A new history of ecclesiastical writers containing an account of the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testament, of the lives and writings of the primitive fathers, an abridgement and catalogue of their works ... also a compendious history of the councils, with chronological tables of the whole / written in French by Lewis Ellies du Pin.

St. OPTATUS.

ST. OPTATUS a 1.1, Bishop of Milevi b 1.2, a City of Numidia, wrote under the Reign of Valens and Valentinian, about the Year 370, his Books of the Schism of the Donatists, against Parmeni∣anus, * 1.3 a Bishop of that Sect. There is nothing in particular, known of the Life of this Author. He died, according to the Testimony of St. Jerom, under the Reign of Valentinian c 1.4. St. Austin and St. Fulgentius, cite him with great Commendation, and he has been numbred among the Saints, because of the Service he did the Church, by this excellent Book which he compos'd in its Defence. It was divided into Six Books, since St. Jerom's time: There is a Seventh now extant, but 'tis very probable, that it is Supposititious. First of all, Because Optatus himself in his First Book, divides his Treatise into Six Books, without mentioning a Seventh. Secondly, Because St. Jerom says, That Optatus wrote but Six Books against the Schism of the Donatists. Thirdly, Because the Stile of the last Book d 1.5, comes not near the Elegance and Sublimeness that is in the others. And Lastly, Because it contains Opinions contrary to those that are in the other Books e 1.6. This Book therefore was written by some African, who lived soon after St. Optatus (for it cannot be doubted but that the Book is ancient) who thought he ought to make this Addition, which was afterwards attributed to this Father.

St. Optatus begins his First Book with words very full of Charity. He complains, That the Peace which Jesus Christ left to his Church, is disturb'd by the Schism and by the Actions of the Donatists: Yet he gives them the Name and Title of Brethren.

Though they renounce us, says he, though all the World knows that they hate us, that they detest us; though they would not have us call them our Brethren, yet we will follow the Command of the Prophet Isaiah, in saying unto them, Ye are nevertheless our Brethren, though ye be Evil: We have the same Spiritual Birth, but our Actions are different.

Afterwards, he gives an Account of his Undertaking to write to Parmenianus,

whom he calls his Brother: He says, That he was the only Donatist with whom he could have a Con∣ference in Writing, and he shews the Usefulness of it: He observes, That this Bishop in writing against the Catholick Church had written for it; so that it had not been necessary to have answer'd his Treatise, if he had not affirm'd many things whereof he was not well-inform'd, as when he charges the Catho∣licks with desiring Souldiers that they might Persecute the Donatists. He owns, That this is the only place in all the Books of Parmenianus which is against the Church; and that all others are either for the Catholicks only, as when he proves that there is but one Church only; or for the Catholicks and the Donatists, as when he shows that Hereticks have not the Sacraments of the Church; Or lastly, against the Donatists only, as when he speaks of the Enormity of their Crime, who deliver'd up the Holy Books and made a Schism. He adds, That the Comparison which Parmenianus has made of Baptism with Circumcision, and the Flood, is honourable to the Church, which maintains, that there is but one only Baptism, as there was but one Circumcision and one Flood.

Optatus having made this general Remark upon the Book of Parmenianus, gives an account of the Method he has observ'd in his Work; and then lays down a Scheme of his Refutation, and proposes the Subject of his Books.

I shall begin, says he, First of all, with giving an History of the Tra∣ditors and Schismaticks, with an Account of their Abode, their Persons, and their Names; that so it may be known who those are that are guilty of the Crimes that Parmenianus has Condemn'd. Secondly, I must show what is the Church, and where it is, because there is but one only, and there cannot possibly be two Churches. Thirdly, I am to prove, That we did not desire the Souldiers, and that we are not guilty of the Crimes which are said to be done by those, who would have pro∣cur'd a Re-union. Fourthly, 'Twill be necessary to shew who is the Sinner, whose Sacrifice God re∣fuses, and whose Unction we must flee from. In the 5th. Book, I shall treat of Baptism. In the 6th. I shall lay open your Errors and Designs.

This is the Argument of those Six Books of Op∣tatus. In the First Book before we come to the History of the Donatists, which is the Subject of it, we must observe a Mistake of Parmenianus, who says, That the sinful Flesh being drown'd in the Waters of Jordan, was purified from all its stains. He reproves this Passage of Parmenianus, because from hence it would follow, either that the Flesh of all Men was purified by the Baptism of Jesus Christ; or that the Flesh of Jesus Christ was sinful. But because he foresaw very well, that Parmenianus might explain his meaning, by saying, That nothing else was intended by those words, but that the Flesh of Men was purified in the Flesh of Jesus Christ, therefore he shows that this Expression is improper; for we never say, That a Christian was baptiz'd in the Flesh of Jesus Christ; but in the Name of Jesus Christ. He adds, That the Flesh of Jesus Christ could not be baptiz'd for the Remission of Sins, since he had not committed any. At last, That he might not Pardon Parmenian in any thing, he blames him even for the term Drown'd, which he uses, and tells us, That he could only say of Pha∣raoh, that he continued at the bottom of the Waters, and not of Jesus Christ, who descended into Jordan that he might come out of it, and who Sanctified the Waters of this River by his descent. He says, That he cannot pass over the Imprudence of Parmenianus, who having given a Description of the Flood and Circumcision, and spoken in the Praise of Baptism, should go about (if I may say so) to raise from the Dead the ancient Hereticks, who were buried together with their Heresies in Obli∣vion, and whose Names and Heresies were unknown long ago in Africa, such as Praxeas, Sabellius, Valentinus and others, who had been confuted in their time, by Victorinus of Passaw, by Zephyrinus of Rome, by Tertullian of Carthage, and other Defenders of the Catholick Church.

Wherefore, says he, do ye make such a War with the Dead, as does not concern the Affairs of our Time? Is it because ye have no Proof that the Catholicks are Schismaticks, therefore ye would swell your Book with a Catalogue of the Names and Errors of the ancient Hereticks? Why do ye speak of those who had no Sacraments which are common to us? Those that are in Health have no need of Remedies. Vertue and Innocence seek no help nor support but in themselves. Truth wants no far-fetch'd Proofs. None but the Sick seek after Remedies; only the Weak and Sluggish trust to External Succors, and 'tis a Sign of a Lye when Men take much pains to find out a Justification:

Parmenianus had not mention'd these Hereticks, but to tell us, That they had not the Signs of a true Church; That their Churches were Strumpets who had no right to the Sacraments, and could not be the Spouses of Jesus Christ. Optatus was so far from refuting this Proposition, that he approv'd it, but he wondred that Parmenianus had joyn'd the Schismaticks with them, since he himself was one of this Number.

I see very well, says he to Parmenianus, That you know not who were the Authors of the Schism at Carthage. Look back to the Rise of this Affair, and you will see that you have condemn'd your selves, by joyning the Schismaticks to the Hereticks; for Caecilian did not separate from Majorinus your Predecessor, but Majorinus separated from Caecilian. 'Twas not Caecilian that deserted the Chair of St. Peter or St. Cyprian, but Majorinus, in whose Chair you sit, a Chair that is of no older Original than Majorinus himself.

This being so, he wonders that Parmenian should joyn the Schismatick with the Heretick, and should say of the former as well as the latter after this manner: How can a Man that is defil'd, cleanse another by a false Baptism? How can an impure Man Purifie? How can one that makes others fall, lift up those that are faln down? How can one that is guilty, grant Pardon? or one that is Condemn'd, absolve? Optatus confesses, That all this may be truly said of Here∣ticks who have corrupted the Creed, and have no share in the Sacraments of the Church; but he de∣nies that this can be said of those that are only Schismaticks; who, as he thinks, may lawfully Admi∣nister the Sacraments. To prove this, he shows the difference between Hereticks and Schismaticks.

Two things, says he, are necessary to render the Church Catholick; The Confession of the true Faith, and the Unity of Hearts. Schism which breaks the Bond of Peace is begotten by Discord,

nourish'd by Envy, and confirm'd by Disputes; thus impious Children forsake the Catholick Church their Mother, withdraw and separate themselves, as you have done, being cut off from the Church, and become Rebels and Enemies: But they innovate nothing in Doctrine, still retaining what they had learn'd from their Mother. The Hereticks on the contrary are Enemies to the Truth, De∣serters of the true Creed, though they are begotten in the bosom of the Church, and being corrupted by their Impious Errors, they call themselves Authors of their Sect.

Optatus concludes from these Definitions, That Hereticks can have no Baptism nor valid Sacraments, but that there is not the same Reason for Schismaticks, because they have preserv'd the true Sacraments of the Church, though they are separated from its Body. After this Digression, he returns to his Subject, and undertakes to prove Historically, that the Authors of the Donatists are guilty of delivering up the Holy Books and making a Schism.

Tis now, says he, 60 Years and more since Africk was harrass'd with a violent Persecution, at which time you might have seen many Martyrs and Confessors; but there were also some Christians who yielded in this Day of Tryal, and others who hid themselves: To say nothing of the Laity, Ministers, Deacons or Priests, there were even Bishops, those that were the Heads and Chief of the Clergy, who deliver'd up the Books of the Divine Law, with an astonishing Impiety; and to preserve for some Years this Mortal Life, expos'd themselves to the loss of Eternal Life. Donatus of Mascula, Victor of Rusiccadia, Marinus of Aquae Tibilitanae, Donatus of Calama, and Purpu∣rius the Homicide of Limata, were of the Number of those Bishops, together with Menalius, who fearing to be accus'd of Sacrificing, would not be present at the Assembly of his Brethren. These Bishops and some others, whom we shall show to have been your Authors, assembled together af∣ter the Persecution, on the 12th. of May, in the City of Cirtha, in the House of Urbanus Carisius, because the Churches were not yet rebuilt. Secundus of Tigisis having ask'd them, they confess'd to him that they had deliver'd up the Holy Books; and when Purpurius objected the same thing to Secundus, they all began to murmur; so that Secundus being afraid of himself, follow'd the Advice of his Nephew Secundus, who counsell'd him to leave this Cause to the Judgment of God. The other Bishops, Victor Garbiensis, Felix of Rotarium, and Nabor of Centurio, were of the same opinion, and therefore, Secundus declar'd that all the Bishops should Sit in the Council. Sometime after the same Bishops, Traditors and Murderers, ordain'd Majorinus Bishop of Carthage, in whose Chair Parmenianus now Sits. Optatus having thus shown that the Ring-leaders of the Donatists were Traditors, Convicts them also of being the Authors of a Schism. In treating of this Separa∣tion, 'tis certain, says he, that there was but one Church in Africk, as there is in all other Parts of the World, before it was divided by the Bishops who ordain'd Majorinus. It is only to be enquir'd, who those were that remain'd united to the Body of the Church with all the World; and who they were that departed from it, who it was that sate in a Chair wherein he had no Predecessor, who those were that set up Altar against Altar, who he was that Ordain'd a Bishop in the room of ano∣ther Bishop yet alive. All the World knows that this was done at Carthage after the Ordination of Caecilian, and that it was done at the Instigation of Lucilla, a great Lady: This Woman had been reprov'd by the Arch-Deacon Caecilian, even before the Persecution begun, because before re∣ceiving the Spiritual Food and Drink, she had kiss'd the Bones of a Dead Man, who was not pub∣lickly acknowledg'd for a Martyr, preferring thus the Carcass of a Dead Man before the Cup of Sal∣vation. She retir'd in great Anger, and very much enrag'd at this Reprimand. The Persecution came on, which hinder'd the Bishop from reducing her within the Bounds of her Duty. In the mean time, a certain Deacon, nam'd Felix, being cited to appear before the Tyrant, and accus'd of writing a Defamatory Libel against him, hid himself in the House of Mensurius the Bishop: who being interrogated about this Fact, deny'd it publickly, and upon his Denial there came an Order from Court, importing, That if Mensurius did not bring forth the Deacon Felix, he should be sent to Court. When he had received this Order, he was very much concerned: He had then in the Church a great Number of Ornaments of Gold and Silver, which he durst neither hide under Ground, nor carry away with him; he trusted them with the most ancient Men of his Church, believing them Faithful, and made an Inventory of them, which he is said to have deliver'd to an old Woman, with this Charge, That if he did not return again, she should deliver it to him that should be chosen Bishop in his Room. When he came to Court, he defended himself, and being permitted to return to Carthage, he died by the Way. Liberty being restor'd to the Church of Africk by an Edict of Maxentius, Botrus and Celesius who were ambitious to be Ordain'd Bishops of Carthage, call'd together the Neighbouring Bishops about this City, without Summoning those of Numidia to come to them: Yet Caecilian was chosen by the unanimous Suffrages of the People, and Ordain'd by Felix of Aptungis, and so Botrus and Celesius fail'd of their hopes. The Inventory of the Gold and Silver belonging to the Church, was deliver'd to Caecilian; who sends for the Old Men that were entrusted with this Charge: who had already made it their own Property. When they saw themselves oblig'd to restore it, they alienated the People from the Communion of Caeci∣lian. Those who had intrigued for the See, did the same thing; and in short, Lucilla, an impe∣rious and powerful Woman, who could not bear a reproof, would not hold Communion with him, and hindred those that belong'd to her from doing it. So the Schism was begun by the Passion of a furious Woman, nourish'd by the Ambition of Botrus and Celesius, and confirm'd by the Avarice of the Old Men. These three sorts of Persons invented Accusations against Caecilian, and endeavour'd to get his Ordination condemn'd. They fetcht Secundus Bishop of Tigisis to Carthage: thither they came with the Bishops Traditors whom we have mention'd, and were receiv'd by the Covetous, Ambitious and Furious, that we nam'd before, but not at all by the Catholicks, who had chosen Caecilian. Not one of them durst enter into the Church where he was with all the People. Caecilian

took care to acquaint them, That if his Accusers had any thing to say or prove against him, they had nothing to do but appear. His Enemies could find nothing to blame in his Conduct. But they accus'd him that Ordain'd Caecilian, of being a Traditor, making this Infamy rebound upon him. Caecilian also told them, That if Felix had no Power to conferr Orders, as they pretended, they might Ordain him a new, as if he had been but a Deacon still: Purpurius then answer'd with his ordinary Malice: Very well, let him come; Let us make as if we would lay hands upon him to Ordain him Bishop, and instead of doing that, let us put him under Penance. This Design being discover'd, the Catholicks detain'd Caecilian, and hindred him from exposing himself to the fury of his Enemies. They must then either force him away as a Criminal, or Communicate with him as an Innocent Man: The whole Church was full of People, the Episcopal Chair was filled, the Altar was in its place, that Altar on which the Pacifick Bishops had offer'd, as St. Cyprian, Lucianus and others. Nevertheless, they set up an Altar against this Altar, and make an Ordination against all the Laws. Majorinus a Domestick of Lucilla, who had been Reader when Caecilian was Deacon, was Ordain'd by the Bishops of Numidia, who had themselves confess'd their Crimes, and Pardon'd themselves. 'Tis plain then that Majorinus withdrew from the Church, and that those were the Ring-leaders of the Donatists who separated themselves, and deliver'd up the Holy Books.

After Optatus has thus prov'd that the Donatists were the Authors of the Schism which divided Africk, he shows by the Example of Corah, Dathan, and Abiram, that there is no Crime greater, or which de∣serves a more severe Punishment than Schism: But not contenting himself with convicting the Dona∣tists, he undertakes also to justifie Caecilian; and proves that he was Innocent by the Judgment of the Council of Rome, which Condemn'd Donatus, and declar'd Caecilian Innocent. He observes that the Ring-leaders of the Donatists had themselves desir'd Judges of Constantine, and that the Emperour had answer'd them in great Passion, Do ye desire Judges of me, of me who am waiting for the Judgment of Heaven? He shows, That nevertheless, he gave them for Judges, Maternus Bishop of Cologne, Rheticius Bishop of Autun, and Marinus Bishop of Arles; which Judges came to Rome, and there held a Council with Miltiades, and Fifteen Italian Bishops: That Donatus was there condemn'd upon the Confession that he made of having re-baptiz'd and re-ordain'd the Bishops which yielded in the time of Persecution; That the Witnesses which he had produc'd against Caecilian having declar'd they had nothing to say against him, he was sent back acquitted by the Sentence of all the Bishops, and of Miltiades who concluded this Judgment: That the Donatists having appeal'd to the Emperour, he cry'd out aloud, O strange Fury! They appeal from us, as if we had given a Pagan Sentence. That the Emperour detain'd Caecilian at Bressia by the Sollicitation of Filuminus a Partisan of Donatus. That there were sent into Africk two Bishops, Eunomius and Olympus, to declare where the Catholick Church was; That being come to Carthage, they were hindred from doing it by the Seditious Party of Donatus; That these two Bishops made Oath in favour of Caecilian; That Donatus came first to Carthage and Caecilian follow'd him, after he had been declar'd Innocent by many Judgments. There remain'd now nothing more for Optatus to do, but to Vindicate Felix of Aptungis, who ordain'd Cae∣cilian, from the Calumny of being a Traditor, which he proves by the Information that Elianus the Proconsul had given about this Matter, who after a most strict Enquiry into it, had declar'd him In∣nocent of this Crime.

The Second Book of Optatus is concerning the Church. There he supposes as an uncontested Prin∣ciple, That there is but one only Church, which Jesus Christ calls his Spouse and his Dove. This Principle being suppos'd, he proves that the Party of the Donatists were not the Catholick Church; because from thence it would follow, that the Church had perish'd in all other Parts of the World, and was enclosed in a little Corner of Africk; which was contrary to the Signification of the Catholick Church, that signifies a Society spread over all the Earth. He adds for Confirmation of this Truth, That those who shut up the Church within such narrow bounds defeated the Promise of Jesus Christ; that they straitned the Extent of God's Mercy, and gave the Lye to the Holy Spirit who has spoken by the Prophets. After he has made use of this general Reason against the Donatists, he proves that the Signs of the True Church do not in the least agree to them. The First of those Signs is the Chair, that is, the Succession of Bishops. He says to Parmenianus, That he cannot be ignorant of this Sign of the True Church;

For you cannot deny, says he, but St. Peter, the Chief of the Apostles, esta∣blish'd an Episcopal Chair at Rome; This Chair was one, that all others might preserve Unity by the Union they had with it; So that whosoever set up a Chair against it, was a Schismatick and an Offender. 'Twas then in this one Chair, which is the first Sign of the Church, that St. Peter first sate; to St. Peter succeeded St. Linus, and after him others till Damasus, who is now our Colleague: by whose means, all the Churches of the World are United with us in the same Communion, keeping Correspondence by Circular Letters. As to your Party, which would willingly be thought to be the Church, enquire after the Original of your Chair. You tell us, That you are a Part of the Roman Church, but this is a branch of your Error, which proceeds from the Root of Falshood, and not from the Stock of Truth. If Macrobius be ask'd in what Chair he Sits, can he say, That it is in the Chair of St. Peter, which perhaps he never saw; for certainly he never went to the Sepulchre of the Apostles. He is disobedient to the Command of the Apostle, who would have us Communicate to the Memory of the Saints; and the Relicks of the two Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul are in the Church of Rome. Tell me, I pray you, if ever he could enter there, if ever he could offer in the Place where these Relicks are certainly kept. Macrobius, your Brother, must then confess, That he sate in the Place where Eucolpius held the See; and if we could ask Eucolpius, he must say, That he succeeded to Boniface of Balli, and Boniface to one Victor Garbiensis, whom ye sent from Africk. This Victor is a Son without a Father, a Disciple without a Master, a Successor without a Predecessor,

a Pastor without a Flock, a Bishop without a People. For we cannot call them a Flock or a People, who were so few, that they had not one of the Forty Churches at Rome to keep their Assemblies in, and who were oblig'd to shut themselves up in a Cave without the City, to keep their Conventicle there.

Optatus does not enlarge so much on the other Signs of the Church that are very obscure, but he insists particularly upon its Extent.

Wherefore, says he, would you Unchurch an infinite Number of Christians that are in the East and the West? You are but a small Number of Rebels who have op∣pos'd all the Churches of the World, with which ye have no Communion: You are also convicted of Falshood, by the Sacrifices which ye offer; for I believe that you do not omit the Solemn Prayer that is made at these Sacrifices; I doubt not but you will say, That you offer Sacrifice for that Church which is one, and scatter'd over all the Earth. Now this Prayer convicts you of a Lye, for how can you offer Sacrifice for one only Church, since you have divided it into two? How can you offer for the whole Church, since you are not within the Catholick Church?

Parmenianus objected to the Catholicks, That they had exercis'd Violence and Persecution against them, and concluded from thence that they could not be the true Church, because that ought never to be cruel, nor to feed it self with the Flesh and Blood of the Saints. Optatus answers him, That the Church had never Persecuted them, and that he could Name none of the Church that had done it. He retorts this Charge upon the Donatists, by observing that in the time of the Emperour Constantine the Church enjoy'd a profound Peace, and all its Members liv'd in wonderful Union; That then Pagans were forbidden to exercise their Sacrilegious Ceremonies, then the Devil groan'd in their Temples where he was shut up, and then the Donatists were banish'd into Foreign Countries, lest they should disturb the Peace of the Church: But no sooner was Julian declar'd Emperour, but they begg'd his leave to return into their own Country, which he granted them very willingly, knowing that they were most fit to trouble the Peace of the Church. He observes, That the same Edict by which he open'd the Pagan Temples, he also restored Liberty to them; That they had not so soon obtain'd it, but that they exercis'd horrible Violences in Africk. He accuses the Donatists of tearing the Members of the Church, of driving away the Bishops, of invading the Churches, of commit∣ting Murders, of killing two Deacons at the feet of the Altars, of rending Mens Garments, of drag∣ging the Women, stifling the Children; and in fine, of violating every thing that was most Sacred. ••our Bishops, says he, cause the Eucharist to be thrown to the Dogs, and presently the Tokens of God's Anger appear; for the Dogs being enrag'd, turn'd upon their Masters, and tore them as if they had been Thieves whom they never knew, the Justice of God making use of their Teeth to revenge this Sacrilege. They also caus'd a Bottle full of holy Oil to be thrown out at a Window, on purpose to break it: But though it was cast down from a very high place, yet being supported by Angels, it fell upon the Stones without breaking. He accuses also a Bishop of their Party nam'd Felix, of abusing a Virgin to whom him∣self had given the Veil, and of having afterwards depriv'd an ancient Catholick Bishop, 62 Years old, of his Bishoprick, and put him under Penance. Here he makes a Digression about the Vanity of the Donatists, who boasted themselves to be Holy and Innocent. Whence comes this Sanctity of yours, says he, which the Apostle St. John durst not attribute to himself, seeing he says, If we say that we have no Sin, we deceive our selves, and the truth is not in us? He that speaks after this manner, does pru∣dently referr himself to the Mercy of God; for a Christian may desire Good, and endeavour to walk in the way of Salvation, but he cannot be perfect of himself: For though he does run, yet there will always remain something to be done by God to perfect him; and 'tis necessary that he should help a Man in his Weakness, for he is Perfection, and there was never any but Jesus Christ the Son of God who was per∣fect; all other Men are imperfect. It belongs to us to will and to run, but God only can give Perfe∣ction. Jesus Christ has not given us perfect Holiness, but has only promis'd it. Optatus afterwards returns to his Subject, and goes on to charge the Donatists with the Crimes and Sacrileges which they had committed, and accuses them of exorcising and washing the Walls of Churches, of breaking down the Altars, of throwing the Eucharist to Dogs, of making the People Swear by their Name, of shaving the Bishops, and putting them under Penance, of sparing neither Priests, Deacons, nor the Faithful, of reproaching the Innocent, and putting Christians against their will under Penance; and in fine, of doing an infinite number of things against Piety and Christian Charity.

In the Third Book, Optatus vindicates the Church from those Violences of which it was accus'd. In the first place, he says, That if some of those Violences were committed by Macarius's Order, the Predecessors of the Donatists, gave occasion to them, because their Seditious Behaviour, oblig'd the Governour to call for Aid, which they no sooner saw come to him, but they presently fled of them∣selves; and that none but those that were most obstinate had been Banished. But then he main∣tains, That the Church did not contribute to this Persecution in the least; and that there was no∣thing of all this done by Her Advice; that she neither wish'd for it, nor knew of it, nor contributed any thing towards it; but the Justice of God alone, had sent this Persecution upon the Donatists, to revenge the Dishonour they had done to the Waters of Baptism. Here Optatus makes a very obscure Digression concerning Baptism and the Church. And afterwards returning to his Subject, he says, That Paul and Macarius, were not sent by Constantine, to Persecute the Donatists, but to carry Alms; That Donatus being transported with Rage, demanded of them with unsupportable Pride, what the Emperour had in common with the Church:

That from that time he carried on a Design of doing Injury to the Kings and Princes of the Earth, contrary to the Precept of St. Paul, who com∣mands us to pray for them, that we may lead a quiet Life; For, says Optatus, the State is not in the Church, but the Church in the State; that is, in the Roman Empire. Thus St. Paul had reason to say, That we must pray for Kings, even when they made Profession of Paganism: But how much more reason have we to show respect to a Christian Prince, one that is Religious and Fears God,

and has sent Alms to the Poor. Wherefore then was Donatus transported with Fury? Where∣fore did he refuse the Alms which the Emperour sent? His Officers said, That they were come to distribute Alms in all the Provinces, to those that would receive them; and Donatus told them, That he had written to all places, forbidding them to receive them. Does this look as if he took Care of those that are in Misery, or would relieve the Necessities of the Poor? God hath said, 'Tis I that make Rich and Poor. Can he not then give Riches to the Poor? Yes, but if he had given them to all the World, then sinners had wanted the means of expiating their Faults; for 'tis written, That as Water quenches Fire, so does an Alms expiate Sin. This being so, What Judgment should we give of him that would give to the Poor, and him that would hinder the giving? What would Donatus answer, if God should ask him, O Bishop, What do you think of Constantine? Do you take him for an Innocent Man, or a Sinner? If you believe him to be an Innocent Man, Why do ye not then receive the Presents of an Innocent Man? And if you believe him to be a Sinner, Why do ye not then permit him to give Alms, since 'tis for the Sinner that I have made the Poor?

Optatus adds, That Donatus had join'd with his Pride, a pitiless Disposition: That he would be con∣sider'd as the Prince and Sovereign of Carthage; That he exalted himself above the Emperour, tho there is nothing above the Emperour, but God only who makes Kings; That he despis'd his Brethren, and would not receive their Oblations; That he made those of his Party Swear by his Name, as if he had been God, and that he would have them carry his Name, instead of that of Jesus Christ. In the following Part of this Discourse, he proves, That the Donatists had not only brought upon them∣selves Persecution, by their Pride, and the Contempt they had testified of the Emperour; but also that 'twas they who had begun the War. That 'twas Donatus of Bagais, who had first gather'd to∣gether a Multitude of Seditious Persons, whom he call'd Agnosticks or Circumcellians, to hinder Paul and Macarius from distributing their Alms. Optatus, describes the horrible Outrages of these desperate Fellows, and shews, That the Souldiers who came only to put a stop to these Disorders, being attack'd by these Madmen, were oblig'd to defend themselves, and to beat them: That the Church nevertheless had no Hand in this, and that the Seditious could attribute it to none but them∣selves. He proceeds further, and shows, That they did justly suffer those Mischiefs, because they broke the Unity of the Church; That the Persecution which they endured, was an Evil that was necessary for procuring the Good of Peace and Union; That this Proceeding against them, was Authoriz'd by the Examples of Moses, who put to Death 3000 Men, for Worshipping the Golden Calf; Of Phinehas, who kill'd Two Persons for violating the Law of God in committing Adultery; and of Elias, who put to Death 450 False Prophets. The Donatists answer'd to these Instances, That we must put a great Difference between the Spirit of the Old Testament, and that of the New; That Jesus Christ had forbidden in the Gospel, the use of the Sword, when St. Peter drew it to cut off Malchus's Ear▪ Optatus, maintains to the contrary, That this Prohibition respected only the Time and Circumstances of that Action of St. Peter; That Jesus Christ was come to suffer, and not to defend himself; That if St. Peter had compass'd what he design'd, Mankind had not been deliver'd by the Death of the Messias: But as distrusting the Truth of this first Answer, which indeed is not very Solid, because the Advice of Jesus Christ, is general; he trys another Answer, and maintains, That Macarius did not use the Sword as St. Peter did, and that he was not the Author of any Persecution like that of the Pagan Emperours; That he would only oblige Christians to go all into the Church and Pray unto one and the same God in the Spirit of Peace and Unity; That those who suffer'd on this occa∣sion were not Martyrs, since they had not Charity, without which, none can be crown'd; That this cannot pass for a Persecution against the Church, but for a just Punishment of some Persons that were refractary to the Church. He objects to the Donatists, their obliging some Catholicks to call them∣selves still Pagans, that they might re baptize them. He observes, That they had spread about a Report when Paul and Macarius came into Africk; That those two Officers were to set up an Image of the Emperour upon the Altar at the time of Offering Sacrifice, but there was nothing done like it; That even those of their own Party who were present at the Sacrifices, had acknowledg'd that 'twas a Calumny, and that they saw nothing but the ordinary Ceremonies of the Church: In short, That there was nothing chang'd, nothing diminish'd, or added to the Sacrifice. He returns again to Macarius, and proposes to himself this Objection: If the Catholicks had not approv'd the Action of Macarius, they should have excommunicated him, which they did not do, and therefore are guilty of his Crime. He answers, That Macarius being no Bishop, they did not Communicate with him, as one Bishop does with other Bishops, and by consequence the Clergy could not be profan'd by his Communion, because a Lay-man has no right to Preach or to Teach, whereas a Bishop speaks to the People with Authority, beginning his Discourse, and ending it always with the Name of God. The Donatists, add, That Macarius ought not so much as to Communicate with Lay-men. Optatus, answers, That being a Minister of the Will of God, and discharging the Office of a Judge, who has Secular Authority in his Hand, the Church ought not to Excommunicate him; That moreover what he had done, might be defended by the Examples of Moses and Phinehas; but in short, That tho' we should confess that Macarius was Guilty, yet the Church could not Excommunicate him who was never accus'd; That there was no Accuser found, neither had he confess'd his Crime, and therefore the Ecclesiastical Judges could not condemn him, since it was forbidden to one and the same Person to be both Accuser and Judge at the same time.

In the Fourth Book, he refutes the Donatists for saying that the Catholicks were such Sinners, that we should shun their Sacrifices, as it is said in Isaiah, ch. 66. and that we should not receive their Unction, as it is in Psal. 140. Optatus, after he has given this Caution in his Introduction, that Men ought not mutually to condemn one another, but to wait for the Judgment of God; and after

having exhorted them to receive the Title of Brethren, which the Catholicks are willing to bestow upon them, he proves that those Accusations which they draw up against the Church, are rather ap∣plicable to themselves, than to the Catholicks. For proof of this, he sets down all the Characters of a wicked Man, which are given in Psal. 49. God hath said unto the wicked, Why do they preach my Precepts? Why do they open their Mouth to speak of my Law? Ye that hate Discipline, and have cast my Words behind you? You sit and speak against your Brother. If you see a Thief, you run along with him, and have made your self the Companion of Adulterers. He shews, That the Donatists cannot excuse themselves from these Crimes; that they hate Discipline, since they shun Peace, since they re-baptize, and rob the Bishops of their Priesthood: That they Preach in their Pulpits against their Brethren; because under pretence of preaching the Gospel they speak injurious Words against Catholicks, and inspire those with hatred against them who hear their Sermons; That they endeavour to perswade them that according to the Apostolical Injunction, they should shun them, they should not Salute them, nor wish them good Morrow, tho' all this is to be understood only of Hereticks, whose Discourse creeps like a Serpent; that theyjoyn themselves with Thieves, since they correspond with the Devil to ex∣tirpate one part of the Flock of Jesus Christ. He describes this after a very pleasant manner.

All Men, says he, that come into the World, tho' they be born of Christian Parents, are fill'd with an unclean Spirit, which must be driven away by Baptism: This is done by the Exorcism which drives away this Spirit, and makes it fly into remote places. After this, the Heart of Man becomes a most pure Habitation. God enters and dwells there, according to that of the Apostle, We are the Temple of God. When therefore ye re-baptize Men, and exorcise them anew, and when ye say, O accurs'd, come forth of this Man, 'tis to God that ye speak after this manner, you drive him disgracefully out of this Man, and the Devil re-enters into his Heart.

This place of Optatus, is very express for proving Original Sin, and the Antiquity of Exorcisms. At last, Optatus shows, That the Donatists render themselves Companions of Adulterers, because they separate from the Church, which is the only lawful Spouse of Jesus Christ, to unite themselves with Adulterers. He comes afterwards to the second Passage taken out of Psal. 140. Let not the Oyl of the wicked anoint my Head; and he observes, That this should only be applied to Jesus Christ, and that it is a Prayer, and not a Precept; a Wish, and not a Command. Then he explains also two other Passages which Parmenianus had quoted against the Catholicks, and shews, that the First is to be understood of Adul∣terers or Hereticks; and the Second, of Jews, and that neither the one nor the other is applicable to Catholicks.

In the Fifth Book, Optatus proves, That the Donatists commit a great Crime, in reiterating Bap∣tism, which Jesus Christ has commanded to be given but once only. He approves of the Commen∣dations which Parmenianus has given this Sacrament, by saying, That it is the Life of Vertue, the Death of Crimes, the Immortal Birth, the means of obtaining the Kingdom of Heaven, the Port of Innocence, and the Shipwrack of Sins. But he adds, That 'tis not he who gives this Sacrament of Baptism, that conferrs these Graces, but the Faith of him that receives it and the Virtue of the Trinity; and consequently, that Baptism is not to be reiterated, which is administred in the Name of the Trinity. He has also here a most Remarkable Reflection about the Rule which we should Consult in all Ecclesiastical Controversies.

We ask, says he, if it be lawful to repeat Baptism given in the Name of the Trinity? Ye maintain, That it is lawful; we say, That it is forbidden. The People are in Suspence, between your affirming and our denying the same thing, and they can neither believe you nor us, for we are all fallible Men: Let us then search after Judges in this Case. But where are they to be found? If they be Christians, they are either of your Party or ours, and by consequence cannot be Judges of our Difference. We must then enquire after a Judge out of Christendom. But then if he be a Pagan, he understands not our Mysteries; if he be a Jew, he is an Enemy to the Baptism of Christians. There cannot therefore be found any Judge upon Earth, but we must seek for one in Heaven. But why should we have recourse to Heaven, since we have the Testament of our Father upon Earth? Let us search after his Will in the Gospel, which will inform us, that he who has been once wash'd, needs not to be wash'd again. Where∣fore, adds he, we do not re-baptize those who have been baptiz'd, when they return again to us.

He proves also, That it ought not to be done, because there is but one Faith, one Jesus Christ, and one Sacrament of Baptism: That there are three Things to be considered in this Sacrament, the Tri∣nity, the Faith of him that receives it, and the Person that administers it: That the Trinity is the first Thing of absolute necessity, without which there can be no Sacrament at all; That the Faith of him that receives the Sacrament, is the second Thing, which is no less necessary, because it ought always to be the same; but then there is not the same Necessity that the Minister should be Faithful and Just, because the Ministers are chang'd every day, and it is Jesus Christ who baptizes, and the Minister ought not to attribute to himself the Effect of the Sacrament which is owing to God only; and in short, because the Sacraments are Holy, and do Sanctify by themselves, tho' the Holiness of the Minister do not contribute to it. Optatus proves this Truth by many Reasons, and many Testimo∣nies. He observes by the bye, That those who had been baptiz'd by John, before Jesus Christ in∣stituted Baptism, were not re-baptiz'd; but those who were baptiz'd, after Jesus Christ had instituted Baptism, have been re-baptiz'd. At last, he endeavours to prove, That the Faith of him that re∣ceives Baptism, is necessary to the validity of this Sacrament, which must be understood of Adult Persons only.

The Sixth Book is written against the Impieties and Sacrileges of the Donatists, who had broken, cut in pieces, raz'd, and overturn'd the Altars of the Catholicks; Those Altars, says Optatus, which have born the Offerings of the People, and the Members of Jesus Christ, upon which the Almighty

God has been invok'd, upon which the Holy Spirit has descended, where the Faithful have receiv'd the earnest of eternal Salvation, the Support of their Faith, and the Hopes of a blessed Resurrection; those Altars upon which we are forbidden to offer any other Offerings, but those of Peace. For what is the Altar, but the place where the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ are laid?

What hath Jesus Christ done to you, says he further to the Donatists, that you should destroy the Altars on which he rests at certain times? Why do ye break the Sacred Tables where Jesus Christ makes his abode? Ye have imitated the Crime of the Jews, for as they put Jesus Christ to Death upon the Cross, so ye have beaten him upon these Altars. If ye believ'd that the Eucharist of the Catholicks is Sacrilegious, yet at least ye should have some respect to the former Offerings that your selves have made upon these Altars. Upon this occasion, Optatus puts a very pleasant Objection to them: All the Faithful know, says he, that Linen Clothes are laid upon the Altars, for the Celebration of the Holy My∣steries. The Eucharist does not touch the Wood of the Altar, but only the Linen Clothes: Why then do ye break? Why do ye scrape? Why do ye burn the Wood of the Altar? If the Impurity can pass through the Linen, Why cannot it penetrate the Wood, nay, and the Ground also? If there∣fore ye scrape off something from the Altars because they are impure, I advise you also to dig into the Ground, and there to make a great Ditch, that ye may offer in a most pure Place: But take heed that ye do not dig down to Hell, where ye will find your Masters, Corah, Dathan and Abiram.

So pleasantly does Optatus ridicule the folly of the Donatists. But from this Raillery, he quickly passes to most bloody Accusations.

Ye have also redoubled your Sacrileges in breaking the Chalices, which carried the Blood of Jesus Christ; ye have melted them down to make Ingots of Gold or Silver, which you have Sold in the Markets to every one indifferently, that offer'd to buy them: Sacrilegious Persons as you are, you have not shown the least respect to those Chalices, wherein you your selves have offer'd. Perhaps, infamous Women bought them for their own use. Perhaps, the Pagans took them to make Vessels wherewith they might offer Incense to their Idols. O enor∣mous Crime! O unheard of Impiety!

This Declamation of Optatus, clearly shews, what is the Reverence that we ought to pay to the Sacrament of the Eucharist, and evidently proves, that it was not consider'd merely as Bread and Wine, but that it was believ'd to be the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. The Donatists answer'd to these Accusations, That those Vessels having been touch'd by polluted Persons, were thereby become unclean, as 'tis said by the Prophet Haggai, That which is touch'd by an impure Man, becomes unclean: From whence they concluded, that they had reason to make no further use of them, but to consider them as common and ordinary Vessels. [As if a be∣lief that the Eucharist was instituted for a Remembrance of the Death of Christ, and of the Benefits which we receive thereby, had not been sufficient to have commanded Reverence to those Instru∣ments with which it was perform'd.] Optatus answers them, by shewing, That the Catholicks were not defil'd with any Crime that they had not Sacrific'd to Idols; That no such Accusation could be prov'd against them; That the only thing that could render them odious to the Donatists, was their Love of Peace, and their endeavours after Union; That they are united by Communion with all the Churches of the World, and that they cannot be accus'd of being defil'd; but supposing that even the Catholicks were unclean, yet the Vessels which they touch'd at the Invocation of the Name of God, would not be so, because that Sacred Name, Sanctifies even that which is unclean: That the touch of an unclean Person, has less Power to render a Vessel impure, than the Invocation of God has to purify it, since 'tis the Invocation, and not the Touch that Sanctifies it.

The Second Accusation that Optatus makes against the Donatists, is their putting under Penance the Virgins Consecrated to God, and making them leave off the Signs of their former Profession, and forcing them to desire a New one, and doing violence unto them. In this place, he speaks of a little Mitre of Cloth, which they put upon their Heads, and of the Veil wherewith they cover'd them, and says, That those Ornaments were Signs that they had profess'd Virginity, and that the Donatists, by taking them away from those Virgins to put them under Penance, had given occasion to many Persons to Ravish and Marry them. He adds, that the Donatists had carried away by force, the Ornaments of Churches, and the Holy Books, and that they had wash'd the Vestments, the Walls and the Floors of the Churches with Salt-Water. He laughs at their folly, and asks them, Why they wash'd the Vestments, and did not also wash the Books of the Gospel? Why they wash'd the Walls, which are only look'd upon? And why they did not also wash the Pavement of the Streets, and how they would make use of that Water wherewith the Catholicks had wash'd themselves? At last, he accuses them of invading the Coemiteries, and hindering the Interment of the Catholicks.

Wherefore do you abuse the Dead, says he to them, that you may terrify the Living? Why do you deny them Burial? If you have any Differences with your Brother while he is alive, yet Death should put an End to them all. Why do you insult over him after Death? Why do you refuse him Burial? Why do you quarrel even with the Dead? But, says he, if you could hinder his Body from being Interr'd among other Christians, yet you cannot separate his Soul from the Com∣pany of those Holy Souls that are with Jesus Christ.

At last, Optatus says, That the Donatists were so extravagantly wicked, that they corrupted all those that came over to their Party:

So those that were Patient, says he, by going over to you, become Furious of the sudden; those that were Faithful, become Perfidious; those that were Peaceable, become Quarrelsome; their Simplicity, is chang'd into Cheating; their Modesty, into Impudence; their Humility, into Pride. Those who are gone over to your Party, sollicite others to come after them, and accuse of Sloth and Stupi∣dity, all those that are yet in the Bosom of the Church, they lay Traps for them, and make them to fall into the same precipice with themselves.

The last Book which is commonly attributed to Optatus, is a Recapitulation of some Points that have been handled in other places; particularly, he refutes the Objection of the Donatists, who say, That they cannot re-unite themselves to the Catholicks, because they are the Sons and Successors of Traditors. The Author of this Book, extenuates as much as he can the Enormity of this Crime, and shows, that tho' it were much greater, and that those to whom the Catholick Bishops succeed were guilty of it, yet they have no share in that Guilt, neither can it be imputed to them, nor alledg'd a∣gainst them as a just Cause of Separation. He shews, that we ought sometimes to suffer sinners in the Church, and to dissemble the Sins of our Brethren for the good of Peace. He observes, That there is no Man free from Sin; and that if any one were so, yet he ought not to separate from his Brethren, though they were Sinners: That the Apostles did not separate from the Communion of St. Peter after his Sin; but on the contrary the Keys were given him, that he being a Sinner, might open the Gates of Heaven to the Innocent, and teach those that are Innocent, that they should not shut them against Sinners. Besides these, there are many other Repetitions of what had been said by Optatus concerning Macarius, and the Persecution that he rais'd against the Donatists.

Optatus at the End of his Books, had plac'd many authentick Instruments to justifie the Matters of Fact which he had propos'd against the Donatists; we have none of those which Optatus plac'd there extant, but many other Monuments concerning the History of the Donatists have been added to his Books.

The First is a part of the Acts of the Conference between the Catholick Bishops and the Donatists, held at Carthage by the Order of the Emperour Honorius, in the Year 411, which belongs to another Century.

The Second, is part of the Verbal Process made by Zenophilus, who had been Consul, on the 30th. of December in the Year 320, by which it appears, That Silvanus who ordain'd Majorinus, had given up the Holy Books to the Heathens: Zenophilus there examines a Grammarian nam'd Victor, a Deacon nam'd Castus, and a Sub-Deacon call'd Crescentianus, and makes them confess, That Silvanus had de∣liver'd up the Ornaments of the Church and the Holy Books, according to the Deposition of Nundi∣narius the Deacon, who was present. He causes also the Verbal Process made in the Year 363. to be read by Munatius Felix, Judge of the Colony of Cirtha, who further confirm'd the Deposition of Nundinarius. The Letters written to Silvanus by the Bishops of his own Party are set down, wherein they reprehend him for his outrageous manner of treating his Deacon Nundinarius. He is accus'd also of making a Simonaical Ordination, of appropriating to his own use the Alms that were given for the Poor, and of being ordain'd himself by the Sollicitation of some Country Fellows. There are many things very remarkable in this Act: For there one may see, That at the Beginning of the 3d. Age of the Church, they us'd Chalices of Silver and Gold, Cups, Lamps and Candlesticks of Silver and Copper; That they kept in the Church Garments for the Poor; That the Readers, who were very numerous, had the Holy Books; That the Christians had a Library near the Church, where they put their Books.

The Third Record, is also part of a Verbal Process concerning the Justification of Felix of Aptungis, made by Aelianus the Proconsul in the Year 314, in the Month of February, as appears by St. Au∣gustin: There he examines one nam'd Ingentius, and Convicts him of making an Addition to a Letter of Caecilian, that he might falsly accuse Felix of being a Traditor.

The Fourth, is a Letter of the Emperour Constantine to Ablabius; wherein he orders him to send Caecilian to Arles, with some Bishops of his Party, as well as some of his Accusers, that he might receive Judgment from the Council which was to assemble there.

The Fifth, is a Letter from the Council of Arles, of which we have spoken in its place.

The Sixth, is the Letter which Constantine wrote against the Donatists, when they appeal'd to his Judgment, after they had been condemn'd in the Council of Arles.

The Seventh, is another Letter of the same Emperour, wherein he acquaints the Bishops of Do∣natus's Party, That he once design'd to send Judges into Africk, to determine their Differences with Caecilian; but that he judg'd it more proper to make him come before himself.

The Eighth, is a 4th. Letter of the same Emperour written to Celsus; wherein he acquaints him, That he will quickly come into Africk to decide the Differences between Donatus and Caecilian himself.

The Ninth, is a 5th. Letter of Constantine, wherein he gives the Donatist Bishops leave to return into Africk.

The Tenth, is a 6th. Letter of this Emperour about the Cause of the Donatists, address'd to the Catholicks of Africk. He tells them, That he had done all that lay in his Power to re-establish Peace, but since the Obstinacy of some Men had frustrated his good Intentions, they must now wait upon God only for the Remedy of this Mischief, and that till it pleas'd the Divine Mercy to remedy it, they must proceed with Moderation, and bear with Patience the Insolence of the Enemies of the Church: That they must not render Evil for Evil, since Vengeance is reserv'd to God only, and that by suffering patiently the Fury of these Insolent Men, they should certainly merit the Glory of Mar∣tyrdom. For, says he, Is not this to Fight and Conquer for God, to bear with Patience the Outrages and Injuries of the Enemies of God's People? At last he assures the Catholicks, That if they observe this Method, they will quickly see their Enemies Party weakned, and that God will give Grace to many to acknowledge their Error and do Penance.

The following Letter is a further Indication of the Meekness of this Emperour, and the Moderation of the Catholicks. The Donatists had invaded the Church which Constantine had caus'd to be built in Constantina a City of Numidia; which the Catholicks demanded back again, but they refus'd it.

The Catholicks to avoid all further Contention, pray'd the Emperour to give them a Place in the Dependances of his Demesnes thereabouts, where they might Build another Church: To which Con∣stantine answer'd, That he did not only grant their Desire, but he had also written to the Receiver of his Revenues to furnish them with so much Money as was necessary for the Building of this Church. In this Letter he praises the Moderation of the Catholicks, and condemns the Obstinacy of the Dona∣tists; and ordains, That the Laws which he had made for Exemption of the Clergy from all Publick Taxes, should be put in Execution.

The last of these Records, which are added to the Books of Optatus, is a Fragment of the Acts of the Passion of the Saints Dativus, Saturninus, Felix, Ampelius, and of some other African Martyrs, made in the time of Anulinus, and written by a Donatist. This Piece contains some part of the Ca∣lumnies of the Donatists against Mensurius and Caecilian. The Author of these Acts accuses them of hindring the Faithful from carrying Food to the Christians that were in Prison, and of beating them back with blows of Whips and Cudgels: He adds, That these Martyrs would never communicate with Mensurius, nor Caecilian, because they had deliver'd up the Holy Books to the Heathens, and that the Church of Christ being Holy, ought not to hold Communion with those that are defil'd with a Crime of this heinous Nature. At last, he says, That those Martyrs who wanted Food by the Cru∣elty of Mensurius and Caecilian, died of Famine in Prison, and went to Heaven there to receive the Crown of Martyrdom.

The Stile of Optatus's Books is noble, vehement and close, but not enough Polite or Neat. He presses briskly upon those against whom he Disputes, and describes very sensibly the Transactions which he relates, and explains the Passages which he produces with a great deal of Wit. He gives his Thoughts a fine and delicate turn, his Expressions signifie very perfectly what he means to say; his Reasonings are subtile, and his Relations pleasant. In a word, It appears that the Author of this little Book, was Master of much Learning and Wit. The Doctrine which he teaches is, and always will be of much use to the Church: for there is not the same Reason of those Questions which concern the Truth of the Church, as of those that concern only some particular Doctrines. These continue only so long as the Sect subsists which opposes these Doctrines; and the Books which treat of them become almost useless whenever the Heresie is extinct. But all Heresies, all Schisms having one common Principle, of opposing the Church, the Books which are written in its Defence, are contrary to all Heresies, and will be useful as long as there shall be any Hereticks in the World who∣soever they be. The Books of Optatus teach us also a great many very remarkable particulars con∣cerning the History of the Donatists: We find in them many Points of Doctrine, and we may observe many things which clear up the ancient Discipline. He says, That all Christians have but one Faith and one Creed. He explains the chief Mysteries in a most Orthodox manner. He shows, That there neither is, nor can be any more but one Catholick Church spread over all the Earth, that it cannot be shut up in a small Part of the World: That this Church is made up of Bishops, Priests, Dea∣cons, Ministers, and those that are meerly the Faithful. He observes, That the Bishops are above the Priests, as the Priests are above the Deacons: He considers the Church of Rome as the chief Church in the World, and as the Centre of Unity, because of St. Peter, who was the Head of the Apostles: He says, That Man by Nature is Weak and Imperfect, and therefore has need of the Grace of Jesus Christ to make him Perfect; That we are all Born in Sin, and that Baptism is necessary to obtain Re∣mission of it; That when the Sacrament is given in the Name of the Trinity, it ought not to be reite∣rated: and yet he seems to think that we ought to re-baptize those who were baptiz'd by Hereticks; but he does not make the same determination for those who were baptiz'd by Schismaticks. He men∣tions Exorcism with Commendation, as a necessary Ceremony at Baptism; He speaks of Chrysm also as a Holy Thing, and of the Unction that was us'd at Baptism. He expresses himself in so plain terms about the Real Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, and about the Adoration that's due to this Holy Sacrament, that nothing can be desir'd more express. He observes many Cere∣monies at the Celebration of the Eucharist, to which he gives the Name of a Sacrifice; and it appears by what he says of it, That in his time they offer'd Sacrifice for the whole Catholick Church, and then they recited the Lord's▪ Prayer; That the Celebration of it was upon an Altar of Wood, which was adorn'd and cover'd with a Linen-Cloth for the greater respect; That they then used Chalices of Gold and Silver, and also had Ornaments. He says, That the Church has Judges; That she punishes Crimes; That she exacts Penances of those that confess their Sins, or are convicted of them. He praises Virginity, and yet he says, That there is no obligation to it upon those that have not made a Vow. He observes, That in his time, this Vow was made Solemnly by the Virgins who dedicated themselves to God; and that they carried a small covering upon their Head, which was the Sign of the Vow they had made. He testifies sufficiently the respect that was paid in his time for the Relicks of the Saints, when he speaks of the Sepulchre of St. Peter and St. Paul, and speaking of Lucilla, he blames those that honour'd the Relicks of false Martyrs, which were not own'd by the Church.

The only Error that can be observ'd in the Books of Optatus is, That he maintains that those who had been baptiz'd with John's Baptism, before the Institution of Christ's Baptism, were not re-baptiz'd. [See Acts xix. 1-5.] We may add to this, what he says of reiterating the Baptism of Hereticks, and perhaps also what he proposes about the Power of Free Will, to which he seems to give the Power of willing and beginning a Good Action, and also of advancing in the Way of Salvation, without the help of the Grace of Christ; but these Errors are light and pardonable. One may also reprehend in his Book the Allegorical way in which he explains many Passages of Holy Scripture, by giving them a sence very remote from that which they naturally have, and by applying them to those things with which they have no affinity. This Fault which would be tolerable in a Preacher, seems not to be

pardonable in an Author who writes a Treatise of Controversy, wherein all Proofs should be solid and convincing. But Optatus had to do with such Enemies as us'd the same way, who perverted Passages of Scripture to calumniate the Church, and commend their own Sect.

The Text of Optatus is much corrupted in many places. It was printed at Mentz in the Year 1549▪ with many Faults. Afterwards Balduinus a Learned Civilian, publish'd it at Paris in 1563, revised by a Manuscript which was communicated to him by Espencaeus, and corrected in many places. He prefixes to it a large Preface against Calvin, wherein he refutes the Conclusion that this Heretick had drawn from the History of Optatus, That Princes were lawful Judges in Matters of Religion, and at the same time he discovers a great many stupid Mistakes and gross Errors that he had propos'd. He thought it not proper to prefix this Preface to the Second Edition of Optatus, which he caus'd to be printed at Paris in 1569, together with Victor Uticensis, after he had revised and corrected it by a Manuscript. 'Twas by this Edition that Commelinus made his in the Year 1599. The Annotations of this famous Civilian upon Optatus, are most learned and curious, and they perfectly clear the Hi∣story of the Donatists; but they are so long, that they may rather pass for a Commentary than for Notes. In 1631. Albaspinaeus caus'd the Books of Optatus to be printed in One Volume in Folio, with short Notes, and large Observations, which he added to the Annotations of Balduinus, and some Notes of an unknown Author. He added the Records of which we have spoken already, together with the History of the Conference of Carthage, publish'd by Balduinus, and the excellent Obser∣vations which he made in French and Latin about the Discipline of the Church. In the same Year 1631. Meric Casaubon printed in a little Volume the Text of▪ Optatus at London, with most Judi∣cious Critical Notes. At last, Philippus Priorius took care to make a new Impression of this Author at Paris by the Widow of Dupuis. In 1679, they put in this Edition the Prefaces of Balduinus, the Notes of Albaspinaeus, Casaubon and Barthi••s, and those of the Unknown Author: Priorius also added some, which he put before the others, though they do not deserve such an honourable place. After this follow'd the Commentary of Balduinus, and the Observations of Albaspinaeus upon Optatus, the Conference of Carthage, and the other pieces of which we have spoken. The History of the Con∣ference of Carthage, written by Balduinus, is the last Discourse in this Volume, which has some affi∣nity with the Books of Optatus. After so many Editions and Commentaries, one would think that this Author were become most correct and plain: and yet 'tis not so, for the Text is still very much corrupted; there are many places that still want to be clear'd up and restor'd. The Notes of Balduinus do indeed enlighten the History; but he is mistaken in many passages of it, as Valesius has plainly prov'd in his learned Dissertation of the Schism of the Donatists. The Notes and Observations of Albaspinaeus explain some Points of Discipline, but they are not always just. Those of Meric Casau∣b••n, are the best for understanding of the Text; but those of Barthius and others, are not very valu∣able: The learned Rigaltius, after he had publish'd Tertullian, Minutius and St. Cyprian, design'd to publish Optatus: And it may be presum'd, that as he was a very able Critick, very well vers'd in the African Antiquities, and in the Knowledge of Manuscripts, he would have made considerable Corre∣ctions, and restor'd the Text of Optatus in many places: But he died before he had undertaken this Work. I shall be able perhaps to undertake it, and to publish the Text of Optatus revis'd by many Manuscripts, more correct than any hitherto published.

Notes

• a 1.1

  St. Optatus.] The Name of Optatus is very com∣mon among the Africans. St Austin speaks of many other Persons of this Name, who are easily distinguish'd from this Bishop.
• b 1.2

  Milevi.] Some Authors have thought that he was Bishop of Malta, but this is a gross mistake: Milevi is a City of Numidia in Africk, often mention'd in the African Councils.
• * 1.3

  St. Optatus.
• c 1.4

  He died under the Reign of Valentinian.] In B. II. he places in his Catalogue of Popes, Pope Siricius, who was not Bishop of Rome till after the Death of Valentinian; which would cause a doubt of what St. Jerom says, if it were not easy for a Transcriber to add the Name of Siricius, when he Copied out this Book after the Death of Optatus.
• d 1.5

  The Stile of the last Book.] The Stile of it is flat, mean and weak, whereas the Stile of Optatus is sublime, masculine, and enrich'd with many Fi∣gures; there are also many Terms, which appear not to be Optatus's: The Author of this Book treats of what Optatus had already handled in B. I. and III. and the beginning of the IV. which Repetition does also show, that it is none of his.
• e 1.6

  Opinions contrary to those that are in the other Books.] This Author extenuates the enormity of their Crime, who deliver'd up the Holy Books to be burnt; he denies that it was a Capital Crime, and endeavours to prove that it was light and pardonable. On the contrary, St. Optatus declares, B. I. That it was a great Sin, equal to that of Schism, and that those who committed it, should purchase some Years of this Life, with the loss of Eternal Life, which sup∣poses, that this Crime was Mortal, and deserv'd Dam∣nation; but the Author of the Seventh Book, teaches the contrary.