspiration, the existence of a spiritual meaning, and the freedom of the Bible