'CD

=00

THE WORK OF ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

THE

WORK OF ST. OPTATUS

BISHOP OF MILEVIS

AGAINST THE DONATISTS

WITH APPENDIX

TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH O "T

WITH NOTES CRITICAL, EXPLANATORY,

THEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ' j O

BY THE n

REV. O. R. VASSALL-PHILLIPS, B.A.

BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD PRIEST Or THE CONGREGATION OF THE MOST HOLY REDEEMER

1 Legant qui volunt quae narret et quibus documents quam multa persuadeat Venerabilis Memoriae Milevitanus Episcapus Catholicae Communionis Optatus.'— S. AUGUSTINUS.

COIL CHW3TI SIB, MAJ, TOHONTON

LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.

39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON

FOURTH AVENUE & 30TH STREET, NEW YORK

BOMBAY, CALCUTTA, AND MADRAS

1917

All rigbtt reserved

•*n

30

PERMISSU SUPERIORUM CONG. SS. RED.

NlHIL OBSTAT

TH. BERGH, O.S.B.,

Censor Deputatus.

IMPRIMATUR

E. CAN. SCRMONT,

Vic. Gen.

Ait 15 Feb., 1915.

PREFACE

ST. OPTATUS, Bishop of Milevis in Africa, is perhaps the least known of all the Fathers of the Church. His treatise against the Donatists — the one work that he left to posterity, was translated into French in I564-1 It is extremely improbable that, but for this exception, it has, until now, ever appeared in any language save Latin. It is quite certain that it has never yet been clothed in an English dress. There is indeed an advertisement still to be seen in The Oxford Library of the Fathers, in which it was announced (in 1848) that a translation of St. Optatus into English would ' soon ' appear. Sixty-eight years have elapsed ; but this intention has not yet been carried into execution.

Until recently St. Optatus could hardly be found, even in the original Latin, anywhere but in the edition published by Du Pin at Antwerp in 1702, and subsequently incorporated by Migne. His work was until 1870 out of the reach of all persons who had not access to the largest libraries. In 1870 — it is true — Fr. Hurter, S.J., published Du Pin's text in convenient form with short notes,2 and in 1893 a new critical

1 Cf. Migne, P.L. xi, p. 883. I have not been able to consult this French version.

2 Sanctorum Patrum Opuscula selecta. Oeniponti,

vi ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

edition was brought out (edited by the late Professor Ziwsa) in the Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum, which has now for many years been in course of publication at Vienna. Comparatively few people, however, have heard of this excellent edition of the Latin Fathers ; still fewer are aware that its volumes may be purchased separately, and that for the sum of a few shillings they may possess themselves of ' the Seven Books of St. Optatus concerning the Schism of the Donatists, against Parmenian.'

Indeed it is not too much to say that the very name of Optatus is barely known even to many students of theology and ecclesiastical history. Yet his is no mean name, and he cannot be ignored with safety, for he has bequeathed to the Church material of no small value, both to the theologian and the eccle siastical historian. Optatus was held in high repute by the great Augustine, upon whom his influence was undoubtedly considerable. To this Harnack bears witness : ' Even when he entered into the Donatist controversy, Augustine did so as a man of the second or indeed the third generation. He therefore enjoyed the great advantage of having at his disposal a fund of conceptions and ideas already collected . In this sphere Optatus especially had worked before him/ *

The work of St. Optatus is, therefore, of consequence not only from the point of view of history— he is the historian of Donatism in its origins — but also from that of doctrine — of ' conceptions and ideas.' It derives special importance from the fact that here we find the

1 History of Dogma, v. 38.

PREFACE vii

first sustained argument from the Catholic side not merely against heresy (false doctrine) but also against schism (separation from the Church).

Heresies come and go. They are essentially ephe meral, according to some transitory fashion of mental speculation. And in fact history proves that the limit of their duration is hardly known to last four centuries. Often indeed they pass into all but complete oblivion. Thus it comes about that a long and sometimes weary discussion concerning a heresy which has perhaps long since vanished from the midst of men is apt to lose much of its actuality.1 But the Church dies not, and in every age excuses are found by the rebellious for their rebellion against her supreme authority. The argument against heresy is necessarily specialised and multiform ; the argument against schism is very simple and admits of no substantial variation in its presentment.

Consequently, it never ceases to be of deep interest to follow the reasoning that has been employed by the champions of the Catholic Church, at any period of her history, on behalf of her exclusive and peremptory claim upon the spiritual allegiance of mankind. When ever this is in discussion, there is no drowsy stirring of dead bones, but an issue which is ever-living and therefore in a certain sense ever-new. Now, upon this subject Optatus is perfectly explicit. Again and again he lays it down that there is but one true Church of Christ,2 that she is not merely local, but is scattered

1 Cf. Optatus, i, 9. a id. i, 7 ; i, 10 ; ii, i ; iv, 6 etc.

viii ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

all over the world,1 her chief rulers bound together by formal bonds and proofs of union, each with his fellow,2 and above all with the Bishop of Rome, Peter's successor.3

In other words for Opt at us the one question of paramount importance is : ' Which and where is the One Church ? ' 4 And to this question his answer is clear-cut and unmistakable in its import. The Church of Christ may be easily recognised by all those who will look for her marks. She and she alone is One ; she and she alone is truly Catholic. In fact this is her name — Catholica.5 She alone is Apostolic — Apos tolic for this reason, that all over the world (' ubique ') her children are in communion with the Cathedra Petri* the See of that Apostle to whom alone the Lord promised the keys of the kingdom of Heaven 7- the See ' against which to contend is sacrilege.'8

And because Parmenian, his Donatist adversary, had failed to recognise ' where is the Church ? ' he is said by Optatus to have ' made confusion of every thing.'9

The clearness and decisiveness of the teaching of St. Optatus on the Church have caused Harnack to write thus : ' In this thought (of the Church as an institution) Catholicism was first complete . . . But Augustine was not the first to declare it ; he rather

1 Optatus, i, 26 ; ii, i ; iii, 2 etc. etc.

z id. i, 4 ; ii, 3 ; vii, 6. 3 id. ii, 2 ; ii, 3 ; vii, 5,

* Cf. quae, vel ubi, sit Una Ecclesia (i, 7).

6 id. i, 5 ; ii, i etc. 6 id. ii, 9 (cf. ii, 6 etc.).

7 id. i, 10 ; i, 12 ; ii, 4 ; vii, 3 etc. * id. ii, 5.

* sic omnia miscui ti (i, 10).

PREFACE ix

received it from tradition. The first representative of the new conception known to us, and Augustine also knew him, was Optatus.' 1

It is hardly necessary to observe that this ' con ception ' was never really ' new ' in Christendom. Optatus did not invent it. He had ' received it ' (in the same way that before him in Africa Cyprian had already 'received it/ and, as Harnack admits, Augustine ' received it) from tradition/ He ' received it ' also from the express words of Christ and from the pro phecies of the Old Testament.2 It is, however, per fectly true to say that St. Optatus is the first writer known to us who sets out in detail the Catholic con ception of the one true Church of Christ. The oppor tunity came to him only with the Donatist schism. It will always be the great merit of Optatus to have seized that opportunity and to have availed himself of it to such an extent, that Augustine had but to broaden it out and illustrate it with his matchless genius. St. Augustine had only to fill in the picture which St. Optatus had already drawn in clear out line. To the end of time the Catholic theologian, preacher or controversialist, desirous of showing the true nature of the Church, and the obligation (binding everywhere, always, upon all persons, and under all conceivable circumstances) of living within her visib e unity, will find everything that he needs ready to his hand, in the writings of St. Optatus. Moreover, Optatus will remind us that from this obligation—

1 History of Dogma, vol. v. p. 42.

2 Optatus, ii, i ; ii, 5 ; iv, 6 etc. etc.

a 3

x ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

strict though it be in itself — ignorance (that ignorance which we now call ' invincible ') will excuse its victims.1 Ignorance could not be pleaded by Parmenian ; it was therefore impossible to hold him guiltless. But Optatus was evidently aware that in his day in Africa (as in our day in England) there were Christians who, through no fault of their own, knew nothing of the claims of the Chair of Peter.

Apart from the constitution and marks of the Church, there is only one specific doctrine — that Baptism may not lawfully be repeated after it has once been validly administered (the Credo unum Baptisma of the Creed) — with which St. Optatus was directly concerned in his controversy with his Donatist adver saries. His statements as to other Truths of Faith (denied in later ages) are only by the way, and are generally incidental to the course of his historical narrative. This, it seems important to observe, gives them an even greater polemical value than would have been theirs had Optatus written controversially on these subjects, and been contradicted by Donatists or any other Christians then living. But this is far from being the case. For example, St. Optatus is able to write to his opponent : ' Bene revocasti Claves ad Petrum.' 2 Similarity, with regard to all the other Catholic doctrines to which he makes refer ence throughout his work, it is quite clear that he and Parmenian are standing on common ground, and were perfectly agreed.

When then we reflect that St. Optatus wrote in

1 Optatus, ii, 2. * id. i, 12.

PREFACE xi

the century preceding the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, in the very heart of what are sometimes known as ' Primitive Times/ when we remember that he was anterior to Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome and Leo the Great, when we recall the fact that the Reformation in Germany and England does not yet go back four hundred years, but that Optatus wrote six centuries before the Norman set foot on our English soil, and that some thousand years and then two hundred more were to elapse between the writings of Optatus and the breach with Rome over King Henry's divorce, it is a most striking and moving fact that this old Father of the Church bears his express and unequivocal witness not only to the necessity of union with the Cathedra Petri, but also to most of those Catholic Doctrines so violently assailed in the days of Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Cranmer, Knox and their associates, and still denied on all sides around us.

For example, St. Optatus affirms explicitly the truth of Baptismal Regeneration1; again and again makes reference to the Sacrifice of the Altar 2 ; states the doctrine of the Real Presence in words that are incapable of any misunderstanding 3 ; insists on the sacred- ness of the Holy Chrism 4 ; writes of the adornment of altars for the offering of the Sacrifice 5 ; refers to the ceremony of Exorcism before Baptism 6 ; appeals to deutero-canonical Books as to authentic Scripture 7 ;

1 Optatus, v, i etc. 2 id. i, 19 ; ii, 4 ; ii, 12 ; iii, 4 etc.

1 id. ii, 19 ; vi, i. 4 id. ii, 25 ; iii, 4 ; vii, 4 etc.

6 id. iii, 12. • id. iv, 6.

7 id. ii, 25 iv, 8. (Cf. Pseudo -Optatus B.)

xii ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

takes the continuance of Miracles in the Church for granted *• ; and is quite express in his references to cloistered Virginity and the difference between the Commandments of God and Counsels of Perfection.2 Sometimes indeed he is so modern in his expressions (or at least his words are so directly applicable to our modern circumstances) that when we first read them we rub our eyes and ask ourselves ' Can it be a Catholic writer of the fourth century, whom we are reading, not one of the twentieth ? ' Instances of this may be found in the famous description of the origin of the Donatist schism,3 which, as Cardinal Wiseman has pointed out,4 can be paralleled with startling exactness by the schism under Henry; or again in such isolated expressions as ' Cathedra ducit ad se Angelum,' which is all that we need should it be urged that it is safe to remain in Anglicanism, because of the (supposed) validity of Anglican Orders. If these Orders were ever so valid, they could not be more valid than were those of the Donatist s ; but St. Optatus teaches us that, by themselves, valid Orders are of no avail. It is useless to have a Bishop (Angelus) who is out of communion with that One Chair of Peter, of which Optatus is at the time writing. Orders he may have, still he remains visibly in schism. Cathedra ducit ad se Angelum.5 Or, similarly, ' Per Cathedram Petri, quae nostra est, per ipsam et ceteras dotes

i Optatus, ii, 19. 2 id. vi, 4. 3 id. i, 19-

* In the Article entitled Anglican Claim for Apostolical Succession first published in-the Dublin Review for August 1839, and republished by the Catholic Truth Society, with a Preface by the late Dr. Rivington. * Optatus, ii, 6.

PREFACE xiii

apud nos esse probatum est.' l It is through the Chair of Peter— through our Union with that Chair which itself ' is ours/ that we derive and can prove our security as to the other Endowments of the Church, amongst which is reckoned lawful Episcopacy. Or, again, in discussion with any Protestant, what need we say more than those three words of St. Optatus — ' Catholica prior est ' 2 ? Before any Protestant body had its birth, before Luther's turbulent spirit began to trouble the peace of Christendom, before the eccle siastical Provinces of Canterbury and York were torn away by the State from their union with the Apostolic See, before the ambition of Photius separated Byzan tium from the elder Rome, before Donatism arose, there was the Catholic Church and the Chair of Peter. Catholica prior est.

It is beyond doubt that, as Vincent of Lerins taught in the fifth century, and as Catholic theologians have since taught in every age, there must be a certain development of doctrine in the Church — that is to say, an ' explication ' or unfolding, more and more explicit as the years pass on, of that which has always been implicit in the Deposit of the Faith delivered in the beginning to the Saints ; for, where there is life, there must also be growth. Yet, whilst studying St. Optatus I have asked myself whether since his day there has been room for any real development. Whatever development of doctrine may have been neces sary, at least with regard to the doctrines concerning the Holy See and the Eucharist, seems to me, as I read

1 Optatus, ii, 9. z id. vii, 5.

xiv ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

Optatus, to have already taken place and to be generally well known and accepted throughout the Church.

The work, then, of St. Optatus derives its great doctrinal importance from its unambiguous teaching, principally indeed as to the marks of the Church, but also concerning other revealed truths, unhappily denied in modern times by great bodies of Christians separated from the Catholic Unity.

There are two subjects, the treatment of which by St. Optatus will probably jar upon the sensibilities of most, if not all, modern readers : the first is religious persecution, and the second the application of certain passages in the Old Testament, in minute and even verbal detail, to the controversies of his day.

With regard to persecution, the Donatists con tinually upbraided the Catholics with the punish ments inflicted upon their fathers by Macarius and Leontius and other officers sent by the Emperors to secure religious unity. Now, the reply of St. Optatus up to a point is curiously similar to that which we make to-day when we are reminded of what happened in England under Mary Tudor. St. Optatus urged in the first place that these punishments had been greatly exaggerated (just as we say when confronted with Foxe's ' Book of Martyrs '). In the second place he pointed out (as we do) that those who were punished were for the most part turbulent conspirators against the public security, and that their treatment of Catholics had been infinitely worse than any reprisals to which it may have led. Thirdly he laid stress

PREFACE xv

upon the fact (and here again we take precisely the same ground) that whatever happened came to pass by the authority of the State, and not by that of the Church, and that the Church was in no way responsible. If he had stopped here, all would have been well, but unfortunately St. Opt atus went further, and argued that ' perchance ' the sufferings of the Donatists were ' by the will of God/ and endeavoured to justify them by several parallels from the Old Testament. This is, it seems to us, exceedingly regrettable, but we must remember that to Opt at us, it was an axiom, and as such seemed a truism which no man would or could dispute, that it was the duty of a Christian State to secure the observance of the true religion, and to punish not only offences against society, but also those against Almighty God. The modern distinction, so clear to us, between ' crime ' and ' sin ' was utterly unknown to him, and no doubt, if it had been stated in his hearing, would have seemed to him — at least in the case of a Christian State — utterly immoral and involving the gravest dereliction of duty on the part of a Christian ruler. We know from his own letters that it so appeared to Constantine.1 When this fact is grasped, it will be more easy to understand a point of view, which is inapplicable to any set of circum stances that can be imagined as arising in modern times. All that can be said fairly on this subject, even by those who think St. Optatus most mistaken and wrong, is that unfortunately he was not ahead of his age.

1 Cf, Appendix, pp. 398, 400, 406.

xvi ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

But it is not only with reference to the punishment of schismatics that the appeal of St. Optatus to the Old Testament will strike us as strange and sometimes even perverse. Again and again, when arguing against some Donatist custom or personage, he quotes a passage from Ezekiel, or Daniel, or Isaiah, as though Donatus the Great or the sacrileges of his followers had been before the mind of the Hebrew Prophet. This to us (at least to me) — however ingenious it may sometimes be — is tiresome and irritating in the extreme. But we must remember that of course St. Optatus did not think or mean anything of the kind. What he did mean was that Almighty God, when inspiring His Prophet, intended that Prophet's words to be applied (amongst other ways) to the case of the Donatist s. All the Fathers of the time (indeed all Christians) held a theory of verbal dictation of the inspired writings, which has never been taught offi cially by the Church and has long been practically unknown amongst Catholics. Moreover, in the fourth and fifth centuries it was generally believed that Holy Scripture had many senses in addition to the literal or first sense. Consequently all ecclesiastical writers during those centuries used the text of Scripture from time to time in a way that will inevitably seem to us to be most far-fetched and unreal. But if this treatment of the Bible so appears to us, it would not have thus appeared to the contemporaries of Optatus. Indeed it is highly probable that many Donatists were much impressed and even converted by his appeal against them couched in the very words of some great

PREFACE xvii

Hebrew Prophet. And if St. Optatus is sometimes insulting to the Donatists in his application of Holy Scripture, it is clear that often — this is certainly true of the muscae moriturae in Book VII and of all the pas sages dealt with in Book IV — he is merely retorting arguments that had been used against Catholics by Parmenian or other Donatists. Evidently, it did not seem to him safe to leave those arguments, so far as they consisted of quotations from Scripture, to answer themselves, and St. Optatus knew, as we cannot possibly know, the mentality of those men of his own day, for whose sake he was writing his work.

However, such an exegesis of Scripture is so alien to our habits of thought that it may draw the attention of the reader away from the real and great excellences of Optatus to a sense of mere annoyance at what will seem to be now and again his perversity of interpre tation. (In fairness it should be said that, so far as this is true of Optatus, it is true also often of St. Ambrose and sometimes even of St. Augustine.) In my anxiety that there should be nothing to hinder the study of the really important and interesting parts of the work of St. Optatus, I thought for a moment of excluding his applications of the Old Testament to the circum stances of the Donatist schism. But a very little con sideration made me see that such a course was out of the question, and that if I translated St. Optatus at all I must translate every word, so that it would be im possible for anyone to think that Optatus had been bowdlerised or mutilated at my hands. He is great enough to be read in his entirety and reckoned with as

xviii ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

a whole. The reader may be certain that I have trans lated — for him to read, if he likes — everything without exception as it stands in the Seven Books of Optatus* as he submitted them to the judgement of his own time.

St. Opt at us can often be usefully illustrated from St. Cyprian and St. Augustine ; occasionally from St. Jerome and Tertullian. I am aware that I have laid myself open to criticism by sometimes supplying references to the writings of these Fathers in their original ; sometimes in a translation. I can but explain that considerations of space made it impossible to give them both in Latin and English. It only remained to do what seemed to me the more useful in each case. Sometimes I thought it safer to sacrifice the vernacular for the sake of giving the exact words of my authority (after all my footnotes are hardly likely to be read by many persons without a knowledge of Latin) ; sometimes, however, I felt it important to give the quotation in a form which all can under stand. I can only plead that I have exercised my judgement to the best of my ability, and have always translated with faithfulness.

I much wished to present the Latin text. But that could not have been done without doubling the size and expense of my book. I have, however, always given the Latin in a note in three cases : (i) when any controversial point was involved, (2) when there was any doubt lingering in my mind as to the exact meaning of my author, (3) when I thought that my English version was somewhat free.

St. Optatus is by no means easy to translate. His

PREFACE xix

sentences are often very long and involved. Not seldom he loses his thread and anacolutha are frequent. Often too he is very crabbed and obscure. I have been most anxious, and I hope careful, to observe the two golden rules of faithful translation : firstly, to put no idea in the rendering which is not clearly in the text, and secondly to express every thought and phrase of the author in words that are as nearly as one can make them the equivalent of his own. To secure these two points I have never hesitated, when necessary, to sacrifice idiomatic English to literalness in translation. Few things are more exasperating than is a French paraphrase, which so often is as misleading with regard to the exact sense of its supposed original, as it is charming in its own beauty and delicacy of expression. The style of Optatus is often majestic, always full of force and vigour, and sometimes rises to heights of real eloquence. There is one peculiarity of the African Latin of the time which, until we are accus tomed to it, creates a difficulty and therefore perhaps here requires a word of notice. It is not too much to say that Optatus had no idea of the sequence of tenses observed by the classical authors, or even of any distinction in meaning between the imperfect and pluperfect subjunctive. This is often noticeable in St. Augustine, but even more so in St. Optatus. Optatus uses these tenses quite indifferently and often linked together in the same sentence, without any reference to the question of time. On the other hand, his Latin is often most musical ; he had a very sensitive ear for rhythm and euphony (it is often a delight to

xx ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

read aloud his sonorous sentences for the very joy of listening to their sound), and accordingly he will use the pluperfect subjunctive where we should expect the imperfect, merely because of the cadence. If pro- posuisset will finish a sentence more imposingly and rhythmically than proponeret, proposuisset will in evitably fall from his pen. Our only guide, as to whether it should be translated ' he would propose ' or ' he would have proposed/ is the sense of the context. As soon as we have become at all conversant with the writings of St. Optatus we shall be accustomed to this peculiarity, and it ceases to trouble us. It might well be otherwise with anyone who has never read the original. He would naturally be much surprised to see a Latin imperfect given in a note, but translated in the text by an English verb in the pluperfect, or vice versa. For this reason I have thought it well to give this explanation in advance.

It remains to say a few words about Jthe occasion of this treatise and its date ; we must also state what is known of Optatus and of Parmenian, the Donatist, to whom these Books are addressed.

St. Optatus himself tells us the origin of his work.1 As the Donatists at the time refused a conference or public discussion with Catholics, it seemed desirable to answer them in writing. Accordingly Optatus determined to reply to a book which had recently appeared, written by a certain Parmenian. This Par menian, about the year 350, had become the Donatist

1 Optatus. i, 4.

PREFACE xxi

Bishop of Carthage, in succession to Donatus, the successor of Majorinus, who had commenced all the trouble by allowing himself to be intruded into the See already occupied by Caecilian, the lawful Catholic Bishop. So we find Optatus writing to Parmenian of Majorinus as his avus, and reproaching him with sitting in the ' Cathedra Pestilential ' on which Majorinus was the first to sit.1 Optatus tells us that Parmenian was not an African, but a stranger to Carthage.2 Besides the book against the Catholic Church which St. Optatus here answers, Parmenian wrote another against a fellow-Donatist named Tichorinus, which was, in its turn, answered by St. Augustine. Of these two works of Parmenian, Du Pin writes in his Preface : ' Diversa utriusque operis divisio, diversus methodus, diversum argumentum, quamquam eadem utrobique in Ecclesiam Catholicam convitia legerentur.'

We are able to gather the date of the work of St. Optatus from internal evidence. St. Optatus himself tells us 3 that when he wrote his book more than sixty years had elapsed since the storms of persecution burst over all Africa. Now, the persecution of Diocle tian (which without doubt is here referred to) began early in 303 and ceased in the East in 305. Again, whilst St. Optatus terms Photinus ' a heretic of this present time,' 4 St. Jerome tells us that Photinus died in the year 376. Putting these two dates — that of the cessation of the Diocletian persecution and the death of Photinus — together, and bearing the words of Optatus concerning them in mind, we gather that he wrote

1 Optatus, i, 10. * i, 5. » i, 13. * iv, 5.

b

xxii ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

after 365 and before 376. But we can narrow it still further, for St. Jerome also tells us that Optatus wrote when Valentinian and Valens were Emperors. Valentinian was elected Emperor in 372, and died in 375. Between these years therefore St. Optatus published the first edition of his work. I say the first edition, for the following considerations seem to make it certain that he subsequently brought out his work anew with considerable additions, directed against the cavils with which the Donatists had met its publication.1 In the list of Popes 2 we now find the name of Siricius given after that of Damasus. But Siricius was not raised to the Supreme Pontificate until 384, some years after the death of both Valenti nian and Valens. It is, therefore, quite certain that Optatus could not possibly have written in the life time of these Emperors, that ' together with the whole Catholic world ' he was then ' united with Siricius in the bonds of communion.' 3 Moreover, Optatus gives us not only a list of the Popes from St. Peter, but also a list of the Donatist anti-Popes from Victor Garbensis (the first of the series) to Macrobius.4 Of this Macro- bius he writes as of one still living, and calls him the socius of Parmenian. Later on, however, in the same chapter Optatus gives the names of two obscure anti- Popes, Lucianus and Claudianus (otherwise unknown to history), who had succeeded Macrobius in the Donatist line. These names, like that of Pope Siricius, must necessarily have been added after the work had

1 Cf. vii, i, and my Introduction to Book vii. 5 Optatus, ii, 3. 3 ii, 4. * ii, 4-

PREFACE xxiii

been finished and first given to the world. We may, therefore, safely conclude that Optatus wrote his Six Books against Parmenian about the year 373, when Valentinian and Valens were Emperors, during the Pontificate of Damasus. But he lived on until the time when Siricius was Pope and Theodosius Emperor, and then brought out a new edition of his work up to date, and no doubt added in some shape or other the chapters which now constitute his Seventh Book.1

Concerning the life of St. Optatus hardly anything is known, but he has always been held in honour in the Church by reason of the tradition concerning the sanctity of his life, as well as the vigour and learning with which he defended the Faith. Thus St. Fulgentius joins his name with those of Augustine and Ambrose, and writes as follows : ' Sive quod Sanctus Ambrosius, sive quod Sanctus Augustinus, sive quod Sanctus Optatus senserunt a nobis quoque salva veritate fidei sentiatur.'2 St. Augustine too joins together St. Ambrose and St. Optatus as authorities, writing, ' doctrinam quam commendavit Milevitanus Optatus vel Mediolanensis Ambrosius.' 3 In another place St. Augustine appeals to St. Optatus as the great authority for the history of the Donatist schism, and describes him as 'Venerabilis memoriae Milevitanus Episcopus Catholicae Communionis Optatus.' 4 Con cerning the accuracy of St. Optatus as an historian there has never been any more doubt than as to his orthodoxy and learning as a theologian. His work was,

1 See Introduction to Book vii. 2 Ad Monimuni ii, 13.

* De Unitate Ecclesiae xix, 50. 4 Con. Ep. Parm. i, 13.

xxiv ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

as he himself tells us and St. Augustine bears witness,1 richly documented and was never controverted on any side. Indeed there is an amusing story given by St. Augustine and still to be found in the Gesta Col- lationis Carthaginensis as to how the Donatist Bishops appealed to his authority concerning Const ant ine's refusal to allow Caecilian to return immediately to his See, and the way in which the laugh was turned against them when the whole passage was read aloud.2

We know from St. Jerome that Optatus was an African by birth,3 and from St. Augustine that he was a convert to the Faith. Augustine's beautiful words on this subject may well be quoted ; they seem to lose the fragrant delicacy of their aroma if any attempt be made to translate them : ' Nonne aspicimus quanto auro et argento et veste sussarcinatus exierit de Aegypto Cyprianus Doctor suavissimus et Martyr beatissimus ; quanto Lactantius, quanto Victorinus, Optatus, Hilarius, ut de vivis taceam ! ' 4

Here the names of Optatus, Lactantius and Cyprian are brought together — three great African converts— by a fourth, Augustine, the greatest of them all. And if, as is undoubted, Augustine, himself ' rich with the spoils of the Egyptians,' owed much also to Optatus, Optatus owed even more to Cyprian. We see the influence of St. Cyprian throughout the writings of Optatus, though, like Augustine after him, Optatus

1 Con. Ep. Farm, i, 13.

2 In Breviculo Collationis xx, 38 (cf. Migne Capitula Collationis Carthaginensis diei tertiae, 375, 477 et seq. usque ad 539, et Epistola Concilii Zertensis apud S. Augustinum cxli, 9),

8 De Doctrina Christiana, Lib. II. xl, 61. 4 Ib.

PREFACE

XXV

did not fear to desert Cyprian, where (as in the question of the re-baptism of heretics) Cyprian was wrong.

To overestimate the influence of Cyprian on the Church in Africa in the fourth century is hardly possible. By his sanctity, by his learning, above all by his heroic martyrdom, Cyprian had won for himself a position which was unique in the veneration and affection of the Faithful. For this reason the works of St. Cyprian were continually appealed to by the Donatists. Petilian quoted them against St. Augustine, as in the days of Optatus they had already been quoted by Parmenian.

The Canon of Scripture was fixed by Pope St. Damasus whilst St. Optatus was very likely still alive, and (whatever we may think of the use that Optatus sometimes made of the sacred text) there is no doubt of the veneration in which he held the inspired writings. On occasion, we must admit, he quoted them with inaccuracy ; from which it follows that he must have quoted by heart. But he (or rather a writer who lived not many years later) tells us that the MSS. were numerous in his time and ' in the hands of all.' 1 Optatus probably knew neither Greek nor Hebrew. He employed a pre-Hieronymian version (African in form, but less typically so than that used by St. Cyprian), to the very words of which (even in the

1 ' Librorum milia ubique recitantur . . . bibliothecae refertae suntlibris . . . manus omnium codicibus plenae sunt.' (See B, p. 305.) Harnack (Bible Reading in the Early Church, p. 97, note i, English translation) quotes these words as those of Optatus. I think, how ever, that there can be no doubt that they are really pseudo- Optatus, (See my Introduction to Book vii, p. 272.)

xxvi ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

translation) he seems to have ascribed inspiration. But surely it is far better to honour the text of the Written Word of God too much than too little, and in this, as in so many other things, St. Optatus may, if we will, be to us, in these days of Modernism, both an example and an inspiration.

Nothing is known as to the exact date or place of his death. Throughout Christendom there are mag nificent temples raised to the honour of Ambrose, Jerome and Augustine ; in memory of Cyprian there is a famous Chapel in the Catacombs ; in no land — so far as I have been able to discover — is there even an altar raised to Heaven under the invocation of Optatus of Mile vis. For him there is no public cultus anywhere amongst the Faithful in the Church of God. But he lives in 'his work — a monument of his zeal for the Catholic Faith and for Catholic Unity. No Catholic, having once read this book, and having therein entered into the loyal, upright, devoted, strenuous, somewhat impetuous spirit of its author — a Bishop who threw himself whole-heartedly into the fight that he knew to be necessary ; a formidable and on occasion hard-hit ting champion of Religion ; a good shepherd who knew not guile and hated schism, but loved the Peace which, as he tells us, Christ bequeathed as a keepsake to His children ; who loved the Unity of the Church which alone can secure that Peace for those who will seek and ensue it ; who loved the Chair of Peter and the safety of his flock better far than he loved aught on earth beside — but will recognise to the full the justice of the simple words of the Roman Martyrology which

PREFACE xxvii

on the fourth of each recurring June commemorate

this single-minded servant of God,

Milevi in Numidia Sancti Optati Episcopi doctrina et

sanctitate conspicui. 1 He being dead yet speaketh.'

At least six manuscripts of St. Optatus are in existence (all of them in a more or less incomplete state), and were consulted by Ziwsa. We shall refer to them as A, B, C, G, P, R, respectively.

A — Orleans, Bibliotheque de la ville, 169 (seventh

century — only a fragment). B — Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, 1712, formerly in

the Library of Baluze, 290 (fourteenth century). C = Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, 1711, formerly in

Colbert's Library (eleventh century). G = Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, 13335, once in the

Library of St. Germain-des-Pres, 609 (1248),

(fifteenth century). P = Petrograd, Imperial Public Library, Lat. 25 Q.v.

omd. I. 2 (fifth or sixth century). R = Reims, Bibliotheque de la ville, 221 (olim 138)

(beginning of ninth century). Of these manuscripts, P is the most ancient and undoubtedly the most valuable. Unfortunately it is extant for the first two Books only. For the other Books R is the best authority. Ziwsa, however, seems to think that some of the various readings in G may represent changes made by St. Optatus himself in his second edition ; from this point of view (late though

xxviii ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

it is) G becomes very important. A is too frag mentary to be of much service ; it is extant for the first two chapters of the Seventh Book only. To C we owe all that remains of the Appendix ; unhappily it commences in its present state only about the middle of the Sixth Book. Ziwsa holds B in small account, and Du Pin tells us that it is valde mendosus.

The Editio Princeps of Optatus was printed at Metz in 1549 by Cochlaeus, a Canon of Warsaw. He dedi cated his book to the Abbot of Tongerloo, in the hope that in the splendid library of that renowned Abbey some manuscript might be discovered, whereby his text might be corrected, since he had at his disposal only a MS. of the fifteenth century, full of faults, which is known as Codex Cusanus. Ziwsa was unable to examine it. Cochlaeus himself says of this Codex that it was ' ex antiquo codice quopiam mendose ab indocto librario scriptum et ab alio deinceps multo adhuc mendosius rescriptum.' Poor material indeed upon which to work ! The Editio Princeps of Optatus is referred to as v.

Fourteen years later, in 1563, a new edition was brought out by Francis Balduinus, who tells us that in the edition of Cochlaeus there were more mistakes than sentences, at which, under the circumstances, we can hardly be surprised. Balduinus had a hitherto un known MS., which was lent him by a Paris theologian, at his disposal, but the text was still exceedingly corrupt, until in the year 1569 he was able to produce a much better edition, since by this time he had access to two new MSS. neither of which is available to us.

PREFACE

XXIX

The second of these MSS., known as Codex Tilianus, from the name of a Bishop of Meaux to whom it belonged, contains the passages in Book VII. which are now generally held to be spurious, and which Balduinus was the first to print. He brought out yet another edition in 1599. This third edition of Balduinus possesses some valuable notes by its author, and is quoted as b.

Three more editions were brought out in the next century : the first, full of mistakes, prepared by Alba- spinaeus, Bishop of Orleans, and published after his death in 1631. This same year the Anglican scholar Casaubon published in London an edition of Optatus, but could only use b, as he was unable to consult any manuscripts. This edition, therefore, abounds in conjectural emendations, many of them highly ingenious, which, apart from any intrinsic probability that they may possess, receive importance from the critical acumen and learning of their author.

Yet another edition was published by Priorius in Paris, but it is of no value whatsoever. The text is that of the first edition of Balduinus.

We now come to the great work of Du Pin, the famous Gallican theologian. Du Pin brought out his edition of Optatus in 1700, again at Amsterdam in 1701, and in an improved form at Antwerp in 1702. He discovered the important MSS CBG, and was thus able to make the first serious attempt to restore the correct text of Optatus in the many places where it had become corrupt. He added notes of his own, and also printed anew those of Casaubon, Albaspinaeus,

xxx ST. OPTATUS AGAINST THE DONATISTS

Barthius and Balduinus. He is the author of the concise marginal summary of the contents of each chapter, prefixed a Preface and a History of the Donatist schism to the text of Optatus, and appended many valuable documents in various ways illus trative of Donatism, as well as the Gesta Collationis Carthaginensis, so far as they exist, in full.

For nearly two hundred years nothing fresh was done for Optatus, until, as we have already stated, at the end of the nineteenth century Ziwsa published his critical edition. He had the advantage not only of the labours of his predecessors, but also for the first two Books he had access to P, which was unknown to all of them. Ziwsa gives us the various readings, but was precluded by the rule of the Vienna Academy for the Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum from providing other footnotes. He has, however, con tributed a long Preface, dealing exclusively with questions concerning the text, as well as two valuable Indices, the first Nominum et Rerum, the second Verborum et Locutionum S. Optati.

In my translation I have generally followed Ziwsa's text, but have not been afraid to desert it, if I thought that I saw good reason — especially when Ziwsa him self has deserted P. The different readings will always be found in a footnote, unless they are of absolutely no consequence. I have (as will be seen) freely availed myself of the notes furnished by Du Pin, especially of his own and of those of Casaubon. But it is strange how often those passages in Optatus which seem to me to present most difficulty and have

PREFACE xxxi

caused the greatest uncertainty in my mind as to their precise meaning have been left untouched by all the commentators, without any explanation what ever.

In conclusion I must express my deepest sense of obligation to Dom John Chapman, O.S.B. With unfailing kindness and generosity he has corrected my work throughout, whilst it was yet in manuscript. To him I owe numerous suggestions. Without his aid I should never have ventured to undertake a task which has been to me a delightful labour, full of unexpected interest on every page. My hope is that many others may, through this English work, go if possible to the Latin, or may, in any case, fall happily under that which to me it is no exaggeration to term the spell and fascination of St. Optatus of Mile vis.

CONTENTS

PAGB

PREFACE v

THE SEVEN BOOKS OF ST. OPTATUS OF MILEVIS AGAINST THE DONATISTS.

BOOK THE FIRST

WHO WERE THE BETRAYERS AT THE TIME OF THE PERSECU TION. THE CAUSES OF THE SCHISM. WHERE AND BY WHOM THE SCHISM WAS MADE 1-56

BOOK THE SECOND

WHICH is THE ONE TRUE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND WHERE IS IT TO BE FOUND ? THE FlVE ENDOWMENTS OF THE CHURCH BELONG TO CATHOLICISM, NOT TO THE SCHISM. THE DONATISTS HAVE BEEN GUILTY OF SHAMELESSLY SCRAPING THE HEADS OF PRIESTS, AND OF MURDERS, OF GIVING THE EUCHARIST TO DOGS, AND OF CASTING AWAY THE HOLY CHRISM 57-119

BOOK THE THIRD

THE FOUR REASONS ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE TO BRING ABOUT UNITY WITHOUT SEVERITY.

BECAUSE THE SCHISMATICS HAD BUILT CHURCHES ' THAT WERE NOT WANTED.'

BECAUSE DONATUS OF CARTHAGE HAD APPEALED TO THE EMPEROR TO BRING ABOUT UNITY.

xxxiv CONTENTS

PAGE

BECAUSE DONATUS OF BAGAIA COLLECTED BANDS OF ARMED MEN TO STOP THE WORK OF UNITY.

BECAUSE NONE OF THOSE THINGS WITH WHICH THE WORK OF UNITY HAS BEEN REPROACHED CAME TO PASS IN OPPOSITION TO THE WILL OF GOD . . . 120-179

BOOK THE FOURTH AN ANSWER is MADE TO CERTAIN ARGUMENTS OF PARMENIAN,

DRAWN FROM VARIOUS PASSAGES IN THE OLD TESTA MENT ........ l8o~202

BOOK THE FIFTH

IN THIS FIFTH BOOK IT is SHOWN THAT THOUGH MEN ARE THE MINISTERS OF BAPTISM, IT is GOD WHO CLEANSES, AND THAT IT is His CHRIST WHO GIVES WHAT is RECEIVED IN BAPTISM, AND THAT THE REBAPTISED CANNOT POSSESS THE KINGDOM OF GOD, AND THAT THEY HAVE LOST THE WEDDING GARMENT ...... 203-245

BOOK THE SIXTH IN THIS BOOK IT is SHOWN THAT THE DONATIST BISHOPS

WICKEDLY DESTROYED ALTARS, THAT THEY SOLD THE

HOLY VESSELS, AND WITHOUT WARRANT STRIPPED NUNS OF THEIR VEILS ..... 246-268

BOOK THE SEVENTH

IN THIS LAST BOOK IT IS SHOWN THAT THE CHILDREN OF THE BETRAYERS, WHOSE NAMES WERE GIVEN IN THE FIRST

BOOK, MAY NOW, FOR THE SAKE OF UNITY, BE RECEIVED BACK INTO THE CATHOLIC COMMUNION . . 275-297

PSEUDO-OPTATUS. A . . 298 | B . . 305 I C . .310

A HUNDRED NOTEWORTHY SAYINGS OF ST

OPTATUS 3"

CONTENTS xxxv

APPENDIX

PREFACE TO APPENDIX ^21

I- — THE ACTS OF THE VINDICATION OF FELIX, BISHOP OF

APTUNGA ...... 327

II- — THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE ZENOPHILUS . . . 346

III- — LETTER OF CONSTANTINE TO AELAFIUS . . . 382

IV. — LETTER OF THE COUNCIL OF ARLES TO POPE SYLVESTER 388

V- — LETTER OF CONSTANTINE TO THE CATHOLIC BISHOPS . 393

VI.— LETTER OF CONSTANTINE TO THE DONATIST BISHOPS . 399

VII. — LETTER OF PREFECTS TO CELSUS .... 401

VIII. — LETTER OF CONSTANTINE TO CELSUS . . 403

IX. — LETTER OF CONSTANTINE TO THE BISHOPS AND PEOPLE

OF AFRICA ...... 407

X. — A RESCRIPT OF CONSTANTINE .... 410

XI, — ACTS OF THE COUNCIL OF CIRTA .... 416

XII.— LETTER OF THE PROCONSUL ANULINUS TO CONSTANTINE 420

XIIL— LETTER OF CONSTANTINE TO POPE MILTIADES . . 422

XIV- — LETTER OF CONSTANTINE TO PROBIANUS . . -425

xv- — LETTER OF CONSTANTINE TO ANULINUS (I). . . 428

XVI. — LETTER OF CONSTANTINE TO ANULINUS (II). . . 430

THE WORK OF ST. OPTATUS THE AFRICAN

BISHOP OF MILEVIS

ON THE SCHISM OF THE DONATISTS AGAINST PARMENIAN

BOOK THE FIRST

WHO WERE THE BETRAYERS AT THE TlME OF THE PERSECUTION. THE CAUSES OF THE SCHISM. WHERE AND BY WHOM THE SCHISM WAS MADE.

ONE Faith,1 most honoured brethren,2 commends 3

1 Cunclos nos Christianas, clarissimi fratres, Omnipotent! Deo fides una commendat. With these striking words St. Optatus opens his work against the Donatists. Fides una — the One Faith, un tainted by any specific heresy. St. Optatus insists more than once, with emphasis, that he does not charge those against whom he writes with heresy (sin against faith), but with schism (sin against unity) (cf. 1,9; i, 12; hi, 9; v, i), and complains (i, 10) that Parmenian paid no attention to this essential distinction. St. Augustine, however, in his second Book against Cresconius explains the reasons why the Donatists of his time deserved to be called heretics, and in his Book on Heresies he hardly ever gives them any other name, explaining at length that their schism had now become a heresy. In this it did but follow a usual law. ' Haeresis scisma inveteratum.' These are the words of St. Augustine, and St. Jerome writes to the same effect : (Ep. ad Tit. iii) ' An erroneous doctrine constitutes

I. The

Divine Gift of Peace, bestowed upon all Christians.

2 THE FAITH

us all, who are Christians, to the keeping of Almighty God. To this Faith it appertains to believe that the Son of God, the Lord,1 shall come to judge the world — that He, who has already come, has been born, according to His Human Nature, through 2 Mary a Virgin, that He has suffered, died, and (after having been buried) has risen from the grave.

heresy ; schism is separation from the Church, through the depar ture of a Bishop (or of Bishops). But there is no schism which fails to frame for itself some heresy, that it may form a pretext for having departed from the Church.' St. Augustine tells us further that Donatus the Great was heretical about the Trinity, though the fact was generally unknown to his followers. He also writes (Ep. clxiii) that he had heard that the Arians had endeavoured to make common cause with Donatists in Africa.

2 fratres. St. Optatus will proceed immediately to justify himself at considerable length for terming the Donatists his brethren, notwithstanding the fact that they were schismatics, and there fore his ' separated brethren ' (i, 3 ; cf. iv, i ; iv, 2). So also St. Augustine : ' Quotidie enim quibusdam non nobiscum in una Ecclesia, nee in iisdem Sacramentis constitutis, dicimus, Prater. Sodomitis etiam dixit Loth, Fratres (Gen. xix, 7), utique ad leniendum eorum animositatem, non ad cognitam fraternitatem, quasi unius haereditate consortium.' (Gesta Collationis Carthag. diei iii, ccxlii). Cf. Aug. cont. Farm, iii, 2.

3 commendat. Ziwsa says that commendat here = tutelae Dei mandat (cf. the prayer of the Church, e.g. in Fest. S. Antonii, ' Inter- cessio nos, quaesumus Domine, beati Antonii Abbatis commendet '). Casaubon thinks that it means either : ' One Faith approves us all, who are Christians, to Almighty God ' (i.e. makes us pleasing to Him) ; or ' One Faith proves that, in the sight of Almighty God, we all are Christians.' (Cf. S. August. Brev. Coll. iii, 10 : ' Dona- tistae Scripturarum testimonio unam Ecclesiam commendaverant.' The Donatists had proved by the witness of the Scriptures that the Church is One.) It must, however, be admitted that it is not possible to produce a passage, at least from the works of St. Augus tine, in which commendare is used in this sense with the Dative, as above Omnipotent Deo.)

1 Ziwsa following G reads Filium Dei Dominum. PRBvb have Filium Dei Deum.

2 G reads ex. All the other MSS. have per.

THE GIFT OF PEACE 3

Also, before ascending to Heaven, whence He had descended,1 He left behind, through His Apostles, as His parting gift,2 to all Christians, Peace.3

1 Cf. John iii, 13.

2 Itoriam P. Storiam RB. Victvicem G. This last reading is evidently a desperate, though brilliant guess (' He bequeathed victorious peace ') . It is, however, adopted by Du Pin, who observes that it seems impossible to translate storiam. Ziwsa reads storiam, and tells us that it here means not as usually, a carpet, but a breast plate (Schutzwehr) (' He left peace as a breastplate '). Du Pin (not knowing P) did not see Itoriam. Evidently Ziwsa put it aside as a hopeless corruption. Yet without doubt it is the true reading, for, as Dom John Chapman O.S.B. has pointed out to me, this word has been discovered with its explanation by the learned Dom Germain Morin O.S.B. in an unpublished sermon of St. Augustine (see Revue Bened. 1895 xii, p. 388). ' Loquebatur cum Apostolis suis ascensurus. Videamus qualia illis reliquit, sicut dici solet ITORIA. Humanae conditionis est quod dico, ut quando ab amicis amici deducuntur (are conducted a little way on their departure), quando ille qui deducitur discedere caeperit, quia necesse est ut relinquat in animo diligentium se nonnullam tristitiam, dat eis aliquid pecuniae, unde illis eadem dies, sicut dicitur, bene sit, id est, unde convivant, simul laetentur et iucundentur. Et haec quantulacunque pecunia quae datur, hilari nomine ITORIA nun- cupatur (This small sum of money is jokingly called ' Journey Money'). Quiddimisit Dominus Ihesus discipulis suis ? Exultate, adtentite, quia ITORIA ilia non solum illos inebriavit, sed ad nos usque manebit . . . (and further on) Eritis Mihi testes in lerusalem. Primo ibi, ubi sum occisus, ibi ero gloriosus. In lerusalem et in totam ludaeam et Samariam. Et adhuc parum est. Et usque in totam terram. O ! ITORIA ! ' Thus we have two forms of Itoria (i) neuter plural with qualia and by itself, (z) feminine singular itoria ilia . . . inebriavit. Evidently it is an adjectival form, in popular use (sicut dici solet, itoria), and doubtful number (i) as a substantive = neuter plural, (2) in feminine ilia itoria, (sc. pecunia). St. Augustine makes Our Lord's itoria (parting gift) to His disciples and to His Church (ad nos usque manebit} the right of preaching throughout the world ; St. Optatus (in accordance with the purpose of his treatise) makes it Peace. ' He left us Peace as His parting gift — to all of us, in the person of His Apostles.'

3 St. Optatus throughout his work continually uses the word Pax, to express the visible unity and communion of the Faithful

4 PEACE BROKEN BY SCHISM

And, lest it should seem that to His Apostles only He had left this Peace, He said :

' That which I say to you, I say to all.' 1 And He also said :

' My peace I give unto you, My peace I leave unto you.- 2

Thus we see that Peace has been given to all Christians.

That it is God's Peace, we know, inasmuch as He says ' My Peace.' But when He says ' I give to you/ we know that He willed that it should belong not only to Himself, but to all those as well who should believe in Him.

Peace had remained whole and inviolate 3 disturbed as it was given, and had not been disturbed by the Schism. authors of the schism, there would not be any disagree ment to-day between us and our brethren, nor would they be causing God inconsolable tears (as Isaiah the prophet bears witness4), nor would they deserve the

in the Catholic Church ; of course it also denotes their invisible union with God through grace.

1 Mark xiii, 37. 2 John xiv, 27.

3 Quae Pax . . . -Integra inviolataque . It is an interesting coinci dence — but probably a coincidence only — that these last two words, applied by St. Optatus to God's Peace (by which he designates the Catholic Unity), are used in the Athanasian Creed of the Catholic Faith : ' Catholicam Fidem, quam nisi quisque integvam inviola- tamque servaverit.'

4 The reference is to Isaiah xxii, 4 : ' Therefore have I said : Depart from Me : I will weep bitterly : labour not to comfort Me for the devastation of the daughter of My people.' Optatus uses the same strong figure twice in iii, 2 : ' In dolore Dei amare plorantis,' and again : ' Indicat Deus lacrymas suas quas vos fecistis, quas testatur nulla posse consolatione siccari,' with a reference to the same passage in Isaiah.

EVIL DEEDS OF DONATISTS 5

name, and do the deeds, of false prophets 1 ; nor would they have built a crumbling and whitened wall 2 ; nor would they overturn simple but too credulous minds ; nor would they, by wickedly imposing hands 3 upon the heads of all, place upon them the veils of destruction 4 ; nor would they speak evil things to God 5 ; nor would they re-baptise the Faithful ; nor should we now be grieving for the souls which they have either destroyed or slain, — souls of the innocent, for whom God was the first to grieve, saying by the mouth of Ezekiel the prophet :

' Woe to you who place a veil over every head and over every age, for the destruction of souls. The souls of My people have been destroyed ; and they spoke evil things to Me amongst My people, that they might slay souls which ought not to die, whilst they proclaim to My people their empty deceits.'6

1 vatum is in all the MSS. It has been suggested that it should be fratrum (cf. 2 Cor. xi, 27). But cf. iii, 10 : ' parietem fecisse dicuntur falsi vales.'

2 nee ruinosum ac dealbaium extvuevent parietem. For the full meaning of this reference to Ezekiel xiii, 10, see iii, 10.

3 In Penance.

4 Cf. Ez. xiii, 1 8. It was strictly forbidden to impose the Veil of Penance upon the innocent, thus withdrawing them from the Communion of the Body of Christ, or, under any circumstances, upon Bishops or clergy, even though they might have been guilty of such a serious sin as that of apostasy.

5 nee malediceyent Deo, i.e. by the exorcisms used by the Donatists when they rebaptised Catholics or subjected them to Penance. These Donatists are said by St. Optatus profanely to rail at, or speak evil things to.the Spirit of God. Optatus develops this thought in iv, 6 where he accuses the Donatists of saying to God — dwelling in the soul of the Catholic : ' Maledicte, exi foras.' In both passages he refers to Ez. xiii, 19, where he reads ' maledicebant Mihi.' (The Vulgate has ' violabant Me.'} Cf. also ii, 21 : ' Quid iniquius quam exorcizare Spiritum Sanctum ? '

6 Ez. xiii, 1 8.

6 WHY SCHISMATICS ARE CALLED BRETHREN

SchisWhy Lest any one should say> that without thought I

matics call them brethren, I would reply that such they are,

cai°iedd ] e for we cannot escape from the words of the prophet

Brethren. Isaiah i . andj although they would not deny (as all

men know well) that they hold us in abhorrence, and

ban us utterly and are unwilling to be called our

brethren,2 still we may not depart from the fear of

God, for the Holy Spirit exhorts us by Isaiah the

prophet, saying :

' You who fear the Word of the Lord, hear ye the Word of the Lord.

' To those who detest and curse you, and are unwilling to be called your brethren,3 say ye nevertheless :

' " You are our brethren." ' 4

They therefore are without doubt brothers, though not good brothers. Wherefore let no one marvel that I term those brothers, who are unable to escape being our brethren.5 They and we have one spiritual birth, though widely differing is our conduct.

For even Ham, who mocked undutifully at his father's shame,6 was the brother of the innocent. In

1 Is. Ixvi, 5.

a St. Augustine also bears witness (con. Gaudent. iii ; con. Farm. iii, 2) that the Donatists repudiated the name of Brothers in their dealings with Catholics.

3 et nolunt se did fratres vestros. These words are interpolated by Optatus in the midst of his quotation, to make his sense clear.

4 St. Optatus quotes here from the Septuagint Version ; the same passage (also from the Septuagint) is quoted by Tertullian, con. Marc, iv, 16, and by St. Augustine Lib. post Coll. The Vulgate (from the Hebrew) conveys quite a different sense : dixemnt fratres vestri odientes vos et abiicientes propter Nomen Meum.

5 They could not escape this, because by Baptism they had become Sons of God, and therefore brethren of all the brothers of Christ.

6 Gen. ix, 22.

WHY OPTATUS ANSWERED PARMENIAN 7

accordance with his deserts, he incurred the yoke of slavery, so that he — their brother — was assigned in bondage to his brethren. From this we see that, even where there is sin, the name of brotherhood is not lost.

Concerning the sins of these our brethren, I will speak in another place. For they, sitting over against us, speak1 evil things about us.2 They consort with that Thief 3 who robs God, and share their lot with adulterers4 (that is, with heretics), and make their sins an object of praise,5 and plan reproachful words against us Catholics.

They all — each in his own district — make a great iv. Why noise with wicked words. To some of their state- Sought it ments I may reply when opportunity arises.6 But

we have found only one with whom it is possible to the task discuss these matters either by correspondence, or by ing Par- the exchange of treatises— Parmenian our brother, if indeed he will allow us to call him brother. Since they are unwilling to be in communion, as \ve are, with

1 denotant. Literally ' they brand us with infamy.' This is the reading of PG and gains added probability from the fact that St. Optatus twice (iv, 3 ; iv, 5) quotes Ps. xlix, 20 thus : ' Sedens adversus fratrem tuum denolabas.' Du Pin says of Denotant ' legunt sed male.' But we must never forget that Du Pin did not see P, and therefore looked upon denotant merely as an emendation of G, destitute of authority. The other MSS. have detrahunt.

2 Ps. xlix, 19 et seq. (cf. iv, 5, where Optatus discusses this passage at length).

3 Satan (cf. iv, 6).

4 moechis. Optatus argues that moechi = haeretici in iv, 6. (Cf. i, 10.)

6 peccata sua laudant.

6 This sentence is not in PRBvb. It is only to be found in G.

•H- B 4

8 THE USEFULNESS OF DISCUSSION

the whole body of Bishops,1 let it be freely granted that they are not colleagues, if they refuse so to be, but (as we have already said), brothers they are.

Now, my brother Parmenian, in order that he might not speak like the rest, in a windy 2 and unconvincing manner, has not only given utterance to his opinions in speech, but has also set them down in writing. Since, then, love of truth compels us 3 to answer what he has said, we may still have some sort of conference — even though we cannot meet together.4

By this means also the wishes of certain people will be satisfied. For many have often expressed a desire for a public discussion between champions drawn from both sides, in order to elicit the truth. And this might well have been done. At any rate, though the Donatists forbid their people to come to us, and close the way to any approach to us, and avoid a meeting,5 and refuse to speak with us, let there be a conference, my brother Parmenian, between us two in this way, that, as I have not thought little of, nor

1 Collegium episcopate nolunt nobiscum habere commune. ' Col legium episcopate,' the whole College of Bishops throughout the Catholic world.

2 ventose. R has venenose.

3 veritate cogente compelUmuv. We shall often find St. Optatus, as here, joining two synonyms together, (I suppose for strength of expression,) without a shade of difference in meaning.

4 St. Augustine (Ep. clxvi) reminds the Donatists that their Bishops had always refused any conference with Catholics, (with whom as sinners they refused to speak,) and also (Ep. Ixviii) not only that Paul had dealings with the Epicureans, but that Christ had conversed with Satan himself concerning the Law. Many years after the death of St. Optatus, the Donatists, though most un willingly, were compelled by the Edict of the Emperor Honorius to have the great Conference with the Catholics at Carthage (A.D. 41 1).

5 consessum.

menian s

PARMENIAN'S ATTACKS 9

despised, your treatises, which you have wished to be read and quoted by many, but on the contrary have patiently listened to everything that you have brought forward, — so do you, in your turn, attend to the reply which, with humility, I make to you.

Now I understand well, and you do not deny, — v. The

, , . Nature

and every man, who is not a fool, will quite plainly of Par- see for himself — that you never would have written at such a length for any other purpose, excepting that you might, by your writings, strike an undeserved blow at the Catholic Church. But (as it has been given me to discover) whilst your wishes say one thing, your arguments shout another. Moreover, I perceive that not all that you have written is an argument against Catholicism.1

Indeed, though you are not a Catholic, what you say often tells in favour of the Catholic Church.2 Therefore it will only be necessary for us to answer you when through wrong information you write, not of what you have yourself seen,3 but of what you have heard from others speaking falsely (although we have read in the Epistle of Peter :

' Be ye unwilling to judge your brother without certainty ' 4) .

1 contra Catholicam. Tertullian (Praescr. 30) was the first Father to use Catholica as a substantive. This use ceases after the seventh century. We find it 240 times in St. Augustine.

2 immo multa pro Catholica, cum Catholicus non sis.

3 Cf. iii, 12 :' Veritas perspecta oculis dulcedinem suam in se habens a falsae opinionis limitibus separata est ' etc.

4 We have here probably a paraphrase of James iv, n. St. Optatus (no doubt quoting by heart) must have written Petri instead of Jacobi by a lapse either of pen or of memory.

io PARMENIAN'S INCONSISTENCY

For instance, amongst other things which have no reference to us (that they have no such reference I shall prove), you say that we asked for armed troops to be employed against you.

But in other parts of your treatise there are some things which tell in our favour, and against you — such are the analogy of the Flood, and that of Cir

cumcision.1

Some things there are which tell both for us and for you. For example, what you have written in praise of Baptism (excepting that you have said untrue things concerning the Flesh of Christ) tells in your favour 2 as well as in ours, because, although you are outside, still, from us you went forth.

It would also be in favour of both sides — if you had not joined yourselves to those who are certainly schismatics3 — that you have proved that heretics are strangers to Catholic Sacraments.4

Some things are arguments for us alone. Such is your reference to the One Church.

Some things that you have mentioned tell the wrong way for you, in consequence of your ignorance,

1 Parmenian had argued that the Flood was a type, and Cir cumcision the forerunner, of Baptism. But this told in favour of Catholics and against the Donatists (who rebaptised) since there was only one Flood and only one Circumcision.

2 Since Catholics admitted the validity of Baptism administered by Donatists.

3 The Donatists, though not yet heretics, had by making or joining a schism, lost their right to the Sacraments of the Church.

4 extraneos esse Catholicis Sacramentis = the Sacraments of the Catholic Church ; cf . iii, 9 ' de unitate Catholica ' = the unity of the Catholic Church.

TYPES OF BAPTISM n

as a foreigner,1 [of the facts] — for instance, your indict ment of ' Betrayers ' 2 and schismatics.

The way in which you have written concerning the Sacraments and Sacrifice,3 offered by one who is in sin, also goes against you.

So, when we investigate, we discover that in reality you have brought nothing against us except your mistaken charge, that we asked to have troops employed against you. That this is a calumny we shall be able to prove to absolute demonstration. Take this calumny out of your book, and you are ours.

For what can be more to our purpose than your argument from the fact that there was only one Flood —the type of Baptism ? And, in maintaining that the one 4 Circumcision availed for the salvation of the people of the Jews, you have written in defence of our doctrine, as though you were one of us. For this is our argument, who defend the Unity of Baptism conferred in [the Name of] the Trinity.5 It is not an argument in favour of you, who dare to repeat, against

1 quia peregrinus es (cf . iii, 3) .

2 Traditorum. The crime of Traditio was the betraying of the Sacred Books and Vessels under the stress of persecution. I have throughout translated Traditores ' Betrayers ' and Traditio ' Betrayal.'

3 de oleo et sacriftcio peccatoris. Oleum is here used for the Sacra ments, since Unction has from very early times been used in Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Order (cf. note 3, p. 109) and the Last Anointing. The reference is to Ps. cxl, 5 : ' Oleum autem peccatoris non impinguet caput Meum.' (Cf. iv, 7, etc.)

* singularem. Cf. Singulars Baptisma (iii, 2 ; v, i), Singulare Sacramentum (i, n), Singularis Cathedra (ii, 2), and Res singularis (bis) (v, 10).

6 Cf. ii, 10.

12 THE ONE BAPTISM

the laws,1 that Baptism, of which the one Flood and one Circumcision are typical. And this, although you yourselves would not deny that what has been com manded to be done once only, ought not to be repeated. But whilst you have praised with acuteness that wThich is worthy of all praise,2 you have by a quibble intro duced your own persons, as if — since it is only lawful once [to baptise] — for you it were lawful, for others unlawful.3

If it be unlawful for Betrayers to baptise, it cannot be lawful for you, for we can prove that your first fathers were Betrayers.

If it be unlawful for schismatics to baptise, it must therefore be unlawful for you, for you originated the Schism.

If it be unlawful for sinners to baptise, we can prove from divine testimony that you are sinners also.

Finally, since the validity of Baptism does not depend upon the character of the man who has been chosen to baptise, but upon an act which lawfully is done but once, for this reason we do not set right4 baptisms which have been administered by you,

1 sc. Baptismatis. (Cf. v, 4 : ' Apostolorum, quibus leges baptis- matis dedit,' and ' certo tempore dedit leges baptismatis Filius Dei.')

2 sc. the Oneness of Baptism.

3 The crafty argument of the Donatists was this : ' There is only one Baptism, it is true, but the right to baptise is lost by the crime of Traditio ' — and the Catholics were Traditores. Therefore Baptism administered by Catholics was no Baptism. It was ' unlawful/ null and void from the beginning.

4 emendamus. Literally correct, sc. by rebaptising.

SCOPE OF PARMENIAN'S BOOK 13

because both amongst us and amongst you the Sacra ment is one.1

The whole nature of this Sacrament we shall set forth in our fifth book.

My brother Parmenian, you have indeed treated VL The

•* arguments

of many things, but I see that I must not answer you set forth point by point, in the same order as that which you menian's have employed. For you have written in the first t- place of the figures and praise of Baptism. Here (with the exception of your error concerning the Flesh of Christ) you have written well. But this, however, tells in our favour, as we shall show in its proper place.

Secondly, you have maintained that there is only One Church, from which heretics are shut out. You have, however, been unwilling to recognise where this One Church is to be found.

Thirdly, you have denounced the ' Betrayers ' without fixing names or describing persons.

Fourthly, you have attacked the makers of Unity.2

Fifthly (to pass over matters of but trifling

1 This is the enunciation of the true Catholic principle. Whether Peter baptises, or John, or James, or Judas Iscariot, it is truly Christ who baptises. (Cf. S. Aug. Tract, vi in Joannem : ' Nam si pro diversitate meritorum Baptisma sanctum est, quia diversa sunt merita, diversa erunt baptismata ; et tanto quisque aliquid melius putatur accipere, quanto a meliore videtur accepisse.')

2 operarii Unitatis. St. Optatus uses this phrase in very many places. Ziwsa says that it = administri Unitatis (officers or servants of Unity). I think, however, that it also carries with it the idea that these ' workmen ' (Leontius, Macarius, Paulus, Taurinus and others of whom we shall hear so often in the course of this work — iii, i, 3, etc.) achieved the task at which they laboured, no doubt, in an official capacity. Operari est opus facere (cf. note 3, p. 30). So I have translated it throughout simply makers.

14 SCOPE OF OPTATUS' ANSWER

importance), you have written about the Sacraments and Sacrifice of a sinner.

vn. The But it seems to me that in the first place the cities,

division of . .

this work positions, and names oi the Betrayers and schismatics content* should be pointed out.1 In this way the true authors several °^ tne crimes, concerning which you have written, books. may ke convicted of their certain guilt.

Secondly,2 I shall have to say which is the Church, or where is to be found the One Church — which is the Church — because, besides the One Church, there is no other.

Thirdly, I shall prove that we did not ask for the troops and that what is said to have been done by the makers of Unity does not concern us.

In the fourth place, I shall show who is the sinner whose sacrifice God repudiates, or from whose Sacra ments 3 we must flee.

Fifthly, I shall treat of Baptism ; and in the sixth place of your ill-considered assumptions and mistakes.

vni. The But before I say anything of these subjects

ChrisUs separately, I shall show briefly that you have spoken

not sinful. wrongfuny 4 Of tfce Flesh of Christ, for you have said

that the Flesh which was drowned by the floods of

1 The public records of each city, if searched, would show in which of these any persons had been guilty of the crime of Traditio, the names of the offenders, and whatever offices they might have held.

2 St. Optatus thinks it well to deal first with the quaestio facti. Having done this (in Book I), he will come secondly (in Book II) to the quaestio iuvis.

3 oleum. (Cf. note 3, p. n.)

4 male.

THE FLESH OF CHRIST 15

the Jordan, and was thus cleansed from all stains, was the Flesh of Sin. You might have said this with reason if the Baptism of the Flesh of Christ had sufficed for all, so that it were not necessary for any man to be baptised for himself. Had this been so, the whole human family would have been in the Jordan, and all that which is born in the flesh would have been there. In that case there would have been no difference between the Faithful and any one of the heathen, for flesh belongs to them all ; and since there is no man who is without flesh, if, according to your mode of expression, the Flesh of Christ was drowned in the waters of the Jordan, the flesh of all men would have gained this benefit. But the Flesh of Christ is one thing in Christ— quite another is the flesh of each man in himself. What came over you to call the Flesh of Christ sinful ? Would that you had said ' the flesh of men in the Flesh of Christ . ' But even thus, you would have spoken without reason,1 since each believer is baptised in the Name of Christ, not in the Flesh of Christ, which belonged to Himself exclusively. I may add that His Flesh, which was conceived by the Holy Ghost, could not be washed, amongst others, for the remission of sins, for It was without any sin.2 You have gone on to say that It was drowned in the floods of the Jordan.3 This word drowned, you have used inadvisedly enough, for it is a word which should be used only of Pharaoh and his people, who were so drowned by the weight

1 nee sic pvobabilitev dixeras.

2 quae nullum videbatur admisisse peccatum = quae nullum admittebat peccatum. This pleonastic use of videor is very common in Optatus.

3 addidisti et lordanis diluvio demersam.

16 THE HERETICS OF THE PAST

of their offences, as to remain, like lead, beneath the waters. But the Flesh of Christ, when It went down into and came up from the Jordan, ought not to have been spoken of by you as drowned. His Flesh was found to be more holy than the very Jordan, so that rather did It cleanse the water by Its entrance, than Itself was cleansed.

ix. Men- Moreover, I cannot pass over a matter in which

Heretics I think you have acted craftily. In order that you

by* Par- might lead the minds of your readers off the point,

tcfncfgood or deceive them, after you had described Circumcision

purpose. and the Flood, and after you had praised Baptism,

you thought fit to raise, as it were from the dead,

heretics who were already dead and, together with

their heresies, buried in oblivion — and this although

not only their errors, but even their names,

were unknown throughout Africa — Marcion, Praxeas,

Sabellius, Valentinus, and the rest up to the Cata-

phrygae, all of whom were confuted in their time by

Victorinus of Pettau,1 by Zephyrinus of Rome,2 by

Tertullian of Carthage, and by other champions of the

Catholic Church.3 Why, then, do you wage a war

with the dead, who have nothing to do with the affairs

1 St. Jerome tells us that Victorinus, Bishop of Pettau, (who was martyred under Diocletian,) published many writings. His notes on the Apocalypse and a fragment on the Creation are extant.

2 urbico. Cf. 'urbica commoratio' (ii, 4), 'in Urbe ' (i, 27). Zephyrinus was Pope cir. 201-218.

3 et aliis adsertonbus Ecclesiae Catholicae. It may, perhaps, at first sight seem somewhat strange that St. Optatus should mention Tertullian amongst ' the champions of the Catholic Church ' ; yet, before his apostasy to Montanism, no one ever defended the Catholic Faith with more zeal, energy and ability than the great Tertullian.

DONATISTS POSSESSED THE SACRAMENTS 17

of our time ? For no reason, excepting that you, who are a schismatic of to-day, having nothing that you can prove against Catholics, have been pleased to enumerate so many heretics and their heresies, to spin out your somewhat wordy treatise.

Now there is another question : For what purpose x. The have you mentioned those who have not the Sacraments which you and we alike possess ? 1 Sound health does not clamour for medicine ; strength which is secure in itself does not need outside help ; truth has no lack of arguments ; it is the mark of a sick man to seek remedies ; it is the sign of a sluggard and a weakling to run in search of auxiliaries ; it belongs to a liar to rake up arguments.2

1 Mr. Sparrow Simpson, professing to paraphrase St. Optatus, writes as follows : ' Plainly these Donatists are schismatics. Although they are not in the Catholic Church, yet they are in possession of the same two Sacraments as the Catholics. They are not heretics. Heretics could not be in possession of true Sacraments, so Optatus teaches.' St. Optatus teaches (i) that Baptism in the Name of the Trinity is valid (v, 3) ; (2) that Baptism by heretics who falsified the Creed (and consequently the Baptismal Formal o\ ic.

Erratum Page 17, note i, line g, for v, 13 read v, 3.

16 THE HERETICS OF THE PAST

of their offences, as to remain, like lead, beneath the waters. But the Flesh of Christ, when It went down into and came up from the Jordan, ought not to have been spoken of by you as drowned. His Flesh was found to be more holy than the very Jordan, so that rather did It cleanse the water by Its entrance, than Itself was cleansed.

ix. Men- Moreover, I cannot pass over a matter in which Heretics I think you have acted craftily. In order that you

might lead the minds of your readers off the point, tcfncfgood or deceive them, after you had described Circumcision purpose. and the Flood, and after you had praised Baptism, you thought fit to raise, as it were from the dead, heretics who were already dead and, together with their heresies, buried in oblivion — and this although not only their errors, but even their names, were unknown throughout Africa — Marcion, Praxeas, Sabellius, Valentinus, and the rest up to the Cata- phrygae, all of whom were confuted in their time by Victorinus of Pettau,1 by Zephyrinus of Rome,2 by Tertullian of Carthage, and by other champions of the Catholic Church.3 Why, then, do you wage a war

DONATISTS POSSESSED THE SACRAMENTS 17

of our time ? For no reason, excepting that you, who are a schismatic of to-day, having nothing that you can prove against Catholics, have been pleased to enumerate so many heretics and their heresies, to spin out your somewhat wordy treatise.

Now there is another question : For what purpose x. The have you mentioned those who have not the Sacraments which you and we alike possess ? x Sound health does not clamour for medicine ; strength which is secure in itself does not need outside help ; truth has no lack of arguments ; it is the mark of a sick man to seek remedies ; it is the sign of a sluggard and a weakling to run in search of auxiliaries ; it belongs to a liar to rake up arguments.2

1 Mr. Sparrow Simpson, professing to paraphrase St. Optatus, writes as follows : ' Plainly these Donatists are schismatics. Although they are not in the Catholic Church, yet they are in possession of the same two Sacraments as the Catholics. They are not heretics. Heretics could not be in possession of true Sacraments, so Optatus teaches.' St. Optatus teaches (i) that Baptism in the Name of the Trinity is valid (v, 3) ; (2) that Baptism by heretics who falsified the Creed (and consequently the Baptismal Formula) is ' varium et f alsum ' (i, 12 ; cf. v, 13) ; (3) that certain heretics of this character, whom he specifies, .' have not the Sacraments,' also that they are ' separated from Catholic Sacraments ' (i, 10) ; (4) that heretics in general are without ' Sacramenta legalia ' (id.), and 'are strangers to the Sacraments of the Catholic Church' (i, 5). This exhausts the teaching of Optatus on this subject: Mr. Sparrow Simpson would himself call Nestorians and Eutychians heretics ; he would say rightly that though they possess true Sacraments, they can not use them lawfully: Mr. Sparrow Simpson allows himself to slip in the word two before Sacraments. St. Optatus nowhere writes of ' two ' or of ' the same two Sacraments.' (St. Augustine and the African Church Divisions, by the Rev. W. S. Sparrow Simpson, B.D., p. 44.)

2 If Parmenian had been in good faith, he would have confined himself to dealing with his living quarrel with Catholics. He was

c

i8 HERETICS LACK LAWFUL SACRAMENTS

To return to your book, you have said l that the Endowments 2 of the Church cannot be with heretics, and in this you have said rightly,3 for we know that the churches of each of the heretics have no lawful Sacraments, since they are adulteresses, without the rights of honest wedlock,4 and are rejected by Christ, who is the Bridegroom of One Church,5 as strangers.6 This He Himself makes clear in the Canticle of Canticles. When He praises One,1 He condemns the others because, besides the One which is the true Catholic Church, the others amongst the heretics are thought to be churches, but are not such.8 Thus He declares in the Canticle of Canticles (as we have already pointed out) that His Dove is One, and that

merely beating the air by arguing with dead heretics, none of whom were to be found at the time in Africa. All this was a virtual admission of the weakness of his cause, and a sign of intellectual dishonesty.

1 dixisti*

2 Dotes. Parmenian had maintained that there were six Notes or Endowments of the Church : Cathedra, Angelus, Spiritus, Fons, Sigillum and Umbilicus. St. Optatus recognises them all, except the last, and discourses on them in his second Book. (Cf. note 3, p. 64.)

3 et recte dixisti.

4 scimus enim haereticorum ecclesias singulorum, prostitutas, nullis legalibus Sacramentis, et sine iure honesti matrimonii esse. (Ziwsa has ' prostitutas, i.q. adulteras.'} The whole analogy is from valid marriage, in contrast with, and opposed to, an irregular union. Cf. iv, 8 : ' de haereticis apud quos sunt sacramentorum falsa connubia ' ; iv, 6 : ' haereticos dicit moechos et moechas Ecclesias illorum.' The True Church is the only Bride of Christ, who is ' the Bridegroom of One Church.'

5 qui est Sponsus Unius Ecclesiae.

G non necessarias. Cf . iii, i : ' Basilicas fecerunt non necessarias ' (where see note 3, p. 121).

7 Canticles vi, 8.

8 ceterae apud haereticos putantur esse sed non sunt.

THE CHURCH IS ONE 19

she is also x the chosen Spouse, and again 2 a garden enclosed, and a fountain sealed up.3

Therefore none of the heretics possess either the Keys, which Peter alone received,4 or the Ring,5 with which we read that the Fountain 6 has been sealed 7 ; nor is any heretic one of those to whom that Garden

1 tandem.

2 eandem (so PGb) hortum conclusum. RBv read here eundem. This reading is — as I venture to think somewhat strangely — followed by Ziwsa. Du Pin has eandem and omits any reference to the variant.

3 Canticles iv, 12.

4 Ut haerelici omnes neque claves habeant, quas solus Petrus accepit. These are no doubt Parmenian's own words, a quotation from his book. They depend not upon what immediately precedes them, but upon dixisti . . . et vecte dixisti, and are in the text adopted and endorsed by St. Optatus. This is made clear in i, 12: 'Bene revocasti claves ad Petrum.' It is hardly necessary to say that Peter received the Keys in the name of the Church.

5 This is exceedingly obscure, and means of illustrating it from other writings of the Fathers are so scanty as to be practically non existent. What is meant by the Ring ? Albaspinaeus understands it of Absolution, and quotes a passage, which he claims to be relevant, from Tertullian (De Pudicitia). Casaubon will not have this at all. He understands it, though with hesitation, of the Ring with which, at certain fixed periods of the year, the baptisteries were sealed. Du Pin understands it either of baptism, for which he also quotes from Tertullian (De Poenitentia) , or of the Creed. For the last interpretation Optatus himself may perhaps be quoted. He writes (ii, 8) : ' Sigillum integrum (id est Symbolum Catholicum) non habentes ad fontem verum aperire non possunt,' and (i, 12) : ' Bene sub- dixisti anulum iis, quibus aperire non licet ad fontem.' If, as is at least highly probable, anulus = sigillum, this settles the question. (Cf . Aug. in loan. Ixxx, 2 : ' Accedit verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum.' The Baptismal Formula is as it were the compen dium of the Creed.)

6 Du Pin understands the Fountain to be the Catholic Faith. More probably, however, it signifies the Baptismal Font, where that Faith was professed. (Cf. Note 3, p. 64, and Note i, p. 84.)

7 The reference is to Canticles iv, 12 : ' My spouse is a garden enclosed, a fountain sealed up.' We search, however, in vain for any reference to the Mystic Ring, with which it is said by Optatus that ' we read that the Fountain has been sealed.'

20 THE SINS OF HERESY AND SCHISM

belongs in which God plants His young trees.1 Con cerning these men, that which you have written at length (although it has nothing to do with our present business) is abundantly sufficient.

But to my surprise you have thought good to attach yourselves to those who certainly are schis matics, for in denying the Endowments of the Church both to those who are heretics, and also to schismatics, you have denied them to yourselves.

Amongst other things you have said that schismatics have been cut off, like branches, from the Vine, and that they have been reserved, marked off for punishment, like dried wood, for the fires of Hell.

But I see that you do not yet know that the Schism at Carthage was begun by your fathers. Search out the beginning of these affairs, and you will find that in associating heretics with schismatics, you have pronounced judgement against yourselves.

For it was not Caecilian 2 who went forth from Majorinus, your father's father,3 but it was Majorinus who deserted Caecilian ; nor was it Caecilian who separated himself from the Chair of Peter,4 or from

1 arbusculas (cf. i, 12; ii, n).

2 Caecilian was the Catholic Bishop of Carthage, whose con secration — as we shall soon see — was the occasion of the beginning of the Schism.

3 avo tuo. The line of the first Donatist Bishops of Carthage was Majorinus, Donatus, Parmenian.

4 Cathedra Petri. The manner in which St. Optatus goes first to the See of Peter and only in the second place to the local See of Carthage, in order to prove that the Donatists were in schism, is a fact of the greatest significance. It is quite clear that, in the eyes of Optatus, any bishop out of communion with the See of Rome was ipso facto schismatic. Otherwise, the reference to the Chair of Peter in this connection is utterly meaningless and unintelligible.

BEGINNING OF THE DONATIST SCHISM 21

the Chair of Cyprian l — but Majorinus,2 on whose Chair you sit — a Chair which had no existence 3 before Majorinus himself. Since then there can be no possible doubt that these things have thus happened, and that you are the heirs of Betrayers and schismatics, I am, my brother Parmenian, sufficiently surprised — seeing that you are yourself a schismatic — that you should have thought it advisable to join schismatics to heretics. If, however, these are your principles, and you wish to do so, heap up together 4 what you have laid down only a little before. For you have said that ' It could not be that one who was stained should wash away sins in a baptism-that-is-not-Baptism,5 that one who is unclean should cleanse, that one who trips men up 6 should raise them, that one who is lost should free,

Moreover, it is evident that Optatus expects the Donatists immedi ately to recognise the force of this argument. Without hesitation he appeals to them as follows : Cum haec ita gesta esse manifestissime constet. Now the facts which are. here stated to be ' most clearly certain ' are that Caecilian did not desert either the Apostolic See of Peter or the local See of Cyprian, and that consequently Majorinus, his rival, though consecrated by an influential party to the See of Carthage, ' began with himself.' Parmenian would no doubt have angrily denied that Majorinus was out of communion with the See of Cyprian ; he could not possibly deny that Majorinus was out of communion with the See of Peter. This, in the eyes of Optatus, was decisive.

1 In Cathedra Petri vel Cypriani. Cf. ii, 4 : 'In Cathedra Petri quam nescio si vel oculis novit [Macro bius].' For the dis tinction between the Chair of Peter and that of Cyprian, cf. Augus tine (II. De Baplismo cont. Donat. i, 2) : ' Et si distat Cathedramm gratia, una est tamen Martyrum gloria [Petri et Cypriani].'

2 Majorinus was the first Donatist bishop. He wa.s, however, merely a figurehead, whose personality was lost very early in that of his successor, Donatus the Great, the immediate predecessor of Parmenian.

3 origincm. * cumula ilia. RBv read cum ilia. 5 in falso baptismate. G omits in. 6 subplantator.

22 THE EARLY HERETICS

that one who is guilty should give pardon, that one who has been condemned should absolve/ 1

All these things might well be true of heretics alone, since they have falsified the creed,2 for amongst them one has said that there are two Gods,3 though God is One ; another wishes the Father to be recognised in the Person of the Son 4 ; another robs the Son of God of His Flesh,5 through which the world has been reconciled to God, and there are yet others of the same kind, who admittedly are separated from Catholic Sacraments.6 Wherefore you should regret that you have coupled schismatics with such men as these, for, when you thought that you were attacking others, you failed to observe how wide is the gulf between schis matics and heretics, and turned the sword of judge ment upon yourself.

1 Cf. i, 12 ; ii, 20.

2 quia falsaverunt Symbolum. G reads qui for quia. Heretics who falsified the Creed would also falsify the Baptismal formula. Consequently, Baptism conferred by them would be invalid, since they did not baptise in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. (Cf. note i, p. 17.) Mr. Sparrow Simpson writes (op. cit. p. 44) : ' Heresy is surrender of the Creed,' and in a footnote gives ' qui falsaverunt Symbolum.' Heresy, according to Optatus, is something worse even than ' surrender.' It is ' falsification,' the substitution of false teaching for true. And so has it ever been with heretics in every age. Luther, for example, was not content with ' surrendering ' the doctrines of the supreme authority of the Church in the interpretation of Holy Scripture, and of salvation through ' Faith working by Charity.' He ' falsified ' them, substituting the doctrines of ' Private Judgement,' and of ' Justification by Faith only.'

3 This was said by Marcion (cf. iv, 5 ; v, 3) — also by Cerdon.

4 With confusion of Personality (cf . iv, 5, note on Praxeas, note 2, p. 190).

5 Valentinus (cf. iv, 5 ; 8) and the other Docetae.

6 a Sacvamentis Catholicis alieni esse noscu-ntur. Cf. note 4, p. 10, and note i, p. 17.

CATHOLICISM 23

This is the reason that you do not see which is the Holy Church,1 and have in this way made confusion of everything.2

Catholicism is constituted by a simple and true XL The

marks of

understanding in the law,3 by an unique and most theCatho true mystery,4 and by unity of minds. But schism, a£d Offc ' after the bond of peace has been broken, is brought Schlsm- into existence through passion, is nourished by hatred, is strengthened by envy and dissensions, so that the Catholic Mother is abandoned, whilst her unfilial children go forth outside and separate themselves (as you have done) from the root of Mother Church — cut off by the shears of their hatred — and wickedly depart in rebellion. They are not able, however, to do anything new, or different 5 from that which long ago they learned from their Mother.

1 quae sit Sancta Ecclesia.

2 sic omnia miscuisti.

3 Catholicam facit simplex et verus intellectus in lege. Harnack quotes this passage and understands by lege the two Testaments (History of Dogma, vol. v, p. 43), but states elsewhere that the word lex is used more than 100 years before the time of Optatus, of the Apostolic tradition preserved by the Roman Church, and Lex Catholica is a common expression in the documents placed by St. Optatus in his Appendix, so that the meaning of lege in this passage is not quite certain. Also it is doubtful whether in lege is the true reading here. PG have it, but Bvb give intelligere, R has intellegere. Ziwsa deserts P and prints intellegere ( = ' a true and simple under standing points out ' etc.). Casaubon is inclined to reject intelligere. He evidently had not seen in lege. Du Pin, though he had not the advantage of seeing P, has the merit (I think) of printing in lege. He boldly relied on G.

4 singular e ac verissimum sacr amentum. Du Pin explains ' sacramentum symboli,' and Albaspinaeus ' unum symbolum, una Fidei regula.'

6 novum aliquid aut aliud,i.e. as long as they remain schismatics only — until they become heretics also.

24 THE SIN OF HERESY

xn. TO But heretics, exiles from the truth, deserters of the

to the sound and most true Creed,1 corrupted by their wicked

between e opinions and led astray from the bosom of Holy Church,

andetschis- reckoning nothing of their noble birth, in order to

matics. deceive the ignorant and ill-informed, have been pleased

to be born of themselves. And they, who for a long

time had been nourished on living food — which not

assimilated has turned to corruption 2 — have by

impious disputations vomited forth deadly poisons,

to the destruction of their wretched dupes.

You see, then, my brother Parmenian, that none but heretics only — who are cut off from the home of truth — possess ' various kinds of false Baptisms with which he, who is stained, cannot wash, nor the unclean cleanse, nor the destroyer raise, nor he, who is lost, free, nor the guilty man give pardon, nor the condemned man absolve.' 3

Rightly hast thou closed the Garden to heretics ; rightly hast thou claimed the Keys for Peter 4 ; rightly hast thou denied the right of cultivating the young trees to those who are certainly shut out 5 from the

1 sani et verissimi Symboli desertores. Optatus here terms heretics symboli desertores ; later on (iii, 8) he will term schismatics caritatis desertores. For sani cf. vestis sana (iii, 9) ; lex in Deo sana fuit (vii, i).

2 corruptela malae digestionis.

3 This is a quotation from Parmenian' s own "words in his book. (Cf. pp. 21, 22.)

4 Perhaps Parmenian held the view enunciated by Tertullian (De Pud. xxi, 9), after he had fallen into heresy, that the keys had been given to Peter only, not to the Church. Perhaps he held that they had passed from Peter to the Donatist Church. The Donatists, it will be remembered, had their Antipope.

5 alienos. St. Optatus here says that heretics are alieni ab hortulo et a Paradiso Dei ; later (ii, 6) he uses the same word (alienum), in the same sense, of schismatics.

THE TRADITORES 25

garden and from the paradise of God l ; rightly hast thou withdrawn the Ring from those to whom it is not allowed to open the Fountain. But to you schis matics, although you are not in the Catholic Church,2 these things 3 cannot be denied, since you have shared true Sacraments with us.4

Wherefore, since all these things are justly denied to heretics, why did you think well to deny them to yourselves as well, who clearly are schismatics, for you have gone outside ? For our part we were willing that in this matter heretics alone should be condemned, but so far as lies with you, you have chosen to strike yourselves, together with them, in one condemnation.5

But now (to return to the order upon which we xin. The have determined), in the first place listen to the of the* ' names of those who were Betrayers and learn more distinctly who were the originators of the schism. It is certain that two evil things have been perpetrated in Africa — even the worst of all 6 — the first — Betrayal, the second — Schism. Both these crimes were com mitted, in one period of time, by the same wicked men.

1 i.e. the Church. Cf. (ii, n) ecclesiam paradisum esse dixisti, in quo horto Deus plantat arbusculas. We see that St. Optatus when writing hortulo et paradiso is joining them as synonyms (cf. note 3, p. 8).

2 quamvis in Catholica non sitis.

3 The Ring (= the Creed) and the Fountain ( = the Font). Cf. note 6, p. 19.

4 quia nobiscum vera et communia Sacramento, traxistis.

6 quantum in te est, etiam vos ipsos una sententia ferire voluisti.

6 duo mala et pessima. Cf. ' Scisma summum malum ' (i, 21) and ' Aestimo vos non negare unitatem summum bonum esse ' (iii, 4).

26 THE PERSECUTION BY DIOCLETIAN

You ought, therefore, my brother Parmenian, to learn that of which you are understood to be ignorant ; for sixty years and more have passed since the storm of persecution spread abroad throughout the whole of Africa 1 — a persecution which made some Martyrs, others Confessors, whilst not a few it laid low in a terrible death,2 leaving unharmed those who lay in hiding.

Why should I make mention of laymen who at that time were supported by no ecclesiastical dignity ? Why name a host of clerics 3 ? Or deacons in the third,4 or priests in the second degree of the sacerdotium, when the heads and chiefs of all,5 some Bishops of that

1 Optatus refers here to the persecution under Diocletian, which began in the month of February A.D. 303, and ended in the West in 305.

2 prostravit in mortem funestam. Sc. the death of the soul through apostasy.

3 ministros.

4 The application of the term sacerdotium to deacons cannot, I think, be found anywhere in antiquity excepting in this passage. Not many years after the death of St. Optatus, the Fathers at the Council of Carthage made the following distinction : ' When a deacon is ordained, it is the Bishop alone (without the imposition of hands of other priests) who blesses him, placing his hand upon his head, because he is consecrated, not to the sacerdotium, but to the ministry of service (ministerium) .' The word sacerdos was used of either bishops or priests, episcopus being reserved for the first degree, and presbyter for the second degree, of the sacred ministry. It is very curious to read these words in the Canon Law (Dist. 31 Can. 14) ' Aliter se Orientalium traditio habet Ecclesiarum, aliter huius Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae. Nam illarum sacerdotes diaconi et subdiaconi matrimonio copulantur. Istius autem Ecclesiae vel Occidentalium nullus sacerdotum a subdiacono usque ad episcopum licentiam habet coniugium sortiendi.' As far as I can discover, this is the only instance of the word sacerdos being applied to subdeacons.

6 ipsi apices et principes omnium, (P omits omnium.) The Episcopate is the apex of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. From the

PURPURIUS THE MURDERER 27

period,1 in order to purchase for themselves, at the loss of Life Eternal, some very short prolongation of this un certain day, impiously betrayed the records 2 of the law of God ? Amongst whom were Donatus of Mascula, Victor of Rusicca, Merinus from the Baths of Tibilis, Donatus of Calama, and Purpurius of Limata, the murderer 3 — who, when he was questioned on the charge of having killed his sister's sons in the prison of Mileum,4 confessed it with the words : ' Yes, I did kill them, and not them alone do I kill, but whoever shall act against me/ And Menalius who pretended that he had a pain in his eyes, and trembled at the idea of meeting his own people,5 for fear lest it should be proved against him by his fellow-citizens that he had offered incense to idols.

After the persecution, these Bishops and others XIV- The

. , ,, . , , acts of the

whom we shall soon show to have been the first leaders Council of your schism, gathered together on the thirteenth of of Qrta'

point of view of the Sacrament of Order, the Bishop of Beneventum is the equal of the Bishop of Rome.

1 aliqui Episcopi illius temporis. RBvb read illis temporibus.

8 instrumenta. This word is used by Tertullian and others for a codex containing several books. Thus Instrumentum loannis = a collection of St. John's Epistles. Novum Instrumentum = the New Testament.

3 homicida.

4 Mileum, also called Milevis, the town where St. Optatus was Bishop.

5 ad consessum suorum procedcre trepidavit. Cf. ' consessum vitant ' (i, 4). Suorum may mean his Brother Bishops, in which case consessum should be here translated a Synod. RBGv read consensum, but this is manifestly a mistake ; it is corrected in the margin of G.

28 THE COUNCIL OF CIRTA

May x at the town of Cirta 2 — in the house of Urbanus Carisius — for the Basilicas had not yet been restored. This is attested by the writings of Nundinarius,3 then a deacon, and is proved by the age of the parchments, which I can show to anyone really in doubt, for in the Appendix to these books I have subjoined the whole number 4 of these documents to certify the truth of my statements. These Bishops, on being questioned by Secundus of Tigisis, acknowledged that they had been Betrayers.5 And, as Secundus 6 himself was taunted by Purpurius not for having escaped, but for having been set free after he had remained for a long time amongst the soldiers, they all stood up 7

1 die Hi Iduum Maiarum. St. Augustine tells us that the official Acts of the Council of Cirta had iv Nonas Martii. Du Pin proves that the true date was Hi Nonas Martii. The year was A.D. 305. These Bishops met to choose and consecrate a successor to Paulus, who had behaved so badly during the persecution under Diocletian two years previously (cf. Appendix, p. 353). Apparently Paulus had died in the interval (cf. S. Aug. c. Cresc. iii, 27-30).

2 At this period the three chief governmental divisions of Africa were (i) 'The Proconsular' or Africa proper, with Carthage for its capital, (2) Numidia, (3) Mauritania. Cirta, soon to be refounded under the name of Constantine, which it still retains, was the capital of Numidia. The ecclesiastical division into provinces was roughly, but not exactly, coincident with the secular.

3 For many references to Nundinarius, see Appendix, Gesta apud Zenophilum, pp. 347-381. Cf. Aug. con. Crescon. iii, 20 ; Brev. Coll. iii, 17.

4 Harum plenitudinem rerum. The full evidence. Half of this appendix has unfortunately been lost. (Cf. Preface to Appendix, p. 322.) For Acts of Council of Cirta see Appendix, pp. 416-419.

5 See Appendix, p. 417.

6 Secundus was Primate of Numidia and President of the Council of Cirta.

7 iam omnes erecti caeperant murmur are. RBvb have heretici. Casaubon, who had not seen erecti, points out that heretici is contra mentem Optati and suggests : ' haeret ei,' caeperant murmur are =' they began to mutter " It sticks to him " ' — i.e. It fits him. It

THE FATHERS OF THE SCHISM 29

and began to mutter that he had been set free only because he betrayed the sacred books. Then Secundus, fearing their temper, received advice from his brother's son, Secundus the Less, to remit an affair of this character to God.1 The others, who had not been accused, that is to say, Victor of Garba, Felix of Rotarium and Nabor of Centurio, were then con sulted. They said that a case of this kind ought to be reserved to the Lord. Then said Secundus ' Sit down all.' They all replied ' Thanks be to God,' and sat down. You see, therefore, my brother Par- menian, that it is quite clear who were the Betrayers.

It was not long after this, that these very persons XJ/ The whom I have mentioned, of the character I have took its described, Betrayers, men who had offered incense to idols, and murderers,2 proceeded to Carthage, and there, although Caecilian was already the Bishop, made the Schism by consecrating Majorinus — on whose Chair, Parmenian, you sit. And since I have shown, that men who were guilty of Betrayal were your first fathers, it follows that Betrayers were also the originators of your Schism.

belongs to him — the charge is true.' This emendation is an example of Casaubon's extraordinary ingenuity. But erecti (PG) is certainly the true reading and would no doubt have been at once accepted by Casaubon (had he known of it) on its own merits, independently of the authority given it by P. So reluctantly we have to sacrifice ' haeret ei.' Du Pin naturally takes erecti from G and observes of heretici ' criticos torsit.' But none of the critics, in his ' torture,' thought of erecti.

1 ut talent caussam Deo servaret. This was the recognised expression when Bishops refused to give judgement, but remitted (or reserved) it to God.

2 homicidae,

cone-

3o THE DIVISION IN AFRICA

In order to make this matter clear and beyond doubt to all, we shall have to prove from what root the branches of error have stretched themselves forth to the present day, and from what fountain this your rivulet of noxious water,1 creeping stealthily along, has flowed down even to our times. We shall have to point out whence, and where, and from whom this evil of schism has arisen ; what were the causes which met together 2 to produce it ; who were the persons who effected it 3 ; who were the authors of this wicked thing ; who fostered it ; by whom appeal was made to the Emperor, that he should judge between the parties ; who were they that sat in judgement ; where the Council was held ; what were its decrees.

The question is about a Division. Now in Africa, as in other parts of the world, the Church was One, before it was divided by those who consecrated Majorinus — whose Chair you have inherited, and now occupy.4 We shall have to see who has remained in the root, with the whole world 5 ; who went forth ; who sits on a second chair, which had no existence before the Schism 6 ; who has raised altar against altar ; who has consecrated a Bishop when another was in undisturbed possession ; who it is that lies under the judgement of John, the Apostle, when he declared that many Anti-Christs should go forth without,

' because they were not of us, for if they had been of us they would have remained with us.' 7

rivulus iste maligni liquoris. 2 quae convenerint caussae.

quae fuerint operatae personae. (Cf. opeyarii, note 2, p. 13.) cuius tu haereditariam cathedram sederis.

cum toto orbe, sc. Catholico. 6 Cf. S. Cyprian. Ep. xliii.

i John ii, 19.

THE WOMAN LUCILLA 31

Therefore, he who was unwilling to remain with his brethren in unity 1 has followed the heretics, and gone forth without, as an Anti-Christ.

No one is unaware that the Schism, after the con- xvi. The secration of Caecilian, was effected at Carthage through LuciiTa °J a certain mischief-making woman named Lucilla. When the Church was still in tranquillity, before her Peace had been disturbed by the storms of persecution, this woman could not put up with the rebuke which she received from the archdeacon Caecilian. It was said that she kissed a bone of some martyr or other — if he was a martyr — before she received the spiritual Food and Drink. Having then been corrected for thus touching — before she touched the Sacred Chalice — the bone of a dead man (if he was a martyr, at least he had not yet been acknowledged as such2), she went away in confusion, full of wrath. This was the woman upon whom, whilst she was angry and afraid that she might fall under the discipline of the Church, on a sudden, the storm of persecution broke.

It was at this time also that a deacon called Felix .

Mensunus

who had been summoned before the tribunals on when sum- account of a much spoken-of letter which he had *thTcourt

entrusted

1 in uno (cf. John). JSntsof

8 necdum vindicate . Catholics in Africa were strictly forbidden the Church to honour with religious worship any martyrs who had not been to certain recognised as such (id est canonised = vindicate] . There were some, seniors- who in a fit of fanatical enthusiasm had surrendered voluntarily to the persecutors, thus bringing death upon themselves. Those who had been guilty of this practice, which the Church never tolerated, far from being considered martyrs, were looked upon by Catholics as disobedient and self-destroyers.

32 THE ACTION OF MENSURIUS

written concerning the usurping Emperor,1 fearing his danger, is said to have lain hidden in the house of Bishop Mensurius. When Mensurius publicly refused to give him up, an account of the matter was despatched. A rescript came back that unless Mensurius would surrender the deacon Felix, he should be himself sent to the palace.2 On receiving this summons 3 he found himself in no small difficulty, for the Church possessed very many gold and silver ornaments, which he could neither hide under ground, nor take away with him. So he confided them to the care of some of the seniors, whom he believed to be worthy of trust, not, however, before he had made an inventory, which he is said to have given to a certain old woman. He charged her, that, when peace was restored to Christians, she should hand this over, if he himself did not return home, to whomsoever she found sitting on the Bishop's Chair. He went away and pleaded his cause ; he was commanded to return, but was not able to reach Carthage.4

xvm. The storm of persecution passed over, and sub-

cratiorTof" sided. By the disposition of God, Maxentius sent

pardon, and liberty was restored to Christians. Botrus thaC?"~The and Celestius — so it is said — wishing to be consecrated cause^and Bishops at Carthage, arranged that, without inviting 5

ningof the j ^g iyYanno imperatore. These events took place in 311, when Maxentius, who had made himself Emperor in Italy in 306, had obtained possession of Africa. Under Constantine he was regularly referred to as tyrannus.

2 adpalatium dingey etur. Dirigere in late Latin = to send.

3 conventus.

4 He died on the way.

5 operam dederunt ul absentibus Numidis. Literally ' in the

THE SEPARATION FROM CAECILIAN 33

the Numidians, only the neighbouring bishops should be asked to perform the ceremony at Carthage.1 Then, by the vote of the whole people, Caecilian was chosen, and was consecrated Bishop, Felix of Autumna laying his hand upon him. Botrus and Celestius were disappointed of their hope. The inventory of the gold and silver, as had been ordered by Mensurius, was handed over, in the presence of witnesses, to Caecilian, who was now in possession of the See. The above- mentioned seniors were summoned ; but they had swallowed up in the jaws of their avarice, as booty, that which had been entrusted to their keeping. When they were commanded to make restitution, they with drew from communion with Caecilian. The ambitious intriguers, who had failed to obtain their consecration, did likewise. Lucilla, too, that influential, mischief- making woman,2 who had before been unwilling to brook discipline, together with all her retainers, separated herself from her Bishop. Thus wickedness produced its effect through the meeting together 3 of three different causes and sets of persons.

absence of the Numidians.' But the point is that Botrus and Celestius chose not to invite them. This was part of what they ' arranged ' (operam dederunt}.

1 The Bishop of Carthage was not only Metropolitan of the province of Africa Proconsularis, but also Primate of all Africa, including Numidia, Byzacium and the two Mauritanias. As the confines of Numidia came close to Carthage, it was customary for the Bishops of that province to come to Carthage for the election. The other provinces were too far off. On this occasion only the nearest Bishops of Africa Proconsularis were assembled. But the vote of the clergy and people of Carthage, approved by a number of Bishops of the province, sufficed. The absence of the Numidians did not affect the validity of the election.

2 potens et factiosa femina.

3 tribus convenientibus. Cf. ' quae convenerint caussae (' i, 15.)

34 THE TRIPLE CAUSE OF THE SCHISM

In this way it came to pass, that at that time the Schism was brought to birth by the anger of a dis- grace(l woman, was fed by ambition, and received its

Ma?onnusf stren§tn ^rom avarice.1

against It was by these three that the accusations were

concocted against Caecilian, so that his Consecration might be declared void. They sent to Secundus of Tigisis 2 to come to Carthage, whither the Betrayers, of whom we have already made mention, proceeded. They received hospitality — not from Catholics, at whose request Caecilian had been consecrated 3 — but

1 Scisma igitur illo tempore confusae mulieris iracundia peperit, ambitus nutrivit, avaritia roboravit. Here we find in combination the lust of the flesh — (the shameless woman) — the pride of life — (worldly ambition) — the lust of the eyes — (the love of gold) — as the three co-operating causes of the Donatist Schism. Before the mind of an English reader another sad schism will come with extra ordinary vividness. History has repeated itself indeed — has shown how the anger of another shameless woman (also potens et factiosa femina, also in the end confusa), co-operating with the ambition of worldly ecclesiastics, together with the lust of the eyes and the lust of gold of a monarch, destroyed that ' parting gift of Peace ' from Christ our Lord, which had reigned amongst all English Christians for more than a thousand years, and produced a Division, over which we grieve to-day. If Optatus might, without breach of charity, recall the memory of Lucilla, Majorinus, Botrus and Celestius, we too may, in like manner, without reproach, remember Anne, Cranmer, Henry and Elizabeth.

St. Augustine tells us (Ep. clxii) that a woman like Lucilla was subsequently the cause of a schism within a schism — of a later schism amongst the Donatists themselves.

2 Because he was Primate of Numidia. In the African Provinces (excepting Proconsular Africa) the senior Bishop was Primate, whatever his See.

3 St. Optatus does not mention the fact that Secundus had seventy Bishops in his Council. But St. Augustine (Ep. xliii, 3, 7) points out how hasty was Secundus : ' He should have had all the more fear of violating the peace of unity, on account of the greatness and fame of Carthage. If an evil started there, it vrould pour

CAECILIAN'S CHALLENGE 35

from the avaricious, from the ambitious, from those who had been unable to govern their tempers. Not one of them went to the Basilica, where all the people of Carthage had assembled with Caecilian.1 Then Caecilian demanded :

' If there is anything to be proved against me, let the accuser come out and prove it.'

Nothing could at that time be got up against him by all these enemies of his ; they imagined, however, that he might be blackened by his Consecrator being falsely alleged to have been a Betrayer. So Caecilian gave a second demand — that, since — so they thought -Felix had bestowed nothing upon him, they should themselves ordain him, as if he were still a deacon.2

itself over the whole of Africa, since it was near Italy and of great celebrity. For this very reason its Bishop had a very great position (non medwcns utique auctoritatis) , nor need he pay attention to the numbers of enemies who conspired against him, when he saw himself in union, by letters of communion, both with the Roman Church, in which the princedom of the Apostolic Chair has always flourished (in qua semper Apostolicae Cathedrae viguit principals}— and with the rest of the world— whence the Gospel came to Africa and where he was ready to plead his cause, should his adversaries attempt to alienate those churches from him.' We may observe that here we see once again the two proofs of a position of ecclesiastical security, quite distinct, but actually inseparable, firstly to be in communion with the Apostolic See of Rome, secondly to be in communion with all other Catholic Bishops throughout the world.

* ad Basilicam, ubi cum Caeciliano tota civica frequentia fuerat.

- tanquam adhuc diaconum. Caecilian here argued after this fashion : If you look upon me as still a deacon, on the ground of my ordination as priest and consecration as Bishop having been void, in consequence of Felix being a Betrayer, come and ordain me yourselves. You ought to do this, on your own principles since you cannot deny that I was duly elected to the See. Needless to say, this was a challenge thrown out in sarcasm, which would never under any circumstances have been acted upon by Caecilian, even though it had been accepted by his adversaries. But of this

D 2

36 CAECILIAN'S TRIUMPH

Then Purpurius, relying upon his usual ribaldry, thus spoke, as though Caecilian had been his sister's son * :

' Let him stand forth as if he were to be consecrated Bishop, and let his head be well smacked in Penance.' 2

When the bearing of all this was seen, the whole Church [of Carthage] retained Caecilian, in order not to hand itself over to murderers.3

The alternatives were, either that he should be expelled from his See as guilty, or that the Faithful should communicate with him as innocent.

The church was crowded with people ; Caecilian was sitting in his episcopal Chair ; the altar was set up in its own place 4 — that very altar upon which

he knew that there was no danger. Yet then was their opportunity, if they really had possessed any arguments against the validity of the election of Caecilian to the See of Carthage. But they could only take refuge in scurrility and insult.

1 Cf. ' Qui interrogatus de filiis sororis suae, quod eos necasse diceretur ' (i, 13).

2 quassetur illi caput de Poenitentia. According to the ancient discipline of the Church hands were laid upon the heads of those who were admitted to Penance, but it was strictly forbidden to lay hands thus upon the clergy, who had received the imposition of hands in Ordination (cf. ii, 24 and Augustine Ep. 1). So now the ribald Bishop is represented as saying : ' Let him come, we will lay hands on him. We will box his ears for him.'

3 latronibus. Latro in Optatus seems always to signify a murderer. (Cf. ii, 19 ; ii, 21 ; iii, 5 ; iii, 10 Latronem aut furem ; v, 10, also Tertullian, De Pudicitia : ' Omne latrocinium extra silvam homicidium est.')

4 erat altare loco suo. (Altare, sc. Episcopi.) African altars appear to have been in the fourth century in general wooden and moveable (for patterns see Dom CafoTol'sDictionnaireArchtologique, and Smith and Cheetham's Dictionary of Christian Antiquities). ' In its own place ' — i.e. in the Cathedral where the Catholic people had been accustomed for generations to see their Bishop say Mass. Optatus gives three visible signs, recognised by all the Faithful, showing that Caecilian was the acknowledged Bishop of Carthage. He was in possession of (a) the Cathedral Church (Basilica), (b) the

THE CONSECRATION OF MAJORINUS 37

Bishops acknowledged by all * had in past times offered sacrifice — Cyprian, Carpophorius,2 Lucian and the rest.

In this manner they went forth,3 and altar was raised against altar ; and there was an unlawful consecration ; and Majorinus, who had been lector when Caecilian was archdeacon4 — Majorinus, a member of the household of Lucilla — at her instigation, and through her bribes — was consecrated Bishop by Betrayers, who in the Numidian Council had (as we have already said) acknowledged their crimes and granted pardon to one another. It is, therefore, clear that both the Betrayers who consecrated, and Majorinus who was consecrated, went forth from the Church.5

Meanwhile, out of the fountain of their own crimes, xx. Th which had gushed forth amongst them in channels 6 of many kinds of wickedness, they thought that a single

one — that of Betrayal — might be spared 7 with which against

r ~ .,. Felix, the

to calumniate the consecrator of Caecilian. For, since, conse- as they foresaw, slander would not be able to occupy herself at the same time with two charges of a similar

Episcopal Chair (Cathedra episcopalis), (c) the Altar of his prede cessors in the See.

1 pacifici. Bishops when Unity (Pax) prevailed. Cf. vii, 5 : ' dum docerent pacem, adhuc pacifici vocabantur . . . dividendo Ecclesiam noluerunt esse pacifici.'

2 Carpophorius. This name is found only in PG.

3 Sic exitum est foras. In this way Majorinus and his party went forth from the Church.

* qui lector in diaconio Caeciliani fuerat. 5 exisse de Ecclesia.

8 multorum flagitiorum venis. Cf. ' ne male fecundae vena periret aquae.' (Ov. Trist.)

7 de fonte . . . unum traditionis convicium derivandum esse.

38 DONATIST CALUMNIES

nature, they endeavoured to blacken the life of another man, that by this means they might consign their own crimes to silence. And, through fear that they should themselves be convicted by the innocent, they strove to convict the innocent instead. To this end they distributed on all sides a letter,1 inspired by their hatred.2 (This letter we have placed, together with the other Acts, in the Appendix.3)

As they were still at Carthage, they sent their letters before them,4 that by untruthful reports they might plant their falsehood in the ears of all. Rumour spread the lie broadcast amongst the people. Thus, whilst these calumnies were noised abroad about one man only, their own most certain crimes were hidden away in silence.

It often comes to pass that sin is blushed for, but at that period there was no one for whom to blush, since, with the exception of a few Catholics, all had sinned,5 so the wickedness which had been committed by many wore the cloak of innocence. The shame of Betrayal, which admittedly had been committed by Donatus of Mascula and the others whom we have mentioned, seemed but of small account. To this Betrayal they added the enormous wickedness of schism.6

xxi. Therefore, my brother Parmenian, you see these

u°therevu two accusations — so evil, so terrible— of Betrayal and

of Schism,

of which ! litteras.

the Dona- 2 nvore, RB have liliore, Cochlaeus conjectures suo ore.

° This letter has been lost (cf< APPendix' P- 322).

4 praecesserunt se epistulis suis.

5 peccaverant, sc. had been guilty of Betrayal. 8 ingens fiagitium scismatis.

SCHISM THE CHIEF EVIL 39

Schism proved against your chiefs. Acknowledge, though late, that you, in attacking others, have fallen upon your own people. And whilst it is certain that those who went before you worked this second abomina tion, you too strive to follow them in their sin-stained footsteps, so that you also have been doing for long, and are even now doing, that of which your Fathers were guilty in the beginning of the Schism.1 They in their day broke peace ; you now banish unity.2 It can be said with reason of your Fathers as well as of yourselves, that, if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the ditch.3 A raging malice blinded your Fathers' eyes ; envy has robbed yours of sight. Even you will not by any means be able to deny that schism is the supreme evil.4

Yet, without fear, you have imitated Dathan, Abiram and Korah, your shameless teachers,5 and you have been unwilling to keep before your eyes the fact that God has both forbidden this wickedness, and gravely punished it when it has been committed. Moreover, remember that the way in which sins are either forgiven or punished shows that there are degrees of guilt.

Now, by the Commandments of God, three things are, amongst others, forbidden by Him. Thou shalt

1 in titulo scismatis.

2 exterminates unilatem. This expression is repeated in vii, 5.

3 Matt, xv, 4 ; Luke vii, 39.

4 scisma summum malum esse el vos negare minime poteritis (cf. i, 13). St. Augustine writes (con. Ep. Par men. i, 4) : ' sacri- legium scismatis quod omnia scelera supergreditur ' ; and (id. ii, 8) : ' Quod autem vos a totius orbis communione separates videmus — quod scelus et maximum et manifestum est.' (Cf. note 4, p. 40.)

5 perditos magistros vestros. Perditos = abandoned, lost to all sense of shame. Cf. ' perditorum multitudinem ' (vi, i).

40 THE GUILT OF MURDER AND IDOLATRY

not kill ; thou shalt not go after 1 strange gods, and summing up the commands,2 thou shalt not commit schism.

Let us see concerning these three, what should be punished, and what it may be lawful to pardon.

Murder of kith is the chief sin.3 Nevertheless, God did not strike Cain dead in his guilt, but declared that He would punish any man who might be his murderer. In the city of Nineve one hundred and twenty thousand inhabitants sacrilegiously followed after strange gods, but when, by the preaching of Jonah the prophet, God had declared His anger, a short period of fasting, together with prayer, obtained their pardon. Let us see whether any such forgiveness was granted to those who first of all ventured to divide the people of God.4

God had placed over so many thousands of children of Israel, from whose necks His Divine Providence had cast away the yoke of servitude, one Priest, holy Aaron. But his ministers, coveting and lawlessly usurping a priesthood to which they had no right, and

1 non ibis post.

2 in capitibus mandatorum. Cf. Romans xiii, 9, where all the sins against our neighbour are summed up as sins against the command to love one's neighbour as oneself. Schism is pre eminently a sin against the neighbour from whom the schismatic separates himself.

3 parricidium est principale delictum.

* Cf. S. Aug. (De Baptis. con. Donat. i, 8) : ' Itaque illi quos baptizant sanant a vulnere idololatriae, gravius feriunt vulnere scismatis. Idololatras enim in populo Dei gladius interemit, scismaticos autem terrae hiatus absorbuit.' No one can say that the Fathers of the Church underestimated the guilt of schism ! It must always be borne in mind that, according to the constant teaching of the Fathers, sin in the Christian, a member of the Body of Christ, is before God far more heinous than sin in the unbaptised. (See St. Thomas, i, 2, qu. cvi, art. 2 ad. 2 ; 2, 2, qu. x, art. 3 ad. 3.)

THE GUILT OF SCHISM 41

leading astray a part of the people, imitated the sacred rites, and placed more than two hundred of their fol lowers (who were to perish with them) — censers in their hands — before the people whom they had led astray. God, to whom schism is displeasing, could not see this and let it pass ; they had, after a certain fashion, declared war against God, as if there were a second God,1 who would accept a second sacrifice. Therefore God was wrathful with a mighty wrath, on account of the schism which had been made, and what He had not done in punishment of the sacrilegious and the fratricide,2 that He did do in punishment of schismatics. The army of ministers stood in array, and the sacri legious host that (together with its forbidden sacrifices) was to perish in an instant. The opportunity for penance was denied them and withdrawn, for this was not the kind of sin that should deserve pardon. The earth was commanded to hunger after its food. Forthwith it opened its jaws for those who had divided the people, and with eager mouth swallowed them up that had despised the commandments of God. Within the space of one moment the earth opened to devour them, seized her victims, was shut once again, and, so that they might not appear to reap any benefit from the suddenness of their death, it was not allowed these men who were unworthy to live even to die. Of a sudden they were shut in the prison of Hell, and were buried there before they died.

And yet you wonder that something of similar severity has been done against you — you who either cause or approve schism, although you see here what

1 Cf. iii, ii ; v, 3. - in parricidam.

42 QUID CHRISTIANIS CUM REGIBUS ?

they, who compassed the first schism, deserved to suffer ! Or is it because punishment of this kind has now ceased, that on this account you claim innocence for yourself and for your party ? In each of these occurrences, God has set forth a model by examples l of the punishment that will come to their imitators. The first sins He has put an end to with punishment, as an example for all time. The sins that come after He will reserve for His Judgement. What have you to say to this, you, who having usurped the name of the Church, both secretly foster and without shame defend the schism ?

TheLetter * kear ^^ some of your party, in their love of of the disputation, produce documents. But we have to ask

Donatist , . . r ,, ,, - . ...

Bishops which of these are worthy of trust, which are in Emperor accordance with reason, which agree with the truth 2 ?

^ may ^e ^^ Your documents — if indeed you have IskiCforhey any — w^ ^e found to be stained with falsehoods. judges of Our documents are proved to be true by the rival arguments and pleadings of the parties, by the final judgements, and by the letters of Constantine. With regard to that which you ask of us :

' What have Christians to do with kings, or Bishops with the palace ? '

If it be a crime 3 to be acquainted with kings, the whole of the odium falls upon you, for your

1 exemplorum posuit formam.

- confibulent. RBG have confabulent, vb confdbulentur. Casau- bon conjectures confibulentur . Confibulare is a Low Latin word for to buckle to (from Fibula] — literally here, ' buckle on to the truth.'

3 si nota est.

DONATIST APPEAL TO CONSTANTINE 43

fathers Lucianus, Dignus, Nasutius, Capito, Fidentius and the rest, when the Emperor Constantine was still without any knowledge of these affairs, addressed a petition to him, of which I will transcribe a copy 1 :

' O Constantine, most excellent Emperor, since thou dost come of a just stock, and thy father (unlike other Emperors) did not persecute Christians,2 and Gaul is free from this wickedness, we beseech thee that thy piety may command that we be granted judges from Gaul ; for be tween us and other Bishops in Africa disputes have arisen ; Given by Lucianus, Dignus, Nasutius, Capito, Fidentius and the rest of the Bishops who adhere to Donatus.' 3

1 precibus rogaverunt, quarum exemplum infrascriptum esl. Cf. S. Aug. Ep. Iii, 5 ; Ixxvi, 2.

2 Constantine Chlorus had the command of Gaul as Caesar, and, being almost a Christian, did not put the decrees of persecution in force.

3 et celeris Episcopis partis Donati. Mgr. Duchesne (Le Dossier du Donatisme, p. 25) (who takes for granted the existence of Donatus, Bishop of Black Huts, see note 3, p. 45) thinks that either these words did not belong to the original document and were added by Optatus as a resume of the signatures, or that Optatus deliberately (' se soit cru permis d'y substituer ') changed the word Maiorini to Donati, since by the time when Optatus wrote, pars Donati had become the usual and recognised designation of the Donatist party . Du Pin had already made the same suggestion (' ipse Optatus nomen notius substituit in locum antiqui '). But neither Du Pin nor Duchesne can have adverted to the fact that Optatus later on (iii, 3) founds an argument in two separate passages upon the use which he supposed the Donatist clerics to have made of the expression partis Donati in this petition. The difficulty concerning the employment of these words at this period is twofold, (i) The party could hardly have been yet termed pars Donati. We do not hear of any Donatus as in any sense their leader until the Synod under Miltiades. (2) We read in the Gesla Coll. Carthag. (diei iii, ccxxx) that two libelli were sent to Constantine, the first of which was endorsed ' Libellus Ecclesiae Catholicae criminum Caeciliani traditus a parte Maiorini ' (cf. also S. Aug. Ep. Ixxxviii). For those who believe that Majorinus was dead and Donatus was Bishop of Carthage before the Synod under Miltiades commenced

44

CONSTANTINE'S WRATH

XXIII.

The

answer of Cons tan- tine. He appointed Judges to meet at Rome.

After having read this letter, Constantine replied with much anger. And in his rescript he testified to the matter of their petition in the words :

' You ask a judgement from me in this world, although I myself am waiting for the Judgement of Christ in the next.' l

(see note 3, p. 45) the objection raised against the words Partis Donati would at once vanish, were it not for the second difficulty — the difficulty arising from the fact that the Gesta Collationis Cartha- giensis and the testimony of St. Augustine prove beyond dispute that this document was presented ex parte Maiorini. ' Quinto loco haec acta sunt. Recitatae sunt duae relationes . . . una quae ostendit Maiores Donatistarum id est de parte Maiorini ' (Brev. coll. diet tert. xii). Balduinus falls back on the ingenious hypothesis that the first document was endorsed de parte Maiorini, the second de parte Donati. But unfortunately for this view St. Augustine (id.) gives a brief summary of this second document, which shows that it was by no means identical with that set out by St. Optatus. After everything has been weighed, we can only suppose either that (as seems to me most probable) the copy (exemplurri) seen by Optatus really contained the words partis Donati, or that he wrote from memory and through a slip (not unnatural under the circum stances of his time and place) wrote Donati when, if his memory had not played him tricks, or rather if he had scrutinised his original more carefully, he would have written Maiorini. We know that on several occasions he made similar slips when quoting from Holy Scripture.

Dom John Chapman writes as follows : (Donatus the Great and Donatus of Casae Nigrae, Rev. Benedictine, Janvier 1909) : ' The Bishops who appealed to Constantine were Lucian, Dignus, Nasutius, Capito, Fidentius and others. There is no Donatus and no Majorinus among the five whose names are preserved. St. Optatus calls them proleptically the Pars Donati, but the Proconsul in his letter to the Emperor called them the Pars Maiorini [see Appendix, p. 421]. As the name of Majorinus does not occur in the first place, he may have just died, and Donatus will have taken his place before the ten accusers started for Rome. The Council was in that case a trial of the two claimants Donatus and Caecilian. The one was acquitted, the other condemned, This is a natural sequence . '

1 See Appendix, p. 396.

These words were written by Constantine after the Council of

THE COUNCIL UNDER POPE MILTIADES 45

Nevertheless, he granted them judges — Maternus from the city of Cologne, Reticius from the city of Autun, Marinus of Aries. These three Bishops from Gaul and fifteen others, who were Italians, arrived in Rome. They met in the House of Fausta on the Lateran, on the second of October which was a Friday, in the year when Constantine for the fourth, and Licinius for the third time, were Consuls.1

There were present Miltiades,2 Bishop of the city of Rome, and Reticius, Maternus and Marinus, Bishops from Gaul, and Merocles of Milan, Florianus of Sinna, Zoticus of Quintianum, Stennius of Ariminum, Felix from Florence of the Tuscans, Gaudentius of Pisa, Constantius of Faenza, Proterius of Capua, Theophilus of Beneventum, Sabinus of Terracina, Secundus of Preneste, Felix of the Three Taverns, Maximus of Ostium, Evandrus of Ursinum and Donatianus of Criolo.

When these nineteen Bishops had taken their seats xxiv.

together, the case of Donatus and that of Caecilian onittaiof

were brought forward. This judgement was passed b against Donatus3— by each of the Bishops— that he

Aries. Optatus (who never mentions and probably knew nothing of that Council, cf. Appendix, p. 323) inserts them here in error.

1 Constantino quater et Licinio ter consulibus. St. Augustine, however, writes (post Coll. xxxiii) : ' Melchiades iudicavit Con stantino ter et Licinio iterum consulibus.'

2 Often called Melchiades, Pope from 311 to 314.

3 in Donatum. Was this Donatus the Great, or another Donatus, Bishop of Black Huts (de Casis Nigris) in Numidia ? It is im possible to answer this question with absolute certainty. On the one hand it was assumed by Optatus, Augustine and Catholic Apologists generally until the Conference in 411 that the Donatus condemned by Pope Miltiades was Donatus the Great, the successor

46 THE GUILT OF DONATUS

acknowledged having both rebaptised, and laid his hand in Penance upon Bishops who had fallen away —

of Majorinus as schismatic bishop of Carthage. The authority of St. Optatus — so at least it seems to me — should go far to settle the controversy, since it is difficult to understand how he could well have confused two distinct Bishops of the same name one with another. Optatus lived, one would think, too near the events which he was chronicling to have made a mistake of this character. On the other hand when the Donatists protested at the Conference of Carthage that the Donatus condemned at Rome was not their protagonist, ' he who was and still is their chief ' (Gesta Coll. Carthag. diet Hi, xxxii), but another Donatus (' alium Casae,' Gesta Coll. Carthag. dxxxix, dxl), the Catholics at once admitted that Donatus of Casa was clearly designated in the Acts of Miltiades. St. Augustine bears witness to this fact, stating that the Catholics granted (concedebant) the Donatist contention that ' it was not Donatus the Great but Donatus of Casa who pleaded in the Court of Melchiades against Caecilian ' (Brev. coll. dieiiii, xx). Moreover Augustine writes as follows (Retract, xxi) : ' In saying that the Donatus whose letter I was answering had asked the Emperor to appoint judges from across the seas between him and Caecilian I was mis taken, for it was not he but another Donatus (who however belonged to the same schism) that will be found more probably to have done this. He was not the Donatist Bishop of Carthage, but of Black Huts, and was the first to make the wicked schism at Carthage.' Until recently this view reigned practically undisputed. Only Albaspinaeus was found to challenge the authority of St. Augustine by conjecturing that Majorinus, of whom we never hear in con nection with the Lateran Synod, was dead at the time (this is held to be certain by Dom John Chapman) and that Donatus of Black Huts had been elected Bishop in his place. But the very existence of a Donatus who was ever Bishop of Black Huts has been lately called in question, in the first place by Fr. Chapman, and subse quently by others. Thus Mr. Sparrow Simpson writes (St. Augustine and African Church Divisions, p. 31), referring to Monceaux (Revue de I'Histoire de Religion) : ' it has been recently pointed out that the former personage [Donatus of Black Huts] is a highly proble matical figure. He appears at the Lateran Synod. While he is called Bishop of Black Huts in Numidia, he is never heard of as residing in his own diocese, but at Carthage. After the Lateran Synod he disappears and is replaced by a Donatus who holds precisely the same position over the party.' The theory of Albaspinaeus,

THE INNOCENCE OF CAECILIAN 47

a thing foreign to the Church.1 Donatus brought forth his witnesses ; they admitted that they had nothing of which they could accuse Caecilian. Caecilian was pronounced innocent by the sentence of all the above- named Bishops ; also by the sentence of Miltiades, by which the matter was closed, and judgement pronounced in these words 2 :

if adopted, would remove these difficulties, but it involves the supposition that there were two Bishops of Carthage, immediately following one another and each named Donatus. For this sup position there is not a scrap of evidence. Moreover such a trans lation from one See to another as is here supposed would have been directly opposed to the Canons in force at the time, and if it had been effected would certainly have been one of the staple charges against the Donatists. But of this there is not a trace in history. Fr. Chapman solves the whole difficulty with the simplicity of genius by a reasoned argument (La Revue Bbntdictine, Janvier 1909) directed to show that Casae Nigrae was not the See, but the birthplace, of the Great Donatus. In the same article he suggests a most interesting explanation of the surprising readiness with which the Catholics at the Conference of Carthage admitted the Donatist contention that their eponymous champion had not been con demned at Rome. However after all has been said, the whole of this matter will remain at least for some minds hidden in obscurity, and it is difficult to see from what quarter we may look for further light. Meanwhile we must all agree with Fr. Chapman that ' the importation of a Bishop of Casae Nigrae only brings confusion into [what would otherwise be] a plain tale.' I myself think that, were Professor Ziwsa still alive, he would gladly bow to Fr. Chapman's authority and arguments and remove the name of Donatus Casensis (at least as a person distinct from Donatus Carthaginis) from the index to any subsequent edition of his Optatus.

1 quod ab Ecclesia alienum est.

2 etiam Miltiadis sententia, qua iudicium clausum est his verbis. These words of St. Optatus remind us of St. Augustine's famous statement (Serm. cxxxi, 10) : ' Already two councils have been sent to the Apostolic See concerning this matter [Pelagianism], and thence have come rescripts. The case is concluded (caussa finita est). Would that the error might soon cease also.' St. Augustine's account of the matter with which St. Optatus is concerned in the text is well worth reading, since he (like St. Optatus) had documents

48 THE JUDGEMENT OF MILTIADES

' Since it is certain that those who came with Donatus have failed to accuse Caecilian in accordance with their undertaking, and since it is also certain that Donatus has not proved him guilty on any count, I judge that, according to his deserts, he be maintained in the

which have not come down to us : ' Will you urge that Melchiades, Bishop of the Roman Church, with his colleagues across the seas was not right in arrogating for his own judgement (non debuit . . . sibi usurpare iudicium) a case which had been concluded by seventy African Bishops under the presidency of the primate of Tigisis ? But what if it was not he who arrogated it ? It was, in fact, because he had been requested, that the Emperor sent Bishops to sit with him, and to decide what they considered to be just with regard to the whole case. This we prove both by the petition of the Donatists and by the Emperor's own words ; for you will remember that both these documents were read to you, and you have now permission to inspect them and copy them out' (Ep. xliii, 5, 14). (See Appendix for the Emperor's letters.) St. Augustine is not, of course, suggesting that the Pope had no right to judge the affair, any more than he is implying that the Emperor had a right to appoint judges. The argument is strictly ad hominem. The Donatists could not complain that Melchiades had no right to reverse the judgement of seventy Numidian Bishops, since they had themselves appealed to the Emperor to appoint Bishops to judge the matter anew. They admitted, therefore, that the Numidian judgement was not irreformable. Further on in the same letter St. Augustine continues : ' And yet what a final sentence that was which the blessed Melchiades himself pronounced, how innocent, how honest, how far-sighted and peace-loving, in that he did not venture to remove from their position in the episcopal fellowship those colleagues against whom nothing had been proved, whilst he laid the chief blame upon Donatus alone (whom he had discovered to be the author of all the evil), but gave the free option of recovering communion to the rest, since he was ready to issue letters of com munion even to those who were known to have been ordained by Majorinus, in such wise that, wherever, on account of the dissension between the two parties, there were two rival Bishops, the one who had been first ordained should be confirmed in his see, and the other should be provided with an other diocese. O admirable man, O son of Christian peace, and father of the Christian people ' (Ep. xiii, 5. 16). We may observe that from this time forward the Popes issued their decretal letters from a small council of Bishops.

THE REQUEST OF DONATUS 49

communion of the Church, continuing to hold his position unimpaired.' l

It is, therefore, sufficient, that Donatus was con- xxv. demned by the verdict of so many Bishops, and that ^Stine°n~ Caecilian was cleared by the judgement of so great theCapedeai an authority.2 Yet Donatus thought well to appeal, of Donatus To this appeal the Emperor Constantine replied in Roman

,, , judge-

these words : ment.

' Oh, mad daring of their fury ! A Bishop has thought fit to appeal to us, as is done in the lawsuits of the Pagans.' 3

At the same time Donatus also asked that he might xxvi. be allowed to return, and promised that he would not go to Carthage.4 Then it was suggested to the Emperor

Roman Synod.

1 Ziwsa remarks that it is not known from what source St. Optatus derived this summary of the judgement of Pope Melchiades.

2 Of the Pope.

3 Constantine wrote these words in answer to the appeal of the Donatists after the Council of Aries. They are to be found in the same document from which Optatus has already quoted in chapter xxiii (Appendix, p. 397).

4 petiit, ut ei reverti licuissel el nee ad Carthaginem accederet (PG) . Ziwsa, however, prints asterisks * * * between licuisset and ad Carthaginem and suggests that Ad ea mandalum, ne should be inserted after licuisset, RBv have revertenii ad Carthaginem con- tingeret, which cannot be translated. The version read at the Con ference at Carthage in 411 was the same as that of PG without the nee. ' Donatus asked that he might return and go to Carthage.' It was this version which afforded the Donatists their opportunity of pretending that Constantine had given Donatus leave to go to Carthage and kept Caecilian at Brescia, but we shall see immediately that when Caecilian heard that Donatus had gone to Carthage, he left Brescia and went there himself. It is this fact that makes it probable either that the nee in PG was in the original text of Optatus, or that some such emendation as that of Ziwsa must be adopted.

50 DECREE OF

by Fiiuminus his advocate,1 that, for peace' sake, Caecilian should be detained at Brescia — and so it was done.2 Then two Bishops were sent to Africa, Euno- mius and Olimpius, to do away with the dual Bishops and establish a single one.3 They came, and remained at Carthage forty days, that they might declare where was the Catholic Church.4 The seditious party of Donatus could not endure this, and every day noisy uproars were made through party spirit.

Eventually these Bishops, Eunomius and Olim pius, delivered their final decree to the effect that the Catholic Church 5 was that which was dispersed all over

1 suffragatore.

2 Cf. S. Aug. Brev, coll. xx, 38.

3 ut remotis duobus unum or dinar ent RBvb. P has ut remotis binis singulos ordinarent. Du Pin has removed the sentence from his text, (as I think,) quite unwarrantably in the face of the MSS. authority.

4 ubi esset Catholica.

5 ut dicerent illam esse Catholicam, quae esset in toto orbe terrarum diffusa. This definition is really an etymological one ; it became famous in the Donatist controversy, and is frequently cited and referred to by St. Augustine.

(a) TI KadoXutrj 'EKK\r)o-ia or Ecclesia Calholica almost always means, in the Fathers, the Church militant on earth at the time when they wrote. Thus even at the beginning of the second century the word Catholic is used by St. Ignatius (Ep. ad Smyrn. 8) for the true Church throughout the world, in contrast with heretical sects. It is also found four times in The Letter of the Church of Smyrna on the Martyrdom of the holy Polycarp : Trjs ayias KOL KadoXtKijs ' EKK\r)<rias (ad init.} ', TTJS Kara TTJV oiKovfjievrjv Ka6o\iKr)s 'EKK.\r)o~ias

(viii, xix) ; Trjs fv 2p.vpvr] KaBoXiK^s 'EKK\r)o-{as.

(b) The word ' Church ' is sometimes used in another sense to denote the Church on earth in all times and places, and the epithet Catholic is still strictly in place. For example, later in the second century St. Clement of Alexandria wrote as follows (Strom. VII, xvii, 1 06, 107) : — ' It needs no long discourse to prove that the merely human assemblies which they have instituted were later in time than the Catholic Church. . . . We say then that the ancient

EUNOMIUS AND OLIMPIUS 51

the world, and that the Judgement of the nineteen

and Catholic Church stands alone . . . gathering together into the unity of the One Faith, built upon the fitting covenants or rather upon the one Covenant given at different times, all those who have been already therein enrolled ' etc.

(c) The Church is also said to include not only her children on earth, but also the holy dead. Thus St. Augustine (De Civ. Dei xx, 9) : ' Neither are the souls of the holy dead separated from the Church, which even now is the Kingdom of Christ.' In this most compre hensive sense the epithet Catholic is rarely (if ever) applied to the word ' Church.' Should any case perchance exist where a Father so employs the word Catholic, it would be ' less properly ' (as opposed to the general patristic usage) — in the sense that the Blessed souls in Heaven and in Purgatory belonged to the Catholic Church when they were living on earth. It seems well to note this, because there has sometimes been confusion on the point amongst Non-Catholic writers. For example Dr. Darwell Stone (The Christian Church p. 214) philosophises concerning ' two ideas of the unity of the Church which St. Augustine failed to reconcile,' and boldly writes as follows : ' that notion of the nature and unity of the Church which may be illustrated from Clement of Alexandria and from Origen, but also from St. Augustine, which lays stress on the union of the church militant with the departed and with those yet unborn, and which finds points of contact amongst living Christians in the unseen realities, is not really allowed for in the Roman Catholic doctrine.' Of course it is pure imagination to fancy that there were two opposing views in the minds of the Fathers, striving for the mastery, which ' Augustine failed to reconcile,' but which eventually emerged the one in ' Ultramontanism,' the other in some such system as Anglicanism. But there are two ways of looking at the Church, as we regard it from different aspects. We find both of these, as we should naturally expect, in the Fathers. There is the ordinary patristic view, with which St. Optatus for example makes us so familiar, of one Body upon earth, not merely local, but scattered throughout the world, with its members all joined together, one with each other, in an actual, visible, external com munion. (This on Anglican theories is admittedly not a necessity, but only a desirable dream-picture.) There is also, no doubt, to be found in the Fathers a conception of the Church as an ideal unity of all the redeemed on earth and in heaven, united by the mystical indwelling of the Holy Spirit. But far from these being mutually exclusive views between which the Fathers oscillate, they are two different entities, each of which represents a great reality, not merely ' allowed for,' but much more — apprehended by ' the Roman

52 ON THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Bishops which had already been delivered could not be upset.1 Accordingly they communicated with the

Catholic ' as keenly now as in any age of the Church's history. The latter of these, however, is not what the Fathers mean by ' the Catholic Church,' but is the whole Church of the Redeemed — whose ' names are written in heaven ' — now in fieri, only to be realised at the Last Day. The former is the Church militant, the Catholic Church, diffused throughout the world (as its name implies) and nowhere else. It is of this visible Catholic Church that the Fathers predicate unity, not merely as a quality, but as an essential quality, and a visible ' note ' or characteristic by which (in conjunction with her existence everywhere, or her Catholicity) she is to be instantly recognised. This is the meaning of the definition of Eunomius and Olimpius (as given by St. Optatus), which cut at the root of the Donatist question. On the one side stood a great number of African bishops. On the other side was Caecilian with (probably) but few colleagues in Africa, but in communion with all the rest of the Catholic world. So seventy African Bishops, even with the Primate Secundus, were of no importance, for over against them was ' the Catholic Church.' It is exactly the same touchstone as St. Cyril of Jerusalem had given when he told his hearers to ask in every city not for the Kvpia<r] (the house of God, or Church), but for ' the Catholic Church,' — the same touchstone that St. Pacian gave against the Novatians, when he said ' Christian is my name, Catholic is my surname.' The visible unity of one visible Church throughout the world is the presupposition and the teaching of all the Fathers. This is seen perhaps with special clearness in this Donatist controversy. But at all times and everywhere the patristic conception of the Church and of Schism is, apart from this presup position, wholly unintelligible.

(d) There is yet another distinction made by St. Augustine against the Donatists between the Catholic Church on earth, in which good and evil men are living together, and the Church of the Saints after the General Judgement. It is, he writes, One Holy Church, but after a different fashion (aliter). The state of the Church now was typified by the miraculous draught of fishes before the Resurrection when the nets were cast on the left hand as well as on the right — and were broken ; the state of the Church hereafter by the draught after the Resurrection, when the nets were cast only on the right side — and remained unbroken. (Cf. Brev. Coll. iii, 9, 10.)

1 St. Augustine (con. Epist. Parmen. iii, 3) summed up the decision of Eunomius and Olimpius in the celebrated words : ' Quapropter securus iudicat orbis terrarum bonos non esse qui

THE RETURN OF THE RIVAL BISHOPS 53

clergy of Caecilian, and went their way. All this we can prove from the written Acts which any who please may read in our Appendix.1 When these things had taken place, Donatus was the first to return to Carthage, unasked. Caecilian, on hearing this news, hastened back to his own people. In this way the schism was planted anew. But the fact remains that so many Bishops had by their Judgement condemned Donatus, and had also pronounced the innocence of Caecilian.

But since two persons on the Catholic side had xxvu. been for some time accused in this matter — the con- Searing secrated and the Consecrator— even after the conse- crated had been acquitted at Rome, it still remained for the Consecrator to be declared guiltless. Then Constantine wrote to Aelianus, the pro-consul, to lay

se dividunt ab orbe terrarum in quacunque parte orbis terrarum.' ' Wherefore the [Catholic] world judges without anxiety that they are not good who in any part of the world separate themselves from the [Catholic] world.' (Cf. note 6, p. 63.)

1 These Acts have unfortunately been lost (cf. Appendix, p. 321). St. Augustine writes (Brev. coll. xii, 24) : ' Atque inde ex ordine coepit etiam episcopale iudicium Melchiadis Romani Episcopi et aliorum cum illo Gallorum et Italorum Episcoporum in eadem Urbe Roma factum, cuius iudicii prima parte, id est gestis primae diei recitatis, ubi accusatores Caeciliani, qui missi f uerant, negaverunt se habere quod in eum dicerent ; ubi etiam Donatus a Casis Nigris in praesenti convictus est, adhuc diacono Caeciliano [that is in the days of Mensurius, when Donatus the Great was probably, like Caecilian, still a deacon, and far more likely to cause trouble at Carthage than any Bishop of Casae Nigrae in Numidia] scisma fecisse Carthagine : de Carthaginis enim scismate exorta est adversus Ecclesiam pars Donati.' From this we learn that the Acts of the first session of the Lateran Synod were read at the Conference of 411, but here once more we have to deplore the loss of the full minutes of the latter part of the proceedings.

54 INQUIRY INTO CHARGES AGAINST FELIX

aside his public duties and make public inquiry into the life of Felix of Autumna.1

The appointed officer took his seat. The witnesses were Claudius Saturianus,2 a state commissioner, who had been in the city of Felix all through the time of the persecution, and had been a commissioner when he was impeached, Callidius Gratianus and Alfius Caecilianus the magistrate ; also Superius the Warder was summoned, and Ingentius the public notary, who was in constant fear of the torture with which he was threatened. By the evidence of all it was ascertained that there was nothing that could disgrace the life of Felix the Bishop.3

The Volume of Acts is in existence in which are recorded the names of those who had been present at the trial, Claudius Saturianus the official, and Caecilianus the Magistrate, and Superius the Warder, and Ingentius the Notary, and Solon a public official of the time. After they had given their replies, the above-mentioned pro-consul gave his Judgement, of which this is a part :

1 See Appendix, p. 327. We know that Aelianus conducted the inquiry ; we know also from St. Augustine (Ep. Ixxxviii ; con. Cresc. iii, 81) that Constantino wrote a letter to Probianus, the successor of Aelianus. But Duchesne writes (p. 12) that Aelianus in the text is probably a mistake for Aelius Paulinus, the Vicar of Africa, ' qui se mit en mouvement pour executer 1'ordre imperial.'

2 Called Saturninus by St. Augustine, Ep. Ixxxviii. (Cf. p. 426, note i.)

3 nihil tale inventum est, quod vitam Felicis Episcopi sordidare potuisset P. For sordidare RBGv have ordinare, which evidently must be wrong. Accordingly Cochlaeus conjectured deordinare, and Du Pin in vita Felicis Episcopi, propter quod ordinare non potuisset. If Du Pin had seen P, he would never have hazarded this guess, of which he says : ' Nos restituimus hunc locum partim ex coniectura, partim ex auctoritate MSS,' and explains that all the MSS which he had been able to consult have ordinare.

HIS VINDICATION 55

'That Felix, the holy Bishop, is guiltless of having burned the divine Books,1 is clear from the fact that no one was able to prove anything against him — neither that he had given up nor burned the most sacred Scriptures. For all the above-mentioned witnesses proved clearly that none of the divine Writings had been either discovered, or injured or burned. It is shown by the Acts that the holy Bishop Felix was not present at that time, and that he was neither privy to any such crime, nor commanded it to be done.'

And so he left the court, cleared of every stain upon his reputation and wonderfully praised. Up to that time men did not know what to think of him, and he had walked under a dark cloud, caused by the breath of hatred and jealousy, whilst truth lay hid. And besides, every document, mentioned either in the Acts or in the letters which we have mentioned or read, was disclosed.2

You see, my brother Parmenian, that you have xxvm. assaulted Catholics to no purpose — falsely nicknaming this First them Betrayers, changing the names of those who were I concerned, and transferring their deeds. You have shut your eyes, that you might not recognise the guilt of your fathers ; you have opened them to cast accusations upon the innocent and blameless.3 You have stated everything according to what is opportune,

1 liberum esse ab exustione strumentorum deificorum.

2 revelata. B has renovata.

3 innocenies et indignos criminose pulsares P (so Ziwsa) . RBvb read indignos crimini copulares = ' to link with crime those who deserve it not.'

56 PARMENIAN'S ATTACKS FAIL

nothing according to what is true ; so that it was of you that the most Blessed Apostle Paul said :

' Some have turned aside to vain-speaking, desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor of whom they say it.'1

We have just now proved that your fathers 2 were Betrayers and schismatics ; yet you, who are their heir, have not wished to spare either schismatics or Betrayers, so that by the proofs which we have alleged, all the darts which you mistakenly wished to hurl against others have glanced back — warded off by the shield of truth — to strike your fathers. Everything, then, which you have been able to say against Betrayers and schismatics, belongs to yourselves, for we have nothing to do with any of it, — we who both remain in the Root, and are joined, with all, in the whole [Catholic] 3 world.

1 i Tim. i, 5, 6. 2 parentes.

3 Cf. illam esse Catholicam, quae esset in toto orbe terrarum diffusa (i, 26).

BOOK THE SECOND

WHICH is THE ONE TRUE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND WHERE is IT TO BE FOUND ? THE FIVE ENDOW MENTS OF THE CHURCH BELONG TO CATHOLICISM, NOT TO THE SCHISM. THE DONATISTS HAVE BEEN GUILTY OF SHAMELESSLY SCRAPING THE HEADS OF PRIESTS, AND OF MURDERS, OF GIVING THE EUCHARIST TO DOGS, AND OF CASTING AWAY THE HOLY CHRISM.

WE have shown who were the Betrayers, and have i. which pointed out the origin of the Schism in such a manner is the that we have almost seen it take place before our church0?

eyes.1 The difference between heresy and schism has

also been explained. It is now our business to show the world.

(as we promised that we would do in the second place)

which is the One Church, called by Christ His Dove

and His Bride.2

The Church, then, is One, and her holiness is not measured by the pride of individuals,3 but is derived

1 ut paene oculis perspecta videatur. St. Augustine may have had these words before his mind, when he wrote of the martyrdom of St. Stephen : ' Hanc passionem modo de libro Actuum Aposto- lorum cum legitur, non solum audivimus sed etiam oculis spectavi- mus ' (Sermo ii de Sancto Stephana}.

8 In the Canticle of Canticles.

3 The Donatists, like the Cathari, the Puritans and many other sectaries, prided themselves (without the slightest justification in

58 PARMENIAN'S FUTILE CLAIMS

from the Sacraments. It is for this reason that she alone is called by Christ His Dove and His own beloved Bride.

The Church cannot be amongst all the heretics and schismatics.1 It follows that [according to you] she must be in one place only.2

You, my brother Parmenian, have said that she is with you alone. This, I suppose, can only be because, in your pride, you strive to claim some special holiness for yourselves, so that the Church may be where it pleases you, and may not be where it pleases you not. And so, in order that she may be with you in a little piece of Africa, in a corner of one small region, is she not to be with us in another part of Africa ? Is she not to be in Spain, in Gaul, in Italy, where you are not ? If you maintain that she is with you only, is she not to be in Pannonia, in Dacia, Moesia, Thrace, Achaia, Macedonia and in all Greece, where you are not ? In order that you may be able to argue that

fact) upon their sanctity. According to their teaching, the true Church was to be exclusively the Church of ' the Saints.' There were to be no unclean beasts in the Ark of Noah. The tares were not to be allowed to grow up with the wheat unto the harvest ; nor were the bad fish to remain with the good in Peter's net. Further more, they made the validity of the sacraments depend upon the supposed holiness of the minister, not upon the operation of the Holy Ghost.

1 Evidently the idea of Comprehensiveness — that the One Church could be Catholic (Universal) — in the sense of comprehending various kinds of religious bodies, varying in belief and without any external bond of union (cf . ii, 3) — never occurred to St. Optatus even as a possibility. Any ' branch ' theory in which the branches were separated from the trunk or from one another (cf. ii, 9 etc.) would have seemed to him unthinkable. He agrees with Par menian in ruling it out ab initio.

2 Because no heretics or schismatics were to be found as an organised body in more than one territory.

MEANING OF THE WORD ' CATHOLIC ' 59

she is with you, is she not to be in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Pamphylia, Phrygia, Cilicia and in the three Syrias, and in the two Armenias, and in all Egypt and in Mesopotamia, where you are not ? And is she not to be throughout innumerable islands and so many other provinces which can hardly be counted, where you are not ? 1

Where in that case will be the application of the Catholic Name,2 since on this very account was the Church called Catholic, because she is in accordance with reason, and is scattered all over the world ? 3

1 In some of the countries mentioned by Optatus as belonging to the Catholic Unity, Christianity has almost disappeared as an energising force. Others of those lands, such as ' Thrace, Achaia, Macedonia, and all Greece,' are now unhappily in schism. Still, his argument has been enormously strengthened by the lapse of centuries. The Catholic of to-day is in full communion not only, as was St. Optatus, with the See of Rome where Peter sat, with the See of Lyons where Irenaeus sat, with the See of Barcelona where Pacian sat, with the See of Tours where Martin sat, with the See of Verona where Zeno sat, with the See of Milan where Ambrose was soon to sit, with the direct successors of ' Maternus from the city of Cologne, of Reticius from the city of Autun, of Marinus of Aries, of Felix from Florence of the Tuscans, of Gauden- tius of Pisa, of Proterius of Capua,' and of every other of the nine teen Bishops who sat in the Synod of the Lateran with Miltiades the Pope (i, 23) — this is surely a great and striking thing — but also with Churches of which Optatus never dreamed, in islands and continents of which he had never heard.

2 ubi ergo erit proprietas Catholici Notninis ?

3 rationabilis et ubique diffusa. Thus in all the MSS. Two emendations have been suggested, Non nationalis et &c., and Rationabiliter ubique diffusa. Probably, however, St. Optatus wrote it as we find it in the MSS., Rationdbilis et ubique diffusa. If so, through his ignorance of Greek, he is linking together two different derivations of the word «a0oAt/c<fc. From Kara, and o\ov, = 'throughout the whole ' (i.e. scattered throughout the world), and from Kara and \6yov — ' in accordance with reason.' We know that, in consequence of this last meaning of the word, Procurators fiscal

60 ALL THE WORLD PROMISED TO CHRIST

For if you limit the Church just as it may please you, into a narrow corner, if you withdraw whole peoples from her communion, where will that be which the Son of God has merited, where will that be which the Father has freely granted Him, saying, in the second Psalm :

' I will give to Thee the nations for Thine inheritance ; and the ends of the earth for Thy possession ' ? x

To what purpose do you break so mighty a promise, so that the breadth of all the kingdoms is compressed by you into a sort of narrow prison ? Why do you strive to stand in the way of so great a largesse ? Why do you fight against the Saviour's Merits ? Permit the Son to possess that which has been granted to Him ; permit the Father to fulfil that which He has promised.

Why do you put bounds, why set limits ? There is nothing in any part of the earth which has been withheld from His dominion, since the whole earth has been promised by God the Father to the Saviour. The whole earth has been granted to Him together

in Roman law were often called Rationales or KaQoXiKoi. St. Optatus was probably in his first derivation thinking of heretics, in his second of schismatics. The Church is Catholic or rationabilis (according to right reason) in contradistinction to heretics, who have strayed from the truth (against the due exercise of their reason) ; she is Catholic or ubique diffusa (spread everywhere) in contradis tinction to schismatics, who are confined within clearly defined, very often within national, bounds and limits. Cf. St. Augustine, Gesta Collationis Carthagiensis diei iii, ci : ' Christiani Afri, et appellantur et merito sunt Catholici, ipsa sua communione nomen testantes. Catholon enim secundum totum dicitur. Qui autem a toto separatus est, partemque defendit ab universo praecisam, non sibi usurpet hoc nomen, sed nobiscum teneat veritatem.' 1 Ps. ii, 8.

AS HIS INHERITANCE 61

with its nations. The whole world is Christ's as His undivided possession.1 God proves this when he says :

' I will give unto Thee the nations for Thine inheritance, and for Thy possession the bounds of the earth.' 2

And in the seventy-first Psalm, it has been written of the Saviour Himself,

' He shall reign from sea to sea, and from the waters to the bounds of the world.' 3

When the Father gives, He makes no exception ; you, that you may give Him one fraction, endeavour to take away the whole measure. And, still, you endea vour to persuade men that the Church is amongst you alone, taking away from Christ that which He has won— denying that God has performed His promises. What ingratitude ! What folly ! What presumption is yours ! Christ invites you, with all others, into the company of the Heavenly Kingdom and exhorts you to be co-heirs with Him ; and you strive to rob Him of the inheritance given Him by the Father, allowing Him a part of Africa and refusing Him the whole world, which the Father has bestowed upon Him.

Why do you desire to make the Holy Ghost appear a liar, who in the forty-ninth Psalm tells of the goodness of Almighty God, saying :

' The Lord, the God of Gods has spoken and has called the earth from the rising of the sun to the going down thereof ' ? 4

1 Christo una possessio est. 2 Ps. ii, 8.

3 Ps. Ixxi, 8. 4 Ps. xlix, i.

62 THE CHURCH OF ALL NATIONS

Therefore the earth has been called to become flesh.1 And, as it has been written, so has it been done, and the earth owes praises to its Creator.

Once more this is mentioned, where the Holy Spirit exhorts us in the hundred and twelfth Psalm with the words :

' The Name of the Lord must be praised from the rising of the sun even to its going down.' 2

And again, in the ninety-fifth Psalm : ' Sing ye to the Lord a new song.' 3

If this were the only verse, you might say that the Holy Ghost had exhorted you alone. But that He might show that this has been said not to you alone, but to the Church which is everywhere, He continued :

' Sing to the Lord, all the earth ; declare amongst the nations His glory, His wonderful works amongst all peoples.'4

He said :

' Declare amongst the nations.' 5

He did not say, ' in a small part of Africa, where

you are ' ; He did say ' Declare amongst all peoples.' 6

He who said ' all peoples ' excepted no man. Yet

1 Vocata est ergo terra ut caro fieret. Cf . ' I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh and will give you a heart of flesh ' (Ez. xxxvi, 26).

Ps. cxii, 3.

Ps. xcv, i.

Ps. xcv, 1-3 : ' Cantate Domino omnis terra, pronuntiate in gentibus gloriam Ipsius, in omnibus populis mirabilia Eius.'

' pronuntiate,' inquit, ' inter gentes.'

' pronuntiate,' inquit, ' in omnibus populis.'

NOT ONLY OF ONE PARTICULAR COUNTRY 63

you are proud to be alone and separated from ' all peoples/ though to them this command was given ; and you maintain that you, who are not in any part of the whole* are yet yourselves alone the whole.

He has said :

' The name of the Lord must be praised/ and ' by all the earth from the rising of the sun to the going down thereof.' 2

Can then the Pagans, who are outside the covenant of Christ,3 either sing to God or praise the name of the Lord ? Is it not His Church alone, which is within the covenant,4 that may praise Him ? 5 Therefore, if you say that the Church is with you only, you are defrauding God's ear of its due. If you alone are praising Him, ' the whole world/ 6 which is from the

1 qui in omni toto non estis. This remains to-day the great Catholic argument against the pretensions of the ' Orthodox ' Easterns. It is as effectual now as when St. Optatus first wrote the words. Like the Donatists before them, the ' Orthodox ' are not ' in any part of the whole ' (they are not in that Church, which is visibly Catholic — spread throughout the world) ; yet, like the Donatists again, the ' Orthodox ' claim to be the whole. But St. Optatus teaches that only those constitute ' the whole,' who are visibly united ' in the whole,' that is who are ' everywhere ' (ubique).

2 Ps. cxii, 3.

3 Pagani extralegales.

4 sola Ecclesia, quae in lege est, as opposed to the ' Pagani extra legales,' of whom he has just written. Lex, as so often elsewhere in Optatus, means 'Lex Christi/ 'Lex Catholica ' (cf. v, 5 etc.).

6 St. Optatus gives us no hint of the great teaching about the Soul (or Heart) of the Church, which is clearly expressed by St. Augustine.

6 Totus orbis. By this phrase St. Optatus and St. Augustine always mean the whole Catholic world. Cf. the saying of St. Augus tine: ' Securus iudicat orbis terrarum' (see note i,p. 52) — by which he means, of course, not the world separated from the Catholic Church — even less the non-Christian world — but the Catholic world. The

64 THE ENDOWMENTS OF THE CHURCH

II. He

proves from the Cathedra Petri that the

Cathedra which is the first endow ment of the Church belongs to Catholics, not to Donatists .

rising of the sun to its going down, will be keeping silence. You have shut the mouths of all the Christian nations. You have imposed silence on all the peoples who desire to praise God from moment to moment. If then God waits for the praise which is His due, and if the Holy Spirit exhorts men to sound His praises,1 if ' the whole world ' is prepared to render to God His due, lest God be robbed — then should you also praise Uim, together with all, or, (since you have refused to be with all,) in your isolation, hold your tongues.

So we have proved that the Catholic Church is the Church which is spread throughout the world.

We must now mention its Adornments,2 and see where are its five Endowments (which you have said to be six3), amongst which the CATHEDRA is the first ;

Catholic world is the Judge, and judges free from anxiety, for this very reason that it is, and knows itself to be, the Catholic world.

1 ut sonent. Cf. vii, i : ' per loca singula divinum sonat ubique praeconium.'

2 St. Optatus has given us a summary proof that the Catholic Church is not merely local, but claims to be everywhere. He proceeds, in answer to Parmenian, to discuss the Adornments (Ornamenta) or Endowments (Dotes) of the Church. The figure is that of a Dowry bestowed by our Lord upon His Bride, the Church. There is no other reference to these Dotes in patristic literature.

3 It is not difficult to reconstruct Parmenian's argument from the pages of Optatus. We see that Parmenian had argued that the Endowments were six in number, and had maintained that they were all distinctive of Donatism and lacking to the Catholic Church.

(1) Cathedra (the expression for See so well known in Africa

from the writings of St. Cyprian).

(2) Angelus (from Apoc. ii, 3).

(3) Spiritus.

(4) Fons signatus (from Cant, iv, i).

(5) Sigillum (quo fons signatur).

(6) Umbilicus (from Cant, vii, 2).

It was common ground between Optatus and his opponent that the

THE ANGELUS 65

and, since the second Endowment, which is the ' Angelus,' cannot be added unless a Bishop has sat on

hortus conclusus (enclosed garden) of Cant, iv, 12-13 (' Hortus conclusus mea sponsa, hortus conclusus, fons signatus, emissiones tuae paradisus ') signified the Church (cf. ii, u : ' Quod ore tuo et sensu nostro ecclesiam paradisum esse dixisti'). Accordingly the fons signatus (sealed fountain) is the baptismal font, which (according to Parmenian) is sealed to all outside the true Church, so that Baptism by schismatics as well as by heretics is invalid. The sigillum (seal) is the baptismal creed.

The font is only made a saving fountain, if it is blessed by the true Bishop or angelus. Only thus is the third Endowment, the Spirit, in the water of Baptism. Parmenian proves this by quoting John v, 4, whence St. Optatus' words (ii, 6) : ' Unde vobis angelum, qui apud vos possit fontem movere aut inter ceteras dotes Ecclesiae numerari ? ' We see that Parmenian had evidently taken the ' Angel ' in the Apocalypse (without identifying him with any particular Bishop) in order to prove that only a true Bishop was able so ' to move the water,' that the Spirit should be there for valid Baptism. By Umbilicus Parmenian understood the altar. We can thus follow what no doubt was his argument. ' The true Church has/ he will have said to the Catholics, ' six Endowments.' (i) Cathedra, a lawful right to the See. But Caecilian had no such right, for the Numidian Bishops were not called to his election, and a Council of seventy Bishops deposed him. (2) Angelus, or a Bishop sent by God, but Caecilian was ordained by a Traditor. (3) Spiritus, the Spirit of adoption, who makes sons of God in Baptism. (4) This Spirit will only work by means of the water in the Fons, which is moved by the Angelus. Hence all those persons who have been baptised by others than Donatists must be rebaptised. (5) For the Fountain is signatus sigillo (Symboli) ,and all but Donatists are heretical. (6) And the Umbilicus (altar) must also belong to the true Angelus. On this pretext they scraped, broke down and even utterly destroyed Catholic altars (cf. vi, i). Such is the argu ment that St. Optatus had to meet. He denied (on what seems to us to be a technicality only) that Umbilicus was one of these Endowments, but proceeded (2-9) to argue against Parmenian that the first five belonged to Catholics, and were marks of the Catholic Church exclusively, and in no way shared by the Donatists. In the first place, he takes Cathedra and Angelus together, and shows that the Donatists could have neither the one nor the other unless they were in union with the See of Peter. For the Cathedra Petri pre-eminently is the Cathedra.

F

66 THE CATHEDRA

the Cathedra?- we must see who was the first to sit on the Cathedra, and where 2 he sat. If you do not know this, learn. If you do know, blush. Ignorance can not be attributed to you — it follows that you know.8 For one who knows, to err is sin. Those who do not know may sometimes be pardoned.4

You cannot then deny that you do know 5 that upon Peter first 6 in the City of Rome 7 was bestowed the Episcopal Cathedra? on which sat Peter, the Head of all the Apostles (for which reason he was called Cephas9),

1 St. Cyprian was the first Father to use the term Cathedra (Chair). He applied it (as a word in common use at the time) to the See of Rome which he termed the Cathedra Petri. Parmenian, evidently, had claimed the Cathedra, stating that it belonged to him through the Angelus or Bishop (in other words ' We have valid Orders, and therefore we are in the Church '). St. Optatus replies to this in the text by making direct appeal to Rome. No man can possess a Cathedra, argues Optatus, who is not in communion with the one Cathedra, which, in all but successive sentences, he calls ' una Cathedra,' ' singularis Cathedra ' and ' Cathedra unica.' Balduinus, in the course of a long letter which he addressed to Calvin on the occasion of bringing out his first edition of Optatus, remarked as follows : ' Locutus est, ut scis, Christus de iis, qui sedent in Cathedra Mosis ; veteres Christiani de iis, qui in Petri . '

8 quis et ubi prior Cathedram sederit ?

* Cf. vii, 5 (p. 294).

* This is what we are now accustomed to call ' Invincible Ignorance ' (cf. John ix, 40).

6 Evidently St. Optatus had no fear that any objection should be taken to what he was about to urge, as to something new. On the contrary, it was well known and recognised by all. ' You cannot deny that you do know.'

6 Petro primo. This in answer to who it was who first sat on the Cathedra (quis i>) . The answer is Peter.

7 in urbe Roma. This in answer to the question where was he the first to sit (ubi ?). The answer is Rome.

3 Cathedram episcopalem esse conlatam.

9 Evidently this is an instance of paronomasia or play upon words (Cephas from Ke<j>a\-f)). It is so atrocious etym ©logically to derive an Aramaic from a Greek word that Balduinus thinks that

THE CATHEDRA PETRI 67

that, in this one Cathedra, unity should be preserved by all,1 lest the other Apostles might claim — each for himself — separate Cathedras, so that he who should set up a second Cathedra against the unique Cathedra 2 would already be a schismatic and a sinner.

Unde et Cephas appellatus est was not written by St. Optatus, but was introduced by some librarian from a marginal note of an ignorant commentator. But we must remember that neither Optatus nor any of the ancients knew anything of etymology. In vii, 3, St. Optatus simply calls St. Peter Caput Apostolorum, without any further comment.

1 in qua unica Cathedra uniias alt omnibus servaretur. This is the doctrine so often and so clearly expressed by St. Cyprian, cf. e.g.

' Una ecclesia a Christo Domino nostro super Petrum, origine unitatis et ratione fundata ' (Ep. Ixx, 3), and ' Petro primum Dominus, super quern aedificavit Ecclesiam, et unde unitatis originem instituit et ostendit, potestatem istam dedit ' (Ep. Ixxiii, 3), and ' Deus unus est et Christus unus, et una Ecclesia, et Cathedra una, super Petrum Domini voce fundata ' (xliii, 5) . We should always bear in mind that St. Cyprian was at this time the great authority in Christian Africa, not only in the eyes of Catholics, but also in those of Donatists. Thus St. Augustine writes (Brev. Coll, iii, 10) : ' Repetierunt Catholici testimonium Cypriani . . . Contra quod testimonium omnino nihil ausi fuerunt respondere, cum auctoritatem Cypriani tanti habeant, ut per illam conentur defendere, quod male de iterando Baptismo sentiunt et faciunt.'

8 ne ceteri Apostoli singulas sibi quisque defender ent, ut iam scistnaticus et peccator esset, qui contra singularem Cathedram alteram conlocaret. This perfectly plain doctrine of St. Optatus was never once challenged amongst Christians (the Albigenses were Manichees rather than Christians) until the days of Hus and Wycliffe, some nine hundred years later. We know that the work of St. Optatus was the great authority and handbook of St. Augustine in his arguments against the Donatists. He constantly echoes the teaching of St. Optatus, concerning the Chair of Peter, and, in his controversy with the Donatists, applied the famous promise ' Upon this Rock I will build my Church ' to this Holy See. ' Sedes Petri . . . ipsa est Petra ' (Ps. con. Donat. St. xiv). Dr. Sparrow Simpson, however, writes as follows with reference to this passage of St. Optatus : ' Optatus illustrates this succession from the case of Rome, because St. Peter as the chief

F 2

68 THE SUCCESSORS OF PETER

Well then, on the one Cathedra, which is the first of the Endowments, Peter was the first to sit.1

in. The To Peter succeeded Linus, to Linus succeeded

of Bishops Clement, to Clement Anacletus, to Anacletus Evaristus, *ome> to Evaristus 2 Sixtus, to Sixtus Telesphorus, to Teles- phorus Hyginus, to Hyginus Anacetus, to Anacetus Pius, to Pius Soter, to Soter Alexander, to Alexander Victor, to Victor Zephyrinus, to Zephyrinus Calixtus, to Calixtus Urban, to Urban Pontianus, to Pontianus Anterus, to Anterus Fabian, to Fabian Cornelius, to Cornelius Lucius, to Lucius Stephen, to Stephen Sixtus; to Sixtus Dionysius, to Dionysius Felix, to Felix Marcellinus, to Marcellinus Eusebius, to Eusebius Miltiades, to Miltiades Silvester, to Silvester Marcus,

Apostle, represents the principle of unity. No Apostle was to arrogate to himself the Apostolic powers in separation from the other Apostles ' (St. Augustine and African Church Divisions, Chapter on St. Optatus' Reply to the Donatists, p. 45). Unfortunately for Dr. Sparrow Simpson's accuracy, St. Optatus has not (either here or elsewhere) written one syllable about ' no Apostle ' separating from ' the other Apostles.' He has, however, explained (vii, 3) that the Apostles were not free, on account of Peter's denial of Christ, to separate from the one Apostle ' who alone received the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, to be shared with the rest.' He has also written with all possible emphasis concerning the unlaw fulness of separating from the Cathedra Petri, which he here calls ' the unique Cathedra.' Of all this, we regret to say that Dr. Sparrow Simpson gives not even a hint in his in some respects useful analysis of the argument of Optatus.

1 Cf. St. Cyprian, Ep. ad Antonian. i, 8 : ' cum Fabiani [Romani Episcopi] locus, id est cum locus Petri et gradus Cathedrae sacerdotalis vacaret.'

2 St. Augustine copied this list of Popes given by St. Optatus. Yet it is incomplete and in one case inaccurate . The name Alexander should come after Evaristus, Eutychian and Gaius should come after Felix, Marcellus (probably) after Marcellinus, and where Optatus places Alexander (after Soter), he should have placed Eleutherius. It may also be mentioned that in the list given by Irenaeus (Adv. Haer. iii, 3) Pius precedes Anacetus.

THE DONATIST ANTI-POPES 69

to Marcus Julius, to Julius Liberius, to Liberius Damasus, to Damasus Siricius,1 who to-day is our colleague, with whom ' the whole world/ 2 through the intercourse of letters of peace,3 agrees with us in one bond of communion.4

Now do you show the origin of your Cathedra? you who wish to claim the Holy Church for yourselves !

But 6 you allege that you too have some sort of a iv. The

. ,, ~., , _, , Donatist

party in the City of Rome.7 Bishops

and their

1 In the first edition of St. Optatus written about 370 A.D. the meeting- list of Popes ended with Damasus. The name of Siricius who became Pope in 383 was added in the second edition (cf. Preface to Book VII).

» Totus orbis (cf. note i, p. 52).

3 Commercio formatarum. As is well known, the Catholic world in the early centuries was kept in touch with its various parts through the communication of litter ae formatae, or ' letters of peace,' which passed at stated times between the Bishop of Rome and all Catholic Bishops, and were also often sent from these Bishops to one another. (Cf. Aug. Ep. xliv, 3 ; con. Cresc. iii, 34.) Formatae — Terwufjifvai. TVTTOVV — sigillare. (Cf. Du Cange, iii, 565.)

4 in una communionis societate concordat.

5 Dr. Darwell Stone (The Christian Church, p. 143) quotes this passage, but translates Cathedra ' Episcopal See.' This is to miss the point. There is no question here of the origin of the Donatist See at Carthage, or as to whether that See was rightly claimed by Caecilian and Restitutus (the Catholic Bishops) on the one hand, or by Majorinus and Parmenian (the Donatists) on the other — a matter which has already been discussed in i, 10. The present question is what have the Donatists to set against the Unica ac singularis Cathedra Petri. To this Optatus replies in the next sentence (we must remember that he knew nothing of the present division into chapters) by suggesting that they might allege their Bishops of Rome. ' But you allege, etc.* St. Optatus is engaged exclusively with the See of Rome in the present chapters ii to vi, from the time, that is, when he begins, until he ceases, to deal with the Cathedra as an Endowment of the Church.

8 sed et habere vos in Urbe Roma aliquam partem dicitis.

1 Harnack points out that Donatists realised so clearly the necessity of communion with the See of Peter, that in the early days of their schism they established a line of Anti-Popes, conse-

70 PETER'S SHRINE

It is a branch of your error growing out of a lie, not from the root of truth. In a word, were Macrobius * to be asked where he sits in the City, will he be able to say on Peter's Cathedra ? I doubt whether he has even set eyes upon it, and schismatic that he is, he has not drawn nigh to Peter's ' Shrine,' 2 against the precept of the Apostle who writes :

' Communicating with the " Shrines " of the Saints/ 3

crating a Bishop for the purpose and sending him to Rome, to preside over their handful of adherents in the City. He writes as follows : ' The connection with Peter's Chair was of decisive importance, not only for Optatus, but also for his opponent, who had appealed to the fact that the Donatists had also a Bishop in Rome ' (Harnack, History of Dogma, v, 155).

1 The Donatist Bishop in Rome at the time. When later on in this chapter St. Optatus comes to give the list of the Donatist Anti-Popes, he evidently added in his second edition the names of Lucian and Claudian, at the same time that he added the name of Siricius to that of the Popes. (See Preface, p. xxii.)

* ad cuius Memoriam non accedit. Albaspinaeus translates Relics. But Memoria is a chapel or church built over the body of a Saint. Here it refers to the Basilica built by Constantine and destroyed in the sixteenth century, where Macrobius could naturally not say Mass. Over the body of St. Paul a small Basilica was erected by Constantine. The great church, burnt in 1826, was built in the fifth century, later than St. Optatus (cf. Condi. Carthag. 14 : ' altaria, quae . . . tanquain Memoriae martyrum constituuntur ').

3 Memoriis Sanctorum communicantes . The reference is to Romans xii, 13. It is quite unintelligible to us until we learn that some ancient MSS. had TCUS /uvefcus instead of TCUS xp*iais' The reading fj.veia.is is in the Acts of Pionius (second or third century) and in the bilingual codices D and G ; it was therefore the Western and Old Latin reading. It is used, amongst others, by St. Hilary, Ambrosiaster, St. Peter Chrysologus and St. Gregory the Great, who writes (De Verbis Domini cxxxvii. 3, 7, last chapter) : ' Com- tnunicaiio Memoriis sanctorum martyrum.' Both readings were known to Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Jerome, Rufinus, Augustine and Pelagius. So we see that in following this reading St. Optatus does not stand alone. There is, however, little, if any, doubt that St. Paul really wrote TO?S xPeiaiS>

VICTOR OF GARBA 71

Behold, in Rome are the ' Shrines ' of the two Apostles. Will you tell me whether he has been able to approach them, or has offered Sacrifice in those places, where — as is certain — are these ' Shrines ' of the Saints.

So it follows that your colleague Macrobius must confess that he sits where once sat Encolpius ; and if Encolpius himself could be questioned, he would say that he sat where before him sat Bonifacius of Balla ; and if Bonifacius could be asked, he would in his turn reply that he sat where Victor of Garba sat, whom some time ago your people sent from Africa to a few wanderers.1

How do you explain that your party has not been able fo possess a Roman citizen as Bishop in Rome ? How is it that in that City they were all Africans 2 and strangers who are known to have succeeded one another ? Is not craft here manifest ? Is this not the spirit of faction — the mother of schism ?

This Victor of Garba was sent first, I will not say as a stone into a fountain (for he could not ruffle the pure waters of the Catholic people), but because some Africans who belonged to your party, having gone to Rome, and wishing to live there, begged that someone should be sent from Africa to preside over their public worship. So Victor was sent to them. He was there as a son without a father, as a beginner without a master, as a disciple without a teacher,

1 ad paucos erraticos — a few Africans staying in Rome — strangers in the city — out of communion with its Church and Bishop — rebuked by its Cathedra — mere ' wanderers.'

8 toti African*. For toti = omnes cf. ii, 5 : ' digiti, quos . . totos ' ; vii, i : ' libri legis dominicae toti ubique recitantur.' Pope Miltiades was an African. The emphasis, therefore, is on the toti.

72 THE CATHEDRA PESTILENTIAE

as a follower without a predecessor,1 as a lodger without a home, as a guest without a guest-house, as a shepherd without a flock, as a Bishop without a people. For neither flock nor people can that handful be termed, who amongst the forty and more Basilicas in Rome, had not one place in which to assemble.

Accordingly they closed up 2 a cave outside the City with trellis-work,3 where they might have a meeting-house at once,4 and on account of this were called Mountaineers.5

Since then, Claudian has succeeded to Lucian, Lucian to Macrobius, Macrobius to Encolpius, Encolpius to Boniface, Boniface to Victor. Victor would not have been able, had he been asked where he sat,6 to show that anyone had been there 7 before him, nor could he havfe pointed out that he possessed any Cathedra save the Cathedra of pestilence 8 ;

1 sequens sine antecedente (cf. St. Cypr. Ep. ad Magnum, 3 : ' Novatianus in Ecclesia non est, nee episcopus computari potest, quia evangelica et apostolica traditione contempta nemini succedens a se ipso ortus est ') .

2 saepserunt. RB have serpserunt.

3 cratibus. RBvb have gradibus. Casaubon adopts this, translates saepserunt ' they fortified/ and understands by gradibus steps going down to the cave from above. But cratibus is almost certainly the true reading.

4 ipso tempore conventiculum. For ipso tempore Barthius con jectured pro tempore.

6 Montenses. Mountaineers — from this ' cave/ which was made to look like a little mountain. St. Jerome writes (In Chronico ad annum Christi 336) : ' Quidam sectatores Donati etiam Mon tenses vocant eo quod ecclesiam Romae primum in monte habere caeperunt.'

6 ubi sederet, i.e. on whose Chair (Cathedra} he sat.

7 illic fuisse, i.e. on his Chair.

8 St. Optatus will soon make great play with this Cathedra Pestilentiae (Ps. i, i), which he declares to belong to the Donatists.

PETER RECEIVED THE KEYS 73

for pestilence sends down its victims, destroyed by diseases, to the regions of Hell which are known to have their gates — gates against which we read that Peter received the saving Keys — Peter, that is to say, the first of our line,1 to whom it was said by Christ :

' To thee will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven/ and these keys

' the gates of Hell shall not overcome.' 2

How is it, then, that you strive to usurp for yourselves the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, you who, with your arguments, and audacious sacrilege, war against the Chair of Peter ? 3

The Chair of Pestilence is ranged by him against the Chair of Peter. For ' Cathedra Pestilentiae ' we may compare St. Ambrose (comm. in cap. xxiiiMatthaei) : ' Quod autem ait super Cathedram Moysis . . . per Cathedram legis doctrinam ostendit. Ergo et illud quod dicitur in Psalmo " In Cathedra Pestilentiae non sedit," . . . doctrinam debemus accipere.'

1 Principem scilicet nostrum, in contrast to Victor, who was the first ' Mountaineer ' Bishop of Rome, or perhaps to the origi nators of the Schism, with whom Optatus often taunts the Donatists as being their Principes.

2 Claves regni coelorum tibi dabo, etportae inferorum non vincent eas.

3 Unde est ergo, quod claves regni coelorum vobis usurpare con- tenditis, qui contra Cathedram Petri vestris praesumptionibus et audaci sacrilegio militatis ? (Rvb have audaciis). It may well be noted that Optatus accused the Donatists of ' audacious sacrilege ' (audax sacrilegium) in ' warring against ' the Chair of Peter. Their ' warring ' consisted, according to Optatus, in claiming the keys argumentatively for themselves — thus justifying themselves in re maining out of communion with the Holy See — and in ignoring the Judgement of Pope Miltiades. Cf. i, 24, 25. Mr. Denny (Papalism, n- 873) quotes this passage, but translates usurpare 'obtain,' and omits altogether vestris praesumptionibus et audaci sacrilegio. (For praesumptionibus cf. i, 7: ' de inconsideratis praesumptionibus et erroribus vestris ' ; v, 4 : ' quod praescribas praesumptionibus vestris ' ; vii, i : ' praesumptiones vestrae.')

Peace.

74 IS CHRIST DIVIDED ?

Thus do you repudiate the blessedness deserved Authors by him who walked not in the counsel of the wicked,

of Schism, *

and did not stand in the way of sinners, and sat not on the Chair of Pestilence.1 Your fathers walked in the counsel of the ungodly, to divide the Church. They also walked in the way of sinners, when they strove to divide Christ, whose garments not even the Jews would rend, though the Apostle Paul cries out and says :

' Is then Christ divided ? ' *

Would that your fathers, after having already walked in the evil way, had recognised their sin, and turned back upon themselves ; would that they had set right their wicked deeds ; would that they had recalled the Peace 3 which they had put to flight.

That would have been to turn back on their way, for on the way we have to walk, not stand still. But, since your fathers would not come back, it is certain that they stood in the way of sinners. They, whose steps had been impelled by mad wickedness, were held back, bound and benumbed by the spirit of strife ; and, that they might not be able to return to better things, themselves placed the shackles of schism upon themselves, so that with obstinacy they stood in their error, and were not able to come back to the Peace which they had deserted. Nor

1 PS. i, i.

J i Cor. i; 13.

3 quam fugaveruut pacew (Pax here as elsewhere = the Unity of the Church. Cf. i, i ; vi, i etc.)-

THE SONS OF THEIR FATHERS 75

did they listen to the Holy Spirit speaking in the thirty-third Psalm :

' Turn away from evil and do good ; seek Peace and pursue it ' 1 ;

but they stood in the way of their sins.

Your fathers also sat on the Chair of Pestilence, which, as we have said above, sends down to death those whom it has beguiled. But you, whilst by your zealous defence you pay homage to your fathers' error, have made yourselves the heirs of their wicked ness, when you might have been, though late, the sons of Peace. For it has been written in the Prophet Ezekiel :

' Raise thy voice over the son of the sinner, that he follow not in his father's footsteps, since the soul of the father is Mine and Mine is the soul of the son. The soul which sins, alone shall be punished/ 2

If you would disown your fathers' sin, they alone would have to give an account of their own deed.3 By acting thus, even you might be blessed and receive praise from the mouth of the Prophet, who says in the first Psalm :

' Blessed is the man who hath not walked in the counsel of the ungodly nor stood in the way of sinners, and has not sat in the Chair of Pestilence, but has his will in the Law of the Lord.' 4

What does it mean to have the ' will in the Law/

1 Ps. xxxiii, 15.

2 Ezek. xviii, 3-20.

3 Cf. vii, i where the argument is elaborated, with reference to this passage in Ezekiel, contrasted with Exodus xx, 5.

1 Ps. i, i.

76 PEACE

unless both to learn the divine precepts with piety, and fulfil them with fear — to have the will set on that Law in which it has been written (in the Gospel) :

' Peace on earth to men of good will/ 1 and in another place (in Isaiah the Prophet 2) :

' I will lay the foundations of peace in Sion,' and in another (the eighty-fourth Psalm) :

' Let us see what the Lord shall say, for He shall speak peace to His people,' 3

and in yet another (the seventy-fifth Psalm) :

' The Son of God has come, and His place has been set in peace,' 4

and again (in the seventy-first Psalm) :

' Let the mountains receive peace for the people, and the hills justice,' 5

and in the Gospel :

' My peace I give to you, My peace I leave to you ' 6 ; and Paul says :

' He who sows peace, peace also shall he reap/ 7

1 Luke ii, 14. 2 Isaiah Ix, 17.

3 Ps. Ixxxiv, 9. ' Ps. Ixxv, 3.

5 Ps. Ixxi, 3. « John xiv, 27.

7 ' qui pacem seret, pacem et metet.' The reference is to 2 Cor. ix, 6, where the Vulgate reads : ' Qui parce seminat, parce et metet.' Parce is in accordance both with the Greek ^ctSo/ieVws and with the context. Evidently, therefore, St. Optatus cannot be quoting from any Latin version, unknown to us, but the mistake is due simply to a slip of his memory. In the same way he will immediately supply the words ' In the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost,' which is probably a reminiscence of 2 Cor. iii, 14.

ISOLATION OF THE DONATISTS 77

and in all his epistles l :

1 Let peace abound amongst you in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Hol