As Cyprian was the great teacher of North Africa, and in the highest place in the esteem of all, Augustine was forced to make distinctions. This he did in his theory as to the validity of baptism as in the following pa.s.sage. The Sixth Book of the same treatise is composed of a statement of the bishops at the Council of Carthage, and Augustines answer to each statement.
Can the power of baptism, says Cyprian, be greater than confession, than martyrdom, that a man should confess Christ before men, and be baptized in his own blood, and yet, he says, neither does this baptism profit the heretic, even though for confessing Christ he be put to death outside the Church. This is most true; for by being put to death outside the Church, he is proved not to have had that charity of which the Apostle says: Though I give my body to be burned and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing [I Cor. 13:3]. But if martyrdom is of no avail for the reason that charity is lacking, neither does it profit those who, as Paul says, and Cyprian further sets forth, are living within the Church without charity, in envy and malice; and yet they can both receive and transmit true baptism. Salvation, he says, is not without the Church.
Who denies this? And therefore whatever men have that belongs to the Church, outside the Church it profits them nothing toward salvation. But it is one thing not to have, another to have it but to no use. He who has it not must be baptized that he may have it; he who has to no use must be corrected, that what he has he may have to some use. Nor is the water in baptism adulterous, because neither is the creature itself, which G.o.d made, evil, nor is the fault to be found in the words of the Gospel in the mouths of any who are astray; but the fault is theirs in whom there is an adulterous spirit, even though it may receive the adornment of the sacrament from a lawful spouse. It therefore can be true that baptism is common to us and to the heretics, since the Gospel can be common to us, although their error differs from our faith; whether they think otherwise than the truth about the Father or Son or the Holy Spirit; or, being cut away from unity, do not gather with Christ, but scatter abroad, because it is possible that the sacrament of baptism can be common to us if we are the wheat of the Lord with the covetous within the Church and with robbers and drunkards and other pestilent persons, of whom it is said, They shall not inherit the kingdom of G.o.d, and yet the vices by which they are separated from the kingdom of G.o.d are not shared by us.
(_d_) Augustine, _Ep. 98, ad Bonifatium_. (MSL, 33:363.)
Relation of the sacrament to that of which it is the sign.
Sacraments are effective if no hinderance is placed to their working.
On Easter Sunday we say, This day the Lord rose from the dead, although so many years have pa.s.sed since His resurrection. The event itself being said to take place on that day, because, although it really took place long before, it is on that day sacramentally celebrated. Was not Christ once for all offered up in His own person as a sacrifice? And yet, is He not likewise offered up in the sacrament as a sacrifice, not only in the special solemnities of Easter, but also daily among our congregations; so that when a man is questioned and answers that He is offered as a sacrifice in that ordinance, does he not declare what is strictly true?
For if sacraments had not some points of real resemblance to the things of which they are the sacraments, they would not be sacraments at all.
[Augustines general definition of a sacrament is that it is a sign of a sacred thing.] In most cases, moreover, they do, in virtue of this likeness, bear the names of the realities which they resemble. As therefore in a certain manner the sacrament of the body of Christ is the body of Christ, the sacrament of the blood of Christ is the blood of Christ, so the sacrament of faith is faith. Now, believing is nothing else than having faith; and accordingly, when on behalf of an infant as yet incapable of exercising faith, the answer is given that he believes, this answer means that he has faith because of the sacrament of faith, and in like manner the answer is made that he turns himself toward G.o.d because of the sacrament of conversion, since the answer itself belongs to the celebration of the sacrament. Thus the Apostle says, in regard to this sacrament of baptism: We are buried with Christ by baptism into death.
He does not say, We have signified our being buried with Him, but: We have been buried with Him. He has therefore given to the sacrament pertaining to so great a transaction no other name than the word describing the transaction itself.
10. Therefore an infant, although he is not yet a believer in the sense of having that faith which includes the consenting will of those who exercise it, nevertheless becomes a believer through the sacrament of that faith.
The infant, though not yet possessing a faith helped by the understanding, is not obstructing(173) faith by an antagonism of the understanding, and therefore receives with profit the sacrament of faith.
(_e_) Augustine, _De Correctione Donatistarum_, 22 _ff._ (MSL, 33:802.)
The argument in favor of using force to compel the Donatists to return to the Church.
Augustine in the early part of the Donatist controversy was not in favor of using force. Like the others, _e.g._, Optatus, he denied that force had been employed by the Church. About 404 the situation changed, and his opinion did likewise. This work, known also as Epistle CLx.x.xV, was written circa 417. Compare Augustines position with the statement of Jerome, Piety for G.o.d is not cruelty, _cf._ Hagenbach, _History of Christian Doctrines_, 135:7. The Donatists had much injured their position by their treatment of a party which had produced a schism in their own body, the Maximianists.
22. Who can love us more than Christ who laid down His life for the sheep? And yet, after calling Peter and the other Apostles by His word alone, in the case of Paul, formerly Saul, the great builder of His Church, but previously its cruel persecutor, He not only constrained him with His voice, but even dashed him to the earth with His power. Where is what they [the Donatists] are accustomed to cry: To believe or not to believe is a matter that is free? Toward whom did Christ use violence?
Whom did He compel? Here they have the Apostle Paul. Let them recognize in his case Christs first compelling and afterward teaching; first striking and afterward consoling. For it is wonderful how he who had been compelled by bodily punishment entered into the Gospel and afterward labored more in the Gospel than all they who were called by word only; and the greater fear compelled him toward love, that perfect love which casts out fear.
23. Why, therefore, should not the Church compel her lost sons to return if the lost sons compelled others to perish? Although even men whom they have not compelled but only led astray, their loving mother embraces with more affection if they are recalled to her bosom through the enforcement of terrible but salutary laws, and are the objects of far more deep congratulation than those whom she has never lost. Is it not a part of the care of the shepherd, when any sheep have left the flock, even though not violently forced away, but led astray by soft words and by coaxings, and they have begun to be possessed by strangers, to bring them back to the fold of his master when he has found them, by the terrors or even the pains of the whip, if they wish to resist; especially since, if they multiply abundantly among the fugitive slaves and robbers, he has the more right in that the mark of the master is recognized on them, which is not outraged in those whom we receive but do not baptize?(174) So indeed is the error of the sheep to be corrected that the sign of the Redeemer shall not be marred. For if any one is marked with the royal stamp by a deserter, who has himself been marked with it, and they receive forgiveness, and the one returns to his service, and the other begins to be in the service in which he had not yet been, that mark is not effaced in either of them, but rather it is recognized in both, and approved with due honor because it is the kings. Since they cannot show that that is bad to which they are compelled,(175) they maintained that they ought not to be compelled to the good. But we have shown that Paul was compelled by Christ; therefore the Church in compelling the Donatists is following the example of her Lord, though in the first instance she waited in hopes of not having to compel any, that the prediction might be fulfilled concerning the faith of kings and peoples.
24. For in this sense also we may interpret without absurdity the apostolic declaration when the blessed Apostle Paul says: Being ready to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled [II Cor.
10:6]. Whence also the Lord himself bids the guests to be brought first to His great supper, and afterward compelled; for when His servants answered Him, Lord, it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room, He said to them: Go out into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in [Luke 14:22, 23]. In those, therefore, who were first brought in with gentleness the former obedience is fulfilled, but in those who were compelled the disobedience is avenged. For what else is the meaning of Compel them to come in, after it had previously been said, Bring in, and the answer was: Lord, it is done as Thou commandest, and yet there is room? Wherefore if by the power which the Church has received by divine appointment in its due season, through the religious character and faith of kings, those who are found in the highways and hedgesthat is, in heresies and schismsare compelled to come in, then let them not find fault because they are compelled, but consider to what they are so compelled. The supper of the Lord, the unity, is of the body of Christ, not only in the sacrament of the altar but also in the bond of peace.
(_f_) Augustine, _Contra epistulam Parmeniani_, II, 13 (29). (MSL, 43:71.)
Indelibility of baptism.
Parmenia.n.u.s was the Donatist bishop who succeeded Donatus in the see of Carthage. The letter here answered was written to Tychonius, a leading Donatist. In it Parmenia.n.u.s calls the Church defiled because it contained unworthy members. The answer of Augustine was written in 400, many years later.
If any one, either a deserter or one who has never served as a soldier, signs any private person with the military mark, would not he who has signed be punished as a deserter, when he has been arrested, and so much the more severely as it could be proved that he had never at all served as a soldier, and at the same time along with him would not the most impudent giver of the sign, be punished if he have surrendered him? Or perchance he takes no military service, but is afraid of the military mark [_character_] in his body, and he betakes himself to the clemency of the Emperor, and when he has poured forth prayers and obtained forgiveness, he then begins to undertake military service, when the man has been liberated and corrected is that mark [_character_] ever repeated, and not rather is he not recognized and approved? Would the Christian sacraments by chance be less enduring than this bodily mark, since we see that apostates do not lack baptism, and to them it is never given again when they return by means of penitence, and therefore it is judged not possible to lose it.
(_g_) Augustine, _Contra epistulam Manichi_, ch. 4 (5). (MSL, 42:175.) _Cf._ Mirbt, n. 132.
Authority of the Catholic Church.
This work, written in 396 or 397, is important in this connection as showing the place the Catholic Church took in the mind of Augustine as an authority and the nature of that authority.
Not to speak of that wisdom which you [the Manichans] do not believe to be in the Catholic Church, there are many other things which most justly keep me in her bosom. The consent of people and nations keeps me in the Church; so does her authority, inaugurated by miracles, nourished by hope, enlarged by love, established by age. The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of Peter the Apostle, to whom the Lord after His resurrection gave it in charge to feed His sheep down to the present episcopate. And so lastly does the name itself of Catholic, which not without reason, amid so many heresies, that Church alone has so retained that, though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets no heretic will venture to point to his own basilica or house. Since then so many and so great are the very precious ties belonging to the Christian name which rightly keep a man who is a believer in the Catholic Church no one shall move me from the faith which binds my mind with ties so many and so strong to the Christian religion.
Let us see what Manichus teaches us; and in particular let us examine that treatise which you call the Fundamental Epistle in which almost all that you believe is contained. For in that unhappy time when we read it, we were called by you enlightened. The epistle begins: Manichus, an apostle of Jesus Christ, by the providence of G.o.d the Father. These are wholesome words from the perennial and living fountain. Now, if you please, patiently give heed to my inquiry. I do not believe that he is an apostle of Christ. Do not, I beg of you, be enraged and begin to curse.
You know that it is my rule not to believe without consideration anything offered by you. Wherefore I ask, who is this Manichus? You reply, An apostle of Christ. I do not believe it. Now you are at a loss what to say or do; for you promised to give me knowledge of the truth, and you force me to believe something I do not know. Perhaps you will read the Gospel to me, and from it you will attempt to defend the person of Manichus. But should you meet with a person not yet believing the Gospel, what could you reply to him if he said to you: I do not believe? For my part I should not believe the Gospel except the authority of the Catholic Church moved me. So then I have a.s.sented to them when they say to me, Believe the Gospel; why should I not a.s.sent to them saying to me: Do not believe the Manichans?
84. The Pelagian Controversy
The Pelagian controversy, in which the characteristic teaching of Augustine found its best expression, may be divided into three periods. In the first period, beginning about 411, Pelagius and Clestius, who had been teaching at Rome unmolested since 400 and had come to Carthage, probably on account of the barbarian attack upon Rome, are opposed at Carthage, and six propositions attributed to Clestius are condemned at a council there, where he attempted to be ordained. Clestius leaves for the East and is ordained at Ephesus, 412, and Pelagius soon after follows him.
In the second period, 415-417, the controversy is in the East as well as in the West, as Augustine by letters to Jerome gave warning about Pelagius, and councils are held at Jerusalem and Diospolis, where Pelagius is acquitted of heresy. This was probably due as much to the general sympathy of the Eastern theologians with his doctrine as to any alleged misrepresentation by Pelagius. But in North Africa synods are also held condemning Pelagius, and their findings are approved by Innocent of Rome.
But Pelagius and Clestius send confessions of faith to Zosimus (417-418), Innocents successor, who reproves the Africans and acquits Pelagius and Clestius as entirely sound. In the third period, 417-431, the attack on Pelagius is taken up at Rome itself by some of the clergy, and an imperial edict is obtained against the Pelagians. Zosimus changes his opinion and approves the findings of a general council called at Carthage in 418, in which the doctrines of original sin and the need of grace are a.s.serted.
The last act of the controversy in its earlier form, after the deposition of the leading Pelagians, among them Julian, of Eclanum, their theologian, is the condemnation of Pelagius at the Council of Ephesus, in 431. _V.
infra_, 89.
Additional source material: See A. Bruckner, _Quellen zur Geschichte des pelagianischen Streites_ (in Latin), in Krgers _Quellenschriften_, Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1906. The princ.i.p.al works of Augustine bearing on the Pelagian controversy may be found in PNF, ser. I, vol. V.
(_a_) Augustine, _Ep. 146, ad Pelagium_. (MSL, 33:596.)
This was probably written before the controversy. As to its use later, see Augustine, _De gestis Pelagii_, chs. 51 (26) _f._ (PNF)
I thank you very much that you have been so kind as to make me glad by your letter informing me of your welfare. May the Lord recompense you with those blessings that you forever be good and may live eternally with Him who is eternal, my lord greatly beloved and brother greatly longed for.
Although I do not acknowledge that anything in me deserves the eulogies which the letter of your benevolence contains about me, I cannot, however, be ungrateful for the good-will therein manifested toward one so insignificant, while suggesting at the same time that you should rather pray for me that I may be made by the Lord such as you suppose me already to be.
(_b_) Augustine. _De Peccatorum Meritis et Remissione et de Baptismo Parvulorum_. (MSL, 44:185, 188.)
Augustines testimony as to the character of Pelagius.
This work was written in 412, after the condemnation of Clestius at Carthage. It was the first in the series of polemical writings against the teaching of Pelagius. The first book is especially important as a statement of Augustines position as to the nature of justifying grace.