Page:Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature (1911).djvu/897

 allusion to Jerome's altered attitude towards Origen, was ungenerous and misleading. The second point is obscured by the loss of the chief part of the Greek of the Περὶ Αρχῶν, but we have enough upon which to form a judgment. Some passages, vouched for and translated by Jerome (Ep. cxxiv. 13), were, with much that leads up to them, omitted by Rufinus, who also carried the licence of paraphrasing difficult expressions to an extreme length. But the texts of Origen were somewhat uncertain; the standard of literary honesty was not then what is it now; and then Jerome himself had in his letter ''de Opt. Gen. Interpretandi (Ep.'' 57) sanctioned a mode of interpretation almost as loose as that of Rufinus. (See also his words to Vigilantius, Ep. lxi. 2, "Quae bona sunt transtuli, et mala vel amputavi vel correxi vel tacui. Per me Latini bona ejus habent et mala ignorant.") We may acquit Rufinus of more than a too eager desire, unchastened by any critical power, to make the greatest exponent of Oriental Christianity acceptable to Roman ears.

Rome.—The first two books Περὶ Ἀρχῶν, with the preface, were first published probably in the winter of 397-398; the other two, having been translated during Lent 398, were carried by Rufinus to Rome, whither Macarius had already gone, when he went to stay with Melania and her family. During his stay Apronianus, a noble Roman, was converted, partly through Rufinus, who addresses him as "mi fili." The friends of Melania were, no doubt, numerous. Pope Siricius also (elected in 385 when Jerome had himself aspired to the office) was favourable to Rufinus. But the expectations formed by Rufinus in his preface were realized at once. Many were astonished at the book of Origen, some finding even in Rufinus's version the heresies they connected with the name of Origen; some indignant that these heresies had been softened down. Jerome's friends at first were dubious. Eusebius of Cremona, who came to Rome from Bethlehem early in 398 (Hieron. Ap. iii. 24), lived at first on friendly terms with Rufinus and communicated with him (Ruf. Apol. i. 20). But Jerome's friends Pammachius, Oceanus, and Marcella resented the use made of their master's name and suspected Rufinus's sincerity. According to his account, Eusebius, or some one employed by him, stole the translation of the last two books of the Περὶ Ἀρχῶν, which were still unrevised, from his chamber, and in this imperfect state had them copied and circulated, adding in some cases words he had never written (Ap. i. 19; ii. 44). But, being in uncertainty as to the value of the translation, Pammachius and Oceanus sent the books and prefaces to Jerome at Bethlehem, who sat down at once, made a literal translation of the Περὶ Ἀρχῶν, and sent it to his friends with a letter (84) written to refute the insinuations through which, as he considered, Rufinus's preface had associated him with Origenism. He sent them also a letter (81) to Rufinus, protesting against his "fictae laudes," but refraining from any breach of friendship. When these documents arrived in Rome, affairs had changed. Rufinus had gone; pope Siricius had died (date in Fagius Nov. 29, 398); the new pope Anastasius was ready to listen to friends of Jerome; Rufinus the Syrian, Jerome's friend, had arrived in Rome (Hieron. Ap. iii. 24) and with Eusebius of Cremona had gone through the chief cities of Italy (Ruf. Ap. i. 21) pointing out all the heretical passages in Origen. Rufinus, a little before the death of pope Siricius, had obtained from him letters of recommendation ("literae formatae"), to which he appealed afterwards as shewing he was in communion with the Roman church (Hieron. Ap. iii, 21). At Milan he met Eusebius in the presence of the bishop, and confronted him when he read heretical passages from a copy of the Περὶ Ἀρχῶν received from Marcella and purporting to be Rufinus's work (Ruf. Ap. i. 19). He then went to Aquileia, where bp. Chromatius, who had baptized him 27 years before, received him.

Aquileia.—Here he soon heard that Jerome's translation of the Περὶ Ἀρχῶν, though intended only for Pammachius and his friends, had been published, and that Jerome's letter against him was in circulation. Of this letter he received a copy from Apronianus (Apol. i. 1); but Pammachius kept back the more friendly letter addressed to Rufinus himself. This act of treachery, which Jerome subsequently in his anger at Rufinus's Apology brought himself to defend (Hieron. Apol. iii. 28), caused Rufinus and Jerome to assail each other with fierce invectives. For that controversy and for the letters of pope Anastasius to Rufinus and John of Jerusalem, and Rufinus's letter of apology, see. We pass on to the last decade of Rufinus's life.

His friends at Aquileia were eager as those at Pinetum had been for a knowledge of the Christian writers of the East; and Rufinus's remaining years were almost entirely occupied with translation, though several of his original works belong also to this period. The translations have no great merit, but on the whole are accurate, with no need for omissions and paraphrases as in the Περὶ Ἀρχῶν. They were undertaken in no distinct order, but according to the request of friends. Rufinus wished to translate the Commentaries of Origen on the whole Heptateuch, and only Deuteronomy remained untranslated when he died. The Commentary on the Romans, however (see preface), and several others, besides other works, intervened.

The Exposition of the Creed is of importance, as a testimony to the variations in the creeds of the various churches (that of Aquileia having "Patrum invisibilem et impassibilem," "in Spiritu Sancto," and "hujus carnis resurrectionem" as distinctive peculiarities), and from its intrinsic merits and as shewing the influence of Eastern theology, harmonized by a sound judgment, on Western theology.

The History is on a par with those of Socrates and Sozomen, exhibiting no conception of the real functions of history nor of the relative proportion of different classes of events, yet dealing honestly with the facts within the writer's view. It was trans. into Greek, and valued in the East, as his trans. of Eusebius, of which it is a continuation, was in the West (Gennad. de Script. Eccl. xvii.).

The History of the Egyptian monks presents many difficulties. It is distinctly attributed