Chapter 51.—63. Next, listen for a short time to the kind of way in which he has tried to use, in his own behalf, the passages which I had advanced from the writings of the Apostle Paul. "For you asserted," he says, "that the Apostle Paul finds fault with those who used to say that they were of the Apostle Paul, saying, ‘Was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?’2444
Wherefore, if they were in error, and would have
perished had they not been corrected, because they wished to be of
Paul, what
hope can there possibly be for those who have wished to be of Donatus? For this is their sole object, that the origin, and root, and head of him that is
baptized should be none other than he by whom he is
baptized."
2445
| 2445 See Book I. cc. 3, 4, 4, 5.
|
These words, and this confirmation from the writings of the
apostle, he has quoted from my
epistle, and he has proposed to himself the task of refuting them. Go on then, I beg of you, to see how he has fulfilled the task. For he says, "This assertion is meaningless, and inflated, and childish, and foolish, and something very
far from a true exposition of our
faith. For you would only be right in asserting this, if we were to say, We have been
baptized in the name of Donatus, or Donatus was crucified for us, or we have been
baptized in our own name. But since such things as this neither have been said nor are said by us,—seeing that we follow the formula of the holy
Trinity,—it is clear that you are
mad to bring such
accusations against us. Or if you think that we have been
baptized in the name of Donatus, or in our own name, you are miserably
deceived, and at the same time confess in your
sacrilege that you on your part
defile
your
wretched selves in the name of Cæcilianus." This is the answer which Petilianus has made to those arguments of mine, not supposing—or rather making a
noise that no one might suppose—that he has made no answer at all which could bear in any way upon the
question which is under discussion. For who could
fail to see that this witness of the
apostle has been adduced by us with all the more propriety, in that you do not say that you were
baptized in the name of Donatus, or that Donatus was
crucified for you, and yet separate yourselves from the
communion of the Catholic
Church out of respect to the party of Donatus; as also those whom
Paul was rebuking certainly did not say that they had been
baptized in the name of
Paul, or that
Paul has been crucified for them, and yet they were making a
schism in the name of
Paul. As therefore in their case, for whom
Christ, not
Paul, was crucified, and who were
baptized in the name of
Christ, not of
Paul, and who yet said, "I am of
Paul,"
the
rebuke is used with all the more propriety, "Was
Paul crucified for you? or were ye
baptized in the name of
Paul?" to make them cling to Him who was crucified for them, and in whose name they were
baptized, and not be
guilty of
division in the name of
Paul; so in your case, also, the
rebuke, Was Donatus crucified for you? or were ye
baptized in the name of Donatus? is used all the more appositely, because you do not say, We were
baptized in the name of Donatus, and yet desire to be of the
party of Donatus. For you know that it was
Christ who was crucified for you, and
Christ in whose name you were baptized; and yet, out of respect to the name and party of Donatus, you show such obstinacy in fighting against the unity of Christ, who was crucified for you, and in whose name you were baptized.
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
