Life of Augustine of Hippo The Donatist Controvers... - (PG 25 - 164) PDF

Article 108
Letters to Paulinus, Romanianus, and Licentius
396 A. D.
Paulinus had sent Romanus and Agilus to Africa. He had written
Augustine a second letter and sent it through them. Apparently they arrived
in Africa some time prior to Augustine’s consecration as bishop and may
well have been present at it. Surely they did not return home during winter,
but rather at the earliest in early spring, 396. In any case, they returned
earlier than Augustine had expected. He let them leave with regret. They
were rushing to return to Paulinus. Augustine writes: “The more eager they
are to obey you, the more promptly we are obliged to let them go. Their
eagerness keenly awakens the picture they gave of you, because it made us
Copyright © 2012. Peter Lang Publishing Inc.. All rights reserved.
see how dear you are to them. The more they urged us to allow them to go,
the more we hoped to keep them here.”1
Augustine sent Letter 31, addressed to Paulinus and Therasia, with
them. This letter is Augustine’s reply to Paulinus’ second letter. He reveals
no less tenderness toward Paulinus and no less desire to see him than was
evident in the letter Romanianus had brought. Augustine apprizes him of his
promotion to the episcopate, but can not dream of going to Italy. He asks
Paulinus, because Paulinus is less occupied with church affairs—he was still
a priest—to come to Africa. This visit would console Augustine and others
who admired the divine gifts in Paulinus. Such a trip would instruct those
who could not or would not believe their intentions unless they could see
the couple. Augustine goes so far as to say he does not know if Paulinus can
exert a greater love toward his neighbor than in making known what he is
and what he is becoming. Augustine recommends a young man named
1
Letter 31.
Le, Nain de Tillemont, Louis Sebastien. Life of Augustine of Hippo : The Donatist Controversy (396 - 411) Part 2
Translation, Introduction and Annotation by Frederick Van Fleteren, Peter Lang Publishing Inc., 2012. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/rug/detail.action?docID
Created from rug on 2017-12-08 12:45:21.
2 The Life of Augustine of Hippo
Vetustinus to him, who apparently was an unfortunate sinner. He also

recommends Romanianus and his son Licentius.
Augustine sends Paulinus De libero arbitrio, and asks Paulinus to send
him a book he was said to be writing against the pagans, along with
Ambrose’s De philosophia, a work no longer extant. Augustine asks Paulinus
to accept a loaf of bread he is sending along. He greets him in behalf of
Valerius and all the servants of God in Hippo. He calls Valerius his father
who desires to see Paulinus as much as he. Augustine also sends the regards
of Severus, bishop of Mileve. The brothers who brought Augustine’s letter
and news of his episcopal consecration to Paulinus also brought letters from
Aurelius of Carthage, Alypius of Tagaste, Profuturus of Cirta, and Severus.2
This is likely the same Severus who at first wanted simply to send his
regards to Paulinus through Augustine, but had since some reason to write
him himself.
Paulinus was waiting for Agilus and Romanus when Romanianus was
still with him; they did not arrive until after his departure. On the day after
their arrival Paulinus wrote Romanianus to apprise him that Augustine had
been consecrated bishop. He shows appropriate joy. Paulinus exhorts
Licentius to speak on behalf of his father and himself in both prose and
verse to satisfy Augustine’s earnest prayer noted in his recent letter.
Paulinus wishes the ears of his heart might be open to the sound of the
trumpet God had sounded through Augustine’s mouth. He hopes through
the confidence he has in divine providence Licentius’ thoroughly carnal
desires will give way to Augustine’s wishes and faith. Augustine had no
greater desire than to make Licentius worthy for being his son in Christ by
virtue as he was worthy for learning and literature.3 Paulinus had not yet
replied to Augustine’s letter by the end of the summer, 397, or, if he had
written, his letters had not yet reached Augustine.
2
Letter 32.
3
Letter 42; Letter 45. Editor’s note: At the time of Tillemont writing, the Maurists had
recently published these two previously unedited letters.
Article 109
Unsuccessful Attempts to Confer with Proculianus
The church of Hippo was split by the Donatist schism. Proculianus, or

Proculeianus, was the Donatist bishop of Hippo. Augustine respected him
because of his duty to human society and Proculianus’ inclination to peace.
Many praised Proculianus’ civility and humility. Nevertheless, Augustine
postponed writing him after becoming bishop. He did not believe it easy to
confer with him.
One day Evodius found himself by chance in a house with Proculianus.
The conversation turned to the hope of the faithful and the heritage of
Christ’s church. Evodius did not intend to flatter him but to defend truth. He
was perhaps more ardent or enthusiastic than Proculianus wished. Procu-
lianus complained Evodius had offended him. Nevertheless, he indicated a

willingness to confer with Augustine before a few honorable men. Evodius
gladly reported this news to Augustine; Augustine on his part joyfully
received it. He took advantage of the occasion offered by Proculianus to
shed light on the cause and origin of the baneful schism dividing families,
close relatives, and friends.
Augustine wrote to Proculianus and apologized for Evodius’ ardor.4 He
assured Proculianus Evodius would not have intentionally offended him.
Augustine promised he was available to meet with him with people of his
own choosing. The sole condition was the conversation would be written
down. They could converse personally, if he preferred, or by letter. The
proceedings of the conference or the letters would then be read to both
congregations, with a view to making them one people and one church.
Augustine assures Proculianus of Valerius’ consent. In the remainder of the
4
Letter 33.
letter he implores Proculianus to prefer peace to considerations of honor

and rank. Augustine may have written this preference since the African
Church had not yet agreed to receive Donatist bishops in rank.
Whether Augustine was a priest or bishop at the time of Letter 33 is un-
clear. More probably he was a bishop, since he speaks of honor received
from those in need his help in hearing cases in juridical proceedings. Simple
priests had no obligation or power of juridical process. At the latest this
letter was written at the beginning of his episcopate, since Valerius was still
alive. He wrote it before Letter 34 where he says he was a new bishop.
What happened after that letter is unknown. In general Donatists
avoided meeting Augustine.5 The letters he wrote to leading Donatist
bishops were not letters of communion, since their schism rendered them
unworthy. Rather, they were letters written as to pagans, with civility
appropriate to bring peace. He invited them to confer to examine causes of
the schism and similar matters. The Donatists rejected his letters, some-
times after reading them, often without. They never replied, either from
contempt or impotence.6 As for Proculianus himself, he had recognized
through experience he did not want to receive Augustine’s letters.7
Augustine wrote Proculianus at least four times,8 although today only the
letter about which we have been speaking is extant.
If Letter 34 refers to lack of personal response, Proculianus may have
replied through Victor, a Donatist priest. Victor spoke to public officers sent
to receive Proculianus’ reply. These officers, themselves Donatists, wrote an
official document. This reply was probably similar to what Proculianus had
said to Evodius and apparently committed him to a public conference.

However, Proculianus may have replied (to a complaint by Augustine). “If
you are Christian, deliver this up to divine judgment.”9 Whatever be the
case, from then on they believed Proculianus had never said what was
reported in the officers’ document. Additionally if Augustine were anxious
to debate he should have gone to Cirta, where several Donatists were
present, or to Mileve, where a council was soon to be held.
Eusebius, a citizen of Hippo and a man of some eminence, serious, wise,
and moderate, was a Donatist friend of Proculianus.10 Augustine did not
want to write Proculianus, because his letters had not been accepted.
5
Letter 43. Contra litteras Petiliani I, 1.
6
Letter 43; Vita Augustini 9; Letter 35.
7
Letter 34.
8
Indiculum 3; Vita Augustini 9.
9
Letter 35.
10
Letter 34; Letter 35.
Unsuccessful Attempts to Confer with Proculianus 5
Augustine turned to Eusebius and asked him to ascertain from Proculianus

through honorable men whether he had spoken to Victor, what Victor had
said to the officers, or whether the officers had made a false declaration of
Victor’s statements. He wrote Eusebius on this subject, and asked him in
general what Proculianus thought concerning discussion of the schism.
Augustine was ready to enter into discussion and examine the matter
calmly with Proculianus’ consent. Augustine hoped he would accept on the
basis of what had been reported: they must seek truth together on the
authority of Scripture; each would have ten honorable men present. They
were not leaving themselves open to the problems the presence of others
often brings.
Proculianus may have found conferring with Augustine difficult because
he was less skilled in humane letters. Augustine assured him dialectic was
not necessary on a question to be decided on the basis of Scripture or
public documents. Proculianus could bring a colleague or Augustine could
ask Samsucius, the Catholic bishop of Turra,11 then at Hippo, to take his
place.
Samsucius wrote a letter with Augustine to Severus and signed after
him.12 He was selected in 407 with Augustine and others as judge in a
judicial matter. He is not mentioned at the conference of Carthage. Pos-
sidius mentions a letter of Augustine to Samsucius.13 At times Augustine
consulted him in cases of doubt and found him to be incisive where
Augustine himself was hesitant.14 Samsucius was eloquent and well in-
structed in the true faith. Thus Augustine did not fear him facing Procu-
lianus and hoped God would assist him in debate.15 Concerning a trip to
Mileve, Augustine replied this belongs properly to Proculianus. Since
Augustine was consecrated only for the church of Hippo, he had no right to
involve himself in other cities.
11
Editor’s note: Turra is a see within the confines of Hippo. Roman political divisions were
not necessarily identical to the ecclesiastical divisions
12
Letter 62.
13
Indiculum 7.
14
Letter 83.
15
Letter 34.
Article 110
Acceptance of Irregular Catholics
Augustine had another reason to write Eusebius. A Catholic adolescent

in Hippo had often beaten his mother without fearing reprisal. She was a
poor elderly widow. His fury was so wicked he did not stop beating her even
on days when the severity of the laws are not applied to the worst crimi-
nals, like Sundays and the Easter fortnight. The bishop (that is, apparently,
Augustine himself) rebuked him. The Catholic Church did not permit him the
satisfaction of his wickedness, so he said to his mother, evidently in these
precise words: “I am going to join the Donatists, and then I am going to
drink your blood.”16
He carried out the first part of his threat. Donatists accepted and re-
baptized him, even though he was mad. They clothed in white a man
stained with his mother’s blood, and set him in front of the choir benches to
be seen by all as a man renewed by the Holy Spirit. All the while he was
thinking of killing his mother. Those re-baptizing him in this condition
themselves urged him to carry out his detestable vow within the baptismal
octave.
Other Donatists bemoaned this action, Augustine suggests. He was
deeply touched by this damnable action. He believed the least he could do
was to speak about it, no matter how terrible Donatist anger might become.
He commissioned official documents concerning this sacrilege. Wherever he
judged it proper to serve these complaints, in Hippo or elsewhere, he could
not be accused of lying. He wrote Eusebius before the Easter octave was
concluded concerning this matter, in the hope that he would himself
disapprove of that action. Augustine protested, as he loved peace and
16
Letter 34.
Acceptance of Irregular Catholics 7
desired to reunite schismatics not by force but by truth, that he was still an
enemy of their schismatic sacrileges.
Eusebius responded by saying he could not approve of admitting this
son who beat his mother to the Donatist communion; if Proculianus knew
about it, he would separate. As for the rest, he was astonished Augustine
wanted to make him a judge over bishops. Augustine told him in writing a
second time he had merely asked, and repeated now, to know from
Proculianus the truth about his reply through Victor concerning his attitude
toward a conference. As for the young man, if Proculianus was ready to
excommunicate him upon knowledge of the facts, Augustine should know
immediately.
Augustine warned Eusebius of another man whom Proculianus was
obliged to separate from his communion.17 Primus was a former Catholic
subdeacon of the church of Spagnana, apparently in the diocese of Hippo.
Primus was associating too closely with virgins. He was often reproached.
He did not correct himself and was deposed. This rebuke caused him to
embrace the Donatist party, who re-baptized him along with two virgins
who followed him. From then on he led an altogether licentious life with
bands of dissolute women, and in the detestable drunken orgies of the
Circumcelliones. Augustine adds, Proculianus and he should agree not to
receive, except through penance, any leaving the church to flee its disci-
pline. Augustine asks Eusebius to inform him. Otherwise he will go through
judicial processes, since he resolved not to be silent when God commands
him to speak. If violence is threatened, God well knows how to defend his
church.
Augustine mentions yet another complaint. A farmer and member of
the church had a daughter who was a catechumen. She had been duped by
Donatists, received baptism, and later wore a habit and was blessed as a
virgin. Her father wanted to assert his authority to bring her back to the
Catholic communion. He even beat her. Augustine forbade violence, and did
not wish to receive her unless she came on her own volition. In spite of this
gentil policy, as Augustine was passing through Spagnana one day, one of
Proculianus’ priests happened to be on the property of the religious
Catholic lady. He began shouting against him and this same lady, calling
them traitors and persecutors. Augustine did not respond, nor did he permit
those in his company to answer. Rather he asked Eusebius to advise
Proculianus to repress the insolence of his Donatist ecclesiastics.
17
Letter 35.
Augustine wrote these two letters recently after his consecration. Va-
lerius was still alive when he wrote to Proculianus, but apparently died soon
after.18 He does not appear in Augustine’s letters and other works. In a
sermon Augustine pictures himself and the entire city of Hippo in extreme
grief over his death,19 but strong reason exists to doubt the authenticity of
this composition.
18
Letter 33.
19
PL Supplement II, 318.
Article 111
Ad Simplicianum
397 A. D.
Ambrose died April 4, 397 and Simplicianus replaced him soon thereaf-
ter.20 Augustine had known Simplicianus in Milan before his conversion, and
had recourse to his understanding and advice in breaking the chains still
binding him.21 From then on Augustine’s heart was filled with affection for
him as a spiritual father.22 Some of Augustine’s writings had fallen into
Simplicianus’ hands and he had read them with satisfaction and pleasure.
He had written Augustine to assure him of his love. He still remembered
Augustine and joyfully saw the divine gifts bestowed upon him. He re-
quested Augustine to explain certain difficulties and asked Augustine to
write him a small book.23

Augustine knew this man’s worth and joyfully received his marks of af-
fection and approval.24 Augustine believed God wanted to console him
through Simplicianus in his continual fear of erring in scriptural exegesis
through ignorance or negligence. Like a good father, Simplicianus occupied
Augustine with questions, not to learn anything new but to ascertain
Augustine’s progress and apprise him of his errors.25 Augustine could not
omit satisfying him without the guilt of disobedience and ingratitude. These
questions were partly on the Epistle to the Romans, partly on the Books of
Kings. Augustine wrote two books, the first, Quaestiones in Paulum, which
20
Vita Ambrosii 94.
21
Confessiones VIII, 1.
22
Ad Simplcianum, praefatio.
23
Ad Simplcianun II, 5.
24
Ad Simplcianum, praefatio.
25
Ad Simplicianum II, 12.
dealt with only two questions, and the second on many others. Simplicianus
wanted to know the prophetic sense.26
Augustine had already explained the two questions on Paul in Ad Ro-
manos inchoata expositio.27 Augustine believed Simplicianus would not have
proposed questions to him unless they were difficult. Augustine examined
them anew, but feared he had not examined them the first time with
sufficient care and attention.28 His reflection on the second question on
these words of Paul, “What do you have that you have not received?”29
caused him to change his mind from his previous opinion that faith came
from man, and that man, after hearing the truth, determined himself to
believe or not.30 He mentioned this sentiment, later known as Semi-
Pelagianism, in some of his works written as a priest.31 He took advantage of
writing and further study to recognize more fully than previously, through
revelation and divine light, that the beginning of faith (initium fidei) was no
less a gift of grace than the entire series of good works which follow.32
In this work Augustine examined difficult principles concerning grace.
He presents a balanced view. He struggles mightily on behalf of free will,
but grace remains victorious in the end.33 In the second part of Ad Sim-
plicianum I, Augustine establishes as indubitable that grace is not given
according to merit. He proves even the beginning of faith is God’s gift. He
lays down principles from which it is easy to conclude, though he does not
mention it here, we can not persevere to the end of life unless it is given by
the one who predestined us to his kingdom and his glory. Thus he asks
Prosper and Hilary to have this work read to those in Marseilles to those
challenging these truths, if they had not already read it.34

Augustine received the reward of his humble faith. Assuredly, if he did
not have sufficient intelligence to find the truth on the questions proposed,
Simplicianus’ merits would assist him in discovering it.35 In beginning the
second question, he treated an obscure point because of his confidence in
the assistance of Simplicianus’ prayers. Simplicianus would not have asked
him to develop these secrets unless he had requested God to obtain the
26
Retractationes II, 1; Ad Simplciianum II, praefatio.
27
Ad Simplicianum, praefatio.
28
De praesdestinatione sanctorum I, 4.
29
Editor’s note: 1Co 4: 7.
30
De praedestinatione sanctorum I, 3.
31
De praedestinatione sanctorum I, 4.
32
De praedestinatione sanctorum II, 20; I, 4.
33
Retractationes II, 1; De praedestinatione sanctorum II, 21.
34
De praesdestinatione sanctorum I, 4.
35
Ad Simplicainum praefatio.
Ad Simplicianum 11
strength for him. He begs Simplicianus not to be satisfied with reading this
work and others possibly falling into his hands, but to point out defects with
precise criticism. After requesting prayers for his imperfections, Augustine
asks him to tell in a few words, but without gloss, what he thinks of this
work.36 He assures Simplicianus, provided his judgment is sincere and
genuine, it will not appear too severe.
Another question proposed by Simplicianus concerned the witch who
conjured up Samuel’s soul for Saul.37 Dulcitius later consulted him on the
same difficulty. Augustine simply repeated what he had written to Sim-
plicianus, but added at the end he had since recognized in Ecclesiasticus
that it was Samuel himself who appeared to Saul.38 Cassiodorus mentions
this work.39 Gennadius says he addressed to Simplicianus various questions
on Scripture and explained them.40
The divine light in this work on the mysteries of grace was affected not
only by Simplicianus’ prayers, but by his episcopal consecration. Ad Sim-
plicianum is the first work he wrote as bishop; he says he wrote it at the
beginning of his episcopate.41 This gives us reason to believe he wrote it in
396. On the other hand it is difficult not to believe Simplicianus was already
a bishop. He could have been consecrated only after April 4, 397.42
It is striking in writing to Simplicianus, who lived in Milan, Augustine did
not say a word about Ambrose, if he were still alive or had recently died.
This lacuna is a mystery of history, teaching us not to condemn rashly that
for which we can find no reason. If we can believe Gennadius, Simplicianus
often wrote Augustine while still a priest, to stimulate him to exercise his
mind and to occupy himself in scriptural exegesis.43 Simplicianus was for

Augustine a new Ambrose, playing the role of stimulator, much as Origen
did for Ambrose. However, no trace of this relationship in Augustine’s works
exists apart from the above. It is difficult to believe that, before his episco-
pate, Augustine had received many letters from Simplicianus. In addressing
two works to him when he was a bishop,44 Augustine indicates clearly
36
37
38
Epistula ad Dulcitium 6.
39
Institutiones 2.
40
Gennadius 36.
41
Retractationes II, 1.
42
On the dating of Ad Simplicianum, see Complementary Note 24.
43
Gennadius 36.
44
Ad Simpliciaunum, praefatio.
enough the letter he was answering was the only one he had received from
Simplicianus since he had begun writing on church doctrine. 45
45
Ad Simplicianum is customarily received as the last decisive turning point in Augustine’s
thought. See P. Brown, Augusitne of Hippo “The Lost Future”. Nevertheless, Augustine
gradually develops his notions on grace over the entire course of his writing career.
Augustine’s writings are voluminous, but a relatively few themes develop and persist. C.
Harrison, Rethinking Augustine’s Early Theology: An Argument for Continuity (Oxford 2006)
has recently contested Ad Simplicianumas a turning point in Augustine’s thought. Though
overstated, her thesis has at least the merit of emphasizing the gradual development of
Augustine’s thought.
Article 112
De agone christiana; De doctrina christiana
Augustine places his refutation of the Manichean letter Epistula quam

uocant Fundamentum after Ad Simplicianum.46 In fact this work contains
almost all the articles of the Manichean creed.47 We possess this work, or
what would have been the first part of a work which remained unfinished.
Augustine refuted only the beginning of Mani’s letter. As for rest, he made
notes which contained the necessary refutation. These notes were to serve
as an outline for finishing the work.48 These notes are no longer extant.
Augustine begins the work asking for divine peace, to make him love
conversion and salvation for Manichean opponents, not their confusion and
downfall.49 He has compassion, not animosity, for those involved in errors
he himself had so much trouble shedding. He mentions several reasons and
predispositions which ought to maintain simple people in the Catholic

Church without long discussion of dogma.50 Augustine then enters fully into
the subject and indicates not only does Mani not prove his claims, as he
should in principle do, but makes statements contrary to good sense and
reason.51
Augustine mentions De agone christiana, or De christiana next.52 In it he
teaches Christians to fight both the devil and themselves. He gives an
abridgement of the rule of faith and moral principles. He briefly mentions
46
47
Epistula quam Manichaei uocant Fundamenti 3; 43.
48
49
Epistula quam Manichaei uocant Fundamenti 1.
50
Ibid 4.
51
Du Pin 3, 764.
52
the principal heresies, among which he lists the Donatists and Luciferians.53
However, he evidently had Manicheans particularly in mind. He mentions
the Donatists had splintered into various schisms. He takes no benefit from
the fact that Donatists had accepted the Maximinianist bishops Praetex-
tatus and Felician back into their communion, after having driven them out.
This reception, which overturned the very foundation of their schism,
occurred toward the beginning of 397. Thus Augustine could well have
written to Simplicianus as early as 396. Augustine remarks he had written
De agone christiana in a simple style well accorded to the understanding of
the brethren not instructed in Latin.54 He may mean monks. Cassiodorus
says this book is intended principally for those rejecting secular pomp and
training for combat against it.55
The order Augustine gives to his works obliges placing De doctrina chris-
tiana I-III next.56 In the first three books, he gives rules for understanding
Scripture;57 in De doctrina christiana IV he shows how to teach others what
has been learned. He had several of these oratorical principles already in
mind.58 He had hoped that, in communicating these God-given insights to
others, he would not refuse other necessary intuitions. He did not complete
the work at that time. He stopped at De doctrina christiana III, 25.59 He cites
53
De agone christiana 13-32.
54
55
Institutiones 15.
56
57
Editor’s note. Throughout history and into the present day, there has been discussion of
whether Augustine presents a complete theory of signs, what moderns call semiotics.
Augustine’s purpose was not to give a complete semiotic theory, but to assemble some
semiotic principles necessary for scriptural exegesis.
58
De doctrina christiana I, 1. Editor’s note: Augustine accepts many principles of Ciceronian
textual exegesis. He also thinks Scripture has its own method of expression. He recognizes
the difference between Hebrew and Latin (and Greek) modes of expression. In the sense that
he is giving rules for Christian orators, he is writing a Christian De oratore. See A. Primmer
“The Function of genera dicendi in De doctrina Christiana 4,” De doctrina christiana: A Classic
of Western Culture?, (eds. ) D. Arnold and P. Bright (Notre Dame1995) where there is an
extensive bibliography on this question. See Le doctrine chrétienne BA 11, 2.
59
Retractationes II, 4. Editor’s note: There has been considerable speculation on the reasons
why Augustine stopped writing the work abruptly in the middle of Book III. Augustine was
about to comment on Tyconius’s seven rules for biblical exegesis. Some have opined that it
was “politically incorrect” for a Catholic to accept scriptural exegesis from a Donatist in 397,
but not so in 426. The usual reason a respectable author stops writing is that he does not
know what to say. This is probably true in this case. Nevertheless, Augustine, against his
usual custom, sent an incomplete copy of De doctrina christiana to Simplicianus in 398. We
may conclude then (1) that the work was complete enough for some of Augustine’s purposes
at that point and (2) that he wanted to inform the “Milanese circle” of the completion and
De agone christiana 15
this work in Contra Faustum.60 When reviewing his writings, Augustine

discovered this work unfinished.61 He completed it before reviewing the
remainder of his works, that is, he finished book three and added book four.
Augustine finished this work circa eight years or more after his journey to
Cherchel in September, 418, thus in 426 or 427.62 In De doctrinachristiana II,
he cites Ambrose’s De sacramentis.63 He had requested this work from
Paulinus in early 396. He calls him “our Ambrose,” but from this text
nothing can be concluded concerning Ambrose’s death.
Augustine reports at the beginning that reliable persons had recently
informed him of a Christian barbarian slave, not knowing how to read and
not having anyone to teach him how, obtaining the ability to read from God
by a triduum of prayer.64 When presented with a book, he read it easily to
the surprise of those present. Cassiodorus cites this passage and another
from book three.65
alteration of his views concerning the purpose of the liberal arts. Apart from providing an
exercitatio animae as found in De ordine and De musica, study of the liberal arts was helpful
in interpretation of Scripture. See K. Pollmann, “To write by advancing in knowledge and to
advance by writing,” Augustinian Studies, 29 (1), 1998; F. Van Fleteren, “Toward an
Understanding of Augustine’s Hermeneutic,” Augustinian Studies, 29 (1), 1998 1, B Studer,
“Augustinus und Tyconius inLicht der patristischen Exegese,” Augustinjian Studies 29 (1),
1998.
60
Contra Faustum XXII, 91.
61
62
De doctrina christiana IV, 24.
63
De doctrina christiana II, 28.
64
De doctrina christiana praefatio. Editor’s note: This passage could easily indicate that
Augustine was writing in light of charismatic, that is intuitive, non-scientific exegesis of
Scripture. While accepting this practice as at times coming from divine inspiration, he thinks
it not to be the usual method. See C. Maier, Die Zeichen in der geistige Entwicklung
jugendlicher Theologie 2 vols. (Würzburg 1969, 1974) K. Pollmann, De doctrina christiana
(Freibuirg 1996). F. Van Fleteren, Principles of Augustine’s Hermeneutic, Augustine: Biblical
Exegete, Collectanea Augustiniana, vol. 5 (New York, 2001).
65
In psalterium praefatio; In psalmum 21 18.
Article 113
Confessiones; Contra Faustum
After De doctrina christiana Augustine mentions one work consisting

two non-extant books entitled Contra partem Donatistarum.66 Next he
places Confessiones, where, in remembrance of his sins and recognition of
the graces he received, he praises divine justice and mercy. He lifts the
human mind and heart toward supreme good and infinite majesty.
Augustine says that work affected him thus when he wrote it, and it still
produces the same effect when he reads it now. He knows many religious
men welcomed it warmly and still admire it greatly. Of all his works, there is
none more read or more pleasing.67 In the whole history of the church, it
gives delight and gains the admiration to all spiritual men.68
Augustine recognized, however, this work was not to everyone’s taste.
In fact, in Rome a bishop read these words: “Give me the grace to accom-
plish what you command, and then command me what you will.”69 Pelagius
was present. He already had heresy in his heart and could not abide these
words. He rose up against them heatedly and wrangled with the reader.
There are several passages in this work from which Pelagians and Semi-
Pelagians take offense. He opposed their errors even before they had
arisen.70 Petilianus falsely interpreted some words of the third book.71 He
66
67
De perfectione iustiitae 10.
68
Du Pin 3. 512‒13.
69
De perfectione iustitiae 20. See Confessiones X, xxix, 41. Editor’s note: the bishop is thought
to be Evodius who visited Rome in 405-406.
70
Editor’s note: In Confessiones Augustine interprets his own life in terms of his recent
exegesis of Romans 9: 9-29. Salvation is completely the work of divine grace. From 411
onward, Augustine saw Pelagius as endangering a work of a lifetime. Nevertheless his theory
of grace in all its detail is only gradually developed during the Pelagian controversy See J.
Brachtendorf, Confessiones (Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 2005).
Confessiones 17
criticized them, though these passages are clear in se and from the context.
Some moderns claim to find too much eloquence in Confessiones, and other
defects of style. These defects should not, they say, occur in so excellent
and useful a work.72
When Count Darius asked Augustine for a copy 73 he sent it and wrote:
Look at me in this book, and learn what I am, if you do not want to praise me be-
yond what I deserve. You must refer to me and what I say of myself in this work
rather than what others say of me. Consider well my portrait that you see in it, and
what I was of myself and by myself. If there is at present anything in me that you
pleases you, rather than praisíng me, join with me in praising the one who should
be praised for what he did in me. When you have recognized me as I am, pray to
74
God not to allow me to destroy what he has begun in me.
Augustine pictures himself both before and after receiving grace. His
purpose was to prevent us misevaluating him, and thus having positive, but
false sentiments. He gives a rarely found example of humility. Augustine did
not want praise for the graces received, but praise for their author who had
delivered him. He wished his brother Christians to ask other graces in his
behalf which he lacked now, but for which he yearned.
Augustine cites Confessions XIII in De Genesi ad litteram.75 The Benedic-
tines summarize each book. Eucher quotes what Augustine used to say to
himself to rouse and give himself wholly to God.76 He assures us Cyprian,
Ambrose, and other saints did the same in storming heaven. Fulgentius cites
a passage from Confessiones XI.77 Cassiodorus mentions Augustine’s Confes-
siones and refers to his care in explaining the beginning of Genesis in the
three final books of this work and many other writings.78 Augustine recog-
nized the difficulty in interpreting Genesis. In a beautiful passage from her
autobiography, Teresa of Avila attributes her conversion to reading
Augustine’s Confessiones.79
71
Contra litteras Petiliani III, 17.
72
Du Pin 3, 512f.
73
Letter 230.
74
Letter 231.
75
De Genesi ad literam II, 9.
76
Eucher, Ad Valerianum de contemptu mundI. Editor’s note. Eucher is a seventeenth-
century bishop of Lyon.
77
Fulgentius, Letter 5.
78
Cassiodorus, Institutiones 22.
79
Vie de saint Therese 9. Trans. D’Andilli (Paris 1670).
Contra Faustum follows Confessiones in Augustine’s catalogue.80 Faus-

tus’ Capitula had fallen into Augustine’s hands.81 The faithful had read it and
wanted Augustine’s refutation. So intensely did they urge him he was
forced to write the refutation by the right their charity had over him. He
refuted it by first placing Faustus’ text and then a solid and forceful refuta-
tion. As a result the book is quite long. He divided it into thirty-three books,
though a few are quite brief. Others are long, especially Contra Faustum
XXII, where he defends the patriarchs’ lives against Faustus’ calumny. He
cites a passage from Contra Faustum XXII in Quaestiones Dulcitii.82 This is
apparently the work he mentions there against Faustus on the life of the
patriarchs.
He sent Contra Faustum to Jerome along with Letter 82circa 405.
Augustine cites it rather frequently: In De ciuitate dei, in De Genesi ad
litteram, Quaestiones Exodi, Contra aduerserium legis et prophetarum, De
consensu Euangelistarum, and De uiduitate.83 Cassiodorus says that in these
thirty-three books Augustine has refuted Faustus’ godlessness with a clearly
reasoned account, and has spoken admirably about Genesis.84 Fulgentius
quotes a passage on Noah’s ark.85
Few clues about dating these works are found. Augustine simply says he
had written Contra Faustum a long time before he received Letter 89 from
Jerome, which he received in 405 at the earliest. We follow the chronologi-
cal order of Retractationes, since Augustine did so in that work, as far as he
could. He was not always exact.86 Immediately after Contra Faustum, for
example, he places the conference with Felix the Manichean, which is
certainly from December, 404. After mentioning several other works, he

places those against Petilian, though they were written under Pope Anasta-
sius, that is, in 402 at the latest. He may have wanted to list in series after
Contra Faustum his other anti-Manichean works. In fact after those he
places here, no other works against this heresy are found. We shall follow
this supposition and place here the other works pertaining to the Mani-
cheans, until we find any work with a more precise date.
80
81
Contra Faustum I, 1.
82
Quaestiones ad Dulcitium I, 7; II, 2.
83
De ciuitate dei XV, 7; 26; XVI, 19; De Genesi ad litteram; Commntariuim Exodi; contra
adversarium lagis et prophetarum II, 12; De consensu euangelistatrum I, 5; De uidiutate 15.
84
Institutiones 22.
85
Letter 5 8.
86
Editor’s note: In general Augustine lists his works in Retractationes in the order he started
to write them, not in the order in which he finished them.
Article 114
De catechizandis rudibus
The first work in this series is Contra Hilarium.87 Hilary was a lay Catholic
and a former tribune. For some unknown reason, he was indignant over
ministers of the church. Hilary condemned the recent custom in Carthage,
of singing hymns at the altar from the Psalms, both before the oblation and
during the distribution of communion to the people. From this custom we
may have inherited our Offertory and Communion antiphons which were
recited with the psalms. Since Hilary was criticizing this practice as an abuse,
Augustine was obliged to respond to appeals from his brethren to refute
him. Possidius calls this work Librum contra Hilarium, de hymnis cantatibus
ad altarem.88 Besides this work, Possidius mentions a second reply to
Hilary’s objections as another book. Neither of these two works is extant.
Augustine places Quaestiones euangeliorum after Contra Hilarium.89 He

wrote this work for someone with whom he was reading the gospel. This
person had asked about several difficulties.90 At times Augustine returned to
material he had passed over. Therefore these questions do not always
follow the order of the sacred text. Augustine apparently remedied this
shortcoming with a table of contents which no longer survives. Since the
person who proposed these questions was already well instructed, these
books do not contain all difficulties that could be raised in these two
evangelists, nor even the most difficult ones.
87
88
Indiculum 6.
89
90
Quaestiones in euangeliorum, praefatio.
Annotationes in Iob are marginal notes which others copied rather badly
and made into one work.91 Augustine was unsure whether these notes
should pass as his. By his own admission they can satisfy and be intelligible
to only a few. These few will also find many matters not understandable
because of brevity and error. He could not correct all the errors contained in
the notes because they were too numerous; but the brothers wanted this
work as it was. He could not refuse them, and was obliged to acknowledge
it as his own in Retractationes. Cassiodorus mentions this work, and says
Augustine explicated with his usual penetration.92
De catechizandis rudibus appears after these annotations.93 This treatise
treats the manner of catechizing and instructing the ignorant. It is ad-
dressed to Deogratias, a deacon at Carthage. Those who were to be in-
structed in the first principles of faith were ordinarily referred to him.94
Deogratias possessed a wide-ranging knowledge of religion and had much
feeling in his discourses. He had a special gift for catechizing, but was
dissatisfied and almost embarrassed to explain Christian truths in so simple
a fashion. He did not know where to begin or end his instruction, or to judge
whether exhortation should accompany his discourse. Should he simply lay
out precepts whose observance was necessary for the profession of Christi-
anity? Often enough he spoke at length and would gradually become weary,
lukewarm, and flat. These traits were not a reliable means to inflame those
receiving instruction or even those merely listening. He believed Augustine
could guide him. Deogratias wrote Augustine as a special friend. He re-
quested, despite Augustine’s responsibilities, that he be kind enough to
write a treatise on this subject.

Augustine felt obliged by the service and charity he owed to a friend
and to the whole church, to grant this request. “The more I hope to spread
the Lord’s treasures from every side, the more I am obliged to aid my
colleagues and dispensers of them. When they have a problem in their
ministry, I should work to make this task easier and more suitable since they
devote themselves to it with such generous ardor.”95 He wrote De catchez-
andis rudibus, in which he consoles Deogratias first of all for his distaste in
speaking about his instruction. Augustine says this aversion frequently
happened to him because he could not express to others truths as he had
them in mind. This discouraged him and made him believe he was boring his
91
92
Institutiones 6.
93
94
De catechizandis rudibus 1.
95
De catechizandis rudibus 21
listeners. However, the ardor they expressed in hearing him made

Augustine realize his words aroused them, no matter how cold they might
appear to him. Admirable and judicious rules appear in this work concerning
the manner in which to conduct ourselves in the company of learned
persons.96 Augustine wanted to use, for them and others, the history of the
Old Testament to produce a better understanding of the mysteries and
greatness of Christianity.
Facundus cites a passage from this work to show we should not treat as
heretics those who through ignorance or human frailty fall into error even
though others take from them the opportunity to form heretical teaching.97
Deogratias, to whom Augustine sent this treatise, was later raised to the
priesthood, if he is the same person to whom Augustine replies circa 406 in
Letter 102 to questions sent from Carthage.98 He treats this priest as a
personal friend to whom he could refuse nothing and a skilled person to be
consulted on difficult religious problems.99 Deogratias wrote in a way
pleasing to both Augustine and others. If this is the Deogratias who became
bishop of Carthage under Genseric, he could scarcely have been thirty years
old in 400—he did not die until 457. Thirty years of age seems rather young
for someone to be charged in Carthage with the function of catechist. Victor
de Vite does not mention that the bishop was of an advanced age.100
96
Du Pin 3, 716.
97
Contra Mocianum scholasticum 978b.
98
99
Letter 102.
100
Ruinart, 21f.
Article 115
De trinitate
Augustine places De trinitate, on which he worked for many years, after

De cathechizandis rudibus.101 He tells us he began the work as a young man
and finished it when he was old.102 He interrupted it whenever he became
involved in work he judged more useful to more persons. He regarded De
trinitate as more difficult and less useful than many other of his works. The
matters it concerned were less necessary and could be addressed only to a
few.
He undertook this work especially for those outside the church, who
were unwilling to recognize the authority of faith and demanded they be
shown the truth of our mysteries by reason.103 God illuminated him when he
meditated on these truths. He meditated during his leisure. His charity did
not allow him to refuse to others what he had received. “Therefore I took
up by God’s order with his help, not so much to treat these mysteries with
authority, as if I understood them perfectly, but rather to try to understand
them myself by examining and treating them with devotion.”104 His humility
is evident in many passages, especially the prefaces. Augustine protests he
would be thrilled to remain silent if these matters had been sufficiently
treated by Latins, if Greek fathers were translated into Latin, or if other
persons would take the responsibility of satisfying the difficulties proposed
to him.105 At the beginning of De trinitate XV, Augustine summarizes the
preceding books.
101
102
De trinitate praefatio; Retractationes II, 16; Enarratio in Psalmum 102.
103
De trinitate I, 1.
104
De trinitate I, 3.
105
De trinitate III, praefatio.
De trinitate 23
He did not want to issue this work incomplete, as he later did with De
ciuitate dei. Rather he wanted to publish it all at once, because the begin-
ning is linked to the end by a chain of reasoning.106 However, those who
heard it mentioned and dearly wanted to have it could not bear a long
delay.107 A copy was stolen prior to finishing De trinitate XII, before the
other books had been reviewed, and before the work was in the final state.
This caused him to discontinue his work.108 Instead of finishing it, he com-
plained in writing of the theft. Nevertheless, he could not resist the urgent
entreaties of his brethren, especially Aurelius of Carthage. He finished what
remained and corrected the earlier books. He did not intend to make
difficult matters clear and easy. Rather he tried as best he could to make
them not at variance with what had already appeared despite his best
intentions not to publish it yet. Later he sent the work to Aurelius of
Carthage through a deacon with a letter which he asked to be placed at the
head of these books to serve as a prologue. There he mentions what we
have just related.109
In a letter to Evodius he says he had not yet published this work.110 In a
succeeding letter, which was written in late 415, he says that he has not yet
finished it, although he had already written De ciuitate dei I‒V.111 In a letter
written toward the end of 412 to Marcellinus, we see he was under pres-
sure to publish them to defend himself against malicious enemies or
uninformed captious friends.112 However, Augustine retained these books
longer than his friends could bear because of the danger of erring in the
material involved. If he could not avoid errors, there would at least be fewer
than if he had rushed to publish. He believed indiscreet haste would lead to

error. He speaks in another letter of not finishing De trinitate, because of
the grandeur and difficulty of the subject.113
In all these passages, except perhaps in the last, he speaks as if no one
had yet seen any part of his work. Thus we can judge that even the first
publication, which took place before he had completed it, did not occur
before 412. Certainly the second writing did not occur until a rather long
time later: in De trinitate XIII, he cites De ciuitate dei XII, which was not
106
De trinitate I, praefatio.
107
108
Editor’s note: A reasonable supposition as to why Augustine stopped writing De trinitiate
is that he was unsure what he wanted to say.
109
De trinitate praefatio; Retractationes II, 15.
110
Letter 162.
111
Letter 169.
112
Letter 143.
113
Letter 120.
written prior to 416. In the De trinitate XV Augustine cites In Iohannis

euangelium tractatus 99 which apparently was not written prior to 416 or
417. He refers Prosper to his fifteen books of De trinitate, which he pre-
sumes to exist already in France.114 Gennadius, who is not prone to exag-
geration, says he appears in this work to have been led into the “King’s
chamber,” according to the scriptural expression, and been clothed with the
mantle of divine wisdom, flashing with beauty.115 Cassiodorus says these
fifteen books demand a high degree of application and penetration because
of their subtlety and elevation.116 Du Pin summarizes De trinitate.117 Fulgen-
tius cites De trinitate I where Augustine says it is useful for several persons
to treat the same matter.118 He adduces other passages from De trinitate I,V,
and VIII to prove to Ferrandus the deacon what the faith of the Church is.
He also cites De trinitate I, VI, and XV.119 John Maxentius cites two passages
from De trinitate II.120 Facundus refers to De trinitate III where Augustine,
wisely and modestly, remarks on the difference he would have us observe
between reading his writings or those of other non-canonical authors on
the one hand, and Scripture on the other.121 Pope John II refers to De
trinitate XV.122 We are assured that in Venice a Greek translation is pre-
served circa 1350 by Maximus Planudes, a Greek monk.123
After De trinitate, Augustine places De consensu euangelistarum, which
was apparently written after the destruction of the temples of the idols in
399.124 We shall not treat it here. We do not claim the works mentioned in
the last few articles were written in 399, but only that they were composed
approximately according to the order given and were written before De
consensu euangelistarum and other works of which we shall presently

speak.125
114
De praedestinatione sanctorum 8.
115
De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis 38.
116
Institutiones 16.
117
Du Pin 767‒71.
118
De duplici praedestinatione II, 14.
119
Letter 14.
120
Dialogii contra Nestorianos
121
Pro defensione trium Capitulorum XXI, 6.
122
Concilium IV, 1732a.
123
Mabillion, Iter Italicum 33.
124
PL. 40, 747; Retractationes II, 16.
125
Editor’s note: dating various books of De trinitate has attracted much attention from
Tillemont to the present. Evidently because of its placing in Retractationes directly before De
consensu euangelistarum, which is surely written circa 399, Augustine was thought to have
begun De trinitate at that time. If the work took twenty years to complete, then he would
have finished it circa 419. This dating has been contested by A. -M. La Bonnardière,
De trinitate 25
Rercherches de chonologie augustinienne (Paris 1965). She placed the beginning of the work
in 404. Analysis of the use of Scripture served as a basis for dating various books. La
Bonnardière thought Augustine finished the work some time after 421. In this dating she was
followed by O’Connell The Origin of the Soul in Augustine’s Later Works (New York 1987)
who claimed, erroneously, that the reason for Augustine’s delay in finishing the work was his
continuing hesitation on the pre-existence of the soul.
The subject of De trinitate is the possibility of human knowledge of God in this life. Augustine
was concerned with this topic throughout his life. But it became especially pertinent in
writing Confessiones VII; IX; XI-XIII. If we date the writing of Confessiones somewhat before
400, then we might conclude that Augustine began De trinitate shortly thereafter.
Article 116
Possidius of Calama
397 A. D.
Megalius, the dean of Numidia, died in 397. At the Council of Carthage,

held August 28, 397,126 Aurelius says he had received a letter from Crescen-
tianus, the bishop of the primatial see of Numidia, a short time previously.
Evidently Aurelius did not yet know he was dean; he should have been
among the first to know. Twenty-four days after the death of Megalius or
thereabouts, Augustine wrote to Profuturus of Cirta to ascertain if he had
already visited Crescentianus, the successor to Megalius in the rank of
primate, as he had planned.127 From this fact we conclude Crescentianus
was a bishop near Cirta rather than Hippo. Augustine’s letter must date
from the end of August or later. The same is true of this Council of Carthage.
Augustine informs Crescentianus that pain from an infirmity rendered
him unable to sit, stand, or walk. He was bed-ridden.128 Other than that, he
was fine, since God desired it so. In the same letter Augustine wrote on the
care to be taken warding off anger, lest it mutate into hatred. He spoke of
this matter with a view to a conversation with Profuturus a short time
previously, but we do not know what was said. Augustine writes to Profutu-
126
Concilium II, 1065. Editor’s note: See Registri ecclesiae carthaginensis excerpta. CC 149,
183.
127
Letter 38.
128
Editor’s note: O’Donnell cites the same passage as Tillemont rhagadis uel exochadis
dolore et tumore, and suggests it was during this bout with hemorrhoids that Augustine
began writing Confessiones. See O’Donnell, Confessions 2. 298, n. 2
Possidius of Calama 27
rus through Victor, who was traveling to Cirta. Doubtless Profuturus is the
bishop of Cirta (Constantine) we meet elsewhere.
Augustine asked him to have Victor pass by Calama on his return trip, as
he had promised, because of a matter on which Nectarius senior was
insistent. We know nothing of that either. A few years later Augustine wrote
to Nectarius, a eminent citizen of Calama, an elderly pagan although his
father had been Christian.129
Megalius had been bishop of Calama.130 Apparently Augustine’s disciple
Possidius was his successor. Possidius honored this see by his labor and
suffering over many years. Nevertheless he is named in the councils of
Africa after Fortunatus of Cirta, successor to Profuturus, to whom Augustine
had written after the death of Megalius.131 Thus the see of Calama may have
been vacant for some time, or another bishop occupied the see between
Megalius and Possidius for a short period.
In 397, at summer’s end, Augustine wrote Paulinus. The Benedictines
have recently given us this letter.132 Augustine went two summers without
receiving a reply to Letter 31 written toward the beginning of 396. Letter 42
is short, but contains marks of Augustine’s warm friendship with Paulinus.
He wrote the letter only to complain he had not received a letter from
Paulinus. He says if some are not as angry as he is, the reason is they do not
love Paulinus enough. He greets Romanus and Agilus, who had carried
Letter 31. Augustine writes through a brother Severus, without giving
further clarification.133 The letter is addressed to Paulinus and Therasia.
He wrote another letter via Alypius to complain again. Paulinus had not
replied for two years, since the time that Romanus and Agilus had returned
to Nola.134 Thus the Benedictines have dated this letter at the beginning of
398, though the full two years had not yet elapsed. Augustine and Alypius
mention they had already written Paulinus and Therasia other letters during
those two years, without entering into specifics. Augustine and Alypius
wrote this letter in behalf of a Christian whom they ask Paulinus and
Therasia to help. Augustine and Alyius assure them he is a man of good
repute. They ask Paulinus to send them via this man the work they heard he
was writing against pagans. Augustine wanted the work very much, and had
already asked for it in 396 in Letter 31. Doubtless Paulinus responded to
129
Letter 91.
130
Editor’s note: Calama is present-day Guelma,Algeria.
131
Noris, Historia Pelagiana II, 8.
132
Letter 42.
133
Editor’s note: Severus may be the bishop of Mileve, present-day Mila, Algeria.
134
Letter 45.
Augustine’s many letters of 396–397. Surely these two friends carefully

continued the correspondence that their mutual devotion had begun. We
have only a few indications of the correspondence because these letters,
like so many others, have not been preserved. They could easily have
written many others which have not been made public. Possidius mentions
only eight of Augustine’s letters to Paulinus—all are in the Benedictine
edition. There could have been several others which even Possidius did not
see.135 At the same time Augustine was writing to Paulinus, the latter was
writing to Augustine to send him Ambrose’s De sacramentis.136 Augustine
had asked for a copy earlier in Letter 31. Augustine possessed a copy and
cites it often, for example in De doctrina christiana apparently written in
397.137
Augustine may have written Letter 40 to Jerome at this time. He had
written Jerome earlier at the bottom of someone else’s letter to compli-
ment him. Jerome had responded to his courtesy with a personal letter in
which he spoke against Origen. In all likelihood this is the non-extant letter
Jerome sent Augustine through the sub-deacon Asterius, perhaps in 396, to
thank him for his courtesy.
Since he owed Jerome a reply, Augustine took the opportunity to ask
him his thoughts on the dispute between Peter and Paul.138 Augustine
speaks to him concerning De uiris illustribus, which he had recently seen. He
also asks Jerome to write a treatise discussing where Origen and other
heretics had strayed from church doctrine. He wrote to Jerome through
Paul, to whose good reputation he testifies. In a letter to Alypius Augustine
speaks of a brother Paul bogged down in business matters.139 In 427 he

writes to Count Boniface through the deacon Paul, Christ’s servant and
minister, for whom he had much affection.140 However, perhaps this Paul
through whom he wrote Jerome is the man who, after being baptized by
Augustine, was consecrated bishop of Cataquas, but did not succeed in the
manner Augustine had hoped.141
135
Courcelle evidently took up Tillemont’s suggestion and speculated concerning several lost
letters of mutual correspondence between Paulinus and Augustine. See P. Courcelle,
Confessions de saint Augustin dans la tradition littéraire, 559‒607; J. Lienhard, “Paulinus of
Nola,” Augustine through the Ages, 628‒29 and the accompanying. bibliography.
136
Editor’s note: Otherwise known as De philosophia.
137
De doctrina christiana II, 28.
138
Letter 40. Cf. Gal 2: 11‒14; Acts 10: 1, 28; 15: 14.
139
Letter 227. See A. Mandouze, Prosopagraphie, 841
140
Letter 220.
141
Letter 85; Letter 96; see, A. Mandouze, Prosopagraphie 842.
Possidius of Calama 29
This Paul who carried the letter to Jerome actually made the trip.142
However, the letter arrived in several places before Jerome received it.143
This misfortune would have led to a falling-out between them had
Augustine’s humility and the mutual charity between them not extinguished
any reason for displeasure.
Jerome wrote Letter 39 to Augustine apparently in 398 a year after
Jerome had sent him a letter through Asterius. He wrote this letter to
Augustine to recommend his close friend, the deacon Praesidius, who was
traveling west for personal reasons. Praesidius was eager to seek friendship
of good men, and happy to meet servants of God. Jerome asks Augustine to
provide only this favor, as Praesidius had no need of help in other matters.
Jerome also greets Alypius. Jerome was feeling the misery attached to our
earthly pilgrimage, and was disturbed and fretful in his monastery over
various matters. This disturbance inclines us to place this letter in 397,
before the understanding reached in 398 between John of Jerusalem and
him. From that accord until his persecutions by the Pelagians in 416, he had
no reason to complain and fret. In the letter he treats Augustine like a pope.
Thus, the letter should be dated in 396 at the earliest. Jerome does not send
congratulations to Augustine on his selection to the episcopate in this letter.
Apparently he had done so by writing him via Asterius the previous year or
by some other non-extant letter.144
Praesidius, whom he recommends to Augustine in this letter, according
to all appearances, is the same man whom Augustine used in 404 to
assuage Jerome’s mind, and to accept his apologies.145 Praesidius was then
no longer a deacon but a bishop. He was sent to the emperor in 410 by the
Council of Carthage to speak against the Donatists. He helped bring about
the great conference of Carthage of the following year, though we have no
evidence he attended. In 416 he signed the letter of the Council of Numidia
to Pope Innocent against the Pelagians.146
142
Letter 72.
143
Editor’s note: such an occurrence was not uncommon in the ancient world where a letter
was not considered merely personal communication.
144
Several detailed studies of the correspondence between Jerome and Augustine exist. See.
M. Vessey, “Jerome,” Augustine through the Ages, 460-62 for discussion and bibliography.
145
Letter 74.
146
Editor’s note: See A. Mandouze, Prosopagraphie 899.
Article 117
Council of Carthage (397)
In 397 two Councils of Carthage took place, one on June 26 and the
other on August 28.147 What is known of the first, which apparently was a
local council of Proconsular, is that no bishop will go overseas without a
letter of approbation from his primate.148 This had already been legislated
by the council of Sardica and by the council of Hippo, but perhaps had not
been observed.149
Between this council and that of August 28 another Council of Carthage
is mentioned, dated August 13. Apparently this was a provincial Council of
Byzacena rather than Carthage. As dean of the province, Musonius presided
over this Council of Byzacena. The council had summarized the canons of
the Council of Hippo and sent the summary to Aurelius for correction.150
The Council of Carthage held August 28, 397 was attended by represen-
tatives of all African provinces. It was a general council since Carthage is the
primatial see. The Council of Hippo had fixed August 23 as the date on
which these general councils were to be held. Aurelius held preliminary
discussions with bishops who arrived early.
147
Editor’s note: Recently R. Zollitsch, the president of the German bishops’ conference,
founding himself on research done by R. Dodaro, has suggested that the African councils
from 393-427 represent a paradigm for twenty-first century bishops’ conferences. Aurelius
as adminstrator and Augustine as theologian combined for productive meetings Tillemont
could not but agree. See R. Zollitsch, Spiritus et Littera; R. Dodaro, in Augustine through the
Ages: an Encyclopedia eds. A. Fitzgerald, F. Van Fleteren et alii 176-184.
148
Concilium II, 1081. See Complementary note 25.
149
Editor’s note: See CC CXLIX 41
150
Editor’s note: Cf. CC CXLIX 47.
Council of Carthage (397) 31
Several members had not yet arrived on the appointed date. Despite
this tardiness, the other members gathered and Aurelius had a document
read concerning what had been treated beforehand with those who had
arrived early. A letter was also read from the bishops of Byzacena, probably
excusing their absence. In addition, the proxy of Bishops Honoratus and
Urban, representatives of Stesan Mauretania was read. Delegates from
Numidia had not yet arrived, but Reginus of Vegesela, Numidia presented a
letter of Crescentianus, the dean of that province, and a letter, perhaps the
same letter as the letter from Macomada in Numidia, who speaks so
frequently at the conference of 411. They addressed this letter to Aurelius.
They promised to come personally to the council or send representatives, as
was customary. The opening was delayed to wait for them, and the dele-
gates from Stesan Mauretania were asked to delay their reports for exami-
nation until their arrival.151
The council waited several days for the representatives from Numidia.
They still had not arrived and members from Stesan Mauretania indicated
they had come from a distance and could wait no longer. Aurelius held the
council in the sacristy of the Basilica restitutus on August 28 or September
1. The latter date may be more historical, but is less attested. This council is
Third Council of Carthage. Chifflet claims this is the council Ferrandus calls
the universal Council of Carthage, the one of which Aurelius says at the
Council of Mileve they confirmed everything ordered by the Council of
Hippo.152 These canons were wisely approved later in the Council of Car-
thage of 397.153
No more than forty-four bishops were present at the Council of Car-

thage of 397. No names are explicitly mentioned except for the following:
Victor of Puppiano, or Pupput in Proconsular, who had assisted at the
council under Genethle in 390 and was then dean of the province;154 Titus or
Tutus of Migirpe,Proconsular, whose successor Victor took part in the
conference in 411;155 Evangelius of Assuras, Proconsular, who assisted
personally in the conference and along with Augustine was commissioned
to resolve a certain matter by the council of 401; Reginus of Vegesela,156
who had been present at the session of August 23157 and was surely not
151
Editor’s note: See CC CXLIX, 182f.
152
Fulgenitus §4, 122.
153
Concilium II, 1100.
154
Ruinart 229‒31.
155
Concilium II, 1098.
156
Editor’s note: Vegesalas is present-day Ksar el Kelb, Algeria.
157
Concilium II, 1095.
absent from the council of August 28.158 He was a bishop older than
Augustine and Alypius, with whom he was commissioned in 401 in the same
matter as Evangelius.159 Illness prevented him from attending the confer-
ence, although he was at Carthage. He is not the bishop of Vigesilus de-
graded by the general council of Africa, as we learn from Augustine’s letter
believed to be dated in 401.160 In effect we know from other sources there
were two Vegeselas in Africa, and perhaps in Numidia. There was certainly
at least one;161 Epigonius of Bulla Regia162 and Numidius of Maxula,163 both in
Proconsular, who had attended the Council of Carthage under Genethle in
390 were prominent in this council (especially Epigonius,164 who had
attended the Council of Hippo).165 We have authoritative proof Augustine
was present,166 but reasons to doubt Postumianus’ presence.167 (At one
point the latter speaks of this council. He was perhaps the bishop of Tagore
who attended the conference of Carthage in 411 and the Council of Car-
thage against the Pelagians. In 416 Tagore was a completely Catholic city at
the extremity of the Procunsular or Numidia.) Honoratus, the delegate with
Urban for the province of Stesan Mauretania at this council, had performed
the same function at the Council of Hippo.168 Their dioceses are unknown.
Deacons were present at the council, not seated like the bishops but
standing.169 Nothing is mentioned of priests.
Many ordinances were passed at this council.170 First of all Aurelius had
read a summary of the canons of Hippo, which the bishops of Byzacena had
sent him.171 They were approved with an addition in the first canon. It was
perhaps this Council of Carthage which set at three the number of delegates
each province should send annually to the general council.172 The first thirty-
seven canons of the Council of Carthage (397) seem to be a part of this
158
Concilium II, 1068.
159
Concilium II, 1096.
160
Letter 64.
161
Ruinart 276.
162
Editor’s note: Bulla‒Regia is present-day Hammam Daradji, Tunisia.
163
Editor’snote: Maxula is presentr day Radès, Tunisia
164
Concilium II, 1061.
165
Concilium II, 1077.
166
See Complementary note 27.
167
Concilium II, 1080; see Complementary note 26.
168
Concilium II, 1072.
169
Concilium II, 1065.
170
Editor’s note: Most of what is contained in this article on the canons of the Council of
Carthage (397) can be found in CC 149, 28‒53.
171
Concilium II, 1068.
172
Concilium II, 1167.
summary of the canons of Council of Hippo (393).173 Some of these canons

must be rejected. The third canon, which orders a reading of the decrees of
the councils to those who are being ordained, was enacted only at
Augustine’s entreaty after he had become bishop.174 It is cited in the Council
of Carthage (525) under Boniface.175 It is certain what the Council of Hippo
had legislated, that the bishop of Carthage would inform the others of the
date of Easter.176 This Council of Carthage added this dating would be
established at the general council of the previous year. Aurelius promised
he would do so beginning from this very year and would write to Stesan
Mauretania to this effect.177
173
See vol. 1, articles 71‒74.
174
Vita Augustini 8.
175
Concilium IV, 1636.
176
Concilum II, 1068.
177
Concilium II, 1076.
Article 118
Canons of the Council of Carthage (397)
After what concerned the Council of Hippo (393) was completed, Hon-
oratus and Urbanus proposed reports received from their colleagues in
Stesan Mauretania.178 The first article concerned Cresconius. He was bishop
of Villaregia, Numidia.179 He had left that church and taken possession of the
church of Tubia or Tubunus, falsely ascribed to Caesarean Mauritania,180 but
actually in Stesan Mauretania. Delegates from there were working to
remove Cresconius from Tubunus.181 The Council of Hippo had ordered him
to be content with his church of Villaregia, and doubtless he was called
upon to return. This order was executed, and the decree against him was
confirmed by another general African council. However, he remained in
Tubunus. So Honoratus and Urbanus asked in the name of their colleagues
for an agreement to appeal to the provincial governor to remove this

usurper by force. They pledged their help to Aurelius and the entire council.
This affair however was not finished four years later in 401 since the general
Council of Carthage, September 13, 401 ordered the primate of Numidia be
informed. The council charged with the care of the church of Villaregia was
ordered to summon Cresconius of Villaregia to appear before the next
general council. If he did not appear, the council would pronounce against
him and depose him. This act referred to the council of 402 held at Mileve.
Nothing remains about him in the report of this council.
Holstein thinks this Cresconius is the same one called bishop of Tubunus
or Tubinus at the Council of Carthage (397).182 This opinion would mean he
178
Concilium II, 1072.
179
Ruinart 277‒82. Editor’s note: Tubunus is near present-day Tobna,Algeria.
180
Baluze, 209.
181
Concilium II, 1072. Editor’s note: See CC CXLIX 203.
182
Holstein, 65.
Canons of the Council of Carthage (397) 35
had triumphed over the authority of the African bishops—not easy to

believe. The council distinguished Tubunus from Tubius and recognized Felix
as the sole bishop.183 The Donatists did not have a church in Tubius. Prota-
sius was Donatist bishop of Tubunus vis-a-vis Cresconius. A Felix was bishop
of Villaregia.
Honoratus and Urbanus complained two bishops in Numidia had or-
dained a bishop, and asked twelve bishops be required for an ordination.
Aurelius was content to require at least three to ordain a bishop, according
to an ancient rule. In the provinces there were few bishops, while in
Carthage they were obliged to ordain almost every Sunday. Aurelius would
require more than three, however, if some difficulty in the person of the
candidate occurred. Thus the candidate would be obliged to wait until he
was publicly cleared before the people whom he would serve.184
The delegates from Stesan Mauretania then asked Aurelius to inform
their province promptly and annually concerning the date of the Easter
celebration. Aurelius promised to advise them and other provinces at the
annual general council, as Epigonius had already requested. The delegates
of Stesan Mauretania also asked Aurelius to visit their province the follow-
ing year. He promised to visit if he could, but did not commit himself.
Epigonius complained of priests who ruled over people in a diocese and
were attempting to withdraw from the jurisdiction of the bishop and
persuade the people to ask for their own bishop, who would turn out to be
this priest. At the same time, he praised Aurelius’ prudence, in rejecting
these requests unless accompanied by the diocesan bishop’s consent.
Aurelius promised to continue the same policy except in the case of bishops
content to remain in their dioceses who did not bother to communicate
with their colleagues, and even refused to come to councils when sum-
moned. He wanted these bishops to lose jurisdiction not only over the
parishes of their dioceses but even over their bishoprics. They should be
removed by civil authority if necessary. The entire council accepted his
opinion. This canon is cited in the Council of Boniface in 525.185
Epigonius had another complaint.186 He had raised a poor child placed in
his hands by a bishop Julian, baptized him with his own hands in his church,
and had him serve for almost two years as reader in the parish of Mapalia in
his diocese. Julian had then taken him without Epigonius’ consent and made
him deacon under the pretext he came from Vazaria in his diocese. Julian
183
Collectio Carthaginensis 128‒133.
184
Concilium II, 1073−1080.
185
Concilium IV, 1638.
186
Concilium II, 1077.
had not respected several canons which forbade usurping a cleric from
another bishop. The council found this usurpation out of order. It declared
that, if Julian did not return this cleric to Epigonius, who had first ordained
him, Julian deserved to be excommunicated. Epigonius asked in the name of
Victor of Puppia, dean of Procunsular, this decision be made a public and
general rule; there was surely no difficulty in obtaining this request.
The bishop of Carthage enjoyed a right which was seemingly opposed to
the canons.187 As he was charged with the care of all the African churches
and had many bishops to ordain, he was often asked for ecclesiastics of
other dioceses to be bishops or pastors. Aurelius wanted to have their
bishops’ consent, as church rule prescribed. These bishops ordinarily did not
refuse him. However, since a refusal could occur, he asked what to do in
these situations. The council decreed that, after he had requested a bishop
once to give him the ecclesiastic he was seeking, if the bishop refused, the
cleric could be ordained in spite of the refusal. It was claimed the church of
Carthage always had this right. Bishop Postumianus objected it could
happen a bishop had only a single priest. Aurelius replied he should never-
theless give him up since it is easier to ordain priests than to find men
capable of being bishops. If that bishop did not have another cleric suitable
to become a priest, he should look to his colleagues, who will provide him
with one of their priests. Boniface of Carthage will insist on having this
entire passage read word for word in the council of 525.188
The last ordinance of this council, according to the order of Collectio
Carthaginensis, was requested by Honoratus and Urbanus. It stated an
ordained bishop of one place where there was no bishop previously should
be content with the people for whom he was ordained.189 He should leave
other people to the church from which his was drawn. This canon is cited in
the council of 525.190 After this canon the common edition of the council
lists the catalogue of canonical Scripture, which could have been consti-
tuted by the Council of Hippo, and, lastly, a decree regulating dispositions
ecclesiastics can make of their goods.191
The ordinance which Siricius of Rome and Simplicianus of Milan will
consult, to know if one can raise to the priesthood those baptized as
children by Donatists, is apparently attributed to the Council of Hippo.192 Yet
187
Concilium II, 1080.
188
Concilium IV, 1638.
189
Concilium II, 1080.
190
Concilium IV, 1637.
191
Concilium II, 1177‒78. Editor’s note: : seeCC CXLIX 340
192
Concilium II, 1072.
Canons of the Council of Carthage (397) 37
it is suited better to the third Council of Carthage (to which it is attributed

by the common edition) since Simplicianus did not become bishop until 397
and Siricius was dead by 398.193 Bishops were doubtless persuaded to this
resolution because of a dearth of ecclesiastics. The bishops would make
even greater exceptions to the rule of the church which excludes from the
ministry of the altar those who have been involved in heresy. They had
apparently not yet written to Italy on this matter when they resolved again
to write on this subject in 401.194 After they had finished what was neces-
sary, Aurelius asked if the resolutions were acceptable to the bishops. They
assured him of their approval and together appended their respective
signatures after the decree had been read aloud.
Nothing more is found concerning the third Council of Carthage both in
the common edition and Collectio Carthaginensis. The order of the canons is
reversed in some places of the common edition.195 Article forty-two is cited
in the fourth canon of the twelfth Council of Toledo.196 Boniface of Carthage
cites two canons from this Council of Carthage in Council of Carthage
(525).197 Part of the citations is proper to the third Council of Carthage, but
the better part comes from Council of Hippo and these canons are renewed
in the Council of Carthage (397). In joining these two kinds of canons
together fifty canons or titles can be ascribed to this council. However,
Chifflet lists fifty-eight canons.198 He brings together all the ordinances
Ferrandus cites from the Council of Carthage in general, and places them in
the order Ferrandus mentions, which differs from the usual order. He does
not have sufficient basis for this conjecture. Five canons are cited from the
Council of Carthage199 by Gratian and other moderns, but which council they
intend to cite is unknown.
193
Concilium II, 1177.
194
Conc ilium II, 1085.
195
Concilium II, 1174.
196
Concilium VI, 1228.
197
Concilium IV, 1638; 1178.
198
Ferrandus 308
199
Concilium II, 1174-79.
Article 119
Fortunatus and Fortunius200
Augustine had written to Profuturus, bishop of Cirta,201 almost a month

after the death of Megalius, perhaps toward mid-August. Apparently
Profuturus died shortly thereafter. He was not bishop for a long period. He
died before Augustine wrote De unico baptismo, circa 400.202
Fortunatus was his successor. He was one of seven bishops chosen by
the conference of Carthage in 411 to defend the Church’s cause against
Donatists. Augustine praises his love of poverty.203 Together with Alypius
Augustine assisted at his ordination. These two traveled together to Cirta,
and were eager to ordain him bishop,204 before the Council of Carthage of
401 where Fortunatus attended.
In all probability Augustine did not make two successive journies to
Cirta. It is not necessary to ascribe to the death of Profuturus a sermon

which the Benedictines believe to be Augustine’s and not Fulgentius’,
among whose works it is customarily placed.205 This sermon was delivered
on the occasion of the death of a bishop who had ruled for a short time. In a
few years he had accomplished more than many presiding longer.
Augustine must have especially loved this bishop since his death touched
him. He could barely deliver a short discourse to console the children of this
saintly and happy father. Augustine had assisted at his death and accompa-
nied his body to burial.
200
201
Editor’s note: Cirta is Constantine, Algeria.
202
Letter 71.
203
Contra litteras Petiliani II, 99.
204
Letter 44.
205
PL 42, appendix 255.
Fortunatus and Fortunius 39
Since Augustine and Alypius were traveling to Cirta to ordain the new
bishop, they would pass by Tubursicu,206 where Fortunius was the elderly
Donatist bishop.207 Augustine had heard of his high esteem in the eyes of
Glorius, Eleusius, and Felix, themselves Donatists. They had also spoken well
of Augustine to Fortunius. Apparently, Augustine was familiar with them,
though they were from a nearby city, not Hippo.208 These Donatists had
spoken to him of Fortunius as a man who would not refuse to confer with
Augustine concerning divisions within the church.209 When Augustine
arrived in Tubursicu, he made it known to this bishop his reputation caused
him to desire to see and speak with him. Fortunius agreed. Augustine
thought he should pay the courtesy due Fortunius’ age; and so he went to
his house accompanied by several persons with whom he had previously
conferred.
The report Augustine was meeting with Fortunus spread throughout the
city.210 A great number of people hastened to the meeting place, but only a
few went with a genuine desire for clarifying the truth. The majority went
out of curiosity. The large crowd caused confusion. Neither pleadings nor
warnings from Augustine or Fortunius could quiet them so that a confer-
ence could take place. Nevertheless, they succeeded in beginning and
conversing a few hours on their topic. As they did not always remember
what they had said (and perhaps did not want to remember), Augustine
requested that what was said be recorded. Then they could proceed
peacefully and moderately. He could thereby also communicate to Glorius
and others what had taken place. Fortunius at long last grudgingly con-
sented. Notaries were present (apparently from Fortunius), but they did not
want to record anything. Some Catholics had begun to write words down.
Augustine and Fortunius could not continue because of the noise.
In the first place Fortunius wanted to say the Donatist communion was
spread throughout the whole world, though he did not dare claim he could
send letters of communion everywhere. If he had so claimed, Augustine
would have obliged him, and himself as well, to write the churches men-
tioned in Scripture, to see who would reply. Fortunius launched into the
persecutions he claimed his sect had suffered. Augustine mentioned
persecutions only make blessed those who suffer for justice’s sake. If
Macarius, against whom they complained, had not persecuted them (in
206
Editor’s note: Tubursicu is present-day Khamissa,Algeria.
207
Letter 44.
208
Letter 43.
209
Letter 44.
210
348) until after their schism, as was the case, they could draw no advantage
from this.
Fortunius asserted they had communicated with all the churches up to
the time of Macarius, and cited the letter the Council of Sardica (347) had
written to Donatus, whom they thought was from Carthage. Apparently,
Augustine had no previous knowledge of this letter, nor of the Council of
Sardica. When he saw in that letter the council had condemned Athanasius
and Pope Julius, Augustine recognized it came from the Arians. Augustine
asked to take the letter with him to examine it further, but Fortunius
excused himself as politely as he could from giving it to him. Fortunius
would not even allow Augustine to make a brief note on it in his own hand.
Augustine wanted this note in case he had to review this particular docu-
ment and not another substituted in its place.
In continuing to show that persecution is not a sufficient proof of the
justice of a cause, Augustine brought in examples: Maximianus, who was
persecuted by the Donatists themselves; Ambrose, who was not a Christian
according to their principles but was persecuted nevertheless by Justinian.
He spoke of the fury of the Circumcelliones and argued as the wicked
persecute the good, so the good also persecute and even kill the wicked.
However, it would be wrong to persecute Donatists. It was better to
tolerate this evil within the Church than to abandon the Church altogether.
Christ had tolerated Judas and had given him the sacrament of his body and
blood at the Last Supper. This example touched almost everyone. Fortunius
unsuccessfully tried to evade the worth of this example by claiming the
apostles had received at that time only the baptism of John. Fortunius
immediately abandoned this contention. Evidently Donatists thought they
were threatened by imperial persecution. Fortunius asked Augustine what
he would do if that occurred. Augustine admitted he would disapprove and
would within his power oppose it. At the time Augustine thought in this
fashion; later experience brought him to change his mind.211
They had stood up to withdraw when Fortunius began praising the gen-
tleness of Genethle, the bishop of Carthage before Aurelius.212 According to
Donatist principles, Augustine replied, Genethle would have to be re-
baptized. Fortunius admitted it was an established rule to re-baptize all
those who came to Donatism. However, he made this statement in such a
way it was clear he did not approve this rule. The entire city agreed Fortu-
nius was strongly opposed to the violence of members of his sect. He often
complained of violence to his colleagues, and lamented it with Catholics at
211
212
Letter 44.
Fortunatus and Fortunius 41
this conference. He and others agreed in these debates that acts of violence
that Donatists and Catholics mutually reproached should not be brought up.
There remained the question of the Donatist schism against Caecilian.
Augustine implored Fortunius to work with him in a spirit of calm to resolve
so important a question. Since Fortunius told Augustine other Catholics did
not want to examine these matters, Augustine promised to find him at least
ten with the same convictions as himself. Fortunius promised the same for
the Donatists. On this note they parted. The next day Fortunius came to see
Augustine. They spoke on the same subject for a short while. Augustine had
sent for the minister of the Celicoles to speak with him and pressed for time
to leave for the ordination of the bishop of Cirta. Fortunius also had a trip to
make.
Later Augustine informed Eleusis and others who had spoken to him of
Fortunius of the conference. Augustine complimented him that among all
Donatist bishops a spirit more reasonable, more courteous, more inclined to
peace, and more able to bring such peace about could scarcely be found. He
implored these Donatists by the Lord’s blood to remember the promise he
had made to re-enter discussion and to put an end to this affair which was
already too far advanced. For this purpose, Augustine proposed the choice
of a place far away from noise and crowds, perhaps the village of Titianus or
some other village in the diocese of Tubursicu, or Tagaste. No church
existed in Titianus, but both a Catholic and Donatist population did. The
participants could lodge and pray with members of their own communion.
The canonical books and other pertinent documents could be brought
there, and a serious discussion could take place on all the difficulties. They
could take as long as necessary. Augustine begged Eleusis and others to
send him and Fortunius their opinion of this mode of action. Nothing of the
success or failure of Augustine’s efforts is known.
Article 120
Conferences with Donatists
An extant letter remains from Augustine to the same Donatists, Glorius,

Eleusis, and Felix, to whom he adds Grammaticus and others in agreement
with them concerning the question of schism.213 Maximianus214 is mentioned
as in the other letter.215 Nothing prevents us then from believing this letter
was written circa the same time or perhaps a bit earlier than Letter 44. The
tyranny of Optatus, the Donatist bishop of Tamugadi, is openly described.
Thus we ascertain his rule had not yet ended. Optatus’ reign ended with the
downfall of his protector Count Gildo in spring, 398.216 Augustine brings out
the justice of the evils Donatists had suffered, but this reference could easily
be to what had happened during the time of Macarius.217
This letter mentions a conference Augustine had held with these very
Donatists when he was in their city. Since he was speaking of reunion, they
presented to him the acts of the condemnation of Caecilian and Felix of
Abthungi,218 his ordaining bishop, by a Council of Carthage.219 Augustine
indicated the errors of that council; the decision was disallowed by the
Council of Rome.220 This latter council was comprised of bishops named by
213
Letter 43.
214
Editor’s note: Maximinianus was a Donatist bishop of Carthage, founder of a Donatist
splinter group named after him. Later he returned to the Donatists without being re-
baptized.
215
Letter 44.
216
Editor’s note: Count Gildo is a native African, a Moor, promoted by Theodosius. He ruled
386‒398.
217
Editor’s note: Macarius was a Roman commissioner sent by Constans, Constantine’s
younger son, to Africa between 343‒348.
218
Editor’s note: Abthungi is present-day Henchir es Souar, Tunisia.
219
Editor’s note: This is a reference to the Council of Carthage (311).
220
Editor’s note: This is a reference to the Council of Rome (316).
Conferences with Donatists 43
Constantine at the request of the Donatists themselves, by the Council of

Arles,221 and by the proconsul who had rendered a decision in Felix’s favor.
The documents concerning these matters were not available, but Augustine
sent for them; the documents arrived two days later. Meanwhile
Augustine’s party visited the church of Gelize (which is not mentioned
elsewhere).
Upon Augustine’s return, he read the Donatists the acts of the Council
of Cirta.222 Donatists had tried unsuccessfully to reject the acts of this
council on the grounds that those who had received mercy at this council
after handing over the Scriptures to persecutors were unlikely to condemn
Caecilian of the same crime. Augustine also read the proconsul’s acts on the
case of Felix of Abthungi. One of the Donatists wanted to blame Felix for his
absolution by a proconsul. Another man had been accused by this procon-
sul, but other Donastists recognized this objection was completely unrea-
sonable. The Donatist request to Constantine, the acts of the Council of
Rome, and Constantine’s letter on his judgment in Milan in favor of Cae-
cilian were read. Augustine produced acts through which it was shown
before Zenophilus, the governor of Numidia in 320, that the infamous
Lucilla had attempted to bribe bishops to condemn Caecilian; no time
remained to read these acts. Augustine gave them the freedom to examine
and copy these documents.
After this conference, Augustine wrote these same Donatists imploring
them to heed what he had read to them. He continues to show the conse-
quences of these acts. Toward the beginning of the letter, he mentions
some who did not approve of his writing to Donatists for their salvation.223
They wanted us to believe Augustine was seeking secular goods. Some men
have high esteem for the world and little esteem for themselves. Augustine
wrote more easily to Donatists whom he believed were disposed to seek
and attain truth sincerely, and not defend positions stubbornly where the
error of their forefathers had carried them. The letter on the conference
with Fortunius showed in fact that peace might be near. Augustine con-
cludes: “This discourse, which God gave me the grace to compose with a
love for peace and a charity for you which is unknown except by him, will
be, if you allow, the instrument of your conversion or, in spite of yourselves,
the reason for your condemnation.”
221
Editor’s note: The Council of Arles was held in 314.
222
Editor’s note: This is a reference to a gathering of eleven or twelve bishops in Cirta in 305
or 307. SeePL XXXIII 161, n. a. . See Lancel, 365.
223
Letter 43.
This event occurred rather likely in the first years of Augustine’s episco-
pate, when Donatists were not yet so animated against the light of truth.
Fortunatus, a Donatist bishop, and a neighbor in Hippo, sent word to
Augustine through Eros that he would be pleased to converse with him
concerning the schism, in order to treat so important a matter with the
gentleness, peace, and calm it deserved. Augustine, who had long wished to
speak with him, let Fortunatus know of his willingly acceptance of his
proposal.224 To begin to enter into the subject, Augustine declared Scripture
promises the church would be spread throughout the entire world. This
prophecy had come true in the Catholic Church. Would Fortunatus please
show him how in spite of this world-wide extension the Donatist party could
be this prophesied Church, and how Christ could have lost the inheritance
promised to him of the whole world and found himself reduced to an
African party? The effect of this letter is unknown.
224
Letter 49.
Article 121
Celicoles
When Fortunius came to visit Augustine, the latter had sent for the min-
ister of the Celicoles to speak with him.225 The name Celicoles is found in the
laws of the emperor Honorius,226 but we do not know precisely what or who
they were. Apparently, they were not Christian heretics or anyone who bore
the name Christian, as did the Nazarenes and others who amalgamated
Judaism and Christianity. Augustine knew of them, but does not deal with
them in De haeresibus. Honorius subjects them to the penalties enacted
against heretics as if they were contrary to the Christian faith. They were
certainly not in conformity with Christianity, unless they embraced divine
worship and converted to the Christian religion.
They could have some relationship with the Hypsistarians, in whose ab-
errations the father of Gregory of Nazianzus227 was involved, and with the
pagan Messalians mentioned by Epiphanius,228 who acknowledged many
gods but worshiped only the one called the Almighty, and apparently the
Most High, hypsiston, whence comes the name Hypsistarians. Thus it is not
difficult to see why they were called Celicoles, that is, heaven-worshipers,
as some pagans said of Jews. Perhaps they had taken this name on their
own or were given it because they prayed in open places without a roof, as
Epiphanius says of Messalians.229
These Hypsistarians observed the Jewish distinction of meats and the
Jewish sabbath, but rejected circumcision.230 The title of the law in the
225
Letter 44.
226
Codex Theodosii VI.
227
Gregory of Nazianzen, Oratio 19.
228
Epiphaniu LXXXI, 1
229
Epiphanius, supplement.
230
Gregory Nazianzen, Oratio 19.
Justinian Code unites the Celicoles with the Jews and Samaritans. The
Celicoles had relationship with the latter two on certain points, but differed
in others.231 Evidently, Honorius mentions them in one law under the name
of Jews.
Possibly the Samaritans, many of whom Melania the Younger had suc-
cessfully worked to convert in Africa circa 415, belonged to these Celicoles.
Samaritans apparently did not enter Africa. However, Ptolemy the son of
Lagus, had brought many Samaritans into Alexandria, where their descen-
dants remained and observed their own customs.232 Hadrian recognized
Samaritans as well as Christians and Jews.233 There was an island in the Red
Sea inhabited by the Samaritan nation.234 Until today they have a synagogue
in Cairo. Thus possibly they spread to Carthage.
To return to the Celicoles, we can see in these heretics what is noted
about the pagan Messalians, or Hypsistarians. They existed from the
beginning of the fourth century, even though the Emperor Honorius in 408
and 409 treats the teachings of the Celicoles as a new dogma, a new
assembly, a modern superstition, and a name unknown up to that time.235
Possibly they were not widely spread in the west, or had changed their
original name to Celicoles. Augustine says their leader, whom he sent for
when passing through Tubursicu and whom he calls their Major, had
established among them a new baptism and had abused many people
through this sacrilege.236 This sect was less important since it had nothing in
common with the church. It became all the more dangerous the closer it
came to the church and tried to appropriate its sacraments, or rather “to
disturb them” according to the expression of a law referring to the Celi-

coles.237
Whoever the Celicoles were, they apparently passed for a new sect in
408−409. They must not have been widespread in Africa until recently,
when Augustine wanted to speak with their Major. Evidently he came to see
Augustine, but we do not know what passed between them, or what
consequences the meeting had.238
In confirming the laws on Nov. 15 or 25, 407, Honorius extends those
laws enacted against Donatists, Manicheans, Priscillianists, and Gentiles to
231
Codex Theodosii VI.
232
Josephus, Antiquitates Judaïcae XXII, 1.
233
Vopiscus, de vita Saturnini typranni, Historia Augusta.
234
Scaligeri, de emendatione temporum VII.
235
Codex Theodosii VI.
236
Letter 44.
237
Codex Theodosii XV, 5.
238
Letter 44.
Celicoles 47
the Celicloes.239 All their buildings dedicated to religious services were to be

given to the Church. The Celicoles were holding meetings to establish new
teaching. On November 24, 408, Honorius sent a rescript to Donatus,
Proconsul of Africa, in which he orders him to quell with suitable punish-
ments Donatist and Jewish violations. With bold daring both were disturb-
ing the Catholic sacraments. Godefroy believes that by Jews he understands
Celicoles.240 But this law is so obscure and corrupted it is difficult to base
anything on it.
On April 1, 409 Honorius enacted an explicit law against the Celicoles.241
He orders them subject to all penalties incurred by heretics unless they
embrace the Christian religion within one year. Whatever differs signifi-
cantly from the faith should be considered contrary to it and thus hereti-
cal.242
398 A. D.
Gildo was ruling in Africa for ten or twelve years under the title of Count
or General of the army. Toward the end of 397 he revolted against Honorius
under the pretext of submitting himself to Arcadius, together with the
whole of Africa. By the following spring, Gildo’s brother Mascezel was sent
from Italy with troops and won a miraculous victory over him. After Gildo’s
defeat and death, Optatus, the Donatist bishop of Tamugadi, was impris-
oned as one of his chief accomplices and died there. Petilianus, the Donatist
bishop, later accused Augustine of having instigated Optatus’ condemna-
tion, but Augustine was incapable of doing this.243

In coming from Italy, Mascezel had brought with him monks from the
isle of Capris, which lies between Tuscany and Corsica.244 Augustine perhaps
mentioned these monks in Letter 48, addressed to a priest Eudoxius and his
brothers. The letter leads us to believe Augustine is writing to monks. He
knew of their devotion first of all through rumor, then through Eustasius
and Andrew, who came from their house and spread its good odor to Africa
and made known their holy way of life. Augustine informs them Eustasius
had died and thus could no longer desire to return to Capris. This statement
239
Codex Theodosii XVI, 5.
240
Godefroy 235.
241
242
Codex Theodosii XVI, 1.
243
244
Orosius VII, 36; Baronius, 398, §52.
makes us conclude that the monastery of Eudoxius, whence he came, was

on that island.
Augustine witnesses to Eudoxius and his monks his love for their holy
retreat. He requests their prayers. To give these prayers more force, he
wanted to merit them by encouraging their perseverance and advance in
virtue. What he requests most of all is that they refer their good works to
God, they love solitude so that ambition and vanity do not succeed in
making them leave the monastery to become involved in the ecclesiastical
government, and that laziness not detain them when the church calls them
to its service.
Article 122
Sermons against Idolatry
When Augustine was conferring with Fortunius, Donatists feared perse-

cution.245 This fear may have had some connection with what Augustine
mentions in a sermon, delivered in 398 at the latest, in which he mentions
new laws against Donatists.246 These laws were enacted against individual
excesses more than against the sect itself. These heretics had been pun-
ished in particular areas by law because of wickedness and violence. This
punishment caused them to say Catholics wanted a general persecution to
eventuate their downfall. This sermon treats the centurion who asked Christ
to heal his servant, without daring to ask him to come to his house. Pos-
sidius may mention this sermon,247 from which Florus has extracted various
texts.248
Augustine preached Sermo 62 to correct Christians who, so as not to

offend the powerful lest harm come to them, accompanied them to pagan
temples. There the Christians sat at table and ate. These Christians commit-
ted an offense against the Pauline prohibition.249 At these feasts Christians
often blasphemed Christ by casting doubt on his divinity. They rendered
honor externally to idols. This helped maintain pagans in error. Certain
Christians eagerly went to these sacrilegious feasts and even offered
sacrifice. Episcopal efforts to convert the declining pagan population were
often futile because the pagans said to each other: “Why should we aban-
don our gods, when the Christians themselves venerate them?”250
245
Letter 44.
246
Sermo 62.
247
Indiculum 9.
248
Ad Monimum.
249
Editor’s note: 1 Cor 10: 21.
250
Sermo 62 11.
This scandal deeply moved Augustine. He addressed it energetically, yet

gently. This sermon was preached in Carthage since Augustine speaks of
another sermon delivered a few days previously in Mappalia, at Cyprian’s
tomb.251 To excuse themselves, these Christians said they did not eat in a
pagan temple, but at the Genius of Carthage, which was in fact simply a
rock. In replying to this apologia, Augustine remarks this rock was regarded
in the pagan mind as divine. An altar and statue were built there. The
quickest way to overcome pagans and bring them to embrace the Christian
faith was for Christians themselves to abandon the folly of pagan celebra-
tions. The pagans could either pursue the light of truth or become embar-
rassed by their small number.
In this sermon Augustine mentions a man who at his conversion had
given the church property previously used for idol worship. He wanted the
idols torn down; the Christians complied. Pagans252 complained the bishops
were looking for idols to destroy. Augustine protests they were not. Many
places where idols were known to be worshipped went untouched because
God had not placed these properties within the bishops’ scope. The bishops
did nothing of which the owners of the places could complain. The bishops
were content to pray for conversion. When converts from paganism asked
the idols on their estates be destroyed, it would have been immoral not to
do so. Often new converts themselves destroyed their idols. Only unruly
and impetuous people such as the Circumcelliones wanted to destroy
properties they did not own, and expose themselves needlessly to death.
The sixtieth canon of the Council of Elvira in fact forbids honoring as martyrs
251
Editor’s note: The date and place of Sermo 62 which Tillemont gives here is universally
accepted. However, Augustine’s sermons are notoriously difficult to date and place. A
resume of the traditional dates and places may be found in “Sermones” in Augustine through
the Ages. Precise dating of many sermons has been attempted by the late A.-M. LaBon-
nardière, Chronologie augustinenne (Paris 1965). Her patient and laborious scholarship can
hardly be questioned. She has been followed by P. Hombert, Nouvelles recherches de
chronologie augustinenne (Paris 2000). However, the principles of dating according to the
use of Scripture led to overly precise dating of many sermons. These theses were questioned
by H. Drobner who speaks of dates within s certain range. Drobner’s skepticism is well
funded, but he is overly cautious in establishing dates. H. Drobner “The Chronology of
Augustine’s Sermones ad populum III,” Augustinian Studies 35 (1)2004; H. Drobner, “Psalm
21 in Augustine’s Sermones ad populum: Catecheses on Christus totus and Rules of Interpre-
tation,”Augustinian Studies 37 (2) 2006.
252
Editor’s note: Tillemont here uses the word which Augustine uses, paganus. Originally, a
pagus designated land outside an oppidum or municipality. One who inhabited this land was
a paganus. In Christian times, a paganus meant one who was not a miles Christi and thus a
heathen; see Tertullian De carona 2; Augustine uses the term to mean polytheist, see
Retractationes II, 43. The term could mean rustic or uncultured as opposed to civilized.
Sermons against Idolatry 51
those who die in destroying property. Although other laws against pagans
already existed, these laws had first been legislated in 398 and executed the
following year when Emperor Honorius ordered the removal of idols. From
that time on, pagans dared to worship idols only in secret.
In the same sermon Augustine witnesses that, when the Jews had acted
brazenly, bishops had obtained disciplinary restraining orders. Thus the
Jews said, genuinely or not, bishops were working to obtain the same
imperial orders against them as against pagans. Jews, pagans, and heretics
held the Catholic Church as an enemy and were united in complaining
against it.
The date of Sermo 24 is 398 at the latest, since sacrifices to idols still
existed in Carthage.253 Among other idols, a statue of Hercules was inscribed
with a divine title. A new magistrate was taken unaware and allowed
pagans to gild it. The luster of the gold annoyed Christians. Christian
magistrates and the new proconsul may have permitted the Christians to
remove the golden beard. In pagan eyes removing Hercules’ beard was
more shameful than decapitation.
Some days later, Augustine delivered Sermo 24. The people interrupted
him by demanding pagan superstition be entirely abolished. Carthage
should become similar to Rome, where neither Hercules nor any other
Roman gods existed. Aurelius of Carthage encouraged Christians to demand
this abolition. Augustine praises their zeal, but begs them to let bishops
handle the matter. He assures them pastors have no less piety than the laity
and would do what was possible to satisfy their desire. Augustine gives
hope for success to their entreaties, since God had foretold the complete
destruction of idolatry. Indeed he had already brought this destruction in
various places, even in Rome itself. Sirmond first gave us this sermon and he
recognized it as preached at Carthage. The Benedictines have followed him.
The scriptural text is “O God, who is like unto you?” (Psalm 82: 2) Possidius
mentions a sermon on this subject 254
The African bishops had sent representatives to Honorius to obtain abo-
lition of paganism. The celebrated laws on this subject, enacted in 398 and
executed in Africa in 399, were effects of their zealous entreaties. Since the
laws were published in 398, the deputation obtaining them must have
occurred in a council previously held.
253
The listing of A. Fitzgerald in Augustine through the Ages dates this sermon on June 16,
401 and, like Tillemont, places it in Carthage.
254
Indiculum 9.
Article 123
Fourth Council of Carthage (398)
The fourth Council of Carthage, a general council of Africa, is dated No-

vember 8, 398.255 The year 436 mentioned in the title by Isidore indicates in
actuality 398.256 Two hundred and fourteen bishops were present, of whom
the chief were Aurelius and Datianus, dean of Numidia following Crescen-
tianus. Apparently Datianus was bishop of Tacarata.257 Augustine is men-
tioned with these two—the celebrity of Augustine’s name caused him to be
mentioned. One hundred and four canons are attributed to this council.
Baronius calls them a treasure of church discipline.258 Whether these canons
should be referred to this council rather than the council of the previous
year is uncertain. Aurelius says as much in the Council of Mileve (402). He
asked the bishops to undersign the decrees of the Council of Hippo and
those issued since more carefully by the Council of Carthage.259

This council is not listed in Collectio Carthaginensis nor Ferrandus’ col-
lection. This omission has led some scholars to cast doubt on the existence
of the canons in whole or in part. They hold we already have a collection of
various ancient canons. Responses of various import can be given to this
difficulty.260 Du Perron recognizes, as do I, the ordinances of this council, or
at least most of them. They accord completely with the situation in Africa
during Augustine’s time. The seventh canon on the ordination of exorcists is
cited by Isidore of Seville,261 but he does not mention from what council this
255
Concilium II, 1198.
256
Editor’s note: See CC CXLIX, 342.
257
Editor’s note: Tacarata is present-day ’Ain Touta,Algeria.
258
Baronius 398, §70.
259
Concilium II, 1210.
260
261
Historia de officiis ecclesiasticis II, 2.
Fourth Council of Carthage (398) 53
canon derives. Likewise Hincmar cites the twenty-third canon, which does
not allow a bishop to judge anyone unless the bishop is accompanied by his
clergy.262
The terms in the citations in this council are ancient, although the text
may be a summary of original canons. Minor difficulties arise regarding
certain canons, which can be clarified by recourse to the original text. For
example the eighty-seventh canon, which excommunicates a Catholic
bringing his case before a non-Catholic judge, no doubt means when he is
allowed to choose judges; this judgment is expressly mentioned in the ninth
canon of the third Council of Carthage.263 This latter council orders some-
thing quite similar in regard to clerics and civil judges.
Canons fifty-one, fifty-two and fifty-three hold that ecclesiastics must
learn a trade in order to support themselves. These canons should be joined
together. The multiplication gives basis to textual scholars for believing
these canons are altered. In one council the ordinances of several councils
were joined together.264 The original acts would apparently show that
various clarifications are given for difficulties proposed by the bishops. We
see an example of this clarification in the forty-fifth canon of the third
Council of Carthage.265
The twenty-fourth canon orders excommunication of those who leave a
sermon when a bishop or priest is preaching in church.266 This excommuni-
cation was surely enacted for particular cases mentioned in the whole
canon. Augustine speaks of those who leave the sermon because they were
tired of standing—he does not make it a crime.267 This canon could easily
regard those who leave noisily and scandalously in rising up against the
preacher. Some scholars explain this canon to regard those who, seeing that
priests were beginning to preach in Africa, did not want to listen.268 The
titles of several canons are sometimes at variance with what the canon
says. We should not look only at the title. Du Pin has recently summarized
these canons; this summary is often a complete translation.269
The first nine canons indicate what must be observed in the examina-
tion of bishops and the ordination of church ministers. All seven orders are
expressly mentioned. The next four canons speak of blessing the psalmists
262
Du Perron, Reponse de Mr Le Cardinal du Perron au Roy de la Grande Bretagne, 339.
263
Concilium II, 1169; 1206.
264
Schelstrat, African Church, 221.
265
Concilium II, 1176.
266
Concilium II, 1202.
267
268
Schelstrat 218.
269
Du Pin, II, 921‒32.
or cantors, virgins, widows or deaconesses, and married people. The canons

up to the thirty-third canon treat various episcopal duties—the following
thirty the duties of other ecclesiastics. The remainder of the canons con-
cerns various matters, in particular nine canons on penance. Manuscripts
exist where the order of the canons is completely different from the one we
follow.270 Some add a one hundred and fifth canon: it refuses entrance to
the church to those who falsely accuse others until they have done pen-
ance. Another canon is added against those who sow divisions within the
church. This canon is extensive but obscure.271
270
Concilium II, 1198.
271
Article 124
Letter 46 and Letter 47 can not be dated later than 398. The letters pre-
sume idolatrous sacrifices, prohibited in this year, were still common. When
in Letter 47 Augustine speaks of temples being destroyed, sometimes with
public authorization, this statement must be understood of particular cases
and not a general law. Publicola consults Augustine in Letter 46 as a bishop
who can settle his doubts. Augustine had likely been a bishop for some
time.
Publicola may be the son of Melania the Elder and the father of the
Melania the Younger. He is a man of delicate conscience; he believed it
absolutely forbidden to swear.272 Tenderness of conscience appears in a
number of the cases he proposes. He had property in Arzuges, a land in the
south near the pagans and barbarians. Some men of that area were obliged
to prefer barbarians over others, to whom they had sworn fidelity. He found
several difficulties with this oath and with the use of objects soiled by
idolatry. He proposed these and other difficulties to Augustine as a father,
his senior, and a pontiff from whom moral principle can be sought.
Augustine replied.273 He declared he could not approve of those who
think one may kill another out of fear he will himself be killed, unless the
former is a legitimate authority defending others. He approves of using
force only against attackers. Following Ambrose and Cyprian, Augustine had
already taught this doctrine.274 He believes a hungry person finding no food
except meat he knows has been offered to idols, should abstain out of
Christian charity, even if no one would see him.
272
Letter 47.
273
Letter 47.
274
Letter 47.
399 A. D.
399 was joyful for Augustine. Pagans had anticipated the collapse of
Christianity; instead they saw the collapse of idolatry.275 By virtue of the law
of Honorius enacted the previous year, temples in Africa and the rest of the
empire were demolished, or at least closed and their contents given to the
church. Idols were destroyed.276 Offering sacrifice to demons was forbidden
under pain of death. Aurelius consecrated the famous temple of Celestis,
the great Carthaginian goddess, to Christ. He celebrated Easter there.
This event converted a large number of pagans. However others be-
came angry.277 In a letter believed to be from this period, Augustine says
when Christians had broken a statue of Hercules, pagans threw themselves
at the Christians and sixty were killed.278 This took place at Sufes, a Roman
colony in Byzacena,279 (some place it at Sufetula in the same province).280
Vita Fulgentii mentions a council held at Sufes circa 525. Ferrandus cites a
council of Sufetula, which required that to be elected bishop a layman must
first spend a year in ecclesiastical ministry and exercise all the orders.281
When this council was held is unknown. Du Bois rejects as a forgery the
letter mentioning the sedition of Sufes.282 No one else shares this opinion—
his criticism is severe and well founded.
Collectio Carthaginensis mentions a Council of Carthage (April 27, 399)
in the sacristy of the basilica restitutus.283 However, the collection tells us
nothing except that Bishops Epigonius and Vincent were deputized to the
court by the council to request a law forbidding anyone seeking asylum in a
church be taken from church where he had taken refuge, no matter of what
crime he had been accused, at least until the charge was examined. We
have mentioned Epigonius, bishop of Bulla Regia in Proconsular, several
times. Vincent of Culusa in the same province was renowned at this time.
Baronius reports the request of these deputies concerning the law of
June 25, 399. This law lays a fine of five librae of gold on those who violate
275
De ciuitate dei XVIII, 53.
276
Codex Theodosii XVI, 10, 15, 280; Sirmond, Idatii chronicon; Prosper, de promissionibus III,
38;Prosper, Tironis chronicon; Augustine, Contra Parmenianum I, 9; De ciuitate dei I, 1.
277
De ciuitate dei XVIII, 54; Baronius, 399 §77.
278
Letter 50.
279
Ruinart, Vandalicae persecutionis historis 305f.
280
Baronius 30, augmentum.
281
Ferrandus, §2.
282
Augustine, Epistulae, fragment 50.
283
Concilium II, 1081.
or allow to be violated the privilege of asylum in a church.284 This law

concerns at least Africa, since it is addressed to Sapidienus, vicar of Africa at
the time. Honorius may have issued the law, February 25, 400 at the
request of the African bishops. He orders posted in major public places the
rescript Donatists had obtained from Julian the Apostate in 362 containing
their infamous request.285 Whether this law was enacted in 400 is unsure—
possibly it should be dated in 405. Garnier maintains an error exists on the
dating of the council.286 April 27 was too near Easter, which was April 10,
400, to assemble the bishops in council. If it were merely a council of
Proconsular, his objection may not be so strong. Others claim several
canons attributed to the Council of Carthage (401) should be referred to this
council: for example, those canons dealing with requests to the emperor,
particularly canon fifty-eight of Collectio Carthaginensis.287 The only proof
given for this assertion is the canon requesting destruction of country
temples, ordered by the law of July 13, 400.288 Admittedly this law is ad-
dressed to Eutychius, Prefect of the East. It can therefore be concluded that
it could not yet have been promulgated in Africa in 401. Godefroy recog-
nizes this objection.289 There was no mutual understanding between
Arcadius290 and Honorius.
284
Baronius, 399, §85.
285
Baronius 400, §20. ;Codex Theodosii VI, 155.
286
Garnier, ed. Marii Merrcatoris commonitorium, I, 212.
287
Réponse de Mr. le Cardinal du Perron au Roy de la Grande Bretagne (Paris 1612);
Schelstrat, Ecclesia Africana 1680.
288
Du Perron 48; Codex Theodosii XVI, 6, 16, 283.
289
Codex Theodosii, 284.
290
Editor’s note: Arcadius (408 †) was emperor with his brother Honorius.
Article 125
De consensu euangelistarum
Augustine’s De consensu euangelistarum can not be dated any earlier

than the end of 399. In Book I he indicates pagan statues were being
destroyed on the authority and under the direction of imperial law.291 No
express laws existed for such destruction until the laws published and
executed in Africa in 399. Previous to these laws, Augustine said he had no
authority to destroy idols except upon the owner’s consent.292 Works dated
after De consensu euangelistarum oblige us to a date no later than 400.
The purpose of these four books is to harmonize apparently contradic-
tory passages of the gospel writers. In Book I, he opposes those who, while
honoring Christ as an extremely wise man, did not yet submit to the gospel,
because it was not written by Christ himself but by his disciples.293 These
falsely attributed divinity to him and tried to pass him off as divine.
Augustine worked on this work uninterruptedly, and postponed writing De
trinitate, which he had already begun. In In Iohannis euangelium tractatus,
he refers to this work, to which he says he gave much effort.294 He did not
have as many resources as those who have worked on this topic since. The
chief of these aids to later authors is his own work, apart from which there
has been practically nothing available.295
291
De consensu euangelistarum I, 20; 27.
292
Sermo 62. Editor’s note: Sermo 62 is usually dated in 399 and thought to be preached in
Carthage.
293
Retractationes II, 16. Editor’s note: Augustine ascribes Photinianism to some of those
whose works he read in Milan in 386. See Confessiones VII, 24.
294
In Iohannis euangelium tractatus CXII.
295
De consensu eruangelistarum attracted some attention in the twentieth century since it is
the first work where Porphyry is mentioned by name, De consensu euangelistarum I, 15.
Augustine differentiates two Porphyrys and thinks the one mentioned in De consensu
euangelistarum is not the editor of Plotinus. However Porphyry of Sicily mentioned in De
De consensu euangelistarum 59
Letter 51, addressed to Crispinus, Donatist bishop of Calama, should be

dated in 399–400.296 When Augustine had met him a short time previously
in Carthage, he had urged Crispinus to meet with him on the schism within
the church. After a rather heated exchange, Crispinus excused himself from
entering into more extensive discussion, but promised to do so on another
occasion. When both had returned to their respective churches in Numidia
and the rumor spread Crispinus was willing to discuss the schism, Augustine
wrote to encourage him. Nothing prevented them then from such a discus-
sion—their churches were close to each other. They could write each other
as often as necessary to clarify the question. “I am resolved to do nothing in
this matter except in writing, lest what has been said only orally might
escape memory. By writing we might take advantage of our exchange to
instruct those who would like to learn something on this question.” In his
letter Augustine suggests the requested responses could be sufficient in and
of themselves to remove difficulties.
In Letter 51, Augustine indicates schism is a greater offense than hand-
ing over the Scriptures. Without proof Donatists were reproaching Cae-
cilian, or rather his ordaining bishop, of handing over Scriptures. Even if
Caecilian were guilty, the Donatists could not have legitimately separated.
They recognized this truth by accepting the return of Felician and Praetex-
tatus. Both were condemned by the Donatists as schismatics. Caecilian
could well have been as innocent as they, if they were innocent. Donatist
behavior toward Maximianists indicates not all persecutors should be
condemned. It is not necessary to repeat baptism given outside the true
church. After Augustine had proved these points which comprised the
entire dispute between the Catholic Church and the Donatists, he summa-
rizes the dispute. He asks Crispinus to reply and show whether there is the
slightest shadow of difficulty which might preclude even the most
unlearned from understanding the issues.
Letter 51 has no title―in fact Augustine did not give it one. If he had
given the letter a simple title, he would have had to excuse himself to
Crispinus. He would have excused himself because Donatists ridiculed the
humility of Catholics, whereas Catholics treated Donastists with civility.
Augustine would not have been offended if Crispinus had acted similarly.
Whether Crispinus responded to this letter is unknown. He persisted in
consensu euangelistaum is surely the famous editor of Plotinus’ works. It is virtually certain
that parts of De regressu animae and Philosophy from Oracles, both not extant, were among
the libri platonicorum Augustine read in Milan in June, 386. Augustine’s main opponent in
this entire work is most likely Porphyry.
296
schism, and even fell into excesses differing from his initial moderation.
Those who abuse God’s graces rightly lose even that which they seemingly
possess.
Augustine and Alypius linked this situation with Crispinus to a similar
conference with Clarence. The Donatists called him father, doubtless
because of his age.297 In the conference of Carthage of 411 Clarence,
Donatist bishop of Tabraca, Numidia, appears.298 Naucelion was used as an
intermediary. Naucelion reported to Augustine and Alypius Clarence did not
dare deny Felician of Musti had been condemned and subsequently re-
ceived back into the Donatist communion. He was condemned without
being guilty since he was absent from the conference. Augustine and
Alypius reply in a letter addressed to Naucelion, which may well have been
written in 400 as there is no mention of Praetextatus, no doubt because he
was dead.299 The Benedictines have dated this letter circa 402.
297
Letter 70.
298
Collectio Carthaginensis I§187.
299
Letter 70. Editor’s note: Praetextatus was a Donatist bishop, became Maximinianists
bishop of Assuras beginning in 396 A. D. and was later re-admitted to the main body of the
Donatists (393‒409/410) without being re-baptized. Assuras was in Proculsular and is
present-day Zanfour, Tunisia. Tillemont remains uncertain as to the precise year of
Praetextaus’ death. He places it variously between 400‒402.
Article 126
Severinus and Generosus
Letter 52 should be numbered among the earliest of Augustine’s works

against the Donatists. Nevertheless, we can not date it much before 400,
since the tyranny of Optatus, the Gildonian, is rather clearly mentioned.
Augustine had a Donatist relative, Severinus. Like many others he remained
a Donatist merely because of tradition. Augustine had long lamented his
confusion and wanted to speak to him and draw him away from Donatism.
Apparently, Augustine had attempted to persuade him through a letter. In
his response, he said Augustine’s letter had arrived recently. Augustine did
not find his hopes realized in Severinus’ letter, but was still pleased to
receive it, especially since Severinus had sent a man to Hippo for the sole
purpose of delivering it. He would not have taken the trouble to write if he
were not disposed to instruction in truth.

In his reply Augustine laid out the reasons he usually advanced to un-
dercut the basis of the Donatist schism. One argument was the large
number of worthless people they tolerated within their ranks lest they split
the Donatist party. In this manner Augustine describes the ten years of
Optatus’ tyranny. Without this description, it would be preferable to date
this letter during Augustine’s priesthood. He does not mention the Maxi-
mianists. Augustine says this letter, short as it is, was long enough for an
intelligent person like Severinus. The result of this letter is unknown.
Letter 53, to Generosus, can be dated around this time. It was written
under the pontificate of Anastasius (399-401) and probably before the
death of Praetextatus of Assuras. Consequently the letter is to be dated
before the three books against Parmenianus300 and around the same time as
the first book against the letter of Petilianus, where Augustine mentions
300
Contra Parmenianum III, 6; Letter 53.
Generosus. Generosus was a Catholic citizen of Cirta and a consul of

Numidia.301 This post existed only after the law of January 21, 409.302 If there
was a post of proconsul in Cirta circa 400, as is likely, it was of a different
kind.
A Donatist priest in Cirta was minded to write Augustine concerning the
appearance of an angel. The angel had commanded him to instruct Genero-
sus, merely on the angel’s authority, on the genuine Christianity of the
church of Cirta.303 This Donatist priest should advise Generosus to number
himself among the Donatist party. Petilianus, Donatist bishop of Cirta,
would instruct him on this advice in a letter. He apprised him of the succes-
sion of bishops of that see, and spoke especially favorably of Silvanus.304
Obviously, this apparition was a diabolical illusion. Satan was transfig-
ured into an angel of light, or possibly a fiction of this Donatist priest, who
by acting as Satan’s minister, wanted to deceive others through this lie. Like
a true Catholic, Generosus scoffed at this letter and sent it to Fortunatus,
Catholic bishop of Cirta, Alypius, and Augustine, all of whom may have been
together at that time in Cirta.305 These three prelates answered him through
Augustine’s pen and tried to convert this priest, to whom they ask Genero-
sus to forward their letter. Fortunatus is named first in the inscription
although he was the most recently consecrated bishop. This matter con-
cerned him more as bishop of Cirta.
The three bishops point out that, if the focus is on succession, the
church of Rome must be preferred over any other. They compile a list of
popes up to Anastasius, who occupied the see at the time. Then they
mention the most important documents from which to learn the history of
the Donatists, especially those documents which proved the Donatist
Silvanus of Cirta a traditor. Augustine and his colleagues mention the history
of the Maximianists, and the reception by the Donatists of the Maximianists
Felicianus and Praetextatus, the latter of whom Augustine and Alypius
presume is still living. These bishops do not refer Generosus to writing
produced against the letter of Petilianus. This fact makes us believe
Augustine had not yet written on this subject. Doubtless Petilianus’ letter
cited by that priest is the celebrated letter Augustine refuted.
301
Letter 115.
302
Codex Theodosii III, 32.
303
Letter 52.
304
Editor’s note: Silvanus was Donatist bishop of Cirta 303-320.
305
Letter 53.
Severinus and Generosus 63
Before treating Petilianus’ letter, it is necessary to appreciate its author

as a former lawyer.306 This explains why at the conference of Carthage a
Catholic bishop refers to the rules of the bar.307 Petilianus himself brags of
his reputation in advocacy, to the point of saying he had acquired the same
quality of advocate we apply to the Holy Spirit. He had been a catechumen
in the Catholic Church.308 Donatists had taken him by force and induced him
into their schism by the honorable but for him baneful bond of episcopal
dignity. What Augustine writes should doubtless be referred to the violence
Petilianus had suffered.
When the Donatist party was the stronger in the city of Constantine, they seized
Petilianus, a lay catechumen of our church, born of Catholic parents. They contin-
ued to use violence on him despite his resistance. He escaped, but they sought him
out and found him where he was hiding. They dragged him out trembling, and
309
baptized him in the state of fear. Then they ordained him despite his resistance.
The Donatists made him bishop of Constantine, or Cirta —it is the same
city—which was the civil metropolis of Numidia.310 He was bishop there
prior to the death of Optatus. He was regarded as far superior in learning
and eloquence to anyone in his sect, and his sermons were polished and
well styled. Occasionally Augustine reproached him for inflated rhetoric,
calculated to incite uproars. Augustine did not express himself in the same
way as Petilianus. He was the principal Donatist advocate at the conference
of Carthage of 411. There he used wit, wrangling, or stubbornness as means
of deception, so as to extend the discussion; yet in the end he would come
up with nothing. He finally became hoarse and was forced into silence.
306
307
Collectio Carthaginensis III, §57.
308
309
Sermo ad Caesarensis ecclesiae plebem. 8.
310
Contra litteras Petiliani II, 1; 9; 73;III, 16; 57; De unitate ecclesiae 1; Contra Cresconium I, 1;
Concilium II, 1101.
Article 127
Refutation of Petilianus
A long time prior to the Council of Carthage (405), Petilianus wrote a

pastoral letter to the priests and deacons of his diocese against the Catholic
Church.311 He charged the church with baseless outrages.312 We can collate
the entire letter by collecting the beginnings of the chapters of Contra
Litteras Petiliani II. In his letter, Petilianus claims to show that Donatists
alone had true baptism. He argues over the title Catholic. 313In the end he
was left to glory in his small number of followers as if the small number in
itself placed him on the narrow road.314
He accused Catholics of being traditores or children of traditores, again
without proof.315 He complained that Catholics had appealed to imperial
authority concerning Donatist persecution and Donatists holding property
belonging to Catholics. Catholics were not suffering personally.316 Magis-

trates were working to dispossess Donatists of their churches, perhaps as a
consequence of Gratian’s law of 377. They had in effect lost properties of
which the Catholics were now owners, both those they had taken from
Catholics and those built during the schism.317 Donatists kept some prop-
erty, even some of it usurped from the Catholic Church. There were laws
forbidding Donatists from residing in the cities. Apparently, Honorius had
made several other laws against them.318
311
Contra epistulas Petiliani I, 1;II, 1.
312
313
Contra epistulas Petiliani II, 38.
314
315
Contra epistulas Petiliani I, 7.
316
Contra epistulas Petiliani II, 58; 92.
317
318
Refutation of Petilianus 65
Petilianus strongly exhorted his people to preserve their supposed pu-

rity, and dispose of their worldly and temporal possessions.319 He numbered
himself among the poor in spirit who do not love, but fear riches.320 These
praises did little to convince other Donatist bishops. As for himself, he did
not lose his wealth—we know nothing of his surrendering it. His pride rose
to such a point that, according to him, bishops of the true church had no
sin, nor any need of the people’s prayers.321 In other words, he himself was
sinless, more righteous than Paul, John the Evangelist, or Daniel.
This letter was in Donatist hands. They had memorized various parts of
it as a firm and solid document against the Catholic Church.322 The first time
Augustine saw any part of the letter personally was at Cirta. At that time
Generosus may have sent him a Donatist priest’s letter in which it is
quoted.323 The faithful presented it to Augustine, and perhaps to Alypius,324
in the church of Fortunatus, the Catholic bishop of Cirta. What they received
was only the beginning, a small part of the letter, because the Catholics had
not yet found a way to copy the whole.325
Augustine remarked that from its first words this letter destroyed Do-
natism: the Donatists held the sanctification of the baptized depended on
the purity of conscience of the one administering the baptism.326 Augustine
had difficulty believing the letter was in fact written by Petilianus, though it
bore his name in the text.327 Those knowing his writing style assured
Augustine it was truly his. Augustine responded promptly, clearly, and
sincerely, lest the less educated believe this letter contained anything solid
against the Catholic Church.328 Augustine’s modesty did not prevent him
from saying truth was vindicated in his reply with such force, and adorned
with such light, as to make it impossible to refute.329 Still, he designates the
first part as a letter, not a book.330
319
320
321
322
De unitate ecclesiae 1.
323
Contra epistulas Petiliani I, 1. Editor’s note: See Letter 53.
324
Editor’s note: The Maurists suggested Alypio presente as a correction for the received text
Absentio presente. See PL 43, 216, (i).
325
Contra epistulas Petiliani I, 19;III, 50; De unitate ecclesiae 1.
326
327
Ibid.
328
Contra epistulas Petiliani I, 1; III, 1; Retractationes II, 25.
329
Contra epistulas Petiliani III, 1.
330
Augustine addressed this work to faithful Catholics. In it he uses the his-

tory of Optatus and even more the history of the Maximianists.331 Augustine
exhorts his people to become acquainted with the latter history since it is
suitable to refuting easily what Donatists could say.332 He adds:
Remember these things, my brothers, and spread them everywhere with peace
333
and zeal. Love people while persecuting and destroying their errors. Be happy to
be in the path of truth, but do not be proud. Fight for its interests, but do not dis-
honor it by animosity. Refute and overcome its adversaries, but at the same time
334
pray God to give them the grace to correct themselves.
In a letter he cites a passage of this first reply to Petilianus.335

He tried to get hold of the remainder of Petilianus’ letter. Donatists
knew he had responded only to the first part.336 No one who was asked
would lend the letter, so much did they fear Catholic possession of their
writings. Augustine says he believes Petilianus would not have dared
acknowledge his letter and sign it with his own hand unless he had been
urged.337 Augustine did not act in the same manner. He asks Catholics to
give his response to all who want it, even to those who would not want it.338
He allows Donatists to reply to it as they like, addressing themselves to him
or their partisans. His only provision was that they not forbid Catholics to
show him their reply. Augustine exhorts Donatists not to hide Petilianus’
letter, lest from the part Augustine had not seen some argument might be
left unanswered. He did not write this work, as we have seen, until after the
letter to Generosus, but before the books against Parmenianus. Thus it can
not be dated any better than 400.339
331
332
333
Editor’s note: This Augustinian principle of hating the sin but loving the fellow man
appears throughout his works and has influenced many contemporary moralists.
334
Contra epistolas Petiliani I, 29.
335
Letter 142 2; PL 33, 584 and (i).
336
Contra epistulas Petiliani III, 1.
337
338
339
Article 128
Contra epistulam Parmeniani
Parmenianus was Donatist bishop of Carthage after Donatus.340 He had

died prior to Augustine authoring this work. The letter Parmenianus had
written against Tyconius fell into Augustine’s hands. He could not resist his
brothers’ request to refute it. Parmenianus had misused various scriptural
passages to justify the Donatist schism.341 Augustine undertook a defense of
the universal Catholic Church against Donatist reproaches and arguments by
which they had substantiated their separation from the Catholic Church.342
Augustine examined and refuted whether the good are sullied by the
wicked. They are united in the society of a single church and in communion
of the same sacraments. He proved the good are unsullied by the wicked.
He used to full affect the history of the schism of the Maximianists.343
Augustine took full advantage of the Donatist reception of Felician of Musti

and Praetextatus of Assur into their communion together with all those
they had baptized in the schism of Maximianus without rebaptism. This
schism occurred in 397. Augustine mentions often the violence of Optatus,
the Gildonian.344 We learn of Praetextatus’ death circa 400.345 Augustine
could not have written this work before 400 and could scarcely have written
340
341
Contra epistulam Parmeniani I, 1.
342
343
Contra epistulam Parmeniani I, 4; 13; 15; III, 3f.
344
Contra epistulam Parmeniani II, 1; 15.
345
Contra epistulam Parmeniani III, 6.
it after: he places a large number of works before the last books against
Petilianus, written in 402 at the latest.346
Augustine promised to treat the question of baptism more extensively
elsewhere.347 Shortly thereafter, he composed De baptismo, which he
places immediately after Contra epistulam Parmeniani in Retractationes.348
He did not promise this work specifically in his books against Parmenianus,
but he could not refuse his brethren, who were pressing him.349
In De baptismo I-VII his intention was to refute Donatist objections
against the doctrine of the church on baptism.350 He wanted especially to
use Cyprian’s authority. The Donatists tried to oppose Cyprian to the truth.
Augustine wanted to show to unprejudiced minds nothing was more
powerful to close their mouths and overthrow the foundations of their
schism than Cyprian’s writings and behavior in the question of baptism.
Augustine uses the authority of Donatists themselves, who had destroyed
their own principles by receiving Felician.351 Since they received him, no
dispute should occur with the majority of these schismatics on the question
of re-baptism. The dispute should lie only with small splinter groups. These
splinter parties had blamed the Donatists themselves for having received
the baptism of the Maximianists. The splinter groups claimed each party
had the right to baptize. Augustine devoted the two last books of this work
to a word-for-word reply to the great Council of Carthage (256) which
Cyprian held to reject the baptism of heretics. Fulgentius cites a passage of
the third book of this work where Augustine, learned of God in the Holy
Scriptures, admirably clarifies the words of the apostles Paul and Jude.352
At that time Augustine was occupied with preaching against Donatists.

Centurius, a Donatist layman, brought an anti-Catholic writing to the
church. The work contained a small number of passages from Scripture
which Donatists claimed supported their teaching. Augustine replied in a
few words in Contra quod attulit Centurius ad Donatistas.353 Possidius
346
Retractationes II, 17‒25; Contra litteras Petiliani II, 51. Editor’s note: in Retractationes
Augustine places Contra epistulam Parmeniani (Retractationes II, 17) eight chapters before
Contra litteras Petiliani (Retractationes II, 25).
347
Contra epistulam Parmeniani II, 14; De baptismo I, 1.
348
349
Contra epistulam Parmeniani I, 1.
350
351
De baptismo I, 6; II, 11; V, 6.
352
Fulgentius, De duplici praedestinatione ad Monimum II, 12. Editor’s note: The reference to
Jude is unclear.
353
Contra epistulam Parmeniani 69
mentions this title in Indiculum,354 and apparently again in Vita Augustini.355

This work is not extant.
Augustine may have sent one of his anti-Donatist works to Celer, to
show these schismatics had no right to separate from the Church univer-
sal.356 Augustine speaks of Celer as a quality person who had been em-
ployed in high places.357 He had followed the Christian faith and lived in an
exemplary manner in the lay state.358 For some time Celer had been closely
connected to Donatists359 and apparently had been involved in their errors.
Celer was a large landowner in the diocese of Hippo, which is how he
became acquainted with Augustine. At his request Augustine promised to
instruct him on the schism. However, Augustine could not deliver on his
promise as early as he would have liked because he was obliged to visit
churches in his diocese. Augustine asked Optatus360 to read Celer in his
behalf the necessary matters on the schism. Augustine wrote Letter 56 to
Celer on this subject.
Augustine wrote Celer again in Letter 57 to inform him he had sent a
book some time previously. He had been asked to show Donatists should
not have separated from the Catholic Church because of Caecilian. If Celer
has any difficulty on this point, Augustine promises to answer in due course.
Celer must have ceased associating with Donatists since Augustine asks him
to recommend union with the Catholics to his subjects in the diocese of
Hippo. Augustine asks him to help make peace with someone then in Hippo
on another matter, but Augustine does not explain his involvement.
These two letters were written toward the beginning of Augustine’s
episcopate. There is no word of the conference of Carthage. In 412 Spon-

daeus, the manager of Celer’s property, was a formidable foe of Do-
natists.361 Celer had no position when Augustine wrote Letter 209 in 424,362
but in 429 he had become proconsul of Africa. Laws were addressed to him
at that time.363
354
Indiculum 3.
355
Vita Augustini 9.
356
Letter 57.
357
Letter 209 5.
358
Letter 56.
359
Letter 139 2. Editor’s note: Lancel takes it as certain that Celer was a Donatist. Lancel 276.
360
Editor’s note: A priest in Hippo, see Letter 56 1.
361
Letter 139 2.
362
Letter 209 5. Editor’s note: The Maurists date this letter at the beginning of 423. PL 33, 953
(a).
363
Codex Theodosii VI.
Article 129
De bono coniugali; De opere monachorum
After the refutation of the writings Centurius had brought, Augustine

places two replies to Januarius’ requests, Letter 54 and Letter 55. In fact, the
first is written in letter form. The second is a treatise. The second bears
neither Augustine’s name nor that of the recipient (although in some
modern editions both are there). The second is much longer than the first.
Augustine tells us both the first and second are to be listed among his
works.364
Januarius is unknown, except that he had made a profession of piety
and had not been well instructed in the curious365 science of astrology.366
Some manuscripts give him the title notary, or writer of notes; he could
have performed this function for the church of Carthage. Augustine men-
tions a Januarius, a priest in Hippo who had not lived up to the sanctity of
his vocation.367 He who asked him questions by letter would not likely be a
priest of Augustine’s own church. If he was not from Hippo, as Augustine
leads us to believe,368 he may have become a priest at Hippo later. In the
salutation Augustine simply refers to him as his son.369 Augustine sent Letter
186 to Paulinus through a Januarius whom he called his dear brother.370
Whoever Januarius was, he sent Augustine a memorandum of difficul-
ties to be explained.371 At first, Augustine answered only the first question,
364
365
Editor’s note: I have retained the French “curieux” as reflecting Augustine’s curiositas, the
vice of useless knowledge. Augustine describes astrologia as curiosa often.
366
Editor’s note: Perhaps Letter 55 19.
367
Sermo 356.
368
Letter 55 1.
369
Letter 54 (salutation).
370
Letter 186 1.
371
Letter 54.
De bono coniugali 71
in which Januarius had inquired at what time the sacrifice of the mass
should be offered on Holy Thursday, and whether the mass should be
before or after the meal.372 Augustine postponed answering the other
questions. When Januarius wrote later to ask Augustine to finish his re-
sponse, Augustine put aside a number of concerns occupying him at the
time to satisfy Januarius. He wanted clarified why we do not celebrate the
feast of Easter annually on the same date, as we celebrate Christmas, and
why we calculate Easter by the day of the week or the lunar calendar. In
these two letters, Augustine treats of many sacraments and religious
practices being observed either by all or by some churches. Du Pin treats
them in detail.373
After Augustine founded monasticism in Africa, this institution spread
to various places, Carthage among them. Several monasteries were formed,
which did not follow the same rule of life.374 According to Paul’s directives,375
some earned the necessities of life by manual work. Others wanted to live
off offerings from donors without working for their subsistence. They were
not occupied with ecclesiastical ministry.376 Serving at the altar they would
have had the right to live from the altar. Some may have had little educa-
tion, but at the same time were incapable of sustaining the fatigue of
manual labor. They were gathered together in a holy congregation with
complete leisure.377 The majority had left a life of labor to enter the monas-
tery.378 They wanted to be occupied continually in prayer, chanting the
psalms, and reading and meditating on God’s word.379 They wanted to work
by giving pious talks and holy readings to visitors, and to practice the
evangelical counsels:380 to consider the birds of heaven and the lilies of the
field, which do not work (Mt 6: 26).381 Of course they did not claim they
were required like the birds to lay up provisions.382
Rather than recognizing their weakness and laziness, these monks
claimed to be more perfect than the working monks.383 Following a purer
372
Letter 54 4.
373
Du Pin 3, 567−72.
374
375
Editor’s note: 2 Th 6‒12.
376
De opere monachorum 21.
377
378
379
380
De opere monachourm 1; 23.
381
Du Pin 329.
382
De opere monachorum 23. Editor’s note: see Mt. 6: 26-29.
383
doctrine, these religious were tempted by the charms of idleness and the
false appearance of enhanced piety. They suffered the shame of passing as
traitors to the gospel in the minds of the ignorant.384 Thereby they author-
ized the unruliness of vagabond monks, who, rather than working in quiet
and silence, deceived the people because of the respect of the laity for their
habit.385 They worked only to collect money either by selling the relics of
real or supposed martyrs, or by various other pretexts. What was even
more vexing was that several laypeople out of praiseworthy charity took
care to provide for their necessities and even undertook to defend their
idleness. Others, on the contrary, condemned their behavior. This dis-
agreement in practice gave rise to disputes which troubled the church.386
These problems aside, some of these idle monks wore long hair against
Paul’s express precept (1 Cor 11:14), for the purpose of attracting more
esteem and offerings.387 People observed others falling into the same fault.
The latter were otherwise holy and esteemed by the most judicious bishops,
but they annoyed and offended the church with affectation, and stirred up
dangerous division. Among the faithful, some, not wanting to condemn holy
persons, were forced to give a false interpretation to Paul’s explicit words.
Others however preferred defense of the true meaning of Scripture to
flattery.
These problems in the Carthaginian church had concerned Aurelius in
his office as bishop. He asked Augustine to write on the subject.388
Augustine wanted to see monasticism spread through Africa and other
Christian provinces.389 He could no more refuse Aurelius than Christ himself,
who, he believed, was ordering him through Aurelius’ mouth.390 Augustine

produced De opere monachorum. At the end he asks Aurelius to notify him
if he found anything that should be omitted or corrected.391 Augustine
mentioned those whom Syrians called pastors. He apparently disapproves
of them.392 On the other hand he praises recluses, even those not doing
manual labor. He mentions his quarrel with Jerome regarding Peter and
Paul.393
384
385
386
387
De opere monachorum 31; 33.
388
389
390
391
392
393
De bono coniugali 73
In Retractationes, Augustine places this work after his writings to Janu-

arius and before De bono coniugali. Augustiine wrote this latter treatise
against Jovinian, who had taught in Rome circa 390 that virginity was no
more meritorious than conjugal chastity.394 This heresy had been strenu-
ously opposed in Rome and was condemned by Pope Siricius, then in Milan
at a council. Jerome had also attacked it in two celebrated books written in
392. No one dared any longer to maintain this thesis publicly, but traces of
it appeared privately. Opposition to this poison was necessary—it was no
less dangerous because hidden. Augustine wrote De bono conjugali. He
expressly chose this topic because of the claim that to refute Jovinian one
necessarily had to find fault with marriage, as did Jerome. Augustine
defended the sanctity of marriage against Manicheans and at the same
time, while maintaining marriage as a good, approved virginity as even
better.395 Augustine never mentioned Jovinian by name, but spoke of him in
one place as “that impudent questioner.”396 Apparently Roman law forbade
the repudiation of a sterile wife in order to take another.397 He treats the
question why those who have had two wives before or after baptism are
excluded from the priesthood.398 Augustine cites this work in De Genesi ad
litteram,399 where he says he had recently published it.
Augustine had advised Christian virgins not to consider themselves
above Old Testament patriarchs, who were married, because he had placed
virginity above marriage. We would expect Augustine to write next on
virginity.400 He did so immediately in De sancta uirginitate.401 In accordance
with his own God-given gift he intended virginity to be loved by those to
whom God had given the gift, without being terrified by its difficulties. At
the same time, he impressed a salutary fear on virgins, lest they become
inflated with pride over the sanctity of their state.402 He showed them on
the one hand the greatness of this God-given gift and, on the other, the
394
395
Du Pin 717-20.
396
De bono coniugali 22.
397
De bono coniugali 7. Editor’s note: In De bono coniugali 24, Augustine speaks of the three
goods of marriage: Procreation (bonum prolis), fidelity (bonum fidei), and indissolubility
(bonum sacramenti). This teaching has been passed down to the church until the present
day.
398
De bono coniugali 18.
399
De Genesi ad litteram VII, 9.
400
De uirginitate 1.
401
402
De uirginitate 1-2.
necessary care to maintain it with humility. He cites these two works in De

remissione peccatorum403 and De uiduitate.404
403
De meritis peccatorum et remissione I, 29.
404
De uiduitate 15.
Article 130
De Genesi ad litteram
At the same time, Augustine began the twelve books entitled De Genesi
ad litteram.405 In them he explicates Scripture according to historical truth,
not the allegorical sense.406 He had attempted such a commentary while still
a priest.407 He had started a book on the same subject, but found the labor
too difficult. Long after, he took the task up again and composed eleven
books on the beginning of Genesis up to where Adam was driven out of
paradise.408 Augustine added a twelfth book on paradise, where he treats at
great length how we see bodily things with the eye of the mind.409
In this work he cites nameless persons several times.410 For example, he
reports an explication of Genesis by a learned Syrian, mentioned also by
Basil, who is thought to be Ephrem. He says the work under present
consideration is incomparably better than the one he wrote while a

priest.411 Nevertheless on many matters he is still seeking truth and has not
yet found it. Even when he has found truth, he often does not present it as
405
406
Editor’s note: See BA 48, introduction for the meaning of literal exegesis in this work.
Literal meaning could be translated as “real meaning.”
407
Retractationes I, 18.
408
409
Letter 159 2. Editor’s note: it is instructive to compare what Augustine writes here on
intellectual vision in De Genesi ad litteram XII with the texts on the ascent of the soul in
Confessiones VII, 13f. The conclusion should be drawn that Augustine has in mind in both
places the highest intellectual activity of man, namely intuitive vision of the divine. See F.
Van Fleteren, “Mysticism in the Confessions—a Contrvoersy Revisited,” Augustine: Mystic
and Mystagogue, F. Van Fleteren and J Schnaubelt eds. (New York 1994).
410
De Genesi ad litteram I, 11.
411
Retractationes I, 18.
certain and frequently reserves resolution to a fuller discussion.412 Instead

he shows what he needs to learn in the passages where he hesitates and
decides nothing in matters so obscure.413 When he does not believe he can
teach definitively, he teaches us not to be over-confident about what we do
not know.
Augustine did not set out to explicate the mysteries contained in the
text, but only to point out the text contains nothing not literally true. There
is nothing contrary to the light of reason.414 Apparently superfluous words
are necessary for presenting the mystery.415 He believes his plan profitable
and useful for those God desired to instruct others, whether for their own
salvation or for the good of the church.416 He does not engage in examining
problems of physics, since he has no time—nor should he.
Augustine wrote this work with interruptions.417 Although friends pre-
vailed upon him to give them this work, he kept it to himself a long time
before finishing it. He did the same with De trinitate, because of the
difficulty of the questions being treated.418 By retaining it, he hoped to
correct faults in the text. He promises to write De ciuitate dei on the
occasion of the sack of Rome in 410. He began this work in 413.419 He had
not yet published his books on Genesis when he wrote to Evodius in 411 or
later420 and to Marcellinus at the end of 412. He cited De Genesi ad liiteram
XII in Letter 159, circa 415.421 He was correcting the entire work as quickly as
possible, to publish it without delay because of the expectation and desire
of several people.422 He finished De Genesi ad litteram before he completed
De trinitate.423
412
Retractationes II, 24. Editor’s note: The aporietic character of De Genesi ad liiteram is well
attested in recent literature. See BA 48, introduction.
413
De Genesi ad litteram XII, 1.
414
De Genesi ad litteram IX, 12.
415
De Genesi ad litteram I, 20.
416
Ibid.
417
418
Letter 143 4.
419
De Genesi ad litteram XI, 15.
420
Letter 162 2.
421
Letter 159 2.
422
Editor’s note: Augustine’s correction of De Genesi ad litteram VI, 27 to the effect that the
imago dei in man is never completely lost, but rather deformed or tarnished so that it is in
need of reformation, is important for understanding Augustine’s anthropology and its
subsequent interpretation. See Retractationes II, 24.
423
De Genesi ad litteram 77
He cites De Genesi ad litteram I in his replies to Dulcitius, composed in

425 or later.424 Fulgentius praises De Genesi ad litteram X on the origin of
the soul.425 Cassiodorus says this eloquent and wise doctor filled De Genesi
ad litteram with the ornament of many sciences.426 Both Basil and Ambrose
had acquired esteem and glory through the books they had written on
Genesis. It is rare and difficult to surpass brilliant people who first treated a
topic. Nevertheless Augustine’s work has a completely different magnitude
and excellence than the ones which these two illustrious fathers authored.
Extraordinary stories, worthy of mention, are often reported by
Augustine. Some are found here. He mentions as extraordinary a fountain
near Bulla-Regia in which fish were accustomed to follow those walking
around it. He himself had witnessed it. Visitors would often throw the fish
something to eat.427
We know a man tormented with an unclean spirit who used to be visited by a

priest. The man would reveal the time this priest started to come to see him, al-
though it was almost five leagues distant. He notes during the trip in what place
the priest was, whether he was near or far, and when he entered the village, his
house, or his room. To speak so accurately this sick man must have seen these
things in some way previously, though not with his eyes. This man had a fever, and
said all these things like a man in a frenzy speaking without thinking. He may in fact
have been frenzied, and thus was believed to be possessed by a devil. He did not
want to receive food from those near him; the priest had to feed him. His relatives
and friends had unimaginable difficulty restraining him; only this priest could calm
him down. When the priest came, the sick man was relaxed, obeyed him in every-
thing, and answered him submissively. However, the priest could not deliver him
from this extreme condition or this demon. The sickness did not leave him until his
428
fever was healed, as happens with other frenzied people.
The illness never recurred.

Augustine writes of another acquaintance who was delirious and had
predicted a woman’s death in a most peculiar way. He did not so much
foretell she was going to die as report her death as if it had already hap-
pened. The woman arose accidentally in conversation: “‘She is dead,’ he
suddenly said, ‘and I saw her brought to burial. They passed by such a way
with her body.’ However at that time she was still in good health. A few
424
De octo Dulcitii Quaestionibus 8. See Retractationes II, 65.
425
De duplici praedestinatione III, 18.
426
Institutiones 1.
427
De Genesi ad litteram III, 8.
428
days later she died suddenly, and was brought to burial in the place he had
indicated.”429
In another passage430 Augustine remarks it occasionally happens to per-
sons who lie awake and are not sick but of clear and sound mind, that they
receive, as if by a secret instinct, thoughts which permit them to see the
future, whether they are thinking of something entirely different than
foretelling the future (for example Caiaphas who prophesied unwittingly Jn
18: 14), or they in fact have the intention. Augustine recounts a peculiar
story of young people on a journey who wanted to amuse themselves by
astrology, without even knowing the twelve signs in the zodiac. They said
anything that came to their lips, and saw with pleasure that their host was
in admiration of them, and had acknowledged the truth of what they said.
This encouraged them to go farther, and they constantly found things were
just as they had said. Finally the host asked them how his son was doing.
The host’s son had been absent for a long time, and the father was grieving
for him, thinking that an accident might have befallen him. The host begged
them for news of his son. As they were on the point of departing and did
not care what would happen after their departure so long as they could put
their host in a happy frame of mind, they answered him reassuringly that
his son was in good health, close to the house, and would arrive shortly on
the very day they were speaking to him. They knew, even if he did not come
on that day, the father would not run after them the day after to reproach
them for having deceived him. But in fact on that very day, even before they
had left, the son arrived.
One day someone was dancing in a pagan solemnity in a place of idols.

He was mimicking the enthusiasts and fanatics though he was not one
himself. All those watching him were convinced he was not an enthusiast.431
According to pagan custom, after making the morning sacrifices the enthu-
siasts were inspired or possessed by the devil. They appeared with their
usual shaking and contortions. The afternoon was open for the young
people who wanted to mimic them for amusement. One young man went
silent while dancing. So that he and others might laugh, he said to them in a
prophetic tone that the following night a man would be killed by a lion in a
nearby forest. At daybreak all the people would leave the place of the
solemnity to see his dead body. This very thing happened, to the great
amazement of all. They were completely convinced he had only said this in
fun, to be amusing without having a deranged or disturbed mind. He
429
De Genesi ad litteram. XII, 17.
430
431
Ibid.
De Genesi ad litteram 79
himself was all the more surprised at the outcome of his prediction since he
knew more than anyone else why and in what disposition he had done it.
We report these amazing stories, without pausing at Augustine’s reflec-
tions on them, and the conclusions he draws. De Genesi ad litteramis the
last work mentioned by Augustine before he wrote against Petilianus
toward the beginning of 402 at the latest. Thus he must have begun writing
it in 400‒401.
Article 131
400 A. D.
We find no mention of a Council of Africa in 400, but it is difficult to
doubt one was held. It was the custom and the rule of that province since
the Council of Hippo up to the change of custom in 407.432 At the end of 401
Jerome testifies a letter had been sent supposedly under his name, ad-
dressed to African bishops. This letter was found in the possession of
bishops of that province who had gone to court over church matters.433 It is
natural to believe these bishops were in Italy in 401 and had been sent by a
council held in 400.
Some believe what is called the Fifth Council of Carthage in the collec-
tion of Isidore, whose dating is contested, was held in 400.434 The year 438,
mentioned by Isidore, is favorable to this conjecture. However we would
have to distinguish this council from those which are mentioned on June 16
and September 13, 401 in Collectio Carthaginensis, unless the fifth council is
only a confused summary of these two. We have no canons attributed to
this fifth council. The canons of this council have no connection to others in
Collectio Carthaginensis, but are better than others found there. According
to more experienced scholars, it is easiest to follow Collectio Carthaginensis
in this matter.435 So as not to pause over this subject, we refer to the council
of 400 what is said in the council of June 16, 401: it had been decided those
baptized by Donatists as children who returned to the church could be
432
Concilium II, 1067-68
433
Jerome, Letter (in Rufinus) II, 7; III, 7.
434
Schelstrat 278.
435
Du Pin II, 922.
admitted to the clerical state.436 This situation had already been discussed at
the Third Council of Carthage (397).437 At that time it was proposed to
consult the bishops of Rome and Milan.438 Instead, the Council of Africa in
401 speaks of the matter as something determined and decided by the
bishops of Africa at the preceding council,439 to which there was need only
to ask the bishops of Italy for their consent.
401 A. D.
Collectio Carthaginensis mentions two Councils of Carthage in 401, one
on June 16440 and the other on September 13.441 The decrees passed in each
give reason to believe Augustine attended both. The first was held in the
sacristy of the Basilica restitutus. The deacons were in attendance standing.
Aurelius, who speaks often at this council, asserts only a portion of the
bishops were present who should have been there.
Aurelius first presents the need for ministers in Africa. Many churches
had only one deacon, however ignorant he may have been.442 We infer a
lack of major ministers who, requiring more qualifications than the diacon-
ate, must have been even rarer. “We can no longer,” Aurelius says, “bear
complaints that people who are almost dead level against us daily. If we fail
to help them, we can not excuse ourselves before God for the loss of so
many souls.”Aurelius assumes everyone knew the remedy for this problem
would be to admit to the ecclesiastical state Donatists returning to the
church. This practice had been forbidden chiefly by the sees of Rome and
Milan, perhaps in 391 at the Council of Capua. Aurelius asked for a bishop to
be deputed to Pope Anastasius and Bishop Veneris of Milan to apprise them
of the African church’s need. He begged them to consent to raising to the
clerical state those who had been baptized by Donatists as children, if their
piety was worthy of the priestly rank.443 The African church had taken this
resolution at the preceding council.
Before this council there had been talk, both at the Council of Hippo
(393) and the Council of Carthage (397), of receiving in their ecclesiastical
436
Concilium II, 1184.
437
Concilium II, 1072.
438
Concilium II, 1084.
439
Concilium II, 1085.
440
Concilium II, 1081.
441
Concilium II, 1089. Editor’s note: See CC CXLIX, 195 f.
442
Concilium II, 1084.
443
rank converted Donatists, provided they had not re-baptized or had re-
turned with their congregations.444 No final decision was taken. Where this
consultation took place or what response was received is unknown. How-
ever, up to the time of this council, the African church was not settled on
this matter. Aurelius expressly distinguished this matter from the preceding
one. He wanted the decision to be left completely to the judgment of the
bishops of Rome and Milan.445
Aurelius adds a request has to be made to the emperor to demolish all
the idols remaining in Africa on the seashore, private estates, and temples
in fields or hidden places.446 Idols could not even serve as decorations.
Although many statues and temples had been destroyed in 399, Honorius
had suddenly ordered preservation of statues which served decorative
purposes.447 In this article Aurelius is restrained, so as not to offend the
emperor. The following council orders destruction not only of idols but of all
places, groves, and trees profaned by idolatry in general.448
Aurelius requested a law forbidding pagan banquets because of dances
and other offenses committed at them in contempt of true religion.449
Christians were forced to attend. Lack of attendance had led to persecution
even under Christian emperors. Aurelius expressly states these feasts came
from pagan error and were contrary to divine commands. Apparently he is
referring to those banquets taking place in temples or places devoted to
idolatry. Augustine had preached against these banquets in Sermon 62,
which is closely related to the discussion in this council. Aurelius was not
directly opposing the law of August 20, 399 by which Honorius authorized
public feasts, and particularly those which took place at the emperor’s
solemnities.450 The same law authorized spectacles established by ancient
custom. Aurelius did not believe he should request their abolition.451 He
requested only they not be celebrated on Sundays and other solemn
Christian feasts, and Christians not be obligated to attend the festivals
which are against divine commands. Occasionally, those serving in city
regiments were required to attend.
Aurelius mentions various requests to the emperor: (1) ecclesiastics
should not be obliged to appear before civil judges to give testimony,
444
Concilium II, 1177; 1181. See Complementary note 27.
445
Concilium II, 1084.
446
Concilium II, 1085.
447
Codex Theodosii XVI.
448
Concilium II, 1097.
449
Concilium II, 1085.
450
Codex Theodosii XVI.
451
Concilium II, 1085.
especially in matters concerning the laity they would have to judge, in case
of an appeal;452 (2) clerics convicted by episcopal decision can not be
defended (perhaps before civil tribunals against the ecclesiastical sentence)
either by the churches over which they have presided or by any other
person whatsoever, under pain of infamy, fine, and even corporal punish-
ment; (3) if an acrobat or actor wants to give up his sordid career to become
Christian, no one can force him to continue in that career.453
In three laws, Emperor Constantine had allowed liberation of slaves in
front of bishops without obligation to other formalities required by law.454
Perhaps, this law had not yet become effective in Africa, or there was some
difficulty over legal forms. Whatever the case, Aurelius asks the deputy sent
to court be responsible for learning how the Italian bishops make use of this
law, so that they might take the same liberty the Italians have.455 At the
council of September 13 it was decided to ask imperial permission to free
slaves in church. Through Augustine we see this right was obtained. In his
sermons some of the formalities which were observed on these occasions
can be observed.456
Aurelius finishes his discourse with a promise to acknowledge and up-
hold whatever the deputy to be sent would do for the good of the church.
The bishops as a group gave their consent to what he proposed.457 The
council ended with the affair of Equitius.
In some canons the title of provincial council appears.458 In fact it is
rather difficult to believe the council of September 13 was a general council
of African provinces, when a similar one had been held a few months
previously.459 Still, the matters treated here pertain more to a general than a
provincial council. This council may have been merely laying out matters
which had to be resolved at the general meeting. However, this solution is
hardly likely.
452
Concilium II, 1085.
453
Concilium II, 1087.
454
Codex Theodosii XVII, 354f.
455
Concilium II, 1088.
456
Sermo 21; Sermo 356.
457
Concilium II, 1088.
458
Concilium II, 1215.
459
Concilium II, 1089.
Article 132
Reception of Donatist Clerics
An African general council assembled in Carthage in the sacristy of the

Basilica restitutus September 13 under the consuls Vincent and Flavius (or
Flavitus) in 401.460 The Council of Carthage (525), which cites many of its
decrees, calls it the sixth council of Aurelius, although it must have been at
least the ninth general council held under him.461 The canons of what is
called the Fifth Council of Carthage are almost all drawn from the Council of
Carthage (525). Which bishops constituted this council in 401 is unknown,
but they were no doubt numerous. The canons of the Fifth Council of
Carthage mention only seventy-two.462 Twenty of them were named,
including Alypius, Augustine, and Evodius, to a particular commission.463
Augustine’s mind is visible in the council’s decrees.464 Among the other
twenty bishops named with him, the most illustrious were Fortunatus
(possibly bishop of Cirta), and Theasius of Memblone,465 both of Proconsu-
lar.466 They worked and suffered with Evodius for the church against the
Donatists to the point of earning the title confessor. Legates from both
Mauritanias and other African provinces attended this council.467 The
primate of Numidia did not attend.468
Letters written by Pope Anastasius were read, exhorting the bishops not
to conceal Donatist violence and the evils with which these heretics afflicted
460
Concilium II, 1089.
461
Concilium IV, 1637. Editor’s note: See CC CXLIX, 255.
462
Concilium II, 1218.
463
Concilium II, 1096.
464
Baronius 401, 12.
465
Editor’s note: Memblone is present-day Sidi Ahmed bou Faris, Tunisia.
466
Concilium II, 1096.
467
Concilium II, 1089; 1093.
468
Concilium II, 1096. See. Complementary note 34.
Reception of Donatist Clerics 85
the Catholic Church so severely in their several provinces.469 The fathers

thanked God for filling this holy pontiff with deep fraternal love. Some
believe Anastasius’ letters were in response to letters the Council of
Carthage of June 16, 401 had decided to write him and Venerus of Milan on
Africa’s need for ministers and the admission of Donatists to the clerical
state.470 Such is not the case. The council never mentions a reply from
Anastasius and the council decided to write him again on the same matter.
It is even more difficult to believe Anastasius’ letter was sent to inform
Africans of a council held to discuss this matter. Venerus of Milan had
attended this council and the council had decided Donatist clerics should
not be received into the clerical rank. The council’s resolution of September
13 on this point, contrary to this previous decision, does not allow us to say
Anastasius had done what is attributed to him.471 Can we believe that all this
took place between June 16, when it was decided to deputize a bishop to
Anastasius, and September 13? It took longer to go to Rome, and there is
every likelihood that Africa wrote to Rome only after the council of Sep-
tember 13.
After the Pope’s letter was read, examination of the most useful
method of treating Donatists was carefully discussed.472 Through divine
inspiration, a resolution was taken to treat them peacefully and gently.
Bishops were to inform Donatists, as much as possible, of their wretched
condition in the hope that by charitable correction God would open their
eyes, touch their hearts, and free them from their diabolical bonds. The
council would write the presiding officials in Africa to give bishops official
documents concerning what had transpired between Donatists and Maxi-

mianists. After this, Catholic bishops would be deputed to exhort Donatists,
both bishops and people, to peace and show them they had no just re-
proach against the Catholic Church. Bishops should help them see how
Donatists had treated Maximianists undid the pretext of their schism. The
council decided to give these bishops, deputed to Donatists in every
province of Africa, power in the form of an instruction, to whose terms they
would be held.473
Nothing was more promising to re-union than to receive Donatist clergy
willing to reunite in the functions of their ministry.474 This policy had been
469
Concilium II, 1089.
470
Schelstrat, Ecclesia Africanus 232-34. See Concilium II, 1084.
471
Concilium II, 1092.
472
Concilium II. 1089.
473
Concilium II, 1100.
474
Conciliuim II, 1092.
followed previously, both at the beginning of the schism and in the re-union
effected by Macarius in 348. Almost all African churches serve as proof of
this policy. However, this policy had been forbidden by various councils,
among them the Council of Hippo and an overseas council, which could
have been the Council of Capua (392).475 African bishops had wanted to
return to the earlier practice, at least with regard to bishops who would
bring their people with them. They did not venture to form this resolution,
however, until after the consent of the Italian bishops.
They had remained of the same mind in the council of June 16, 401, and
had referred this issue to the judgment of the pope and the bishop of
Milan.476 At this council they decided to write the Italian bishops and
especially Pope Anastasius to affirm that the peace and prosperity of the
African church necessarily demanded local bishops be allowed to receive
Donatists in their clerical ranks when they judged this reception to serve the
re-union of others.477 The African bishops observed that overseas canons
with regard to reception of the Donatist clerics were not advantageous to
the African church. The benefit to the African church of returning to the
former policy would compensate for offending present church discipline.
The title of this article, “That Donatists Clerics Be Received into the Clerical
State,” apparently indicates it was an absolute resolution of the African
church, independent of the pope’s consent.
475
Conciliium II, 1092; 1181.
476
Concilium II, 1084.
477
Concilium II, 1092.
Article 133
Reception of Donatists
In writing against Cresconius circa 406, Augustine indicated that the de-
cree concerning Donatist clerics and their parishioners mentioned in the
previous article was being observed.478 Donatist bishops and other ecclesias-
tics returning to the church exercised their functions or not, depending on
whether it was judged useful for the peace of the church and salvation of
the people for whom in actuality these functions and dignities are estab-
lished. Augustine defended this practice against Donatist criticism. Later in
writing to Count Boniface, Augustine said it is similar to making a hole or
opening in the bark of a tree to insert a graft.479 Up to 407, Donatist bishops
of the places where there was no Catholic bishop continued to govern their
people after bringing them into the church.480 At the conference of Carthage
of 411 many Catholic bishops were present who had previously been
Donatists. Even those who had re-baptized parishioners were included
among those received in their orders.481
Theodore asked Augustine how he should receive Donatist clergy if they
wanted to convert.482 The council had left this to the discretion of each
bishop.483 Augustine assured Theodore orally he would receive them in their
orders. Augustine wrote this policy for Theodore in his own hand to assure
the Donatists, even to giving them his letter if they wanted it.484 Theodore,
whom Augustine calls his brother, was probably a man of some prominence
478
Contra Cresconium II, 11.
479
Contra Cresconium II, 10-16; Letter 185 10.
480
Concilium II, 1116.
481
482
Letter 61.
483
Concilium II, 1092.
484
Letter 61.
in Hippo. Augustine used him in dealing with Donatists. It was through

Theodore and Maximus, whom Augustine calls his dear and honored
children,485 that Augustine sent Letter 108 to Macrobius, the Donatist bishop
of Hippo. Augustine gives him the title brother, but he occasionally ad-
dresses laypeople by the same title.486
According to his promise, Augustine received two deacons of Procu-
lianus, Macrobius’ predecessor.487 Later these two deacons fell into some
fault. Several people reproached Proculianus’ conduct. They delighted in
Augustine’s virtue that they should see no ecclesiastics trained in
Augustine’s discipline fall in this manner. However, Augustine did not
approve of the people’s conduct. He did not want anyone bragging about
him or reproaching heretics; rather they should reproach the heresy itself.
Augustine recommended to the people’s prayers a Donatist sub-deacon
who had embraced union and over whose conversion he had rejoiced.488
Donatists who had abandoned the Catholic Church to be re-baptized
were not received with the same ease as those who had been schismatics
since birth.489 The church loved both, and worked with maternal love to heal
both.490 She showed more gentleness to those who had not yet been her
children, and required a more humble penance of those who had left her
unity.491 She did not admit the latter into her clergy, nor those who, once
having abandoned the schism, subsequently left the church and returned to
schism, whether they had remained laypeople or had become Donatist
clerics. If a Catholic bishop chose to leave these men in the ecclesiastical
state, or to raise them to it, he was reproached. On the other hand,
Augustine found it poor policy to refuse both entry into the church and
penance for his error to a relapsed person, under the pretext he may have
been asking for this re-entry only because of fear of the law. “We must
admit him to penance, where we will experience whether his conversion is
false or sincere. Later we will admit him to reconciliation. We follow this
policy, fearing profanation of what is holy.”492
Some Donatist clerics were not permitted to exercise their functions.493
Hands were not imposed on them before the people lest offense be given
485
Letter107.
486
Letter 53.
487
Letter 78 8.
488
Enarratio in psalmum 36.
489
490
Letter 93 9.
491
De unico baptismo 12.
492
Sermo 296.
493
Contra Parmenianum II, 13.
Reception of Donatists 89
to the sacrament of ordination while still in effect. This policy was ordered
in general for priests and deacons obliged to be deposed for their crimes.494
Optatus says the Catholic Church did not impart chrism to those who had
already received it from the Donatists, without touching or harming them.495
Some were raised to the episcopate who had formerly been only priests
among the Donatists.496 Several examples of this policy can be seen at the
conference of Carthage in 411. The most noteworthy is Sabinus, who as a
priest of Tucca497 in the diocese of Mileve498 brought his people, who had
often prayed for unity, back to communion with the church. When these
people wanted their own bishop, Sabinus was given them. Laity who had
been baptized as children by Donatists were allowed from June 16 onward
to be raised to clerical rank.499 Since this policy was caused principally by
lack of African clergy, Possidius once asked Augustine if he would ordain a
man baptized in the Donatist party. Augustine replied he would not advise
Possidius to do so, though he would not prevent him if there were need.500
When Donatist clerics had fallen into some fault and had been degraded
among the Donatists, but had asked to enter into Catholic communion,
Augustine promised from the beginning of his episcopate that he would
observe the practice of not receiving them without them humbly doing
penance.501 In all likelihood, Donatists themselves would have submitted
them to penance, had they remained in their communion. People should
never be allowed to pass from one church to another to escape the severity
of discipline. Augustine acknowledged Quoduultdeus had been received
either to communion or even to the ecclesiastical state after he was exiled
by Donatists for being charged with two adulteries. This reception occurred
only after he had proved his innocence.502
Apparently there was a man of this sort whom Augustine mentions
while commenting as follows:
A Donatist had withdrawn to us after having been accused and excommunicated by

the members of that sect. He believed he could receive with us what he lost with
them. We could not receive him except in the rank church discipline allowed, as a
494
Concilium II, 1064.
495
Optatus, Contra Parmenianum 7.
496
Collectio Cathaginensis I, 128-30.
497
Editor’s note: Tucca is present-day Henchir al Abiod,Algeria.
498
Editor’s note: Mileve is present-day Mila,Algeria
499
Concilium II, 1084.
500
Letter 245 2.
501
Letter 35 3.
502
penitent or at most a layman. He had not left Donatism with an irreproachable

record so that he may have made this change more out of necessity than choosing
a better community. In fact he claimed to find among us the same recognition and
empty honors he had lost in his sect, which indicates something besides commun-
ion. As he could not acquire what he was searching for, he found only death in the
house of salvation and life. He was seen with his heart grieved with sorrow, gasp-
ing and lamenting, without finding any consolation, because he had a conscience
tormented by cruel and secret needles, more from his ambition than from sorrow
for his sins. . . . We tried to console him with God’s word. However, he was not of
the wise and prudent ants which set aside in summer what they are to live on in
winter. He had not made provision for God’s word and was surprised by the winter.
Truth did not set him free or console him. He could not obtain the honor he was
seeking, which was his one consolation. He was empty interiorly. Exteriorly he did
not find the goal of his aspirations. He was burning angrily and spitefully, and his
soul was strangely disquieted. For a while he hid his pain, but at length he broke
out in laments which the brethren heard when he thought no one was listening.
We beheld the distressing state of that soul, its crosses, its shame, its torments—
and God knows our sadness from it. We could not find any remedy because no one
can correct him whom God scorns and rejects. We could not violate church disci-
pline to satisfy his ambition and pride. Finally, he could not bear to see himself in a
lower rank although this lowliness would have been salutary had he had a real
taste for humility, and had he not behaved in a way which forced even us to drive
503
him out.
503
Enarratio in Psalmum 36.
Article 134
Council of Africa (401)
After matters concerning Donatism in the General Council of 401 had

been settled, the bishops turned to disciplinary ordinances. The first
ordinance confirmed a previous one by which marriage had been forbidden
in 390 to bishops, priests, and deacons under pain of being deposed.504 For
other ecclesiastics each church should follow its own custom. Schelstrat
believes that sub-deacons were also obliged to maintain celibacy in Africa at
that time.505 The council then forbade bishops from changing the ordinary
location of their see, and from being absent from their see for long periods.
The deputies to the council from Caesarean Mauretania described the
situation that often children would be ransomed from barbarians with no
certain proof that they had been baptized. The council declared that in this
uncertain condition children should be baptized without difficulty.506 A rule

to publish the date of Easter and to hold the General Council of Africa on
April 23, as ordered by the Council of Hippo is also found here. The primates
of each province were ordered not to hold provincial councils at the same
time as the general council.
Apparently it had been customary in Africa, when a see was vacant, a
neighboring bishop would be appointed to govern it until a permanent
bishop was named. These were called interventores or intercessores, in
French commissaires507 or commendataires.508 Donatists had accused
Catholics of having killed an interventor whom Donatists had sent to
504
Concilium II, 1093.
505
Schelstrat 226.
506
Concilium II, 1093.
507
Editor’s note: in English stewards.
508
Editor’s note: in English acting administrators.
Carthage before the election of Majorinus.509 In Rome, before ordaining

proper bishops for their dioceses, interventores were sent.510 Today the
bishops of Lyons and Autun render each other this office of charity. The
Council of Carthage (401) decreed that these interventores should never be
chosen as bishops of the place where they were governing in this capac-
ity.511 If a selection of a bishop could not be effected, the interuentor should
be replaced at the end of the year.
Next, this council decreed, when a general council was to be held, bish-
ops of every province not having a legitimate excuse should assemble in
two or three groups.512 From each group deputies would in turn be chosen
who would be obliged to come promptly to the place where the council was
being held or to include regrets in a public letter that the province would
write to the council. If after being deputed they were detained, they should
explain this delay to the primate. Failing this explanation, they can not have
communion with anyone outside their church. Some believe this canon
concerns only provincial councils, composed of deputies from various parts
of the provinces.513 If that were true, who should write the letter in which
deputies sent their regrets? If it were the assembly itself which deputed
them which would write the letter, why did they not merely unburden the
deputies upon their regrets and name other deputies?
This council decreed ecclesiastics deprived of communion and deposed
for some crime would have one year to pursue vindication.514 If they did not
do so within a year, they would no longer be received in communion.
Augustine cites this canon in Letter 65.515 He apparently cites a canon when
he writes that in the last council it was decreed those who left their monas-
tery or were expelled could not become clerics in other churches or superi-
ors of other monasteries.516 Augustine mentions this canon in Letter 60,
where he requests Aurelius of Carthage to observe this policy. The council
was speaking generally of monks from a monastery of another diocese.517
The council condemns monks deposed and subsequently promoted by a
bishop so that the former could remain in his own church while separated
from other churches. This simple statement of policy gives us reason to
509
Letter 44 4.
510
De unico baptismo XVI, 26.
511
Concilium II, 1093.
512
Concilium II, 1096.
513
Thomassin, Ancienne et nouvelle discipline de l’Eglise I, part 2 (Paris 1688) 335.
514
515
Letter 65.
516
Letter 64.
517
Concilium II, 1097. See Complementary Note 35.
Council of Africa (401) 93
believe we possess only a summary. The summary nature would also be

true of the other canons.
The eighth canon of the Council of Hippo of 393 allowed bishops to dis-
pose of gifts and inheritances as they might, but instructed them to leave to
the church whatever had been acquired while in ecclesiastical ministry.518
Doubtless the goods this canon allows them to dispose in a manner worthy
of their state should be interpreted according to the ordinance of the
Council of Carth.
518
Concilium II, 1064.
Article 135
Delegation to the Emperor
Whether the council of September 13, 401 deputed a bishop to Italy, or

was content with the delegate the council of June 16 had sent to the court
is not expressed. Clearly the council resolved to request favors of the
emperor.519 The first was that bishops might appoint defenders to care for
the affairs of the poor with which the church was burdened. These defend-
ers would look after the poor against the oppression of the rich. Godefroy
believes these defenders of the poor were different from the defenders of
the church.520 The council also asked the emperor to give freedom to the
church to destroy not only remaining idols, but also all places, groves, and
trees devoted to idolatry.521
At this council, the affair of Cresconius of Villa-Regia,522 and the affair of
Equitius, the bishop of Hippo-Dhiarrytus523 in Proconsular were discussed.

What Equitius had done is unknown. A long time previously he had been
convicted of crimes by episcopal judgment.524 Rather than submit to this
judgment, he caused the church grief by disquiet and impudence. This
situation obliged the council of June 16, 401 to recommend to the deputy
sent to the emperor that, if the delegate met Equitius in Italy, he should
make every possible complaint against him. Some in Hippo-Dhiarrytus were
still attached to his party and were awaiting his return.525 Others, on the
contrary, had separated from his criminal communion, and were holding
519
Concilium II, 1096.
520
Godefroy, Codex Theodosii VI.
521
Concilium II, 1097.
522
Editor’s note: Villa-Regia is a town near present-day Tobna,Algeria. .
523
Editor’s note: Hippo-Dhiarrytus is present-day Bizerte,Tunisia.
524
Concilium II, 1083.
525
Concilium II, 1096.
Delegation to the Emperor 95
onto a church, but had no bishop. The general council did not believe it
should leave this church in its present state without a bishop. The council
appointed twenty bishops, among them Alypius, Augustine, and Evodius to
go to Hippo Dhiarrytus to ordain a bishop with common consent of the
people. This selection depended upon persuading the followers of Equitius
to agree to join the others, or at least not to prevent the election. Florentius
was the bishop of Hippo-Dhiarrytus at the conference of Carthage of 411.526
Apparently, Equitius had returned and claimed to be the bishop, as pre-
viously. In the instruction given to the bishops deputed to the emperor at
the Council of Carthage (401), the council fathers charged the deputies to
obtain in accord with imperial decrees that the church of Hippo Diarrhytus
be delivered from the aggravation of Equitius. By a strange impudence he
was usurping episcopal rights.527 The following February 12, 402, Honorius
declared, on the basis of complaints made to him, he knew of bishops
deposed by councils forcibly holding on to their sees.528 They stirred up
trouble, acquired rescripts by deceit, and insisted upon being treated as
bishops. Honorius ordered every bishop deposed by a council, who did not
accept his sentence, to be exiled at least one hundred miles from his see,
without being able to come to the imperial court, in accord with Gratian’s
law, apparently enacted circa 378.529
In writing immediately after the council of September 13, 401,
Augustine says the bishop of Vegesela had been deposed at the general
council of Africa.530 The people of that place rightly did not want to receive
him. However, no one could or should coerce him. If that bishop attempted
to force himself into office by use of secular power, as it seems he was

threatening, he would prove himself a criminal at the very time he pre-
tended to be innocent. A deposed bishop brings out more clearly no better
reason for his plight than when he uses violence to re-establish himself,
without care for the troubles and disorders stemming from his action. By
this action he does not render the service Christ requests, while exercising
over Christians a dominion which they do not want and ought not to bear.
Reginus, bishop of Vegesela, Numidia, had attended the Third Council of
Carthage (397).531 He is named in the conference of 411.532 No doubt he was
526
Concilium II, 1302.
527
Concilium II, 1112.
528
Codex Theodosii VI.
529
Note of J. Sirmond on Augustine’s sermons in volume 2 of the supplement edited by
Vignier.
530
Letter 64 4.
531
Concilium II, 1068.
532
Concilium II, 1389.
the same Reginus who was in charge of the twenty bishops appointed to
assign a pastor to Hippo Dhiarrytus. Privatianus was bishop of Vegesela533 at
the same conference.534 Vegesela was near Cillite, Byzacena. According to
some, there could be another Cillite, this one in Numidia. Apparently two
Vigeselas, or Vegeselas, existed in Numidia, but there is no proof.535 What
Augustine says of Vegesela does not prevent us from believing it was in
Byzacena. Holstein is confused on this point.536 We find nothing on the affair
of Vegesela in the remains of the two councils of that year.
The council of September 13 concluded with the power of the bishop of
Carthage to dictate and sign in the name of all bishops the instruction
regarding Donatists and the letters the council decided to write.537 The
terms of the council generally grant this right to the bishops of Carthage.
Boniface of Carthage, more interested in these rights than Aurelius, had this
passage read in the council of 525 to establish the prerogatives of his see.538
Nevertheless, Vita Fulgentii speaks of this as a privilege granted personally
to Aurelius because of his own merit.539 Perhaps, Aurelius was given this
right only for this council in particular, since the following councils give it to
him several times, without assuming he had received this privilege perma-
nently.
533
Editor’s note: Vegesela is present-day Kaar el-Kalb,Algeria
534
Concilium II, 1386.
535
T. Ruinart, Vandalicae persecutionis historia (Paris 1694) 277.
536
L. Holstein, Notae in geographiam sacram cum aliis ejus geographicis (Rome 1666) 5.
537
538
Concilium IV, 1638.
539
Bolland, Januarius 20 et sic in reliquiis mensibus.
Article 136
Dispute on Numidian Episcopal Primacy
The primate of Numidia, to whom the council of 401 decreed it would

write concerning Cresconius of Villa-Regia, probably died a short while
later.540 Xanthippus was primate of Numidia from the beginning of 402 at
the latest, and was still primate in 407.541 He had some difficulty in becom-
ing primate. When Xanthippus was already acting primate, on the evening
of November 9, 401 Augustine received a letter from Victorinus who was
assuming the same title.542 This letter was a circular convocation of a council
of Numidia and the two Mauretanias. It bore the name of Victorinus alone
without the names of primates of the two Mauretanias in whose name the
letter should also have been written. These provinces had their own
primates and were not subject to the primate of Numidia. At the very least
the letter should have been addressed by name to the senior prelates in
those provinces. Apparently neither was done. At the same time, Augustine
was surprised and angry to see himself named in the letter as third bishop,
although there were many bishops senior to him. On the other hand
Xanthippus’ name was not found. His name should have been listed first.
These mistakes caused Augustine to fear the letter was forged. This
doubt alone would have prevented his attendance at the council Victorinus
was convening. Beyond this, he was indisposed when he received the letter,
and was concerned with other pressing matters. Only a short time inter-
vened before the scheduled day of the council. What detained him even
more was that Xanthippus claimed to be the primate, was writing various
letters in that capacity, and in fact was thought to be the most senior
540
Concilium II, 1096.
541
Concilium II, 1117; Letter 65. Editor’s note: Xanthippus was bishop of Tagura, present-day
Taoura, Algeria.
542
Letter 59.
according to common belief. Thus Augustine was satisfied to write Victori-

nus to excuse himself. He wanted to see him with Xanthippus to whom the
primacy and the right to convene a council belonged. Perhaps both should
convene it together, without prejudice to a right to examine with the other
senior bishops of the province which of the two was senior.
Augustine gives Victorinus the title Father, and Xanthippus the title of
Ancient or Elder, which was the ordinary title of primates in Africa.543 At
times Augustine gave the latter title to others. Surely Augustine was not
claiming to declare himself for Xanthippus against Victorinus, at least here.
Victorinus’ see is unknown. According to the Louvain edition Augustine
called Xanthippus bishop of Tagaste. This term would oblige us to say there
were two Tagastes in Numidia because certainly Alypius was bishop of
Tagaste while Xanthippus was still alive.544 Many manuscripts call Xanthip-
pus bishop of Tagosa, a reading the Benedictines have followed in their
edition.545 Tagosa could be the same city that others call Tagora or Tagura,
in Numidia.546 Two cities called Tagores, or a similar name, also existed in
Africa.
Whether Victorinus, or as seems likely Xanthippus, was recognized as
primate, Augustine’s letter on their quarrel comes from 401 or at least after
397. Xanthippe had been exercising primacy from the beginning of 401.547
Disputes between those who claimed to be deans and primates in the
African provinces had been referred apparently to the bishop of Carthage
by the Council of Hippo.548 However Augustine says nothing concerning this
custom. Apparently on the occasion of this dispute at the council of the
following year (402) various laws were passed to ascertain the date of the
ordination of bishops.549
Augustine’s Letter 58 to Pammachus was likely written toward the end
of 401,550 and delivered by the deputies of the Council of Carthage of 401.
Augustine informs him he does not wish to speak of the snares by which
Donatist thought they could become powerful in the heritage of Christ, nor
of the reasons for the fear they gave Catholics. The brethren he recom-
543
H. Noris, Historia Pelagiani, (Padua 1673) vol,. 2, 3, 212.
544
Noris 2, 217, n. c. .
545
PL 33, 226 (a),
546
Ruinart, Vandalicae persecutionis (Paris 1646).
547
Noris, II, 3, 217. Editor’s note: The Maurists date Letter 59 circa the beginning of 401 and
Letter 65 at the beginning of 402.
548
P. Quesnel, Codex Romanus II, 36.
549
550
Editor’s note: The Maurists date Letter 58 at the beginning of 401, PL 33, 225(a).
Dispute on Numidian Episcopal Primacy 99
mended could instruct him in this matter. The story of Pammachus, the
senator, has been treated in detail elsewhere.551
Pammachus owned lands in the middle of Numidia. The inhabitants
were Donatists. His charity and piety compelled him to write them a letter
to persuade them to embrace the unity of the church. Pammachus filled the
letter with such ardor that it immediately produced the effect he desired
when least expected. Augustine was so overjoyed at this that he wanted to
let Pammachus know about his joy in the letter of which we are speaking.
Augustine insists he be allowed to write.
Enter with your mind into the depth of my heart, and see what is happening there
in your regard. The eye of charity penetrates into this sanctuary from which we
close the doors to the world’s tumultuous vanities when we enter into it to wor-
ship God. There you will see the joy I have over that excellent accomplishment you
have brought about, and what flames the fire of my love pushes toward heaven
when I offer for you a sacrifice of praise to the one who inspired you with this plan
552
and who gave you the strength to carry it out.
Augustine adds he would like other Christian senators to do the same as

Pammachus. But Augustine did not presume to exhort them. If the senators
did not follow Augustine’s advice, the enemies of the church would use this
as an excuse to insult him as if his plan were defeated by their influence. His
enemies could take advantage of the situation for setting traps to deceive
the weak. Augustine asked Pammachus to have other officers read his letter
because they might be neglecting to work for the conversion of their
subjects only because they think such conversion is impossible. Apparently

there were a few examples of the conversion of a considerable number of
Donatists together at that time. Thus this conversion took place before the
conversions of 405, and even before the violence to which the Circumcel-
liones553 resorted when they saw Catholics were widely disseminating the
story of the Maximianists, as the Council of Carthage (405) had decreed.
Augustine spoke only of the evils to be feared from Circumcelliones, but
acknowledged his fear could be regarded as not sufficiently well founded.
551
Memoire Ecclesiastique V.
552
Letter 58 2.
553
Editor’s note: Circumcelliones (circum cellas, near the rural huts) were a rural Donatist
splinter group of the fourth and fifth century. Their religion was focused on tombs of
martyrs. They practiced armed violence against orthodox Catholics and often committed
suicide. Donatist bishops had a somewhat ambiguous relationship to them. See C. Lepelley,
Augustinus Lexikon, vol. 1 930.
Article 137
Donatus’ Exit from the Monastery
Augustine found both consolation and acrimony in his monastery. He

cared for the discipline of his religious companions. He was a man living
among men, and could not hope to find in his midst only the good. This
condition was found neither in the family of the greatest saints nor in the
company of Christ. He experienced the weakness of human relationships.554
Two brothers lived in Augustine’s monastery in Hippo, one named Do-
natus.555 They were from Carthage or environs. Vanity inclined them to
leave the monastery, apparently under the pretext of serving the people in
their home town in the clerical ministry. Because of a desire for their
salvation, Augustine opposed their departure. In spite of Augustine’s advice,
they left the monastery and went to Carthage. Aurelius may have believed
Augustine had allowed them to come and serve God in their native country.
He raised Donatus to holy orders. Donatus had left the monastery because
of his brother. This event took place before the council which addressed
ordination of monks who had left their monasteries, that is, before the
council of September 13, 401. Augustine had not spoken of this affair with
Aurelius at that council, although both had attended it. The first letter he
received from Aurelius before they departed concerned Donatus and his
brother.
Augustine hesitated a while over his response. His desire for the salva-
tion of those for whom he was responsible obliged him to tell Aurelius the
following: to raise deserting monks to the clerical state in a place where it
was usual to raise only the most excellent monks to the clergy, even the
best of whom were sometimes not fit to be ecclesiastics, exposed monks
554
Letter 56.
555
Letter 60.
Donatus’ Exit from the Monastery 101
themselves to great temptation and insulted the clergy, of whom bishops

are members. If Donatus does not suffer from pride as he once did, Aurelius
can handle him as he will, since he was ordained before the council had
decided anything on the subject. “I do not know what to say about his
brother, but you know well what I think” [that is doubtless he should not
ordain him or could not have him ordained except in violation of the
council’s decree]. In respecting Aurelius as he did, Augustine did not
presume to place himself at odds with his love and prudence. He hoped
Aurelius would do only what he thought useful for the church. Apparently
Augustine gives the title of pope to Aurelius in the salutation of his letter.
This salutation does not allow us to doubt the correpondent is Aurelius of
Carthage.
Whether Aurelius is mentioned by Augustine in Letter 64, where he
twice calls him the Elder Aurelius, is unknown. This term was the ordinary
title for deans and primates in Africa. Whether this title was given to the
bishop of Carthage because of the eminence of his see is also unknown. If
the letter was written after Christmas of 401, as there is no reason to doubt,
this Aurelius was not primate of Numidia, since the rank was held at the
time by Victorinus or Xanthippus. Whether he was primate in some other
African province, such as Byzacena, where several believe the Vegesala
spoken of in this letter was located, is also unknown.
Whoever this Aurelius was, Letter 64 was written to a priest named
Quintianus, who was governing the church of Badesila556 in the diocese, or
at least in the province, of this Aurelius. Quintianus had read publicly in his
church several books not numbered among the official canon of Scripture as
drawn up at the Council of Hippo. They were apocryphal writings which
heretics, principally Manicheans, were accustomed to use to deceive
people. In fact shelter may have been offered in Badesila to various Mani-
cheans. Doubtless for this reason Aurelius was not in communion with
Quintianus. Aurelius had not yet settled his case because his other business
had not allowed him leisure. Aurelius was supposed to come to Badesila at
Christmas.
Privatio, a young man who had read an apocryphal book publicly on one
single occasion, came to request Augustine to accept him into his monas-
tery. Augustine believed he should not be considered a lector. Thus he
should not be included in the canon forbidding the reception of clerics from
another diocese. Augustine wrote to Aurelius about the matter, to do what
he would judge best.
556
Editor’s note: Badesila is present-day Henchir Rekba,Tunisia.
Quintianus wrote both of them about Privatio. He could not be ac-

cepted without violating the canons. Quintianus complained about Aurelius
not settling his case. He may have wanted Augustine to intervene, to
ascertain his judgment, and to write the people of Badesila before Aurelius
went there, lest his arrival disturb the people. Quintianus indicated his
intention of coming to see Augustine. He may have complained of a popular
revolt in Vegesala against their bishop.
Augustine received his letter a day or two before Christmas, and sent a
copy of it to Aurelius to apprise him of Quintianus’ complaints, and his
justification of himself. Augustine wrote civilly to Quintianus and exhorted
him to endure the situation patiently. Augustine spoke to him as innocent.
Augustine clearly does not take sides in this matter. He reprimands Quin-
tianus severely for having apocryphal books read. Augustine shows Quin-
tianus he is wrong on the subject of Privatio, and on the bishop of Vegesala
deposed at the council of Africa.
Augustine excuses himself from taking part in the matter with Aurelius,
since there are other bishops more notable and nearer who could judge
better than he. Augustine informs Quintianus he has forwarded his letter to
Aurelius. He could not write to the people of Badesila without a letter from
them, since it was not within his jurisdiction. Quintianus’ letter had arrived
late. What Augustine says to Quintianus can serve for the others as well.
Augustine assures him he can come and see him whenever he wishes.
Augustine can not admit him to communion, since he is not in communion
with Aurelius.
Augustine mentions a decree at the recent council regarding monks

who had left monasteries. Thus we believe, following du Perron, Augustine
wrote this letter near the end of 401. What he cites was settled at the
council of September 13, 401.557
557
Reponse de Mr. le Cardinal du Perron du Roy de la grande Bretagne. (Paris 1612).
Article 138
Deposing of Abundantius
Contemporaneously, Augustine judged the matter of Abundantius, one

hundred days before Easter Sunday. That year Easter was celebrated on
April 6.558 Xanthippus was primate of Numidia. During this period Easter fell
on April 6 only in 402.559 Thus Augustine judged this matter on December
27, 401.
Abundantius was vicar in Straboniana in the diocese of Hippo. He had a
poor reputation, deservedly so. This reputation caused Augustine angst.
However, he did want to believe anything lightly of Abundantius. He
observed the situation carefully to see if he could discover sure indications
of the evil life of which Abundantius had been accused. He had kept a
farmer´s money on deposit in his house. He could not say what had hap-
pened to it; he must have stolen it.

On Christmas Eve Abundantius left at eleven a. m. from the home of the
pastor of Gippe as if to return to Straboniana. Unaccompanied by any other
cleric he stopped at the home of a woman of questionable reputation in
Gippe. Even though the parish of Gippe was fasting on that day like other
churches, Abundantius had taken dinner and supper at this woman’s house
and had spent the night there. He met an ecclesiastic of Hippo staying in the
same place—it was apparently an inn. Thus, when Augustine inquired into
the case, Abundantius could not deny what he had done.
Without investigating other matters Abundantius was thoroughly deny-
ing, Augustine believed this one confession sufficient to relieve him of the
care of a church surrounded by heretics. These incidents were also grounds
to depose him from the priesthood. Augustine rendered his judgment on
558
Letter 65.
559
Noris, 2, 217.
December 27, one hundred days before Easter. Abundantius decided to

retire to the parish priest of Armeme in Bulla, his home town. He asked
Augustine to write this parish priest and inform him of the affair so he
would not be believed more criminal than he in fact was. Out of pity
Augustine granted this request. Abundantius could live there if possible in a
more edifying way without exercising the priesthood. In the index of
Augustine’s letters, Possidius lists one to Victor the priest in the plain of
Bulla.560 Bulla is in Proconsular, where we find the cities of Bulla and Bulla
Regia.561 Procopius speaks of the plain of Bulla.
If Abundantius wanted to appeal the judgment rendered in his case, he
could do so within a year, according to the previous council’s decree. After
that, no further appeal could be entertained. Augustine wrote Xanthippus
as primate of the province to explain his action. Abundantius had the right
to have his case judged on final appeal by six bishops. If these bishops found
he did not deserve deposition, whoever wanted could entrust a church of
his jurisdiction to him. As for himself he could not do this, lest he be
responsible for any resulting evil. Augustine must have written this letter at
the beginning of 402 at the latest, certainly before Easter. Possidius men-
tions a letter to Xanthippus.562
Toward the end of 401 an incident occurred which Augustine was still
grieving at the beginning of 402.563 Crispinus, Donatist bishop of Calama,
had no fear of wealth. Petilianus had boasted of poverty for the entire sect.
Crispinus loved wealth rather than despising it. He had raised a large sum of
money and bought a parcel of land in Mappalia near Hippo.564 This land was
under imperial domain and was committed to Crispinus under lease. The
property belonged fundamentally to the Catholic emperor (who forbad re-
baptism) but Crispinus decreed re-baptism for all men in the country. Fear
of this order was so powerful in the minds of the poor that almost eighty
allowed themselves to be re-baptized, or rather drowned, despite their
laments and complaints.
Because of his sorrow over this incident, Augustine wrote Crispinus. He
could well force Crispinus to pay the ten librae of gold the emperor Theodo-
sius levied on heretical clergy. Augustine preferred to warn him. Crispinus
would have to answer to God himself. If he claimed these country folk had
embraced Donatism on their own, Augustine would ask to confer with him
560
Indiculum 7.
561
Ruinart, 237‒46.
562
Indiculum 7.
563
564
Letter 66.
Deposing of Abundantius 105
in their presence and have their words written down and signed. The words
would then be translated into Punic. Crispinus would leave them the liberty
of choosing their communion. If there were people Crispinus claimed to
have left the Donatists because of fear of their landlords, Crispinus should
consent to the same agreement. Augustine implored him to respond.
Crispinus could refuse this proposal only by showing he did not place trust
in truth. However shame may have prevented Crispinus from accepting the
offer.
Article 139
Severus of Mileve and Timothy
Letter 62 and Letter 63 were written to Bishop Severus before the

Council of Mileve.565 Severus doubtless had spent time in Augustine’s
monastery. He was ordained bishop of Mileve, Numidia. He was held in high
esteem when Augustine recommended him to Paulinus at the beginning of
his episcopate.566 Paulinus was happy to receive letters from Severus and
other holy and venerable bishops. Severus may have succeeded Honorius of
Mileve. Augustine refers to him to show the Catholic Church punishes faults
of bishops and lower clergy.567 The church of Mileve had drawn glory from
Optatus, who may have been Honorius’ predecessor. Circa August, 397
Augustine asked Profuturus of Cirta to greet Severus in his behalf since he
had no time to write.568 If this is the Severus through whom Augustine wrote
Letter 42 to Paulinus, he wrote it immediately before Severus’ departure to

Italy in August or September. Severus was from Tagaste, the city
Augustine’s birth. They had long been nourished together on God’s word.
Two brothers could not have been more closely united than these two
bishops.569 However a minor misunderstanding came between them. The
report of the affair is confusing. However the affair can be reconstructed in
the following manner.
Timothy had begun to read the Scriptures publicly in Subsana570 in a
church of the diocese of Hippo in front of the parish priest of the place, and
565
Editor´s note: Mileve is present-day Mila,Algeria.
566
Letter 31 8.
567
568
Letter 38 3.
569
Letter 84 1.
570
Editor’s note: Subsana is unknown today
Severus of Mileve and Timothy 107
in other places, all of them apparently in the same diocese.571 He could and
should have been considered a lector. As such he could not pass on to
another church. However, he wanted to go to Mileve. Severus ordered him
not to come without Carcedonius’ permission, who may have been the
parish priest of Subsana. Timothy came to see Severus despite this order,
without asking for Carcedonius’ consent. Thus the problem began. Severus
did what he was supposed to do. He advised Timothy to serve God in
Subsana. Timothy protested with an oath he would never leave Severus.
However, he returned to Subsana.572
Severus discussed this subject with Augustine, perhaps in Hippo. Doubt-
less Severus asked Augustine for Timothy, while leaving Augustine the judge
of whether to give Timothy to him or keep him for himself, as specified in
the canons. As Augustine was deliberating, a parish priest (or someone
named Verinus) had Timothy ordained sub-deacon of Subsana, against
Augustine’s intention. How this ordination took place without Augustine is
unknown. After Severus had left Augustine, Timothy, who wished to be with
Severus, apparently wanted to send men to provoke Severus against
Augustine. The local people believed these men would not leave without a
guide. They wanted to detain them, so they did not give them a guide. They
wanted to leave the entire matter to Augustine and Severus, who they
believed would be arriving together soon. These persons left without a
guide, a fact which upon its discovery angered Augustine. Among the
cemetery-keepers it was said that Timothy had gone with them. This was
not the case. All this happened without Carcedonius’ knowledge.
Augustine went to Subsana with Alypius and Bishop Samsucius.573 They

were informed of what had taken place in their absence against their will.
They found what was reported to them partly false, partly true, but all
worrisome. Nevertheless they remedied the situation, insofar as they could,
by reproving, admonishing, and praying. The bishops reproved Timothy for
having first gone to Severus, and reproved the parish priest and Verinus for
having him ordained sub-deacon. All of them admitted their error and asked
pardon. This behavior was all Augustine, Alypius, and Samsucius could ask
under the circumstances. The bishops warned them not to fall into the
same mistakes again, lest they meet God’s wrath. “We even corrected
ourselves by prayer, by recourse to God, and by leaving the disposition and
571
Letter 63.
572
Letter 62 2.
573
Editor’s note: Samsucius was bishop of Turren in the diocese of Hippo-Regius.
result of our intentions to his mercy, to obtain his grace to heal the wounds
emotion could have caused our souls.”574
As for Timothy, they tried to make him see he should stay in Subsana.
He declared he had sworn not to leave Severus; otherwise he would have
acceded to their request. Severus, who had not committed himself to
Timothy by oath, would release him from his oath. To avoid scandal the
bishops consented to his remaining at Subsana. He could stay in Subsana
without the guilt of perjury. Timothy did what any servant of God and child
of the church would do: He promised to follow whatever the bishops and
Severus agreed.
The three bishops wrote to Severus informing him of what they had
done. They excused those who refused a guide for those with whom
Timothy had come. They implored him through the love of Christ to re-
member what they had said to the people. They also asked Severus to
release Timothy from his oath. Timothy himself did not write Severus.
Severus’ brother, who remains unnamed, told him everything. Augustine
had hoped Severus would leave Timothy to him. Augustine prepared
Carcedonius’ mind. Carcedonius did not want to let Timothy go. However
they endured whatever church order and discipline might compel them to
enjoin.
574
Letter 62.
Article 140
Severus and Timothy
Severus was upset with Timothy because he had been ordained sub-
deacon for the church of Subsana while Severus was requesting him for his
own diocese. Severus let it be known he was surprised these bishops were
content to say Timothy’s ordination was not in order but should be toler-
ated. Severus thought they should correct the fault and remit him to the
one who had been offended.575
Augustine knew Severus’ disposition. He may have known it either from
his reply or previously. To preserve his bond of friendship with Severus,
Augustine believed he could do nothing less than return Timothy. This
solution bothered Carcedonius—he had a problem agreeing. Augustine was
reconsidering the letter in which he was returning Timothy to Severus. He
may have considered writing to Severus, asking him to mull over his course
of action. Carcedonius saw Christ in the person of Severus. Like a good son,
he finally whole-heartedly acceded to Severus’ desire. He feared Severus’
reproaches and even urged Augustine to return Timothy to Severus.
Augustine had no further reason to hesitate.
After receiving Severus’ reply or perhaps finding another occasion to
write, Augustine sent Letter 63. Augustine begins with these words: “If I tell
you frankly what the affair requires, may I do so without wounding charity?
If I do not dare tell you, where is the freedom between friends? However,
between these two extremes I choose the path of justifying myself to you
rather than complaining.” Augustine proceeds to justify his conduct. He has
no regrets returning Timothy to Severus. Augustine asked him to consider
the following before God: retaining a cleric from another church under the
pretext he had sworn not to be separated from him was to open the door to
575
Letter 63.
disintegration of church discipline. On the other hand, Augustine did not

want to cause perjury. Instead he preserved the rule of peace. No one could
blame him if he returned Timothy despite his oath. The oath was no longer
binding. Augustine reserved the case to his judgment. Augustine asked only
that Severus consult Christ, “who, I certainly know, dwells in your heart, and
is the master and captain of your soul.”
Augustine does not call Timothy a cleric of Severus’ church by reason of
his sub-diaconate. Severus did not receive Timothy until after Timothy’s
oath to attach himself to him was dismissed. Severus himself asked
Augustine to return him, but as a lector. Augustine asked Severus if a man
who had begun to read in his diocese and who had read in several places
including Subsana in the presence of the parish priest, was not in actuality a
lector. The canons do not officially determine his status. Thus this affair
must have taken place prior to the Council of Mileve of August 27, 402.
There it is declared that whoever has read publicly a single time can not be
retained for the clergy of another church.576 If the Timothy affair gave rise to
this canon, as seems likely, Severus could not have dispensed himself from
returning Timothy to Augustine after the council. We might even conclude
Severus had returned him before the council. Bede cites Augustine’s two
letters of which we have just spoken.577 Those whom God inspires to follow
Augustine’s spirit and virtue will find many reflections on his conduct during
this affair. His conduct differs from the course the less humble and enlight-
ened would follow or would even think themselves bound to follow.
In Letter 110 Augustine mentions he had written earlier to Severus
through his son, the deacon Timothy. This man could be the same as the
one of whom we have just spoken, raised from sub-diaconate to diaconate.
But Augustine could also be referring to Timothy, deacon of Carthage,
though he probably would have mentioned this. If it is the former, we have
indubitable proof Timothy had returned to Severus’ service, and this minor
misunderstanding had not changed Augustine’s friendship with Severus.
There can be nothing more compassionate and cordial than Augustine’s
Letter 110 and Severus’ earlier missive.578
Severus wrote his letter in the country. There he had leisure to spend
time reading Augustine’s works. We surmise Confessiones was among them.
During this leisure Severus wrote this letter, less a product of his mind than
a conveyance of love. We cite a part of it to evaluate the genius of this
bishop, and the respect we should have for Augustine’s works.
576
Concilium II, 1104.
577
Chronicon 239-41.
578
Editor’s note: Letter 109 in the Maurist edition.
Severus and Timothy 111
God be praised, my brother Augustine, since he is the author of all the holy pleas-
ures of which we partake. I acknowledge it is a great joy for me to be with you. I
read your works constantly. I will tell you something surprising but true: you are
more present to me when I do not see you than often when I do. I enjoy you now
without the trouble and agitation of temporal matters coming between us. I am
taking advantage of my happiness as much as I can, but not as much as I would like.
All I can do is tell you my wishes. You know where my enthusiasm leads me. How-
ever in the end I am not complaining for not going as far as I would like, because I
am going as far as I can. So may God be blessed, my dear brother, for the satisfac-
tion I have of being with you. I am delighted to be so closely united and glued to
your breasts, as it were, to receive what comes from their plenitude. I get stronger
with this excellent food, and I am trying to shake these breasts and press them to
draw out what is deepest and most secret. Instead of presenting me with only a
small opening to suck like an infant, I would like them to open completely, if that
were possible, and have all they contain spill out at once. Yes, I would like these
breasts to empty out completely for me, these breasts full of an essence wholly
divine with various kinds of spiritual sweetness, these breasts so pure and so re-
moved from duplicity, though adorned with the double crown of love of God and
neighbor, these breasts, finally, drenched with the essence of truth. They pour out
only truth. So I keep myself under these precious breasts to receive what drops or
gushes from them, so that my night may be brightened by your light, and we might
walk together enlightened by this great brightness. O holy and industrious divine
bee, you know how to form combs full of heavenly and divine honey, from which
flow mercy and truth, where my soul finds its entire delight, and on which it feeds
as from a source of life to draw from it something to fill its emptiness and bear its
weakness. In lending God your voice and ministry you make us bless his name. You
listen to what the Lord sings in your heart, and you answer it perfectly with your
voice. Thus what flows down to us of Christ’s fullness becomes sweeter and more
pleasant by passing through so excellent a channel and presented by a minister so
holy, worthy, pure, and faithful. You enhance truths so much by your treatment
and the light in which you place them. The beauty of your mind would dazzle us
and fix our minds on you if you were not always intent on having us look at the
Lord to refer to him what we admire in you, to have us recognize it comes from
God, and what is good, pure, and beautiful in us is there only by participation in his
579
goodness, purity, and beauty.
Severus thanks God for joining him to Augustine in obedience. Under

Augustine’s tutelage he desired to be like him who in turn could rejoice for
having Severus as a disciple. This letter was written at the end of Severus’
leisure. Before he finished it, a bishop visited to recruit him for a less
pleasant, but more necessary task. It concerned the public good, to which
the pleasure of meditation must yield and for which that pleasure prepares
us. He asks Augustine to reply with a long letter, which would still be too
short. He was supposed to come and meet Augustine concerning some
579
Letter 109.
matter or other. Severus asks Augustine to excuse him if possible, and not
draw him away from his course. He may mean either the course of his
retirement or the visitation of his diocese.
Article 141
Response to Severus
Quoduultdeus and Gaudentius brought Augustine the letter of which

we have just spoken.580 Augustine had just written Severus on another
subject through the deacon Timothy. Timothy was about to leave. Thus
Augustine could not reply through him to this kind letter. “But when I do
reply, I shall still be beholden to your letter. I could never reply to the
tender kindness of your friendship and your ardor for my writings.”
Augustine replied later.581 He humbly complained over Severus’ inflated
praise. Augustine would not have bothered if these praises came from a
sycophant. He knew they came from sincere love and a trustworthy heart.
Augustine admits Severus knows him like his own soul, he is his second soul,
or rather their souls make one. Nevertheless, Severus could still be mis-
taken in his opinion of Augustine since we do not even know ourselves that
well. Augustine is vexed his friend is deceived, all the more because Severus
will be less eager to pray for him and obtain for him from God a perfection
Severus believes Augustine has already achieved. Augustine could treat
Severus in the same manner by expressing his esteem and could speak with
complete sincerity of the virtues and divine gifts Augustine knows are
certainly present in Severus. Yet he wants to spare his modesty. He has no
fear of being mistaken. If Severus is praised by someone else, Severus may
feel as if he were himself being praised. Augustine does not want to give
Severus reason to complain as Augustine did against him. Thus runs
Augustine’s response. As for the long letter requested of him, Augustine
excuses himself, citing his present occupations. Justice required what he
owed to Severus should yield to what he owed to the church. Augustine
580
Letter 109.
581
Letter 110.
asked Severus and his other close friends not to put new work on him and
to discourage others even more. Augustine awaits his visit.
Augustine writes Bishop Novatus to let him have his brother, whom he
needed for the service of the church.
Not to bring you to this by citing a far-fetched example, think a little of this, that if
you are closely united with Lucillus by the bond of blood, I am no less so to my
brother Severus by the bond of friendship. Still, you know how rarely we see each
other. He and I wish to converse often. But the hope of the world to come, where
we shall be united with no further separation, makes us prefer the needs of the
church our mother to our personal need and temporal satisfaction. With how
much less grief should the interest of the same church make us bear the absence of
a brother with whom you must have pondered the pastures of Holy Scripture, so to
speak, as I have with my dear Severus, my fellow citizen? However, rarely do I now
receive letters from him, most of which speak only of cares and business instead of
582
the delights we would like to taste together in Christ’s divine pastures.
Augustine’s and Severus’ mutual affection was public and well known.
In a letter written to Augustine by someone in Africa, not Jerome (among
whose works Erasmus recognizes it is a mistake to number it) a person had
come to Leges in Africa, in the hope of finding Augustine and Severus.583 He
found only Severus. He tells Augustine: “I found half of you in the person of
my dear Severus, whom I can call a part of your soul. Thus I rejoiced at
having found half of the one for whom I was looking, and I was much
saddened at not having found the other half. To rejoice completely I would
have had to find the whole. I hope God will bring me to see once again the
one I love with all my heart.” Augustine had written earlier to ask for
prayers. He answered Augustine his sins take away his freedom of praying
for others. Augustine mentions an experience of a magnet Severus saw
while dining in Africa at the home of Count Bathanarius,584 killed in 408.
Augustine adds he believed his report as if he had seen it himself.585
Later in 408, troubles arose against the African church. Severus played
the part love demanded. He met with Augustine in search of a remedy.
When a priest of his diocese had to go to the imperial court, Severus asked
him to pass through Hippo. Augustine used the occasion to write Olympius,
to whom he sent along regards from Severus.586 Apparently, Severus did not
attend the conference of Carthage of 411. Doubtless this Catholic Bishop
582
Letter 84.
583
Letter 270.
584
Editor’s note: Bathanarius was the brother-in-law of Stilicho.
585
De ciuitate dei XXI, 4.
586
Letter 98 2.
Response to Severus 115
Severus who had waited for so long to be present was obliged to withdraw
because of illness. Some understand from this passage he died at that
time,587 but he was still living eleven years later. He wrote against Pelagians
to Pope Innocent in 416 with other bishops of Numidia assembled at
Mileve.588 Severus died in 426 after naming a successor in front of his
clergy.589 He did not mention this successor to the people, some of whom
disliked this procedure. However, Augustine went to Mileve to calm things,
and the people received with pleasure the one whom Severus had desig-
nated as soon as they were assured this choice came from him. His succes-
sor was ordained with universal peace and joy. His name is unknown. There
were in Mileve monks whom Severus had settled there. Possidius says they
were monks who had left Augustine’s monastery.590
587
T. Ruinart 283; 297.
588
Letter 176.
589
Letter 213.
590
Vita Augustini 11.
Article 142
Refutation of Petilianus’ Letter
402 A. D.
Pope Anastasius died April 27, 402.591 News of his death had not yet
reached Africa when Augustine began writing Contra litteras Petiliani II. He
speaks of Anastasius as still occupying the chair of Peter.592 In our opinion,
he could not have worked on this opus before 402 because of the works he
places between De consensu euangelistarum and this work.
Petilianus, Donatist bishop of Cirta, had written a letter against the
Catholic Church. Augustine had begun to answer the letter with Contra
litteras Petiliani, but was able to refute only a part.593 Donatists had not
permitted him see the whole. They hid the last part. Finally it fell into
Augustine’s hands. Catholics of Cirta found it, copied it, and sent it to him
after he had seen the first part.594 This deed apparently took place circa two
years later, toward the beginning of 404. This dating is believable since
Cresconius wanted to reply to Augustine’s first books against Petilianus and
addressed a letter to Augustine himself.595 He did not send it immediately.
The letter arrived later, just before Honorius’ edicts against the Donatists in
405 at the earliest.596
When Augustine received Petilianus’ letter, he replied immediately.597
He interrupted De trinitate and De Genesi ad litteram. Petilianus had
591
Vita Hieronimi 5, Memoire Ecclesiastique.
592
593
Contra Cresconium IV, 1.
594
Contra litteras Petiliani II, 1; III, 1; Retractationes II, 25-26
595
Ibid.
596
597
Refutation of Petilianus’ Letter 117
written nothing new—Augustine had already refuted him several times.

Augustine wrote the work for people of lower intelligence who were unable
to apply in one place what he had said on the same subject in another.
Following the opinion of his friends, Augustine decided to follow point by
point Petilianus’ reply. He refuted article after article as if it were a dia-
logue. In this way no one could say he left anything unanswered, or com-
plain they did not hear what was said because they did not know who was
speaking. Augustine engaged, so to speak, in a conference with the Do-
natist’s writing. The Donatists did not want to meet in live discussion.
Augustine showed they had nothing to say which could escape the light and
force of truth. He had refuted Faustus in the same manner.598
Augustine complained he was obliged to refute trifles, lest they cause
harm to the weak and become an occasion for faltering.599 His precision was
more troublesome to Donatists than to himself. Petilianus complained
Augustine erred in his response in the form of a conference since they had
never spoken together. What can one do, says Augustine, when he is
dealing with these types of men, or people who imagine those to whom
they show their writings will be without light and judgment?600
He wrote a second book, much longer, against Petilianus. In it he re-
futes the beginning of Petilianus’ letter, which he had already answered in
his first book.601 Augustine believed he had established everything in the
first book by scriptural authority. His opponent would have to declare
himself an enemy of the divine word to oppose him. He had no fear those
who had appreciated Petilianus’ letter would doubtless recognize, after
reading the refutation, on which side the truth lay. Still, he left them free to
listen to Petilianus, if he wanted to defend his letter.602
Meanwhile, Augustine addressed a pastoral letter to the faithful of his
diocese, apparently at the same time he published his second book against
Petilianus and before he began work on the third. The letter is an instruc-
tion to prove the truth of the Catholic Church from Scripture, and to show
Donatists can produce nothing scriptural on their behalf. Every clear
passage in Scripture is against them and obscure passages can not provide
proof in contested matters.603 The same is true for allegorical interpreta-
tions similar to one used by a Donatist bishop preaching in Hippo. This
598
599
600
Contra Gaudentium II, 1.
601
602
603
bishop drew cheers from those glad to hear something new in favor of their
sect. However, they did not bother to examine if what he preached was
solid or specious. In this letter, Augustine mentions the death of Praetex-
tatus of Assur.604 A long passage is spent on the miracles of the heretics.605
What he says of the persecutions apparently fits the laws of Honorius of
405.606 However in my opinion what he writes can apply to previous laws
passed against either Donatists or heretics in general.
Rather strangely Augustine does not mention this treatise in Retracta-
tiones, even though it is long and important. There is no reason to doubt its
authenticity. Some think it does not appear in Retractationes because of its
letter form. He may have reserved it for discussion among his letters.607
Apparently Possidius mentions this work as follows: Epistola contra quos
supra ad Catholicos fratres, liber unus.608 Today we entitle it De unitate
ecclesiae. The fifth Council cites chapter three under the title Epistola ad
Catholicos.609
Augustine wrote De unitate ecclesiae before he saw Petilianus’ works,
written directly against him. Augustine leaves Petilianus the choice of
defending his letter against Augustine’s refutation or responding to his work
as Augustine had responded to his, or at least recognizing the truth si-
lently.610
604
605
606
607
PL 43, 389-90.
608
Indiculum 3.
609
Concilium V, 481. Editor‘s note: Tillemont may be referring to the second Council of
Constantinople (553).
610
Article 143
Petilianus’ Response
The choice given Petilianus by Augustine to respond to his writings or

yield to the force of the truth presented problems for Petilianus.611
Augustine upheld invincible truth. All eyes were on Petilianus to see what
he would do. How could he extricate himself from the embarrassment to
which the power of God’s word had reduced him? He was not inclined to
scorn human opinion in favor of truth.612 He made it appear he was re-
sponding to a work to which there could be no response. Either he could say
nothing good or remain silent.613 He wrote a letter, as Augustine614 and
Possidius615 call it, or a book, as he himself calls it.616 He wrote the first part
and promised a second.617 He directed his discourse to Augustine. Petilianus
wrote prior to Augustine finishing his second book against him. He was
responding only to the first.618 He attacked passages inserted verbatim into

his writing. His treatment was unsatisfactory.619 He disposed of the history
of the Maximianists by delaying it until his second book.620 It would have
been as difficult to respond in a second book as in the first, but the second
never appeared. He omitted other matters.621 He was content to maintain
absurd conclusions which Augustine had shown were deduced from his
611
612
613
614
615
Indiculum 3.
616
617
618
619
Contra litteras Petiliani III, 19-20; 33‒40.
620
Contra litteras Petiliani III, 36; 39.
621
Contra litteras Petiliani III, 50-57.
principles; Petilianus attributed the absurdity to Augustine; he insultingly

tried to point out falsity without realizing that his invectives fell back upon
himself.622
Petilianus preferred to abandon his case, and to find a subject on which
his eloquence could please those of his party who so hated Augustine that
whoever spoke in his favor was regarded as their enemy. So Petilianus
substituted Augustine for the Church against which he had nothing to say.623
He turned his hatred against Augustine: although he had no charges to
allege, he compensated with verbosity.624 He insulted Augustine and
reproached him with accusations either completely false, or not blamewor-
thy, or not applicable since his baptism.625 Petilianus was not bothered by
the judgment of the wise who would have recognized the weakness of
turning a public battle into a private squabble. He often returned to that
point, for he found much to say over private affairs, but nothing about
public matters.626
Petilianus spent considerable time on Augustine’s life prior to his con-
version. He often emphasized lapses into which Augustine had not fallen; at
other times he overlooked real faults.627 He falsely interpreted passages in
Confessiones: for example, he said Augustine became a Manichean priest to
whom he attributed base things. In various passages he confused the
matter from either ignorance of the sect or pretending to know what he did
not.628 He spoke with similar ignorance concerning the Academics, whose
skeptical spirit he attributed to Augustine.629 He expatiated on his supposi-
tion Augustine had been banished from Africa as a Manichean in 386. In
actuality he had been in Milan for more than a year.630 With insufferable
temerity he claimed Augustine was still a Manichean.631
Petilianus named Augustine Tertullus, Paul’s accuser (Acts 24: 1), be-
cause of his former profession of rhetoric.632 To discredit Augustine’s talent
for argument against the Donatists, Petilianus treated him as a dialectician.
622
623
Contra litteras Petiliani III, 23; 59; Retractationes II, 25.
624
625
626
Contra litteras Petiliani III, 21; 24.
627
628
629
630
631
632
Petilianus’ Response 121
At the same time he employed bombast to imply dialectic was fit only to
defend lies.
Petilianus cited judgments rendered against men unknown to
Augustine. He claimed to have convicted Augustine of a crime because a
friend had once named him in some interrogatory in his absence. Augustine
had been unable to defend himself. He referred capriciously to the headings
of Augustine’s letters to find something to reproach. When Augustine
informed a friend, perhaps Paulinus, he was sending him bread as a testi-
monial, Petilianus claimed to find a heinous crime. He was not ashamed of
accusing Augustine to have given a woman a potion; he wanted to make
public what Megalius had written against Augustine before his ordination as
bishop. Because Megalius had subsequently asked for pardon, Petilianus
found granting this pardon out of order. He accused Augustine of deceit for
having omitted two words in his text which were not found in the copy sent
him, and which in fact had nothing to do with the question.633 Petilianus
regarded Augustine’s establishment of monasticism in Africa as a crime.634
633
Contra litteras Petiliani III, 22‒23.
634
Contra litteras Petliani III, 40.
Article 144
Response to Petilianus’ Invective
Petilianus may have hoped to divert Augustine from defending the

Church by obliging him to defend himself against vain accusations.635
However, he was dealing with a holy man, a genuine man of God, who
labored not to draw men to himself but to God. Augustine was more
prepared to abandon his own cause than the Church’s. He delighted in
humbling himself to use his voice solely to sing the praises of God’s house.
Augustine had consecrated his heart, his pen, and his life to the church. He
had been released from the false charges of the enemies of truth by his care
in preaching God’s word and refuting their errors.636 Far from causing him
grief, the truth gave him profound consolation through the hope of reward
promised by Christ. He regarded Petilianus’ abusive language as the devil’s
ruse.637 Satan was trying to make him hate the one mistreating him.
Augustine vigilantly combated this invisible enemy. His charity was taken up
with loving Petilianus and praying God’s forgiveness for him.
Augustine found himself obliged to respond.638 He did not violate his
accustomed rule against offensive discourses and writings concerning him:
he did not try to satisfy his justified indignation; he tried to profit his
hearers or readers by overcoming his adversary’s error with convincing
proofs; he did not repay insult with further insult. For this purpose, he
wrote Contra litteras Petiliani III, to show this Donatist attack had not in fact
responded to his first book. He intended to show the Donatist error so
clearly that Donatists themselves would be convinced in their heart, no
matter how attached to their party and how inflamed against his person,
635
636
637
Contra litteras Petilani III, 13.
638
Response to Petilianus’ Invective 123
provided they read his writings in full.639 To be convinced, they only needed
to collate his first book with Petilianus’ response.640 His charity for the less
intelligent had obliged him to make the matter more evident with a third
book.
In Contra litteras Petiliani III, Augustine simply and mildly defends him-
self against Petilianus’ insults. He condemns and detests his life prior to
baptism.
I look to the glory only of the one who, through his grace, has delivered me from
myself. Thus, whenever I hear someone censure the life I led at that time, what-
ever his motive, I am not so ungrateful toward God’s mercy that these censures
cause me displeasure. The more my faults are exaggerated, the more I bless the
641
physician who healed me.
Augustine had no need to justify his external life before the Church’s
children who already knew him from the time of his baptism. He hoped
those who did not know his life after his baptism would be fair enough not
to accuse him further on the testimony of a declared enemy such as
Petilianus over his friends’ testimony. If Petilianus could probe his heart, his
conscience alone would be witness to his interior sentiments. Necessarily
Augustine should be taken at his word. He can not say like Paul (Acts 25: 10)
he does not consider himself guilty of anything. Nevertheless he can
truthfully say in God’s presence he does not consider himself guilty of the
sins with which Petilianus was attempting to blacken his life since bap-
tism.642
Augustine was far from causing the Church to justify him. On the con-
trary he wanted to show the heretics he was detached from men to place
his glory and confidence in God alone. Catholics, loving the truth in him and
receiving it with pleasure from his mouth, were reassured, not because of
their high opinion and esteem for him, but because of their hope in God
himself.643 Donatists had only to consider, not what he was or what Petil-
ianus was saying about him, but rather the force of his arguments. He
showed that the Church of which he was a member, whether good or bad,
remained triumphant over their error.644 They had only to urge Petilianus to
639
640
641
642
643
644
Contra littera Petiliani III, 10-11.
be satisfied with truth, not to distract himself uselessly and repeatedly with
insults.645
Nor does Augustine delay justifying others whom Petilianus had likewise
accused in his writing. Petilianus tried to take advantage of Augustine’s
notion that one could not leave the Church’s communion under pretext of
separating from the wicked who could not be convicted. Petilianus claimed
wrong-doing was not punished among Catholics.646 To support his claim, he
had cited the case of a bishop deposed for an odious crime and replaced by
another. The former had been reinstated in the episcopate. On this matter
Augustine was content to say Petilianus did not know the facts. Petilianus
spoke about another bishop who was doing penance. Augustine apparently
calumniates. Petilianus did not forget the case of Quoduultdeus.647
In all these matters, Augustine maintained Petilianus erred in reproach-
ing a lack of ecclesiastical discipline. “An infinite number of examples exist
of men who exercised the episcopate or other ecclesiastical offices who
were deposed, and afterwards retired in shame to other lands, or into your
sect or other heretical groups. Some have remained where they were, and
everyone there knows them.”648 Augustine mentioned Honorius of Mileve,
perhaps Severus’ predecessor, and Splendonius, deposed from the diacon-
ate in Gaul, who had come to Cirta, was re-baptized, and was ordained a
priest by Petilianus. This latter case obliged Fortunatus, the Catholic bishop
of Cirta, to have read or posted publicly the acts of deposition which had
been sent him.649 Even Petilianus, who since then had experienced terrible
treachery from Splendonius, was obliged to excommunicate him.650 He
showed Petilianus the existence of wicked Donatist ministers who tempo-

rarily remained hidden. Augustine mentioned by name Cyprian, bishop of
Tubursicu,Numidia,651 who was caught in a house of ill repute with a
prostitute. Whereupon, he was brought before Primian, condemned, and
excommunicated, without those he had baptized being re-baptized.652
Augustine ends this book with these words addressed to Donatists.
Do you know how to distinguish truth from falsity, solid discourse from empty in-
vective, a spirit of peace from a spirit of dissension and disturbance, vigor of health
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
Editor’s note: Tubursicu is present-day Khamissa,Algeria.
652
Response to Petilianus’ Invective 125
from the tumor of sickness, divine prophecies from human musings, clear proofs
from vague accusations, genuine teaching from fiction, those addressing the sub-
ject from those avoiding the question? If you know such distinctions, act well and
rightly. If you can not, we shall nevertheless not withdraw our care for you, be-
cause if your heart does not turn to peace, according to the gospel our peace will
653
return to us (Mt 10: 13).
653
Article 145
Enarratio in Psalmum 36
What Augustine says at the end of Enarratio in Psalmum 36 is closely

connected to Contra litteras Petiliani III; we can not but believe he delivered
the former circa the same time. Since the Donatists could not defend their
schism, they turned their tongues against him. They spoke both about what
they knew and what they did not know.
What they know about us has to do with our former life. It is true in the past we
were foolish, unbelieving, and incapable of good work. We were involved in perni-
cious error. We were bewildered and veritably crazed. We do not deny this. The
more we recognize our past disorder and misery, the more we praise God, who
granted us mercy. You find fault with my past sins. What are you trying to prove? I
am more severe in condemning them than you are. I was the first one to detest
what you censure. Would to God you might choose to imitate me, and the error in
which you are involved might someday become an error of the past. As for what
they censure in me now, they have no idea. Admittedly, I still have faults that can
be criticized, but they ought not pretend they know them. I struggle interiorly
against evil desires. I have endured long and almost endless wars against tempta-
tions of an enemy who wants to bring me down. I sigh before God when I experi-
ence my weakness. God knows what my heart begets, so to speak, he who sees the
spiritual pain and colic I suffer. The one before whom we sigh is the only one who
654
knows what we are.
Augustine does not pause to justify himself in everything the Donatists

were saying against him. He lets them believe what they want. He prayed
for the faithful of Carthage, before whom he was speaking, and of whose
affection he was assured by a mutual love. He begged them to leave his
cause alone, and he did not pause to dispute over it with Donatists. He
urged them to the Church’s cause, which was independent of his own.
654
Enarratio in Psalmum 36 3.
Enarratio in Psalmum 36 127
Who am I? Am I the Catholic Church? It is enough for me to be in it. You say I am

nasty; I would have much to say against myself. But is this really the issue? Let us
leave these useless matters. Do not insult me. Come to the question; investigate
what concerns the Church. Look where you are, whether you are treading the path
to heaven or hell. From whatever direction the truth speaks to you, listen to it ea-
gerly, lest you never taste that heavenly bread if you are always stopping to seek
with distaste and a slanderous spirit the defects of the vase in which it comes.
This sermon was certainly delivered at Carthage. It was not delivered in

his ordinary residence and was preached in the city where his youthful
faults occurred. We should not be surprised he spoke of Cyprian. First he
explains the gospel of the final judgment, “there will be two in the field,
etc.” (Mt 24: 41) He then explicates the psalm. He covers only the first part
that day. He had intended to leave Carthage, but rain had obliged to stay.
So as not to remain idle he preached and continued to explain the same
psalm. Since his discourse brought him to speak of the Donatists, he read a
large part of the synodal letter of the Maximianists against Primian.655
Augustine spent considerable time on the subject, which resulted in his not
finishing the psalm a second time. He took it up a third time. God called him
against his plans, either by keeping him in Carthage or by making him return
soon after, to pay his debt.
At that time Augustine may have had documents relating to the Do-
natists read to the people in addition to the documents from the Council of
the Maximianists. He excuses himself for having documents which were not
in the canon of Scripture read to them because the Donatist affair required
this. “If they criticize us for this, I accept the criticism, as long as the people
receive the necessary instruction.” He notes Felician of Musti656 was still
living at the time, and later he refers to him explicitly almost always by
himself. This sermon surely took place after the death of Praetextatus.
Augustine mentions a Donatist document wherein they call Catholics a
race of traitors with sharp daggers. Donatists on the contrary did not ask
things taken from them be returned (this statement is false). The Catholics
had no other arms than the gospel. Primian surely made this insulting
declaration against Catholics before the Carthaginian magistrate. There he
said among other things: “They steal what does not belong to them, and we
for our part do not ask to have anything taken from us returned.”657 He sent
655
Editor’s note: Donatist bishop of Carthage (393-411).
656
Editor’s note: Felician was bishop of Musti in Proconsular, present-day Henchir Mest, near
Kreb,Tunisia. He was a Donatist bishop, became a Maximianist, and then re-entered the
Donatist church.
657
Contra Cresconium IV, 47.
this document to the bishops of his communion. Primian responded toward

the end of September, 403 when he was summoned to accept a conference
with the Catholics. At that time he replied: “There is no likelihood that the
children of martyrs and the race of traitors could come together.”658 After
September, 403 Augustine, who attended the Council of Carthage on
August 25,659 preached Enarratio in Psalmum 36 before returning to Hippo.
Perhaps he finished Contra litteras Petiliani III a short time previously.
Augustine probably had not seen Petilianus’ reply until after the third book
was written. The same could apply to other Donatist writings. The connec-
tion of this Enarratio with the subject of Donatism has led us to insert it
here.
In Enarratio in Psalmum 36, Augustine mentions a recent sermon,
preached in that same city, that God is our possession and we are his. This
statement appears in Enarratio in Psalmum 32, Sermo 2, which in fact was
preached at Carthage in the church of the martyrdom of Cyprian.
In our opinion Augustine wrote Letter 67 to Jerome in 402. He asks him
to reply to Letter 40, written by 397. Letter 40 had long circulated in Rome
and Italy against Augustine’s will before falling into Jerome’s hands. As
Augustine was challenging Jerome’s opinions with the freedom of friend-
ship, particularly over the dispute between Peter and Paul (Gal 2: 11-14),
some said he had written a book against Jerome and sent it to Rome.
Augustine did not know the source of this rumor.660 He protested to Jerome
he had not done what his accusers were saying. Far from wanting to
displease Jerome, Augustine would take great joy in either living with him or
consulting him often through letters.661

Asterius the sub-deacon was on the verge of leaving Palestine for Africa
when Jerome received Augustine’s letter. Jerome replied immediately with
Letter 68.662 On the one hand he expressed affection for Augustine, on the
other resentment over Letter 40. Jerome questions its authenticity and asks
Augustine for reassurance. At the same time he sent him Apologia secunda
contra Rufinum.
Jerome’s Letter 68 arrived in Africa later. In the meantime Augustine
had written him two letters; the first is lost and the second is Letter 71, sent
by way of the deacon Cyprian with copies of Letter 27, Letter 40, and Letter
67. Augustine did not know if Jerome had received them. In Letter 71
658
659
Concilium II, 1105.
660
Letter 82.
661
Letter 57.
662
PL 33, 237.
Enarratio in Psalmum 36 129
Augustine states he does not whole-heartedly approve Jerome’s translation

of Scripture directly from the Hebrew. He reports the rumor circulating in
Africa over the word ivy that Jerome had inserted in Jonah 4: 6 instead of
gourd, as found in the Septuagint. Jerome answered Augustine’s lost letter
with Letter 72. He chafes somewhat more than in Letter 68, yet rendering
Augustine affection and respect. Jerome has none of Augustine’s writings
except Soliloquia and a few Enarrationes in Psalmos. Doubtless these last
letters can be dated in 403. The remainder we date toward the end of
404.663
663
For a further discussion of Jerome and Augustine, complete with bibliography, see M.
Vessey, “Jerome,” Augustine through the Ages, 460‒62.
Article 146
First Council of Mileve (402)
A general council of Africa was held in Mileve, Numidia on August 17,

402. Aurelius of Carthage was present.664 He was invited by a bond of charity
and brotherly love. God strengthened his infirmity. Xanthippus, primate of
Numidia, and Nicetas, primate of Stesan Mauretania, also attended.
Valentinus and Datianus are also named. Some years later a certain Valen-
tinus appears as dean of Numidia, but this Valentinus and Datianus were
either primates or deputies of other African provinces. Datianus, bishop of
Leges, attended the conference of 411.665 Leges is located in Numidia.
Apparently the Council of Mileve lasted more than a day.
In the council Aurelius first proposed canons of the Councils of Hippo
(393) and Carthage (397) be read, so that all the bishops might confirm and
subscribe to them. The canons were read, and signed at least by Xanthippus
and Nicetas. This decree and the following one are cited in 525 A. D. as the
seventh council under Aurelius.
In the previous year a dispute had arisen between Xanthippus and Vic-
tor regarding primacy. Xanthippus enjoyed that honor before Easter, 401—
Augustine had written him in that capacity. Seemingly this dispute served as
an occasion for decrees from the Council of Mileve.666 Valentinus requested
the prevailing episcopal practice be confirmed by decree, that episcopal
rank be determined by the time of promotion to the episcopate. Aurelius
approved this request. Xanthippus’ request was confirmed by the entire
council.667 The rank of the primates of Numidia and Stesan Mauretania were
excepted, perhaps because they took precedence over other primates even
664
Concilium II, 1100. Editor’s note: Carthage lay in Proconsular.
665
Collectio Carthaginensis I, 120.
666
Schelstrat, Ecclesia Africana (Antwerp 1680) 239; Concilium II, 1100-01.
667
Concilium II, 1101.
First Council of Mileve (402) 131
if the latter were older. In any case, the primate of Numidia usually signed
immediately after the bishop of Carthage.
The Council of Boniface of 525 draws from the Council of Carthage (418)
that Numidia had the first rank after Proconsular, then Byzacena.668 From
this we conclude that Stesan Mauretania and Tripoli should be placed after
Byzacena. Caesarean Mauretania is not mentioned in the Council of 418.
Thus Caesarean Mauretania followed immediately after Numidia. This is
speculation. In one place Caesarean Mauretania is placed after Stesan
Mauretania, which was new at the time. Thus there could scarcely have
been any other rule besides the rule of charity and humility, that one
province should yield to another. Possibly the bishop of Cirta which was the
civil metropolitan of Numidia had a special rank. Fortunatus is mentioned in
the salutation of a letter before Alypius and Augustine.669 No doubt he is not
the bishop from Cirta, who appears later. This placement may have hap-
pened for some other reason. In fact, on another occasion Fortunatus is
listed after Augustine and Alypius.670
In order to remove difficulty arising over the order of promotion, the
Council of Mileve decided all consecrated bishops would accept a letter
written or signed by the hand of the ordaining prelate wherein the day and
year of their ordination would be indicated.671 On this subject it was decreed
to place the order and list of bishops of Numidia in the see of the primate
and in Cirta, which was the largest city. Apparently in every church whose
bishop had been a primate, an official list of the bishops ordained during
the time of his primacy would be kept. In addition, copies of these lists
would be made and placed in the archives of the church of Cirta to have a
definite place where all might be found. The council also decreed it was
sufficient to have read publicly once in a church to be considered a lector in
it. This lector could not hold office later in another church, a decision
possibly related to the Timothy affair.672
As for particular matters, Quoduultdeus, the bishop of Centuriones,
Numidia, had a case with a person present at the council. Quoduultdeus
had promised to accept the council’s judgment, but the next day he re-
versed himself and left. The council did not believe it had the authority to
depose him before thorough examination of his case. The council decreed
simply from then on no one (apparently outside his church) should be in
668
Concilium IV, 1635.
669
Letter 53.
670
Letter 176.
671
Concilium II, 1101.
672
Concilium II, 1104.
communion with him. The Latin text of this canon is somewhat problematic.
The Greek is clearer. No doubt the affair of Quoduultdeus died down. He
was at the conference of 411, where the Donatists advanced no criticism of
him.673 Thus he was not the Quoduultdeus who had been condemned by
Donatists for being guilty of two adulteries, then justified before the
Catholic Church, and received as innocent.674
673
Labbeus, Collectio Carthaginensis 126.
674
Article 147
Maximian of Vagine
The Council of Mileve (402) wrote Maximian the bishop of Bagai675

again, to order him to resign from the episcopate.676 The council asked the
people of that city to look for another bishop. Augustine directly refers to
this canon, as Baronius and Rivius have mentioned.677 In Letter 69 Augustine
writes that Maximian, bishop of Vagine, and Castor his brother had left the
Donatist schism to re-unite with the Catholic Church. Joy over their conver-
sion was tempered by a scandal the devil raised against Maximian. God
resolved the scandal in a way giving more joy to the Church than the
scandal had caused sorrow. Maximian saw he could not keep the honor of
the episcopate without troubling the Church with embarrassing dissension,
which could have resulted in serious losses to the Church. By renouncing
this dignity he showed he was seeking Christ’s interests rather than his own.
He had abandoned the schism out of a sincere love for peace and genuine
humility. The edifice Christ had built in his heart was strong enough to
withstand the tempest of so vexing a temptation. Evidently he was bishop
only a short time, at least in the Catholic communion.678 After his resigna-
tion his brother Castor was elected to succeed him.679 Out of fear lest Castor
not accept the episcopate, someone was sent to lay hold of him. Augustine
and Alypius, who apparently were in Bagai at the time, had some unknown
reason for not going to Castor personally. They wrote him Letter 69, to
convince him to take his brother’s episcopal seat. Augustine and Alypius call
Maximian their son, and praise his resignation. They also mention Castor’s
675
Editor’s note: Bagai is present-day Ksar Baghai,Algeria.
676
Concilium II, 1101.
677
Letter 69, Baronius 402, §59; Rivius, 289.
678
Baronius, 402, §61.
679
Letter 69.
virtues explicitly and exhort him to use them not merely in the secular
world. Apparently he was involved or ready to be involved in a career,
perhaps as an attorney. Baronius believes Maximian wrote the Council of
Mileve concerning the resignation he had already submitted or was plan-
ning to submit.680 His submission was the reason the council wrote this
canon, to confirm and authorize his resignation. Rivius has followed
Baronius’ opinion.681 Augustine would have had no reason to praise his
resignation so strongly if it had not been decreed by a council.
However, what Baronius and Rivius add is not as well founded: They
spread the rumor against Maximian that he had been a Donatist and
therefore Catholics had a difficult time accepting him. This rumor would
have involved Castor, who had also been a Donatist. This rumor could not
come from the people—Augustine exhorts Castor to show the people by his
conduct his brother did not leave his Church to escape work, but rather to
devote himself to peace.
Augustine could have Maximian’s resignation in mind when he said
some years later to the Donatists: “There have been holy people, humble
enough to resign from the episcopacy, in the belief that piety demanded
this. Something was damaging the people. Even though they have been
criticized, they were praised for their resignation as a holy action.”682 In 404,
strange cruelties were practiced by Donatists on a Maximian, bishop of
Bagai or Vagi (as we read in some places).683 However, according to the
manuscripts this bishop of Bagai is different from the latter Maximian. In
the same manuscripts the latter is constantly referred to as bishop of
Vagine or Vage, Numidia.684 Castor is not named in this council.

Ferrandus cites685 the first and the fifth canons, but numbers them as
the second and fourth. This variation indicates they were arranged differ-
ently, and no doubt better, at that time than what we have today in
Collectio Carthaginensis.686 The order of this collection is confused. Some
scholars attribute canons on grace to this council, although they were
written much later.687
680
Baronius 402, §59.
681
Rivius 289.
682
Contra Cresconium III, 72.
683
Letter 185; Contra Cresconium III, 43.
684
Editor’s note: Lancel evidently conflates these two Maximians; see Lancel, 289f.
685
Ferrandus, Breviatio Canonum §78-79.
686
Schelstrat, 235-37.
687
Schelstrat, 235.
Article 148
Donatist Anger and Augustine’s Preaching
403 A. D.
The Council of Carthage (401) had ordered gathering of original docu-
ments concerning the Maximianists.688 These documents were sent to invite
the Donatists to peace. This history could be useful in encouraging them.689
The bishops did this officially, and publicized this history enthusiastically.690
Catholics showed the consequences of this history to the Donatists, in order
to change their minds to withdraw them from schism.691 The material was so
recent and so manifest it was impossible for Donatists to reply.692 Many
were placed in salutary confusion. They dared not resist so palpable a
truth—they abandoned their error. Conversions became more frequent,
especially in places where Circumcellion cruelty was not free to reign.

The light of truth illumined some but blinded others. Those who loved
the darkness of lies were angry—they no longer had good reasons to
defend Donatism. They became furious and used violence to terrify Catho-
lics. In this manner, they strove to prevent Catholics from preaching the
truth and refuting lies. Catholic bishops asked only for freedom to preach.
The willing might listen and embrace truth without constraint.693 However
the Donatists deprived them of this liberty. They violently intimidated the
Catholics. Their hatred and fury were so ignited scarcely a church was
688
Concilium II, 1089; see CC CXLIX, 199f.
689
Concilium II, 1092; see CC CXLIX, 200f.
690
Contra Cresconium III, 40; 43.
691
Letter 185.
692
Contra Cresconium III, 39-40.
693
Letter 105 1.
protected from open insult and public plundering.694 Those who preached
peace and union and met their rage and madness with the light of truth
were not safe. Not only laity and clergy but even bishops found themselves
reduced to either remaining silent or bearing what cruelty inspired in these
crazed people. Silence about the truth would have led to failure in returning
Donatists to the Church. Silence would have permitted seduction of Catho-
lics. Continual preaching of truth meant strengthening Catholics and
perhaps delivering Donatists from error. However, preaching truth meant
awakening fury in those determined to halt it and removing from the weak
the freedom of embracing truth. This fury obliged the bishops to have
recourse to the emperor in 404.695 In 402 Augustine had said Catholics
would have been obliged to abandon the campaign against Donatism
because of Circumcellion havoc and violence. Catholic bishops, successfully
to some extent, appealed to urban Donatist bishops to stop the Circumcel-
liones. This appeal may have been successful less out of fear of the law than
of public embarrassment in the minds of decent people. The Circumcel-
liones were their henchmen and messengers.
Perhaps after the council’s commission to various bishops to preach
peace among the Donatists696―no doubt Augustine was foremost among
them―the following notable incident occurred.697 Frequently, when asked,
Augustine visited and exhorted Catholic people in neighboring areas. Often
armed bands of Circumcelliones waited for him on the roads to and from
these charitable visits. On one occasion when they lay in wait for him to
pass by, he and his retinue would have fallen into their hands.698 Providen-
tially Augustine’s guide lost his way, diverged from the main road, and
arrived by detour to the proper destination. So the Circumcellion ambush
was avoided. Augustine learned later of the Donatists’ plan, was happy his
party lost its way, and thanked God for delivery from this peril.699
The Circumcelliones transferred their wrath to the clergy and laity.700
They treated Catholics with their usual cruelty; criminal activity led to civil
complaints. In speaking of what had taken place prior to the laws of Hon-
orius and before the council of 405, the clergy of Hippo said Circumcelliones
laid ambushes along the roads for Catholic bishops, dealt blows to the
694
Letter 185.
695
Noris, 2, 83.
696
Concilium II, 1092; CC CXLIX, 201.
697
Vita Augustini 12.
698
Enchiridion 17.
699
Editor’s note: See Dolbeau Sermo 26.
700
Vita Augustini 12.
Donatist Anger and Augustine’s Preaching 137
clergy to the point of maiming them, and treated the laity no less badly.
Houses were set on fire. Hippo’s clergy joined to these accounts the well
known story of the priest Restitutus.701
Restitutus was a Donatist priest of Victoriana, a rural locality in the dio-
cese of Hippo. He was touched by truth and embraced Catholic unity
voluntarily.702 Honorius’ laws demanding Donatists abandon their schism
were enacted only later.703 Restitutus’ conversion angered Donatists. Their
clerics and Circumcelliones forced him from his house and led him in broad
daylight to a nearby fortress. There, in full view of a large number of people
who did not dare resist, they cudgeled him until their fury was sated. They
then rolled him in a pool of mud and covered him with garb made of rushes.
He was displayed for some time in this state as recreation for some and an
object of compassion for others. They brought him to a place no Catholic
would dare approach. After twelve days they finally and grudgingly released
him. They might have retained him permanently, but Proculianus, Donatist
bishop of Hippo, was in danger of being brought to court because of this
action.
Augustine did not want to bring a complaint to the emperor for this vio-
lence and many other actions occurring in his diocese.704 He did however
bring a complaint to Proculianus.705 Lest Proculianus say he had not received
the complaint, Augustine officially served him with a juridical document.
Proculianus was required to answer. Proculianus answered in writing, but
what he wrote is not extant. He certainly took no steps to meet the
charge.706 This lack of action obliged Augustine to send him a second
summons. Proculianus declared simply he did not wish to respond. From

this lack of a reply it can be conjectured those responsible were Donatist
priests. They threatened Catholics daily and caused trouble. Because of this
incident Restitutus deserved the title of confessor; he was martyred in
412.707
Augustine writes of other violent acts in the same letters where he
speaks of Restitutus. When these incidents happened is uncertain.708 Mark,
a priest in Casphaliana,709 voluntarily became a Catholic. The Donatists were
701
Letter 88.
702
703
Letter 105; Letter 88.
704
Letter 88.
705
706
Letter 88.
707
Letter 133.
708
Letter 105.
709
Editor’s note: Casphaliana is located in rural Hippo.
ready to kill him. God stopped their violence by an accidental presence of

people happening upon the scene. Marcianus, a priest at Urge, had volun-
tarily embraced the Catholic union. Donatists forced him to flee. After
seizing his sub-deacon, they beat him, stoned him, and left him nearly dead.
These offenders were punished for their misdeed by destruction of their
homes.710
710
Letter 105.
Article 149
Bishops’ Request to Donatists
Many Donatists had neither Circumcellion malice nor immediate

strength to recognize and embrace truth.711 They did not withdraw from
schism; when urged by Catholics; these matters, they replied, should be
taken up with their bishops. The Donatist laity wanted a conference of both
parties to investigate the reasons on both sides and then judge where the
truth lay.
This attitude led Catholics at Council of Africa, held in Carthage at the
basilica of the second region712 on August 25, 403, to attempt to bring about
a conference.713 Four deputies from Byzacena and two from Stesan
Mauretania were present. Their powers were read and approved. Deputies
from Caesarean Mauretania had not yet arrived because the convocation
letter was received late. Dulcitius of Tacape,714 who attended the council,
had been deputized in Tripoli;715 he had embarked for Carthage but had not
yet arrived, apparently detained by a storm. In behalf of Numidia, Alypius

had brought a letter of Aurelius of Carthage to the primate Xanthippus for
the convocation of the council. Aurelius had decided to gather the bishops
of Proconsular together to send representatives and charge them with
necessary instructions. Alypius wrote later to Xanthippus and informed him
Aurelius could not assemble the bishops because of certain disturbances
caused by new taxes which obliged most bishops not to leave their cities. A
similar disturbance prevented Numidia from sending representatives to the
council, but Alypius, Augustine, and Possidius were present. The council
711
712
Editor’s note: Several basilicas existed in fourth- and fifth-century Carthage: Basilica
Fausti, Basilica Maiorum, Basilica Novarum, Basilica Restitutus. Tillemont merely cites the
acts of the council (see CC CXLIX, 208)
713
Concilium II, 1092; see CC CXLIX, 209.
714
Editor’s note: Tacape is presen-day Gabès, Tunisia.
715
Concilium II, 1105: CC CXLIX 209. Ruinart, 193.
resolved the bishop of Carthage would send the council’s resolutions to the
provinces whose deputies were not present, in the hope they would
consent and execute them without difficulty.
Which bishops attended the council with Alypius, Augustine, and Pos-
sidius is unknown. Numidus, bishop of Maxula, Proconsular, whom we have
already seen at several councils, and who spoke with authority, and six
representatives from Byzacena and Stesan Mauretania were present.716 The
representatives from Byzacena were: Philologius of Hadrumet,717 Geta of
Jubaltiana, Venustianus (whose see is unknown), and Felicianus of Cufru.718
The representatives for Stesan Mauretania were Lucianus (whose see is
unknown), and Silvanus of Perdicia. Geta and Felicianus were representa-
tives of Numidia.719
Deputies whom the Council of Africa sent to Italy some time previously,
likely at the end of 401, had returned. They had already reported informally
on the eve of the council and were to make a formal report in a council
session.720 A resolution at a solemn session of the council was required. This
resolution has not been preserved. What survives of the acts of the council
after the examination of the representatives concerns only Donatists.
Discussion on the Donatist problem occurred on the eve of the council.
By consensus it was decided each bishop, either singly or with one of his
neighbors, would call upon Donatist bishops by the means of magistrates or
local authorities to meet with his Donatist colleagues to choose representa-
tives.721 At an agreed time and place these representatives with those
chosen by the Catholics would examine the entire question of the schism.
They would try to conclude a pleasant re-union to this unfortunate strife.

The Catholics were glad to prove their love of truth. If the Donatists ac-
cepted the conference, the bishops hoped it would be a simple matter to
bring them to recognize the truth. If they refused, it would be a mark of
their distrust of their own cause. Such a public admission by the Donatists
might be helpful in leading their followers to the truth, in spite of them-
selves.
The council solemnly confirmed this verbal decision.722 That all the bish-
ops might act congruently, Aurelius presented a prepared model of a
716
Concilium II, 1104: CC CXLIX, 208.
717
Editor’s note: Hadrumet is present-day Sousse, Tunisia.
718
Concilium II, 1182: see CC CXLIX, 208. Editor’s note: Cufru is probably near present-day Ain
Hamiett,Algeria.
719
Ruinart, 345-49; 387.
720
Concilium II, 1105.
721
Concilium II, 1108: See CC CXLIX, 210; Contra Cresconium III, 45; Letter 88.
722
Concilium II, 1105: See CC CXLIX, 210.

Life of Augustine of Hippo The Donatist Controvers... - (PG 25 - 164) PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Life of Augustine of Hippo The Donatist Controvers... - (PG 25 - 164) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Article 108

Letters to Paulinus, Romanianus, and Licentius

Vetustinus to him, who apparently was an unfortunate sinner. He also

Unsuccessful Attempts to Confer with Proculianus

The church of Hippo was split by the Donatist schism. Proculianus, or

lianus complained Evodius had offended him. Nevertheless, he indicated a

letter he implores Proculianus to prefer peace to considerations of honor

said to Evodius and apparently committed him to a public conference.

Augustine turned to Eusebius and asked him to ascertain from Proculianus

Acceptance of Irregular Catholics

Augustine had another reason to write Eusebius. A Catholic adolescent

write him a small book.23

challenging these truths, if they had not already read it.34

mind and to occupy himself in scriptural exegesis.43 Simplicianus was for

De agone christiana; De doctrina christiana

Augustine places his refutation of the Manichean letter Epistula quam

predispositions which ought to maintain simple people in the Catholic

this work in Contra Faustum.60 When reviewing his writings, Augustine

Confessiones; Contra Faustum

After De doctrina christiana Augustine mentions one work consisting

Contra Faustum follows Confessiones in Augustine’s catalogue.80 Faus-

certainly from December, 404. After mentioning several other works, he

Augustine places Quaestiones euangeliorum after Contra Hilarium.89 He

write a treatise on this subject.

listeners. However, the ardor they expressed in hearing him made

Augustine places De trinitate, on which he worked for many years, after

than if he had rushed to publish. He believed indiscreet haste would lead to

written prior to 416. In the De trinitate XV Augustine cites In Iohannis

consensu euangelistarum and other works of which we shall presently

Megalius, the dean of Numidia, died in 397. At the Council of Carthage,

Augustine’s many letters of 396–397. Surely these two friends carefully

speaks of a brother Paul bogged down in business matters.139 In 427 he

Council of Carthage (397)

No more than forty-four bishops were present at the Council of Car-

summary of the canons of Council of Hippo (393).173 Some of these canons

Canons of the Council of Carthage (397)

for an agreement to appeal to the provincial governor to remove this

had triumphed over the authority of the African bishops—not easy to

it is suited better to the third Council of Carthage (to which it is attributed

Fortunatus and Fortunius200

Augustine had written to Profuturus, bishop of Cirta,201 almost a month

Cirta. It is not necessary to ascribe to the death of Profuturus a sermon

Conferences with Donatists

An extant letter remains from Augustine to the same Donatists, Glorius,

Constantine at the request of the Donatists themselves, by the Council of

disturb them” according to the expression of a law referring to the Celi-

the Celicloes.239 All their buildings dedicated to religious services were to be

tion, but Augustine was incapable of doing this.243

makes us conclude that the monastery of Eudoxius, whence he came, was

Sermons against Idolatry

When Augustine was conferring with Fortunius, Donatists feared perse-

Augustine preached Sermo 62 to correct Christians who, so as not to

This scandal deeply moved Augustine. He addressed it energetically, yet

Fourth Council of Carthage (398)

The fourth Council of Carthage, a general council of Africa, is dated No-

those issued since more carefully by the Council of Carthage.259

or cantors, virgins, widows or deaconesses, and married people. The canons

Council of Carthage (399)

or allow to be violated the privilege of asylum in a church.284 This law

Augustine’s De consensu euangelistarum can not be dated any earlier

Letter 51, addressed to Crispinus, Donatist bishop of Calama, should be

Severinus and Generosus

Letter 52 should be numbered among the earliest of Augustine’s works