Heresies:DONATISM
An
Analysis of Augustin's Writings Against the Donatists.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY.
By Rev. Chester D. Hartranft, D.D.
--------
Chapter I.-Bibliography.
A. Sources.
i. Of course all the Anti-Donatist writings of Augustin are found in the general
editions from Amerbach, 1506, to Migne, 1861. A few are also collected in Du
Pin's edd. of Optatus Mil. 1. In the Monumenta vetera ad Donatistarum Historiam
pertinentia. 2. In the Gesta Collationis Carthagini habitae Honorii Caesaris
iussu inter Catholicos et Donatistas. See also the different Collections of
Councils, Labbe, Baluze, Harduin, Mansi, etc. Since these works are discussed in
Chapter II. it is unnecessary to repeat the titles here. Cp. titles in
Retractationes: and Indiculus librorum, tractatuum et epistolarum S. Augustini,
ed. cura Possidii, cap. III.
ii. Separate editions of Augustin's Anti-Donatist writings. (From Schönemann's
Bibliotheca, and other bibliographies.)
1. S. Augustini liber seu Epistola de unitate Ecclesiae contra Petiliani Donat.
Epistolam, Argumentis, Notis atque Analysi illustrata, studio Justi Caluini.
Moguntiae. 1602.
2. SS. Cypriani et Augustini de unitate Ecclesiae tractatus. Accedit Georgii
Calixti, S. Theo. Doct. et in Acad. Julia Prof. primarii, in eorundem librorum
lectionem Introductionis fragmentum edente Frid. Ulrico Calixto. Georgii filio.
Helmaestadii ex typogr. Calixt. 1657. 8.
3. Aurelii Augustini, Episcopi Hipponensis, Liber de Unitate Ecclesiae contra
Donatistas. Ext. cum Commentariis uberrimis et utillisimis in Melchioris
Lydeckeri Historia illustrata Ecclesiae Africanae, cujus totum paene tomum
secundum constituit inscriptum:
Tomus secundus ad Librum Augustini de Unitate Ecclesiae contra Donatistas, de
principiis Ecclesiae Africanae, illiusque fide in Articulis de Capite Christo et
Ecclesia, de Unitate et Schismate, plurimisque Religionis Christianae capitibus
agit. Ultrajecti apud viduam Guil. Clerck, 1690. 4.
4. D. Augustini liber de moderate coercendis haereticis ed Bonifacium Comitem.
Nic. Bergius Revalensis Holmiae, 1696, in 8.
iii. III. Translations.
1. Epistre ou le Livre de St. Augustin de l'Unité de l'Eglise, contre Petilien,
Evesque Donatiste, avec certaines observations pour entendre les lieux plus
difficiles par Jac. Tigeou, imprimé à Reims par Jean de Foigny. 1567. 8.
2. L'Epistre à Vincent, Evesque de l'heresie Rogatiane, traduict de latin par
Clément Vaillant. A Paris, Mathurin Prevost. 1573. 8.
3. Traité du Baptême trad. par l'abbé Dujat, chapelain d'Étampes. Paris. 1778.
12.
4. Writings in connection with the Donatist controversy, translated by the Rev.
J. R. King, M.A. In the Series of Translations of the Works of Augustin.
Edinburgh. T. & T. Clark. 1872.
5. Ausgewählte Schriften des heil. Aurelius Augustinus, Kirchenlehrers, nacnaem
Urtexte ubersetzt. Mit einer kurzen Lebensbeschreibung des Heiligen von J.
Motzberger. 1871-1879. In the Bibliothek der Kirchenväter, Kempten, 1869 sqq.
B. Literature.
This is a selected literature of the Donatist controversy so far as Augustin was
connected with it.
i. In the Benedictine editions occur:
1. Their Vita S. Aurelii Augustini. Tom. XI. Antw., pp. 1-344. Tom. I. Migne,
pp. 65-578.
2. Praefatio of Tom. IX. Antw. s. p. Migne, pp. 9-24.
3. Index opusculorum S. Augustini contra Donatistas. Tom. IX. Antw., pp. 463, 4.
Migne, pp. 757-760.
4. Excerpta et scripta vetera ad Donatistarum historiam pertinentia. Tom. IX.
Antw., App. pp. 7-50. Migne, pp. 773-842.
5. Epistolarum ordo chronologicus. Tom. II. Antw., s. p. Migne, pp. 13-48.
ii. Possidius: Vita S. Aurelii Augustini. Reprinted in Migne Aug. Op. Tom. I.,
pp. 33-66. Cp. Migne Pat. Lat. L. p. 407.
iii. Ecclesiastica Historia. By the Magdeburg Centuriators. 1559-1574. Tom. II.
and III., Centuria, IV. and V., contain the Donatist history.
iv. Balduinius, Franc.
1. Delibatio Africanae historiae ecclesticae, s. Optati libri VII. de Schismate
Donatistarum, etc. Paris, 1563. A second edition with improved readings. Ib.,
1569. In this the prefaces and annotations are of value. Reprinted in Du Pin's
ed. of Optatus Mil.
2. Historia Carthaginensis Collationis sive disputationis de ecclesia, olim
habitae inter Catholicos et Donatistas. Paris, 1566. 8. Reprinted in Du Pin. ib.
v. Baronius. Annales Ecclesiatici. 1588-1607. Tom. III.-V., contain the Donatist
history.
vi. Albaspinoeus: Optati Mel. opera cum notis et observationibus Gabrielis
Albaspinoei. Paris, 1631. Valuable mainly for the observations; reprinted in Du
Pin's ed. of Optatus.
vii. Casaubonus:
Optati Mel. de schismate Donatistarum libri VII. In eosd. notae et emendationes
Merici Casauboni. Lond. 1631. These notes are of value and are reproduced with
those of other editions in the Annotationes Variorum of Du Pin's ed
viii. Valesius Henricus: Eusebii Pamph. Historia ecc., libri de Vita Constantini,
Panegyricus, Const. Oratio ad Sanctorum coetum, gr. et lat. cum annotatt. Paris,
1659 and often. In this is his dissertation: De schismate Donatistarum.
ix. Long, Thomas, B.D. History of the Donatists. Lond. 1677. 8.
x. Du Pin: Nouvelle Bibliothéque des Auteurs Ecclésiastiques.
1. St. Augustin. Tom. III. première partie, pp. 522-839, 1690. Particularly the
review of vol. IX. of Augustin's collected works, pp. 792-811.
2. In Tom. II., Troisième partie, 1701, there are also many allusions to the
history and literature.
3. In his ed. of Optatus Mel., Historia Donatistarum.
xi. Ittig, Thomas: de Haeresiarchis oevi apostolici at apostol. prox. Lips.
1690-1703. 4.
xii. Leydecker Melchior; Historia Ecclesiastica Africana. 2 Tom. 4, See above.
Traj. 1690. 4.
xiii. Witsius, Hermann: Miscellaneorum Sacrorum libri. 2 vols. Amst. 1692. 4. In
vol. I. Dissertatio de schismate Donatistarum.
xiv. Bernino: Historia di tutte l'heresie descritta da Domenico Bernino. Venezia
1711. Tom. I., contains hist. of Donatism.
xv. Storren, J. Ph.: ansführlicher und gründlicher Bericht von den Namen,
Ursprung, v.s.w. der Donatisten. Frankf. 1723. 8.
xvi. Norisius, Henricus: Opera omnia nunc prim. collecta et ordinata. Veronae,
Tumermani, 1729-32, fol. 4 vols. The fourth volume contains his posthumous work
on History of Donatism, as finished by Ballerini.
xvii. Tillemont: in his Memoires pour servir a l'histoire Ecclésiastique:
1. Tom. VI. Histoire du schisme des Donatistes, où l'on marque aussi tou ce qui
regarde' l'Eglise d 'Afrique depuis l'an 305, jusques en l'an 391 que S.
Augustin fut fait Prestre. 1732.
2. Tom. XIII. La Vie de Saint Augustin, dans laquelle on trouvera l'histoire des
Donatistes de son temps, et celle des Pelagiens. 1732.
xviii. Orsi: Della Istoria Ecclesiastica descritta da F. Guiseppe Agostino Orsi.
Tom. IV. (1741) and V. (1749) contain the history ot the Donatists.
xix. Walch, Ch. Wilh. Fr.: Entwurf einer vollständigen Historie der Ketzereien,
Spaltungen und Religionsstreitigkeiten, bis auf die Zeiten der Reformation.
Leipzig, 1768. Vierter Theil: Von der Spaltung der Donatisten; with its three
sections:
a. Von der historie der Donatisten.
b. Von den zwischen den Donatisten und ihren Gegnern geführten
Religionsstreitigkeiten.
c. Beurtheilung der Donatistichen Streitigkeiten. This work was the beginning of
a new critical estimate of the documents.
xx. Schröckh, Johann Mattheus: Christliche Kirchengeschichte. Sechster Theil:
1784, but particularly Elfter Theil, 1786. A juster estimate of Donatism.
xxi. Morcellii, Steph. Ant.: Africa christiana in tres partes distributa. 3
vols. 4. Brixiae, 1816-17. 4. P. II. for Donatism.
xxii. Bindemann, C.: Der heilige Augustinus, 1844-1869. Bdd. II. & III. contain
excellent analyses of the works on Donatism, as well as a history during
Augustin's life.
xxiii. Roux, Adrianus: Dissertatio de Aurelio Augustino, adversario Donatistarum.
Lugduni Batavorum, 1838. A brief summary of the works and doctrine.
xxiv. Ribbeck: Donatus und Augustinus oder der erste entscheidende Kampf
zwischen Separatismus und Kirche. Ein Kirchenhistorischer Versuch von Ferdinand
Ribbeck. Elberfeld. 1857. 8. An uncritical history; but a vigorous analysis,
apologetic and polemic.
xxv. Deutsch: Drei Actenstücke zur Geschichte Donatismus. Neu herausgegeben und
erklärt von Martin Deutsch. Berlin, 1875. The first work on the textual and
historical criticism of the sources.
xxvi. Voelter: Der Ursprung des Donatismus, nach den Quellen untersucht und
dargestellt von Lic Dr. Daniel Voelter. Freiburg i. B. und Tübingen, 1883. This
keen writer, at present Prof. Ord. in Univ. of Amsterdam, has gone still further
into textual and historical criticism, and gives fair promise of a more
impartial hearing for Donatism. It is to be hoped that he will fulfill his
qualified promise of further research.
Among the general church histories particular mention may be made of Gieseler,
Neander, Lindner, Niedner, Robertson, Ritter, Hergenröther, Schaff. The articles
on Augustin, Donatism and related persons and topics in Ceillier, Ersch und
Gruber, Herzog, Schaff-Herzog, Smith's Dictionary of Christian Biography, Wetzer
and Welte, Lichtenberger, are more or less noteworthy. Mention must also be made
of the Patrologies, the biographies, Hefele's Conciliengeschichte. the Analyses
Patrum, etc.
Chapter II.-An Analysis of Augustin's Writings Against the Donatists.
The object of this chapter is to present a
rudimentary outline and summary of all that Augustin penned or spoke against
those traditional North African Christians whom he was pleased to regard as
schismatics. It will be arranged, so far as may be, in chronological order,
following the dates suggested by the Benedictine edition. The necessary brevity
precludes anything but a very meagre treatment of so considerable a theme. The
writer takes no responsibility for the ecclesiological tenets of the great
Father, nor will he enter here into any criticism of the text and truth of the
documents, upon which the historical argument was so laboriously and
peremptorily built, to the utter ignoring of the Donatist archives, and the
protests of their scholars against the validity and integrity of their
opponents' records. Both parties claimed to be the historic Catholic church;
both were little apart in doctrine, worship, and polity; both tended toward
externalism in piety; both accused one another of fraud in inventing records.
Later Romanism in its bright spirit of selection took much spoil from either
camp.
The city of Augustin's birth, its neighborhood, indeed the whole ecclesiastical
province of Numidia, was a stronghold for this puristic school. Is it not
singular, then, that it seems to have made no impression upon his early years?
As a child he had witnessed its brief restoration under Julian, and then the
severe or lax efforts at suppression under succeeding emperors; the Rogatian
schism and the Tychonian reformation were quite familiar to him in his
Manichaean period; but the Confessions are silent as to any such stamp or hold
upon his mind. His activity begins with his ordination to the presbyterate, a
time marked in Donatist annals by the Maximianist separation, and increases as
he becomes bishop. From about 392 to near the close of his life, pen and voice
were seldom still. In all those years the outlinear thoughts grew in breadth and
depth; endless are the forms in which his few and radical conceptions manifest
themselves; never does he lose sight of the popular effect, so that he knows
when to relax his love of word-play and delight in mysterious inductions, in
order to make the chief themes plain to the dullest mind.
How varied the channels through which he struggled for the mastery of his idea
of the Church! In the pulpit he made Donatism the occasion of many a polemic,
many an appeal; in his correspondence it was an ever-recurrent topic; it was the
staple of many a tract and book; verse was not shunned to destroy its
fashionableness and popularity; commentaries and manuals for the meditative hour
or for the training of the theological student, abounded in warnings against its
aggressiveness; no opportunity for debate or conference or epistolary discussion
was left unimproved. And no wonder: it was a living thing, of the street, of the
market, of the social circle, of the home; it threatened at times to obliterate
the transmarine view of the church from North Africa; its spirit of political
independence and plea for religious liberty went to the hearts of a people, more
and more restive under the decline of the Empire.
The literary creations of Donatism had been somewhat more fertile than that of
Caecilianism. We must not belittle Donatus the Great, Parmenian, Petilian,
Gaudentius, and certainly the eminence of Tychonius is confessed by Augustin
himself. Up to this time Optatus of Milevis had been the only forcible opponent.
But against the great Augustin whom could they bring into the field? And against
the great Augustin, backed by the energy of the State, there was little hope of
fairness. Augustin found a new and weighty school. Donatism, with its impossible
ideal, already began to despise the culture which seemed to help its defeat and
withdrew into its sensitive shell after the manner of all puristic tendencies
under persecution.
The two prevalent lines of attack are the historical on the origin of the
schism, which involved the dissection of the documents, and the doctrinal, or
the discussion of the true notes of the Church from the basis of the Scriptures.
This latter Augustin preferred, because final; he bowed to no patristic. One or
the other or both may be traced in all his works, great or small, against them.
Out of so protracted a controversy there grew up a symmetrical and comprehensive
theory of the Church and the Sacraments on either side.
Of three fundamental points of Donatism, as perpetuated practices of North
Africa, rebaptism and the encouragement of a martyr spirit with its attendant
feasts, the continuance of the Seniores in the government of the Church, we find
Augustin aiming mainly at the overthrow of the first two. One of his earliest
letters suggests to his bishop some means for checking the drunkenness and great
excess connected with the Natalitia. Passing to the specific subject in view:
In the early period of his presbyterate, (possibly about 392, others place it
later), Augustin journeyed through Mutugenna, which apparently belonged to his
bishop's see. He learned how pacifically disposed Maximin, Donatist bishop of
Sinaita, was. The friendly feeling thus kindled toward him was shaken by the
rumor that he had rebaptized a defecting Catholic deacon of Mutugenna; not
willing to credit the story, he visited the deacon's home. His parents testified
to their son's reception into the same office by the Donatists. In the absence
of Bishop Valerius, he writes to Maximin with entreaty, refusing to credit the
repetition of the rite, and urging him to remain firm in the convictions which
had been imputed to him. He solicits a reply, that both letters may be read in
the public service, after the dismission of the military. The prominent points
of the letter are: while declining to recognize the validity of Maximin's
orders, he does not refuse to salute him as Dominus dulcissimus, and Pater
venerabilis. His solicitude as a shepherd to do his duty to all the sheep,
constrains him to force himself upon their attention, and to be eager for
correspondence or conference with a view to bringing them back to the fold. He
is perfectly assured of the absolute and final correctness of his idea of the
Church, and of the hopeless error of Donatism, an error so great as to merit
eternal destruction. He discriminates, however, between heresy and schism at
this time. Rebaptism in any case is a sin, but as applied to apostatizing
Catholics, is an immanissimum scelus. There is only one baptism; that of Christ;
as there was no double circumcision, so the sacrament of the New Testament
should not be repeated. The Church is the owner of the nations which are
Christ's inheritance, and of the ends of the earth, which are his possession;
hence it is universal; the seamless robe should not be rent. Moreover the Lord's
threshing-floor has chaff upon it along with the wheat, and therefore he urged
the disuse of imputations through unworthy members on either side, whether
Macarius or Circumcelliones. The schism made itself disastrously felt in all
domestic and social relations. He engages to avoid anything that would look like
using the power of the state for coercing conscience, and begs that on Maximin's
side the Circumcelliones may be restrained. [Ep. xxiii.]
A Plenary council of all Africa was convened in Hippo-Regius in 393, before
which Augustin preached the sermon. His subject was Faith and the Creed: his
handling made such an impression that he was induced to expand it into the
treatise: De Fide et Symbolo. In explaining the article credimus et sanctam
ecclesiam, utique catholicam, he reflects on heretics and schismatics as
claiming the title of churches for their congregations; and distinguishes
between these two opponents of the Catholic body, heretics erring in doctrine,
schismatics, while similar to the Catholic body in views of truth yet
transgressing in the rupture of fraternal love. Neither pertain to the true
Church of God. (Cp. Retractt. I. xvii).
Determined if possible to win the ear of all classes, the presbyter next
affected a poem, "Psalmus contra Partem Donati," in the art of an Abecedarium,
running the letters to U. The line with which it began was to be chanted as a
refrain after each group of usually twelve lines connected with each letter, the
whole closing with an extended epilogue. A generally vulgar performance it is,
and purposely disclaimed all metrical dignity; and yet it contains the germs of
his logical and historical opinions on the controverted points. The Church is a
net in the sea of the world, enclosing the good and bad, which are not to be
separated until the net is drawn to the shore. Those who accuse the Catholics of
tradition, were themselves traditors and broke the net. The history is repeated,
and all proof of the Donatist charges declared to be wanting. Unity is a note of
the Church, and toleration within the net essential to its preservation. Over
against Macarius he puts the violent Circumcelliones. The wicked members of the
Church do not contaminate the good by a communion which is only outward and not
of the heart. The threshing-floor has chaff upon it; wheat and tares must grow
together. The Catholics rear the Elijah altar, the Donatist the Baal altar over
against it. Christ endured Judas. Why rebaptize us, he exclaims, when you do not
repeat the rite upon your once expelled but now restored Maximianists? Surely it
is better to draw life from the real root. The character of him who administers
the sacrament has nothing to do with its efficiency; and so he returns to the
necessity for toleration within the net, as Judas was forborne in the apostolic
company. The epilogue pictures the personified Church expostulating with the
Donatists for quarreling with their Mother, and presents a loose summary of the
previous arguments.
It is doubtful whether, even in the fashion of the times, so lengthy a poem
could become a street theme, or find many repeaters in the markets and inns of
Hippo or Carthage, although the refrain for peace and truthful judgment might
catch the ear of the more zealous. [Cp. Retractt. I. xx.].
The Bishop of Carthage, Donatus the Great, the sphinx of Donatism, had written a
book to vindicate the claim of his church to the only Christian baptism. The
work obtained considerable currency, and maintained its authority, even in
Augustin's day, so he answered it during the year 393, most probably, in a
treatise of one book now no longer extant, but which has been given the title:
"Contra Epistolam Donati haeretici," The Retractations (I. xxi.) correct some
points which had been held in this work. (1). According to the Ambrosian view,
Augustin here identified Peter with the rock, on which the Church was to be
built; but afterwards he regarded that rock as Christ, who was the subject of
the Petrine confession; on Christ was the Church to be built, and to the Church
as thus reared, were given the keys. (2). The Donatus present at the Roman
Synod, he had spoken of as the bishop of Carthage, the author of the book, which
error is corrected in the Retractations. (3). He had also charged the writer
with falsifying a favorite passage of their side, Ecclus. xxxiv. 30, but
afterwards found that some codices read according to the Donatist quotation, and
apologizes for his assertions.
Doubtless many of the sermons preached during his presbyterate had reference to
the schism, but the chronology of these is too uncertain to allow of any
definite arrangement.
We pass to the period of his co-bishopric with the aged Valerius, which dates
from 395 A.D.
Evodius, a brother connected with the Church at Hippo Regius, had a chance
meeting with Proculeianus, bishop of the Donatist body in that diocese. The two
fell into a discussion of their mutual differences. Evodius spoke in rather a
lofty and censorious way, after the fashion of his side, and wounded the
feelings of the older disputant, for the Donatists, like all kindred bodies,
cultivated an undue sensitiveness and were altogether too ready to take offense.
Proculeianus, however, expressed a perfect readiness to have a friendly debate
with Augustin in the presence of competent men. In view of this suggestion, and
in the absence of Valerius, Augustin, always anxious to improve such an opening,
addressed a letter to Proculeianus (c. 396), with courteous recognition, and no
such sharp denial of the episcopal function as in the case of Maximin. He
apologizes for the severe language of his friend, and in every way avoids any
expression which might cause the tendrils again to be drawn in. The methods
suggested for discussion show the anxiety of Augustin to beat out the fire of
Donatism; there is the debate before chosen hearers, all the statements to be
written out for use; or there is the private discussion through mutual
discourse, to be read to one another and corrected, and so given to the people;
or the single correspondence with a view to public lections, or any possible way
that the aged bishop himself might prefer. He urges that the dead bury their
dead, and the past history be left out of the debate; the present with its
burning dissensions affords sufficient topics. As the people seek the bishop to
arbitrate in their private litigations, let these worthies cultivate peace in
this broader field; to this end he invites to prayer and conference. (Ep.
xxxiii.).
Apparently the letter led to nothing practical. A new turn was given to matters.
A son had beaten his mother, and threatened her life; to avoid Catholic
discipline, he joined the Donatists and was rebaptized by them: as Augustin
says, he wounded also his spiritual mother by contemning her sacrament. Public
registration of the facts were made by Augustin, all the more because the
reported instructions, given by bishop Proculeianus to his presbyter Victor
concerning the affair, had already been denied. The case presented an
opportunity for getting at some rule for the recognition of one another's
discipline. Accordingly Augustin addresses himself to Eusebius, a judicious
Donatist of higher rank. He professes that his aim is peace; he emphasizes with
impatient vehemence his opposition to coercive measures in matters of
conscience: neque me id agere ut ad communionem catholicam quisquam cogatur
invitus. He asks Eusebius to find out whether Proculeianus had given the order
to his presbyter as recorded; whether the bishop would consent to a collation
between themselves and ten selected men on each side, agreeably to the original
suggestion so that the whole question might be discussed from the Scriptural
grounds, not the historical. Some proposals for a meeting either at the Donatist
region of Constantina, or at their projected council at Milevis, he could not
accept, because both lay outside of his diocese. If Proculeianus objected to the
dialectic and rhetorical skill of his counter bishop, the latter would propose
Samsucius, bishop of Turris, an earnest but uncultivated man, as a substitute to
lead the Catholic side. (Ep. xxxiv.).
Eusebius declined to interfere on the ground that he could not be a judge, so
Augustin replies (Ep. xxxv.) that he had only asked him to make some inquiries,
because the bishop refused to have any direct communication. The need for some
adjustment concerning discipline had become very pressing; a Catholic subdeacon
and some nuns under rebuke had been received into full standing by the
Donatists, yet their subsequent career had been even more scandalous. Augustin
claimed that the Catholics always respected the penal enactments of their
opponents. To show his own hostility to compulsory conversions, he cites the
case of a daughter, who against the paternal will had joined the Donatists, and
had professed among them; when the father was about to use violence for her
recall, he was dissuaded by Augustin, and when a presbyter of Proculeianus had
shouted abusive epithets at him, although upon the property of a Catholic woman,
he neither replied nor allowed others to resent the insult.
A practical treatise is ascribed by some to this time, called de Agone
Christiano. In expounding the faith he warns against different groups of
heretics and schismatics. In Chap. xxix. 31, he cautions against listening to
the Donatist party, who deny the one holy Catholic church to be diffused
throughout the whole world, and claim it to be alone in Africa, and there among
themselves, against the plain Scripture teaching of its universality; they
affirm that the prophecies of its extension have already been fulfilled, after
which the whole church perished outside of their remnant. He alludes to the
divisions which have befallen them as a retribution for their separation. If the
end shall come after the preaching of the gospel to all nations, how can all
nations have lapsed from the faith, when there remain some who are yet to hear
and believe? This system robs Christ of His glory, and is to be avoided by all
who love the Church. (Cp. Retractt. II. iii.).
In 397 A.D., at the death of Valerius, he became sole bishop. In this year,
while on a visit to Tibursi, he had met with Glorius and other Donatists, with
whom he held a friendly disputation on the origin and history of the schism,
during which some Donatist documents were produced which he declared to be
false, and from memory recapitulated the archives current on his side. Augustin
pursued his journey to Gelizi, where he attended to some episcopal duties, and
brought back with him a copy of the Catholic Gesta, and spent a day with these
friends in reading them, but could not quite finish. He subsequently reproduces
this story with the arguments in a letter. (Ep. xliii.). The chief burden is a
criticism of the Acts, highly important in its place, but it must be passed by
here save to remark that in speaking of Bishop Secundus, he suggests that it
would have been better to appeal to the principalities of Rome or of some other
apostolic church, than to have proceeded as he did; he should have preserved the
unity at all hazards; had the case been inexplicable, he should have left it to
God; if definable, he should have addressed the transmarine bishops, after
finding that his peers at home could not adjust the difficulty; disobedience on
the part of Caecilian to such an order, would have made him the author of the
schism; but now the Donatist altar is set up against the Universal Church. It
may be well to note that throughout the survey of these acts, there appears a
manifest contradiction as to the beginning of the appellations. In the next
place, the Donatists are held guilty of schism, rebaptism, and resistance to
civil correction; of non-communion with those churches concerning whom they read
in their lections; and of the demand for purism against the Lord's parable. The
angels of the churches in the apocalypse are ecclesiastical powers, not heavenly
messengers. The Church cannot be charged with the crimes of the evil men in it.
Toleration is the only practice by which unity can be conserved; Moses bore with
murmurers, David with Saul, Samuel with the sons of Eli, Christ with Judas. They
themselves forbear with Circumcelliones, with Optatus bishop of Thamugada. The
emphasis, however, is not so much upon those matters as upon schism. He would
rather leave the archives and elucidate the doctrine, in which he claims to have
the book of the world; that the Catholics are the Lord's inheritance; that they
stand in fellowship with the churches of the New Testament; they are the light
of the world. A divine rebuke has befallen Donatism in all the tenets of its
particularity, by the schism and return of the Maximianists.
No open door was passed by. On a journey to Cirta, possibly about the beginning
of 398 A.D., he visited with clerical friends the aged Donatist, bishop
Fortunius, at Tibursi. A great company gathered who interrupted the debate; all
attempts at taking notes were finally given up. In a letter (Ep. xliv.) to the
Donatists, Eleusius, Glorius, and the two Felixes, who were of the number of
those addressed in the previous epistle, he speaks of their witness to the
conciliatory disposition of Fortunius, and recounts the substance of the
interview, with the desire that it may be submitted to that bishop for
correction. The discussion had opened with the question of the Church. Fortunius
regretted that Augustin was not in it; the latter reversed the wish. What is the
Church? Is it diffused throughout the whole world, or is it confined to Africa?
Can the Donatists send letters of communion to any of the apostolic churches?
Thence they dissected the Donatist claim to be the people of God, on account of
their subjection to persecution; in which it appears that they recorded the
schism of the whole world from themselves as the true Church as due to sympathy
with the Macarian persecution; up to that time they had held fellowship with the
whole world, and as proof thereof brought forward a letter of a council of
Sardica addressed to them. From the condemnation of Athanasius and Julius by
this document, Augustin, to whom it was new, concluded that this was an Arian
council, and was only the more damaging to their theory. The note of persecution
being resumed, he maintained that there was no approved suffering unless for a
just cause, and hence the justice of the cause must first be established. Though
Ambrose had endured violence at the hand of the soldiery, they would deny him to
be a Christian, for they would rebaptize even him. Maximianists on the other
hand were confessed to be just, although they had been dispossessed of their
basilicas by the Primianist appeal to the state. As an offset, Fortunius urged
the curious fact that before the election of Majorinus, an interventor had been
chosen, whom the Caecilianists put out of the way. On the following day Augustin
had to confess that there was no example in the New Testament to justify
compulsion in matters of faith. The next topic was Discipline. Augustin pleaded
for toleration in order to keep unity. A point as to Johannic baptism sprang up,
but was not pressed. From this time the debate became miscellaneous and
repetitious; in its progress Fortunius confessed reluctantly that rebaptism was
a fixed practice among them, and that even a Catholic bishop so highly esteemed
among the Donatists for his non-persecuting spirit as was Genethlius, would have
to submit to the rite before he could be recognized by their body. Augustin
proposes a further examination of matters, with a view to peace, but the pacific
Fortunius doubts whether many of the so-called Catholics really desire concord,
to which Augustin replies that he can find ten men who would heartily enter into
such a conference.
On the next day the venerable Donatist calls upon his opponent to resume their
talk, until an ordination called Augustin away; we also obtain information of
the Coelicolae professing a new sort of baptism, with whose leader he desired to
confer. The letter closes with a proposition to meet in the little village of
Titia, near Tibursi, where there was no church, and the population pretty
equally divided, and where no crowd could disturb the progress of the
investigation; thither all documents should be brought and the whole subject
canvassed for as long a time as it might take to terminate the discussion.
During the year Augustin issued a weighty work, which stands closely related to
these visits to Fortunius. It was in two books named by himself: Contra partem
Donati. Unhappily it is lost, but in the Retractations (II. v.), he says, that
in the first book he had opposed the use of the secular power for compelling the
schismatics to return to the communion of the State Church, a form of discipline
which experience afterwards persuaded him was necessary and wholesome.
Possibly it was at the close of the year 398 that a hint from the Donatist
bishop Honoratus was brought by Herotes to Augustin, to the effect that they
carry on a correspondence on the questions in dispute between them, and avoid
the uproar of public debates. Augustin acquiesces heartily, and at once plunges
(Ep. xlix.) into the doctrinal aspect of the matter. He begins with the note of
Universality, the Church is diffused through the whole world, to establish which
he brings forward some of his key passages, Ps. ii. 7, 8, Matt. xxiv. 14, Rom. i.
5. With all the apostolic churches Catholics communicate, Donatists do not. How
then can this universality be limited? Why call the Catholic church Macarian,
when the name of Macarius or Donatus is not known in any of these gospel
regions? It rests with Donatists to prove how the Church is lost from the whole
world and is confined tothem. Catholics can rely on the Scriptures only for
their theory. Correspondence seems to him also the better plan for discussion.
Whether this mutual approach went further is not known.
It may have been in 399 A.D. that the Donatist presbyter Crispinus had met
Augustin at Carthage; the two joined words, and both seem to have become heated;
the former made promise to resume the parley at a later date, to the fulfillment
of which the bishop had occasionally urged him. When Crispinus was elevated to
the see of Calama, c. 400 A.D.., and was not far from Augustin's diocese, the
latter addressed him a letter (Ep. li.) rehearsing these facts. A new rumor
credited Crispinus with being ready to enter the arena once more. All salutation
is avoided in Augustin's letter, because the Donatists had accused him of
servility. For the sake of accuracy and instruction he proposes simply to
correspond, whether by one interchange of letters or by many. He pleads that
present interests alone may be touched upon. Schism according to the Old
Testament was more severely punished than idolatry or the burning of the sacred
scroll. The charge of traditorship is set off by the acceptance of the
Maximianists, whom the council of Bagai had condemned in such severe terms. If a
mistake was made with regard to them why not in Caecilian's case? If these were
really guilty, you consulted the wider duties of unity and toleration, and why
not carry these principles farther and apply them to communion with the
Catholics? As to the charge of persecution, Augustin will not enter into the
merits of the matter theoretically, nor stop to plead the mildness of the
measures used, but at once asks why the Donatists used the State to dislodge the
Maximianists, and to deny the Catholics the possession of genuine baptism is
made foolish by the recognition of the rite as existing among the Maximianists
who had been cut off, and were restored without a renewal of the ceremony. The
whole world had been condemned by the Donatists without an opportunity of being
heard, and yet they accept the sacrament of the condemned Felicianus and
Praetextatus. While they deny the validity of the symbol as administered by
apostolic communions, and by the missionary churches which brought the light to
Africa, they maintain that their little fraction alone is its possessor.
Summarizing these arguments as a weight for the bishop to stagger under, he
invokes the peace of Christ to conquer his heart.
In this same year one of his relatives, Severinus, who was a Donatist, sent a
communication to him at Hippo by a special messenger, with a view of reopening
friendly intercourse with his kinsman; and Augustin seizes it as a way to
reestablish as well the higher kinship in Christ (Ep. lii.). The Church is an
unconcealable city set on a hill; it is Catholic, being diffused throughout the
whole world. The party of Donatus is cut off from the historic root of the
Oriental churches, and therefore cannot bring forth the fruits of peace and
love; indeed it suppresses Christ by its rebaptism. Had their charges been
genuine the transmarine bishops would have supported them; at any rate they
should not have withdrawn from the Unity, but rather have practiced toleration.
He hopes that the bonds of custom may be broken by Severinus, and that both may
find their truest relationship in Christ, since the state of schism is a
despising of the eternal heritage and of perpetual salvation.
Further along in the year, a Donatist presbyter had sent to Generosus an ordo
Christianitatis, or episcopal succession of Constantina, his native city,
asserting that it had been delivered by an angel from heaven. About nothing were
the church externalists of every camp so eager as the preservation of the
succession in proof of antiquity. Generosus had only laughed at the man's
stupidity, but nevertheless wrote to the bishop of Hippo about it. Fortunatus,
Alypius and Augustin combine in a reply, undeniably written by the latter,
commending him (Ep. liii.). The ordo Christianitatis of the whole world is
theirs, from which the Donatists do not hesitate to separate themselves. This
presbyter's fiction would have to be rejected at any rate, even had it come from
an angel, since all other gospels than that which teaches the universality of
the Church are anathema. That doctrine is in Matt. xxiv. 14, Gen. xii. 3, Gal.
iii. 16. The true ordo is the Roman, which he gives from Peter to Anastasius,
the cotemporary pope; no Donatist is found in this list; yet as Montenses and
Cutzupitae, they have intruded into Rome. Had there been an actual tradition, or
any wicked man in the Church, that would not have vitiated the ordo, or the
Church, for the law of Christ is plain, Matt. xxiii. 3, a passage again and
again quoted by Augustin to substantiate this thought. They are separated from
the peace of these very churches, concerning which they read in their codices,
and sing pax tecum. There follows a very full and notable summary of the acts,
as a refutation of the schism. He prefers the Scriptural proofs, which certify
to the world-wide reach of Christ's inheritance, and its existence among all
nations; from this they are separated by a nefarious schism, and charge upon the
Catholics the crimes of the chaff on the threshing-floor, which must be mixed
with the grain until the winnowing; these accusations do not affect the wheat
which grows with the tares in the field until the end. Their divinely appointed
retribution is in the history of the Maximianists, with whom they now commune,
and affirm that they are not stained thereby; let them apply that lenity of
judgment to the inheritance of Christ. The angel then was either Satan, or the
man is Satanic, yet his salvation is desired; the sharp writing concerning him
is without odium, and seeks only his correction.
Celer was a Donatist, a man of middle age and of considerable estate and civil
position. He afterwards rose to the proconsulship. Augustin expresses (Ep. lvi.)
a peculiar respect and affection for him, as a man of integrity and seriousness.
He had desired direct instruction from the bishop, both in a matter of Christian
culture and in the controversies between the two parties. Weighed down with the
cares of visitation, Augustin had to delegate his presbyter Optatus to the
reading and explanations of the bishop's works and views in Celer' leisure
hours. The superior claims of the life beyond are set before him, together with
the overwhelming force of the proofs against the schism, so that the dullest
with patience and attention can get correction. The sundering of the bonds of
custom and of a perversity that has become familiar, is a matter requiring great
strength of character, for which step however, he, under God, would be readily
capable.
But Celer was not persuaded to change his church connection by this first
endeavor. On the contrary, Augustin thought he saw a laxity in the enforcement
of the repressive measure ordered by the government, and so wrote a second time
(Ep. lvii.). He affirms that there is no just cause for separation from that
Catholic church which prophets and evangelist have declared should be diffused
through the whole world. A long retained codex of Augustin, which had been
loaned to Celer through Caecilian, his own son, who seems to have been under the
special tutelage of the bishop, was designed to convince the state official on
this very point (we do not know which writing it may have been), should
inclination or leisure lead him to its perusal, and whatever difficulties might
occur, Augustin was ready to answer. He desires him also to stir up his
subordinates to greater care in restoring the Catholic unity in the region of
Hippo; indeed he cautions him to diligence on his own estates; a friend there,
who fears to be strict in the carrying out of the statutes, could have his
position alleviated by a word from Celer his patron. From this point we notice a
decided sympathy with the effort to break up Donatism by force.
Parmenian, the successor of Donatus the Great in the see of Carthage, was one of
the brightest disputants on their side. Against him Optatus of Milevis had
directed his review of the schism, full indeed of grave historical blunders, but
not lacking in that suavity which those who think they have the keys of heaven
sometimes affect. When Tychonius had exposed some of the inconsequences and
weaknesses of the Donatist theory of the Church, Parmenian undertook a reply,
whose main object was to fortify the propositions, (1) that the evil defile the
good in the Church, and must therefore be cut off; and (2) that puristic folly,
that the Donatist community was absolutely pure in its membership and
priesthood. To this much-esteemed work, Augustin replies (c. 400 A.D.) in three
books: Contra Epistolam Parmeniani.
In Book I. the main question is, who really incurred the guilt of schism, and
initiated the appeal to the State? He opens with the praise of Tychonius as man
and author, but misses the acute drift of that great man's argument. He seeks to
answer the data of the origin of the separation as given by Parmenian, who
attributes it to the joint movement of Gaul, Spain and Italy in seeking to make
their views universal, and to the influence of Hosius over Constantine, in
winning him to their opinion; nor does Parmenius cease to deprecate the imperial
intervention. Augustin defends this use of the secular arm, but accuses the
Donatists by their history of beginning it in the appeal to Constantine, in the
treatment of the Rogatists and Maximianists, in the abuses of the
Circumcelliones, in their petition to Julian.
Book II. discusses the texts alleged by the Donatists in support of the purity
of the Church, the need of discipline, the sole validity of their baptism and
ordination, the blamelessness of their members and clergy. While both fail in
exegetical principles, Parmenian, after the manner of his school, is
aggravatingly guilty of using mere catch-words, without regard to text or
context. He quotes indiscriminately whatever sounds favorable to his cause. Some
of the passages are: Is. v. 20, Prov. xvii. 15, Is. lix. 1-8, Ecclus. x. 2, Is.
lxvi. 3, Prov. xxi. 27, and others. Augustin gives his interpretations, and does
not fail to prod his opponent with barbs of Optatus, Maximianists, and
Circumcelliones.
Book III. handles further the theory of purism in the light of Scriptural
proofs. The first part is mainly an endeavor to give the true significance of I
Cor. v. 12, 13. (Compare his correction in the Retractt. II. xvii.). Augustin is
constrained to confess the need of some internal discipline, and then enforces
with wider range the notes of universality, unity and toleration, especially as
illustrated by Cyprian. [Cp. Retractt.. II. xvii.].
In the work against Parmenian, he had promised to write more fully on this
subject of baptism, the frequent persuasions of the brethren also moved him so
that in this same year (400 A.D.) he issued the seven books De Baptismo: Contra
Donatistas. The double purpose is to define that sacrament as the property of
Christ, and to overthrow the Donatist appeal to the authority of Cyprian and the
famous council of Carthage, with its eighty-seven deliverances in favor of the
repetition of the rite. Since this is one of the works translated in the
accompanying volume any further analysis may be passed by. [Cp. Retractt. II.
xviii.].
In this period of frequent and heated controversy, a Donatist layman, Centurius
by name, brought some of their quotations and writings, and supported with
Scriptural proofs to the Church in Hippo. It seems to have begun with an
exposition of Prov. ix. 17. (N. Afr. version and LXX). Augustin answered them
briefly in a tractate, which he entitles: Contra quod attulit Centurius a
Donatistis. It is however not extant. In the Retractations (II. xix.) it is
placed immediately after the work on Baptism.
Meanwhile, and as the Retractations tell us, before he had finished his work on
the Trinity, and his literal commentary on Genesis, he found it desirable to
reply to the pastoral letter of Petilian, Donatist bishop of Constantina;
unfortunately only a part of the epistle came into his hand, so strenuous and
vigilant were the efforts to hide their literature from the eyes of this ardent
foe. He replied with one book to so much as he had received, c. 400 A.D. Some of
his clergy subsequently obtained and wrote out a complete copy, so that he
composed the second book, c. 401 A.D. Meanwhile Petilian responded to the first
issue, and this necessitated a third book, c. 401 or 402 A.D. The three books
were collected into one treatise, and are known under the title Contra Litteras
Petiliani. The main object of the series is the refutation of Petilian's
proposition: "Conscientia namque (sancte) dantis attenditur, quoe (qui) abluat
accipientis." "Nam qui fidem (sciens) a perfido sumpserit, non fidem percipit,
sed reatum." "What we look for is the conscience of the giver (him who gives in
holiness), to cleanse that of the recipient." "For he who (wittingly) receives
faith from the faithless receives not faith, but guilt." Since the work is also
a part of this volume, we need not dwell on it farther. [Cp. Retractt. II. xxv.]
The civil restraints were applied with vigor on the one side and resented on the
other by the retaliatory Circumcelliones. To Pammachius, a man of senatorial
rank, Augustin, in 401 A.D., sends a letter [Ep. lviii.] of exuberant
congratulations and flatteries, because he had compelled some of his Numidian
tenants to return to the mother Church; a converting agency which he condemns
unmercifully when practiced by the Donatists. The plan, he says, would have been
urged upon other landholders, had the clergy not been afraid of the scornful
finger of the Donatists, who were in such favor with the proprietors, that an
effort like this might have failed. He desires the senator to circulate this
letter wherever there was promise of effect. The bishop, now thoroughly
committed to these arbitrary procedures, was in some trepidation lest the
plausible arguments which the Donatists were urging, might shake the resolution
of Pammachius himself, and so he sends a secret commission of instruction.
The coercive measures yielded fruit, and the question about the status of
recedent Donatist clergy now became pressing. Augustin had already met with a
certain Theodore on this subject, and in a letter addressed to him [Ep. lxi.] c.
401, recapitulated the proposition then agreed upon, to be used as a basis for
treatment with all who wanted to come over. The Catholic church opposed only the
schism and the rebaptism among the Donatists; what was good she was ready to
acknowledge. Baptism itself, ordination, self~denial, celibacy, doctrinal views,
especially as to the Trinity, these were confessedly right, only to reap the
profit of them, it was essential for Donatists to be in the unity and in the
root.
The Council of Carthage of September 13, 401, adopted this view, Can. 2. There
had also been a remarkable scarcity of Catholic clergy, so that application had
been made to Rome and Milan for relief; probably this had its influence upon so
charitable a view of schismatic ordination.
It was alleged that Crispinus, the bishop of Calama, had bought a state farm at
Mappalia, and had rebaptized the tenants. Augustin was roused by this
counter-irritant and wrote him a letter, c. 402 A.D. [Ep. lxvi.], wondering what
he would do if the authorities were to impose the fine for every offense. He
pleads for an answer to Christ, whose was all the world, because bought with his
blood, while the Donatist would affirm that Christ had lost all the world save
Africa. He urges a public discussion of the mooted points before these converts,
which should be reported and done into Punic as a test of their freedom in this
conversion, and frankly enough offers to do the same for any case of coercion on
his side. Unless Crispinus and his helpers acquiesce, he will hold them guilty.
The uppermost talk of those times was the extraordinary charity of the Donatists
toward the Maximianists. One form of apology for such a seeming vacation of all
their tenets was to say, e.g., of Felicianus of Musti, that he was ignorantly
condemned when innocent and absent, so in his absence, he was reinstated. This
statement was made by a Donatis bishop, Clarentius, in reply to the inquiries of
Naucelio. Alypius and Augustin, who were made aware of this defense, urged in
criticism [Ep. lxx.] that the Council of Bagai was therefore guilty in
condemning Felicianus unheard, and all the more in that they afterward found him
to be innocent. Either he ought not to have been condemned if he was innocent,
or if guilty, he ought not to have been received back. If the council erred, why
not apply such a liability to error to the origin of the schism; might not
Caecilian, unheard, have been condemned although innocent? But, as a matter of
fact, Felicianus was found guilty while in thorough and declared sympathy with
Maximian, and the state was called upon to enforce his ejection. If he was
welcomed without rebaptism, why not treat the Church diffused through the whole
world with the same consideration?
It was probably in the year 402 that he addressed a general appeal to the
Donatist [Ep. lxxvi.], not to endanger their salvation by continuance in schism.
If they counted the surrender of the sacred books so great a sin, how much more
grievous a transgression ought the refusal to obey the plain commands of these
books as to unity be considered. He brings forward the usual array of passages
to demonstrate the universality of the Church, and that any limitation of this
note, can only be at the end of the world. The attempt to separate the wheat
from the tares before the harvest, is only a proof that they are of the tares. A
rapid survey of the origin of the schism follows, and all the archives are made
to tell against them. He asks how they can hold any theory of purism while they
regard Optatus as a martyr and welcome the excommunicated Maximianists? Schism
in the Scriptures is punished more severely than the burning of the books. Why
complain about traditorship when Maximianists are received? Why abuse the
imperial laws directed against them, when they had invoked the same against the
Maximianists? If theirs is the only baptism, what is the baptism of these
Maximianists, which is without question validated? He challenges the Donatist
bishops to discuss these matters with their laity, if they persist in declining
to meet the Catholics, and bids the sheep beware of the wolves and their den.
The ad Catholicos Epistola, popularly known as de Unitate Ecclesiae, is pretty
generally attributed to Augustin, and is addressed to the brethren of his
charge; it may be taken as a contrast to the previous letter directed to the
Donatists, and not unlikely saw the light in 402 A.D. This book is designed as a
continuance of the controversy with Petilian, and indeed a further
correspondence is proposed, so that the work must have appeared before that
bishop's death, which is generally placed in this year. The chief question
between the two parties is, Where is the Church? Is it with Catholic or
Donatist? The Church is one and Catholic: it is the body of Christ, consisting
of Him as its Head and those in Him as members. The historical issue in any of
four possibilities of truth or falsity does not justify separation from this
body. The point is, What does the Lord say? The Donatist should believe in the
books, which he says were delivered up, and put aside all other documents except
the divine canons. Do the Scriptures say that the Church is in Africa only, and
in the few Cutzupitanae or Montenses at Rome, and in the house or patrimony of
one woman in Spain, or is it in the whole world? A second time does he start out
with a definition of the Church, as having for its head the Only Begotten Son,
and for its body the members in Him; as bridegroom and bride, two in one flesh.
Any divergence from the Head or the body, whether caused by difference in
doctrine or government, is per se outside of the Church. He meets the two
favorite Donatistic comparisons of the divine institution with the ark and
Gideon's fleece, and then enlarges upon the note of universality, with included
unity, by Scripture texts from the Law, the Prophets, especially Isaiah, and the
Psalms. From the Donatist position these are not fulfilled, because, say they,
men are unwilling. Men were created with free will; they believe or disbelieve
according to that. When the Church began to increase in the world, men refused
to persevere, and the Christian religion was lost from all the nations with the
exception of the Donatists. All this, replies Augustin, as if the Spirit of God
did not know the future volitions of men. But Christ, after the resurrection,
said that the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms testified of Him, and that the
fulfillment of his kingdom should begin from Jerusalem. He then follows out the
expansion of the Church as given in the Acts, and the foundation of Christian
communities as mentioned in the Epistles and the Revelation. The Donatists reply
to this theory of development that the Church perished save among them in North
Africa. It is among the few: for which they cite a similar state of things under
Enoch, Noah, Lot, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the Kingdom of Judah. The
spread of the Church did indeed begin from Jerusalem, but afterwards an apostasy
befell it, in the progress of which the communion of the Donatists alone
remained faithful. Augustin says the fact that there are evil persons in the
Church is simply a proof of the fulfillment of those parables of our Lord, which
illustrate the mixed characters in his kingdom. There is indeed a paucity of the
good, but within that communion. Then follows a discussion of the geographical
limitation, the Donatists maintaining that the Oriental churches and the rest
mentioned in the sacred canon had receded from the faith. Especially is their
favorite paragraph, a passage from Cant. i. 7, commented upon. He presses the
continuous preaching among all nations, after which event the end is to come;
there must be such a universal growth to that end. Let us cease drawing from the
acts and sayings of men about this great matter, and take the simple testimony
of the Scriptures. But the Donatists object: If the Church be among you why do
you compel us by force to enter its peace? Or if we are evil why do you desire
us? and if we are tares why hinder us from growing until the harvest? Augustin
then justifies the system of correction adopted in loving care for their
salvation, not failing to remind them of the Circumcelliones and their own
action with regard to the Maximianists. Another inquiry of the Donatists was,
How will you recognize us if we come to you? Augustin says, as the universally
founded Church is wont to receive, put away all hatred and your sacraments are
acknowledged. This leads to the discussion of baptism and of that related topic,
the effect, of the celebrant's character, upon the recipient. He returns finally
to the note of universality as essential to the unity, with the one Head and the
one body.
Somewhere about 404 A.D. two official cases of discipline had occurred in
Augustin's monasterium, which had grieved the pride of the clergy, because they
had boasted of their establishment as really purer than the puristic body
gathered about the Donatist bishop Proculeianus. They were more troubled about
this than about the sins of the suspected brethren, one of whom, however, seemed
to have considerable injustice done him. While discussing this matter [in Ep.
lxxviii.] he incidentally mentions the lapse of two Donatists, who had been
received into Augustin's communion, and whose conduct the clergy had regarded as
a proof of the laxity of discipline under Proculeianus.
A sermon on the 95th Ps. (96) may have been preached in the year 404 or
thereabouts, in which he rebukes the Donatists for their pride in claiming
either that they, the few in Africa, are the ones bought by Christ, or that they
are so great because this large gift was bestowed on them alone. And in
commenting on v. 10, dicite in nationibus, Dominus regnavit a ligno, etc., he
twits them with seeking this reign by the wood through the cudgels of the
Circumcelliones; and enlarges too upon the theme of universality, against their
undiscoverable here and there.
Caecilianus, whose exact civil office, whether vicar or proefectus annonoe is
yet undetermined, Augustin addresses as praeses in Ep. lxxxvi., which is
ascribed to 405 A.D. The severer edicts of Honorius had just been published.
This official had carried them out with telling earnestness. His administration
in the greater part of Africa is particularly commended; the bishop begs of him
to restore the Catholic unity also in Hippo and the frontiers of Numidia. The
ill-success of his own work is not due to lack of episcopal duty, and he asks
Caecilianus to inquire of the clergy, or of the bearer, a commissioned
presbyter, about the true state of matters; he would have the State begin with
monitions in the hope of preventing a resort to severer remedies.
Emeritus, the bishop of Julia Caesarea, one of the seven Donatist disputants at
the later conference, did not shun correspondence or association with his
opponents. He is described as a man of parts and character. Augustin had written
a letter to him, which is not preserved, and it had received no reply. He once
more seeks to win him to a friendly discussion or correspondence [Ep. lxxxvii.],
in this time of general return to the mother Church. He would have all men of
culture come back to the true fellowship. What Emeritus's particular ground for
continuing in separation may be he does not know. He proceeds to discuss
universality, purism, the validity of the documents, the heinousness of schism,
the paucity of numbers, and the right of coercion.
The enforcement of the civil edicts was followed by violent outbreaks of the
Circumcelliones, especially in Augustin's diocese. The clergy united in a
protest [Ep. lxxxviii.] addressed to the venerable Bishop Januarius, a Donatist,
probably in 406 A.D. They claim (1) that they are receiving evil for good. (2)
The appeal to the state was begun by the Majorinists, and two full documents are
given in proof. (3) All decrees of the empire since, are the simple execution of
the edict of Constantine against the party of Donatus which these had wanted to
be issued against Caecilian. (4) The acts of the Circumcelliones; were the real
occasion for sharper efforts at suppression; instances of their cruelty are
mentioned. (5) The Catholics have pursued a conciliatory policy by conferences
and by desiring a mitigation of the penalties, which were frustrated the one by
refusals, the other by a gross assault on the Catholic bishop of Bagai; all who
come into the hands of the state clergy, are treated with merciful persuasion.
(6) Various proposals for peace are suggested.
Festus, a government official and a landed proprietor apparently in Hippo, had
written a letter urging a return of the Donatists to the mother Church. It bore
little fruit, and he asks Augustin first to instruct him and also to give him a
tractate for general use. Augustin, c. 406. [Ep. lxxxix.], enforces the duty of
perseverance in the civil reclamation of the Donatists; their claim of
persecution as a note attesting them to be the true people of God is folly,
because it is not the mere suffering but the cause for which one suffers that
makes a martyr. He exhorts him to read the archives and see how the schismatics
initiated the appeal to the secular power, and how all things that have befallen
them through that arm would have been the just fate of the Caecilianists, had
the Donatist course been approved. Besides, why this unjust treatment of the
Church universal in condemning it unheard, and rebaptizing its members, who have
done them no wrong? The theory that baptism alone is valid when administered by
the just, is putting a trust in man which the Scriptures condemn; the sacrament
is not man's but Christ's; further, one would prefer to be baptized by a bad
man, for then he would receive grace from Christ directly, according to their
subterfuge. He is vexed with their active and passive opposition; the mother has
to correct, although her obstinate child may not like it. They aver that the
Catholics accept them without requiring any change in them, but the change
required is great, no less a one than from error to truth. The bishop proposes
as a substitute for Festus's plan, the sending of an authorized messenger
secretly to himself, and they would devise together a method for the correction
of the Donatists.
In the second sermon on Ps. cii. (ci.) preached about this time, when enlarging
upon the unity he ridicules the Donatist assertion that the Church which was
among all the nations had perished, as the impudent voice of those who are not
in it declares. So is their affirmation that Scripture prophecies about the
spread of the kingdom have been fulfilled; all nations have believed, but this
diffused communion apostatized and perished. He rebukes the conceit that the
Lord's saying, I am with you, even to the end of the world, was designed for
them alone, the Lord foreseeing that the party of Donatus would be in the earth.
If emperors have propounded laws against heretics, it is a part of the
predictions which foretold how kings would serve the Lord. Thence he expands the
notes of universality and perpetuity.
Cresconius, a layman and philologist, read Augustin's first book in answer to
Petilian, and wrote a reply, which, however, was circulated among the Donatists
only. Augustin at last secured a copy, and wrote (406 A.D., some say as late as
409) Contra Cresconium Grammaticum Partis Donati, libri IV. Three of these books
controvert the arguments of Cresconius; part of the third and the fourth entire
is a detailed polemic history of the Maximian schism.
In Book I. he alludes to the occasion of the writing, and hesitates between
being regarded as contumelious if he declined an answer, and arrogant, should he
reply. Cresconius had attacked eloquence, which Augustin defends as simply the
art of speaking, and as not to be condemned because it has been abused. You do
not condemn military armament for your country because others have taken up arms
against the country; the physician does not refuse to use all drugs because some
are baneful; because there are sophists one is not to deny the value of
eloquence. Cresconius seemed to regard its cultivation as injurious to the
simplicity of Christian law and teaching. He also had accused Augustin of
persistent arrogance in his pertinacious pursuit of the Donatists. Augustin
claims to do a good work with good ends in view, and says its fruit has been a
rich harvest for the Church. So the discussion passes on to the use of
dialectics, which Cresconius assails, but Augustin defends as nothing else than
a demonstration of results, either the true from the true or the false from the
false. He justifies not disputatiousness, but the arguments by which truth is
built up, for Christ employed it, and St. Paul wielded its weapons not only with
the Jews but with Epicureans and Stoics. In all this we have an illustration of
that unfortunate tendency to undervalue culture whenever a puristic community
passes into the fires. Augustin applies the art to one of the points which
Cresconius had discussed, viz., rebaptism. He had endeavored to prove that it
was solely among them. Augustin concedes that the rite is there, but not its
profit; in order to enjoy its profit, it must be administered lawfully. The
oneness of baptism as a ceremony is not dependent on the oneness of the Church,
whereas its profit is. A reprobate society of heretics can have a good baptism,
but it is not properly and not profitably administered among them; the proper
and profitable administration is solely in the Church to salvation; the rite
outside is to judgment.
In Book II. after a résumé of the previous book, he notices first the criticism
as to the true construction of the name Donatistoe; it should rather be
Donatiani as Cresconius claimed: He is ready to concede this, and in his
controversy with the philologist will use that form, but on all other occasion
he would prefer the more familiar termination. Cresconius also protests against
the term heretic as applied to them, which he regards as a divergence of views
from the Christian faith; while a schism has sprung up among those for whom the
same Christ was born, died and rose again, who have one religion, the same
sacraments, and no diversity in Christian observance. August, however, while not
particularly dwelling on these agreements, presses upon him the articles of
divergence, and asks why they rebaptize? The recognition of Donatist ordination
concerning which Cresconius had asked, Augustin declares to be a matter of
charity. As to the question of Cresconius, Why, if the Donatists are such
heretics and so sacrilegious, if they are indeed guilty of a nefarious and
inexpiable crime, some purification is not adopted when they come over to the
Catholic church? Augustin answers: We do not regard it as inexpiable, and
baptism is not to be repeated, it is Christ's; on coming to us the Donatist
receives the Spirit signified by that rite; he begins to have healthfully what
he previously had hurtfully and unworthily. The relation of the celebrant to the
symbol as presented by Cresconius is a modification of Petilianism. "Regard is
had," says he, "to the conscience of the giver, not according to its actuality,
which cannot be perceived but according to his reputation, whether that be true
or false." Augustin does not fail to crowd him for the change of base. The
favorite passages of Ps. cxli. 5, Jer. xv. 18, and Ecclus. xxxiv. 31, are gone
over. Then he answers the charge made by Cresconius, as to the right of any
sinner to baptize among the Catholics. Finally, he reviews Cyprian's relation to
rebaptism, who is not a canonical authority for him; the Scriptures alone are
such; but the Donatists ought to consider that decision of his to remain in
unity from the fact that the mixed nature of its membership requires toleration.
Book III. Augustin contends that the Donatists by their schism from especially
the Eastern churches had violated the principle of toleration, which their
boasted leader had so strenuously enforced. There follows then a seriatim
consideration of the points made by Cresconius, similar to those maintained by
Petilian, as to the importance of the origin and the head and root in baptism,
or the character of the celebrant, and the rebaptism by Paul of John's
disciples. The case of Optatus and the Maximianists next come under review, as
witnesses against their testimonies. Cresconius says he will neither absolve nor
condemn Optatus, and as to the Maximianists, he professes to have made special
inquiry into the whole history. The Synod had granted a season of delay during
which all who returned should he held innocent. Of this very many availed
themselves; the baptism of these was valid; those who remained outside lost both
baptism and the church. Augustin refutes the statement from its inherent
contradictions and from the language of the Synod against the Maximianists.
Cresconius also brings forward the Sardican council's letter to Donatus as a
proof of sustained fellowship. Augustin declares it to be an Arian council; and
he insists on paralleling all Cresconius would say about Caecilianism with the
career of the Maximianists. With reference to persecution, he cites in extenso
their own persecutions, the case of Severus, bishop of Thubursicubur; the acts
of Optatus; his own treatment at a collation by the Circumcelliones; the case of
Crispinus, the Donatist bishop of Calama; their own invocation of the state
against the Maximianists. Thence he returns to the doctrine of the unity as
universal with many of the familiar Scripture texts, and asserts by the
documents that the Donatists were the occasion of the rupture.
Book IV. is a review of Cresconius's work by the light of the Maximianist
records. Beginning with a pleasantry as to their eloquence and dialectic spirit,
he follows in detail the points of Cresconius whether doctrinal or historical as
to Caecilian, mainly with Maximianist data as offsets. Cresconius charges
Augustin with having called Petilian Satan, and so violating the peace he
professes. Augustin claims that he only compared the error not the person, to
Satan. Nor had Cresconius forgotten to bring out the Manichaeism of his
opponent. Augustin reminds him both of what he had written against them and also
of what sins were forgiven in the return of Maximian, who was an old man when
Augustin was but young; these were the sins of his youth. The theories of
fellowship, of persecution, of baptism, are all considered in the light of their
own council of Bagai and its sequences. [Cp. Retractt. II. xxvi.].
After concluding his work against Cresconius, he issued, probably in this same
year, a little treatise he had promised, containing a collection of proofs both
for Donatist and Catholic popular use. To the pledge itself an unknown Donatist
replied, which led to the production of a second book, whose title Augustin
designed to be: Contra nescio quem Donatistam. The original promise was
fulfilled in the publication of the Probationes et Testimonia contra Donatistas,
embracing all the ecclesiastical and public acts and Scripture proofs bearing on
the questions between them. It was designed mainly for public reading in the
basilicas. Both were joined in one book, although apparently afterwards
separated. In each he confesses to the error of placing the purgation of Felix
after instead of before the vindication of Caecilian. At this writing he still
regarded the Donatists as psychics and babes, but in his old age corrects his
application of the words to them, since he came to consider them rather as dead
and lost. Unfortunately neither treatise has been preserved. [Cp. Retractt. II.
xxvii. and xxviii.].
He also conceived the plan of preparing a polemic for the people who had little
time for extended reading, by refuting the entire theory of the schism through
the story of the excision and restoration of the Maximianists. It appeared c.
406 A.D. under the name of Admonitio Donatistarum de Maximianistis: this too is
lost. [Cp. Retractt. II. xxix.].
An acquaintance of earlier days in Carthage,
Vincentius, had become bishop of the little Rogatist fragment as the immediate
successor of Rogatus himself at Cartenna. He, or some one of that little band,
had written a letter to Augustin with a pretty strong plea against persecution.
This was not unlikely in c. 408 A.D., and Augustin answers in one of his most
weighty epistles (Ep. xciii.), under the supposition that Vincentius was the
author, and vindicates the help of the State. Evidently a change had come over
Numidia, for he boasts of the multitudes who had been converted, and rejoices in
the fruitful use of the secular arm for their salvation. Even Circumcelliones
had become steadfast Catholics. Coercion stimulates the thoughtless and those
bound by custom, and delivers these held back by fear; it is like a wholesome
medicine, or the wounds inflicted by a friend. God chastens in order to better
the life and to bring men to repentance. The householder instructs us to compel
them to come in. Sarah and Hagar are types; so the mother Church corrects her
children. Everything depends on the aim in persecution, whether it be done for
oppression or for good; it is the difference between Pharaoh and Moses in their
treatment of Israel. The Father gave up the Son, and the Son gave Himself up;
while Judas betrayed Him. The righteousness of the end for which one suffers
alone constitutes martyrdom. The Rogatist is not suffering for righteousness but
for unrighteousness. Augustin is constrained to confess that there are no
persecutions recorded in the New Testament as inflicted by Christians, but
explains the omission as due to the fact that rulers were not yet members of the
Church. He thinks, too, that the moderate and discriminating form of the
correction employed, helps to justify a resort thereto. If the Rogatists have
nothing to do with the violence of the Circumcelliones, and use no force as the
rest of the Donatists do, it is because they are so few and feeble. The
Donatists, however, did use the secular arm against the Maximianists, and in the
appeal to Julian. He will not allow a distinction between resort to law for the
recovery of property and for the coercion of the conscience. He claims that to
regain one's own in this way has no apostolic warrant. The Donatists, too,
sought imperial aid to coerce Caecilianus. Why shall not Catholics return in
kind? The very edict of confiscation which had hit them they had hoped might
fall on the head of Caecilian and his followers. What Tychonius said describes
the very essence of Donatist arbitrariness: quod volumus sanctum est. The sin of
separation from the whole world followed; the universal church was condemned
unheard, and the toleration which Cyprian urged disregarded. He traces his own
change of views from the non-coercive to the coercive policy, the success of the
method in hastening conversions won him wholly as an enthusiastic and persistent
supporter. He bids Vincentius flee from the wrath to come. What is his little
handful compared with the universal Church? This note of universality he
develops in extenso against their limitation, and especially their new
definition of Catholic, as obedience to all the laws and the sacraments, and to
their childish allegory of Cant. i. 7. He hints that in the ancient times there
might have been a little schism which anticipated the Rogatists, and which had
called itself exclusively the Church. He thinks it is also the duty of the State
to suppress idolatry. The passage quoted from Hilary by Vincentius, as to the
few who in Asia in his day were believers in spite of the spread of the Church,
Augustin softens into an excited picture of the dark times of persecution. Next,
he discusses the position of Cyprian. All patristic testimony, however, is of no
final value; the only authority is the Word of God. Moreover, if Cyprian be
quoted, why not on the side of his love for unity and toleration? The averment
that the Church, with the exception of the Rogatists, perished by fellowship
with the unbaptized, is met with the fact that in Cyprian's time men had been
received without rebaptism into the Church, and therefore the Church, according
to their theory, must have perished before their day; if it, however, survived
that condition, then there is no excuse left for a schism on that ground. One is
not of higher merit than Cyprian simply because he may abhor that father's
error, any more than they who did not fall into Peter's mistake are above him in
worth on that account. Indeed Cyprian may have rectified his fault before death;
and some say that those passages are interpolations. Augustin, however, concedes
their authenticity. Cyprian, in his Epistle to Antonianus, shows how the African
bishops maintained unity in spite of the corrupt lives of some colleagues;
variations of opinion were allowed; neither were they contaminated by such a
fellowship, nor was the Church destroyed. Tychonius states the result of a
Donatist council which granted fellowship to those in their own body who had
been guilty of tradition, and that without rebaptism, in case the restored
should oppose such a repetition of the rite. Deuterius, bishop of Macriana, had
admitted traditors to his communion without renewing the sacrament, and many
witnesses of both facts were living in Tychonius's own day. Parmenian had indeed
replied to the arguments, but could not gainsay the facts. Augustin professes in
all sincerity his anxiety for the salvation of the jeopardized Donatists; the
Church acknowledges the Sacrament which they have administered, and desires them
to have the profit thereof. In defence of rebaptism Vincentius had alleged the
case of Paul, repeating the ceremony after John. Augustin asks was John then a
heretic? If not, it is for you to say why the ordinance was iterated;. Christ's
baptism is always the same and must not be iterated; it has nothing to do with
the merit or demerit of the individual, or else Paul would not have declined its
continuous administration. He begs him to put no confidence in the accident of
their being a little company, and not to arrogate to themselves the title of
Catholic, in the sense of being keepers of the entire law and all the
sacraments, nor to peculiar sanctity as the few who were to have faith at the
coming of the Son of Man. The Church does not take pleasure in correction, save
for conversion; she abhors those who seek Donatist property out of sheer
covetousness, yet all property does belong to the true Church. She has also no
delight in any who disregard Donatist discipline, by receiving members who have
been ejected from that body for sin. The Catholic Church sustains the unity, and
recognizes the mixture of chaff and wheat, good and bad fish, the goats and the
sheep. He bids him come to that Church into whose fellowship Vincentius had
described Augustin as entering. He closes with reflections on the aggravations
in the sin of schism and on the need of repentance.
Olympius had recently been elevated to the dignity of magister officiorum. He
had written to Augustin soliciting his advice on the best way for the civil
authority to help the Church. Augustin, c. 408 [Ep. xcvii.], welcomes his
elevation, commends his devotion to the body of Christ, and is glad to have his
own timidity relieved by this invitation to lay before the highest official the
exacting needs of the hour. These had become grave; the very success of coercion
had precipitated new commotions among the Circumcelliones and their clerical
abettors. A commission had sailed in mid-winter to solicit imperial help against
their fury. The first point he would suggest, but without having had the
opportunity of consultation, save probably with bishop Severus, is to declare by
proclamation that the imperial edicts were not the invention of Stilicho, as the
Donatists and heathen boasted. As to further plans, the episcopal commission
would doubtless consult with him on their return from court. He invites Olympius
to rejoice with him on the practical benefits of coercion thus far.
It may have been a little later (c. 408 or 409) that Augustin writes to Donatus
the proconsul (Ep. c.) regretting indeed that the Church must avail herself of
the State, but he is gratified that so devoted a son is wielding the sword for
her. The crimes against the Church are greater than all other crimes, but in her
discipline he deprecates any spirit of revenge, and pleads most beseechingly
against the infliction of capital punishment; that would be a deterrent to the
bringing in of any charges against the guilty. He asks for a republication of
the repressive laws, since the enemy is boasting of their repeal.
Augustin wrote a general letter to the Donatist people in c. 409 [Ep. cv.], in
which he declares that the Catholic effort at their conversion is the work of
peacemakers. Some Donatist presbyters had ordered the Catholics to let their
people alone, if they did not want to be killed, but Augustin would all the
rather ask the people to recede from the schismatics because they were separated
from that body for which Christ died. Catholics must seek for the stolen sheep
that had on them the mark of Christ. The charge of being traditors, says he, we
meet with a like accusation against you, and then you bid us leave. You claim to
be the Church on this unproved charge, unmindful of what law, prophecy, Psalms,
Apostles and Gospels say as to its universality beginning at Jerusalem. You are
not in communion with that universal body, and you prevent the escape of others
from a similar perdition. The objection as to persecution he meets with an
invitation to look at the deeds of clergy and Circumcelliones, and cites
instances of grievous ill-treatment toward voluntary converts: Marcus, presbyter
of Casphalia, Restitutus of Victoria, Marcianus of Urga, Maximinus and Possidius,
and then protests against their general violence and robberies, and especially
against attributing martyrdom to those who had only been punished for their
crimes. To all this compulsion we oppose the State, he affirms, and many of your
own people rejoice in deliverance from your oppressions. You have filled Africa
with false charges as to Caecilian, Felix, etc., and though we do not place our
hope in man, yet we do recognize the State as the servant of the Church.
Nebuchadnezzar is an example both of the persecutor and the correctionist. You
despise the baptism of Christ; ought this not to be punished? He then reviews
the history of the case in the light of the documents; commenting on them as
forms of their own appeal to the State. The liberty of error is most deadly to
the soul. Christ and the Apostles command unity, and this command the Emperors
seek to enforce. Only Julian and the heathen emperors were persecutors; the only
martyrs are those who suffer for Catholic truth. The whole imperial legislation
against Donatism is the outcome of the original statute of Constantine and
sprang after all from their appeal. He next discusses their view of baptism and
insists that the rite is independent of the character of the celebrant; were it
dependent, then, according to their notion, we should rather desire to be
baptized by a bad man, in order to receive the grace directly from Christ. The
appeal to unity follows. Make concord with us he urges; we love you and desire
to serve you, even by the aid of the temporal laws; we do not want you to perish
as aliens from your Catholic mother. Your charges you are unable to
substantiate, and yet you avoid all conference with us, as if to shun fellowship
with sinners; a false pride, which is rebuked by Paul's conduct, by the Lord's
in his treatment of Judas; the Lord held conference even with the devil. This he
follows with extended Scriptural proofs of the universality of the Church. He
reminds them again of the unproved charges which apply rather to themselves; but
he has no desire for the historical argument, rather for the doctrinal. The
Catholic aim is their conversion, whether by the persuasion of argument or the
correction of laws. They should remember the mixed nature of the Church, and
that mere contact with evil does not defile. If you hold to Christ, hold also to
His Church; you kill us who seek to tell you the truth, and do not want you to
perish in evil. May God vindicate us and his cause by slaying your errors and
making you rejoice with us in the truth.
On the death of Proculeianus, Macrobius succeeded to the see of Hippo Regius.
Augustin hears that he is about to rebaptize a subdeacon (Rusticianus) who under
discipline left the Catholics. Augustin urges him [Ep. cvi.], c. 409, not to do
this by his desire to have life in God, and to please God by not making the
sacraments vain, and by his hope of not being separated from the body of Christ
eternally. The Donatists have admitted the validity of baptism as administered
by Felicianus and Primianus, why then rebaptize others? and begs him to search
that case as a test of the whole matter.
Maximus and Theodore had been commissioned to deliver the previous letter to
Bishop Macrobius. He at first declined to listen to its reading, but was at last
persuaded to attend, and in reply said: It was his duty to receive all who came,
and to give faith to those who asked it. Into the question about Primian he
would not enter, because of his own recent ordination; he was not a judge of his
father, and he would remain in what his predecessors had accepted. These replies
were conveyed to Augustin in the letter cvii. (c. 409) by the two commissioners.
In still further hope of reaching Bishop Macrobius, Augustin addressed another
epistle. (cviii. ) c. 409, to him in answer to the objections offered by him at
the interview with the commissioners. 1. As to the point that he must receive
those who come and give them the faith they ask: Augustin proposes the case of
some one who has received the rite in their communion, but had been separated
from it for a time, and having returned, conscientiously desires to be
rebaptized; Macrobius, according to his objection, could not repeat the rite,
but would proceed to instruct him. Why repeat it when Augustin administers it?
May be you will quote, "keep thyself from strange water and do not drink from a
strange fountain." How then will you explain the reception of Felicianus? 2. As
to the second conclusion, that you would remain in the faith of your
predecessors: It is a pity for a young man of good parts to say so; nothing
compels you to remain in evil; you had better be in the Church which began in
Jerusalem and spread thence through the world. 3. And if you will not judge your
fathers why judge my fathers? If not Primian, why Caecilian? Why deny us to be
brethren? why rend the body? why extinguish the baptism of Christ, who baptizes
with the Spirit, and who gave Himself for the Church? Yet your colleagues in
effect do yield to the truth in their recognition of the Maximianists. Judge not
the evil but do judge what was good in Primian. That act of his, the reception
of the Maximianists, absolves the nations who are ignorant of what you accuse
us. He then traces the whole development of that schism and its overthrow, to
show that those schismatics were not rebaptized at their return. That history
Augustin considers a divinely appointed refutation of all the Donatist tenets.
He proceeds to criticise their Scripture proofs, Prov. ix. 18, Jer. xv. 18,
Eccl. xxxiv. 30, Ps. cxli. 5, which he turns against them through the story of
the schism. He next addresses himself to their theory of fellowship, and
discusses their proof texts, I Tim. v. 22, Is. lii. 11, I Cor. v. 6; Ezekiel,
Daniel, the Apostles, Christ and Paul all rebuke this purism. Cyprian's
authority for rebaptism is reviewed. Augustin repeats the doubts of very many as
to the authenticity of those parts of his works which favor this view; but
granted that they are valid, Cyprian, nevertheless, maintained unity and
toleration, and by martyrdom purged his mistake. There is, however, no martyrdom
outside of the unity, as that father also testified. Cyprian acknowledged as
well the presence of many evil persons in the ministry and in the Church, but
stood to it that unity must not be sacrificed on that account. The Church is a
mixed society; this is Christ's law. Had Macrobius's associates remembered the
parable of the wheat and tares they would not have separated. This argument is
concluded with a sort of summary of the points traversed before. As to the note
of persecution: that alone is a martyrdom which surrenders the life for a good
cause. The Donatists too used the State in the case of the Maximianists, and to
them belong the Circumcelliones. The matter of unity and the connected points of
toleration and fellowship are again enlarged upon.
A sermon attributed to Augustin, De Rusticiano subdiacono a Donatistis
rebaptizato et in diaconum ordinato, falls in the same year, 409, with the
letter to Bishop Macrobius. There is an outburst of deep grief over the act. It
would appear that Rusticianus had been a special favorite of Augustin, on whom
he had expended much care; but he had become involved in scurrilous deeds, in
feasting and intemperance, day and night, and was plunged in debt, and at last
was excommunicated by his presbyter, and so fled to the Donatists, by whom he
was rebaptized and made a deacon; this defection happened in the diocese of the
bishop Valerius (?); so Augustin interposed through Maximius and Theodorus with
Bishop Macrobius, but in vain. He deplores the disgrace done to the sacrament,
as dishonor done to the sign of the King. The repetition is contradicted by the
procedure with regard to the returning Maximianists. He corrects the
misinterpretation of Ecclus. xxxiv. 30. He wishes for the Donatists the
experience of the prodigal, that they may be forgiven by return to the Church
and so attain to the profit of charity.
Great calamities were befalling the Church in all parts of the world.
Victorianus, a presbyter, wrote to Augustin for relief from doubts as to the
office of such afflictions; in the bishop's reply, [Ep. cxi.] possibly of Nov.,
409, he mentions the cruelties of the Donatists at Hippo exceeding those of the
Barbarians, especially in the resort to acidified lime, clubbing, robberies, and
other destructive measures to compel rebaptism; forty-eight in one place were
thus forced to a repetition. The coercion policy, in other words, had stimulated
some of the Donatists to retaliation.
Donatus had resigned his proconsulship. Augustin writes [Ep. cxii.] at the end
of 409 or beginning of 410 A.D., to express his regrets at not meeting him on
his visit to Tibilis; his retirement would now give leisure for a larger
development in graces, and would lead him to esteem the superiority of eternal
things. He praises him for his official worth, which indeed was in everybody's
mouth, but he urges him not to defer to that popularity, but to seek the higher
approbation. After reminding him of the duty of Christian progress, he asks for
a reply and an exhortation to be addressed to all his dependents at Sinitis and
Hippo to return to the Church. Greetings are sent to his father, whom the son
had been instrumental in converting to the faith.
Petilian of Constantina had written a treatise, de unico baptismo, which
Constantinus had come into possession of through some Donatist presbyter, and
then gave it to Augustin while they were in the country, imploring him to answer
it. He did so, c. 410, in the book bearing the same title. He scorns those who
desire secrecy in such matters; when the deeds are public let the discussion be.
Petilian claims that the only true baptism is theirs: and therefore it is not
repeated by the sacrilegious theorists. Yes, replies Augustin, baptism is indeed
one, but it is Christ's, not yours; yours is only a repetition of the rite. We
correct what is yours and recognize what is Christ's. Therefore we do not repeat
it. So Christ corrected what was evil and recognized what was good among the
Jews. So Paul exposed the sin of the heathen world but acknowledged what truth
it had. Moreover you perform the ceremony, but it is to destruction: there is no
real advantage in baptism outside of the Church. Petilian pleads for rebaptism
because Paul rebaptized John's disciples; but, says Augustin, that is to declare
John a heretic. These are two different things, as indeed Petilian himself
suggests, some might say, and then gives two irrelevant passages, Matt. xii. 30,
and vii. 21-23, as if the Catholics had no fellowship with Christ and were not
recognized by Him. Augustin, after considering the import of these passages,
avers the readiness of the Church to recognize the baptism of Christ as
administered by Donatists when they return to the Church; for to deny Christ's
baptism because it is administered by heretics, is to say Christ Himself should
be denied, when even demons confess Him. There is a belief in God outside of the
Church; the devils believe in Him outside of the Church. So there is one baptism
of Christ which may exist also outside of the Church. Petilian's declaration
that true baptism is where the true faith is, Augustin disproves by citing the
case of the unbelieving and schismatic, yet baptized Corinthians. So all the
ages of the kingdom bear witness to a like state of things. The action of
Agrippinus and Cyprian on the one side, and of Stephen on the other, as to
rebaptism is reviewed; differing in this, they yet maintained unity, especially
Cyprian. Further, if the contact of evil men within the fellowship really
defiles the good, then the Church perished in Cyprian's time; where could
Donatus then have been spiritually born? If there is no such pollution, then
there is no occasion to rage for separation. The origin of the schism is then
denied from documentary testimony, and the charges declared to be not sustained;
on the other hand, these archives prove the schismatics to have been traditors.
A summary of the main points concludes his plea for the sole baptism as that of
Christ. [Cp. Retractt. II. xxxiv.].
After this book against Petilian just mentioned had been finished, he wrote
another work of larger proportions and with more thoroughness, in refutation of
their schism, by the data of the Maximian schism, which he considered a full
surrender of all their particularism. This has been styled: De Maximianistis
contra Donatistas. It is lost, but noticed in the Retractations (II. xxxv.)
immediately after de unico Baptismo.
At Carthage, about May 15, 411, he preached in praise of peace (Sermo ccclvii.).
After its eulogy, he summons his hearers to the love of that peace; and recalls
Donatists as alienated from the unity unto the concord which exists in the
Church only. Patience and prayer are better means to their conquest than
reproof. After the pentecostal fast he bade them exercise hospitality toward the
guests who should attend the Conference.
The two edicts concerning the great Conference had been issued by Marcellinus.
The Donatists had sent in their protest to the second, while the Catholic
bishops sent in their acquiescence in a letter [Ep. cxxviii.], which is ascribed
to Augustin's hand. It was of course written before June 1, 411, the day
appointed for the opening. They agree to all the provisions for maintaining an
orderly discussion; to the time and place of meeting; to the numbers to be
present; to the requirement that all the delegated disputants sign their
deliverances; to the countersignatures; to the order prohibiting the people from
access to the Conference. If the Donatists prove the Church universal to have
been lost and to be solely with them, the Catholic bishops will resign their
sees; if, however, the collation prove the universality of the Church, then they
suggest the recognition of the ordination and office of the Donatist clergy, and
propose details for the succession in case of any jointure. The conciliatory
example of Christ persuades them to this step; the peace of Christ in the Church
is higher than the episcopate. The Donatist use of the civil authority against
the Maximianists, and their gladness in receiving the returning schismatics
without rebaptism, and without any diminution of their honors, give hope of a
return to the root.
Before the meeting of the Conference, Augustin preached a sermon (No. ccclviii.)
in Carthage, on peace and love, of which the main thoughts were the peace to
which the Catholics cling and which they love under the persuasion of the divine
testimonies; the victory of truth is love. He presents the Scripture proofs of
charity and universality; the inheritance should not be divided. Donatus and
Caecilian were but men, but baptism is Christ's and not man's. The charity
spread abroad in the heart is a broad commandment. He invites the Donatists to
snare in the Church's possessions, and to be bishops along with the Catholics,
and pleads for a joint fraternal recognition; the Catholics seek peace and want
to build up the Church. He finally requests the people to keep aloof from the
place of dispute, but invokes their prayers in its behalf.
The objection to the second edict on the part of the Donatists respecting the
restriction upon the number to be present at the collation, led the Catholics to
write a second letter to Marcellinus, which is most likely also from the pen of
Augustin. [Ep. cxxix.]. Solicitude over the opposition is expressed; some seem
disposed to present a hindrance to the peaceful progress of the Conference; and
yet the writers hope that the thought and suspicion may not prove true, but that
the desire of the whole body may after all be to press into the unity of the
Catholic Church. Then they go on, very wrongfully in such a document, to discuss
their favorite note of the universality of the Church, as the body of Christ was
not stolen, so neither are His members outside of the few in Africa, dead. From
Jerusalem outward was to be its progress and thence it filled the whole world.
The fact that the Donatists have the very same Scriptures as the Catholics which
contain these proofs of universality, fills the complainants with grief for
them. The Jews who denied the resurrection rejected also the New Testament; but
the Donatists receive it, and yet they deny the note of universality, and accuse
the Catholics of being traditors of the sacred books. Now at the collation
probably they wish to be in full numbers, in order to search completely the
Scriptures; and through their innumerable testimonies they long to come en
masse, not to create a tumult, but to put an end to the old discord. It is true
that they have found fault with our use of the State; and yet the Scriptures
vindicate such a recourse, and the Donatists themselves appealed to Constantine.
The Scriptures too show the mixed character of the Church, wheat and chaff, good
and bad fish, to the final harvest, the winnowing, and the further shore.
Perhaps they see the wrong of their opposition to the Church. The case of the
Maximianists has shown their willingness to use the power of the State and to
ignore rebaptism; and probably moved by these things, they want to come in such
large numbers in the interest not of tumult but of peace. They desire to show
that they are not so few as their enemies report them to be. The Catholic
numbers exceed in proconsular Africa, and, except in Numidia, are more numerous
than in the rest of the African provinces; and most of all when one comes to
compare the whole world with the few Donatists. Why, however, could not the
number be just as well certified by the subscription? Even though quietbe
preserved, yet at such a Conference the murmur of such a crowd will impede the
progress of the work. If they all are allowed to be present, the writers,
nevertheless, will limit themselves to the delegation suggested by the Judge,
and then no blame for disorder can attach to them. If, however, the protest has
been made in behalf of unity, they all will be present joyfully to welcome the
Donatists as brethren.
The Mandatum Catholicorum, a sort of voucher and letter of instruction for the
disputants on the side of the State Church, was undoubtedly the product of
Augustin's pen. After a preamble which attests the sufficiency of the Church
through her divine proofs against all heretics and schismatics. and the desire
of Church and State to settle the long pending controversy in Africa, and the
duty to enlighten men as to the eternal salvation, which things had induced them
to convene and to select defenders, there follows the note of the universality,
which, as the great proposition, is expanded with many proof texts from the Old
and the New Testament. This truth is to be defended against the Donatist
assertion that the universal Church had perished through contamination with
Caecilian; for the Church is a mixed society of good and evil, and not to be
condemned on this account, but its unity is to be preserved by toleration. If
they maintain this view, the documents concerning Caecilian's character must be
examined. The contestants must prove that the Church was thus defiled, or else
the evil do not defile the good in this unity. The mandate then gives Scriptural
and also post-apostolic proofs on this point, especially from Cyprian, and
quotes the Donatist action concerning the Maximianists. The next topic is
baptism as a sacrament of Christ and not of man, and as independent of the
character of the celebrant: the Maximian schism again affords material for the
confutation of this Donatistic tenet. They are instructed also to use the
archives to show that their opponents initiated civil appellation.
In the session of the second day, Augustin is the speaker, mainly on the matter
of delay and adjournment.
In the third session, he appears as the chief disputant on the doctrinal and
historical points, and also as answering the letter of the Donatists in reply to
the mandate.
In a sermon preached after the close of the Conference, (Sermo ccclix. on Ecclus.
xxv. 2), he exhorted all Christians to be brethren; the Catholics desire to have
the Donatists unite with them in worship in the universal Church. The history of
Caecilian should not affect the doctrine of the body. He claims a triumph indeed
for his side and rejoices over the many who are returning to the mother Church,
but candidly confesses that many harden themselves in their opposition. His
exordium appeals for a restoration of brotherly harmony.
A little later in the year, probably, Augustin preached from Gal. vi. 2-5 (Sermo
clxiv.), in which he rebukes those who say: "We are saints, we do not carry your
burdens, therefore we do not communicate with you; "and says: "your ancestors
carry burdens of separation, burdens of schism, burdens of heresy, burdens of
dissension, burdens of animosity, burdens of false proofs, burdens of calumnious
accusations." In your boast of non-participation in other's sins, you desert the
flock, the threshing-floor and the net. The traditors who had condemned the
absent Caecilian dissolved connection with the whole world. He reminds them of
the Maximianists; he charges them with breaking the parables, and yet inculcates
patience. The whole sermon indicates that the effect of the conference had been
to embitter both sides.
Another sermon (xcix.) on Luke vii. 36, 50, was also preached about this time,
in which he conceives that the Puristic noli me tangere may develop into a
system for sin-pardoning, and justification and sanctification; the men of the
Gesta Collationis are likely to bring about such a machine religion. Already do
they say: if men do not remit sins, then what Christ says is false as to loosing
on earth and in heaven. With this conception of the tendency of their tenets he
further says against them, that the cleansing in baptism does not depend on the
man.
In a fragment of another sermon (ccclx.), preached on the vigils of Maximian, he
personates a Donatist, who has returned to the unity, thanking the Lord that the
lost is found, and expressing his joy in the vine, the unity, the baptism and
peace of Christ.
The authorized acts of the council of 411 were too unwieldy for either general
or popular use, and a compendium framed from them was too obscure; so Augustin,
about the close of 411, determined to make a digest, called the Breviculus
collationis cum Donatistis. It gives the collations of the three days, but it is
thoroughly disconnected without the official account, for too many links known
to the actors alone are not apparent to the uninitiated; too much of what would
throw light on the animus of the parties in power is passed over, and a
considerable deal of the minor business necessary to the understanding of the
spirit of the debate does not appear. A reader would certainly get a still more
one-sided and intolerant idea of the Conference from the digest than from the
Gesta. The analysis of the order of business would require a comparison with the
Gesta Collationis, and that lies outside of our present purpose. [Cp. Retractt.
II. xxxix.].
The decision of the Conference again stirred up a counter movement by the
Circumcelliones, especially in Augustin's diocese, during which some terrible
outrages were perpetrated; the presbyter Restitutus was killed; the presbyter
Innocentius was clubbed and mutilated. A trial was instituted by Marcellinus and
the crimes confessed. Augustin hastens to write to him [Ep. cxxxiii.], somewhere
about the opening of 412 A.D., imploring that the punishment be not capital or
retaliatory; restraint and labor would be just. He commends the tribune-notary's
moderation in the examination, in that he did not resort to torture for
extorting evidence, but only to whipping. He commands him, as bishop, not to
proceed to extremity, which would be an injury to the Church, or at least to the
diocese of Hippo. Since the pronouncing of the sentence presumably belonged to
the proconsul, he had also indicted a letter to him.
Apringius, the proconsul, was a brother of Marcellinus. To him Augustin
addressed a letter in the same interest, and at the same date. [Ep. cxxxiv.] For
the use of his newly gained authority, he was accountable to God; he was also a
Christian, so that Augustin felt a greater confidence in petitioning and in
warning, and begs that he may regard his interference as a part of a bishop's
zeal for the welfare of the Church. He repeats the story of the arrest of the
Circumcelliones and Donatist clergy, the trial by Apringius's own brother, the
tribune-notary, Marcellinus, and the gentleness of the hearing, in which the
accused confessed their crime, especially as to the copresbyters. He now begs
for a mild punishment; in the one case it cannot be strictly retaliatory; in
that of the homicide he fears it may he capital punishment. Apringius must not
only consider the State, but the Church, and respect her clemency. He is not
only a ruler of exalted power but a son of Christian piety. Our enemies boast of
persecution; we must give them no occasion for it. These acts should be read for
the cure of the minds which have been perverted. If the extreme penalty has to
fall, spare at least the children. He implores him to imitate the patience and
mildness of the Church and of Christ.
Augustin, in 412, writes to Marcellinus [Ep. cxxxix.] expressing his delight
that the proceedings connected with the trial are in preparation, and for the
intention of having them read in the churches of the city, and, if possible, in
all the churches of his diocese. The crimes mentioned are the same as before,
with added confessions of many who were in some degree abettors. These are the
men who refuse to commune with the Catholic Church for fear of pollution from
wicked men, and yet refuse to leave a schism debased by such a fellowship. It
was a question in Marcellinus's mind whether the Gesta should be read in the
Donatist church of Theoprepia in Carthage. Augustin urges it, and if it be too
small then in some other quarter, in that region of the city. Augustin pleads
for a mild punishment in imitation of the clemency of the Church; however weak
it may seem at the outset, men will afterward regard it with favor, and the
reading of the Gesta will be more welcome and more effective by the contrast
between Donatist cruelty and Catholic moderation. He speaks of the commission of
the bishop Bonifacius and the bearer Peregrinus, who were empowered to treat
upon some new measures for the benefit of the Church. The Donatist Bishop
Macrobius was busy reopening the churches of his sect, followed by a band of
both sexes. In the absence of Celer, a Donatist, his procurator, Spondeus, a
Catholic, had broken their audacity. He is commended to the favorable notice of
Marcellinus. While Spondeus was on a visit to Carthage, Macrobius had actually
reopened the Donatist churches on the estates of Celer. He was assisted by
Donatus, a rebaptized deacon and a leader in the slaughter; from which fact
other outrages might be expected. Should the plea for mildness not be granted,
Augustin asks that his letters urging clemency [Epp. cxxxiii. and cxxxiv.] be
read along with the Gesta. At least let a remission be granted to give time for
an appeal to the Emperors, for no martyrs desire their blood to be avenged by
death. In apologizing for his inability to complete his work on the baptism of
infants, he urges the variety of his labors; among other things he had completed
the Breviculus Collationis, as a compend for those who had not the leisure to
read the entire proceedings of the Conference; also a letter addressed to the
Donatist laity.
The Donatists were charged with circulating the story of the bribery of the
cognitor or judge of the Conference. The letter from the council of Zerta, June
14, 412, in refutation of this was written by Augustin, [Ep. cxli.] in which it
is said that they had become acquainted with this rumor so easily credited by
the common people. The vote of the council was to authorize a refutation of it
as a falsehood. The Donatists had been convicted of mendacity in the charge
which they had made and signed against the Catholics as traditors; they had also
invented stories to account for the signature of an absent bishop. How can they
be believed in such a charge against the cognitor? Since the acts of the
Collation are so voluminous we present herewith a digest. The meeting, the
election of disputants and scribes, the matter of the subscriptions, are then
recapitulated. In the attempt at discussion, the whole aim of the Donatist
disputants was to avoid coming to the point to be debated, while the Catholic
representatives exerted themselves to reach just that goal and nothing else.
When at last the Donatists were forced to the issue, they were vanquished by the
clear testimony of the Scriptures to the universality of the Church. Any one
separated from this unity has not life; the wrath of God abides upon him. The
communion with the wicked does not defile any one by the mere participation in
the sacraments, but only by agreement with their deeds. All these truths they
had to acknowledge. The Catholics had prevented a confusion between the
doctrinal and historical sides of the question. In the discussion of the
documents, the chief offset to all the points was found in the case of the
Maximianists, although the Donatists plead that a case should not be prejudged
by a case, nor a person by a person. All the accusations which had been
concentrated against Caecilian they were unable to meet with proofs. Defeated
men are wont to suggest such a defense as the corruption of the judge. Then says
the paper in effect: If you will believe us, let us hold fast to the unity which
God commands and loves. But if you are unwilling to believe us, read the
proceedings themselves, or allow them to be read to you, and do you yourselves
test whether what we have written to you be true. If you decline all these, and
will still cleave to the Donatists, we are clear from your judgment. If you will
renounce the schism, we will welcome you to the peace of Christ, and you will
have the profit of that sacrament which was administered among you to judgment.
The Donatist presbyters Saturninus and Eufrates had joined the Catholic Church
and maintained their rank. Augustin writes [Ep. cxlii.], c. 412 A.D., to express
his joy at their arrival and bids them not to grieve at his absence, for they
are now in the one Church whose note of universality he expands as the one Body
of the one Head, and as the one house in all the earth; in the unity of this
house we rejoice as embracive of those transmarine churches, to whom the appeal
had vainly been made by the Donatists. He who lives evilly in this Church eats
and drinks condemnation to himself, but whoever lives correctly, another case
and another person cannot prejudge him. The Donatists had protested against the
parallel proofs drawn from the Maximianists, on the ground that a case should
not be prejudged by a case nor a person by a person. On the Lord's
threshing-floor the chaff must be tolerated. He exhorts them to a faithful
discharge of their clerical duties, especially in mercifulness and also in
prayer for the removal of the schism.
The hostility of the Donatists was increased by the Collation. Their clergy
charged the judge with bribery, and protested against the unfairness of the
trial, the compulsion of the meeting, the unjust decision. Augustin felt
compelled to write, c. 412 A.D., to the people in order to stay the fury of
their leaders. The treatise is known as Ad Donatistas post Collationem. Why make
such a charge? Why does Primian say, it is unworthy for the sons of the martyrs
to meet in the same place with the offspring of traditors? Why did they come?
Why were they unable to prove the old accusations? And how are they the sons of
martyrs? The universality of the Church was demonstrated at the Conference.
Donatists do not commune with the churches addressed in those epistles which
they read at their services, because they say these perished by communion with
the African Caecilians, and yet they put in the plea that a case should not be
prejudged by a case nor a person by a person. He meets the Caecilian charge by
the Maximianists in spite of this caveat. He represents all the New Testament
churches and the East as expostulating on the basis of this very plea with the
Donatists for separation from them. So the case and the person of the bad does
not prejudice the case and the person of the good; they must abide together
until the end. He condemns their arrogant pretense to holiness. The wicked must
be tolerated in the Church, but their deeds are not to be participated in.
Cyprian would not destroy the unity because bad people were in it; frequent are
the examples of such forbearance in the Scriptures, and the principle was not
changed after the resurrection of Christ; it continued in force in the New
Testament Church; the winnowing and severance come at the end of the world. They
would perhaps deny their own words as uttered in the Conference were they not
written; that was the beauty of requiring subscription. They charge too that the
sentence against them was pronounced in the night. Augustin playfully speaks of
many good things which have been said and done in the night. He subsequently
reminds them of the days in which they tried to prove the origin of heresy, and
their defeat at every point of the Caecilian history. It appears here again that
the Donatists had a considerable body of acts of their own. The plea of
persecution as a note of the Church and as an experience of the Donatists was
one of the points urged at the conference in the Donatist reply to the Catholic
mandate, and by Primian, to which we have the usual answer. Another complaint of
the Donatists was that they were tried by those who had been condemned by
themselves, and were compelled to unite with sinners; to which Augustin gives a
little Maximianist parallel and then considers the questions of purism, the
paucity of believers, the need of discipline, the fellowship of a mixed
community which ought not to degenerate into a participation in the deeds of the
wicked therein. These are discussed with considerable detail of quotations from
the Old and New Testaments. Some who thought Caecilian guilty would not break
the unity; they imitated Cyprian. He charges their clergy with duplicity. He
reminds them of the deception practiced in presenting the signature of a
Donatist, who was already dead; so with regard to the show of numbers in
attendance and the alleged multitude absent, and also the means adopted for
securing delay, the interruptions and turnings of the debate from the true
object in view. He vindicates the cognitor's method and rulings. He then renews
the discussion concerning the archival origin of the schism. In conclusion he
addresses them as brethren and exhorts them to love peace and unity.
The Donatists of Cirta, clergy and people, had returned to the Catholic Church
and had written a letter of thanks to Augustin for his preaching, under which
they had been persuaded to renounce the schism. Augustin in reply [Ep. cxliv.],
probably at end of 412 A.D., says that this is not man's work, but God's. Their
allusion to the conversion of the drunken and luxurious Polemo by Xenocrates,
draws from him the reflection, that such a change of character, though not a
Christian repentance, is, nevertheless, a work of God. So he bids them not to
give thanks to himself but to God, for their return to the unity Those who still
are alienated, whether from love or fear, he charges to remember the undeceived
scrutiny of God; to weigh Scripture testimony as to the universality of the
Church; and the documents as to the origin of the schism. The case has been
tried or not been tried by the transmarine churches; if not, then there is no
existing ground for the separation; if it has, the defeated ones are the
separatists. But alas! the obstacles to their persuasion are well-nigh
insuperable. He hopes that the mutual desire for his visit to them may be
fulfilled.
About the beginning of the year 413, appeared the book De Fide et Operibus. In
Chap. iv. 6, he speaks of the need of coercion against the Donatists as
disturbers of the peace of the Church, as separaters of the tares from the wheat
before the time, as those who have blindly preferred to cut themselves off from
the unity; commixture of evil and good is a necessity, and we ought to remain in
that fellowship which is not at all destitute of discipline. [Cp. Retractt. II.
xxxviii.]
Donatus, a Donatist presbyter, and another person connected with that body, had
been arrested by order of Augustin about the beginning of 416 A.D. Mounted upon
a beast against his will, he dashed himself to the ground and so received
injuries which his less obstinate companion escaped. Augustin writes lEp.
clxxiii.] to vindicate himself as concerned about the salvation of the
recusants, and puts the blame of the wounds upon the offender. Donatus urged in
opposition to this style of conversion that no one should be compelled to be
good. Augustin claims on the other hand that many are compelled to take the good
office of a bishop against their will. Donatus argues that God had given us free
will, therefore a man should not be compelled even to be good. Augustin replies
that the effort of a good will is to restrain and change the evil will, because
of the awful results which follow a vitiated will. Why were the Israelites
compelled to go to the land of promise? Why was Paul forced to turn from
persecution to the embrace of the truth? Why do parents correct children? Why
are negligent shepherds blamed? You are an errant sheep, with the Lord s mark
upon you, and I as shepherd must save you from perishing. Of your own will you
threw yourself into a well, but it would have been wicked to leave you there
where you had cast yourself according to your will, and hence the attendants
took you out; how much more is it a duty to save you from eternal death.
Besides, it is unlawful to inflict death upon yourself. He reminds him that the
Scriptures do not allow suicide; and controverts his use of I. Cor. xiii. 3,
"though I give my body to be burned." Severed from charity and unity, nothing
can profit, not even the surrender of the body to burning. The points of the
recent joint Conference are then dwelt upon. Donatus was understood to have
criticized the saying of his party as to the Maximianist parallel: do not
prejudge a case by a case or a person by a person. Augustin twits him in this
wise: If you object to this, then you are deceived concerning it, because you
oppose your authority to theirs, and if you say it is not true, the hope of
vindicating the great schism falls through entirely. He presses him to weigh all
the proceedings. But Donatus objects also that the Lord did not cause the
seventy to come back, and did not put a barrier in the way of the twelve when he
asked, "Will ye also go away?" Augustin says that was in the beginning of
Christianity; kings were not yet converted; now the State helps the Church. Our
Lord said prophetically, Compel them to come in. So we hunt you in the hedges;
the unwilling sheep is brought to the true pasture.
The series of Tractatus on the Gospel of John, which are ascribed to 416 A.D.,
contain many reflections on Donatism. We can only notice the passages:
Tractatus iv. in Jo. i. 19-33.
Tractatus v. in Jo. i. 33.
Tractatus vi. in Jo. i. 32, 33. Quite fully.
Tractatus ix. in Jo. ii. 1-11.
Tractatus x. in Jo. ii. 12-21.
Tractatus xi. in Jo. ii. 23-25, and iii. 1-5.
Tractatus xii. Jo. iii. 6-21.
Tractatus xiii. Jo. iii. 22-29.
To the same year are ascribed the Tractatus on the I. Ep. of John.
Tractatus i. 1 Jo. i. and ii. 1-11.
Tractatus ii. 1 Jo. ii. 12-17.
Tractatus iii. 1 Jo. ii. 18-27.
Tractatus iv. 1 Jo. iii. 1-8.
In the Retractations, II. xlvi., we read of a book addressed to Emeritus, the
Donatist bishop of Caesarea, in the province of Mauritania Caesariensis. [See Ep.
lxxxvii.] He speaks of him as the best of the seven Donatist disputants at the
Conference. The work marked briefly the lines on which the Donatists were
defeated. Its title is: Ad Emeritum Donatistarum Episcopum, post collationem,
liber unus. Since the Retractations place it before De Gestis Pelagii, and De
Correctione Donatistarum, it was most likely written in the beginning of 417
A.D.
Boniface had requested from Augustin a letter of instructions on the relation of
the Donatists to the Arians. The bishop replies, c. 417 [Ep. clxxxv.], which he
himself calls a book de Correctione Donatistarum. [Cp. Retractt. II. xlviii.].
Since this is translated in the present volume, we will omit any further notice.
The above-mentioned Emeritus was present at a Synod of the Catholics, near
Deuterius, September 20, 418. At a service held two days after, Augustin
preached the Sermo ad Caesariensis Ecclesiae plebem. Emeritus was present. In
the church during a previous colloquy with Augustin he had said: I cannot will
what you will, but I can will what I will. Augustin in this sermon (and the
writing has all the abruptness and repetition of an extempore address) urges him
to will what God wills, viz., peace, and that now, in response to the cry of the
people; and if you ask why I, who call you schismatics and heretics, desire to
receive you, it is because you are brethren; because you have the baptism of
Christ; because I want you to have salvation: one can have everything outside
the Church except salvation; he can have honor, he can have the sacraments, he
can sing Allelulia, he can respond Amen, he can hold to the gospels, he can have
faith in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and can preach.
Persecution after all is rather of you. The failure of the archival evidence as
to Caecilian is alleged as usual, and hence no reason for separation exists. He
recites too the story of the seizure, escape, reseizure, compulsory baptism and
ordination of Petilian, while at the time a Catholic catechumen. This occurred
at Constantina, when that city and region were largely Donatist. He was seized
unto death, do we not draw him to salvation? Here or nowhere, says Augustin,
repeating the voice of the people, is the place for peace.
There was a gathering of clergy (the bishops Alypius, Augustinus, Possidius,
Rusticus Palladius, etc., many presbyters and deacons and a considerable number
of people) in the exedra of the larger church at Caesarea, c. 418 A.D. Emeritus,
the Donatist bishop of the city, was also present. Augustin addresses those
devoted to the unity, and says that when he came to the city on the day before
yesterday he found Emeritus returned from a journey. Augustin met him in the
street and invited him to the Church, and Emeritus consented without any demur.
The sermon of Augustin is full of the peace, love and related themes of the
Church, in hope of winning Emeritus, He alludes to the many conversions in the
city and since the collation; if Emeritus has anything new to say in defense of
his side, he invites him to state it. Emeritus had been reported as affirming
that at the Conference the Donatists were overcome by power rather than by
truth. Augustin then addresses inquiries to Emeritus directly: as to why he had
come if he was defeated at the council; or if he thought his party had
triumphed, then to state the ground for such an opinion. Emeritus said: The acts
show whether I am defeated or not, whether I am defeated by truth or oppressed
by power. Augustin: Then why do you come? Emeritus: That I might say this very
thing which you ask, and so on. Under some taunting and arrogant observations to
the brethren, Emeritus keeps quiet. From Augustin's statement it appears that
the Acts were read during Lent, at Thagaste, Constantina, Hippo, and all the
faithful churches. Part of these Gesta are then read by Alypius, viz, the
imperial convocation of the Conference, and comments are made by Augustin. Then
follows his application of the lessons afforded by the Maximianist schism, in
which he says the Donatists make shipwreck of all their tenets. Emeritus,
however, remained a silent hearer. The account of the above meeting is given in
the treatise: De Gestis cum Emerito, Caesariensi Donatistarum Episcopo liber
unus. [Cp. Retractt. II. li.]
The book de Patientia is assigned to 418 A.D. In Chapter xiii. he contrasts
genuine and false martyrdom.
Dulcitius had been appointed Tribune-notary. The effect of his carrying out of
the renewed edicts against the Donatists was signalized by many conversions, but
also by many suicides. He had written to Augustin requesting directions about
how he ought to proceed against the heretics. Augustin replies [Ep. cciv.], c.
420 A.D., that his work had indeed persuaded many to return to their salvation,
but others were stirred either to kill the Catholics or themselves. We indeed do
desire the return of all to unity, yet some are doubtless predestinated to
perish by an occult yet just decree of God. They perish not only in their own
fires but in that of Gehenna. The Church grieves over them as David over his
son, although they have met the deserved punishment of rebels. Augustin does not
find fault with the notary's edict at Thamugada, only with the phrase: You may
know that you are to be given over to the death which you deserve; for that is
not contained in the rescripts. In the second edict there is a clearer statement
of the notary's aim. Augustin also criticizes his courtesy toward Gaudentius,
the Donatist bishop of Thamugada. As to a special reply to that bishop Augustin
urges a more diligent refutation of the fallacious doctrines by which the
Donatists are accustomed to be seduced. He had already done this in very many
works, but adds some points by way of suggestion. He alone is a martyr who dies
for a true cause. Man's will is free, but nevertheless amenable to divine and
human laws. The State can punish not only adulteries and homicides, but also
sacrileges. Many think it strange that we do not rebaptize, but the sacrament
once given ought not to be repeated. Suicides are utterly prohibited by the
Scriptures. The case of Razius gives the Donatist no pretext, for the deed is
simply mentioned but not commended. (II. Mac. xiv. 37-46). In conclusion he
intimates that in answer to the united wish of the people of Thamugada, of
himself and of Eleusinus, the tribune of that place, that Augustin should answer
both epistles of Gaudentius, the Donatist bishop, and especially the latter of
the two, which contained Scriptural proofs, he will write such a criticism.
Dulcitius had written a pacific letter to Gaudentius, the Donatist bishop of
Thamugada, one of the quieter members of the seven Donatist disputants,
concerning the enforcement of the imperial edicts. Gaudentius replied in two
epistles, one short, the other longer and fortified by Scripture proofs.
Augustin was requested to answer these, which he does (c. 420) in the work
Contra Gaudentium Donatistarum Episcopum, Libra duo. In Book I. he makes a
change of form from the Petilian cast of personal dialogue, because of the
captious fault found with that way as savoring of untruth, and takes a duller
formula, "Verba Epistolae" and "ad haec responsio," whose dryness and literality
the most sensitive Donatist could take no exception to. In the first epistle of
Gaudentius, the fairly courteous strain in which he had replied to the
tribune-notary, with titles and recognition of character, Augustin rather
resents by saying that the Catholic had treated the heretic too kindly and
incautiously, and bids Gaudentius consider what he had said at the Collation.
Gaudentius proposes to remain in the communion where the name of God and of his
Christ is and where the Sacraments are, and pleads for religious liberty against
compulsion as to matters of faith; and concludes, by another hand, with wishing
him well and desiring his recession from the disquieting of Christians. Augustin
objects that Gaudentius had not reproduced the language of Dulcitius correctly,
and accuses the Donatists of holding the truth of baptism in the iniquity of
human error; he comments on their false eagerness for death; he responds to all
the good wishes for the tribune, but not that he should cease from correcting
the heretics.
The second epistle of Gaudentius is mainly a protest from Scriptural grounds;
against persecution he brings forward the case of Gabinus, who, if bad, should
not have been received without correction, that is, baptism; but if innocent,
why kill the innocent Donatists from whom he came to you? The false rumor about
Emeritus, as having turned Catholic, is another instance of this persecution.
The duty of a persecuted pastor is to be a doer of the law and to lay down his
life for the sheep; there is no place whither the persecuted may now flee; the
divine right of free will is restrained by the arbitrary laws of the emperor;
persecution is a note of the Church from the blessings attached to it by Christ
and the apostles. The peace of Christ invites the willing but does not compel
the unwilling; a thing very different from the war-bearing peace and the bloody
unity which their oppressors present. We rejoice in the hatred of the world;
there is a martyr host of the apocalypse; Christians may yield up their souls in
testimony against sacrilege, as Razius did. He begs Dulcitius to turn to the few
who have the solidity and not the semblance of truth. God gave prophets not
kings to teach the people: the Saviour sent fishermen not soldiers. God never
needs the aid of soldiers. Gaudentius charges the Catholics with coveting the
Donatist possessions. The farewell is in another handwriting, in which he wishes
Dulcitius well, and advises him to pursue a lenient and temperate course.
The points of Augustin's reply are in no way different save form from those so
constantly presented, unless there be an increase of roughness and a more
hardened idea of the Church's right to use coercion. As to Gabinus, the Church's
course with regard to him is a vindication of the right to receive a convert
without rebaptism: in communion with charity and unity he received the profit of
that rite which had been administered among the Donatists. In the case of
Emeritus, Augustin confesses that the rumor of his having turned Catholic was
false; but Emeritus came to Caesarea of his own will; he came to the Church
where a multitude was present; he could say nothing for his or his party's
defense; he kept quiet. The argument against suicide from the case of Razius is
well made; he died rather in suffering for the state; and besides the narrative
does not commend the deed, but only states it; then too the books have not the
weight that the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms carry with them. The plea for
correction is precisely as usual. The doctrines of universality and unity and
charity are incidentally brought forward. Circumcelliones, Secundus and
Maximianists furnish the concluding parallels.
Book II. Gaudentius had written a reply to Augustin's first book. He had taken
refuge under the example of Cyprian; but Augustin now refers him to the writings
of Cyprian on De Simplicitate Praelatorum seu De Catholicae Ecclesiae unitate,
showing Cyprian's belief in the universality of the Church which Augustin
expands by the explanation of the term Catholic. Purgation of the Church is not
by separation, but by toleration, as Cyprian too held in his letter to Maximus
and others. The explanation of the field not as the Church, but rather as the
world outside of the Church, had been supported at the Conference and is
repeated by Gaudentius; and also its alternative, that were the field the Church
then it must have perished from the tares which were in it. If so, says Augustin,
then the ancestors of the Donatists would have perished. The period of
separation is at the end, when the Gospel shall have been preached in the whole
world. As to their theme of rebaptism, Augustin replies that he had already
before referred him to his Maximianist practice, so that the action of
Agrippinus and Cyprian are vain for him. And then too, according to Cyprian's
own confession, and Stephen's testimony, there were crimes in the Church in
their day; did the Church perish then? If so where was Donatus born? If not,
then why did the party of Donatus separate? They are guilty of the very schism
which Cyprian particularly deprecated as a cure, instead of toleration and
discipline, for the ills of the Church. As to baptism: The Catholics recognize
the Donatist rite, for the sacrament cannot be lost upon those who receive it
among Catholics and then pass over to heretics; they have the truth but in
iniquity; the truth is not the property of the Donatists. The apostle recognized
such truth as he found among the Gentiles. Gaudentius had vindicated his
reference to the tribune's letter, as to the Donatists having the names of God
and of his Christ, and quoted the passage in proof. Augustin acknowledges his
mistake, which, however, was not intentional, and he apologizes for the
tribune's error as that of a military man who was not familiar with theology.
Since Gaudentius had called the tribune religious in his first letter, Augustin
accuses him of insincerity and berates him as superstitious He also corrects
Gaudentius for saying that God sent Jonah not to the king but only to the people
of Nineveh, for the king compelled the humiliation of his subjects. In
conclusion he quotes from Cyprian's letter to Maximus in behalf of universality
and tolerant unity. His exordium is an earnest appeal to the Catholics to
maintain all the notes of the Church. [Cp. Retractt. II. lix.].
Felicia had been a Donatist originally and was converted by force. She had
devoted herself to the virgin life and apparently had become head of a religious
house; but by reason of some wicked deeds of the clergy, possibly the extortion
and rapacity of Antonius at Fussala, she was much disturbed and seemed inclined
to relapse into her earlier puristic notions, if not to return to the body that
upheld them. To quiet her doubts Augustin writes Ep. ccviii. c. 423. The Lord
had predicted offenses. There are two kinds of shepherds over the flock, and
will be to the end: the flock too has the good and the bad in it. The gathering
is the present duty, tile separation will be the future one; this latter is the
Lord's prerogative. To abide in unity under such circumstances is a duty until
the winnowing, and one is to believe what these shepherds teach, not what they
do. Good and bad are therefore in the world under the widely diffused Catholic
Church; the Donatist has no such note of universality. Love Christ and the
Church, and then He will not permit you to lose the fruit of your virginity and
to perish with the lost. If you go out of this life, separated from the unity of
the body of Christ, this preserved integrity of the body will not profit you.
You were compelled to come in; be thankful to those who compelled you. Show your
devotion to the Lord, as your only hope, by being unmoved with these offenses,
and by cleaving to his body, the Church.
A letter addressed to Pope Coelestine is ascribed to Augustin [Ep. ccix. c.
423]; its authenticity has been disputed. The author, in giving an account of
the appointment of Antonius as bishop of Fussala, remarks that at Fussala, a
castellum about forty miles distant from Hippo, as in all the adjoining region,
there had been a Donatist population; in Fussala itself there had not been a
solitary Catholic; the Punic was the common language. The coercive measures had
converted the whole territory, but the process had also aroused a violent
opposition in the form of robbery, beating, blinding, murder. After its
conversion, the distance from Hippo and the great numbers to be instructed,
required a new bishopric, the history of which and the troubles growing out of
it, the author further relates.
In that valuable book De doctrina christiana, (begun in 397, but ended in 426,
including the part having reference to our subject III. xxx. 42), Augustin
quotes approvingly from the book of Tychonius the de septem regulis, and
prefaces a discussion of these rules by an allusion to the treatise of Tychonius,
which had refuted some of the narrow and doctrines of the Church, as held by his
own party; this we have already seen was answered by Parmenian, whose letter in
turn was dissected by Augustin. The first, second, fourth and seventh of these
rules bear especially upon the doctrinal points under discussion. [Cp. Retractt.
II. iv. and Tychonius de Septem Regulis is reprinted in Migne. Pat. Lat. xviii.]
In his de Hoeresibus [c. 428 A.D.] Chapter lxix. gives a brief account of the
Donatiani or Donatistae: (a) as to origin and progress; (b) Donatus's view of
the Trinity; (c) the Montenses at Rome; (d) the Circumcelliones; (e) the schism
of Maximian.
This was his parting arrow after the thirty-six years of battle. Catholics and
Donatists passed under the persecutions of the Arian Vandals. Two years after
this treatise Augustin laid aside his weapons to enter the land of eternal peace
and unity.
More or less extended allusions are made to Donatism in the following sermons,
arranged in the order of the Benedictine editions; for the years in which they
were delivered cannot be determined. Want of space prevents the presentation of
any analysis.
sermo x. 1 Kings, iii. 16-28..
sermo xlv. Is. lvii. 13 and 2 Cor. vii. 1.
sermo xlvi. Ez. xxxiv. 1-16.
sermo xlvii. Ez. xxxiv. 17-31.
sermo lxxi. Matt. xii. 32.
sermo lxxxviii. Matt. xx. 30-34.
sermo xc. Matt. xxii. 1-14.
sermo cvii. Luc. xii. 13-21.
sermo cxxix. Jo. v. 39-47.
sermo cxxxvii. Jo. x. 1-16.
sermo cxxxviii. Jo. x. 11-16.
sermo clxxxiii. 1 Jo. iv. 2.
sermo ccxviii. Luc. xxiv. 38-47.
sermo ccxlix. Jo. xxi. 1-14.
sermo cclii. Jo. xxi. 1-14.
sermo cclxv. The Ascension.
sermo cclxvi. Ps. cxli. (cxl).
sermo cclxviii. Pentecost.
sermo cclxix. Pentecost.
sermo cclxxxv. Anniversary of the martyrs Castus and Aemilus.
sermo ccxcii. John the Baptist.
sermo cccxxv. Anniversary of the Twenty Martyrs.
Similar references are to be found in the expositions and sermons based on the
Psalms. The first column is the Hebrew and English order; the second that of LXX.
and Vulgate.
exposition of psalms xi. (X.)
exposition of psalms xxvi. (XXV.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms xxxi. (XXX.) Sermons I. and II.
exposition of psalms xxxiii. (XXXII.) Sermon II.
exposition of psalms xxxiv. (XXXIII.) Sermon II.
exposition of psalms xxxvi. (XXXV.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms xxxvii. (XXXVI.) Sermons II. (archival) and III.
exposition of psalms xl. (XXXIX.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms lv. (LIV.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms lviii. (LVII.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms lxxxvi. (LXXXV.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms xcix. (XCVIII.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms cxx. (CXIX.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms cxxv. (CXXIV.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms cxxxiii. (CXXXII.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms cxlvi. (CXLV.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms cxlvii. 12-20 (CXLVII.) Sermon.
exposition of psalms cxlix. Sermon.
The time of writing the de Utilitate Jejunii is unknown. Chapter V. 9, contrasts
pagan, heretical and Catholic fasts; heretics claim indeed to fast in order to
please God; how can they, when they sever the unity? All heretics perish; they
are the dividers of the inheritance of Christ.
In conclusion the reviser desires to commend the fidelity and lucidity of the
translation made by the Rev. J. R. King, M.A.
No changes made by the reviser have been indicated, since all could not be
without confusion. The translation had taken most of its notes and references
from the Benedictines. The citations of Cyprian are according to the numerals in
Hartel's edition.