Optatus of Milevis, Against the Donatists (1917) Book 5. pp.203-245.
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.
I. 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 Law 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 maintained that there is divine warrant for saying that it is you, rather than we, who are 'sinners.'
We must now in this place speak of Baptism. In the matter at present to be considered the whole |204 question consists in this, that you have dared to do violence 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. 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, as the sermon was developed 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.
You strengthen the oneness of Holy Baptism, when trying to weaken it ; 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, that you might fill the other to the full. By saying |205 that (apart from the Baptism of heretics ), there is one Baptism and yet a second, you could not deny----although you have tried to show that they are different ----that they are two; when you endeavoured to remove one of these, you laboured to treat the second as though it were the first. 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 family 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, 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, |206 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 away 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, confers grace; if it be repeated it causes loss of life.
What then has come over you, my brother Parmenian, to bring forward a thing which is one, and over against it 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.
After this you have made mention also of the Flood. 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, restored----cleansed----to its former appearance. But since you were going to say that (besides the muddy fountains of the heretics) there was another water----that is a lying water in opposition to the |207 true----to what purpose have you thought well to refer to the Flood, which happened but once? But as you will have it so, 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 sanctified not from any place, nor by any [human] person, but by the Trinity. And, as you have said that there is a water which is lying, learn where you may find such----with Praxeas, the Patripassian, who totally 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' -----
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, 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 |208 have been said just as well by us as in support of your side.
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, we read from the same Scriptures, 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 Baptism is life for virtues, death to evil deeds, birth to immortality, the attainment of the heavenly kingdom, the harbour of innocence, and (as you too have said) the shipwreck of sins ? 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.
II. That in Baptism the work is done by the Trinity, not by the person of the Minister.
Then you will ask what you have, when praising Baptism, said against yourselves. Listen! But first you must acknowledge something which not one of |209 you will be able to deny. You say that the Trinity counts for nothing, unless you be present.
If you think little of us, at least reverence the Lord, who is First in the Trinity, who with His Son and the Holy Ghost effects and completes all things, even when no human person is present.
But, my brother Parmenian, you have said in praise of the water, of which we read in the Book of Genesis, that the waters first gave forth living beings'. Could they have given them birth of their own instance ? Was not the whole Trinity there as well? Surely God the Father was there----He who had deigned to command:
'Let the waters bring forth swimming things, birds and the rest.'
But if that which was then done were to be done without any to effect it, God would have said:
'O waters, bring forth.' |210
So the Son of God----who effected it ----was there. The Holy Ghost was there, as it has been written:
'And the Spirit of God was borne over the waters.'