Letter 74. To Rufinus of Rome.

Rufinus, a Roman Presbyter (to be carefully distinguished from Rufinus of Aquileia and Rufinus the Syrian), had written to Jerome for an explanation of the judgment of Solomon (1 Kings 3:16-28). This Jerome gives at length, treating the narrative as a parable and making the false and true mothers types of the Synagogue and the Church. The date of the letter is 398 a.d.

The below translation made by ChatGPT 3.5 from this Latin text.

1. Rumor frequently lies much in both directions, and, in false reports, proclaims both bad things about good people, and good things about bad people. Hence, indeed, I rejoice concerning the testimony of your holiness toward me, and the love of Saint Presbyter Eusebius; nor do I doubt that you will publicly proclaim me, but I fear the silent judgment of your prudence. Therefore, I beseech you, to remember me more, and to make worthy your praise. That which you prompted me first to do, and the second part of writing was given to me, came not from neglect of friends, but from ignorance; for if I had known, I would have anticipated your conversation.

2. The interpretation of Solomon's judgment on the quarrel of two harlot women (1 Kings 3) is clear as far as the simple history is concerned: that a boy of twelve years judged with an affection beyond his age for the depths of human nature. Hence, he was both admired and feared by all Israel, because he would not miss what was so skillfully concealed. But regarding typical understanding, as the Apostle says: All these things were written to happen to them by way of example, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. (1 Corinthians 10:11) Some Greeks hold that this should be understood in reference to the Synagogue and the Church, and that all things should be referred to that time when, after the crucifixion and resurrection, the true Solomon, that is, the peaceful one, began to reign both in Israel and among the Gentile people. But that adulteresses and prostitutes are called Synagogue and Church in the Scriptures, there is no doubt.

3. And this seems blasphemous at first glance; but if we turn to the Prophets, to Hosea namely, who took a prostitute as his wife and begot sons of fornication (Hos. 1), and then took an adulteress; and to Ezekiel, who accuses Jerusalem of being like a harlot because she followed her lovers and spread her legs for everyone who passed by, and built a brothel in a prominent place (Ezek. 16); we will note that Christ came in order to give marriage to prostitutes, and to make one flock out of two flocks, and by destroying the middle wall (Ephes. 2), to gather into the same sheep-pens the sheep that had previously been sick. These are the two rods which are joined in Ezekiel (chapter 37), and of which the Lord speaks through Zachariah: And I took two rods to myself, one I called Beauty, and the other I called Cord, and I fed the flock (Zach. 11.8) . Also that harlot woman in the Gospel, who washes the feet of Jesus with tears, wipes them with her hair, and to whom all sins are forgiven, clearly depicts the Church gathered from the Gentiles (Luc. 7) . I repeated this on the first page so that no one may find it incongruous if the synagogue and the church are called prostitutes, of which one has been given possession by the judgment of Solomon's son. A wise listener would ask how the church could be like a prostitute, which has neither blemish nor wrinkle? (Ephesians 5) We do not say that the Church has remained a prostitute, but that it was. For even in the house of Simon the leper, the Savior is written to have entered a feast (Matthew 26), not because he was a leper at the time when he had the Savior as a guest, but because he had been a leper before. Matthew also says in the list of the Apostles that he was called a publican, not because he remained a publican after his apostolic dignity, but because he had been one before, so that where sin abounded, grace superabounded.

4. And at the same time consider what the Church says against the slanderous Synagogue: "I and this woman lived in one house" (3 Kings 3:17). For after the resurrection of the Lord and Savior, one Church was gathered from both peoples, and how beautifully: "I gave birth to her in the chamber." For the Church from the Gentiles, which previously had neither the Law nor the Prophets, gave birth in the house of the Synagogue; nor did she come out of the chamber, but enter it. Where it says in the Song of Songs: The king has brought me into his chamber (Cant. 1:3). And again: Indeed, I will not reject you. I will take you up and bring you to my mother's house, the chamber of the one who gave birth to me (Cant. 3:4). On the third day, however, she gave birth to a child after I had given birth. If you consider Pilate washing his hands and saying, 'I am innocent of the blood of this just person' (Matth. 27.24), if [you consider] the Centurion confessing in front of the gallows, 'Truly this was the Son of God' (Mark 15.39), if [you consider] those who before the Passion desired to see the Lord through Philip, you will not hesitate to say that [they were] the first fruits of the Church, and thereafter the Jewish people, for whom the Lord prayed, 'Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do' (Luke 23.34). And one day three thousand believed: and the next day about five thousand (Acts 2 and 4). And we were together (for the assembly of believers was of one heart and soul) and no one else was in our midst, except the two of us: those who did not blaspheme against the Jews, and those who did not serve idols of the Gentiles. But the son of this woman died tonight. For while he followed the observance of the law and coupled the yoke of the grace of the Gospel with the doctrine of Moses, he was covered by the error of darkness. And his sleeping mother oppressed him, who could not say: I sleep, and my heart is awake (Song of Solomon 5: 2). Rising in the middle of the night, she took the son from the side (of the Church) sleeping, and placed him in her own bosom. Reread the entire Epistle of the Apostle to the Galatians, and you will see how the Synagogue is eager to make its own children, and the Apostle says: My little children, of whom I travail in birth again, until Christ be formed in you (Gal. 4. 19) . She bore a living child, not that she might possess it, but that she might kill it. For she did not do this out of love for her son, but out of jealous hatred, and she placed her own dead child in the bosom of the Church by the ceremonies of the Law.

5. It would be long if I wanted to go through each point; as the church understood through the Apostle Paul, and the men of the Church, the one who was held under the Law was not their son, and in the light he was known whom they could not see in the darkness. Hence an argument arose, in the presence of the king, one saying 'Your son is dead, while mine lives,' the other responding, 'You lie, for my son lives and yours is dead,' and in this way they argued in front of the king. Then King Solomon, who is clearly understood as the Savior (according to Psalm 71, which is inscribed with the title of Solomon; where there is no doubt that everything that is said, does not belong to Solomon who is dead, but rather to the majesty of Christ) feigned ignorance, and lied about human emotions for the dispensation of the flesh, just as in another place: Where have you put Lazarus? (John 11:34) and to the woman with the issue of blood, Who touched me? (Matthew 9) He demands a sword, about which he had said: Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. (Matthew 10) And the Lord tries the nature of nature, and wishes to divide the living son into Law and Grace according to the will of each, not that He may approve, but that He may say this for the purpose of reproving the calumny of the Synagogue. She, who did not want the son of the Church to live in grace, nor to be set free through baptism, is happy to have the child divided: not to possess him, but to kill him. The Church, which knows him to be her own, willingly grants him to the rival, if only he may live with her adversary, lest he be struck by the sword of the Savior, divided between the Law and Grace. Hence the Apostle says: Behold, I Paul say to you, that if you observe the Law, Christ will profit you nothing (Gal. 5).

6. These things have been said under the cover of a metaphorical cloud. Furthermore, your wisdom knows very well that the same rules do not apply in the shadows of the tropic figures as apply in the truth of history. And if, in any place, we stumble and it seems trivial to the discerning reader what we have written, let them place the blame on the author. For even these things we, lying in bed and worn out by drawn-out illness, with difficulty dictated to the notary quickly: not to fulfill a subject, but so that we might not appear to refuse you anything at the beginning of our friendship. Pray for our safety from the Lord, so that after twelve months, in which I have been weakened by constant illness, I may be able to write something worthy of your desire, and forgive me if my speech, which is usually fluent, does not flow. For we do not dictate with the same elegance as we write: because in one we often sharpen the style, again writing what is worthy of reading; in the other, we roll forward anything that comes to our tongue with quick speech. I saw Caninius willingly, who can tell you how difficult and dangerous it has been for my right hand, up to the present day, when I dictated this.