Letters & Polemics (CSEL) 25 part 15/16

If anyone should say that a man who, when he received baptism, held fraternal hatred in his heart, and so had not received the remission of sins, is not to be baptized again when he dismisses that hatred from his heart—does he then intercede by the ecclesiastical baptism on behalf of murderers, or make them just and us murderers? Let him understand this, then, concerning heretics also. Geminius of Furni said: 'Certain of our colleagues can prefer heretics to themselves; to us they cannot. And therefore we hold to what we once decreed, that we baptize those coming from heretics.' And here he most openly confesses that certain of his colleagues held a differing view.

Whence again and again the love of unity is confirmed, in that they were separated from one another by no schism, until God should reveal to some of them if they thought anything otherwise. But to this it is answered that his colleagues did not prefer heretics to themselves, but recognized the baptism of Christ—just as it is recognized in covetous defrauders, plunderers, and murderers, so also in heretics. Rogatianus of Nova said: 'Christ instituted the Church, the devil heresy. How can the synagogue of Satan have the baptism of Christ?' To this it is answered: Because Christ instituted the godly and the devil the envious, can she therefore not have the baptism of Christ, who in the envious is convicted to be a part of the devil? Therapius of Bulla said:

'He who concedes the baptism of the Church to heretics and betrays it, what else is he than a Judas to the bride of Christ?' O great conviction of the schismatics, who have separated themselves by wicked sacrilege from the inheritance of Christ spread throughout the whole world! If Cyprian had communion with such men as Judas the betrayer was, and yet was not stained by them—or if he was stained, then all became Judases; therefore even now all are Judases; or if they are not, then the crimes of the former do not pertain to their descendants, although propagated from the same communion. Why then do they cast up to us traditors whom they did not convict, and do not cast up to themselves the Judas with whom Cyprian and his colleagues had communion? Behold the council of which these men are wont to boast:

we indeed say that he who approves the baptism of Christ even in heretics does not thereby betray to heretics the baptism of the Church, just as he who approves the baptism of Christ even in murderers does not betray to murderers the baptism of the Church. But because these men strive from this council to prescribe to us what we ought to think, let them first agree with it themselves. Behold, those men were compared to Judas the betrayer, who said that heretics, though baptized in heresy, ought not to be baptized again. But with such men Cyprian had communion, who said: 'judging no one, nor removing anyone from the right of communion if he holds a differing view.' That such men had also formerly been in the Church is made plain by that opinion where he says: 'But someone says:'

What then shall become of those who in times past were admitted into the Church without baptism? That this was the custom of the Church is often recalled by the very men who convened this council. If therefore whoever does this is nothing else than a Judas to the bride of Christ, as this opinion has been pronounced, and if Judas, as the Gospel teaches, was a traitor, then all those who at that time were even saying these things communicated with traitors; and before they said these things they had all become traitors through that custom which the Church then maintained. All therefore—that is, both we and they, since we have been propagated from that same unity—are traitors.

But we are defended in two ways: because we do not consent to this council in which this was pronounced, while preserving the right of unity, as Cyprian himself foretold; and because we judge that the wicked do no harm to the good within the Catholic unity, until at the end the chaff is separated from the wheat. But these men, since they both bring forward this council as though on their behalf and contend that the good perish through communion with the wicked as though by contagion, cannot find how to say either that the earlier Christians from whom these men are propagated were not traitors—for by this council they are convicted—or that the deeds of their predecessors do not pertain to them, since they cast our forefathers in our teeth. Likewise another, Lucius of Membressa, said: It is written, 'God does not hear a sinner.'

How can one who is a sinner be heard in baptism? We answer: How is the covetous man heard, and the plunderer, and the usurer, and the murderer? Are these not sinners? Yet Cyprian rebukes and tolerates them within the Catholic Church. Likewise another, Felix of Buslacca, said: In admitting heretics without the baptism of the Church, let no one prefer custom to reason and truth, for reason and truth always exclude custom. To him it is answered: You do not display the truth; you confess about custom. Rightly then would we hold the custom, confirmed by a later plenary council, even if the truth still lay hidden which we believe has now been made manifest. Another, Saturninus of Abitina, said:

If antichrist can give to anyone the grace of Christ, then heretics too, who are called antichrists, can baptize. What if another should say: 'If a murderer can give to anyone the grace of Christ, then those too who hate their brothers, who are called murderers, can baptize'? Surely he would seem to be speaking as though something true, and yet they can; so therefore the heretics can also. Quintus of Aggya said: He can give something who has something. But what can the heretics give, who are agreed to have nothing? To him it is answered: If then he can give something who has something, it is manifest that heretics can give baptism, since when they withdraw from the Church they still have the sacrament of the laver which they had received there.

For those who return do not receive it again, because they had not lost it when they withdrew. Another, Julian of Marcelliana, said: If a man can serve two masters, God and mammon, then baptism too can serve two, the Christian and the heretic. Nay rather, if it can serve the continent man and the covetous, the sober and the drunkard, the pious and the murderer, why not also the Christian and the heretic? To whom indeed it does not serve, but is administered to them—or by them—for salvation to those who use it well, and for judgment to those who use it ill. Tenax of Horrea Caeliae said: There is one baptism, but it is the Church's. Where the Church is not, there baptism cannot be. To him we answer: Why then can it be where there is no rock but sand, since the Church is upon the rock, not upon the sand?

Another, Victor of Assuras, said: It is written that God is one, and Christ one, and the Church one, and baptism one; how can anyone be baptized there where God and Christ and the Church are not? How can it be even in that sand where neither the Church is—for she is upon the rock—nor God and Christ, since there is not there the temple of God and of Christ? Donatulus of Capsa said: I too have always held this, that heretics, who have obtained nothing outside, when they are converted to the Church, should be baptized. To this it is answered: They have indeed obtained nothing outside—that is, unto salvation, not unto the sacrament. For salvation is proper to the good, but the sacraments are common to good and bad alike. Verulus of Rusiccada said:

A heretical man cannot give what he does not have; much more the schismatic, who has lost what he had. But we have already shown that they have it, since they do not lose it when they withdraw; for they do not receive it again when they return. Wherefore, if they seemed unable to give for the reason that they were thought not to have it, let it be understood that they can now give, because they are understood also to have it. Pudentianus of Cuicul said: The newness of my episcopate, most beloved brothers, has caused me to await what my elders should judge; for that heresies have nothing and can do nothing is manifest. And so, if any come from among them to be baptized, it is most justly decreed. As therefore it was answered to those above, whose judgment he here awaited, so let it be understood to have been answered to this man himself.

Peter of Hippo Zaritus said: Since baptism is one in the Catholic Church, it is manifest that one cannot be baptized outside the Church. And therefore I judge that those dipped in heresy, or coming to the Church from schism, ought to be baptized. Baptism is one in the Catholic Church in such a way that, when some go out from it, in those who go out there do not become two, but the same one remains. What therefore is acknowledged in those who return, this also is acknowledged in those who received from the departing what those men, when they departed, did not lose. Likewise another, Lucius of Ausafa, said: According to the movement of my mind and of the Holy Spirit, since there is one God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one Christ, and one hope, one Spirit, one Church, there ought also to be one baptism.

And therefore I say that if anything has been set in motion or done among heretics, it ought to be rescinded, and that those who come thence should be baptized in the Church. Let there then be rescinded what they baptize who hear the words of God and do them not, when they begin to migrate from iniquity to righteousness—that is, from the sand to the rock. But if this is not done, because in these men also that which was Christ's was not violated by their iniquities, let this be understood also concerning heretics. For neither is their hope the same, so long as they are on the sand, as the hope of those who are upon the rock; yet the baptism is the same in both, although, just as the hope is called one, so also the baptism is called one. Felix of Gurgites said:

I judge that those baptized by heretics unlawfully outside the Church, if they wish to flee to the Church, should according to the precepts of the Holy Scriptures obtain the grace of baptism where it is lawfully given. It is answered: Nay rather, let them begin to have lawfully unto salvation what they had unlawfully unto perdition; for under the same baptism a man is justified when he turns to God with a truthful heart—the same baptism under which he was being judged, when in receiving it he had renounced the world with words only and not with deeds. Pusillus of Lamasba said: I believe baptism to be salutary only in the Catholic Church. Whatever is apart from the Catholic Church is pretense. This indeed is true, that baptism is not salutary except in the Catholic Church.

For baptism itself can exist even outside the Catholic Church, but there it is not salutary, because there it does not work salvation—just as that good odor of Christ is certainly not salutary in those who perish, not through its own fault but through theirs. But whatever is outside the Catholic Church is pretense—yet only insofar as it is not Catholic. Now something Catholic can exist outside the Catholic Church, just as the name of Christ could exist outside the congregation of Christ, in which name that man cast out demons who did not follow with the disciples. For pretense can exist even within the Catholic Church, in those namely who renounce the world with words and not with deeds; and yet that Catholic thing is not pretense.

As therefore there is within the Catholic Church that which is not Catholic, so there can be outside the Catholic Church something that is Catholic. Salvianus of Gazanfala said: It is agreed that heretics have nothing, and therefore they come to us, that they may receive what they did not have. We answer: Then those very men who founded the heresies are not heretics, since they withdrew from the Church and certainly had what they had received there. But if it is absurd to say that those are not heretics through whom the rest become heretics, then it can be that a heretic has that by which, using it ill, he perishes. Honoratus of Tucca said:

Since Christ is truth, we ought rather to follow truth than custom, so that we may sanctify with the Church's baptism the heretics who come to us for the reason that outside they could receive nothing. This man too is a witness to the custom, wherein he most helps us, whatever else he may seem to say against us. But heretics do not come to us for the reason that outside they received nothing; rather, they come so that what they received may begin to be profitable to them—for this can in no way happen outside. Victor of Octavum said: As you yourselves also know, I was not long ago appointed bishop, and therefore I awaited the counsel of my predecessors. This then is what I think: that whoever come from heresy should without doubt be baptized.

What therefore was answered to those whom he awaited, let it be taken as the answer to this man too. Clarus of Mascula said: Manifest is the sentence of our Lord Jesus Christ, sending his apostles and granting to them alone the power given to him by the Father—apostles whom we have succeeded, governing the Lord's Church with the same power and baptizing the faith of believers. And therefore heretics, who have neither the power outside nor the Church of Christ, can baptize no one with his baptism. Did impious murderers too succeed the apostles? Why then do they baptize? Is it because they are not outside? But they are outside the rock, to which the Lord gave the keys and upon which he said he would build his Church. Secundianus of Thambeis said:

We ought not to deceive heretics by our presumption, so that, not being baptized in the Church of our Lord Jesus Christ and thereby not having obtained remission of sins, they may, when the day of judgment comes, impute to us that through our fault they were not baptized and did not obtain the pardon of divine grace. Wherefore, since there is one Church and one baptism, when they are converted to us, let them together with the Church obtain also the Church's baptism. Nay rather, let them, transferred to the rock and united to the dove, receive the remission of sins which they could not have outside the rock and outside the dove—whether openly outside, like heretics, or as it were within, like ruined Catholics.

Yet it is manifest that such men both have and give baptism without remission of sins, since even from these very men such persons receive it—those who, not changed for the better, honor God with their lips, while their heart is far from him. Yet baptism is one in the same way as the dove is one, since those who are not in the dove can nevertheless have baptism in common. Likewise another, Aurelius of Chullabi, said: John the apostle set down in his epistle: 'If anyone comes to you and does not have the doctrine of Christ, do not receive him into your house, and do not say hail to him; for he who says hail to him communicates in his evil deeds.' How can such men be rashly admitted into the house of God, who are forbidden to be admitted into our private house?

Or how can we communicate with them without the Church's baptism, with whom, if we say but 'hail,' we communicate in their evil deeds? Concerning this testimony of John there is no need to discourse at length, since it pertains not at all to the question of baptism which we are now treating. For he says: 'If anyone comes to you and does not have the doctrine of Christ.' But heretics, leaving behind the doctrine of their error, are converted to the doctrine of Christ, that they may be incorporated into the Church and begin to belong to that dove whose sacrament they possessed. And therefore that which was not hers they had, is given to them—that is, peace and charity from a pure heart and a good conscience and faith unfeigned.

But that which was hers they had is acknowledged and received without any affront, just as in the adulteress God acknowledges his own gifts even when she follows her lovers; for when the fornication is corrected, when she turns to chastity, those gifts are not blamed, but she herself is amended. But just as Cyprian could defend himself, if this testimony of John were cast at him, when he communicated with such men, so let those against whom it is alleged defend themselves. For, as I said, it pertains not at all to this question. For John says that hail is not to be said to men of alien doctrine; but Paul the apostle says more vehemently: 'If any man that is named a brother among you be either covetous or a drunkard,' and the rest, 'with such a one not even to take food together.'

And yet with his colleagues who were usurers, deceitful, defrauders, plunderers, Cyprian had in common not a private table, but the altar of God. But how this is to be defended has already been sufficiently said in other books. Litteus of Gemellae said: If the blind lead the blind, both fall into the pit. Since therefore it is agreed that heretics cannot enlighten anyone, being blind, their baptism is of no avail. Nor do we say that it avails unto salvation so long as they are heretics—just as it does not avail those murderers so long as they hate their brothers. For they too are in darkness, and if anyone follows them, they fall together into the pit; nor even so, however, do they either not have baptism or not hand it on. Natalis of Oea said:

Both I who am present, and Pompeius of Sabrata, and also Dioga of Leptis Magna—who, being absent in body but present in spirit, have commissioned me—we judge, as our colleagues also do, that heretics cannot have communion with us unless they have been baptized with ecclesiastical baptism. I believe he means by 'communion' that which pertains to the fellowship of the dove. For in the participation of the sacraments they doubtless communicated with these men, judging no one, nor removing anyone from the right of communion if he held a different view. But in whatever manner he may have said it, these words need not be greatly refuted. For certainly a heretic does not have communion unless he is baptized with ecclesiastical baptism.

But it is agreed that baptism is ecclesiastical even among heretics, when it is consecrated with the words of the Gospel—just as the Gospel itself is ecclesiastical and does not pertain to their perversity, but assuredly retains its own holiness. Junius of Neapolis said: I do not depart from what we have once judged: let us baptize the baptized who come to the Church. Since this man brought forward no reasoning or testimony of the Scriptures, he need not detain us long. Cyprian of Carthage said:

My opinion is most fully expressed by the epistle which was written to our colleague Jubaianus: that heretics, according to the evangelical and apostolic testimony, are called adversaries of Christ and antichrists; and when they come to the Church, they must be baptized with the one baptism of the Church, that from adversaries they may be made friends, and from antichrists Christians. What else is here to be discussed, when that very epistle which he mentioned, sent to Jubaianus, we have treated with all the diligence we could? And let us remember that what he here said can be said of all the wicked, whom he himself testifies to be even within the Catholic Church, and whom none of us doubts to have and to give baptism.

For those come to the Church who pass over from the part of the devil to Christ, and build upon the rock, and are incorporated into the dove, and are fortified in the enclosed garden and the sealed fountain—where all those are not who live against the precepts of Christ, wherever they may seem to be. For in the epistle which he wrote to Magnus, when he was treating of this very matter, he himself sufficiently and plainly admonished us in what kind of fellowship the Church ought to be understood. For, speaking of a certain one, he says: 'Let him be made a stranger and profane, an enemy of the Lord's peace and of the Lord's unity, not dwelling in the house of God'—that is, in the Church of Christ, in which none dwell save the concordant and unanimous.

What then we here say, let those attend a little who wish to prescribe to us concerning Cyprian. For if in the Church of Christ none dwell save the concordant and unanimous, then without doubt they did not dwell in the Church of Christ—although they seemed to be within—those who through envy and contention, without charity, proclaimed Christ; whom he himself understands to be not heretics or schismatics mentioned by Paul the apostle, but false brethren dwelling inwardly among them. These certainly ought not to baptize, since they did not dwell in the Church, in which he himself says that none dwell save the unanimous and concordant;

unless perchance someone so shrinks from the truth as to say that the envious and malevolent and, without charity, contentious were concordant and unanimous. And yet they baptized, nor did that detestable perversity of theirs in any part diminish or violate the sacrament of Christ, which was handled and dispensed through them. It is indeed worthwhile to treat the whole passage itself, set down in the same epistle to Magnus, which he wove together thus: 'not dwelling,' he says, 'in the house of God—that is, in the Church of Christ, in which none dwell save the concordant and unanimous, the Holy Spirit speaking in the Psalms and saying: God who makes those of one mind to dwell in a house.'

Finally, the Lord's very sacrifices declare that Christians are bound to one another by unanimity, with firm and inseparable charity. For when the Lord calls his body bread, gathered together from the union of many grains, he indicates our people whom he bore, made one; and when he calls his blood wine, pressed out from many clusters and grapes and forced into one, he likewise signifies our flock, joined together by the mingling of a united multitude. These words of blessed Cyprian indicate that he both understood and loved the beauty of the house of God, which house he affirmed and taught—by prophetic testimony and by the signification of the sacraments—to consist of the unanimous and concordant;

in which house those envious and, without charity, malevolent men certainly were not—yet they baptized. From which it appears that the sacrament of Christ can both be in, and be given by, those who are not in the Church of Christ, in which Cyprian himself testifies that none dwell save the unanimous and concordant. For not even this can be said, that they were able to baptize only when they were hidden, since those men were not hidden from Paul the apostle, whom in his epistle the most truthful witness notes and says that he rejoices, because they too proclaimed Christ. For of these he says: 'Whether in pretense or in truth Christ be proclaimed, in this I rejoice, yea and I will rejoice.'

All these things considered, I think I do not rashly say that some are in the house of God in such a way that they themselves also are that same house of God which is said to be built upon the rock, which is called the one dove, which is the fair bride without spot or wrinkle, and the enclosed garden, the sealed fountain, the well of living water, the paradise with the fruit of apples—which house also received the keys and the power of loosing and binding. If anyone despise this house when it reproves and corrects him, 'let him be to you,' he says, 'as a heathen and a publican.' Of this house it is said: 'Lord, I have loved the beauty of thy house and the place of the habitation of thy glory'; and: 'who makes those of one mind to dwell in a house'; and: 'I was glad in those who said to me: we shall go into the house of the Lord'; and:

'Blessed are they that dwell in thy house; they will praise thee forever and ever'; and innumerable such passages. This house is also called wheat, bearing fruit thirtyfold or sixtyfold or a hundredfold, with endurance. This house is among vessels of gold and of silver and precious stones and imperishable wood. To this house it is said: 'Bearing with one another in love, being eager to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace'; and: 'for the temple of God is holy, which you are.' This house indeed exists among the good faithful and the holy servants of God, dispersed everywhere and bound together by spiritual unity in the same communion of the sacraments, whether they know one another by face or do not know one another.

But others, I say, are in the house in such a way that they do not pertain to the framework of the house, nor to the fellowship of fruitful and peaceable righteousness, but are as chaff is said to be among the grain. For that these too are in the house we cannot deny, since the apostle says: 'In a great house there are not only vessels of gold or silver, but also of wood and earthenware; and some indeed are unto honor, but others unto dishonor.' Out of this innumerable number, not only does a crowd within press upon the heart of the few in comparison with so great a multitude of the saints, but also, the nets being broken, heresies and schisms arise among those who are now to be said to be rather out of the house than in the house—of whom it is said: 'They went out from us, but they were not of us.'

For those who are now even bodily segregated are more separated than those who inwardly live carnally and animally and are spiritually separated. But of all these kinds, that first kind who are in the house of God in such a way that they themselves are the house of God—whether they are already spiritual, or are still little ones nourished with milk, yet nevertheless advance toward the spiritual habit with an intent heart—no one doubts that they both usefully have baptism and usefully hand it on to those who imitate them. But the feigned, whom the Holy Spirit flees, even though they themselves, as far as in them lies, usefully hand it on, yet those others receive it uselessly, not imitating those through whom they receive.

But those who are in the great house as vessels unto dishonor both uselessly have baptism and uselessly hand it on to those who imitate them. Yet those receive usefully from them who are joined not to them in heart and morals, but to the holy house. But those who, being more separated, are rather out of the house than in the house, neither have it at all usefully, nor is it received usefully from them—unless perchance the necessity of receiving presses, and the mind of the receiver does not depart from the bond of unity. Yet they both have it, although they have it uselessly, and it is received from them, even when it is useless to those receiving. That it may become useful, one must withdraw from heresy or schism and cleave to that house.

This not only heretics and schismatics, but also those ought to do who are in the house through the communion of the sacraments in such a way that they are outside the house through the diversity of their morals. For thus the sacrament begins to be useful even to themselves, which otherwise is useless.

It is also wont to be asked whether that ought to be approved which is received from one who has not himself received it—if perchance he has learned through some curiosity how it should be given; and whether it makes no difference with what intent he receives to whom it is given, whether with pretense or without pretense; if with pretense, whether deceiving, as in the Church or in that which is thought to be the Church, or jesting, as in a mime; and which is more wicked, to receive deceitfully in the Church, or in heresy or schism without deceit—that is, with an intent not feigned; and whether it is worse to receive deceitfully in heresy, or in a mime with faith, if anyone in the course of the acting be moved by a sudden piety.