Library › St Optatus of Milevis › Against the Donatists

Against the Donatists

St Optatus of Milevis, tr. Vassall-Phillips, 1917

Book 5, The Parable of the Marriage Feast Was Wrongly Brought Forward by Parmenian

Lastly what is to be said with regard to that part of your treatise concerning the heavenly nuptials, in which----taking away hope of future things----you have applied it all to the present time, saying that he, who escaped your doorkeepers and ministers,¹ has been cut off from your fellowship, in such a way as to be cast outside,² with contumely, far from the communion of the Faithful? If the parable mean this,³ nothing is left for faith to hope, nothing for the resurrection to restore,⁴ nothing further in heaven to be awaited, nothing⁵ for God, the King⁶ and Father of the Family, to recognise at His own Banquet, when He shall rejoice over the presence of many and grieve over the absence of some,⁷ and shall say that many have been called, but few chosen.⁸ In that case there will be no occasion for Him to be wrath with the man who is without the Wedding Garment.

For the Son of God, Christ Himself, is the Bridegroom; He is also the Garment and the Tunic, that floats in the water, to clothe many,⁹ yet awaits others innumerable¹⁰ and is never used up.¹¹

And before anyone say that I have been rash in calling the Son of God the Garment, let him read the words of the Apostle who says:
‘As many of you as have been baptised in the Name of Christ, have put on Christ.’¹²

O tunic ever one and unchangeable, which fitly¹³ clothes all ages and forms, which is not too loose¹⁴ in infants, nor stretched in youth, nor changed in women!

Assuredly the day will come, when the heavenly nuptials begin to be celebrated. There without anxiety shall they sit down, who have preserved the one Baptism.¹⁵ For with regard to any who has allowed himself to be rebaptised by you----resurrection is not denied him, for he has believed in the resurrection of the Flesh.¹⁶ He shall rise indeed, but naked. But because he has allowed you to spoil him of his wedding garment, he shall hear the Father of the Family speak thus:
‘My friend,’ that is to say----‘I recognise thee----once thou didst renounce the devil, and wert converted to Me, and I gave thee a wedding garment. Why hast thou come thus, without that which I gave thee?’----that is to say, ‘why hast thou not what I gave thee?’

For no one can be angry with one who has not something, which has not been given him.

‘Thou didst receive a wedding garment, together with these others, and thou alone art without one. Why hast thou come naked and doleful¹⁷? Who has torn his spoils from thee? What thieves’ doors hast thou entered¹⁸? What murderous robbers¹⁹ hast thou met on the way?’

However many they are who come thus, they shall have no place at that banquet.²⁰

Notes

qui ianitores et ministros fefellerit vestros.
foras.
si ita est.
quod resurrectio repraesentet.
sc. the Wedding Garment.
Casaubon supplies the word caelestis after Rex, but since the word Deus follows, caelestis (which is not in the MSS.) hardly seems necessary.
praesentia multorum gaudeat et de aliquorum absentia contristetur. aliquorum, i.e. the Donatists. Optatus on several occasions already has spoken of God grieving (cf. i, 2 bis; ii, 24; ii, 26; iii, 2 ‘Deus dolet’). Here he represents Him as grieving over the absence of those first called, and rejoicing over the presence of others from the byways and hedges. St. Optatus evidently leaves the opposition between his praesentia multorum and the pauci electi without noticing it.
Cf. Matt, xxii, 14.
cum Filius Dei Ipse Christus sit Sponsus et vestis et tunica natans in aqua, quae multos vestiat. Casaubon has suggested natos in aqua for natans in aqua. If this suggestion be adopted, we translate ‘and the Tunic, wherewith He may clothe many who are born in the water (the baptised).’ This, however, has no MS. authority, and is quite unnecessary. The spiritual garment of grace is Christ, whom the baptised ‘puts on’ (induit), as the water flows over him. But St. Optatus will not identify Christ with the water----so He is the Grace in the water----a spiritual garment invisibly ‘floating in the water,’ which clothes the baptised, as the water covers him. It is a very beautiful idea. There seems to be no reference here to the ἰχθύς. (Still cf. iii, 2: ‘Hic est piscis, qui in baptismate per invocationem fontalibus undis inseritur.’)
infinitos.
nec vestiendo deficiat.
Gal. iii, 27.
decenter.
nec rugatur. Literally ‘is not wrinkled.’
qui baptisma singulare servaverint.
Is it the case that this strange sentence shows that St. Optatus was a Chiliast? It is quite possible that the text as we have it is corrupt; however, the view that St. Optatus held Millennarian tenets in some form or other is at least plausible. We know that, though St. Augustine abandoned Chiliasm, he would by no means have held that its repudiation, even in his time, was a matter of obligation.
nudus et lugubris.
quas fraudulentas adisti fauces?
quos latrones? (cf. i, 19).
All the MSS. finish this Book at this point.