Letter 204: Augustine tells Dulcitius to pursue unity firmly while rejecting Donatist arguments for self-inflicted death.

To Dulcitius, an excellent lord and honorable son: Augustine sends greetings in the Lord. I ought not to disregard your request. You wanted me to instruct you how you should answer the heretics whose salvation is being sought by the Lord's mercy and by the persistence of your energy. We rejoice greatly that enormous numbers of them understand what benefit is being conferred on them. Yet some of them, ungrateful to God and to human beings through a miserable impulse of madness, believe that when they cannot devastate us by killing us, they can frighten us by destroying themselves. They look either for joy from our deaths or for our grief from their own deaths. But the raging error of a few people must not obstruct the salvation of so many and such great peoples. What we want for them is recognized not only by God and by prudent people, but even by those people themselves when they are most hostile to us. When they think we can be frightened by their destruction, they do not doubt that we fear their perishing. But what are we to do, when we see that many, with the Lord's help and through your occasion, are finding the way of peace? Can we, or should we, forbid you from this pursuit of unity because we fear that certain very hard and very cruel people will destroy themselves, not by our will but by their own? We would certainly wish that all who carry Christ's sign against Christ, and boast against the Gospel from the very Gospel they do not understand, would leave their perversity and rejoice with us in his unity. But since God, by a disposition hidden enough yet still just, has predestined some of them to extreme punishments, it is undoubtedly better that, after incomparably many more have been restored and gathered back from that destructive division and scattering, some perish by their own fires than that all alike burn in the eternal fires of Gehenna for the crime of sacrilegious dissension. The Church grieves over those who die in this way just as holy David grieved over his rebel son, whose life he had lovingly ordered to be spared. When that son was killed by the merit of his wicked impiety, David groaned with the testimony of a tearful voice. Yet after that proud and malicious man went to his own place, the people of God, who had been divided by his tyranny, recognized their king; and the perfection of unity consoled the father's grief over the lost son. So we do not blame you, excellent lord and honorable son, for deciding that such people at Thamugadi should first be warned by an edict. But when you said there, "Know that you will be given over to the death you deserve," they thought, as their reply shows, that you were threatening to kill them once they were arrested. They did not understand that you were speaking of the death they want to bring on themselves. You have not received the right of the sword against them under any laws, nor were you commanded by the imperial enactments entrusted to you for execution to have them killed. In your second edict Your Love explained more plainly what you meant. As for your decision to address even their bishop by letter in a most humane way, you showed with what gentleness even those who, by the power of a Christian emperor, are placed over the correction of errors, whether by frightening or by punishing, are tempered in the catholic Church. My only reservation is that you treated a heretic with more honorable words than was fitting. You wanted me to answer his reply because, I believe, you thought this too should be provided for the people of Thamugadi: that the false teaching by which they were being seduced should be refuted somewhat more carefully. But we are very busy, and in many other works of ours we have already refuted empty talk of this kind. Again and again, by speaking and writing, we have shown that they cannot have the death of martyrs, because they do not have the life of Christians; it is not punishment but the cause that makes a martyr. We have also taught that free choice was given to human beings in such a way that very serious punishments for grave sins are nevertheless rightly established by both divine and human laws, and that it belongs to religious kings of the earth to restrain with fitting severity not only adultery, murder, and other crimes of that sort, but also sacrileges. They are greatly mistaken when they think that we receive such people just as they are because we do not rebaptize them. How are they received just as they are, when they are heretics and by coming over to us become catholic? Crooked hearts may certainly be corrected, even though sacraments once given may not be repeated. As for the most frenzied deaths that some of them inflict on themselves, deaths for which they are often detestable and hateful even to many of their own people whose minds have not been possessed by such great madness, we have often answered them according to Scripture and Christian reasoning. It is written, "Whoever is evil to himself, to whom will he be good?" Or if someone thinks it is useful and lawful to kill himself, because Scripture says, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," let him also kill a neighbor who, placed in the same temptations, wants to die. But Scripture in the books of Kingdoms indicates clearly enough that it is not lawful to kill another person, even one who wants and asks for it and can no longer live, unless laws or lawful powers command it. King David ordered the killer of King Saul to be put to death, although that man said Saul, already wounded and half alive, had asked him to do it and to free by one blow the soul struggling against the body's bonds and longing to be released from those torments. Therefore everyone who kills a human being without any authority of lawful power is a murderer. Whoever kills himself is not a murderer only if he is not a human being. We have said all this in many ways in many other sermons and letters of ours. Still, I admit that I do not recall ever answering them about that elder Razis. When, pressed by a total lack of examples and after searching through all the church authorities, they glory that they have barely found him in the books of the Maccabees as authority for the crime by which they destroy themselves, this is enough for Your Charity and for any prudent people to refute them. If they are ready to transfer every example of deeds from the Jewish people and those Scriptures to the life of Christians, then let them transfer this too. But if there are many deeds even of people praised by the truth of those Scriptures that are either not fitting for this present time or were not rightly done even then, then what Razis did against himself is of that kind. He was noble among his own people and had made much progress in Judaism, things which the apostle says were loss and refuse compared with Christian righteousness, and for this reason Razis was called father of the Jews. What wonder is it if proud self-exaltation crept in on him as a human being, so that he preferred to die by his own hand rather than, after such height in the sight of his people, endure an unworthy slavery in the hands of enemies? Such things are often praised in the writings of the Gentiles. But in these books of the Maccabees, although the man himself was praised, his deed was narrated, not praised. It was set before our eyes to be judged rather than imitated, not judged by our own judgment, which we too could have as human beings, but by the judgment of sober teaching, which is clear even in those old books. Razis was far from the words where it is written, "Accept whatever is brought upon you, and in pain endure, and in your humility have patience." He was not wise in choosing death; he was impatient in bearing humiliation. It is written that he wanted to die nobly and bravely. But does that mean wisely? Nobly, because he did not want, as a captive, to lose the freedom of his race; bravely, because he had such strength of spirit that he was fit to kill himself. When he could not accomplish this with a sword, he threw himself down from the wall, then, still alive, ran to a broken rock. There, already drained of blood, he pulled out his entrails, tore them apart with both hands, scattered them among the people, and then at last collapsed exhausted. These are great things, but they are not good. Not every great thing is good, for there are also great evils. God said, "Do not kill the innocent and just." If Razis was not innocent and just, why is he put forward for imitation? But if he was innocent and just, why is the killer of an innocent and just man, that is, Razis himself, thought worthy of praise besides? For now, lest this letter become too long, let these things be enough to fill it. I owe the people of Thamugadi this service of charity, because they have been well commended to me both by your wish and by my honorable and very dear son Eleusinus, who served as tribune among them. I will answer both letters of Gaudentius, bishop of the Donatists, and especially the later one, which he thinks he wrote according to the holy Scriptures, so that nothing may seem to have been passed over.

EPISTOLA 204 Scripta ca. a. 419/420. A. Dulcitio, tribuno et notario, imperialium edictorum executori (cf. Retr. 2, 59), docens ad Ecclesiae unitatem imprimis adlaborandum prudenter sed firme seque Donatistarum querelis iam abunde satisfecisse (nn. 1-4) vesanosque esse qui sibi ultro necem consciscerent, ut fuit Razis quidam Machabaeorum aetate (nn. 5-8), pollicensque denique se Thamugadensibus responsurum (n. 9). DOMINO EXIMIO, ET HONORABILI FILIO DULCITIO, AUGUSTINUS, SALUTEM IN DOMINO. Plurimorum saluti providendum quorumdam spreto furore. 1. Non debui contemnere petitionem tuam, qua desiderasti a me institui quemadmodum te oporteat haereticis respondere, quorum salus in Domini misericordia, instantia quoque tuae strenuitatis inquiritur. Quamvis enim ingentes eorum multitudines (unde plurimum gratulamur), quid sibi beneficii conferatur intellegant; quidam tamen eorum Deo et hominibus miserabili instinctu furoris ingrati, ubi suis caedibus nos vastare non possunt, suo nos exitio terrere se credunt, aut laetitiam suam quaerentes de mortibus nostris, aut tristitiam nostram de mortibus suis. Sed non debet tot tantorumque populorum salutem furiosus error hominum impedire paucorum. Quid eis velimus non solum Deus et prudentes homines, verum etiam ipsi, cum sint nobis inimicissimi, sentiunt. Cum enim sua pernicie nos terrendos putant, non dubitant nos timere ne pereant. A. summopere unitatem exoptat Christianorum. 2. Sed quid faciamus, videntes quod multi, adiuvante Domino, per occasionem vestram viam pacis inveniant? numquid prohibere vos possumus vel debemus ab hac unitatis instantia, dum metuimus ne quidam durissimi, et in seipsos crudelissimi, non nostra, sed propria voluntate se perdant? Optaremus quidem ut omnes qui contra Christum portant signum Christi, et contra Evangelium de ipso Evangelio, quod non intellegunt, gloriantur, a sua perversitate discederent, et nobiscum in eius unitate gauderent. Sed quoniam Deus occulta satis dispositione, sed tamen iusta, nonnullos eorum poenis praedestinavit extremis; procul dubio melius, incomparabili numerositate plurimis ab illa pestifera divisione et dispersione redintegratis atque collectis, quidam suis ignibus pereunt, quam pariter universi sempiternis ignibus gehennarum merito sacrilegae dissensionis ardebunt 1. Sic enim pereuntes istos dolet Ecclesia, quemadmodum rebellem filium sanctus David, de cuius salute servanda sollicita dilectione mandaverat. Nam eum merito nefandae impietatis exstinctum, etiam cum testimonio lacrymosae vocis ingemuit: verumtamen superbo et maligno discedente in locum suum, populus Dei, qui fuerat illius tyrannide divisus, agnovit regem suum; et de amisso filio moerorem patris, perfectio consolata est unitatis 2. Quomodo tractandi Donatistae. 3. Non itaque reprehendimus, domine eximie et honorabilis fili, quod tales homines apud Thamugadem prius edicto admonendos existimasti: sed quod ibi dixisti: "Noveritis vos debitae neci dandos", putaverunt sicut eorum rescripta indicant, hoc te fuisse comminatum quod tu illos apprehensos fueras occisurus, non intellegentes de illa nece, quam ipsi sibi volunt ingerere, te locutum. Non enim tu in eos ius gladii ullis legibus accepisti, aut imperialibus constitutis, quorum tibi iniuncta est exsecutio, hoc praeceptum est ut necentur. Secundo sane edicto Dilectionis tuae planius quid volueris aperuisti. Quod autem etiam ipsum episcopum illorum putasti litteris alloquendum humanissime; ostendisti quanta mansuetudine temperati sint in catholica Ecclesia etiam qui potestate christiani Imperatoris, sive terrendo, sive plectendo corrigendis praeficiuntur erroribus; nisi quod honorificentioribus eum verbis tractasti quam decebat haereticum. Quam saepe A. Donatismum refutaverit. 4. Sed quod eius responsioni me respondere voluisti, credo te arbitratum etiam hoc Thamugadensibus debere praestari, ut fallax doctrina ipsius a quo seducebantur, aliquanto diligentius refellatur: verum nos et occupatissimi sumus, et iam in aliis plurimis opusculis nostris huiusmodi vaniloquia refutavimus. Iam enim nescio quoties disputando et scribendo monstravimus non eos posse habere martyrum mortem, quia christianorum non habent vitam; cum martyrem non faciat poena, sed causa. Docuimus etiam liberum arbitrium sic homini datum, ut tamen et divinis legibus et humanis rectissime gravium supplicia constituta sint peccatorum; et pertinere ad religiosos reges terrae, non solum adulteria vel homicidia vel huiusmodi alia flagitia seu facinora, verum etiam sacrilegia severitate congrua cohibere: multumque illos falli qui putant a nobis tales istos suscipi, quales sunt, quia non eos rebaptizamus. Quomodo enim tales suscipiuntur quales sunt, cum sint haeretici, et ad nos transeundo fiant catholici? Neque enim propterea corda depravata non licet corrigi, quia Sacramenta semel data non licet iterari. Ne volentes quidem licet occidere. 5. De mortibus autem furiosissimis quas quidam eorum ipsi sibi inferunt, de quibus solent detestabiles et abominabiles esse multis etiam suis, quorum mentes dementia non tanta possedit, eis secundum Scripturas rationesque Christianorum saepe respondimus quoniam scriptum est: Qui sibi nequam, cui bonus? 3 Aut certe in eisdem positum tentationibus mori volentem occidat et proximum, qui sibi expedire et licere putat occidere seipsum, quoniam Scriptura dicit: Diliges proximum tuum tamquam teipsum 4. Nullis autem iubentibus legibus vel legitimis potestatibus, non licere alterum occidere, etiam volentem et petentem, et vivere iam non valentem, satis indicat Scriptura Regnorum, ubi rex David regis Saülis interfectorem iussit occidi, cum ille dixisset ab eo iam saucio atque semivivo petitum se fuisse ut hoc faceret, et animam corporis nexibus obluctantem solvique cupientem uno ictu vulneris ab illis cruciatibus liberaret 5. Proinde quia omnis qui sine ulla legitimae potestatis auctoritate hominem occidit, homicida est; quisquis seipsum occidit non sit homicida, si non homo est. Haec omnia multimodis in aliis plurimis nostris sermonibus et litteris diximus. Voluntaria Razis mors minime laudant. 6. Verumtamen, quod fatendum est, de isto Razio seniore, quem summa exemplorum inopia coarctati se in Machabaeorum libris 6, quasi ad auctoritatem sceleris quo seipsos perdunt, perscrutatis omnibus ecclesiasticis auctoritatibus, vix aliquando se invenisse gloriantur, adhuc eis numquam respondisse me recolo. Sed, quod tuae Caritati et prudentibus quibusque sufficiat ad istos redarguendos, si ad vitam Christianorum de Iudaea gente atque illis Litteris parati sunt omnium factorum exempla transferre, tunc et hoc transferant. Si autem illic sunt plurima eorum quoque hominum, qui Litterarum illarum veritate laudati sunt, vel huic iam tempori non convenientia vel etiam illo tempore non recte facta; tale etiam hoc est, quod in seipsum Razius iste commisit: qui cum esset apud suos nobilis, et multum in Iudaismo profecisset (quae sibi in comparatione iustitiae christianae damna et stercora fuisse dicit Apostolus 7), et propter hoc idem Razius Iudaeorum pater appellaretur; quid mirum est, si tamquam homini elatio superba subrepsit, ut mallet manu propria perimi, quam post illam in suorum aspectibus celsitudinem, sustinere indignam in hostium manibus servitutem? Razis mortem Scriptura narrat, non laudat. 7. Solent in litteris Gentilium ista laudari. In his autem Machabaeorum libris quamvis homo ipse fuerit laudatus, factum tamen eius narratum est, non laudatum, et iudicandum potius quam imitandum quasi ante oculos constitutum; non sane nostro iudicio iudicandum, quod nos quoque ut homines habere possemus, sed iudicio doctrinae sobriae, quae in ipsis quoque Libris veteribus clara est. Longe quippe fuit iste Razius a verbis illis, ubi legitur: Omne quod tibi applicitum fuerit accipe, et in dolore sustine, et in humilitate tua patientiam habe 8. Non ergo fuit iste vir eligendae mortis sapiens, sed ferendae humilitatis impatiens. Razis facinus insipientis fuisse. 8. Scriptum est quod voluerit nobiliter et viriliter mori 9; sed numquid ideo sapienter? Nobiliter scilicet, ne libertatem sui generis captivus amitteret: viriliter autem, quod tantas vires animi haberet, quibus idoneus esset ut se ipse perimeret; quod gladio cum implere non posset, de muro se praecipitem dedit, et sic adhuc vivus abruptam cucurrit ad petram, atque ibi iam exsanguis intestina sua produxit, quae utraque manu dissipata spargebat in populum, ac deinde postea defessus occubuit 10. Magna haec sunt, nec tamen bona: non enim bonum est omne quod magnum est; quoniam sunt magna etiam mala. Deus dixit: Innocentem et iustum ne occidas 11. Si ergo iste innocens et iustus non fuit, cur proponitur imitandus? Si autem innocens et iustus fuit, quare interfector innocentis et iusti, id est ipsius Razii, insuper putatur esse laudandus? A. respondebit Thamugadensibus. 9. Haec interim, ne nimium prolixa fiat, huic epistolae implendae satis sint. Debeo autem Thamugadensibus eiusmodi ministerium caritatis, quoniam mihi et voto tuo et ab honorabili et carissimo filio meo Eleusino, qui tribunatum apud eos egit, bene insinuati sunt, ut ambabus epistolis Gaudentii Donatistarum episcopi, et maxime posteriori, quam secundum Scripturas sanctas se fecisse arbitratur, ita respondeam, ne aliquid praetermissum putetur.