Library › St Optatus of Milevis › Against the Donatists
Against the Donatists
St Optatus of Milevis, tr. Vassall-Phillips, 1917
Book 5, From Parmenian’s Own Principles It Follows that Baptism is One
In our First Book we have shown by the clearest proofs who were the Betrayers of the Law1 and the originators of the schism; in the Second we have pointed out that with us is the One True Catholic Church, whilst in the Third we have proved that whatever is said to have been done with severity cannot rightfully be in any way ascribed to us. We have also maintained2 that there is divine warrant for saying that it is you,3 rather than we, who are ‘sinners.’4
We must now5 in this place speak of Baptism. In the matter at present to be considered the whole question consists in this, that you have dared to do violence6 to Baptism----that you have repeated what Christ has commanded to be done but once.
And this, my brother Parmenian, you do not deny, since at the beginning of your treatise you have said many things which are on our side, and tell for us, but against you.7 Thus with reference to Baptism, you have mentioned that there was only one Flood, and only one Circumcision for the people of the Jews. But although you dealt with these subjects at the beginning of your oration,8 as the sermon was developed9 you soon forgot all about them, and introduced two waters; so you made a silly commencement to your argument, for you knew that you were going on to discuss the true water and the false.10
You strengthen the oneness of Holy Baptism, when trying to weaken it11; for you have wished to lay as it were a foundation, with regard to the Jewish Circumcision, that the Baptism of Christians had been foreshadowed in the Circumcision of the Hebrews. In this way you have defended, whilst attacking, the Catholic Church. As your treatise progressed, you claimed to empty of value one kind of Baptism,12 that you might fill the other to the full.13 By saying that (apart from the Baptism of heretics14), there is one Baptism and yet a second,15 you could not deny----although you have tried to show that they are different16 ----that they are two; when you endeavoured to remove one of these,17 you laboured to treat the second18 as though it were the first.19 But before the coming of Baptism, Circumcision was sent forward in advance in a figure. Yet you have maintained that there are amongst Christians two waters. Show then that there are also two Circumcisions amongst the Jews----of which one was the better, the other the worse. If you search for this, you will not be able to find it. The family20 of Abraham----by descent from whom men are judged to be Jews----glory in being marked with this seal. Therefore the truth ought afterwards to follow, like in character to its figure,21 which was sent on before. For God too, who wished to show that the reality to come (when the truth should follow the type) must be something unique,22 willed not that anything should be removed from the ear, nor from the finger; but that part of the body was chosen where what had been once cut away23 should leave them with a sign that is to our point, because it cannot be removed a second time. For when this is done once it preserves health; if done again it may do harm. Similarly, Christian Baptism, effected by the Trinity,24 confers grace; if it be repeated it causes loss of life.
What then has come over you,25 my brother Parmenian, to bring forward a thing which is one,26 and over against it27 to compare two Baptisms (even though you allege that they are different)----the one true, the other false? For in this way you have proceeded to argue that there are two waters, and claiming one as true for yourselves, wished to ascribe the other to us as false.28
After this you have made mention also of the Flood.29 This was indeed a figure of Baptism, inasmuch as the whole sin-stained world, after the sinners had been drowned, was, through the intervention of washing,30 restored----cleansed----to its former appearance.31 But since you were going to say that (besides32 the muddy33 fountains of the heretics) there was another water----that is a lying34 water in opposition to the true----to what purpose have you thought well to refer to the Flood, which happened but once? But as you will have it so,35 show first two Arks unlike one another, and two dissimilar doves, bearing different branches in their mouth----that is, if you are to prove that there is a true water and another which is false.
That water alone is true which has been sanctified36 not from any place, nor by any [human] person,37 but by the Trinity. And, as you have said that there is a water which is lying,38 learn where you may find such----with Praxeas, the Patripassian, who totally39 denies the Son, and maintains that the Father has suffered.
Since the Son of God is Truth----as He Himself bears witness, saying:
‘I am the Door, and the Way and the Truth’40 -----
therefore----if the Son of God is Truth----where He is not, there is a lie. And as the Son is not with the Patripassian, there the Truth is not, and where the Truth is not, there the water is lying. So, though late, cease now to concoct accusations,41 and do not transfer to Catholics that which was said against Patripassians.
It has, then, been clearly demonstrated that what you have said of the Flood and of Circumcision might have been said just as well by us as in support of your side.42
It remains to show that you have praised Baptism in such a way as to bring forward many things which tell both for you and for us, but something that tells against you. Whatever we share with you is in favour of both. For this reason does it favour you, because from us you went out. Thus, for example, you and we have one ecclesiastical discipline,43 we read from the same Scriptures,44 we possess the same Faith, the same Sacraments of Faith, the same Mysteries. With reason, therefore, have you praised Baptism, for who amongst the Faithful is unaware that the one Baptism45 is life for virtues, death to evil deeds,46 birth to immortality, the attainment of the heavenly kingdom, the harbour of innocence, and (as you too have said) the shipwreck of sins47? These are the blessings conferred upon every believer, not by the minister of this Sacrament, but by the Faith of him who believes and by the Trinity.
Notes
- Legis, id est, of the Holy Scriptures.
- docuimus.
- vos esse divino indicio.
- peccatores----i.e. in the matter of the schism (cf. iv, 3 etc.).
- It will be noticed that in this summary of the preceding Books, there is no express reference to the Fourth. For this reason Casaubon thinks that the two lines which are now printed at the end of the Fourth ought to be placed at the beginning of this Fifth Book; Probatum est ergo te non contra nos, sed contra vos dixisse, quod a te dictum est de oleo et sacrificio peccatoris.
- quod Baptisma vestra violavit audacia.
- multa contra vos pro nobis, quae sunt nostra, dixisti (cf. i, 5).
- dictionis tuae. (Dictio is a formal piece of rhetoric.)
- in processu tractatus tui. Tractatus is usually a sermon (cf. p. 176, note 2).
- de aqua vera et falsa.
- infirmando confirmas.
- That administered by Catholics.
- alterum te inanire professus es, ut alterum replere videreris. Videor is again used pleonastically.
- extra haereticorum Baptisma. By heretics St. Optatus here understands heretics such as Marcion, Praxeas and Valentinus (cf. iv, 5), who denied the doctrine of the Trinity. As they did not baptise in the Name of the Trinity, baptism administered by them was certainly invalid (cf. notes i,p. 17; 2, p. 22). Of such varia et falsa baptismata (i, 12) there was to be no question in this Book. They lay outside its scope.
- Baptisma alterum et alterum.
- diversa, in the same way that Catholic Baptism differs from any baptism not administered in the Name of the Trinity.
- auferre alterum, id est, to deny the validity of Baptism by Catholics.
- id est, rebaptism by Donatists.
- laborasti ut de secundo quasi primum facere videreris. We have here once more a pleonastic use of videor.
- prosapia.
- eius imago.
- rem singularem post esse debere.
- peritomen semel ablatum.
- Trinitate confectum.
- quid tibi igitur placuit, frater Parmeniane?
- rem singularem.
- contra hanc.
- mendacem.
- Cataclysmi.
- lavacro interveniente.
- in faciem pristinam mundaretur.
- extra.
- morbidos.
- mendacem. The epithet applied by Donatists to Catholic Baptism.
- si ita est.
- condita est.
- non de persona, that is not (as the Donatists maintained) from the sanctity of the baptiser.
- mendacem.
- ex toto.
- John xiv, 6.
- configere crimina.
- a nobis et pro vobis. G reads pro nobis. No doubt an emendation, to make the text less difficult.
- conversatio = manner of life.
- communes lectiones (St. Optatus, however, seems to contradict this in vi, 3, where he accuses the Donatists of having ‘furtivas et alienas lectiones ‘).
- singulare baptisma.
- criminum mortem.
- peccatorum naufragium.