The Lantern

Against the Donatists · Translator's introduction3

CCEL

But it is not only with reference to the punishment of schismatics that the appeal of St. Optatus to the Old Testament will strike us as strange and sometimes even perverse. Again and again, when arguing against some Donatist custom or personage, he quotes a passage from Ezekiel, or Daniel, or Isaiah, as though Donatus the Great or the sacrileges of his followers had been before the mind of the Hebrew Prophet. This to us (at least to me)----however ingenious it may sometimes be----is tiresome and irritating in the extreme. But we must remember that of course St. Optatus did not think or mean anything of the kind. What he did mean was that Almighty God, when inspiring His Prophet, intended that Prophet's words to be applied (amongst other ways) to the case of the Donatists. All the Fathers of the time (indeed all Christians) held a theory of verbal dictation of the inspired writings, which has never been taught officially by the Church and has long been practically unknown amongst Catholics. Moreover, in the fourth and fifth centuries it was generally believed that Holy Scripture had many senses in addition to the literal or first sense. Consequently all ecclesiastical writers during those centuries used the text of Scripture from time to time in a way that will inevitably seem to us to be most far-fetched and unreal. But if this treatment of the Bible so appears to us, it would not have thus appeared to the contemporaries of Optatus. Indeed it is highly probable that many Donatists were much impressed and even converted by his appeal against them couched in the very words of some great |xvii Hebrew Prophet. And if St. Optatus is sometimes insulting to the Donatists in his application of Holy Scripture, it is clear that often----this is certainly true of the muscae moriturae in Book VII and of all the passages dealt with in Book IV----he is merely retorting arguments that had been used against Catholics by Parmenian or other Donatists. Evidently, it did not seem to him safe to leave those arguments, so far as they consisted of quotations from Scripture, to answer themselves, and St. Optatus knew, as we cannot possibly know, the mentality of those men of his own day, for whose sake he was writing his work.

However, such an exegesis of Scripture is so alien to our habits of thought that it may draw the attention of the reader away from the real and great excellences of Optatus to a sense of mere annoyance at what will seem to be now and again his perversity of interpretation. (In fairness it should be said that, so far as this is true of Optatus, it is true also often of St. Ambrose and sometimes even of St. Augustine.) In my anxiety that there should be nothing to hinder the study of the really important and interesting parts of the work of St. Optatus, I thought for a moment of excluding his applications of the Old Testament to the circumstances of the Donatist schism. But a very little consideration made me see that such a course was out of the question, and that if I translated St. Optatus at all I must translate every word, so that it would be impossible for anyone to think that Optatus had been bowdlerised or mutilated at my hands. He is great enough to be read in his entirety and reckoned with as |xviii a whole. The reader may be certain that I have translated----for him to read, if he likes----everything without exception as it stands in the Seven Books of Optatus, as he submitted them to the judgement of his own time.

St. Optatus can often be usefully illustrated from St. Cyprian and St. Augustine; occasionally from St. Jerome and Tertullian. I am aware that I have laid myself open to criticism by sometimes supplying references to the writings of these Fathers in their original; sometimes in a translation. I can but explain that considerations of space made it impossible to give them both in Latin and English. It only remained to do what seemed to me the more useful in each case. Sometimes I thought it safer to sacrifice the vernacular for the sake of giving the exact words of my authority (after all my footnotes are hardly likely to be read by many persons without a knowledge of Latin); sometimes, however, I felt it important to give the quotation in a form which all can understand. I can only plead that I have exercised my judgement to the best of my ability, and have always translated with faithfulness.

I much wished to present the Latin text. But that could not have been done without doubling the size and expense of my book. I have, however, always given the Latin in a note in three cases: (1) when any controversial point was involved, (2) when there was any doubt lingering in my mind as to the exact meaning of my author, (3) when I thought that my English version was somewhat free.

St. Optatus is by no means easy to translate. His |xix sentences are often very long and involved. Not seldom he loses his thread and anacolutha are frequent. Often too he is very crabbed and obscure. I have been most anxious, and I hope careful, to observe the two golden rules of faithful translation: firstly, to put no idea in the rendering which is not clearly in the text, and secondly to express every thought and phrase of the author in words that are as nearly as one can make them the equivalent of his own. To secure these two points I have never hesitated, when necessary, to sacrifice idiomatic English to literalness in translation. Few things are more exasperating than is a French paraphrase, which so often is as misleading with regard to the exact sense of its supposed original, as it is charming in its own beauty and delicacy of expression. The style of Optatus is often majestic, always full of force and vigour, and sometimes rises to heights of real eloquence. There is one peculiarity of the African Latin of the time which, until we are accustomed to it, creates a difficulty and therefore perhaps here requires a word of notice. It is not too much to say that Optatus had no idea of the sequence of tenses observed by the classical authors, or even of any distinction in meaning between the imperfect and pluperfect subjunctive. This is often noticeable in St. Augustine, but even more so in St. Optatus. Optatus uses these tenses quite indifferently and often linked together in the same sentence, without any reference to the question of time. On the other hand, his Latin is often most musical; he had a very sensitive ear for rhythm and euphony (it is often a delight to |xx read aloud his sonorous sentences for the very joy of listening to their sound), and accordingly he will use the pluperfect subjunctive where we should expect the imperfect, merely because of the cadence. If proposuisset will finish a sentence more imposingly and rhythmically than proponeret, proposuisset will inevitably fall from his pen. Our only guide, as to whether it should be translated 'he would propose' or 'he would have proposed,' is the sense of the context. As soon as we have become at all conversant with the writings of St. Optatus we shall be accustomed to this peculiarity, and it ceases to trouble us. It might well be otherwise with anyone who has never read the original. He would naturally be much surprised to see a Latin imperfect given in a note, but translated in the text by an English verb in the pluperfect, or vice versa. For this reason I have thought it well to give this explanation in advance.

It remains to say a few words about the occasion of this treatise and its date; we must also state what is known of Optatus and of Parmenian, the Donatist, to whom these Books are addressed.

St. Optatus himself tells us the origin of his work. As the Donatists at the time refused a conference or public discussion with Catholics, it seemed desirable to answer them in writing. Accordingly Optatus determined to reply to a book which had recently appeared, written by a certain Parmenian. This Parmenian, about the year 350, had become the Donatist |xxi Bishop of Carthage, in succession to Donatus, the successor of Majorinus, who had commenced all the trouble by allowing himself to be intruded into the See already occupied by Caecilian, the lawful Catholic Bishop. So we find Optatus writing to Parmenian of Majorinus as his avus, and reproaching him with sitting in the ' Cathedra Pestilentiae ' on which Majorinus was the first to sit. Optatus tells us that Parmenian was not an African, but a stranger to Carthage. Besides the book against the Catholic Church which St. Optatus here answers, Parmenian wrote another against a fellow-Donatist named Tichorinus, which was, in its turn, answered by St. Augustine. Of these two works of Parmenian, Du Pin writes in his Preface: 'Diversa utriusque operis divisio, diversus methodus, diversum argumentum, quamquam eadem utrobique in Ecclesiam Catholicam convitia legerentur.'

We are able to gather the date of the work of St. Optatus from internal evidence. St. Optatus himself tells us that when he wrote his book more than sixty years had elapsed since the storms of persecution burst over all Africa. Now, the persecution of Diocletian (which without doubt is here referred to) began early in 303 and ceased in the East in 305. Again, whilst St. Optatus terms Photinus 'a heretic of this present time,' St. Jerome tells us that Photinus died in the year 376. Putting these two dates----that of the cessation of the Diocletian persecution and the death of Photinus----together, and bearing the words of Optatus concerning them in mind, we gather that he wrote |xxii after 365 and before 376. But we can narrow it still further, for St. Jerome also tells us that Optatus wrote when Valentinian and Valens were Emperors. Valentinian was elected Emperor in 372, and died in 375. Between these years therefore St. Optatus published the first edition of his work. I say the first edition, for the following considerations seem to make it certain that he subsequently brought out his work anew with considerable additions, directed against the cavils with which the Donatists had met its publication. In the list of Popes we now find the name of Siricius given after that of Damasus. But Siricius was not raised to the Supreme Pontificate until 384, some years after the death of both Valentinian and Valens. It is, therefore, quite certain that Optatus could not possibly have written in the lifetime of these Emperors, that 'together with the whole Catholic world' he was then 'united with Siricius in the bonds of communion.' Moreover, Optatus gives us not only a list of the Popes from St. Peter, but also a list of the Donatist anti-Popes from Victor Garbensis (the first of the series) to Macrobius. Of this Macrobius he writes as of one still living, and calls him the socius of Parmenian. Later on, however, in the same chapter Optatus gives the names of two obscure anti-Popes, Lucianus and Claudianus (otherwise unknown to history), who had succeeded Macrobius in the Donatist line. These names, like that of Pope Siricius, must necessarily have been added after the work had |xxiii been finished and first given to the world. We may, therefore, safely conclude that Optatus wrote his Six Books against Parmenian about the year 373, when Valentinian and Valens were Emperors, during the Pontificate of Damasus. But he lived on until the time when Siricius was Pope and Theodosius Emperor, and then brought out a new edition of his work up to date, and no doubt added in some shape or other the chapters which now constitute his Seventh Book.

Concerning the life of St. Optatus hardly anything is known, but he has always been held in honour in the Church by reason of the tradition concerning the sanctity of his life, as well as the vigour and learning with which he defended the Faith. Thus St. Fulgentius joins his name with those of Augustine and Ambrose, and writes as follows: 'Sive quod Sanctus Ambrosius, sive quod Sanctus Augustinus, sive quod Sanctus Optatus senserunt a nobis quoque salva veritate fidei sentiatur.' St. Augustine too joins together St. Ambrose and St. Optatus as authorities, writing, 'doctrinam quam commendavit Milevitanus Optatus vel Mediolanensis Ambrosius.' In another place St. Augustine appeals to St. Optatus as the great authority for the history of the Donatist schism, and describes him as 'Venerabilis memoriae Milevitanus Episcopus Catholicae Communionis Optatus.' Concerning the accuracy of St. Optatus as an historian there has never been any more doubt than as to his orthodoxy and learning as a theologian. His work was, |xxiv as he himself tells us and St. Augustine bears witness, richly documented and was never controverted on any side. Indeed there is an amusing story given by St. Augustine and still to be found in the Gesta Collationis Carthaginensis as to how the Donatist Bishops appealed to his authority concerning Constantine's refusal to allow Caecilian to return immediately to his See, and the way in which the laugh was turned against them when the whole passage was read aloud.

We know from St. Jerome that Optatus was an African by birth, and from St. Augustine that he was a convert to the Faith. Augustine's beautiful words on this subject may well be quoted; they seem to lose the fragrant delicacy of their aroma if any attempt be made to translate them: 'Nonne aspicimus quanto auro et argento et veste sussarcinatus exierit de Aegypto Cyprianus Doctor suavissimus et Martyr beatissimus; quanto Lactantius, quanto Victorinus, Optatus, Hilarius, ut de vivis taceam!'

Here the names of Optatus, Lactantius and Cyprian are brought together----three great African converts----by a fourth, Augustine, the greatest of them all. And if, as is undoubted, Augustine, himself 'rich with the spoils of the Egyptians,' owed much also to Optatus, Optatus owed even more to Cyprian. We see the influence of St. Cyprian throughout the writings of Optatus, though, like Augustine after him, Optatus |xxv did not fear to desert Cyprian, where (as in the question of the re-baptism of heretics) Cyprian was wrong.

To overestimate the influence of Cyprian on the Church in Africa in the fourth century is hardly possible. By his sanctity, by his learning, above all by his heroic martyrdom, Cyprian had won for himself a position which was unique in the veneration and affection of the Faithful. For this reason the works of St. Cyprian were continually appealed to by the Donatists. Petilian quoted them against St. Augustine, as in the days of Optatus they had already been quoted by Parmenian.

The Canon of Scripture was fixed by Pope St. Damasus whilst St. Optatus was very likely still alive, and (whatever we may think of the use that Optatus sometimes made of the sacred text) there is no doubt of the veneration in which he held the inspired writings. On occasion, we must admit, he quoted them with inaccuracy; from which it follows that he must have quoted by heart. But he (or rather a writer who lived not many years later) tells us that the MSS. were numerous in his time and 'in the hands of all.' Optatus probably knew neither Greek nor Hebrew. He employed a pre-Hieronymian version (African in form, but less typically so than that used by St. Cyprian), to the very words of which (even in the |xxvi translation) he seems to have ascribed inspiration. But surely it is far better to honour the text of the Written Word of God too much than too little, and in this, as in so many other things, St. Optatus may, if we will, be to us, in these days of Modernism, both an example and an inspiration.

Nothing is known as to the exact date or place of his death. Throughout Christendom there are magnificent temples raised to the honour of Ambrose, Jerome and Augustine; in memory of Cyprian there is a famous Chapel in the Catacombs; in no land----so far as I have been able to discover----is there even an altar raised to Heaven under the invocation of Optatus of Mile vis. For him there is no public cultus anywhere amongst the Faithful in the Church of God. But he lives in his work----a monument of his zeal for the Catholic Faith and for Catholic Unity. No Catholic, having once read this book, and having therein entered into the loyal, upright, devoted, strenuous, somewhat impetuous spirit of its author----a Bishop who threw himself whole-heartedly into the fight that he knew to be necessary; a formidable and on occasion hard-hitting champion of Religion; a good shepherd who knew not guile and hated schism, but loved the Peace which, as he tells us, Christ bequeathed as a keepsake to His children; who loved the Unity of the Church which alone can secure that Peace for those who will seek and ensue it; who loved the Chair of Peter and the safety of his flock better far than he loved aught on earth beside----but will recognise to the full the justice of the simple words of the Roman Martyrology which |xxvii on the fourth of each recurring June commemorate this single-minded servant of God,

Milevi in Numidia Sancti Optati Episcopi doctrina et sanctitate conspicui.

'He being dead yet speaketh.'

--------

At least six manuscripts of St. Optatus are in existence (all of them in a more or less incomplete state), and were consulted by Ziwsa. We shall refer to them as A, B, C, G, P, R, respectively.

A = Orléans, Bibliothèque de la ville, 169 (seventh century----only a fragment).

B = Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, 1712, formerly in the Library of Baluze, 290 (fourteenth century).

C = Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, 1711, formerly in Colbert's Library (eleventh century).

G = Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, 13335, once in the Library of St. Germain-des-Prés, 609 (1248), (fifteenth century).

P = Petrograd, Imperial Public Library, Lat. 25 Q.v. omd. I. 2 (fifth or sixth century).

R = Reims, Bibliothèque de la ville, 221 (olim 138) (beginning of ninth century).

Of these manuscripts, P is the most ancient and undoubtedly the most valuable. Unfortunately it is extant for the first two Books only. For the other Books R is the best authority. Ziwsa, however, seems to think that some of the various readings in G may represent changes made by St. Optatus himself in his second edition; from this point of view (late though |xxviii it is) G becomes very important. A is too fragmentary to be of much service; it is extant for the first two chapters of the Seventh Book only. To C we owe all that remains of the Appendix; unhappily it commences in its present state only about the middle of the Sixth Book. Ziwsa holds B in small account, and Du Pin tells us that it is valde mendosus.