The Donatist schism and early Catholic Church responses to heresy

Donatist Heresy

An Analysis of the Problems Posed by the Donatists in the Early Catholic Church

Introduction

Donatus Magnus represents a kind of Puritanism that has always existed in the Church. The Donatist movement of the early fourth century was a response to perceived laxity on the part of Church officials concerning Catholics who had lapsed out of fear under the persecutions of Diocletian. That was one side of the argument, at least. On the other side was the work of St. Optatus the African, Bishop of Milevis, who authored a significant treatise concerning the schism of the Donatists. The problem, essentially, was one of Church politics, judgment and charity -- and it was a problem that eventually found itself coming before the throne of Emperor Constantine, who sent a group of bishops to hear the case and give a decision. This paper will analyze the problems the Donatists posed for the early Catholic Church, and the manner with which they were dealt.

The Schism

As J.R. King (1870) notes, "The schism of the Donatists…arose indirectly out of the persecution under Diocletian" (ix). The martyrdom of many, such as St. Cyprian, a bishop of Carthage killed for the faith in the third century, was having a euphoric effect on the early Christians. King describes it as a kind of fanaticism "in which many of the Christians courted martyrdom" (ix). Bishop Mensurius of Carthage and his successor, Caecilianus, because of their apparent lack of longing for martyrdom were accused of having given up their Bible (of being, in other words, traditor -- a defamatory word used to describe those whose faith appeared to waver under the threat of annihilation).

When Caecilianus was consecrated by a Felix (also suspected of having been a traditor) the alarm rang out among the hard-line opposition, who installed Marjorinus as the new bishop of Carthage. Marjorinus believed the sacraments of traditors to be invalid, thus he (and his successor, Donatus) were legally bound to occupy the See. By the time Donatus had succeeded in 315, the Puritanical element of what became known as Donatism had risen to foreground. By then, of course, the dispute about who was legal bishop of the Church, Marjorinus (and later Donatus) or Caecilianus (consecrated by a suspected traditor and therefore invalidly installed -- according to the Donatists) had come before Constantine. Pope Melchiades along with three other bishops heard the case and "decided in favor of the validity of the consecration of Caecilianus; and a similar verdict was given by a council held at Arles, by direction of the Emperor, in the following year" (King 1870:ix).

The Donatists continued to appeal their case and the Church's response against them was, as King states, to issue "sever laws…against their schism" (x), which only added fuel to their fire and kindled the intensity of their belief. So concerned with purity and asceticism were they, that they attracted a host of likeminded religious and with Donatus now at the head of their movement, their views spread like wildfire through Africa. They imprudently longed for martyrdom and become violent with those whose fanaticism failed to measure up to their own. The Church had given its ruling, but Donatus and his followers were not content to mind it. The schism was in full swing and now the early Church doctors were beginning to make their own minds known on the matter.

The Donatist Defensive

As Albrecht Vogel states, a synod at Cirta was held at which the seeds of schism were sewn -- a decade before Donatus came to power. At Cirta, Bishop

Secundus of Tigisis proposed that an investigation should be made, whether there were any traditores among the assembled. The result of the investigation was, that nearly every one of the bishops present was proved guilty of the crime, in some form or other. Suspicion fell even upon Secundus himself. He was consequently compelled to drop the investigation.

The event showed the depth of the dilemma for Donatists -- and the grey area that existed for the Church regarding traditores. No one, it appeared, was safe from suspicion. Yet, the fact that the question of who had lapsed under persecution and who had longed for martyrdom, from the Donatist perspective, was a question that provoked too much scrutiny and far too many accusations. Thus, it is no surprise that Augustine would decry it as a movement that was tearing the Church apart. Such hard-line Catholicism would always threaten the stability of the Church, right down the present day sedevacantism (an extremely conservative movement that denies the current Papacy due to signs of modernism).

The problem worsened when Donatus took upon himself his own bishopric (as happens still today): "There were two bishops and two congregations" (Vogel). Most of the African church and many of its bishops followed Donatus (who appealed to St. Cyprian in the same way the sedevacantist groups appeal to St. Pius V). But the Church outside of Africa recognized Caecilianus. Thus, the problem for the Church at whole was evidently one of schism.

This problem became even more evident when the first decision by the Pope was granted in favor of Caecilianus. The Donatists appealed to the Constantine (in a move that showed little respect for the Papacy and showed a terrible lack of judgment on the part of the Donatists). The Emperor himself was nowise pleased by the appeal and the Donatists were digging themselves into a hole by expressing their outrage and contempt for their fellow churchmen in such an unorthodox manner. Their protest that the Pontiff's judgment had been partial to the other side found little favor with Constantine, who was already "disgusted, that he, a Pagan, was asked to decide upon the internal affairs of the Christian Church; but he accepted, nevertheless, the appeal, summoned Caecilianus and his accusers to Milan, and condemned the latter as guilty of calumny" (Vogel).

Afterwards, Constantine preferred to ignore the matter. Constans, his son, did not. The Church in Africa was still enthralled with asceticism and the longing for martyrdom as if this were the only proof of one's Catholic faith. Constans took more of an interest in the Catholic faith than his father did and began to focus his attention on rooting out the schism that was separating the Church in Africa from its Catholic roots.

Unfortunately, at the same time a group even more ascetic than the Donatists called the Circumcelliones merged with part of the Donatist group: "the result was a complete uproar, which, however, was speedily suppressed by Taurinus" (Vogel).

Now the Donatists were so completely out of favor with the Church that any chance they had of legitimizing themselves was gone. Caecilianus, the legitimate and recognized bishop of the Church now died, leaving only the Donatist bishopric in Carthage. The schism might have been healed through some kind of compromise with the Church at this point -- but no such event took place for the Church regarded the Donatists with a very unfavorable light. Caecilianus was succeeded by Gratus as bishop of Carthage.

As Frend notes, many of the Donatists belonged to the lower class and were made up of the poor country people, which was a point that Constans now tried to use to bring them back into the fold:

As most of the Donatists belonged to the poor class, and many were completely destitute, Constans sent (in 348) Paul and Macarius to Africa to try to reconcile them by means of a liberal support. But Donatus the Great declared with vehemence against this attempt of seduction; and Donatus of Bagai met the negotiators at the head of a swarm of armed Circumcelliones. The commotion, however, was speedily suppressed. Donatus of Bagai was decapitated, Donatus the Great was banished, and the Donatist churches were closed. (Vogel)

The Donatist defensive was now worse off than ever. But not for long.

Julian the Apostate succeeded to the throne of Rome. It was the mission of this Emperor to thwart the Church's mission by restoring the pagan gods of Rome to places of public worship and honor. Julian despised the Church, and employed the aid of every heretic and schismatic he could find in his quest to destroy it. The ban against the Donatists was overturned and they were once again allowed access to their churches and their bishops were allowed to return from the exile. Julian even went so far as to make new bishoprics for the Donatists -- anything so long as it went against the Church. However, by the time Valentinian and Gratian ascended to the throne, the Donatists were again out of favor and they were suppressed by both Roman Emperors.

The Donatist movement now began to break up all of its own accord. As happens with schismatic movements, one break is precedent for the next. So from Carthage having two bishoprics, Carthage gained a third when the Donatists themselves began to separate over moderate and extreme stances. That is when Augustine in junction with the Council of Carthage "petitioned the Emperor Honorius to issue penal laws against the Donatists. The petition was granted: laymen should be fined, clergymen banished, and the churches closed" (Vogel).

Pope Honorius, however, was willing to be lenient at this point -- at least to protect his own interests. Nonetheless, the Pontiff's leniency was met with scorn by the rest of the Church and another debate was set up at Carthage at which Augustine was present (and Aurelius), both speaking against the Donatists. The matter was finally resolved by imperial decree, which denied them in 414, some century after their birth, "all civil rights; in 415 they were forbidden to assemble for worshipping, under penalty of death. Nevertheless, they had not become extinct, when, in the seventh century, the Saracens occupied the country, and destroyed the African Church" (Vogel).

The Arguments

Optatus wrote against the Donatists in a very systematic manner, touching upon point after point, and doctrine after doctrine, thoroughly and succinctly. One of his earliest points against the Donatists is their lack of Catholicity. Essentially what the Donatists did for the hundreds of years that they existed (till the Saracens took over) was to cause dissension in the Church of Christ, to disparage and accuse. The Catholic Church should have been the model of charity, but with the Donatists, fanaticism and a thirst for "testimony" was the model. Optatus, therefore, sought to show just how this was so by distinguishing between the marks of the Catholic Church and the marks of Schism:

Catholicism is constituted by a simple and true understanding in the law, by an unique and most true mystery, and by unity of minds. But schism, after the bond of peace has been broken, is brought into existence through passion, is nourished by hatred, is strengthened by envy and dissensions, so that the Catholic Mother is abandoned, whilst her unfilial children go forth outside and separate themselves (as you have done) from the root of Mother Church-cut off by the shears of their hatred -- and wickedly depart in rebellion. They are not able, however, to do anything new, or different from that which long ago they learned from their Mother.

Such opinion is seconded by Gordon R. Lewis, who states that "Separatists from the catholic (universal) church resorted to violence. The most zealous of the Donatist separatists, the Circumcellions, burned houses and churches, beat people, cut off a bishop's hands and tongue, and blinded others with a mixture of lime and acid" (Lewis). The Donatist hatred for a perceived lack of faith resulted in a violent expression of hatred for Christ's Church. Lewis admits that "not all Donatists went to these extremes of physical torture, but many carried their separation to rather bizarre personal ends. They would not bury Catholics in their cemeteries, bake bread for them, greet them, sit in the same room with them, or answer mail from them" (Lewis).

Again, the teachings and wisdom of Christ are evident in the writings of Aurelius of Utica (who spoke in the debate against the Donatists in the early fifth century):

Since the apostle says that we ought not to be partakers with the sins of other men, what else does he do but make himself partaker with the sins of other men, who holds communion with heretics without the baptism of the Church? And therefore I pronounce my judgment that heretics should be baptized, that they may receive remission of their sins, and so communion be allowed to them.

The degree of mercy that Aurelius speakers (whether it is regarding heretics or lapsed Catholics) cannot be missed -- for it is the very same mercy with which Christ dealt with sinners. The mercy is in the fact of forgiveness and repentance, for which Aurelius calls. It is distinctly opposed to the hard-heartedness of the Donatists who refused to accept the failings of the traditores.

Nonetheless, the Donatists took their fire from one who himself was tested unto death -- St. Cyprian, martyr. It is not difficult to see how the Donatists could take such inspiration from Cyprian, for his courage and vigor resound in his writings of the time. They call from strength and steadfastness in the face of persecution -- in such a way, in fact, that it can easily be understood why the Donatists would develop such a fanatical longing for martyrdom Cyprian gives in his own words, this inspiring mantra:

Let none, my beloved brethren, let none depreciate this glory; let none by malignant dispraise detract from the uncorrupted steadfastness of those who have stood. When the day appointed for denying was gone by, everyone who had not professed within that time not to be a Christian, confessed that he was a Christian. It is the first title to victory to confess the Lord under the violence of the hands of the Gentiles.

The call for testimony and witness is passionate and strong -- and one sees in it the corruption of the Donatist doctrine. Yet, the Donatist doctrine fails to take into account Cyprian's words which follow. If the first title to victory is public confession and death, the second title to victory is private confession:

It is the second step to glory to be withdrawn by a cautious retirement, and to be reserved for the Lord. The former is a public, the latter is a private confession. The former overcomes the judge of this world; the latter, content with God as its judge, keeps a pure conscience in integrity of heart. In the former case there is a readier fortitude; in the latter, solicitude is more secure. The former, as his hour approached, was already found mature; the latter perhaps was delayed, who, leaving his estate, withdrew for a while, because he would not deny, but would certainly confess if he too had been apprehended.

In essence, what the Donatists failed to realize was that God only called so many to give witness to the faith through death. The rest had to give witness through the daily living of their lives -- a fact that the Donatists who persecuted failed to realize.

In conclusion, the Donatist movement caused several problems for the early Christian Church: it was the cause of schism in Africa, of violent persecution, of doubt, and of debate. Different rulers handled it differently, from Constantine to Julian the Apostate, and on, and different doctors of the Church had the say, such as Augustine and Aurelius. In the end, the Donatist movement was legally and officially put down -- but it continued to survive until it suffered the same kind of persecution it had exacted on Catholics at the hands of the Saracens who invaded African and gave the Donatists the martyrdom they were looking for.