Against the Donatists

Notes

1. 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.
2. 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, 1).
   (5) Sigillum (quo fons signatur).
   (6) Umbilicus (from Cant. vii, 2).
   It was common ground between Optatus and his opponent that the 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, 11: ‘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.’ (1) 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, 1). Such is the argument 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. …
3. 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. … 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.’
4. quis et ubi prior Cathedram sederit?
5. Cf. vii, 5 (p. 294).
6. This is what we are now accustomed to call ‘Invincible Ignorance’ (cf. John ix, 40).
7. 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.’
8. Petro primo. This in answer to who it was who first sat on the Cathedra (quis?). The answer is Peter.
9. in urbe Roma. This in answer to the question where was he the first to sit (ubi?). The answer is Rome.
10. Cathedram episcopalem esse conlatam.
11. Evidently this is an instance of paronomasia or play upon words (Cephas from κεφαλή). It is so atrocious etymologically to derive an Aramaic from a Greek word that Balduinus thinks that 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.
12. in qua unica Cathedra unitas ab omnibus servaretur. … ‘Una ecclesia a Christo Domino nostro super Petrum, origine unitatis et ratione fundata’ (Ep. lxx, 3), and ‘Petro primum Dominus, super quern aedificavit Ecclesiam, et unde unitatis originem instituit et ostendit, potestatem istam dedit’ (Ep. lxxiii, 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.’
13. ne ceteri Apostoli singulas sibi quisque defenderent, ut iam scismaticus et peccator esset, qui contra singularem Cathedram alteram conlocaret. … 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, … ‘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 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 unlawfulness 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.
14. Cf. St. Cyprian, Ep. ad Antonian. i, 8: ‘cum Fabiani [Romani Episcopi] locus, id est cum locus Petri et gradus Cathedrae sacerdotalis vacaret.’