 Most scholars now agree that the neologism “synderesis” introduced in Jerome’s commentary is simply a corruption of the Greek syneidesis (Kries 2002: 67). Since syneidesis is simply the Greek equivalent of the Latin term conscientia—a fact of which Jerome would certainly have been aware—one might have expected Jerome to use them interchangeably. Surprisingly, however, Jerome suggests that the Latin term means something different from the Greek term. In the text cited above, he quite explicitly states that regardless of how morally corrupt its possessor becomes, synderesis can never be lost. A few lines later, however, he does admit the existence of those who are shameless and lacking in moral insight. Such people are oblivious to their offenses because, according to Jerome, their conscience (conscientia) ceases to be present in them (“looses its place”). If synderesis cannot be lost, but conscience can, then it seems to follow that they are separate properties of the soul. In any case, whatever Jerome’s intention, this curious passage was indirectly handed down to the Middle Ages via the Sentences of Peter Lombard (1095–1160).