Th. Bergh, O.S.B.,
Censor Deputatus.
I MPRIMATUR
E. Can. Surmont,
Vic. Gen.
Westmonasterii
die 15 Feb., 1915.
PREFACE
St. Optatus, Bishop of Milevis in Africa, is perhaps the least known of all the Fathers of the Church. His treatise against the Donatists----the one work that he left to posterity, was translated into French in 1564.It is extremely improbable that, but for this exception, it has, until now, ever appeared in any language save Latin. It is quite certain that it has never yet been clothed in an English dress. There is indeed an advertisement still to be seen in The Oxford Library of the Fathers, in which it was announced (in 1848) that a translation of St. Optatus into English would 'soon' appear. Sixty-eight years have elapsed; but this intention has not yet been carried into execution.
Until recently St. Optatus could hardly be found, even in the original Latin, anywhere but in the edition published by Du Pin at Antwerp in 1702, and subsequently incorporated by Migne. His work was until 1870 out of the reach of all persons who had not access to the largest libraries. In 1870----it is true-----Fr. Hurter, S.J., published Du Pin's text in convenient form with short notes, and in 1893 a new critical |vi edition was brought out (edited by the late Professor Ziwsa) in the Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum, which has now for many years been in course of publication at Vienna. Comparatively few people, however, have heard of this excellent edition of the Latin Fathers; still fewer are aware that its volumes may be purchased separately, and that for the sum of a few shillings they may possess themselves of 'the Seven Books of St. Optatus concerning the Schism of the Donatists, against Parmenian.'
Indeed it is not too much to say that the very name of Optatus is barely known even to many students of theology and ecclesiastical history. Yet his is no mean name, and he cannot be ignored with safety, for he has bequeathed to the Church material of no small value, both to the theologian and the ecclesiastical historian. Optatus was held in high repute by the great Augustine, upon whom his influence was undoubtedly considerable. To this Harnack bears witness: 'Even when he entered into the Donatist controversy, Augustine did so as a man of the second or indeed the third generation. He therefore enjoyed the great advantage of having at his disposal a fund of conceptions and ideas already collected. In this sphere Optatus especially had worked before him.'
The work of St. Optatus is, therefore, of consequence not only from the point of view of history----he is the historian of Donatism in its origins----but also from that of doctrine----of 'conceptions and ideas.' It derives special importance from the fact that here we find the |vii first sustained argument from the Catholic side not merely against heresy (false doctrine) but also against schism (separation from the Church).
Heresies come and go. They are essentially ephemeral, according to some transitory fashion of mental speculation. And in fact history proves that the limit of their duration is hardly known to last four centuries. Often indeed they pass into all but complete oblivion. Thus it comes about that a long and sometimes weary discussion concerning a heresy which has perhaps long since vanished from the midst of men is apt to lose much of its actuality. But the Church dies not, and in every age excuses are found by the rebellious for their rebellion against her supreme authority. The argument against heresy is necessarily specialised and multiform; the argument against schism is very simple and admits of no substantial variation in its presentment.
Consequently, it never ceases to be of deep interest to follow the reasoning that has been employed by the champions of the Catholic Church, at any period of her history, on behalf of her exclusive and peremptory claim upon the spiritual allegiance of mankind. Whenever this is in discussion, there is no drowsy stirring of dead bones, but an issue which is ever-living and therefore in a certain sense ever-new. Now, upon this subject Optatus is perfectly explicit. Again and again he lays it down that there is but one true Church of Christ, that she is not merely local, but is scattered |viii all over the world, her chief rulers bound together by formal bonds and proofs of union, each with his fellow, and above all with the Bishop of Rome, Peter's successor.
In other words for Optatus the one question of paramount importance is: 'Which and where is the One Church?' And to this question his answer is clear-cut and unmistakable in its import. The Church of Christ may be easily recognised by all those who will look for her marks. She and she alone is One; she and she alone is truly Catholic. In fact this is her name---- Catholica . She alone is Apostolic----Apostolic for this reason, that all over the world ('ubique') her children are in communion with the Cathedra Petri , the See of that Apostle to whom alone the Lord promised the keys of the kingdom of Heaven ----the See 'against which to contend is sacrilege.'
And because Parmenian, his Donatist adversary, had failed to recognise 'where is the Church?' he is said by Optatus to have 'made confusion of everything.'
The clearness and decisiveness of the teaching of St. Optatus on the Church have caused Harnack to write thus: 'In this thought (of the Church as an institution) Catholicism was first complete . . . But Augustine was not the first to declare it; he rather |ix received it from tradition. The first representative of the new conception known to us, and Augustine also knew him, was Optatus.'
It is hardly necessary to observe that this 'conception' was never really 'new' in Christendom. Optatus did not invent it. He had 'received it' (in the same way that before him in Africa Cyprian had already 'received it,' and, as Harnack admits, Augustine 'received it) from tradition.' He 'received it' also from the express words of Christ and from the prophecies of the Old Testament. It is, however, perfectly true to say that St. Optatus is the first writer known to us who sets out in detail the Catholic conception of the one true Church of Christ. The opportunity came to him only with the Donatist schism. It will always be the great merit of Optatus to have seized that opportunity and to have availed himself of it to such an extent, that Augustine had but to broaden it out and illustrate it with his matchless genius. St. Augustine had only to fill in the picture which St. Optatus had already drawn in clear outline. To the end of time the Catholic theologian, preacher or controversialist, desirous of showing the true nature of the Church, and the obligation (binding everywhere, always, upon all persons, and under all conceivable circumstances) of living within her visible unity, will find everything that he needs ready to Ms hand, in the writings of St. Optatus. Moreover, Optatus will remind us that from this obligation---- |x strict though it be in itself----ignorance (that ignorance which we now call 'invincible') will excuse its victims. Ignorance could not be pleaded by Parmenian; it was therefore impossible to hold him guiltless. But Optatus was evidently aware that in his day in Africa (as in our day in England) there were Christians who, through no fault of their own, knew nothing of the claims of the Chair of Peter.
Apart from the constitution and marks of the Church, there is only one specific doctrine----that Baptism may not lawfully be repeated after it has once been validly administered (the Credo unum Baptisma of the Creed)----with which St. Optatus was directly concerned in his controversy with his Donatist adversaries. His statements as to other Truths of Faith (denied in later ages) are only by the way, and are generally incidental to the course of his historical narrative. This, it seems important to observe, gives them an even greater polemical value than would have been theirs had Optatus written controversially on these subjects, and been contradicted by Donatists or any other Christians then living. But this is far from being the case. For example, St. Optatus is able to write to his opponent: 'Bene revocasti Claves ad Petrum.' Similarly, with regard to all the other Catholic doctrines to which he makes reference throughout his work, it is quite clear that he and Parmenian are standing on common ground, and were perfectly agreed.
When then we reflect that St. Optatus wrote in |xi the century preceding the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, in the very heart of what are sometimes known as 'Primitive Times,' when we remember that he was anterior to Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome and Leo the Great, when we recall the fact that the Reformation in Germany and England does not yet go back four hundred years, but that Optatus wrote six centuries before the Norman set foot on our English soil, and that some thousand years and then two hundred more were to elapse between the writings of Optatus and the breach with Rome over King Henry's divorce, it is a most striking and moving fact that this old Father of the Church bears his express and unequivocal witness not only to the necessity of union with the Cathedra Petri, but also to most of those Catholic Doctrines so violently assailed in the days of Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Cranmer, Knox and their associates, and still denied on all sides around us.
For example, St. Optatus affirms explicitly the truth of Baptismal Regeneration ; again and again makes reference to the Sacrifice of the Altar ; states the doctrine of the Real Presence in words that are incapable of any misunderstanding ; insists on the sacredness of the Holy Chrism ; writes of the adornment of altars for the offering of the Sacrifice ; refers to the ceremony of Exorcism before Baptism ; appeals to deutero-canonical Books as to authentic Scripture ; |xii takes the continuance of Miracles in the Church for granted ; and is quite express in his references to cloistered Virginity and the difference between the Commandments of God and Counsels of Perfection. Sometimes indeed he is so modern in his expressions (or at least his words are so directly applicable to our modern circumstances) that when we first read them we rub our eyes and ask ourselves 'Can it be a Catholic writer of the fourth century, whom we are reading, not one of the twentieth?' Instances of this may be found in the famous description of the origin of the Donatist schism, which, as Cardinal Wiseman has pointed out, can be paralleled with startling exactness by the schism under Henry; or again in such isolated expressions as ' Cathedra ducit ad se Angelum,' which is all that we need should it be urged that it is safe to remain in Anglicanism, because of the (supposed) validity of Anglican Orders. If these Orders were ever so valid, they could not be more valid than were those of the Donatists; but St. Optatus teaches us that, by themselves, valid Orders are of no avail. It is useless to have a Bishop (Angelus) who is out of communion with that One Chair of Peter, of which Optatus is at the time writing. Orders he may have, still he remains visibly in schism. Cathedra ducit ad se Angelum . Or, similarly, 'Per Cathedram Petri, quae nostra est, per ipsam et ceteras dotes |xiii apud nos esse probatum est.' It is through the Chair of Peter----through our Union with that Chair which itself 'is ours,' that we derive and can prove our security as to the other Endowments of the Church, amongst which is reckoned lawful Episcopacy. Or, again, in discussion with any Protestant, what need we say more than those three words of St. Optatus----' Catholica prior est ' ? Before any Protestant body had its birth, before Luther's turbulent spirit began to trouble the peace of Christendom, before the ecclesiastical Provinces of Canterbury and York were torn away by the State from their union with the Apostolic See, before the ambition of Photius separated Byzantium from the elder Rome, before Donatism arose, there was the Catholic Church and the Chair of Peter. Catholica prior est.
It is beyond doubt that, as Vincent of Lerins taught in the fifth century, and as Catholic theologians have since taught in every age, there must be a certain development of doctrine in the Church----that is to say, an 'explication' or unfolding, more and more explicit as the years pass on, of that which has always been implicit in the Deposit of the Faith delivered in the beginning to the Saints; for, where there is life, there must also be growth. Yet, whilst studying St. Optatus I have asked myself whether since his day there has been room for any real development. Whatever development of doctrine may have been necessary, at least with regard to the doctrines concerning the Holy See and the Eucharist, seems to me, as I read |xiv Optatus, to have already taken place and to be generally well known and accepted throughout the Church.
The work, then, of St. Optatus derives its great doctrinal importance from its unambiguous teaching, principally indeed as to the marks of the Church, but also concerning other revealed truths, unhappily denied in modern times by great bodies of Christians separated from the Catholic Unity.
There are two subjects, the treatment of which by St. Optatus will probably jar upon the sensibilities of most, if not all, modern readers: the first is religious persecution, and the second the application of certain passages in the Old Testament, in minute and even verbal detail, to the controversies of his day.
With regard to persecution, the Donatists continually upbraided the Catholics with the punishments inflicted upon their fathers by Macarius and Leontius and other officers sent by the Emperors to secure religious unity. Now, the reply of St. Optatus up to a point is curiously similar to that which we make to-day when we are reminded of what happened in England under Mary Tudor. St. Optatus urged in the first place that these punishments had been greatly exaggerated (just as we say when confronted with Foxe's 'Book of Martyrs'). In the second place he pointed out (as we do) that those who were punished were for the most part turbulent conspirators against the public security, and that their treatment of Catholics had been infinitely worse than any reprisals to which it may have led. Thirdly he laid stress |xv upon the fact (and here again we take precisely the same ground) that whatever happened came to pass by the authority of the State, and not by that of the Church, and that the Church was in no way responsible. If he had stopped here, all would have been well, but unfortunately St. Optatus went further, and argued that 'perchance' the sufferings of the Donatists were 'by the will of God,' and endeavoured to justify them by several parallels from the Old Testament. This is, it seems to us, exceedingly regrettable, but we must remember that to Optatus, it was an axiom, and as such seemed a truism which no man would or could dispute, that it was the duty of a Christian State to secure the observance of the true religion, and to punish not only offences against society, but also those against Almighty God. The modern distinction, so clear to us, between 'crime' and 'sin' was utterly unknown to him, and no doubt, if it had been stated in his hearing, would have seemed to him----at least in the case of a Christian State----utterly immoral and involving the gravest dereliction of duty on the part of a Christian ruler. We know from his own letters that it so appeared to Constantine. When this fact is grasped, it will be more easy to understand a point of view, which is inapplicable to any set of circumstances that can be imagined as arising in modern times. All that can be said fairly on this subject, even by those who think St. Optatus most mistaken and wrong, is that unfortunately he was not ahead of his age. |xvi