The “Other” Is Jerome Himself

What could be plainer than this statement? What could possibly be thought or said, whether by Origen or by any of those you say you condemn, that would be clearer than this: that the inequality of conditions among those who are born into this world is ascribed to the justice of God? You say that the cause of each soul’s salvation or ruin is to be found in itself, that is, in the passions and dispositions it showed in its earlier life in that new Jerusalem which is the mother of us all. [a]

“But this too,” he will no doubt say, “is not said by me. I described it as someone else’s opinion. Besides, I used the expression ‘they seize the opportunity.’” Well, I do not deny that you make it look as though you are speaking of someone else. But you have not denied that this man you are speaking of agrees and is in accord with you; you have not said that he is opposed or hostile to you. For when you use this formula of ‘another’ for someone who is really opposed to you, your habit is to set down a few of his words and then at once attack and overthrow them. You do this with Marcion, Valentinus, Arius and others. But when, as here, you do use this formula of ‘another,’ yet report his words backed by the strongest assertions and the fullest testimonies of Scripture, is it not plain even to us, who are so slow of understanding and whom you call ‘moles,’ that the man whose words you set down and do not overthrow is none other than yourself? Is this not a case of the figure well known to rhetoricians, when they use another man’s person to set out their own opinions? Rhetoricians turn to such figures when they are afraid of offending particular people, or when they want to avoid stirring up ill will against themselves.

But if you think you have escaped blame by putting forward ‘another’ as the author of these statements, how much freer of it is the man you accuse! For his way of proceeding is much more cautious. He is not content merely to say, “This is what others say,” or “So some men think,” but says, “On this or that I do not decide; I only suggest,” and, “If this seems more probable to anyone, let him hold to it and set the other aside.” He has been very careful in his statements, as you know, and yet you summon him to be tried and condemned. You think you have escaped because you speak of ‘another,’ but the very points on which you condemn him are the ones in which you follow and imitate him.