Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| To Emeritus
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Letter LXXXVII.
(a.d. 405.)
To His Brother Emeritus, Beloved
and Longed For, Augustin Sends Greeting.
1. I know that it is not on the possession of
good talents and a liberal education that the salvation of the soul
depends; but when I hear of any one who is thus endowed holding a
different view from that which truth imperatively insists upon on a
point which admits of very easy examination, the more I wonder at
such a man, the more I burn with desire to make his acquaintance,
and to converse with him; or if that be impossible, I long to bring
his mind and mine into contact by exchanging letters, which wing
their flight even between places far apart. As I have heard that
you are such a man as I have spoken of, I grieve that you should be
severed and shut out from the Catholic Church, which is spread
abroad throughout the whole world, as was foretold by the Holy
Spirit. What your reason for this separation is I do not know. For
it is not disputed that the party of Donatus is wholly unknown to a
great part of the Roman world, not to speak of the barbarian
nations (to whom also the apostle said that he was a debtor2086
) whose
communion in the Christian faith is joined with ours, and that in
fact they do not even know at all when or upon what account the
dissension began. Now, unless you admit these Christians to be
innocent of those crimes with which you charge the Christians of
Africa, you must confess that all of you are defiled by
participation in the wicked actions of all worthless characters, so
long as they succeed (to put the matter mildly) in escaping
detection among you. For you do occasionally expel a member from
your communion, in which case his expulsion takes place only after
he has committed the crime for which he merited expulsion. Is there
not some intervening time during which he escapes detection before
he is discovered, convicted, and condemned by you? I ask,
therefore, whether he involved you in his defilement so long as he
was not discovered by you? You answer, “By no means.” If, then,
he were not to be discovered at all, he would in that case never
involve you in his defilement; for it sometimes happens that the
crimes committed by men come to light only after their death, yet
this does not bring guilt upon those Christians who communicated
with them while they were alive. Why, then, have you severed
yourselves by so rash and profane schism from the communion of
innumerable Eastern Churches, in which all that you truly or
falsely affirm to have been done in Africa has been and still is
utterly unknown?
2.
For it is quite another question whether or not there be truth in
the assertions made by you. These assertions we disprove by
documents much more worthy of credit than those which you bring
forward, and we further find in your own documents more abundant
proof of those positions which you assail. But this is, as I have
said, another question altogether, to be taken up and discussed
when necessary. Meanwhile, let your mind give special attention to
this: that no one can be involved in the guilt of unknown crimes
committed by persons unknown to him. Whence it is manifest that you
have been guilty of impious schism in separating yourselves from
the communion of the whole world, to which the things charged,
whether truly or falsely, by you against some men in Africa, have
been and still are wholly unknown; although this also should not be
forgotten, that even when known and discovered, bad men do not harm
the good who are in a Church, if either the power of restraining
them from communion be wanting, or the interests of the Church’s
peace forbid this to be done. For who were those who, according to
the prophet Ezekiel,2087
obtained the reward of being
marked before the destruction of the wicked, and of escaping unhurt
when they were destroyed, but those who sighed and cried for the
sins and iniquities of the people of God which were done in the
midst of them? Now who sighs and cries for that which is unknown to
him? On the same principle, the Apostle Paul bears with false
brethren. For it is not of persons unknown to him that he says,
“All seek their own, not the things which are Jesus
Christ’s;” yet these persons he shows plainly to have been
beside him. And to what class do the men belong who have chosen
rather to burn incense to idols or surrender the divine books than
to suffer death, if not to those who “seek their own, not the
things of Jesus Christ”?
3. I omit many proofs which I might give from
Scripture, that I may not make this letter longer than is needful;
and I leave many more things to be considered by yourself in the
light of your own learning. But I beseech you mark this, which is
quite enough to decide the whole question: If so many transgressors
in the one nation, which was then the Church of God, did not make
those who were associated with them to be guilty like themselves;
if that multitude of false brethren did not make the Apostle Paul,
who was a member of the same Church with them, a seeker not of the
things of Jesus Christ, but of his own,—it is manifest that a man
is not made wicked by the wickedness of any one with whom he goes
to the altar of Christ, even though he be not unknown to him,
provided only that he do not encourage him in his wickedness, but
by a good conscience disallowing his conduct keep himself apart
from him. It is therefore obvious that, to be art and part with a
thief, one must either help him in the theft, or receive with
approbation what he has stolen. This I say in order to remove out
of the way endless and unnecessary questions concerning the conduct
of men, which are wholly irrelevant when advanced against our
position.
4. If, however, you do not agree with what I
have said, you involve the whole of your party in the reproach of
being such men as Optatus was, while, notwithstanding your
knowledge of his crimes, he was tolerated in communion with you;
and far be it from me to say this of such a man as Emeritus, and of
others of like integrity among you, who are, I am sure, wholly
averse to such deeds as disgraced him. For we do not lay any charge
against you but the one of schism, which by your obstinate
persistence in it you have now made heresy. How great this crime is
in the judgment of God Himself, you may see by reading what without
doubt you have read ere now. You will find that Dathan and Abiram
were swallowed up by an opening of the earth beneath them,2088
and that
all the others who had conspired with them were devoured by fire
breaking forth in the midst of them. As a warning to men to shun
this crime, the Lord God signalized its commission with this
immediate punishment, that He might show what He reserves for the
final recompense of persons guilty of a similar transgression, whom
His great forbearance spares for a time. We do not, indeed, find
fault with the reasons by which you excuse your tolerating Optatus
among you. We do not blame you, because at the time when he was
denounced for his furious conduct in the mad abuse of power, when
he was impeached by the groans of all Africa,—groans in which you
also shared, if you are what good report declares you to be,—a
report which, God knows, I most willingly believe,—you forbore
from excommunicating him, lest he should under such sentence draw
away many with him, and rend your communion asunder with the frenzy
of schism. But this is the thing which is itself an indictment
against you at the bar of God, O brother Emeritus, that although
you saw that the division of the party of Donators was so great an
evil, that it was thought better that Optatus should be tolerated
in your communion than that division should be introduced among
you, you nevertheless perpetuate the evil which was wrought in the
division of the Church of Christ by your forefathers.
5. Here perhaps you will be disposed, under the exigencies of
debate, to attempt to defend Optatus. Do not so, I beseech you; do
not so, my brother: it would not become you; and if it would
perchance be seemly for any one to do it (though, in fact, nothing
is seemly which is wrong), it assuredly would be unseemly for
Emeritus to defend Optatus. Perhaps you reply that it would as
little become you to accuse him. Granted, by all means. Take, then,
the course which lies between defending and accusing him. Say,
“Every man shall bear his own burden;”2089
“Who art thou that judgest
another man’s servant?”2090
If, then, notwithstanding the
testimony of all Africa,—nay more, of all regions to which the
name of Gildo was carried, for Optatus was not less notorious than
he,—you have not dared to pronounce judgment concerning Optatus,
lest you should rashly decide in regard to one unknown to you, is
it, I ask, either possible or right for us, proceeding solely on
your testimony, to pronounce sentence rashly upon persons whom we
do not know? Is it not enough that you should charge them with
things of which you have no certain knowledge, without our
pronouncing them guilty of things of which we know as little as
yourselves? For even though Optatus were in peril through the
falsehood of detractors, you defend not him, but yourself, when you
say, “I do not know what his character was.” How much more
obvious, then, is it that the Eastern world knows nothing of the
character of those Africans with whom, though much less known to
you than Optatus, you find fault! Yet you are disjoined by
scandalous schism from Churches in the East, the names of which you
have and you read in the sacred books. If your most famous and most
scandalously notorious Bishop of Thamugada2091
was at that very time not known to
his colleague, I shall not say in Cæsarea, but in Sitifa, so close
at hand, how was it possible for the Churches of Corinth, Ephesus,
Colosse, Philippi, Thessalonica, Antioch, Pontus, Galatia,
Cappadocia, and others which were founded in Christ by the
apostles, to know the case of these African traditors, whoever they
were; or how was it consistent with justice that they should be
condemned by you for not knowing it? Yet with these Churches you
hold no communion. You say they are not Christian, and you labour
to rebaptize their members. What need I say? What complaint, what
protest is necessary here? If I am addressing a right-hearted man,
I know that with you I share the keenness of the indignation which
I feel. For you doubtless see at once what I might say if I
would.
6. Perhaps, however, your forefathers formed
of themselves a council, and placed the whole Christian world
except themselves under sentence of excommunication. Have you come
so to judge of things, as to affirm that the council of the
followers of Maximianus who were cut off from you, as you were cut
off from the Church, was of no authority against you, because their
number was small compared with yours; and yet claim for your
council an authority against the nations, which are the inheritance
of Christ, and the ends of the earth, which are His possession?2092
I wonder
if the man who does not blush at such pretensions has any blood in
his body. Write me, I beseech you, in reply to this letter; for I
have heard from some, on whom I could not but rely, that you would
write me an answer if I were to address a letter to you. Some time
ago, moreover, I sent you a letter; but I do not know whether you
received it or answered it, and perhaps your reply did not reach
me. Now, however, I beg you not to refuse to answer this letter,
and state what you think. But do not occupy yourself with other
questions than the one which I have stated, for this is the leading
point of a well-ordered discussion of the origin of the
schism.
7. The civil powers defend their conduct in
persecuting schismatics by the rule which the apostle laid down:
“Whoso resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God; and
they that resist shall receive to themselves judgment. For rulers
are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not
be afraid of the power? Do that which is good, and thou shalt have
praise of the same: for he is the minister of God to thee for good.
But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not
the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to
execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”2093
The whole question therefore is,
whether schism be not an evil work, or whether you have not caused
schism, so that your resistance of the powers that be is in a good
cause and not in an evil work, whereby you would bring judgment on
yourselves. Wherefore with infinite wisdom the Lord not merely
said, “Blessed are they who are persecuted,” but added, “for
righteousness’ sake.”2094
I desire therefore to know from
you, in the light of what I have said above, whether it be a work
of righteousness to originate and perpetuate your state of
separation from the Church. I desire also to know whether it be not
rather a work of unrighteousness to condemn unheard the whole
Christian world, either because it has not heard what you have
heard, or because no proof has been furnished to it of charges
which were rashly believed, or without
sufficient evidence advanced by you, and
to propose on this ground to baptize a second time the members of
so many churches founded by the preaching and labours either of the
Lord Himself while He was on earth, or of His apostles; and all
this on the assumption that it is excusable for you either not to
know the wickedness of your African colleagues who are living
beside you, and are using the same sacraments with you, or even to
tolerate their misdeeds when known, lest the party of Donatus
should be divided, but that it is inexcusable for them, though they
reside in most remote regions, to be ignorant of what you either
know, or believe, or have heard, or imagine, concerning men in
Africa. How great is the perversity of those who cling to their own
unrighteousness, and yet find fault with the severity of the civil
powers!
8. You answer, perhaps, that Christians ought
not to persecute even the wicked. Be it so; let us admit that they
ought not: but is it lawful to lay this objection in the way of the
powers which are ordained for this very purpose? Shall we erase the
apostle’s words? Or do your Mss. not
contain the words which I mentioned a little while ago? But you
will say that we ought not to communicate with such persons. What
then? Did you withdraw, some time ago, from communion with the
deputy Flavianus, on the ground of his putting to death, in his
administration of the laws, those whom he found guilty? Again, you
will say that the Roman emperors are incited against you by us.
Nay, rather blame yourselves for this, seeing that, as was long ago
foretold in the promise concerning Christ, “Yea, all kings shall
fall down before him,”2095
they are now members of the
Church; and you have dared to wound the Church by schism, and still
presume to insist upon rebaptizing her members. Our brethren indeed
demand help from the powers which are ordained, not to persecute
you, but to protect themselves against the lawless acts of violence
perpetrated by individuals of your party, which you yourselves, who
refrain from such things, bewail and deplore; just as, before the
Roman Empire became Christian, the Apostle Paul took measures to
secure that the protection of armed Roman soldiers should be
granted him against the Jews who had conspired to kill him. But
these emperors, whatever the occasion of their becoming acquainted
with the crime of your schism might be, frame against you such
decrees as their zeal and their office demand. For they bear not
the sword in vain; they are the ministers of God to execute wrath
upon those that do evil. Finally, if some of our party transgress
the bounds of Christian moderation in this matter, it displeases
us; nevertheless, we do not on their account forsake the Catholic
Church because we are unable to separate the wheat from the chaff
before the final winnowing, especially since you yourselves have
not forsaken the Donatist party on account of Optatus, when you had
not courage to excommunicate him for his crimes.
9. You say, however, “Why seek to have us
joined to you, if we be thus stained with guilt?” I reply:
Because you still live, and may, if you are willing, be restored.
For when you join yourselves to us, i.e. to the Church of
God, the heritage of Christ, who has the ends of the earth as his
possession, you are restored so that you live in vital union with
the Root. For the apostle says of the branches which were broken
off: “God is able to graft them in again.”2096
We exhort you to change, in so far
as concerns your dissent from the Church; although, as to the
sacraments which you had, we admit that they are holy, since they
are the same in all. Wherefore we desire to see you changed from
your obstinacy, that is, in order that you who have been cut off
may be vitally united to the Root again. For the sacraments which
you have not changed are approved by us as you have them; else, in
our attempting to correct your sin, we should do impious wrong to
those mysteries of Christ which have not been deprived of their
worth by your unworthiness. For even Saul did not, with all his
sins, destroy the efficacy of the anointing which he received; to
which anointing David, that pious servant of God, showed so great
respect. We therefore do not insist upon rebaptizing you, because
we only wish to restore to you connection with the Root: the form
of the branch which has been cut off we accept with approval, if it
has not been changed; but the branch, however perfect in its form,
cannot bear fruit, except it be united to the root. As to the
persecution, so gentle and tempered with clemency, which you say
you suffer at the hands of our party, while unquestionably your own
party inflict greater harm in a lawless and irregular way upon
us,—this is one question: the question concerning baptism is
wholly distinct from it; in regard to it, we inquire not where it
is, but where it profits. For wherever it is, it is the same; but
it cannot be said of him who receives it, that wherever he is, he
is the same. We therefore detest the impiety of which men as
individuals are guilty in a state of schism; but we venerate
everywhere the baptism of Christ. If deserters carry with them the
imperial standards, these standards are welcomed back again as they
were, if they have remained unharmed, when the deserters are either
punished with a severe sentence, or, in the exercise of
clemency, restored. If, in regard to this, any more
particular inquiry is to be made, that is, as I have said another
question; for in these things, the practice of the Church of God is
the rule of our practice.
10. The question between us, however, is,
whether your Church or ours is the Church of God. To resolve this,
we must begin with the original inquiry, why you became
schismatics. If you do not write me an answer, I believe that
before the bar of God I shall be easily vindicated as having done
my duty in this matter; because I have sent a letter in the
interests of peace to a man of whom I have heard that, excepting
only his adherence to schismatics, he is a good and well-educated
man. Be it yours to consider how you shall answer Him whose
forbearance now demands your praise, and His judgment shall in the
end demand your fears. If, however, you write a reply to me with as
much care as you see me to have bestowed upon this, I believe that,
by the mercy of God, the error which now keeps us apart shall
perish before the love of peace and the logic of truth. Observe
that I have said nothing about the followers of Rogatus,2097
| 2097 Rogatus, bishop of Cartenna in Mauritania, who
left the Donatists and suffered much persecution at the hands of
Firmus, a brother of Gildo; hence the Donatists were named by the
Rogatists Firmiani. See Augustin, Contra Literas Petiliani,
book ii. ch. 83. | who call
you Firmiani, as you call us Macariani. Nor have I spoken of your
bishop of Rucata (or Rusicada), who is said to have made an
agreement with Firmus, promising, on condition of the safety of all
his adherents, that the gates should be opened to him, and the
Catholics given up to slaughter and pillage. Many other such things
I pass unnoticed. Do you therefore in like manner desist from the
commonplaces of rhetorical exaggeration concerning actions of men
which you have either heard of or known; for you see how I am
silent concerning deeds of your party, in order to confine the
debate to the question upon which the whole matter hinges, namely,
the origin of the schism.
My brother, beloved and longed for, may the Lord our
God breathe into you thoughts tending towards reconciliation.
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
