7/28/2019 Epistle of St Jude

1/6

Epistle of St. Jude

The present subject will be treated under the following heads:I. The Author and the Authenticity of the Epistle:

(1) Jude in the Books of the New Testament;(2) Tradition as to the Genuineness and the Canonicity of the Epistle;

(3) Difficulties Arising from the Text;

(4) The Relation of Jude to the Second Epistle of St. Peter;

(5) Vocabulary and Style;

II. Analysis of the Epistle;

III. Occasion and Object;

IV. To Whom Addressed;

V. Date and Place of Composition.

I. THE AUTHOR AND THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE(1) Jude in the Books of the New Testament

In the address of the Epistle the author styles himself "Jude, the servant ofJesus Christ and brother of James". "Servant ofJesus Christ" means"apostolic minister or labourer". "Brother of James" denotes him as thebrother of James kat exochen who was well-known to the HebrewChristians to whom the Epistle of St. Jude was written. This James is to beidentified with the Bishop of the Church of Jerusalem (Acts, xv, 13; xxi, 18),spoken of by St. Paul as "the brother of the Lord" (Gal. i, 19), who was theauthor of the Catholic Epistle of St. James. and is regarded amongstCatholic interpreters as the Apostle James the son of Alpheus (St. Jamesthe Less). This last identification, however, is not evident, nor, from a

critical point of view, does it seem beyond all doubt. Most Catholiccommentators identify Jude with the "Judas Jacobi" ("Jude, the brother ofJames" in the D.V.) of Luke, vi, 16, and Acts, i, 13 -- also called Thaddeus(Matt. x, 3: Mark, iii, 18) -- referring the expression to the fact that hisbrother James was better known than himself in the primitive Church. Thisview is strongly confirmed by the title "the brother of James", by whichJude designates himself in the address of his Epistle. If this identification isproved, it is clear that Jude, the author of the Epistle, was reckoned amongthe Twelve Apostles. This opinion is most highly probable. Beyond this wefind no further information concerning Jude in the New Testament, exceptthat the "brethren of the Lord", among whom Jude was included, were

known to the Galatians and the Corinthians; also that several of them weremarried, and that they did not fully believe in Christ till after theResurrection (I Cor., ix, 5; Gal., i, 10; John, vii, 3-5; Acts, i, 14). From a factof Hegesippus told by Eusebius (Hist. eccl., III, xix, xx, xxii) we learn thatJude was "said to have been the brother of the Lord according to theflesh", and that two of his grandsons lived till the reign ofTrajan (see,however, BRETHREN OF THE LORD).(2) Tradition as to the Genuineness and the Canonicity of theEpistleThe Epistle of Jude is one of the so-called antilegomena; but, although itscanonicity has been questioned in several Churches, its genuineness hasnever been denied. The brevity of the Epistle, the coincidences between itand II Peter, and the supposed quotation from apocryphal books, created a

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#Ihttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I1http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I1http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I2http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I3http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I4http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I5http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I5http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#IIhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#IIhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#IIIhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#IIIhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#IVhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#Vhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#Vhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08280a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12789a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05617b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15015a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#Ihttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I1http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I2http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I2http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I3http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I3http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I4http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I4http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I5http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#I5http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#IIhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#IIIhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#IIIhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#IVhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#IVhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#Vhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/#Vhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08280a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12789a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05617b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15015a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02767a.htm

7/28/2019 Epistle of St Jude

2/6

prejudice against it which was gradually overcome. The history of itsacceptance by the Church is briefly as follows:Some coincidences or analogies exist between Jude and the writings of theApostolic Fathers -- between Barnabas, ii, 10, and Jude, 3, 4; ClemensRomanus, Ep. xx, 12; lxv, 2, and Jude, 25; Ep. ad Polyc., iii 2; iv, 2, and

Jude, 3. 20, Mart. Polyc., xx, and Jude, 24 sq. It is possible, though notcertain, that the passages here noted were suggested by the text of Jude.The similarity between "Didache" ii, 7 and Jude, 22 sq., does not seem tobe accidental, whilst in Athenagoras (about A.D., 177), "Leg.", xxiv, and inTheophilus of Antioch (d. about 183), "Ad Autol." II, xv, there is a clearreference to Jude, 6 and 13 respectively.The earliest positive reference to the Epistle occurs in the MuratorianFragment, "Epistola sane Jud et superscript Joannis duae in catholica[scil. Ecclesia] habentur." The Epistle was thus recognized as canonicaland Apostolic (for it is Jude the Apostle who is here meant) in the RomanChurch about 170. At the end of the second century it was also acceptedas canonical and Apostolic by the Church of Alexandria (Clement ofAlexandria, "Pd.", III, viii, followed by Origen), and by the African ChurchofCarthage (Tertullian). At the beginning of the third century the Epistlewas universally accepted except in the primitive East Syrian Church,where none of the Catholic Epistles were recognized, nor the Apocalypse.This remarkably wide acceptance, representing as it does the voice ofancient tradition, testifies to the canonicity and the genuineness of Jude.During the third and fourth centuries doubt and suspicion, based oninternal evidence (especially on the supposed quotation from the Book ofHenoch and the "Assumption of Moses"), arose in several Churches.

However the prejudice created against the deuterocanonical Jude wassoon overcome, so that the Epistle was universally accepted in theWestern Church at the very beginning of the fifth century (see CANON OF THENEWTESTAMENT).In the Eastern Church Eusebius of Csarea (260-340) placed Jude amongthe antilegomena or the "disputed books, which are nevertheless knownand accepted by the greater number" (Hist. Eccl., II xxiii; III, xxv); heincorporated all the Catholic Epistles in the fifty copies of the Bible whichat the command of Constantine, he wrote for the Church ofConstantinople. St. Athanasius (d. 387) and St. Epiphanius (d. 403) placedJude among the canonical and Apostolic writings. Junilius and Paul of

Nisibis in Constantinople (513) held it as medi auctoritatis. However, inthe sixth century the Greek Church everywhere considered Jude ascanonical.The recognition of Jude in the Syriac Church is not clear. In Western Syriawe find no trace of Jude in the fifth century. In Eastern Syria the Epistle iswanting in the oldest Syriac version, the Peshito, but it is accepted in thePhiloxenian (508) and Heracleon (616) versions. Except among the SyriacNestorians, there is no trace of any ecclesiastical contradiction from thebeginning of the sixth century till the Council of Trent, which defined thecanonicity of both the proto- and deutero-canonical books of the NewTestament.(3) Difficulties Arising from the Text

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01637a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10642a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10642a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01300b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04045a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04045a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11306b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01191a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03385a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14520c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14413a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03453a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01594b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01602a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01602a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09022a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05617b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03453a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06752a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06752a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06752a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14417a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14413a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10755a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10755a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15030c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01637a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10642a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10642a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01300b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04045a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04045a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11306b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01191a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03385a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14520c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14413a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03453a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01594b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01602a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01602a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09022a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05617b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03453a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06752a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06752a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06752a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14417a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14413a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10755a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10755a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15030c.htm

7/28/2019 Epistle of St Jude

3/6

The wording of verse 17 -- which some critics have taken as an evidencethat the Epistle was written in the second century -- does not imply thatthe recipients of the Epistle had, in a period that was past, received oralinstructions from all the Apostles, nor does it imply that Jude himself wasnot an Apostle. The text ton apostolon implies only that several of the

Apostles had predicted to the readers that such "mockers" as aredescribed by the writer would assail the Faith; it is not separation in time,but distance of place, that leads Jude to refer to the scattered Apostles asa body. Nor does he exclude himself from this body, he only declares thathe was not one of those prophesying Apostles. The author of II Peter, whooften ranks himself among the Apostles, uses a similar expression tonapostolon humon (3:2), and certainly does not mean to imply that hehimself was not an Apostle.Many Protestant scholars have maintained that the false teachersdenounced in Jude are Gnostics of the second century. But, as Bigg rightlysays: "It is not really a tenable view" (op. cit. infra). St. Jude does not giveany details about the errors denounced in this short letter any more thandoes St. Peter, and there is no ground for identifying the false teacherswith any of the Gnostic sects known to us. There is nothing in thereferences made to false doctrines that obliges us to look beyond theApostolic times.The use made of apocryphal writings, even if proved, is not an argumentagainst the Apostolicity of the Epistle; at most it could only invalidate itscanonicity and inspiration. Verse 9, which contains the referenceconcerning the body of Moses, was supposed by Didymus ("Enarr. in Epist.Jud" in P. G., XXXIX, 1811 sqq.), Clement of Alexandria (Adumbr. in Ep.

Jud), and Origen (De Princ., III, ii, 1), to have been taken from the"Assumption of Moses", which is unquestionably anterior to the Epistle ofJude. Jude may possibly have learned the story of the contest from Jewishtradition. But, at any rate, it is evident that Jude does not quote the"Assumption" as a written authority, and still less as a canonical book.As regards the prophecy of vv. 14 sq., many Catholic scholars admit it tobe a loose and abbreviated citation from the apocryphal Book of Henoch, i,1, 9, which existed a century before St. Jude wrote. But here again St. Judedoes not quote Henoch as a canonical book. There is nothing strange, asPlumptre remarks (op. cit. infra, 88), in Jude making use of books notincluded in the Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament, "as furnishing

illustrations that gave point and force to his counsels. The false teachers,against whom he wrote, were characterized largely by their fondness forJewish fables, and the allusive references to books with which they werefamiliar, were therefore of the nature of an argumentum ad hominem. Hefought them, as it were, with their own weapons." He merely intends toremind his readers of what they know. He does not affirm or teach theliterary origin of the apocryphal book, such is not his intention. He simplymakes use of the general knowledge it conveys, just as the mention of thedispute between Michael and the Devil is but an allusion to what isassumed as being known to the readers. By no means, therefore, doeseither of the passages offer any difficulty against the canonicity of theEpistle, or against the Catholic doctrine ofinspiration.(4) The Relation of Jude to the Second Epistle of St. Peter

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12495a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06592a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06592a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04784a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04045a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11306b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10275b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04764a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08045a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12495a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06592a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06592a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04784a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04045a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11306b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10275b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04764a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08045a.htm

7/28/2019 Epistle of St Jude

4/6

The resemblance as to thought and language between Jude and II Peter, ii,is quite sufficient to make it certain that one of the two writers borrowedfrom the other: the hypothesis that both writers borrowed from a commondocument must be put aside, as having no support whatsoever. Thequestion remains: Which of the two Epistles was the earlier? The priority of

II Peter, as well as the priority of Jude, has found strong advocates, andmuch has been written about this intricate question. The followingarguments, however, lead to the conclusion that the Epistle of Jude wasthe earlier of the two:

It is not uncommon forSt. Peterto throw a light on the more obscure passages of the

Epistle of Jude, or to interpret the more difficult passages. At one time he puts them in

a shorter form or uses more general terms; at another, while adducing in general the

same arguments, he adds a new one or omits one or another used in Jude. This shows

that St. Peterhad probably read the Epistle of St. Jude. Compare especially II Peter, ii,

12, with Jude, 10.

This may also be confirmed not only by II Peter, i, 17, compared with Jude, 13 --

where St. Peterdoubles Jude's comparison and puts more strength into it, whilst Jude

has more similitudes -- but also by comparing the style of both, for, whereas the style

of Jude is always the same, that ofSt. Peterdiffers somewhat from his usual way of

writing, and the reasons for this change seem to be the matter he writes about and the

influence of the Epistle of St. Jude.

Finally, is more probable thatSt. Peterhas embodied in his work the text of Jude's

Epistle than that Jude should have included in his writing only a part of St. Peter's

Epistle. If Jude wrote later thanPeterand found the same state of things, why did he

omit the remaining questions, e.g. the doubts about the parousi? Or why should he,

in order to combat the same heretics, give only a summary of St. Peter's Epistle,

omitting entirely the strongest arguments?

(5) Vocabulary and StyleThe vocabulary of Jude proves that the author was a Jew, saturated withthe Old Testament, using Hebraisms, yet acquainted with the koinedialektos -- the "common dialect". Thirteen words found in Jude do notoccur elsewhere in the New Testament. Some words of the new Christiandialect appear in Jude as well as in the Pauline Epistles, but literary affinityor direct quotation cannot be proved. The style, although sometimespoetical, always evinces the severe and authoritative tone of a man ofApostolic rank, held in high honour.

II. ANALYSIS OF THE EPISTLE(a) Exordium. Address and good wishes (vv. 1-2), occasion and purposeof the Epistle (3-4).(b) First Part. He inveighs against the pseudo-teachers; describes theirlife and errors (5-16). They will be severely punished, as is evident fromthe severe punishment of the unbelieving Israelites in the desert (5), ofthe wicked angels (6), and of the inhabitants of Sodom (7). He mentionstheir wicked teaching and life (8), and opposes the modesty ofMichael theArchangel (9) to their pride (10). He foretells for the heretics thepunishment of Cain, Balaam, and the sons of Core, for they have imitatedtheir errors (11-3). Enoch has already prophesied the judgment ofGodupon them (14-6).

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10275b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10275b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10275b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10275b.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htm

7/28/2019 Epistle of St Jude

5/6

(c) Second Part. He exhorts the faithful (17-23). They must rememberthe teaching of the Apostles, by whom they had been warned of thecoming of such heretics (17-19). They must maintain the Faith, keepthemselves in the love ofGod, and wait for life everlasting (20-21). Whattheir behaviour should he towards Christians that have in any way fallen

away (22-23)(d) Epilogue. A most beautiful doxology (24-25).

III. OCCASION AND OBJECTOccasion. The Epistle was occasioned by the spread of the dogmatico-moral errors amongst the Hebrew Christians; pseudo-doctors "are secretlyentered in", who abuse Christian liberty to give themselves over tointemperance; moreover "denying the only sovereign Ruler, and our LordJesus Christ" (4).Object. Jude's intention was to caution his readers, the Hebrew Christians,against such depraved teaching, and to exhort them to keep faithfully theteaching of the Apostles.

IV. TO WHOM ADDRESSEDThe dedicatory address runs as follows: tois en Theo patri hegapemenoiskai Iesou Christo teteremenois kletois (to them that are beloved in God theFather, and preserved inJesus Christ, and called). Which are the kletoi, or"called", becomes manifest from the context. They are not all theChristians of the whole Christian world, but those of a particular Church(vv. 3, 4, 17, 22). Several commentators think that St. Jude's Epistle wasaddressed to the same churches of Asia Minor to which St. Peter's Epistlewas written. This opinion, according to these commentators, is to be heldbecause in both Epistles the same errors are condemned, and also

because Jude (v. 17) appears to have known II Peter, and shows that theprophecy of the Prince of the Apostles has been verified. But we havealready proved that the second argument is of no value (see above I, 4);as for the first, there are two objections:

the errors condemned in the Epistle of St. Jude and in II Peter may have spread in

countries outside Asia Minor;

we find in Jude several reasons for believing that the Epistle was addressed, not to the

Gentile Christians of Asia Minor, but to the Hebrew Christians of Palestine or of a

neighbouring country.

V. DATE AND PLACE OF COMPOSITION

Date. It is difficult to state the exact time at which St. Jude wrote hisEpistle. But the doctrines against which he inveighs, and the looseness ofmorals or the so-called antinomismus, seem to indicate the end of theApostolic age. Jude seems on the other hand to have written before A.D.70; otherwise in vv. 5-7 he would have spoken of the destruction ofJerusalem. In those verses St. Jude mentions the different punishments ofprevaricators, and therefore in this exhortation to Hebrew Christians hecould not have passed over in silence so dire a calamity. Moreover wehave shown that the Epistle of St. Jude was written before II Peter, whichlatter was probably written A.D. 64 (65). Therefore St. Jude must havewritten shortly before 64 (65).

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06608a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm

7/28/2019 Epistle of St Jude

6/6

Place of Composition. Here we can only guess, but we prefer theopinion that the Epistle was written in Palestine, and probably inJerusalem.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08344a.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08344a.htm