Jerome

Atticus: I grant you that they are just men, but I cannot agree with you at all that they are without sin. For I say that humanity can be without fault, which in Greek is called kakia [“wickedness”], but I deny that it is anamartētos [“faultless”], that is to say sine peccato [“without sin”]. For this is a virtue that befits God alone; and every creature is subject to sin and stands in need of the mercy of God, as Scripture says: “The earth is full of the mercy of the Lord.” And lest I seem to be discussing certain little faults, so to speak, of the saints, into which they slipped through error, I shall produce a few testimonies that refer not to individuals but rather to all people in general. In the thirty-first psalm, it is written, “I said I will confess against myself my injustice to the Lord, and you have forgiven the wickedness of my heart.” And it continues immediately, “For this” (that is to say, for this impiety or iniquity, for both words can be understood in this passage) “shall everyone that is holy pray to you in a seasonable time.” If one is holy, what is his reason for praying for forgiveness of his iniquity? If one has iniquity, in what sense is he called holy? In the sense, to be sure, that it is also written in another place: “A just person shall fall seven times and shall rise again.” And, “The just is accuser of himself in the beginning of his speech.” And in another place: “The wicked are alienated from the womb, they have gone astray from the womb, they have spoken false things.” They became sinful at the very moment they were born in the likeness of Adam’s sin, who was a figure of the one who was to come, or at the moment when Christ was born of a virgin. It has been written about him: “Every one who opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord.”

“The earth has yielded its fruit,” earth, holy Mary who is from our earth, from our seed, from this clay, from this slime, from Adam. “Dust you are, and to dust you shall return.” This earth has yielded its fruit; what it lost in the Garden of Eden, it has found in the Son. “The earth has yielded its fruit.” First, it brought forth a flower. It says in the Song of Songs, “I am the flower of the field and the lily of the valleys.” This flower has become fruit that we might eat it, that we might consume its flesh. Would you like to know what this fruit is? A Virgin from a virgin, the Lord from the handmaid, God from man, Son from mother, fruit from earth. Listen to what the fruit itself says: “Unless the grain of wheat fall into the ground and die, it cannot bring forth much fruit.” “The earth has yielded its fruit”; it has yielded a grain of wheat. Because the grain of wheat has fallen into the ground and died, it produces many fruits. The fruit is multiplied in the head of grain. Because one had fallen, it rose again with many; one grain of wheat has fallen into the ground and a fruitful harvest came of it.

[Daniel 7:10] "There were millions ministering unto Him, and a billion stood by His side." This was not intended to be a specific number for the servants of God, but only indicates a multitude too great for human computation. These are the thousands and tens of thousands of which we read in the Psalms: "The chariot of God is attended by ten thousands; thousands of them that rejoice. The Lord is among them" (Psalm 68:17). And in another place: "He who maketh His angels spirits, and His ministers a flaming fire" (Psalm 104:4). Now the duty of angels is twofold: the duty of one group is to bestow rewards upon just men; the duty of the other is to have charge over individual calamities.

"...The court was in session, and the books were opened." The consciences of men, and the deeds of individuals which partake of either character, whether good or bad, are disclosed to all. One of the books is the good book of which we often read, namely the book of the living. The other is the evil book which is held in the hand of the accuser, who is the fiend and avenger of whom we read in Revelation: "The accuser of our brethren" (Revelation 12:10). This is the earthly book of which the prophet says: "Let them be written on earth" (Jeremiah 17:13).

[Daniel 11:24] "And there shall stand up in his place one despised, and the kingly honor shall not be given him; and he shall come privately and shall obtain the kingdom by fraud. And the arms of the fighter shall be overcome before his face and shall be broken, and the prince of the covenant as well. And after friendly advances he shall deal deceitfully with him, and shall go up and shall overcome with a small people. And he shall enter into rich and prosperous cities, and shall do things which his fathers never did, nor his fathers' fathers. He shall scatter their spoil and their booty and their wealth, and shall undertake plots against the best fortified cities, and shall continue thus for a time." Up to this point the historical order has been followed, and there has been no point of controversy between Porphyry and those of our side (variant: and us). But the rest of the text from here on to the end of the book he interprets as applying to the person of the Antiochus who was surnamed Epiphanes, the brother of Seleucus and the son of Antiochus the Great. He reigned in Syria for eleven years after Seleucus, and he seized Judaea, and it is under his reign that the persecution of God's Law is related, and also the wars of the Maccabees. But those of our persuasion believe all these things are spoken prophetically of the Antichrist who is to arise in the end time. But this factor appears to them as a difficulty for our view, namely the question as to why the prophetic discourse should abruptly cease mention of these great kings and shift from Seleucus to the end of the world. The answer is that in the earlier historical account where mention was made of the Persian kings, only four kings of Persia were presented, following after Cyrus, and many who came in between were simply skipped over, so as to come quickly to Alexander, king of the Macedonians. We hold that it is the practice of Scripture not to relate all details completely, but only to set forth what seems of major importance. Those of our school insist also that since many of the details which we are subsequently to read and explain are appropriate to the person of Antiochus, he is to be regarded as a type of the Antichrist, and those things which happened to him in a preliminary way are to be completely fulfilled in the case of the Antichrist. We hold that it is the habit of Holy Scripture to set forth by means of types the reality of things to come, in conformity with what is said of our Lord and Savior in the Seventy-first Psalm, a psalm which is noted at the beginning as being Solomon's, and yet not all the statements which are made concerning can be applied to Solomon. For certainly he neither endured "together with the sun and before the moon from generation to generation," (Psalm 72:5) nor did he hold sway from sea to sea, or from the River unto the ends of the earth; neither did all the nations serve him, nor did his name endure before the sun; neither were all the tribes of earth blessed in him, nor did all races magnify him. But in a partial way these things were set forth in advance, by shadows as it were, and by a mere symbol of the reality, in the person of Solomon, in order that they might be more perfectly fulfilled in our Lord and Savior. And so, just as the Savior had Solomon and the other saints as types of His advent, so also we should believe that the Antichrist very properly had as a type of himself the utterly wicked king, Antiochus, who persecuted the saints and defiled the Temple. Let us therefore follow along with the explanation point by point, and let us briefly observe in the case of each item what it signifies to those of the other school of thought and what it signifies to those of our school, in accordance with each of the two explanations. Our opponents say that the one who was to "stand up in the place of" Seleucus was his brother, Antiochus Epiphanes. The party in Syria who favored Ptolemy would not at first grant him the kingly honor, but he later secured the rule of Syria by a pretense of clemency. And as Ptolemy fought and laid everything waste, his arms were overcome and broken before the face of Antiochus. Now the word arms implies the idea of strength, and therefore also the host of any army is known as a hand. And not only does the text say that he conquered Ptolemy by fraud, but also the prince of the covenant he overcame by treachery, that is, Judas Maccabaeus. Or else this is what is referred to, that after he had secured peace with Ptolemy and he had become the prince of the covenant, he afterwards devised a plot against him. Now the Ptolemy meant here was not Epiphanes, who was the fifth Ptolemy to reign in Egypt, but Ptolemy Philometor, the son of Antiochus' sister, Cleopatra; and so Antiochus was his maternal uncle. And when after Cleopatra's death Egypt was ruled by Eulaius, the eunuch who was Philometor's tutor, and by Leneus, and they were attempting to regain Syria, which Antiochus had fraudulently seized, warfare broke out between the boy Ptolemy and his uncle. And when they joined battle between Pelusium and Mt. Casius, Ptolemy's generals were defeated. But then Antiochus showed leniency towards the boy, and making a pretense of friendship, he went up to Memphis and there received the crown after the Egyptian manner. Declaring that he was looking out for the lad's interests, he subjected all Egypt to himself with only a small force of men, and he entered into rich and prosperous cities. And so he did things which his father had never done, nor his fathers' fathers. For none of the kings of Syria had ever laid Egypt waste after this fashion and scattered all their wealth. Moreover he was so shrewd that he even overcame by his deceit the well-laid plans of those who were the boy-king's generals. This is the line of interpretation which Porphyry followed, pursuing the lead of Sutorius with much redundancy, discoursing of matters which we have summarized within a brief compass. But the scholars of our viewpoint have made a better and correcter interpretation, stating that the deeds are to be performed by the Antichrist at the end of the world. It is he who is destined to arise from a small nation, that is from the Jewish people, and shall be so lowly and despised that kingly honor will not be granted him. But by means of intrigue and deception he shall secure the government and by him shall the arms of the fighting nation of Rome be overcome and broken. He is to effect this result by pretending to be the prince of the covenant, that is, of the Law and Testament of God. And he shall enter into the richest of cities and shall do what his fathers never did, nor his fathers' fathers. For none of the Jews except the Antichrist has ever ruled over the whole world. And he shall form a design against the firmest resolves of the saints and shall do everything for a time, for as long as God's will shall have permitted him to do these things.

A cleric, then, as he serves Christ’s church, must first understand what his name means; and then, when he realizes this, must endeavor to be that which he is called. For since the Greek word klēros means “lot,” or “inheritance,” the clergy are so called either because they are the lot of the Lord, or else because the Lord himself is their lot and portion. Now, he who in his own person is the Lord’s portion, or has the Lord for his portion, must so bear himself as to possess the Lord and to be possessed by him. He who possesses the Lord and who says with the prophet, “The Lord is my portion,” can hold to nothing beside the Lord. For if he holds to something beside the Lord, the Lord will not be his portion. Suppose, for instance, that he holds to gold or silver, or possessions or inlaid furniture; with such portions as these the Lord will not deign to be his portion. I, if I am the portion of the Lord, and the line of his heritage, receive no portion among the remaining tribes; but, like the priest and the Levite, “I live on the tithe,” and serving the altar, am supported by its offerings. “Having food and raiment, I shall be content with these” and as a disciple of the cross shall share its poverty. I beseech you, therefore, and again and yet again admonish you;41 do not look to your military experience for a standard of clerical obligation. Do not seek worldly gain through service to Christ, so that, if you should be better off than when you first became clergy, you will not hear people say to your disgrace, “Their portion shall not profit them.” Welcome poor people and strangers to dine with you so that with them Christ may become your guest. Avoid as you would a plague a cleric who engages in business and who rises from poverty to wealth and from obscurity to a high position. For “bad company corrupts good character.” You despise gold; he loves it. You avoid wealth; he eagerly pursues it. You love silence, meekness, privacy; he takes delight in talking and insolence, in [town] squares and streets and apothecaries’ shops. What unity of feeling can there be where there is so wide a divergence of character?

[Daniel 7:2-3] "And during the night I saw in my vision, and behold, the four winds of heaven strove upon the great sea, and four great beasts were coming up out of the sea, differing from one another." The four winds of heaven I suppose to have been angelic powers to whom the principalities have been committed, in accordance with what we read in Deuteronomy: "When the Most High divided the nations and when He separated the children of Adam, He established the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the angels. For the Lord's portion is His people; Jacob is the line of His inheritance (Deuteronomy 32:8). But the sea signifies this world and the present age, overwhelmed with salty and bitter waves, in accordance with the Lord's own interpretation of the dragnet cast into the sea (Matthew 13:47-50). Hence also the sovereign of all creatures that inhabit the waters is described as a dragon, and his heads, according to David, are smitten in the sea (Psalm 74:13). And in Amos we read: "If he descends to the very depth of the sea, there will I give him over to the dragon and he shall bite him" (Amos 9:3). But as for the four beasts who came up out of the sea and were differentiated from one another, we may identify them from the angel's discourse. "These four great beasts," he says, "are four kingdoms which shall rise up from the earth." And as for the four winds which strove in the great sea, they are called winds of heaven because each one of the angels does for his realm the duty entrusted to him. This too should be noted, that the fierceness and cruelty of the kingdoms concerned are indicated by the term "beasts."

Thus when we have to face the hard and cruel necessity of death, we are comforted by this consolation, that we shall shortly see again those whose absence we now mourn. For their end is not called death but a slumber and a falling asleep. Wherefore also the blessed apostle forbids us to sorrow concerning them which are asleep, telling us to believe that those whom we know to sleep now may hereafter be roused from their sleep and when their slumber is ended may watch once more with the saints and sing with the angels: “Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace among people of good will.” In heaven where there is no sin, there is glory and perpetual praise and unwearied singing; but on earth where sedition reigns and war and discord hold sway, peace must be gained by prayer, and it is to be found not among all but only among persons of good will, who pay heed to the apostolic salutation: “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” For “his abode is in peace, and his dwelling place is in Zion,” that is, on a watch tower, on the height of doctrines and of virtues, in the soul of the believer; for the angel of this latter daily beholds the face of God and contemplates with unveiled face the glory of God.

[Daniel 7:7] "After this, I beheld in the night-vision, and behold, there was a fourth beast, terrible and wonderful and exceedingly strong. He had large iron teeth, devouring and crushing, and everything that was left he stamped to pieces under his feet." The fourth empire is the Roman Empire, which now occupies the entire world, and concerning which it was said in connection with the image, "Its lower legs were of iron, and part of its feet were of iron, and part of clay." And yet from the iron portion itself Daniel calls to mind that its teeth were iron, and solemnly avers that they were large in size. I find it strange that although he had set forth a lioness, a bear and a leopard in the case of the three previous kingdoms, he did not compare the Roman realm to any sort of beast. Perhaps it was in order to render the beast fearsome indeed that he gave it no name, intending thereby that we should understand the Romans to partake of all the more ferocious characteristics we might think of in connection with beasts. The Hebrews believe that the beast which is here not named is the one spoken of in the Psalms: "A boar from the forest laid her waste, and a strange wild animal consumed her" (Psalm 80:13). Instead of this the Hebrew reads: "All the beasts of the field have torn her." While they are all included in the one Empire of the Romans, we recognize at the same time those kingdoms which were previously separate. And as for the next statement, "...devouring and crushing, and pounding all the rest to pieces under his feet," this signifies that all nations have either been slain by the Romans or else have been subjected to tribute and servitude.

"...But it did not resemble the other beasts which I had previously seen" (Vulgate: "...which I had seen before it"). In the earlier beasts he had seen various symbols of fright-fulness, but they were all concentrated in this one.

"...and it had ten horns." Porphyry assigned the last two beasts, that of the Macedonians and that of the Romans, to the one realm of the Macedonians and divided them up as follows. He claimed that the leopard was Alexander himself, and that the beast which was dissimilar to the others represented the four successors of Alexander, and then he enumerates ten kings up to the time of Antiochus, surnamed Epiphanes, and who were very cruel. And he did not assign the kings themselves to separate kingdoms, for example Macedon, Syria, Asia, or Egypt, but rather he made out the various kingdoms a single realm consisting of a series. This he did of course in order that the words which were written: "...a mouth uttering overweening boasts" might be considered as spoken about Antiochus instead of about Antichrist.

“And he fed them with the fat of wheat.” He led them into the land of promise. He fed them, not with manna as in the desert, but the wheat that had fallen, that had risen again. “And he fed them with the fat of wheat.” Be sure you penetrate the mystery in the scriptural words: “With the finest of wheat.” Does wheat have fat? Does it also have intestines? The prophet wanted to show the abundance and richness of spiritual grace, and hence he called it fat. “And with honey from the rock he would fill them.” He is the wheat; he also is the rock who quenches the thirst of the Israelites in the desert. He satisfied their thirst spiritually with honey, and not with water, so that they who believe and receive the food taste honey in their mouth. “How sweet to my palate are your promises, sweeter than honey to my mouth!” Lastly, that is why our Lord ate honeycomb after the resurrection and was satisfied with honey from the rock. I am going to tell you something new. The Rock himself ate honey in order to give us honey and sweetness, so that they who in the law had drunk myrrh, or bitterness, might afterwards eat the honey of the Gospel.