Ἅγιος ὁ Θεός, Ἅγιος ἰσχυρός, Ἅγιος ἀθάνατος, ἐλέησον ἡμᾶςKatholikon

Library › St Optatus of Milevis › Against the Donatists

Against the Donatists

St Optatus of Milevis, tr. Vassall-Phillips, 1917

Book 5, That the Grace of Baptism is the Gift of God, Not of Man, Who is Shown to Be Only…

So consider how ridiculous is that saying, which is always heard to come from you, as though for your glorification:
‘This gift of Baptism belongs to him who gives, not to him who receives.’1

And would that you should say this of God, who is the true Giver.2 But----a stupid thing----you say that you are the givers. If this be so, suppose that both you and we are dealing with two Pagans.3 Do you, who say that you are holy, ask the one whom you have in your hands,4 whether he renounces the Devil and believes the Lord, and we will suppose that he says:
‘I will not.’5

On the other hand, let us who, as you will have it, are sinners, ask the other Pagan, whether he renounces the Devil, and believes God and the other questions, and we will suppose that he says:
‘I do renounce and I do believe, and the rest’6 ----
will you tell me when you baptise the one who is unwilling, and we baptise the other who is willing, which of these two can arrive at the grace of God?

Surely, without doubt, it is acquired by the one who believes, not by him, in whose case, as you say, your holiness takes the place of his own will.7 Recognise, though late, that you are only ministers. Or if (you say that) the work is in the workmen, and not in itself, find some who will claim this for themselves in their arts, so that we may, according to your challenge, compare human arts with things that are divine.

When something is dyed with a precious colour, its nature is often changed. A white fleece is dyed, and becomes purple.8 Even as the white wool passes into the royal purple, so the catechumen passes into the Christian.9 Surely, whilst he begins to be that which he was not, he ceases to be that which he was. The wool changes both its colour and its name, and the man changes both his appellation and his disposition.10 We have to think of the results that have been effected, and must consider once more what it is that has effected those results.11 You say that it is your gift that has made that man a Christian.

If this is all your doing, then the workman also who makes the purple, may say that he has the precious colour in his own hands, and has no need to procure from the Ocean precious dyes----unknown to many----that the fleeces may be promoted to a marvellous dignity,12 and is free to assert that he can make the purple, merely by his touch, without admixture from the blood of the fish.

But if on the contrary this workman is unable to give the colour by his touch alone, then neither is the workman in Baptism able to give anything of himself without the Trinity.

Such is this question, about which we have our present contention. For in Whom the nations should be baptised has been ordained by the Saviour. Through whom they should be baptised was appointed without the making of any exception. He did not say to the Apostles:
‘Do it you! Let not others do it.’

Whosoever has baptised in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, has discharged the Apostles’ work.

And so it has been written in the Gospel.13 When John said:
‘O Master, we have seen one casting out devils in Thy Name, and we have forbidden him, because he followeth not with us,’
Christ said:
‘Forbid him not, for he that is not against you is for you.’14

For to them the command had been given that their work should be sanctification by the Trinity,15 and that they should not baptise in their own name, but in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Therefore it is the Name which sanctifies, not the work.16

Understand, though late in the day, that you are labourers not lords.17 And, if the Church is the Vineyard, and men are the vines, and those who are to attend to the vines have been duly appointed, why do you rush upon that which appertains to the dominion of the Father of the Family? Why do you claim for yourselves what belongs to God? Why do you wish that something of which you cannot have even a part, should be yours altogether? For on account of swelling pride----yours----with which you are swollen against us18 ----the most blessed Paul chides the Corinthians. In himself and Apollo he gives a picture of that which happens in our time.19

‘Let not one,’ he said, ‘be puffed up against another.’20

And, that he may show how all this Sacrament of Baptism belongs to God, so that there is nothing here that the ‘Minister’ may claim for himself, he speaks as follows:21
‘I indeed have planted ‘----
that is,
‘of a pagan I have made a catechumen’----‘Apollo has watered’----
that is, he has baptised the catechumen, but God has given that which had been planted, or watered, the power to grow. In like manner anyone to-day, who wishes to dig up and loosen the ground in his vineyard,22 hires a labourer23 for an agreed sum, to make holes in the ground, in which----with bent back, the sweat running down his sides----he may place the little vines that have been selected,24 and (after he has trodden the ridges under his feet) pour water upon them. He is able to dig at the trenches and plant the vines. He is able to bring them water, but he is not able to command the water to hold them25; it is in the power of God alone from the pith of vine-branches to bring forth roots which assimilate themselves to the soil, and the budding eyelets, out of which leaves burst forth.26

Even as the blessed Apostle Paul, to tame your presumption and pride, and that the workman27 may not think either that he has any dominion over Baptism, or claim any share for himself----however small----in so great a gift, writes as follows, showing that all belongs to God:
‘Neither he that plants nor he that waters is anything, but God alone, who leads to the attainment of the increase28.’

You are workmen amongst others. When the sun goes in,29 that is to say, when the world has come to an end----on the Judgement Day30 ----you may argue with us about reward.31

Do not wish to claim for yourself that which belongs to the supreme authority of God.32 For if this is your due, then the servants who wait at the Lord’s table should claim to be thanked by His guests for the courtesies which their Lord has rendered.33 It is the Voice of Christ, who gives the invitation:
‘Come, ye blessed of My Father, receive the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.’34

The nations flock to receive His grace. He, who deigned to invite, is the giver thereof. A crowd of His servants exercise their ministry. Thanks must be rendered, not to those who serve, but to Him who provides the repast. Since you are the ministers, it is shameless in you to claim for yourselves the entire ownership of the banquet,35 though the most blessed Paul confesses with humility that he and the others are servants----in order that no one may imagine that he ought to place his hope in Apostles or Bishops alone. On this account says the Apostle:
‘For what is Paul, or what Apollo? Surely the ministers of Him, in whom you have believed?’36

Accordingly, in all those who serve there is not ownership but service.37 Now, therefore, my brother Parmenian, you see that of the three elements [in Baptism] which I have mentioned above,38 the one which is threefold39 comes first, is immovable, is supreme and unchangeable, but that the person of any individual minister remains only for a time.

Notes

  1. hoc munus baptismatis esse dantis, non accipientis.
  2. qui huius rei dator est.
  3. et nos et vos teneamus singulos gentiles. Cf. i, 8: nihil interesset inter fideles et unumquemque gentilem.
  4. quem tenetis.
  5. ‘nolo.’
  6. ‘renuntio et credo’ et cetera.
  7. non ille, pro cuius voluntate, ut dicitis, sanctitas vestra succedit. For succedit cf. i, 3: ‘Petrus, cui successit Linus,’ etc. In pro cuius voluntate we have another curious example of Optatus’ use of pronouns. Cf. v, 5: ‘Qui non post personam operarii interrogavit.’
  8. confectione vellus candidum purpurascit. Cf. Cic. in Acad. ap. Non. 2, 717: ‘Nonne unda, cum est pulsa remis, purpurascit? ‘
  9. fidelem.
  10. et vocabulum mutat et mentem.
  11. consideranda sunt effecta, retractanda sunt efficientia.
  12. quibus tincta vellera per colorem promoveantur in admirabilem dignitatem.
  13. Luke ix, 49.
  14. Luke ix, 49, 50.
  15. ut opus esset illorum sanctificatio Trinitatis.
  16. ergo Nomen est, quod sanctificat, non opus.
  17. operarios esse non dominos. Cf. note 2, p. 22.
  18. nam propter tumorem vestrum, quo in nos intumescitis. We may notice the verbal alliteration tumorem . . . intumescitis. St. Optatus does not, of course, mean to imply that St. Paul any more than Isaiah or Ezekiel had received a supernatural gift of prophecy, whereby Apostle or Prophet could consciously to himself foresee and provide medicine for the troubles brought on by Donatism. But the lessons given for all time by the Sacred Writers seemed to Optatus especially applicable to his own days.
  19. in se et Apollo actus nostri temporis conformat.
  20. i Cor. iv, 6.
  21. i Cor. iii, 6.
  22. vineam suam pastinare.
  23. operarium.
  24. electa plantaria.
  25. aquam inducere potest; imperare, ut teneat, non potest. It is very difficult to understand what is meant here by ut teneat. How can water hold the vines? Possibly he may be the subject of teneat: ‘He cannot command the vines, so as to keep them there.’ If for teneat we read teneant, we might translate in an intransitive sense: ‘He cannot order that they hold’ = coalescere in terram (infra). But nothing is really satisfactory. Casaubon thinks that the ut teneat is probably a corrupt gloss due to some scribe who could not understand the imperare standing alone. The meaning is clear. It is God alone who can ripen the vine. Casaubon suggests that if St. Optatus wrote anything between imperare and non potest, it was vineae. On the other hand, cf. iv, 9: Lacus detritos, qui non possunt aquam continere. St. Optatus, who often slightly varies his phrases, may have had this phrase unconsciously lingering in his ear.
  26. de medullis palmitum producere radices coalescentes in terram et gemmantes oculos, incrementa frondium provocare. Coalescentes: cf. Plin. xiv. 2: ‘Ut nisi pinguissimo solo coalescere non possit.’ The little feelers or feeling roots must be one with the soil. Gemmantes oculos: cf. Cicero, De oratore, iii. 38: ‘gemmare vites, laetas segetes etiam rustici dicunt,’ ‘Even rustics understood and used such metaphors as these.’ Oculos = the knob from which the bud rises; cf. Columel. iv, 29: ‘Interest plures oculos, quibus egerminet inesse.’
  27. operarius.
  28. qui ad incrementa perducit. Cf. 1 Cor. iii, 7.
  29. sole intrante. This is a Hebraism. The Jews spoke of the setting sun as entering (into the heavens), and of the rising sun as coming forth (from the East).
  30. in die retributionis.
  31. nobiscum de mercede contendere.
  32. Maiestatis dominium. Cf. iv. 9: ‘in Deo perennis Maiestas exundat.’
  33. pro humanitate exhibita.
  34. Matt. xxv, 34.
  35. totum convivii dominium.
  36. 1 Cor. iii, 4, 5.
  37. in universis servientibus non dominium sed ministerium.
  38. The reference is to v, 4: ‘In hoc Sacramento baptismatis celebrando tres esse species constat.’
  39. ex tribus speciebus illam primo tripartitam esse, sc. the Trinity.

· Contents ·