Library › St Optatus of Milevis › Against the Donatists

Against the Donatists

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

Book 5, 8. Concerning the Faith of Him Who Receives Baptism

It remains¹ now to say something of the merit of the believer, to whom belongs the faith, which the Son of God placed before both His Sanctity and Majesty. For you cannot be more holy than is Christ. When that woman, whose daughter was dead, came to Him, and besought that she should be restored to life, He promised nothing of His own Power,² but asked about the faith of another, so that if the woman believed, her daughter should be raised up, in view of her mother’s faith³; but that if she believed not, the Power of the Son of God would be idle, with nothing to do.⁴ The woman is questioned. She replies that she believed that what she had asked for could be accomplished. She is ordered to depart. She returns to her house, and finds the daughter alive whom she had left dead. She does not rush to kisses, she does not hasten to embraces, but returns to render thanks to the Saviour. And the Son of God, that He might show that He had stood by,⁵ and that her faith alone had worked, said to her:
‘O woman, depart in peace. Thy faith hath made thee whole.’⁶

What comes of your saying:
‘It is of the giver, not of the receiver’⁷?

And what think you of the centurion’s faith? He besought the Saviour to ward off death from his son, when he was ill. Christ then went to the dying boy. In such estimation did the centurion hold Him, that he acknowledged the unworthiness of his house, and begged that the Son of God would not enter it in person,⁸ but that He should send His Power, by which death might be put to flight, and the lad be restored to life. It was not the valour of the centurion, nor his wisdom that was praised, but his faith:
‘And his son was cured at that hour.’⁹

Of a truth it is ‘of the giver,’ not of him that receives!¹⁰ There are many things of this kind in the Gospel about perfect faith, but we must finish the story of at least three witnesses to Faith.¹¹

What think you of that woman, who, after she had been ill for twelve years of a hidden malady, belonging to women, and had spent all her substance upon doctors,¹² on beholding so many wonderful works¹³ performed by the Son of God, went into the crowd, saw the physician, saw also the people? Her pain¹⁴ urged her on to ask for medicine, shame hindered her from disclosing, in the presence of men, the cause of her complaint. Her silent faith told her what to do.¹⁵

‘I will send forth my hand,’ [she said] ‘and I will touch the hem of His garment and I shall be healed.’

When no one observed her, in the midst of the crowd she put forth her hand. She touched and was healed. But she did not venture to tell aloud that for which she had not ventured to ask. However, that the fruit of her faith might not be hidden from those who were unaware of it, the Saviour asked:
‘Who has touched Me?’

His disciples marvelled and said:
‘The crowds press on Thee, yet Thou dost ask, “Who has touched Me?”’
and Christ asked:
‘Who, I say, has touched Me? I have felt that virtue has gone forth from Me.’

So the woman acknowledged that she it was who had touched Him and been healed. In the other cases the mother had asked for her daughter, the centurion had asked for his son. Here neither did the woman ask, nor did Christ promise, but faith obtained all that it anticipated.¹⁶ Without doubt ‘it is of him that gives, not of him that receives.’¹⁷

Notes

Having discussed the part played by the Trinity and the minister (operarius) in Baptism, something must be said of the remaining species, the Faith of the adult recipient.
de virtute sua.
pro matris credulitate.
feriata cessaret.
se vacasse.
Luke viii, 48. St. Optatus was evidently quoting by heart, and in consequence got strangely mixed. It is hardly necessary to point out that no such incident as that here described is to be found in any of the Gospels. Optatus seems to have been confusing his recollections of Luke viii, 42-48 with Matt. viii, 5 and Luke vii, 2 seq.
dantis est, non accipientis was, as we have learned already, a saying of the Donatists. By ‘the giver’ they meant the Minister of the Sacrament, one of themselves, one of the holy. St. Optatus has already shown, in answer to their argument Nemo dat quod non habet, that the real giver is God. He now proves that God does not ‘work’ (vacat), but is always ready to give, and lets the recipient receive according to his faith. Unless he who is to be baptised possesses faith, God will not give the grace of Baptism, even as our Lord on earth would not work miracles excepting on behalf of those who believed----their faith He put before His own power.
totus = corporeally.
Matt. viii, 13.
This is evidently sarcasm.
vel tria complenda sunt fidei testimonia. Optatus often uses vel in the sense of at least.
Luke viii, 43-46; Matt. ix, 20-22; Mark v, 25-34.
tantas celebrari virtutes (cf. iv, 9).
dolor.
invenit consilium tacita fides.
fides quantum praesumpsit exegit. Quantum, ‘so far as,’ = ‘all that.’ Ziwsa, however, thinks that exegit here = impetravit.
dantis est, non accipientis. It is clear that Parmenian had given a series of proofs, concluding at the end of each: Dantis est, non accipientis, and Optatus ironically repeats the words. According to the argument of St. Optatus there are three ‘species’: (α) The Name of the Trinity by which all the grace is given; (β) the minister of the Sacrament, who is only instrumental----a servant; and (γ) the faith of the recipient, which by the ministry of (γ) impetrates the grace from (α). Finally therefore all depends upon (γ). The Trinity is unchangeable, the minister a mere servant, but the disposition of the recipient all-important. If, then, outside the Church the recipient has faith the Baptism will be valid. Of course this implies that although baptism by heretics (if administered in the Name of the Trinity) is valid, the baptism of a heretic is invalid. But we have to bear in mind that St. Optatus assumes (for such had so far for the most part been the experience of the Church) that a heretic does not believe in the Trinity or in the Catholic Doctrine of the Incarnation (cf. note i, p. 17). His argument, so far as it is here stated (apart from any implications), is good, but incomplete. The doctrine of character handed down by the Greek Fathers was unknown to St. Optatus. He had no idea of character being given without grace, nor of reviviscentia on arriving at true and living Faith.