283
Izvirni znanstveni članek/Article (1.01)
Bogoslovni vestnik/Theological Quarterly 81 (2021) 2,283—292
Besedilo prejeto/Received: 09/2020; sprejeto/Accepted: 01/2021
UDK: 27-36-1sv.Hieronim
DOI: 10.34291/BV2021/02/Keller
© 2021 Keller, CC BY 4.0
Rebecca J. Keller
Jerome, Vigilantius, and the Cults of the Saints
Hieronim, Vigilancij in kult svetnikov
Abstract: While the publication of a new critical edition of Jerome’s Contra Vigi-
lantium in 2005 has renewed interest in recent years, there remains much work 
to be done on several issues concerning the text. The argument that Jerome 
was tacitly endorsing Vigilantius’s theological perspective because Jerome did 
not respond with a clear explanation of his position is not entirely convincing, 
not least because this argument fails to take into account the genre of the text. 
Because Jerome’s purpose was primarily to attack and undermine the position 
of Vigilantius, Jerome’s doctrine is veiled beneath his scathing rhetoric. This 
study provides a close reading of Contra Vigilantium, considering the genre of 
the text, Jerome’s rhetoric, and its implications. It also examines how Jerome’s 
other works and letters provide insight into Jerome’s position in Contra Vigi-
lantium, and his understanding of the cults of the saints and relic practices. 
Keywords: relics, saints, Jerome, theology, Vigilantius, Victricius
Povzetek: Čeprav je objava nove kritične izdaje Hieronimovega dela Contra Vigilan-
tium leta 2005 obnovila zanimanje zanj, ostaja veliko vprašanj v povezavi z njim 
še vedno odprtih. Argument, da je Hieronim potihem odobraval Vigilancijev 
teološki pogled, ker naj prvi ne bi jasno izrazil svojega lastnega prepričanja, ni 
povsem prepričljiv, saj premislek te vrste ne upošteva zvrsti besedila. Hieroni-
mov primarni namen sta bila napad in spodkopavanje Vigilancijevega pogleda, 
zato je svoj nauk zakril pod ostro retoriko. Prispevek ponuja podrobno branje 
dela Contra Vigilantium, pri tem pa upošteva zvrst besedila, Hieronimovo reto-
riko in njene implikacije. Analizira tudi, kako druga Hieronimova dela in pisma 
pomagajo k razumevanju Contra Vigilantium in na sploh njegovega pojmovanja 
čaščenja svetnikov in relikvij.
Ključne besede: relikvije, svetniki, Hieronim, teologija, Vigilancij, Viktricij
284 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 2
1. Introduction
1600 years after Jerome wrote his Contra Vigilantium, allegedly in a single night in 
Bethlehem, a new critical edition of the text was published (CCSL 79C, vi.).1 Of all 
Jerome’s works, the Contra Vigilantium has been deemed his rudest, most abu-
sive, most violent, and least structured polemic (Lössl 2005, 100). Thus, it seems 
hardly a credible source for reconstructing the position of Vigilantius. Neverthe-
less, the text has been used to promote a view of Vigilantius as a true Christian, a 
proto-Protestant, over and against the ,paganising‘ medieval, vulgar Catholicism‘ 
of Jerome (100). Of course, this is too simplistic by far, even if one ignores the di-
sparaging use of terms.
Since the Contra Vigilantium is the only known source for his thought, much of 
the scholarly attention given to the text has been focused on recovering the beli-
efs of Vigilantius. Jerome’s position has received little consideration by comparison, 
and though his vitae of the saints Paul, Hilarion, and Malchus have been examined 
at length, there is little in the scholarly literature that discusses Jerome’s doctrine of 
the cults of the saints specifically.2 In his analysis of the Contra Vigilantium, one no-
table scholar argued that Jerome was tacitly endorsing Vigilantius’ position because 
Jerome did not respond with a coherent explanation of his doctrine of the power of 
the saints or their relics.3 The genre of the text, however, needs to be taken into ac-
count. Jerome is not writing a primarily theological treatise, but a personal polemic, 
an invective, meant to attack and undermine the position and person of Vigilantius, 
such that Jerome’s position is veiled, as it were, under layers of vituperation.4
Nor is Jerome engaged in a systematic theology of the cults of the saints.5 Je-
rome is not concerned with defending his own or the Church’s beliefs as he is 
concerned with excoriating Vigilantius. His numerous personal insults make this 
clear: Jerome calls Vigilantius »insane (insanum caput)« (Hier., C. Vigil. 5), »drunk 
and drowsy (ebrius et dormiens)« (5), »from the stock of tramps and bandits (de 
latronum et conuenarum natus est semine)« (4) »a living dog (canis uiuens)« (6), 
»an inarticulate viper (elinguis uiperae)« (15). He says that Vigilantius »vomit[ed] 
up [his text] while snoring between hangovers (quos inter crapulam stertens euo-
muit)« (3) and even implies that demons possess Vigilantius himself (5).
In order to recover Jerome’s thought, we must begin by prying back some of 
these layers by digging underneath the name-calling and classical allusions.6 Then 
1 Translations are based on the work of Amy Oh (2013), with few modifications.
2 For Jerome’s hagiographical works, see, for example, Coleiro 1957; Gray 2017; Šubrt 2014; Weingarten 2005.
3 Indeed, Lössl states, »Jerome reveals little of a positive teaching of his own« (2005, 103) in the Contra 
Vigilantium, and that Jerome »has no real alternative theology to offer to explain this new martyr cult« 
(2005, 115). 
4 This is not to say that the Contra Vigilantium is Jerome’s only polemical work, or that his taste for rhe-
toric isn’t evident in his other writings. Yet it is surprising that Jerome’s own doctrine of the cults of the 
saints as presented in this text has not been the focus of concerted scholarly attention.
5 For more on the development of the cults of the saints in Late Antiquity, see Brown 1981 and Wiśniewski 2019. 
6 For an excellent analysis of the numerous classical allusions Jerome employs throughout the text, see 
285Rebecca J. Keller - Jerome, Vigilantius, and the Cults of the Saints
Jerome’s own opinion does emerge, and it looks very different from the opinion he 
accuses Vigilantius of holding. Jerome’s rhetoric carefully identifies himself with 
apostles, martyrs, and even emperors, thereby claiming their agreement with his 
orthodox views. In contrast, he paints a portrait of Vigilantius as the heir of a mul-
titude of heretical figures, including Eunomius (8; 10), Montanus (8), and Jovinian 
(1). In this reconstruction of Jerome’s doctrine of the cults of the saints, drawing on 
the Contra Vigilantium and other texts from his vast oeuvre, I shall focus on a few 
main points, all of which were contentious vis-a-vis Vigilantius: the honor due to 
saints and martyrs, the location of the souls of the dead and their intercession on 
behalf of the living, and the efficacy of the relics of the saints. 
2. Jerome’s Thought on the Saints in Contra Vigilantium 
and Other Works
A letter to Riparius, a presbyter in Gaul, dated 404, gives a preview, as it were, of 
some of Jerome’s rhetorical flourish in dealing with Vigilantius: »You tell me that 
Vigilantius (whose very name ,Wakeful‘ is a contradiction: he ought instead to be 
described as ,Sleepy‘) has again opened his fetid lips and is pouring forth a torrent 
of filthy venom upon the relics of the holy martyrs; and that he calls us who cherish 
them ,ashmongers‘ and ,idolaters‘ who pay homage to dead men’s bones.«7 Jerome 
proceeds to address the distinction between veneration or honour and worship. To 
worship (colere), to adore (adorare), and to serve (servire) are inappropriate verbs 
to describe the glory due to the saints. Rather, Jerome states, »We honour (hono-
ramus) the relics of the martyrs in order to adore him whose martyrs they are; we 
honour the servants so that the honour of the servants may overflow to the Lord«.8 
This distinction is also found in the Contra Vigilantium. In what seems to be a 
direct quotation from Vigilantius’ work, he hints none too subtly that the honour 
given to the relics of the saints is crossing over into worship: »Why is it necessary 
not only that you honour (honorare) with such great honour, but also that you 
worship (adorare) that ›I don’t know what‹ which you revere (colere) while car-
rying it around in a bit of vessel? /…/ Why do you kiss and worship dust wrapped 
in linen?«9 Further, Vigilantius states, »We see that a virtually pagan rite (ritum 
gentilium) has been brought into the church under the pretext of religion«.10
Oh 2013, 75ff. 
7 »Ais Uigilantium, qui /…/ hoc uocatur nomine - nam Dormitantius rectius diceretur - os fetidum rursus 
aperire et putorem spurcissimum contra sanctorum martyrum proferre reliquias et nos, qui eas susci-
pimus, appellare cinerarios et idololatras, qui mortuorum hominum ossa ueneremur.« (Hier., Ep. 109.1) 
English translation based on NPNF2. 
8 »Honoramus autem reliquias martyrum, ut eum cuius sunt martyres, adoremus, honoramus seruos, ut 
honor seruorum redundet ad dominum.« (Hier., Ep. 109.1) See also Oh 2013, 190.
9 »Quid necesse est tanto te honore non solum honorare, sed etiam adorare illud nescio quid quod in 
modico vasculo transferendo colis?… Quid puluerem linteamine circumdatum adorando oscularis?« 
(Hier., C. Vigil. 4)
10 »Prope ritum gentilium videmus sub praetextu religionis introductum in ecclesiis.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 4) 
286 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 2
Jerome’s response is clothed in his castigation of Vigilantius: »Who, you insane 
man, has ever worshipped (adoravit) martyrs? Who considered a human being 
to be God?«11 Jerome’s rhetorical tool here serves to render his opponent’s ar-
guments ridiculous. He cites the apostolic examples of Paul, Barnabas, and Pe-
ter, who refused to be worshipped as gods since »honour was being given to 
them when it was owed to God«.12 Jerome further accuses Vigilantius of desi-
ring worship for himself »so that Vigilantius alone, drunk and drowsy, may be 
worshipped.«13
Jerome goes on to defend the practice of relic translation by appealing to the 
tradition of the church. He mentions the translations of the relics of Andrew, 
Luke, and Timothy by Emperor Constantius; and the translation of the relics of the 
prophet Samuel by Emperor Arcadius (Hier., C. Vigil. 5). While Jerome’s view of 
Constantius is ambiguous, the point he makes is not: if the emperors treat relics 
with such honour and respect, how much more ought ordinary people reverence 
the saints. The people who celebrated the translation of Samuel were worship-
ping Samuel instead of Christ, Jerome dismisses out of hand with characteristic 
irony, rendering Vigilantius’ claims farcical.14 
Jerome also addresses the location of the souls of the apostles and martyrs, stat-
ing, »You say that the souls of the apostles and martyrs have come to rest either 
in the lap of Abraham, or in a place of refreshment, or under the altar of God and 
that they are unable to leave their tombs and be present where they wish.«15 Vigi-
lantius objects to the notion that the souls of the saints could be »multiplied and 
travel at will along with each fragment of their bodies« (Hunter 1999, 425). Again, 
Jerome answers with sharp rhetoric: »Will you set down the laws for God?«16 Quot-
ing Scripture, he refers to the apostles and martyrs, »Of them, it is written: ›They 
follow the Lamb wherever he goes.‹ If the Lamb is everywhere, then those who are 
with the Lamb must be believed to be everywhere.«17 This is one of the most sig-
nificant positive formulations in the whole Contra Vigilantium: Here, Jerome states 
outright his belief that the saints can be present in places other than those men-
tioned by Vigilantius. Saints can be present with their remains, and indeed, seem-
11 »Quis enim, o insanum caput, aliquando martyres adorauit? Quis hominem putauit deum?« (Hier., C. 
Vigil. 5)
12 »… sed quod sub gentilitatis errore honor eis deo debitus deferretur.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 5)
13 »ut solus Vigilantius ebrius et dormiens adoretur.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 5)
14 »Are the people of all churches foolish, who went to visit holy relics and received them with as great a 
joy as if they were seeing a living being in the flesh so that crowds of people might be joined together 
from Palestine all the way to Chalcedon and resound in one voice in praise of Christ? It must have been 
the case (uidelicet) that these people adored Samuel instead of Christ - Samuel who was Christ’s Levite 
and prophet.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 5)
15 »Ais enim uel in sinu Abrahae uel in loco refrigerii uel subter aram dei animas apostolorum et martyrum 
consedisse nec posse suis tumulis et ubi uoluerint adesse praesentes.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 6) The sinus 
Abrahae and the locus refrigerii seem to be synonymous for Jerome.
16 »Tu deo leges pones /…/?« (Hier., C. Vigil. 6)
17 »/…/ de quibus scriptum est: ›Sequuntur agnum quocumque uadit.‹ Si agnus ubique ergo et hi qui cum 
agno sunt ubique esse credendi sunt.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 6) 
287Rebecca J. Keller - Jerome, Vigilantius, and the Cults of the Saints
ingly without their remains, »everywhere (ubique)«. Jerome does not linger on this 
point, perhaps because it is pretty radical, but it is a point to which I shall return.
Vigilantius also doubts that the dead can intercede on behalf of the living. Jerome 
writes, »You say in your little pamphlet that while we live, we can pray for one an-
other reciprocally; after we have died, however, one’s prayer on behalf of another 
cannot be heard.«18 Jerome again points out the absurdity of this position: if the 
apostles and martyrs can intercede on behalf of the living while they are living, will 
they not be able to do so once they have achieved »their crowns, their victories, 
and their triumphs?«19 »Will they have less power after they have begun their life 
with Christ?«20 Jerome’s defence of this argument is a bit weak here, but the same 
point can be found in his other works. Throughout his consolatory letters, the Hi-
eronymian position is that the saints are not only present with Christ, but they are 
also reigning with Christ (O’Connell 1948, 88–89). Indeed,  the saints are better able 
to intercede on behalf of the living now that they are no longer solicitous for them-
selves.21 Another example of this is found at the end of Jerome’s account of the life of 
Paula: for Jerome, Paula is united to Christ by her faith and works, such that she may 
»more easily obtain« what she asks for (Cain 2010, 128).22 Of course, Paula will ask 
for petitions on behalf of the living, seeing as she has already attained her reward.
Another critical point, and one that appears not to have been examined in the 
scholarship on this text, is Jerome’s firm belief in the efficacy of relics. Vigilantius 
seems to object to the signs and miracles occurring at the basilicas of the martyrs 
because they are superfluous. Where the people are already Christian believers, 
what need is there for such signs and wonders? »/…/ as if the critical question 
to answer is for whom they occur, not by what miracle«, Jerome huffs in reply.23 
Turning Vigilantius’ own words against him, Jerome answers: »tell me how in the 
vilest dust and ash, the ›I-don’t-know-what‹, there is such a significant presence 
of signs and power.«24 Jerome dares Vigilantius only to enter the basilicas of the 
martyrs, where the presence of the saints will cleanse him of the demons which 
are prompting his attacks on these pious practices.25
18 »Dicis in libello tuo quod dum uiuimus mutuo pro nobis orare possumus. Postquam autem mortui fu-
erimus, nullius sit pro alio exaudienda oratio /…/« (Hier., C. Vigil. 6)
19 »Si apostoli et martyres adhuc in corpore constituti possunt orare pro ceteris quando de se adhuc debent 
esse solliciti, quanto magis post coronas, uictorias et triumphos?« (Hier., C. Vigil. 6)
20 »/…/ et postquam cum Christo esse coeperint, minus ualebunt?« (Hier., C. Vigil. 6)
21 See, for example, Hier., Ep. 75.2 to Theodora on the death of her husband Lucinius: »Sed gaudeas re-
gnare cum Christo /…/ Ille iam securus et uictor te aspicit de excelso et fauet laboranti et iuxta se locum 
praeparat eodem amore et eadem caritate /…/« »rejoice as well that he now reigns with Christ /…/ 
Victorious now and free from care he looks down on you from on high and supports you in your struggle, 
nay more, he prepares for you a place near to himself; for his love and affection towards you are still 
the same /…/« See also O’Connell 1948, 76.
22 See Hier., Ep. 108.33: »Fides et opera tua Christo te sociant. Praesens facilius, quod postulas, inpetrabis.«
23 »/…/ quasi nunc hoc quaeratur, quibus fiant, et non qua uirtute fiant.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 10)
24 »/…/ sed responde quomodo in uilissimo puluere et fauilla nescio qua tanta sit signorum uirtutumque 
praesentia.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 10)
25 »ingredere basilicas martyrum et aliquando purgaberis.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 10)
288 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 2
Jerome confesses his trepidations in defence of the power of relics: »Whenever I 
am angry and think something evil in my mind, and a phantasm deceives me at night, 
I do not dare to enter the basilicas of the martyrs.«26 Though Jerome does not elabo-
rate here, it seems that he believes the power and presence of the saints to have a 
connection with their relics, such that he fears not the evil thought or the phantasm 
in the night but entering those places where the saints are most efficacious. 
How is this reconcilable with Jerome’s earlier statements that the saints are with 
Christ wherever he is and can be everywhere?27 Jerome does not answer in this 
text, so we must look to his other writings. In a letter dated c. 405 to Theophilus, 
Jerome praises Theophilus’s treatise on the Eucharist and the accompanying liturgi-
cal ephemera. Jerome indicates that not only is the Eucharist itself to be honoured 
and reverenced, but that »the sacred chalices, veils, and other accessories used 
in the celebration of the Lord’s passion are not mere lifeless and senseless objects 
devoid of holiness, but that instead, from their association with the body and blood 
of the Lord, they are to be venerated (ueneranda) with the same awe as the body 
and the blood themselves.«28 Christ in his divinity is not confined to a specific place, 
and nevertheless, the presence of Christ in the Eucharist is different somehow, and 
that presence extends to all of the accessories used in the celebration of the mass. 
The saints are also not limited in their power by the location of their earthly re-
mains. At the end of the Vita Hilarionis, after describing the theft of Hilarion’s body 
from Cyprus, where he died, and its relocation to Palestine by one of his disciples, 
Jerome describes the ,strange dispute‘ (miram /…/ contentionem) between the 
people of Palestine and Cyprus, »the one contending that they have the body, the 
other the spirit of Hilarion.«29 »And yet«, Jerome closes the life, »in both places 
great miracles are wrought daily, but to a greater extent in the garden of Cyprus, 
perhaps because that spot was dearest to him.«30 This notion can also be seen in 
Jerome’s letter to Julia Eustochium, where, in encouraging the latter to the life of 
virginity, Jerome exhorts her: »Rarely go abroad, and if you wish to seek the aid 
of the martyrs, seek it in your own chamber.«31 One need not go on pilgrimage to 
faraway places because the aid of the saints can be sought in any place.  
If there is a contradiction here in Jerome’s thought on the presence of the 
saints, it ought not to be surprising. The saints may be present everywhere, and 
26 »Quando iratus fuero et aliquid mali in meo animo cogitauero et me nocturnum phantasma deluserit, 
basilicas martyrum intrare non audeo.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 12)
27 This is another of Lössl’s critiques: that Jerome is inconsistent in his argument on this point (2005, 112).
28 »Mirati sumus in opere tuo utilitatem omnium ecclesiarum, ut discant, qui ignorant, eruditi testimoni-
is scripturarum, qua debeant ueneratione sancta suscipere et altaris Christi ministerio deseruire sacro-
sque calices et sancta uelamina et cetera, quae ad cultum dominicae pertinent passionis, non quasi 
inania et sensu carentia sanctimoniam non habere, sed ex consortio corporis et sanguinis domini eadem, 
qua corpus eius et sanguis maiestate ueneranda.« (Hier., Ep. 114.2)
29 »Cernas usque hodie miram inter Palaestinos et Cyprios contentionem, his corpus Hilarionis, illis spiri-
tum se habere certantibus.« (Hier., V. Hilar. 47 [PL 23, 53]) 
30 »Et tamen in utrisque locis magna quotidie signa fiunt, sed magis in hortulo Cypri, forsitan quia plus 
illum locum dilexerit.« (Hier., V. Hilar. 47 [PL 23, 53–54])
31 »Rarus sit egressus in publicam: martyres tibi quaerantur in cubiculo tuo.« (Hier., Ep. 22.17)
289Rebecca J. Keller - Jerome, Vigilantius, and the Cults of the Saints
yet their bodily remains, their clothing, and the locations of their earthly lives 
have a specific other power to work miracles. Jerome does not define how these 
phenomena are reconcilable, just as he does not define how Christ’s presence in 
the eucharist differs from Christ’s presence in all creation. He also does not echo 
the more radical thought of Victricius of Rouen, who argues that »the relics of 
the saints are, in effect, consubstantial with God« (Clark 1999, 365–399; 366).
Victricius of Rouen, in a sermon dated 396, gives a much more robust, if still 
unsystematic, theological explication of the saints.32 Jerome agrees with Victricius 
on many points, including that the saints can be present everywhere and yet are 
present in their relics in a more substantive way. Addressing the martyrs, Victri-
cius states, »I knew that you are everywhere by the merit of your virtue: heavenly 
brilliance is not cheated out of any place on earth.«33 Victricius believes in the ef-
ficacy of the relics of the saints to heal,34 and he acknowledges the relationship 
between the living and the dead.35 
Victricius takes his theology of the saints much farther than Jerome, however. 
He gives a fuller explanation of how the saints are everywhere, arguing that they 
are joined to the divinity of Christ by adoption.36 The saints are »entirely with the 
Saviour in his entirety.«37 Therefore, the saints are joined to the Trinity itself, such 
that the only difference between them and the three trinitarian persons is that 
the saints have an ,acquired‘ (indemptam) divinity, while the persons of the Trinity 
are divine by nature: »You see then /…/ that the Father and the Son have by prop-
erty of nature what the saints have by the unity of the gift they have received.«38 
For Victricius, the saints are the same (idem) as the »ineffable substance of the 
godhead« (inenarrabilisque substantia deitatis), though by gift and by adoption 
rather than by nature and property.39
32 As Clark rightly points out, Victricius’ argument is »unusually difficult to follow« (1999, 368), both be-
cause of the genre of the text and because of his penchant for rhetorical flourish. 
33 »Merito uirtutis ubique uos esse noui: nullo enim terrarum spatio caelestis claritudo fraudatur.« (Victric., 
De laude sanctorum 1)
34 »If the hem of the Saviour’s garment cured when lightly touched, it is beyond doubt that the dwelling 
places of the martyrdoms will cure when we take them into our arms.« »Nam si curauit adtacta leuiter 
fimbria Saluatoris, procul dubio curabunt amplexata domicilia passionum.« (Victric., De laude sanctorum 
2)
35 Victricius calls the saints ‚advocates‘ and holds that they have a say in the judgement of souls: »Adsunt 
aduocati, delictorum nostrorum gesta oratione pandamus. Fauent iudices, possunt mitigare sententiam 
/…/« (Victric., De laude sanctorum 12)
36 »/…/ it follows that we should believe, by a similar argument, that for those who live in Christ and the 
church there is one substance of flesh and blood and spirit, by the gift of adoption.« »/…/ sequitur ut 
in Christo et in ecclesia uiuentibus pari argumento unam beneficio adoptionis et carnis et sanguinis et 
spiritus credamus esse substantiam.« (Victric., De laude sanctorum 7)
37 »/…/ toti cum toto sint Saluatore.« (Victric., De laude sanctorum 7)
38 »Uidetis itaque /…/ hoc esse Patris et Filii per naturae proprietatem, quod est sanctis per suscepti 
muneris unitatem.« (Victric., De laude sanctorum 8)
39 »Dico idem esse per beneficium non per proprietatem, per adoptionem non per naturam.« (Victric., De 
laude sanctorum 8)
290 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 2
It is possible that this teaching prompted Vigilantius to speak out against the 
saints’ cults.40 Vigilantius is deeply concerned about the proper worship of God 
and sees the honour being given to the saints as pushing the boundaries of wor-
ship inappropriately, even to idolatry. Vigilantius sees martyrs’ veneration as a 
reintroduction of ,pagan‘ cultural manifestations into the Christian liturgy (Force 
2003, 18). Jerome, strikingly, does not refute this. Instead, he argues that it is pos-
sible to begin from a place of idolatry or error and be transformed by the Chris-
tian message: »Because we used to worship idols, we should not worship God 
now, because we may seem to worship God with a similar honour once given to 
idols? That was done for idols and should be detested; this is done for martyrs 
and should be accepted.«41 For Jerome, the outward manifestations might look 
the same, but God rewards each individual according to their faith.42
3. Conclusion
Jerome certainly does not give such a radical explanation of how the saints are 
efficacious, as does Victricius. Nevertheless, this is not to say that Jerome and 
Vigilantius are on the same side of this debate.43 Jerome is forced by Vigilantius 
to think theologically about the cults of the saints, to go beyond his epistolary 
and hagiographical writings, and deal with some thorny issues: the relationship 
of the soul and the body, the connection between the living and the dead, the na-
ture of the presence of the saints, and the efficacy of their relics (Force 2003, 24). 
Vigilantius was not a minor heretic to be dismissed; he was »an active member 
of an influential group in the western church« (Oh 2013, 36). Indeed, Vigilantius 
seems to have been in the majority of Gallic clerics in his critiques of the cults of 
the saints and the increasingly ardent asceticism of those who championed such 
cults.44 While Jerome’s desire to be influential in Gallic affairs and his success in 
such influence is a matter of debate (Mathisen 2009), it is clear, at least in this re-
gard, that Jerome’s position won out over his opponent.45 Gennadius of Marseilles, 
in his Liber ecclesiasticorum dogmatum written around the year 470, includes this 
40 This point is debated in the scholarship on Victricius and Vigilantius. David Hunter sees Vigilantius’s 
articulation of his critique of the cults of the saints as responding to both the practice and theology of 
Victricius (1999, 423). However, according to Paul Force, following Élie Griffe, Vigilantius was responding 
to the development of the cult of St. Saturninus in Toulouse and the attitude of Bishop Exuperius (2003, 
20–21).
41 »Et quia quondam colebamus idola, nunc deum colere non debemus, ne simili eum uideamur cum 
idolis honore uenerari? Illud fiebat idolis et idcirco detestandum est, hoc fit martyribus et ideo recipi-
endum est.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 7) 
42 »/…/ secundum fidem suam habent mercedem.« (Hier., C. Vigil. 7)
43 For more on the relationships between Victricius, Vigilantius, and Jerome, see Force 2003, 24; Hunter 
1999, 409–413; Trout 1999, 200–209.
44 »Vigilantius’s opinions were received with sympathy by many Christians in Gaul, especially within the 
ecclesiastical hierarchy.« (Hunter 1999, 403)
45 Feiertag offers some tantalizing hints of the ways the Jerome’s thought and language are used and 
promoted by Gallic figures (1985 [CCSL  79C], x–xix).
291Rebecca J. Keller - Jerome, Vigilantius, and the Cults of the Saints
entry: »The bodies of the saints and especially the relics of the blessed martyrs are 
to be honoured as if they were the actual remains of Christ /…/ If anyone thinks 
differently, he is to be considered a Vigilantian and not a Christian.«46
Abbreviations
 C. Vigil. – Contra (Adversus) Vigilantium [Feiertag 2005].
 CCSL – Corpus Christianorum Series Latina.
 CSEL – Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum.
 Dogm. – Liber ecclesiasticorum dogmatum.
 NPNF – Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.
 PL – Patrologia Latina.
 V. Hilar. – Vita Hilarionis.
 Victric. – Victricius Rotomagensis.
References
46 "Sanctorum corpora, et praecipue beatorum martyrum reliquias, ac si Christi membra sincerissima 
honoranda…Si quis contra hanc sententiam uenit, non christianus sed Vigilantianus credatur." (Gennad., 
Dogm. 39 [CCSL 79C, xviii]) Emphasis added.
Primary sources
Feiertag, Jean-Louis, ed. 2005. Hieronymus: 
Adversus Vigilantium. CCSL 79C. Turnhout: 
Brepols.
Hilberg, Isidorus, ed. 1996. Hieronymus: Epistulae. 
CSEL 54, 55 and 56/1. Vienna: Verlag der Öster-
reichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. 
Mulders, Jacobo, and Roland Demeulanaere, ed. 
1985. Victricii Rotomagensis: De laude sancto-
rum. CCSL 64, 55–93. Turnhout: Brepols.
Secondary sources
Brown, Peter. 1981. The Cult of the Saints: Its Rise 
and Function in Latin Christianity. Chicago: Uni-
versity of Chicago Press.
Cain, Andrew. 2010. Jerome’s Epitaphium Pau-
lae: Hagiography, Pilgrimage, and the Cult of 
Saint Paula. Journal of Early Christian Studies 
18:105–139.
Clark, Gillian. 1999. Victricius of Rouen: Praising 
the Saints. Journal of Early Christian Studies 7, 
no. 3:365–399.
Coleiro, Edward. 1957. St. Jerome’s Lives of the 
Hermits. Vigiliae Christianae 11:161–178.
Force, Paul. 2003. Vigilance de Calagurris et la cri-
tique du culte des reliques: Eléments pour une 
théologie du culte des reliques. Connaissance 
des pères de l’Eglise 89:15–26.
Gray, Christa. 2017. Holy and Pleasing to God: A 
Narratological Approach to Hagiography in Je-
rome’s Lives of Paul and Malchus. Ancient Nar-
rative 14:104–128.
Hunter, David G. 1999. Vigilantius of Calagurris 
and Victricius of Rouen: Ascetics, Relics, and 
Clerics in Late Roman Gaul. Journal of Early 
Christian Studies 7, no. 3:401–430.
Lössl, Josef. 2005. An Early Christian Identity Crisis 
Triggered by Changes in the Discourse of Mar-
tyrdom: The Controversy between Jerome of 
Strido and Vigilantius of Calagurris. In: Johan 
292 Bogoslovni vestnik 81 (2021) • 2
Leemans, ed. More than a Memory: The Dis-
course of Martyrdom and the Construction of 
Christian Identity in the History of Christianity, 
97–117. Leuven: Peeters.
Mathisen, Ralph. 2009. The Use and Misuse of Je-
rome in Gaul During Late Antiquity. In: Andrew 
Cain and Josef Lössl, ed. Jerome of Stridon: His 
Life, Writings and Legacy, 191–208. Farnham: 
Ashgate.
O’Connell, John P. 1948. The Eschatology of Saint 
Jerome. Mundelein: Seminarium Sanctae Mar-
iae ad Lacum.
Oh, Amy Hye. 2013. A Commentary on Jerome’s 
Contra Vigilantium. PhD dissertation. Univer-
sity of Illinois.
Šubrt, Jiří. 2014. Hagiographic Romance: Novelis-
tic Narrative Strategy in Jerome’s Lives of the 
Hermits. In: Maríla P. Futre Pinheiro, Gareth L. 
Schmeling, and Edmund P. Cueva, eds. The An-
cient Novel and the Frontiers of Genre, 205–
214. Groningen: Barkhuis.
Trout, Dennis E. 1999. Paulinus of Nola: Life, Let-
ters, and Poems. Berkeley, CA: University of 
California Press.
Weingarten, Susan. 2005. The Saint’s Saints: Ha-
giography and Geography in Jerome. Leiden: 
Brill.
Wiśniewski, Robert. 2019. The Beginnings of the 
Cult of Relics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.