Optatus of Milevis, Against the Donatists (1917) Appendix 2. The trial before Zenophilus. pp. 346-381.
APPENDIX----II
GESTA APUD ZENOPHILUM
(I NTRODUCTION .)
It is A.D. 320, six years after the vindication of Felix of Aptunga, and another trial is proceeding. Time has amply brought her revenge. Now the accusation is no longer against the consecrator of Caecilian the Catholic Bishop of Carthage, but against Silvanus the Donatist Bishop of Cirta, the consecrator of Majorinus, who had been intruded into Caecilian's Chair. In this trial it is conclusively proved that Silvanus and his abettors had been guilty not merely of Betrayal----the sin falsely alleged against Felix and Caecilian, as a pretext for abandoning communion with Caecilian----but also of theft and simony under peculiarly disgraceful circumstances.
St. Optatus, in his description of the commencement of the Donatist schism, has mentioned the name of the Deacon Nundinarius, the editor of the Acts of the Bishops who, in the year 303, met at Cirta to elect a successor to the recently deceased Bishop of that city. When the citizens of Cirta heard that Silvanus had been chosen to be their chief Pastor----Silvanus, a man of bad reputation, who was well known to them as a Traditor ---- they cried out ' Traditor est, alius fiat. Purum et integrum civem nostrum volumus.' The clergy also protested against this election, but Silvanus was supported by a noisy mob of the lowest |347 rabble, and consecrated Bishop by the notorious Secundus of Tigisis. One of the first acts of Silvanus after his consecration was to ordain a certain Victor. This Victor, in order to be made a priest, paid a large sum of money to Silvanus, which Silvanus on his part promptly distributed amongst Secundus and the other Bishops who had taken part in his own consecration. (Such was the character of the shameless men, who were so soon, for their own purposes, to precipitate the Donatist schism by their consecration of Majorinus in opposition to Caecilian.)
Now these facts were well known to Nundinarius the Deacon. It was therefore an evil hour for Silvanus, leading him into much trouble, when, for some reason unknown to us, he violently quarrelled with Nundinarius. Other guilty Donatist Bishops, especially the terrible Purpurius and a certain Fortis, were greatly alarmed when the news of this quarrel reached their ears, and wrote to Silvanus, and to their party in Cirta, that it was imperative that a reconciliation should be effected between Silvanus and Nundinarius. Means must be found to hush the matter up, lest worse things befall them. Evidently it would be too deplorable if it were to be publicly proved that they had been themselves guilty of crimes far more shameful than anything with which they falsely reproached the Catholic Bishops. But it was all to no purpose. Nundinarius was, in the end (though he seems to have wavered for a while), not to be appeased. Catholics called out for a public investigation. It was granted, and followed in due course before Zenophilus.
Throughout the proceedings Nundinarius proved the case against Silvanus with merciless precision. There was first the evidence of an inhabitant of Cirta----a certain Victor, a grammarian. As this Victor tried at first to screen Silvanus, there were read aloud municipal Acts recorded during the persecution when Munatius Felix was |348 Curator. From these it became clear that Silvanus had indeed been a Betrayer, and Victor had to admit this, though he tried to save himself by denying that he was present when it all happened. Then the compromising and discreditable letters were read, from which it was seen how much Purpurius and Fortis dreaded exposure. No doubt they were afraid that Nundinarius might denounce them, as already he had denounced Silvanus in a libellus of accusation, which had been addressed to all the clergy and elders of Cirta, and was read in full before Zenophilus. Furthermore, witnesses were produced who told the old story of the events that took place at the consecration of Silvanus, which proved him to have been guilty of Betrayal and Simony. It was also shown that he and Purpurius, as well as other Donatists, had been guilty of thefts from the Temple of Serapis. Further evidence was given which proved that the Numidian Bishops (now Donatists) had received money from Lucilla, in order that Majorinus might be consecrated rival Bishop of Carthage in opposition to Caecilian, and that they had kept it all for themselves, though part of it at least was intended by its donor for the poor.
Most of these Proceedings are extant, but the judgement is wanting. It is, however, certain that Silvanus was banished by Zenophilus for Betrayal, for robbing the Treasury of vinegar casks, for taking money for Ordination, and for having been himself made Bishop by violence, of all of which crimes he had been proved guilty in the course of these Proceedings. |349
THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE ZENOPHILUS.
The Commencement of the Proceedings before Zenophilus, by which it becomes clear that Silvanus, who with others consecrated Majorinus, the Predecessor of Donatus, was a Betrayer.
In the consulship of Constantine Maximus Augustus and Constantine the younger the most noble Caesar, on the thirteenth of December, (Sextus of Thamagudi being the secretary,) after Victor the Grammarian had been brought in and sworn, Nundinarius the deacon also being present, Zenophilus, a most noble man of consular rank, said:
'What is your name?'
He answered:
'Victor.'
Zenophilus said:
'What is your station in life?'
Victor said:
'I am a lecturer in the literature of Rome, a Latin grammarian.' |350
Zenophilus said:
'What is your rank?'
Victor said:
'My father was a decurion of Cirta. My grandfather was a soldier. He had seen service at court. For our family is of Mauritanian blood.'
Zenophilus said:
'Be mindful of your honour and character, and tell me with simplicity----what was the cause of the dissension amongst Christians?'