# To the Donatists after the Collation - Author: [Augustine of Hippo](https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/authors/augustine-of-hippo/) - Latin title: *Ad Donatistas post collationem (Contra partem Donati post gesta)* - Date: ca. 412 (approximate) - Source: Michael Petschenig, ed., Sancti Aureli Augustini scripta contra Donatistas, pars III, CSEL 53 (Vienna: Tempsky; Leipzig: Freytag, 1910) (Latin text: Michael Petschenig, Contra partem Donati post gesta (CSEL 53, 1910), digitized by Open Greek and Latin (csel-dev, University of Leipzig), CC BY-SA 4.0) - Translation: Claude, from the original text, unless a passage says otherwise; each passage below gives the translator - Work page: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/ - Passages: 58 ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 1 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-1 - Source: CSEL 53:97–98 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Augustine asks the Donatist laity why their bishops, who had refused to meet “the offspring of betrayers,” came to the conference of 411, and answers their claim that the judge was bribed. ### Latin text Quid adhuc, Donatistae, seducimini ab episcopis uestris, quorum fallaces tenebrae clara luce discussae sunt, quorum error apparuit, quorum pertinacia superata est? quid adhuc uobis iactant uana mendacia? quid adhuc creditis hominibus uictis? cum uobis dicunt iudicem praemio fuisse corruptum, quid nouum faciunt? quid aliud omnes uicti facere consuerunt, qui ueritati consentire nolunt, nisi ut de iudicis iniquitate mentiantur? quaerite ab eis et ad hoc primum uobis respondeant, si possunt, quare ausi sunt uenire Carthaginem et in unum locum nobiscum conlationis gratia conuenire. iam ante aliquot annos conueneramus eos publice, ut nobis conferentibus ueritas appareret et dissensio quae nos diuidit de medio tolleretur, sed ipsam ueritatem refugientes actis responderunt: indignum est ut in unum conueniant filii martyrum et progenies traditorum. quare ergo modo nobiscum conuenire uoluerunt? puto quod non facerent, quod eis uidebatur indignum, nisi nos cognoscerent non esse progeniem traditorum. aut certe ipsi nobis respondeant, quare dixerunt: indignum est ut in unum conueniant filii martyrum et progenies traditorum et in unum nobiscum postea conuenerunt. quae res eos coegit facere quod indignum est? non enim ligati adducti sunt, sed omnino liberi conuenerunt. si dixerint: quia iusserat imperator, ergo tunc faciunt quod indignum est, quando iusserit imperator. quid ergo irascuntur nescio quibus traditoribus ad causam nostram non pertinentibus? codices enim dominicos persecutoribus dare utique indignum est; quod cum fecit traditor, non habet crimen, quia iusserat imperator. hoc dicimus non secundum ueritatem, sed secundum ipsorum peruersitatem. ipsi enim dixerunt — publica gesta proclamant —, apud acta dixerunt. non quilibet ignotus, sed Carthaginiensis episcopus eorum Primianus hoc dixit, Primianus hoc scriptum magistratui Carthaginis dedit et a diacono suo dicendum apud acta mandauit: indignum est ut in unum conueniant filii martyrum et progenies traditorum. ecce conuenimus in unum: quid ad ista respondent? si dicunt (non est indignum, quare mentiti sunt, quando indignum esse dixerunt? si dicunt (indignum est, quod indignum est quare fecerunt? uno modo se poterunt adserere quod indignum est non fecisse et in illis Primiani uerbis non fuisse mentitos, si dicant: indignum est quidem ut in unum conueniant filii martyrum et progenies traditorum, sed nos ideo uobiscum in unum conuenimus, quia cognouimus uos non esse progeniem traditorum. quod si ita est, quare nobis iam conuenientes in unum ipsas calumnias obiecerunt, nisi forte ut etiam nos eos cognosceremus non esse filios martyrum? martyres enim testes dicuntur. testes autem Christi ueri testes sunt. isti autem falsi testes inuenti sunt, qui traditionis crimina et aliena aliis obiecerunt et nec ipsa probare potuerunt. ### English translation (Claude) Why, Donatists, do you still let yourselves be led astray by your bishops, whose deceitful darkness has been scattered by clear light, whose error has been exposed, whose stubbornness has been overcome? Why do they still boast empty lies to you? Why do you still believe men who have been defeated? When they tell you that the judge was corrupted by a bribe, what new thing are they doing? What else are all the defeated accustomed to do, who will not consent to the truth, but lie about the judge’s injustice? Ask them, and let them answer you this first, if they can: why did they dare to come to Carthage and to meet with us in one place for the sake of a conference? Some years ago we summoned them publicly, so that by our conferring the truth might appear and the dissension that divides us might be removed from our midst; but fleeing the truth itself, they answered on record: “It is unworthy that the sons of the martyrs and the offspring of betrayers should come together in one place.” Why, then, did they now wish to meet with us? I suppose they would not do what seemed to them unworthy unless they knew that we are not the offspring of betrayers. Or else let them answer us why they said, “It is unworthy that the sons of the martyrs and the offspring of betrayers should come together in one place,” and afterward came together with us in one place. What compelled them to do what is unworthy? For they were not brought in bound, but came together entirely free. If they say, “Because the emperor had ordered it,” then they do what is unworthy when the emperor orders it. Why, then, are they angry at some betrayers or other who have nothing to do with our case? For to give the Lord’s books to persecutors is certainly unworthy; and when a betrayer did this, he has no guilt, because the emperor had ordered it. We say this not according to the truth but according to their own perversity. For they said it (the public records proclaim it), they said it on record. Not some unknown person, but their bishop of Carthage, Primian, said this; Primian gave this in writing to the magistrate of Carthage and instructed his deacon to say it on record: “It is unworthy that the sons of the martyrs and the offspring of betrayers should come together in one place.” See, we have come together in one place: what do they answer to this? If they say, “It is not unworthy,” why did they lie when they said it was unworthy? If they say, “It is unworthy,” why did they do what is unworthy? There is only one way they can claim both that they did not do what is unworthy and that they did not lie in those words of Primian: if they say, “It is indeed unworthy that the sons of the martyrs and the offspring of betrayers should come together in one place; but we came together with you in one place because we learned that you are not the offspring of betrayers.” If that is so, why, when we were already together in one place, did they throw those same slanders at us, unless perhaps so that we too might learn that they are not the sons of the martyrs? For martyrs are called witnesses; and the witnesses of Christ are true witnesses. But these were found to be false witnesses, who charged the crimes of betrayal, and those of some against others, and could not prove even these. ### Translation notes - This address “to the Donatists after the conference” (412) is written to the Donatist laity. Primian’s words (“It is unworthy …”) are quoted as a Donatist statement; see also Breviculus 3.4. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 1 (CSEL 53:97–98; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/1). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 2 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-2 - Source: CSEL 53:98–99 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Scripture foretold a church spreading from Jerusalem to all nations, yet the Donatists refuse communion with the very churches to which the apostles wrote. ### Latin text Quid adhuc adtenditis humana mendacia et diuina testimonia non adtenditis? quid adhuc uictis hominibus creditis et ueritati, quae numquam est uicta, non creditis? ueritas enim dei, sicut in ipsa etiam conlatione probauimus, perhibuit testimonium ecclesiae suae per multa documenta scripturarum sanctarum, per propheticas et euangelicas litteras; et locus designatus est, unde Christi ecclesia fuerat inceptura, et fines terrae, quo usque fuerat peruentura. per omnes gentes futuram ecclesiam suam dominus dicit incipientem ab Hierusalem. diuina lectio recitatur, quemadmodum coeperit ab Hierusalem, ubi primum congregatis fidelibus missus est de caelo spiritus sanctus. diuinae lectiones recitantur, quemadmodum se ab Hierusalem per uicina et longinqua diffuderit. expressa sunt nomina locorum, manifestata sunt nomina ciuitatum, in quibus ecclesia Christi apostolico labore fundata est, quae loca et ciuitates etiam epistulas ab apostolis accipere meruerunt; quas epistulas et ipsi in uestris congregationibus legunt et tamen non communicant eorum locorum et ciuitatium ecclesiis, quae ipsas epistulas accipere meruerunt, obicientes eis nescio qua crimina Afrorum, quod eorum contagione perierint, cum ipsi dixerint in hac ipsa conlatione, quam modo Carthagini habuimus, quod nec causae causa nec personae persona praeiudicet. ### English translation (Claude) Why do you still pay attention to human lies and not pay attention to divine testimonies? Why do you still believe defeated men and not believe the truth, which has never been defeated? For the truth of God, as we proved at the conference itself, has borne witness to his church through many proofs of the holy Scriptures, through the prophetic and Gospel writings; and the place was marked out from which the church of Christ was to begin, and the ends of the earth, as far as which it was to reach. The Lord says that his church is to be in all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. The divine reading is read of how it began from Jerusalem, where the Holy Spirit was first sent from heaven upon the gathered faithful. The divine readings are read of how it spread from Jerusalem through places near and far. The names of the places are stated, the names of the cities made known, in which the church of Christ was founded by apostolic labor, places and cities which were even counted worthy to receive letters from the apostles. These letters your bishops themselves read in your congregations, and yet they are not in communion with the churches of those places and cities which were counted worthy to receive those very letters, charging them with some crimes or other of Africans, as if they had perished by their contagion; although they themselves said, at this very conference which we lately held at Carthage, that neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person. ### Scripture references - Luke 24:47: allusion, high confidence - Acts 2:1–4: allusion, high confidence - Acts 1:8: allusion, medium confidence ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 2 (CSEL 53:98–99; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/2). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 3 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-3 - Source: CSEL 53:99–100 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The Donatists conceded that “one case does not prejudice another” to protect Primian, yet deny the same to Caecilian and the worldwide church. ### Latin text Tunc autem hoc dixerunt, quando eis diximus: concilium, quod contra Caecilianum profertis, sic non obest absenti Caeciliano, quemadmodum concilium, quod in causa Maximiani factum est, ubi damnatus est Primianus, non obest absenti Primiano. protulerunt enim, ubi septuaginta et quod excurrit episcopi absentem damnauerant Caecilianum, cum proferantur plus minus centum episcopi partis ipsorum, qui damnauerant absentem Primianum. quia ergo diximus eis sic illud non obesse Caeciliano, quemadmodum hoc non obest Primiano, quoniam contra absentes facta sunt ambo concilia, continuo non inuenientes quod responderent et horribiles angustias passi dixerunt nec causam causae nec personam praeiudicare personae; quod aduersus omnes humanas calumnias in ore habet catholica ecclesia, nunc autem multo fortius multoque liberius, quando id, quod semper ueritas tenuit, etiam inimicorum confessio confirmauit. quis ergo sine graui tristitia perferat, quis gemitum cohibeat, quis non in lacrimas et in uocem doloris erumpat, qui hoc digne considerauerit? ecce ut ab episcopis partis Donati damnatus Primianus non amittat episcopatum aut ut Primianus damnatus non inquietet partem Donati, nec causae causa nec personae persona praeiudicat; ut autem Caecilianus, quem absentem inimici similiter damnauerunt, non deputetur episcopus et contaminet omnes christianas gentes usque ad terminos terrae, et causae causa et personae persona praeiudicat. ### English translation (Claude) They said this when we told them: “The council that you bring against Caecilian does not harm the absent Caecilian, just as the council held in the case of Maximian, where Primian was condemned, does not harm the absent Primian.” For they brought forward the council in which seventy-odd bishops had condemned Caecilian in his absence, while some hundred bishops of their own party are brought forward who had condemned Primian in his absence. So because we told them that the one did not harm Caecilian just as the other did not harm Primian, since both councils were held against absent men, at once, finding nothing to answer and suffering dreadful straits, they said that neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person; which the Catholic Church has on its lips against all human slanders, and now much more strongly and much more freely, when what the truth always held has been confirmed even by the confession of its enemies. Who, then, could bear it without grave sorrow, who could hold back a groan, who would not burst into tears and a cry of grief, having duly considered this? See: so that Primian, condemned by bishops of the party of Donatus, should not lose his episcopate, or so that the condemned Primian should not disturb the party of Donatus, neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person; but so that Caecilian, whom his enemies likewise condemned in his absence, should not be counted a bishop and should contaminate all the Christian nations to the ends of the earth, both does one case prejudice another case and one person another person. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 3 (CSEL 53:99–100; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/3). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 4 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-4 - Source: CSEL 53:100–102 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Augustine imagines the churches addressed by Peter, John, and Paul asking the Donatists why Caecilian’s case should cut them off when Primian’s does not cut off the Donatists. ### Latin text Si uoce ipsius unitatis clament ecclesiae Ponti, Bithyniae, Asiae, Cappadociae ceterarumque orientalium regionum, ad quas beatus Petrus apostolus scribit: (o pars Donati, non nouimus quid dicatis. quare nobis non communicatis? si Caecilianus mali aliquid fecit, quod nobis non probatum est nec demonstratum, tamen si mali aliquid fecit, quare nobis praeiudicat? si nos audire non uultis, uos ipsos audite dicentes: nec causae causa nec personae persona praeiudicat. an usque adeo potest uestra peruersitas, ut haec uerba ualeant, ne nobis praeiudicet Primianus, et haec uerba non ualeant, ut nobis praeiudicet Caecilianus? clament etiam similiter septem orientales ecclesiae, ad quas scribit apostolus Iohannes, Ephesi, Zmyrnae, Thyatirae, Sardis, Philadelphiae, Laudociae, Pergami, et dicant: (quid uobis fecimus, fratres, qui potius Donati quam nostrae communionis esse uoluistis? si Caecilianus peccauit, quamuis et ipsius crimen non potuistis ostendere, quia, sicut Primianus uester, sic absens etiam iste damnatus est, uerumtamen qualiscumque ille fuerit, nos nobis quid fecimus? quare christiani cum christianis pacem habere non uultis, quare in nobis communia sacramenta rescinditis? quid nobis fecimus? quare Primiani causa non praeiudicat parti Donati, nisi quia uerum est quod dixistis: nec causae causa nec personae persona praeiudicat? quare ergo causa Caeciliani praeiudicat hereditati Christi, in qua sumus apostolorum labore plantati? ad unam nostrum scribit apostolus Iohannes, quod habeat pauca nomina in Sardis eorum, qui non inquinauerunt uestimenta sua; nec tamen ab eis, qui in ipsa ecclesia inmundi fuerunt, illorum paucorum uestimenta polluta sunt, quoniam uerum est quod dixistis, nec causam causae nec personam praeiudicare personae. quomodo ergo potest causa et persona Caeciliani praeiudicare nobis? aut si non praeiudicat, quare separamini a nobis? dicant etiam ecclesiae, ad quas Paulus apostolus scribit, Romanorum, Corinthiorum, Philippensium, Colossensium, Thessalonicensium — nam de Galatia et Epheso supra iam dictum est —, dicant ergo et istae: (litteras ad nos datas, fratres, cotidie legitis, qui uultis adhuc esse de parte Donati. in ipsis epistulis per nomen pacis nos apostolus salutauit dicens: gratia uobis et pax a deo patre et domino Iesu Christo. quare pacem in nostris epistulis legendo didicistis et eam nobiscum tenere noluistis? tam in longinquis terris trans mare positis Afrum nobis obicitis Caecilianum. certe uerum est quod dixistis: nec causae causa praeiudicat nec persona personae: quae est ista priuata et peculiaris sanctificatio, qua uobis licet, ut Afrae parti Donati causa non praeiudicet Afri Primiani nec personae Primiani Carthaginiensis praeiudicet persona Mustitani Feliciani, et ad nos Africana praeiudicia tam longe mittantur aut nobis praeiudicet causa Caeciliani? ### English translation (Claude) Suppose the churches of Pontus, Bithynia, Asia, Cappadocia, and the other eastern regions, to which the blessed apostle Peter writes, were to cry out with the voice of unity itself: “Party of Donatus, we do not know what you are talking about. Why are you not in communion with us? If Caecilian did something evil, which has not been proved or shown to us, yet if he did something evil, why does it prejudice us? If you will not listen to us, listen to yourselves saying: neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person. Or can your perversity go so far that these words hold good so that Primian does not prejudice you, and these words do not hold good so that Caecilian prejudices us?” Let the seven eastern churches to which the apostle John writes, Ephesus, Smyrna, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea, and Pergamum, likewise cry out and say: “What have we done to you, brothers, that you chose to be of the communion of Donatus rather than ours? If Caecilian sinned, though you could not show even his crime, since like your Primian he too was condemned in his absence, yet whatever he was, what have we done to you? Why will you not, as Christians, have peace with Christians? Why do you annul in us the sacraments we have in common? What have we done to you? Why does Primian’s case not prejudice the party of Donatus, unless because what you said is true: neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person? Why then does Caecilian’s case prejudice the inheritance of Christ, in which we were planted by the labor of the apostles? To one of us the apostle John writes that it has a few names in Sardis of those who have not soiled their garments; and yet the garments of those few were not polluted by those who were unclean in that very church, since what you said is true, that neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person. How, then, can the case and person of Caecilian prejudice us? Or if it does not, why do you separate yourselves from us?” Let the churches to which the apostle Paul writes also say it, those of the Romans, the Corinthians, the Philippians, the Colossians, the Thessalonians (for Galatia and Ephesus have already been mentioned above); let these too say: “Brothers, you who still wish to be of the party of Donatus, you read every day the letters given to us. In those very letters the apostle greeted us in the name of peace, saying: ‘Grace to you and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.’ Why did you learn peace by reading our letters and refuse to keep it with us? To us, set in lands so far away across the sea, you object the African Caecilian. Surely what you said is true: neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person. What is this private and peculiar sanctification of yours, by which you are permitted that the case of the African Primian should not prejudice the African party of Donatus, nor the person of Felician of Mustis prejudice the person of Primian of Carthage, and yet African prejudgments are sent so far to us, and the case of Caecilian prejudices us?” ### Scripture references - 1 Pet 1:1: allusion, high confidence - Rev 1:11: allusion, high confidence - Rev 3:4: allusion, high confidence - Rom 1:7: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The digital text twice reads “nos nobis quid fecimus” / “quid nobis fecimus”; the sense requires “to you” (uobis), and it is so translated. Galatia and Ephesus “mentioned above” are presumably covered by Asia and the seven churches. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 4 (CSEL 53:100–102; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/4). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 5 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-5 - Source: CSEL 53:102–103 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The African Catholic Church asks why the long-dead Caecilian should stain it when the living Felician, a condemned Maximianist, does not stain the Donatists. ### Latin text Dicat etiam catholica ecclesia in ipsa Africa constituta et per pacem atque unitatem Christi illis omnibus communione copulata, dicat etiam ipsa: nec mihi Caeciliani causa praeiudicat, contra quem absentem septuaginta episcoporum est prolata sententia, quia non praeiudicat ecclesiae, quae toto orbe diffunditur, in cuius communione permaneo, aut certe praeiudicet parti Donati causa Primiani, quem sui collegae similiter absentem numerosiore concilio damnauerunt. si autem ideo non praeiudicat, quia nec causa causae nec persona personae, multo magis seruanda est ista iustitia erga unitatem catholicam Christi, si eam seruari erga se postulat pars Donati. hoc ecclesia catholica in Africa constituta proclamat: o pars Donati, tu ista uerba dixisti, tu ista uerba tua recognouisti, tu istis uerbis etiam suscripsisti: nec causa causae nec persona personae praeiudicat. ego inter spiritus olim requiescentium recito Caecilianum, tu adhuc uides et tecum habes in corpore Felicianum, a quo Primianus damnatus est. in ipsa Primiani causa Felicianum damnasti et eum postea, sicut erat, episcopum Primiano tibique sociasti. si tantum ualet, quod nec causa causae praeiudicat nec persona personae, ut tibi non praeiudicet hodie tecum uiuentis communio Feliciani, mihi quomodo praeiudicat olim defuncti memoria Caeciliani? ### English translation (Claude) Let the Catholic Church established in Africa itself, joined in communion with all those churches through the peace and unity of Christ, let it too say: “Neither does the case of Caecilian prejudice me, against whom in his absence the sentence of seventy bishops was pronounced, since it does not prejudice the church spread over the whole world, in whose communion I remain; or else let the case of Primian prejudice the party of Donatus, whom his colleagues likewise condemned in his absence in a more numerous council. But if it does not prejudice it, because neither does one case prejudice another nor one person another, much more must this justice be kept toward the Catholic unity of Christ, if the party of Donatus demands that it be kept toward itself.” This the Catholic Church established in Africa proclaims: “Party of Donatus, you said these words, you acknowledged these words as yours, you even signed these words: neither does one case prejudice another nor one person another. I name Caecilian among the spirits of those long at rest; you still see Felician, by whom Primian was condemned, and have him with you in the body. In Primian’s very case you condemned Felician, and afterward you joined him, a bishop as he was, to Primian and to yourself. If the principle that neither does one case prejudice another nor one person another has such force that communion with Felician, living with you today, does not prejudice you, how does the memory of Caecilian, long dead, prejudice me?” ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 5 (CSEL 53:102–103; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/5). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 6 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-6 - Source: CSEL 53:103–104 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The Catholics argued from the parables of the weeds, chaff, goats, and fish that the bad mixed in the church do not harm the good, while discipline continues in love. ### Latin text Quid ad ista respondent, qui uobis adhuc iactant inania et suae saluti, si non se correxerint, nocitura mendacia? quid adhuc dicunt nos iudicem corrupisse, ut pro nobis sententia proferretur? numquid et tanti apud uos meriti episcopum praeclarissimum defensorem corrupimus, ut pro nobis talia loqueretur? hoc enim agebamus omnibus uiribus, hoc instabamus, ut Caeciliani causa atque persona, qualiscumque ille fuerit, ad causam et personam ecclesiae, quam deus suis sanctis testimoniis roborauit, non pertinere ostenderetur. hoc agebamus etiam similitudinibus euangelicis, ut causa et persona zizaniorum non praeiudicaret causae et personae tritici, quamuis in eodem agro eadem pluuia simul crescerent usque ad messem, quando separari oporteret; ut causa et persona paleae non praeiudicaret (causae et) personae frumenti, quamuis in eadem area simul triturarentur, donec nouissima uentilatione separarentur; ut causa et persona haedorum non praeiudicaret causae et personae ouium, quamuis communibus pascuis utraque pecora permixta seruentur, donec a pastore summo in iudicio nouissimo alii ad sinistram, alii ad dexteram segregentur; ut causa et persona piscium malorum non praeiudicaret causae et personae piscium bonorum, quamuis intra eadem retia tenerentur in extremo litore separandi, hoc est in fine maris, quod significat finem saeculi. quibus parabolis et figuris ecclesia praenuntiata est usque ad finem saeculi bonos et malos simul habitura, ita ut mali bonis obesse non possint, cum uel ignorantur uel pro pace et tranquillitate ecclesiae tolerantur, si eos prodi aut accusari non oportuerit aut aliis bonis non potuerint demonstrari, ita sane, ut nec emendationis uigilantia quiescat corripiendo degradando excommunicando ceterisque cohercitionibus licitis atque concessis, quae salua unitatis pace in ecclesia cotidie fiunt secundum praeceptum apostolicum caritate seruata, qui dixit: si quis autem non obaudit uerbo nostro per epistulam, hunc notate, et nolite commisceri cum eo, ut erubescat; et non ut inimicum existimetis, sed corripite ut fratrem. sic enim et disciplina seruat patientiam et patientia temperat disciplinam et utrumque refertur ad caritatem, ne forte aut indisciplinata patientia foueat iniquitatem aut inpatiens disciplina dissipet unitatem. ### English translation (Claude) What do they answer to this, who still boast empty things to you and lies that will harm their own salvation unless they correct themselves? Why do they still say that we corrupted the judge so that sentence would be given for us? Did we also corrupt your bishop, the most distinguished defender of such merit among you, so that he would say such things for us? For this is what we were doing with all our strength, what we were pressing: to show that the case and person of Caecilian, whatever he was, had nothing to do with the case and person of the church, which God has strengthened with his holy testimonies. We were doing this also with the Gospel likenesses: that the case and person of the weeds should not prejudice the case and person of the wheat, though they grow together in the same field under the same rain until the harvest, when they must be separated; that the case and person of the chaff should not prejudice the case and person of the grain, though they are threshed together on the same threshing floor until they are separated by the final winnowing; that the case and person of the goats should not prejudice the case and person of the sheep, though both flocks are kept mixed in common pastures until they are separated by the chief Shepherd at the last judgment, some to the left, some to the right; that the case and person of the bad fish should not prejudice the case and person of the good fish, though they are held within the same nets, to be separated on the far shore, that is, at the end of the sea, which signifies the end of the age. By these parables and figures the church was foretold as going to have good and bad together until the end of the age, in such a way that the bad cannot harm the good, since they are either unknown or tolerated for the peace and tranquillity of the church, if it was not fitting to expose or accuse them, or they could not be shown to be bad to other good people; yet so that the vigilance of amendment does not rest, by rebuking, degrading, excommunicating, and the other lawful and permitted restraints which are done daily in the church without harm to the peace of unity, according to the apostle’s precept, with love preserved, who said: “If anyone does not obey our word in this letter, note that person, and do not mix with him, so that he may be ashamed; and do not regard him as an enemy, but rebuke him as a brother.” For in this way discipline keeps patience and patience tempers discipline, and both are referred to love, lest undisciplined patience foster iniquity or impatient discipline scatter unity. ### Scripture references - Matt 13:24–30: allusion, high confidence - Matt 3:12: allusion, high confidence - Matt 25:32–33: allusion, high confidence - Matt 13:47–50: allusion, high confidence - 2 Thess 3:14–15: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Your bishop … the most distinguished defender” refers ironically to a Donatist spokesman whose admission (“one case does not prejudice another”) favored the Catholics; probably Emeritus of Caesarea or Petilian. The editor’s addition “(causae et)” is translated. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 6 (CSEL 53:103–104; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/6). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 7 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-7 - Source: CSEL 53:104–105 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The good separate from the bad in heart, not body; the Donatist bishops’ refusal to sit with the Catholics while entering with them misreads Ps 26. ### Latin text Ista cum fiunt a bonis, non inquinantur a malis, quia nec eorum peccatis consentiendo communicant et ab eis etsi non corporaliter segregatione, tamen spiritali uitae dissimilitudine et morum diuersitate discedunt, eo modo oboedientes praecepto dominico quo ait: discedite inde, et inmundum ne tetigeritis. nam qui hoc non spiritaliter obseruandum putant, adrogantia uanitatis in illud incidunt, quod per eundem prophetam dominus detestatur dicens: qui dicunt (noli me tangere, quoniam mundus sum, hic fumus indignationis meae. hoc episcopi uestri faciendum putauerunt, quando utrisque nostrum a iudice oblato consessu nobiscum sedere noluerunt, dicentes scriptum sibi esse ne cum talibus sedeant, illud utique non spiritaliter, sed carnaliter intellegentes, quod in psalmo positum est: et cum impiis non sedebo, et tamen fecerunt, quod in eodem ipso loco psalmi pariter prohibetur. nam ibi dicit propheta: et cum iniqua gerentibus non introibo. si ergo, quia nos iniquos uel nouerant uel putabant, ideo nobiscum sedere noluerunt, quare, quod similiter prohibetur, nobiscum introierunt ex parte sancti et ex parte polluti, nisi quia scripturas sanctas non intellegendo et carnaliter sapiendo etiam ipsam unitatem dissipauerunt? ### English translation (Claude) When good people do these things, they are not defiled by the bad, because they do not share in their sins by consenting to them, and they depart from them, if not by bodily separation, then by spiritual unlikeness of life and difference of conduct, obeying in this way the Lord’s command where he says: “Depart from there, and touch no unclean thing.” For those who think this is not to be observed spiritually fall, through the arrogance of vanity, into what the Lord detests through the same prophet, saying: “Those who say, ‘Do not touch me, for I am clean’: this is the smoke of my anger.” Your bishops thought they should do this when, though the judge offered seats to both of us, they refused to sit with us, saying that it was written for them not to sit with such people, understanding not spiritually but carnally what is set down in the psalm, “And I will not sit with the impious”; and yet they did what is forbidden equally in the very same place of the psalm. For there the prophet says: “And I will not go in with those who do wicked things.” If, then, because they either knew or thought us wicked, they refused to sit with us, why did they go in with us (which is likewise forbidden), from the side of the holy and from the side of the polluted, unless because, by not understanding the holy Scriptures and thinking carnally, they have scattered unity itself? ### Scripture references - Isa 52:11: quotation, high confidence - Isa 65:5: quotation, high confidence - Ps 26:4 (25:4 Vulg.): quotation, high confidence - Ps 26:5 (25:5 Vulg.): quotation, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 7 (CSEL 53:104–105; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/7). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 8 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-8 - Source: CSEL 53:105–106 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Sharing the sacraments with the bad does not make the good share their guilt; only consent to evil does, as Peter and Judas received from the same hand. ### Latin text Non itaque polluunt mali bonos in eodem agro, in eadem area, in eisdem pascuis, in eisdem retibus constituti, quia non eis communicant boni, sed altari et sacramentis dei. communicant autem malis qui consentiunt factis malorum; scriptum est enim: non solum qui faciunt ea, uerum etiam qui consentiunt facientibus. Cum uero mali pacis conseruandae necessitate tolerantur, non iniquitatis communicandae societate appetuntur, ut cum zizaniis triticum suauem pluuiam pariter bibat, seruet tamen ubertatem suam nec conuertatur in zizaniorum sterilitatem, sed utrumque simul usque ad messem crescat, ne forte, cum colliguntur zizania, eradicetur simul et triticum, nullam cum bonis habent mali participationem salutis uel perditionis — quae enim participatio iustitiae cum iniquitate?-, nullam cum bonis habent mali societatem regni aut ignis aeterni — quae enim societas luci ad tenebras? —, non habent mali cum bonis consonantiam uitae ac uoluntatis — quae enim consonantia Christi ad Beliar? —, non habent boni cum malis partem nec in poena criminis nec in praemio pietatis-quae enim pars fideli cum infideli? — et cum intra eadem retia, donec ad litus perueniant, pariter diuina sacramenta percipiunt, illi sociantur, illi dissociantur, isti consonant, illi dissonant, isti habent partem cum misericordia, illi cum iudicio, quoniam misericordiam (et iudicium) cantat ecclesia domino et qui manducat indigne iudicium non alteri, sed sibi manducat. de ipso quippe pane et de ipsa dominica manu et Iudas partem et Petrus accepit; et tamen quae societas, quae consonantia, quae pars Petro cum Iuda, quoniam nec causa causae praeiudicat nec persona personae? ### English translation (Claude) So the bad do not pollute the good, though placed in the same field, on the same threshing floor, in the same pastures, in the same nets, because the good are in communion not with them but with the altar and the sacraments of God. But those are in communion with the bad who consent to the deeds of the bad; for it is written: “Not only those who do them, but also those who consent to those who do them.” When the bad are tolerated out of the necessity of keeping peace, not sought out by a partnership of sharing in iniquity, so that the wheat drinks the gentle rain together with the weeds yet keeps its fruitfulness and is not turned into the barrenness of the weeds, but both grow together until the harvest, lest perhaps, when the weeds are gathered, the wheat be rooted up with them: then the bad have no participation with the good in salvation or in perdition (for what participation has righteousness with iniquity?); the bad have no fellowship with the good in the kingdom or in the eternal fire (for what fellowship has light with darkness?); the bad have no harmony with the good in life and will (for what harmony has Christ with Belial?); the good have no part with the bad either in the punishment of crime or in the reward of piety (for what part has a believer with an unbeliever?). And though within the same nets, until they reach the shore, they receive the divine sacraments alike, these are joined, those disjoined; these agree, those disagree; these have their part with mercy, those with judgment; since the church sings to the Lord of mercy and judgment, and “whoever eats unworthily eats judgment” not to another but “to himself.” For from the same bread and from the same hand of the Lord both Judas and Peter received a portion; and yet what fellowship, what harmony, what part has Peter with Judas, since neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person? ### Scripture references - Rom 1:32: quotation, high confidence - Matt 13:29–30: allusion, high confidence - 2 Cor 6:14–15: quotation, high confidence - Ps 101:1 (100:1 Vulg.): allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:29: quotation, high confidence - John 13:26: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The editor’s addition “(et iudicium)” is translated. Judas and Peter receiving from the Lord’s hand: John 13:26 with the Last Supper. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 8 (CSEL 53:105–106; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/8). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 9 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-9 - Source: CSEL 53:106–107 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Whether the bad leave the church or remain within it, God sees that each bears his own guilt; consent makes one cause with the wicked, mere sharing of sacraments does not. ### Latin text Siue ergo exeant, de quibus scriptum est: ex nobis exierunt, sed non erant ex nobis, siue intus esse uideantur, de quibus beatus Cyprianus apertissime loquitur dicens: nam etsi uidentur in ecclesia esse zizania, non tamen inpediri debet aut fides aut caritas nostra, ut quoniam zizania esse in ecclesia cernimus ipsi de ecclesia recedamus — quibus uerbis episcopi uestri nihil omnino ausi sunt respondere, quamuis diu frustra contenderint, quod non in ecclesia praedicta sint figurata zizania, quia dixit dominus: ager est hic mundus nec dixit (ager est ecclesia. nos autem mundum pro ecclesiae significatione positum dicebamus, sicut etiam Cyprianus intellexit, quia per totum mundum futura praefigurabatur ecclesia. unde illi dicebant mundum semper in malam significationem positum, et testimonia de scripturis dabant, quia scriptum est: si quis dilexerit mundum, non est caritas patris in illo et cetera talia; nos uero non solum in malam, sed etiam in bonam significationem mundum in scripturis positum respondebamus et commemorabamus inter alia etiam illud quod scriptum est: deus erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi, qui utique non sibi reconciliat nisi ecclesiam —, siue ergo exeant mali siue intus uel ignorentur uel uideantur, hoc agit misericordia et iustitia dei, ut sibi ad mala non consentientibus bonis mali non obsint, sed utrique propriam sarcinam portent, et nec filius accipiat peccata patris, nisi eum fuerit in malis imitatus, sed anima quae peccauerit ipsa moriatur. Cum ergo quisque malis consentit ad malum, iam unam causam cum eis habet et totius societatis malorum fit una persona, ac per hoc, cum simul pereunt simulque damnantur, causa sua et persona sua cuique praeiudicat, non aliena; cum uero boni et mali idem uerbum dei simul audiunt et simul dei sacramenta percipiunt et tamen dissimiles habent actuum suorum causas et dissimiles gerunt uoluntatis diuersitate personas, eundem cibum sanctum aliis manducantibus digne aliis indigne, nec causa causae praeiudicat nec persona personae. ### English translation (Claude) Whether, then, they go out, those of whom it is written, “They went out from us, but they were not of us,” or whether they seem to be inside, those of whom the blessed Cyprian speaks most plainly, saying: “For even if there seem to be weeds in the church, our faith or our love ought not to be hindered, so that, because we see that there are weeds in the church, we ourselves should withdraw from the church” (to which words your bishops dared to answer nothing at all, though they contended long and in vain that the weeds were not figured as foretold in the church, because the Lord said, “The field is this world,” and did not say, “The field is the church.” We, however, said that “world” was put to signify the church, as Cyprian too understood, since the church was prefigured as going to be throughout the whole world. Hence they said that “world” is always used in a bad sense, and gave testimonies from the Scriptures, since it is written, “If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him,” and other such things; but we answered that in the Scriptures “world” is used not only in a bad but also in a good sense, and recalled among other things what is written, “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself,” who surely reconciles to himself nothing but the church): whether, then, the bad go out, or whether inside they are either unknown or seen, the mercy and justice of God bring it about that the bad do not harm the good who do not consent to them in evil, but each bears his own burden; and the son does not receive the sins of the father, unless he has imitated him in evil, but the soul that has sinned, it shall die. So when anyone consents to the bad in evil, he already has one case with them and becomes one person of the whole fellowship of the bad; and therefore, when they perish together and are condemned together, it is his own case and his own person that prejudices each, not another’s. But when the good and the bad hear the same word of God together and receive the sacraments of God together, and yet have unlike cases in their actions and play unlike persons by the difference of their wills, some eating the same holy food worthily and others unworthily, neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person. ### Scripture references - 1 John 2:19: quotation, high confidence - Matt 13:38: quotation, high confidence - 1 John 2:15: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 5:19: quotation, high confidence - Gal 6:5: allusion, high confidence - Ezek 18:20: quotation, high confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Cyprian, Ep. 54.3 (Letters): quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Cyprian, Letter 54.3 (Hartel). ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 9 (CSEL 53:106–107; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/9). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 10 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-10 - Source: CSEL 53:107–108 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Texts promising a pure church describe the age to come, and texts about sons bearing parents’ sins apply only to imitators; the Donatists set Scripture against itself. ### Latin text Ac per hoc, quaecumque testimonia diuinarum scripturarum episcopi uestri commemorare potuerunt, quibus ab omni malorum hominum permixtione pura praenuntiabatur ecclesia, non qualis nunc est illis testimoniis praenuntiabatur, sed qualis post istam mortalitatem in uita aeterna futura est; et quaecumque testimonia scripturarum posuerunt de filiis, quos merito parentum, (non) imitando malitiam, unam cum eis causam habere uoluerunt, [quod] non intellegentes diuina testimonia secum pugnare cogebant nec utrasque uoces dei pro diuersitate temporum, causarum personarumque distinguentes in concordiam redigebant, sed sicut contra nos ipsi, ita etiam uolebant inter se ipsa diuina documenta pugnare. nec mirum si pacem scripturae dei non intellegebant, qui pacem cum eius ecclesia non habebant. ### English translation (Claude) And so, whatever testimonies of the divine Scriptures your bishops could cite in which the church was foretold as pure of all mixture with bad people, those testimonies foretold not such a church as it is now, but such as it will be in eternal life after this mortality. And whatever testimonies of the Scriptures they set down about sons whom they wished to have one case with their parents by the parents’ desert, not by imitating their wickedness, they did not understand them; they were forcing the divine testimonies to fight against each other, and did not bring both voices of God into harmony by distinguishing them according to the difference of times, cases, and persons; but just as they themselves fought against us, so they wanted the divine documents to fight among themselves. No wonder they did not understand the peace of God’s Scriptures, who had no peace with his church. ### Translation notes - The editor adds “(non)” (translated) and deletes “quod” before “non intellegentes”. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 10 (CSEL 53:107–108; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/10). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 11 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-11 - Source: CSEL 53:108–109 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The Donatists themselves admitted hidden bad fish within the church’s nets, so Isaiah’s promise of a church without the unclean refers to the age to come. ### Latin text Nos autem utraque accipientes testimonia demonstrabamus utrorumque concordiam. nam et illud accipiebamus, quod in suis litteris commemorauerunt, ecclesiae dictum esse: nec adiciet ultra per te transire incircumcisus et inmundus et illud, quod scriptum est: sinite utraque crescere usque ad messem, sed hoc esse in agro, illud futurum in horreo. denique et ipsi, qui diu contenderunt dicentes zizania, quae cum tritico simul crescere usque ad messem permissa sunt, non in ecclesia, sed in mundo esse contra intellectum martyris Cypriani, qui dixit: etsi uidentur in ecclesia esse zizania: non tamen inpediri debet aut fides aut caritas nostra, ut quoniam zizania esse in ecclesia cernimus ipsi de ecclesia recedamus, et nolentes consentire mundi nomine ecclesiam posse significari contra uerba apostoli, qui dixit: deus erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi et contra ipsius uerba domini, qui dixit: non uenit filius hominis ut iudicet mundum, sed ut saluetur mundus per ipsum — neque enim reconciliari deo et saluari per ipsum mundus potest, nisi mundi nomine intellegatur ecclesia, quae sola per eum deo reconciliata saluatur —, tamen in illa similitudine, quam ex euangelio commemorauimus, quod et boni et mali pisces, quousque in litore, hoc est in fine saeculi, separentur, intra eadem permixti retia continentur, uicti euidentia ueritatis malos in ecclesia usque in finem saeculi permixtos esse confessi sunt, sed eos occultos esse dixerunt, quoniam sic a sacerdotibus ignorantur, quemadmodum pisces intra retia, cum adhuc in mari sunt, a piscatoribus [intra retia] non uidentur. quomodo ergo testimonium propheticum, quod in sua responsione posuerunt, quo ecclesiae dictum est: non adiciet ultra per te transire incircumcisus et inmundus, ad hoc tempus pertinere intellegitur, quando ecclesia retibus comparata est, quibus in mari adhuc positis pisces malos bonis permixtos uel occultos esse confessi sunt? unde manifestum est non nisi in futuro saeculo post iudicium nullum incircumcisum et inmundum per ecclesiam transiturum. o uiolentia ueritatis, quae suos non in carne, sed in corde torquet inimicos, ut eam confiteantur inuiti! ### English translation (Claude) We, however, accepting both sets of testimonies, showed their harmony. For we accepted both what they cited in their letter as said to the church, “The uncircumcised and the unclean shall no longer pass through you,” and what is written, “Let both grow until the harvest”; but the latter is in the field, the former will be in the barn. Finally, they themselves contended long, saying that the weeds which were permitted to grow with the wheat until the harvest are not in the church but in the world, against the understanding of the martyr Cyprian, who said, “Even if there seem to be weeds in the church, our faith or our love ought not to be hindered, so that, because we see that there are weeds in the church, we ourselves should withdraw from the church”; and they would not agree that the church can be signified by the name “world,” against the words of the apostle, who said, “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself,” and against the words of the Lord himself, who said, “The Son of Man did not come to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through him” (for the world cannot be reconciled to God and saved through him unless by the name “world” the church is understood, which alone is reconciled to God and saved through him). And yet, in that likeness which we cited from the Gospel, that good and bad fish are held mixed within the same nets until they are separated on the shore, that is, at the end of the age, overcome by the evidence of the truth they confessed that bad people are mixed in the church until the end of the age; but they said they are hidden, since they are unknown to the priests just as fish within the nets, while still in the sea, are not seen by the fishermen. How, then, can the prophetic testimony which they set down in their reply, in which it is said to the church, “The uncircumcised and the unclean shall no longer pass through you,” be understood to belong to this time, when the church is compared to nets in which, while they are still in the sea, they confessed that bad fish are mixed with the good, or hidden? From this it is plain that only in the age to come, after the judgment, will no uncircumcised and unclean person pass through the church. O force of truth, which tortures its enemies not in the flesh but in the heart, so that they confess it against their will! ### Scripture references - Isa 52:1: quotation, high confidence - Matt 13:30: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 5:19: quotation, high confidence - John 3:17: quotation, high confidence - Matt 13:47–49: allusion, high confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Cyprian, Ep. 54.3 (Letters): quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Cyprian, Letter 54.3. The editor deletes “intra retia” after “a piscatoribus”. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 11 (CSEL 53:108–109; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/11). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 12 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-12 - Source: CSEL 53:109–110 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The Donatists’ own admission proves that the church is mixed now and will be pure only after the resurrection. ### Latin text Ecce manifestatum est quod dicebatur a nobis, distinguenda esse tempora ecclesiae: non eam nunc esse talem, qualis post resurrectionem futura est; nunc malos habere permixtos, tunc omnino non habituram; ad illam eius puritatem, non ad huius temporis permixtionem illa diuina testimonia pertinere, quibus eam deus praedixit ab omni malorum permixtione penitus alienam. ecce etiam ipsi ueritate euangelica non aliud coacti sunt confiteri, qui malos occultos nunc ei permixtos esse dixerunt. ecce nunc transit per illam licet occultus inmundus. non est ergo tempus, quod praedictum est dicente propheta: non adiciet ultra per te transire incircumcisus et inmundus. nunc ergo transeunt uel occulti. nam et hoc ipsum, quod ait (non adiciet ultra, ostendit eos prius solere transire, sed ultra non transituros. et a nobis inuidiose requirebant, quomodo potuerit in ecclesia Christi diabolus seminare zizania, cum ipsi faterentur in ecclesia malos saltem occultos esse permixtos nec uellent adtendere a diabolo utique seminatos. ### English translation (Claude) See, what we were saying has been made plain: that the times of the church must be distinguished; that it is not now such as it will be after the resurrection; that now it has the bad mixed in, then it will not have them at all; that those divine testimonies in which God foretold it as wholly free of all mixture with the bad belong to that purity of it, not to the mixture of this time. See, they too were compelled by the Gospel truth to confess nothing else, when they said that hidden bad people are now mixed in it. See, now an unclean person passes through it, though hidden. So it is not yet the time that was foretold when the prophet said, “The uncircumcised and the unclean shall no longer pass through you.” Now, then, they pass through, even if hidden. For the very words “shall no longer” show that they used to pass through before but will not pass through any more. And they asked us spitefully how the devil could have sown weeds in the church of Christ, when they themselves admitted that at least hidden bad people are mixed in the church, and would not consider that these were certainly sown by the devil. ### Scripture references - Isa 52:1: quotation, high confidence - Matt 13:25: allusion, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 12 (CSEL 53:109–110; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/12). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 13 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-13 - Source: CSEL 53:110 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The threshing floor shows that even manifest sinners are mixed in the church; Jeremiah’s “What has chaff to do with wheat?” concerns dreams and prophecy. ### Latin text Hoc ipsum etiam, quod sibi acutum inuenisse uidebantur, contra se potius proferebant. si enim dominus propterea retibus bonos et malos pisces pariter congregantibus ecclesiam conparauit, quia malos in ecclesia non manifestos, sed latentes intellegi uoluit, quos ita nesciunt sacerdotes, quemadmodum sub fluctibus quid ceperint retia nesciunt piscatores, propterea ergo et areae conparata est, ut etiam manifesti mali bonis in ea permixti praenuntiarentur futuri. neque enim palea, quae in area est permixta frumentis, etiam ipsa sub fluctibus latet, quae sic omnium oculis est conspicua, ut potius occulta sint in ea frumenta, cum sit ipsa manifesta. de hac autem areae similitudine, quia et ipsam inter ceteras ex euangelio posueramus, nihil in litteris suis contra nos scribere potuerunt nisi Hieremian prophetam dixisse: quid paleis ad triticum? quod ideo dixit, quia similia non sunt, non quia permixta esse non possunt, quia in horreo non simul erunt, non quia in area pariter non triturantur. quamquam Hieremias, cum hoc diceret, non agebat de populo dei, sed de somniis hominum et uisionibus prophetarum, quia haec duo nulla similitudine conparanda sunt, sicut plenitudini tritici inanitas paleae non potest conparari. ### English translation (Claude) The very point which they seemed to themselves to have found so sharp, they were rather bringing forward against themselves. For if the Lord compared the church to nets gathering good and bad fish alike because he wished the bad in the church to be understood as not manifest but hidden, whom priests do not know just as fishermen do not know what the nets have caught under the waves, then for that very reason the church was also compared to a threshing floor, so that it would be foretold that even manifest bad people would be mixed in it with the good. For the chaff mixed with the grain on the threshing floor does not also lie hidden under the waves; it is so conspicuous to all eyes that the grain in it is rather what is hidden, while the chaff itself is in plain view. About this likeness of the threshing floor, which we had also set down among others from the Gospel, they could write nothing against us in their letter except that the prophet Jeremiah said, “What has chaff to do with wheat?” He said this because they are not alike, not because they cannot be mixed; because they will not be together in the barn, not because they are not threshed together on the threshing floor. And yet Jeremiah, when he said this, was not dealing with the people of God, but with the dreams of men and the visions of prophets, because these two cannot be compared by any likeness, just as the emptiness of chaff cannot be compared to the fullness of wheat. ### Scripture references - Jer 23:28: quotation, high confidence - Matt 3:12: allusion, high confidence - Matt 13:47–48: allusion, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 13 (CSEL 53:110; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/13). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 14 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-14 - Source: CSEL 53:110–112 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: If hidden sinners are the bad fish, the chaff on the open threshing floor must be manifest sinners, and neither harms the good. ### Latin text Temptauerunt sane episcopi uestri negare scriptum in euangelio, quod areae sit ecclesia conparata, sed mox euangelicorum uerborum commemoratione conuicti ad id se conuerterunt, ut etiam ibi dicerent occultos malos significatos, non manifestos, de quibus scriptum est: ueniet ferens uentilabrum in manu sua et mundabit aream suam, frumenta recondet in horreo, paleas autem conburet igni inextinguibili. uos itaque iudicate, aperite oculos, aures intendite ueritati. si propterea, sicut ipsi dixerunt, dominus ecclesiam retibus conparauit, quia non manifestos, sed latentes in ea malos intellegi uoluit, quos ita non uident sacerdotes, quemadmodum pisces intra retia sub fluctibus non uident piscatores, numquid et area sub aqua uel sub terra trituratur aut certe nocturnis horis, non in sole conteritur aut in ea rusticus caecus operatur? quanto ergo melius se ipsos corrigunt quam euangelia sancta peruertunt et ad uanum suae mentis errorem eloquia dominica detorquere conantur! aut enim et illa piscium similitudo non propter occultos, sed tantum propter mixtos in ecclesia malos a domino posita est aut certe singulis rebus propriae similitudines datae sunt, de piscibus propter occultos, de area propter manifestos malos, quod, sicut illi ante litus, sic isti ante uentilabrum bonis in ecclesia misceantur. ipsi enim nos admonent, ut in area paleam manifestos in ecclesia malos intellegamus, qui pisces reprobos intra natantia retia propterea malos occultos intellegi uolunt, quia, sicut illos nesciunt piscatores, sic istos nesciunt sacerdotes. cur enim non dicamus: sic ergo et palea manifesti sunt mali, quia in aperto eam uident trituratores? sed sicut illi non possunt ante litoris exitum separari, sic nec illa potest ante finem debitum uentilari. custodit autem deus innocentiam sanctorum et fidelium suorum sicut piscium bonorum, sicut pinguium frumentorum, ut intra ista retia non eis noceant permixta genera reprobanda et in ista area non eis noceat permixta palea uentilanda, quia, sicut ipsi dixerunt relegerunt suscripserunt, nec causae causa nec personae poterit praeiudicare persona. ### English translation (Claude) Your bishops did try to deny that it is written in the Gospel that the church is compared to a threshing floor; but soon, convicted when the Gospel words were cited, they turned to saying that there too hidden bad people were signified, not manifest ones, of whom it is written: “He will come with his winnowing fork in his hand and will clean his threshing floor; he will store the grain in the barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.” So you judge: open your eyes, turn your ears to the truth. If, as they themselves said, the Lord compared the church to nets because he wished the bad in it to be understood as not manifest but hidden, whom priests do not see just as fishermen do not see the fish within the nets under the waves, is a threshing floor also threshed under water or under the earth, or at least at night hours, not trodden in the sun, or does a blind farmer work on it? How much better, then, for them to correct themselves than to pervert the holy Gospels and try to twist the Lord’s words to the empty error of their own minds! For either that likeness of the fish too was given by the Lord not because of hidden bad people but only because of bad people mixed in the church, or else each thing was given its own likeness: of the fish because of the hidden, of the threshing floor because of the manifest bad, who, just as the former are mixed with the good in the church before the shore, so the latter are before the winnowing fork. For they themselves remind us to understand the chaff on the threshing floor as the manifest bad in the church, when they want the worthless fish within the swimming nets to be understood as the hidden bad because, just as fishermen do not know the former, so priests do not know the latter. For why should we not say: so too the chaff is the manifest bad, because the threshers see it in the open? But just as the fish cannot be separated before they come out on the shore, so the chaff cannot be winnowed before the appointed end. And God guards the innocence of his saints and faithful as of the good fish, as of the plump grain, so that within these nets the mixed kinds to be rejected do not harm them, and on this threshing floor the mixed chaff to be winnowed does not harm them; since, as they themselves said, read over, and signed, neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person. ### Scripture references - Matt 3:12: quotation, high confidence - Luke 3:17: quotation, medium confidence ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 14 (CSEL 53:110–112; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/14). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 15 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-15 - Source: CSEL 53:112 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The Donatists were made to sign their own statements, so they cannot deny their words and instead accuse the judge of bribery. ### Latin text Haec uerba se negarent forte dixisse, nisi sua possent suscriptione conuinci. ecce quam diligenter actum est pro salute uestra, ut uerbis nostris suscriberemus, quod fieri omnino nolebant et ut facerent tandem aliquando pudore conpulsi sunt. nam exstant uerba eorum, ubi hoc facere recusarunt, et rursus alia uerba, ubi hoc facere consenserunt quod primo negauerant; omnia scripta sunt, omnibus suscriptum est. ideo enim uidebantur nolle suscribere, ut negare se possent dixisse quod dixerant et de gestis corruptis iudici calumniari. quod modo quia non possunt, dicunt ipsum esse corruptum, qui ut contra illos iudicaret non nisi ipsi fecerunt, qui contra se ipsos pro nobis tanta dixerunt, quae ut negare non possent, etiamsi coacti et inuiti, suis tamen prosecutionibus suscripserunt. ideo ergo nolebant suscribere, ut liceret eis per calumniam corruptorum gestorum negare quod dixerant, et ideo postea instante iudice consenserunt, quia sentiebant omnibus apparere nihil se aliud indicare nolendo suscribere, nisi se uerba sua ne sibi legerentur timere. maluerunt enim prosecutiones suas quibuscumque nebulis postea defendere quam eas tam cito damnare. ### English translation (Claude) Perhaps they would deny having said these words, if they could not be convicted by their own signature. See how carefully it was managed for your salvation that we should sign our words, which they absolutely did not want done, and which they were at last compelled by shame to do. For their words survive in which they refused to do this, and again other words in which they agreed to do what they had first refused; everything was written down, everything was signed. They seemed unwilling to sign precisely so that they could deny having said what they had said and slander the judge over corrupted minutes. Since they cannot do this now, they say the judge himself was corrupted, whom no one but they themselves caused to judge against them, they who said so much against themselves and for us that, so as not to be able to deny it, they signed their statements, though compelled and unwilling. So they did not want to sign, so that they might be allowed to deny what they had said by slandering the minutes as corrupted; and they agreed afterward, at the judge’s insistence, because they sensed it was plain to all that by refusing to sign they showed nothing but that they feared having their own words read to them. For they preferred to defend their statements afterward with whatever fogs they could rather than condemn them so quickly. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 15 (CSEL 53:112; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/15). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 16 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/1/#p-16 - Source: CSEL 53:112–113 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The Donatists complain that the sentence was given at night; Augustine answers from Scripture and notes that they fled the light by day. ### Latin text Sed uidete, rogamus uos, quemadmodum ipsa sua defensione se peius implicent et agant causam nostram et omnino perimant suam. nam post conlationem, posteaquam uicti appellare uoluerunt, obiecta sunt eis haec uerba, et ea conantur peiore sua implicatione defendere, quando ab eis quid egerint quaeritis. ita enim uos putant cor non habere, ut non intellegatis eos omni modo esse superatos, quando uobis ea dicunt quae omnino non dicerent, si aliquid utile quod dicerent inuenirent. quis enim ferat uictos homines conqueri, quod nocte contra eos est prolata sententia? quasi non saepe iudices audiendi necessitas tenet, ut usque ad multam partem noctis sedere cogantur, aut ideo non est uerum quod dicitur, quia per noctem dicitur. nec audiunt scripturam clamantem: per diem mandauit dominus misericordiam suam et nocte declarauit, et iterum: ad annuntiandam mane misericordiam tuam et ueritatem tuam per noctem. aut quod dixerunt nocte uenisse ad dominum tenendum persecutores, non adtendentes quoniam ipsis nocturnis horis etiam dominus ueritatem suis discipulis praedicauit, nec aduertere uoluerunt quod scriptum est, apostolum Paulum usque ad medium noctis produxisse sermonem. si haberent uerum quod dicerent, nox eos impedire non posset. sed sane tenebrosissimam noctem in suis mentibus patiebantur, quando contra se ipsos tanta proferebant nec ad ueritatis lucem peruersum animum corrigebant. et adhuc utique dies erat, quando nobis forensi more de tempore praescribebant, dicentes causam lapsam esse et agi iam omnino non posse, nec intellegentes nihil se hominibus ostendisse nisi quantum timuerint ne ageretur, ubi eorum peruersitas et catholica ueritas monstraretur. ### English translation (Claude) But see, we beg you, how by their very defense they entangle themselves worse, and plead our case and destroy their own altogether. For after the conference, when the defeated wished to appeal, these words were put to them, and they try to defend them with a worse entanglement of their own when you ask them what they did. For they think you have so little sense that you do not understand they have been beaten in every way, when they tell you things they would never say if they could find anything useful to say. For who could bear defeated men complaining that the sentence against them was pronounced at night? As if the need to hear a case did not often hold judges so that they are compelled to sit far into the night, or as if what is said is not true because it is said at night. Nor do they listen to Scripture proclaiming: “By day the Lord commanded his mercy, and by night he declared it”; and again: “To proclaim your mercy in the morning and your truth through the night.” Or they say that the persecutors came by night to arrest the Lord, not noticing that in those same night hours the Lord also preached the truth to his disciples; nor did they wish to note what is written, that the apostle Paul prolonged his speech until midnight. If they had anything true to say, the night could not hinder them. But indeed they were suffering a most dark night in their minds, when they brought forward so much against themselves and did not correct their perverse spirit toward the light of truth. And it was certainly still day when, in forensic fashion, they pleaded the time limit against us, saying that the case had lapsed and could no longer be heard at all, not understanding that they showed people nothing but how much they feared that the case would be heard, in which their perversity and the Catholic truth would be shown. ### Scripture references - Ps 42:8 (41:9 Vulg.): quotation, high confidence - Ps 92:2 (91:3 Vulg.): quotation, high confidence - John 18:3: allusion, high confidence - Acts 20:7: allusion, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 16 (CSEL 53:112–113; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/16). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 17 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-17 - Source: CSEL 53:113–115 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The Donatist charge against Miltiades rests on shared names (Strato, Cassian), though Scripture itself has two Johns, Simons, Jameses, Judases, and Herods. ### Latin text Adhuc dies erat, quando uolentes destruere iudicium Romani episcopi Miltiadis, quo purgatus et absolutus est Caecilianus, etiam ipsum Miltiadem traditorem fuisse dixerunt. cuius criminationis cum ab eis esset exacta probatio, gesta prolixissima recitarunt, ubi Miltiadis nomen, quod aliquid tradiderit, non fuit. et recitauerunt etiam alia gesta, ubi legebatur Miltiadem misisse diaconos cum litteris Maxenti imperatoris et praefecti praetorio ad praefectum urbi, ut reciperent loca, quae fuerant a christianis tempore persecutionis ablata. ubi cum Miltiadis crimen nullum penitus adpareret, dixerunt superioribus traditionis gestis traditorem Stratonem fuisse recitatum, quod uocabatur unus etiam ex diaconis, quos ad recipienda loca miserat Miltiades, eundem ipsum esse contendentes et non ostendentes. neque enim Stratonem qui tradiderat saltem diaconum fuisse monstrabant. quod etiamsi esset, respondimus eis ante paruum tempus in eodem clero ecclesiae Romanae duos Petros diaconos fuisse. ita mente caeci tenebrosas calumnias innectebant, addentes etiam manifestissimam falsitatem, quod non solum nomen, sed etiam loca et regiones et personae conuenirent, quibus non alius, sed ipse esse Straton ostenderetur, cum in illis gestis omnino nihil conueniens praeter similitudinem nominis legeretur, qua plena est consuetudo generis humani, ut non solum duo, sed etiam plures homines uno nomine uocitentur. nam ipsi quoque Donatum suum Carthaginiensem, ne in iudicio Miltiadis ipse putaretur esse damnatus, quoniam illum pro magno habent, a Donato Casensi distinguendum esse clamauerunt, quia (non) Donatus Carthaginiensis contra Caecilianum missus fuerat ad Miltiadis episcopale iudicium, tam crassam noctem in corde gestantes, ut Donatum infamari nollent similitudine nominis sui et Miltiadem maculari uellent similitudine nominis alieni. nunc autem Stratoni etiam Cassiani nomen addere dicuntur, quod in conlatione tacuerunt, quasi Straton solus cognominalem habere potuisset et Cassianus non potuit. nec adtendere potuerunt interna sua nocte impediti non solum duos Iohannes, unum baptistam, alterum euangelistam, sed etiam duos Simones, unum Petrum, alterum magum, in ipso denique tam paruo numero apostolorum non solum duos Iacobos, unum Alphaei, alterum Zebedaei, sed etiam duos Iudas, unum sanctum, alterum diabolum; cui tamen Iudae apostolo sancto quisquis similiter mente caecus de crimine Iudae traditoris calumniaretur, non nisi istos imitaretur. non enim mirum est, si tales istos calumniatores post tam longum tempus patitur existimatio Miltiadis de duobus Cassianis uel de duobus Stratonibus, quales euangelica ueritas patitur de duobus Herodibus. nam quia non est expressum, quis Herodes pro Christo occisis infantibus continuo mortuus fuerit et quis Herodes cum Pilato dominum persecutus sit, putantes unum fuisse obiciunt euangelio crimen falsitatis, sicut isti putantes unum fuisse Stratonem uel Cassianum obiciunt Miltiadi maculam traditionis. et tamen illi tolerabilius errant, quia non solum nomen, uerum etiam dignitas consonat — uterque enim legitur rex Herodes —, isti autem dignitatem consonare mentiti sunt, quia utrosque fuisse diaconos nullo modo legere potuerunt. ### English translation (Claude) It was still day when, wishing to destroy the judgment of Miltiades, bishop of Rome, by which Caecilian was cleared and acquitted, they said that Miltiades himself had been a betrayer. When proof of this accusation was demanded of them, they read some very long minutes in which the name of Miltiades, as having handed anything over, did not occur. And they also read other minutes in which it was read that Miltiades had sent deacons with letters of the emperor Maxentius and of the praetorian prefect to the prefect of the city, to recover the places that had been taken from the Christians in time of persecution. When no crime of Miltiades whatever appeared there, they said that in the earlier minutes of the betrayal a betrayer Strato had been read, since one of the deacons whom Miltiades had sent to recover the places was also called that, contending that he was the same man and not showing it. For they did not even show that the Strato who had handed over was a deacon. And even if he had been, we answered them that a short time ago there had been two deacons named Peter in the same clergy of the Roman church. So, blind in mind, they wove dark slanders, adding even a most manifest falsehood, that not only the name but also the places, regions, and persons agreed, by which it would be shown that Strato was not another but the same; when in those minutes nothing at all was read that agreed except the likeness of the name, with which the custom of the human race is full, so that not only two but even more people are called by one name. For they too cried out that their Donatus of Carthage was to be distinguished from Donatus of Casae, so that he would not be thought to have been condemned in the judgment of Miltiades, since they hold him in great esteem; because it was not Donatus of Carthage who had been sent against Caecilian to Miltiades’ episcopal judgment: carrying so thick a night in their hearts that they would not have Donatus disgraced by the likeness of his name, and would have Miltiades stained by the likeness of another’s name. Now they are said also to add to Strato the name of Cassian, which they kept silent about at the conference; as if Strato alone could have had a namesake and Cassian could not. Nor, hindered by their inner night, could they notice not only two Johns, one the Baptist, the other the Evangelist, but also two Simons, one Peter, the other the magician; and finally, in the very small number of the apostles, not only two named James, one of Alphaeus, the other of Zebedee, but also two named Judas, one a saint, the other a devil; and yet anyone equally blind in mind who slandered the holy apostle Judas with the crime of Judas the betrayer would only be imitating these men. For it is no wonder if the reputation of Miltiades, after so long a time, suffers such slanderers as these about two Cassians or two Stratos, as the truth of the Gospel suffers about two Herods. For since it is not stated which Herod died soon after the infants were killed for Christ’s sake, and which Herod persecuted the Lord with Pilate, those who think they were one man charge the Gospel with falsehood, just as these, thinking that Strato or Cassian was one man, charge Miltiades with the stain of betrayal. And yet those err more tolerably, because not only the name but also the rank agrees, for each is read as King Herod; but these lied that the rank agreed, since they could in no way read that both had been deacons. ### Scripture references - Acts 8:9–24: allusion, high confidence - Luke 6:14–16: allusion, high confidence - John 6:70: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 2:16–19: allusion, high confidence - Luke 23:7–12: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - Two Herods: Herod the Great (Matt 2:16–19) and Herod Antipas (Luke 23:7–12). The editor’s addition “(non)” is translated. Pagans who charged the Gospels with contradiction over the Herods are not named. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 17 (CSEL 53:113–115; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/17). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 18 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-18 - Source: CSEL 53:115–116 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The Donatists’ own acts of martyrs show that Christians assembled, ordained, and baptized during persecution, so the council of Cirta was possible. ### Latin text Adhuc dies erat, quando Cirtense concilium — si tamen concilium dicendum est, in quo uix undecim uel duodecim episcopi fuerunt —, unde recitauimus traditores fuisse quosdam, qui cum Secundo Tigisitano contra Caecilianum sententias protulerunt, falsum uolentes ostendere dixerunt persecutionis tempore non potuisse in aliquam domum illos undecim uel duodecim episcopos congregari, et ut probarent tempus fuisse persecutionis, protulerunt martyrum gesta, ut diebus et consulibus consideratis quod tempus fuerit appareret. quae martyrum gesta contra se ipsos protulisse conuicti sunt; in eis quippe gestis manifestatum est illo tempore persecutionis christianas plebes solitas congregari. unde constitit non esse incredibile, quod etiam illi episcopi in priuatam domum similiter conuenisse legebantur, ut plebi, quae poterat, sicut gestis martyrum continebatur, etiam persecutionis tempore congregari, occulte ordinaretur episcopus, qui posset sibi etiam ipse occulte clericos ordinare in tanta necessitate, ubi anterior episcopus cum clero lapsus per epistulam ipsius Secundi, quae ab illis allegata est, monstrabatur. ex his martyrum gestis, quae ipsi proferebant, admoniti sumus et in alia gesta martyrum intendere, et inuenimus et diximus feruente tempore persecutionis et priuatam domum, quod illi fieri potuisse negauerant, congregationi christianorum fuisse concessam et in carcere fuisse martyres baptizatos, ut uiderent, quam non esset incredibile tempore persecutionis in priuatam domum paucos episcopos congregari, quando et in ipso carcere celebrarentur sacramenta Christi, in quo inclusi homines tenebantur pro fide Christi. quantum uos ergo adiuuerint gesta martyrum proferendo, quis non uideat, qui non similem noctem habet in corde, qualem illi habebant qui haec non uidebant? ### English translation (Claude) It was still day when, wishing to show false the council of Cirta (if indeed it should be called a council, in which there were scarcely eleven or twelve bishops), from which we read that certain men who pronounced sentences against Caecilian with Secundus of Tigisi had been betrayers, they said that in time of persecution those eleven or twelve bishops could not have assembled in any house; and to prove that it was a time of persecution, they produced acts of martyrs, so that, the days and consuls being considered, it would appear what time it was. They were convicted of having produced these acts of martyrs against themselves; for in those acts it was made plain that at that time of persecution Christian congregations were accustomed to assemble. From this it was established that it was not incredible that those bishops too were read to have met likewise in a private house, so that for a congregation which could assemble even in time of persecution, as the acts of the martyrs contained, a bishop might be secretly ordained, who could himself also secretly ordain clergy for himself in such great necessity, where the previous bishop with his clergy was shown to have lapsed by the letter of Secundus himself, which they had cited. From these acts of martyrs which they produced we were prompted to look into other acts of martyrs too, and we found and said that at the height of the time of persecution both a private house, which they had denied could happen, had been granted for an assembly of Christians, and martyrs had been baptized in prison; so that they might see how far from incredible it was that a few bishops assembled in a private house in time of persecution, when the sacraments of Christ were celebrated even in the very prison where men were held shut in for faith in Christ. How much, then, they helped you by producing the acts of the martyrs, who does not see, unless he has a night in his heart like that of those who did not see it? ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 18 (CSEL 53:115–116; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/18). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 19 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-19 - Source: CSEL 53:116–118 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The dispute over dated and undated councils was an empty delay; copies vary in recording dates, as the Donatists’ own documents show. ### Latin text Qui etiam hinc gestis ipsis Cirtensibus calumniabantur, quia ibi dies et consules legebantur, et exigebant a nobis, ut aliqua ecclesiastica concilia proferremus, ubi dies recitarentur et consules. ipsi enim Carthaginiense concilium factum sine die et consule proferebant. dicebant enim etiam concilium Cypriani consules non habere, ubi tamen legitur dies, in illo autem ipsorum Carthaginiensi nec dies. nos autem quod in manibus erat Romanum concilium Miltiadis, sicut illud Cirtense, et diem habere demonstrabamus et consules. neque enim tunc ad horam antiqua archiua ecclesiastica discutienda nobis fuerunt, unde ista consuetudo etiam ueterum fuisse doceretur. nec tamen inanes eis etiam nos calumnias mouere uoluimus, quare in Cypriani concilio dies inueniretur, in ipsorum autem non inueniretur, quia illi uanas moras uolebant innectere, quas nos conabamur (auertere). nam etiam hoc exigebant, ut de scripturis sanctis ostenderemus alicubi dies et consules esse conscriptos; quasi episcoporum concilia scripturis canonicis aliquando fuerint conparata aut possint etiam ipsi de scripturis sanctis proferre concilium, ubi apostoli iudices sederint et accusatum aliquem uel damnauerint uel absoluerint. et tamen respondimus eis etiam prophetas libros suos praenotatis et definitis commendasse temporibus, quo anno cuius regis, quoto mense anni, quoto die mensis factum super eos fuerit uerbum domini, ut ostenderemus, quam inaniter et calumniose de diebus et consulibus episcopalium conciliorum quaestiones uanissimas excitarent. fieri enim potest, ut in codicibus sit ista uarietas, dum alii etiam dies et consules diligentia maiore describunt, alii tamquam superfluum praetermittunt: sicut etiam codex, de quo primum legimus iudicium Constantini, quo inter partes Caecilianum innocentem, illos autem calumniosissimos pronuntiauit, diem et consulem non habebat, alius autem, quem contra eorum calumnias postea protulimus, habebat. qui etiam illic inuidiosissime proclamauerant, quod imperatoris litteras sine die et consule recitauimus, et tamen etiam ipsi alias eiusdem imperatoris litteras in causa Felicis ordinatoris Caeciliani, quas mirabili caecitate contra se ipsos protulerunt, sine die et consule recitarunt. nec eis inde aliquid obiecimus, ne similiter ut ipsi tempora necessaria superfluis uerbis occuparemus; haec autem modo dicimus, ut uos saltem oculos aperiatis et tenebrosa nocte careatis, quam uestri episcopi corde gestabant, qui nocturnam sententiam cognitioni iudicis obiecerunt et ipsi per diem interioribus tenebris inuoluti mirabili caecitate contra se ipsos tanta dixerunt. ### English translation (Claude) They also slandered the minutes of Cirta on the ground that a day and consuls were read there, and they demanded that we produce some councils of the church in which days and consuls were read. For they were producing a council of Carthage held without day or consul. They said too that the council of Cyprian has no consuls, though a day is read in it, while in that Carthaginian council of theirs there is not even a day. We, however, showed that the Roman council of Miltiades, which was in hand, has both a day and consuls, like that of Cirta. For we did not then have time on the spot to examine the ancient archives of the church, by which it might be shown that this was a custom of the ancients too. Nor did we wish to raise empty slanders against them in turn, why a day was found in Cyprian’s council but not in theirs, since they wanted to weave in empty delays, which we were trying to avert. For they even demanded that we show from the holy Scriptures that days and consuls were written down somewhere; as if councils of bishops had ever been compared with the canonical Scriptures, or as if they themselves could produce from the holy Scriptures a council in which apostles sat as judges and either condemned or acquitted someone accused. And yet we answered them that the prophets too commended their books with times noted and fixed at the head, in what year of what king, in what month of the year, on what day of the month the word of the Lord came upon them; so as to show how emptily and slanderously they raised most empty questions about the days and consuls of episcopal councils. For it can happen that there is this variation in copies, some writing out even days and consuls with greater care, others omitting them as superfluous; just as the copy from which we first read the judgment of Constantine, in which he pronounced Caecilian innocent between the parties and them most slanderous, had no day and consul, while another, which we later produced against their slanders, had them. They had also cried out there most spitefully that we read the emperor’s letter without day and consul; and yet they themselves read another letter of the same emperor in the case of Felix, Caecilian’s ordainer, which by an amazing blindness they produced against themselves, without day and consul. Nor did we charge them with anything on that account, so as not to fill the necessary time with superfluous words as they did; but we say these things now so that you at least may open your eyes and be free of the dark night which your bishops carried in their hearts, who charged the judge’s hearing with a night sentence, while they themselves, wrapped by day in inner darkness, said so much against themselves with amazing blindness. ### Scripture references - Ezek 1:1–2: allusion, medium confidence - Hag 1:1: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “The council of Cyprian” is the council of Carthage of 256 (Sententiae episcoporum). ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 19 (CSEL 53:116–118; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/19). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 20 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-20 - Source: CSEL 53:118–119 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: By boasting that Donatus of Carthage had Caecilian condemned by the emperor, the Donatists make their hero the persecutor and refute their own claim to be the church that suffers persecution. ### Latin text Leguntur actis apud Carthaginis magistratum expressa uerba Primiani, ubi dicit, quod parentes eorum nostri maiores uariis exiliis uexauerunt, et in conlatione probare conantur accusantibus maioribus suis ab imperatore Caecilianum exilio esse damnatum. dicunt in litteris suis communionem suam ecclesiam ueritatis, quae persecutionem patitur, non quae facit, et conantur ostendere Caecilianum damnatum iudicio imperatoris persequentibus maioribus suis, et hoc dicunt factum non per Donatum Casensem, sed per eum, quem prae ceteris praedicant, Donatum Carthaginiensem. hoc enim scriptis suis [per suos] modo iactare dicuntur, ubi uicti iudicem accusant, quia noctem cordis ipsorum nocturna ueritas confutauit. Donatum illum, illum, inquam, Donatum, quem dixerunt ecclesiae Carthaginis ornamentum et martyralis gloriae uirum, sic commendare uoluerunt, ut dicerent, quod apud imperatoris Constantini cognitionem ipse reum et asseruerit et conuicerit Caecilianum. ille ergo uir gloriae martyralis apud imperatoris cognitionem reum constituit et asseruit Caecilianum illamque cognitionem Caeciliani damnatio consecuta est, illo uiro gloriae martyralis accusante et instante Caecilianus ab imperatore damnatus est. quod quidem nos falsum esse conuicimus, qui eiusdem imperatoris litteras, quibus se inter partes audisse et iudicasse testatur, ubi Caeciliano absoluto atque purgato illorum calumnias detestatus est, prolatas de archiuo publico recitauimus. contra quas omnino quid responderent nihil inuenire potuerunt et ad eas confirmandas contra se ipsos alia protulerunt. proinde a maioribus eorum apud imperatorem accusatum constitit Caecilianum, damnatum autem non constitit, immo etiam constitit absolutum. sed tamen uel uos uidete, quantum adiuuerint causam nostram episcopi uestri, qui de illa uoluerunt etiam falsitate gloriari. si enim Donatus ille uir gloriae martyralis apud imperatoris cognitionem reum asseruit Caecilianum et illo uiro gloriae martyralis accusante et instante Caecilianus ab imperatore damnatus est, respondeant uobis, quando haec agebantur, quis erat martyr, utrum Donatus, qui hominem apud imperatorem persequebatur, an Caecilianus, qui illo persequente ab imperatore damnabatur? ubi est nunc illa definitiua regula ipsorum communionem Donati esse ecclesiam ueritatis quae persecutionem patitur, non quae facit? ecce patitur Caecilianus, Donatus facit: quis eorum est uir gloriae martyralis? ### English translation (Claude) In the records before the magistrate of Carthage the words of Primian are read stated plainly, where he says that our forebears harassed their parents with various exiles; and at the conference they try to prove that, on the accusation of their forebears, Caecilian was condemned to exile by the emperor. They say in their letter that their communion is the church of truth, which suffers persecution, not that which inflicts it; and they try to show that Caecilian was condemned by the emperor’s judgment, their forebears persecuting him; and they say this was done not through Donatus of Casae but through the one whom they praise above the rest, Donatus of Carthage. For this is what they are now said to boast in their writings, in which, defeated, they accuse the judge because truth at night refuted the night of their hearts. That Donatus, that Donatus, I say, whom they have called the ornament of the church of Carthage and a man of martyr’s glory, they wished to commend by saying that before the hearing of the emperor Constantine he himself both charged Caecilian as guilty and convicted him. So that man of martyr’s glory, before the emperor’s hearing, made Caecilian a defendant and charged him, and condemnation of Caecilian followed that hearing; on the accusation and insistence of that man of martyr’s glory Caecilian was condemned by the emperor. This indeed we proved false, we who read the letter of the same emperor, brought out from the public archive, in which he testifies that he heard and judged between the parties, where, having acquitted and cleared Caecilian, he expressed his detestation of their slanders. Against it they could find nothing at all to answer, and to confirm it they produced other things against themselves. So it was established that Caecilian was accused before the emperor by their forebears, but not established that he was condemned; on the contrary, it was established that he was acquitted. But you at least see how much your bishops helped our case, who wished to boast even of that falsehood. For if that Donatus, a man of martyr’s glory, charged Caecilian as guilty before the emperor’s hearing, and on the accusation and insistence of that man of martyr’s glory Caecilian was condemned by the emperor, let them answer you: when these things were being done, who was the martyr, Donatus, who was persecuting a man before the emperor, or Caecilian, who was being condemned by the emperor while he persecuted him? Where now is that defining rule of theirs, that the communion of Donatus is the church of truth, which suffers persecution, not that which inflicts it? See, Caecilian suffers, Donatus inflicts: which of them is the man of martyr’s glory? ### Translation notes - The Donatist claims (Primian’s words; “the church … which suffers persecution, not that which inflicts it”; Donatus as “a man of martyr’s glory”) are quoted as theirs. The editor deletes “per suos” after “scriptis suis”. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 20 (CSEL 53:118–119; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/20). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 21 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-21 - Source: CSEL 53:119–120 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Augustine argues that suffering persecution does not prove a church true; he defends mild legal coercion of Donatists without bloodshed and asks judges to soften harsh penalties. ### Latin text Adtendite, aduertite, nolite in errorem perniciosum adhuc usque seduci. ueritatem, quae uobis occultabatur, deus aperire dignatus est, falsitatem, quae uobis offundebatur, deus confutare dignatus est; tanto eius beneficio quare adhuc estis ingrati? hoc est nempe, quod uobis saepe dicebant, unde cordis uestri oculos astuta fallacia caligabant, et adhuc etiam conuicti inde se iactant, inde nos lacerant, quia nos facimus persecutionem, ipsi patiuntur. hoc eis remansit omni ex parte superatis, unde adhuc nebulas faciant imperitis, hinc se quasi ostendentes esse ecclesiam ueritatis, quia persecutionem patitur, non facit. non uos ergo adhuc fallant; hoc eis facimus, quod maiores suos et ipsum quem praedicant uelut martyralis gloriae uirum Caeciliano fecisse gloriantur. hoc egit ille apud imperatorem, conuictus Caecilianus ut illius iudicio damnaretur: hoc et nos egimus, ut isti conuicti similia paterentur. si male fecit, quare hoc illi Donatus faciebat? si autem recte fecit, quare hoc catholica parti Donati non faciat? immo recte fieri nec illi dubitant, qui hoc maiores suos, quos multum laudant, fecisse gloriantur, nec nos dubitamus, qui hoc eis esse faciendum negare non possumus, ut sine effusione sanguinis, qui uerbis non emendantur, aliqua mitissima poena legum corripiantur inquieti; et si forte imperator permotus mentis sacrilegae pertinaciam grauiore supplicio statuit esse plectendam, mitius agant iudices, quibus semper licuit lenire atque emollire sententiam. interim ergo, quamuis non possit ostendi Caecilianum ab imperatore Constantino esse damnatum, a uobis tamen error ille sublatus est, quo putabatis eam esse ueram ecclesiam quae persecutionem patitur, non quae facit; fecit enim Donatus, passus est Caecilianus. et si persecutionem patitur pars Donati, patitur cum illa etiam pars Maximiani, quam et ipsi Christi ecclesiam non esse confirmant. ac per hoc et facere persecutionem non est iniquitatis indicium, quia et boni faciunt malis et mali bonis, et pati persecutionem non est iustitiae documentum, quia eam non soli boni pro pietate, sed (et) mali pro iniquitate patiuntur. ### English translation (Claude) Pay attention, take notice, do not let yourselves be led any longer into a ruinous error. The truth that was hidden from you God has deigned to reveal; the falsehood that was spread over you God has deigned to refute: why are you still ungrateful for so great a kindness? This, surely, is what they often told you, by which their cunning deceit clouded the eyes of your heart, and even now, though convicted, they boast of it and tear us with it: that we inflict persecution and they suffer it. This is what remains to them, beaten on every side, with which to make fogs still for the unlearned, showing from this, as it were, that they are the church of truth, because it suffers persecution and does not inflict it. So do not let them deceive you any longer; we do to them what they boast that their forebears, and the very man they praise as a man of martyr’s glory, did to Caecilian. He acted before the emperor so that Caecilian, convicted, would be condemned by his judgment; we too have acted so that these men, convicted, would suffer similar things. If he did wrong, why did Donatus do this to him? But if he did right, why should the Catholic Church not do this to the party of Donatus? Indeed, neither do they doubt that it is done rightly, who boast that their forebears, whom they praise greatly, did it; nor do we doubt it, who cannot deny that this must be done to them: that those who are not amended by words, being restless, should be corrected without the shedding of blood by some very mild penalty of the laws; and if perhaps the emperor, moved by the stubbornness of a sacrilegious mind, has decreed that it be punished with a heavier penalty, let the judges act more mildly, who have always been permitted to soften and lighten a sentence. Meanwhile, then, although it cannot be shown that Caecilian was condemned by the emperor Constantine, that error has been taken away from you by which you thought that the true church is the one which suffers persecution, not that which inflicts it; for Donatus inflicted it, Caecilian suffered it. And if the party of Donatus suffers persecution, the party of Maximian suffers with it too, which they themselves affirm is not the church of Christ. And so to inflict persecution is not a sign of iniquity, since the good do it to the bad and the bad to the good; and to suffer persecution is not a proof of righteousness, since not only the good suffer it for piety, but the bad too for iniquity. ### Translation notes - Augustine’s defense of coercion of the Donatists by imperial law, with his plea that no blood be shed and that judges mitigate sentences, is translated as written. The editor’s addition “(et)” is translated. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 21 (CSEL 53:119–120; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/21). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 22 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-22 - Source: CSEL 53:120–121 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Persecution endured counts only if it is for righteousness; Augustine lists Donatist violence against Catholics and says Donatists who die do so by suicide or in violent attacks. ### Latin text Restat ergo uobis errore depulso ecclesiam Christi uidere ac tenere catholicam, non ut inde eam eligatis, quia persecutionem patitur. cum enim dixisset dominus: beati qui persecutionem patiuntur, ne inde se iactent haeretici, addidit: propter iustitiam. nam quanta mala nostris fecerint furiosissimi clerici et circumcelliones partis Donati, nostis et uos. incensae sunt ecclesiae, missi in flammas codices sancti, incensae etiam priuatae domus, rapti homines de sedibus suis, et omnibus quae inerant ablatis aut perditis ipsi caesi laniati excaecati. nec ab homicidio potuit temperari, quamuis sit mitius huic luci morientem quam istam lucem auferre uiuenti. uentum est ad homines, non ut retenti aliquo ducerentur, sed tantum ut ista paterentur. nec tamen nostros ideo iustificamus, quia ista perpessi sunt, sed quia pro christiana ueritate, pro Christi pace, pro ecclesiae unitate perpessi sunt. illi autem sub tam multis, sub tam seueris legibus et sub tanta ecclesiae catholicae quam dominus ei tribuit potestate quid tale patiuntur? si quando enim morte multantur, aut ipsi se occidunt aut eorum cruentae uiolentiae dum resistitur occiduntur, non pro communione partis Donati nec pro errore sacrilegi schismatis, sed pro apertissimis facinoribus et sceleribus suis, quae more latronum inmani furore et crudelitate committunt. pro parte autem Donati uix aliquid tale patiuntur, quale Caecilianum Donato instante passum esse dixerunt. ### English translation (Claude) It remains for you, then, with error driven away, to see and hold the Catholic Church of Christ, not choosing it because it suffers persecution. For when the Lord had said, “Blessed are those who suffer persecution,” so that heretics would not boast of this, he added, “for righteousness’ sake.” For you too know what great evils the most furious clerics and circumcellions of the party of Donatus have done to our people. Churches were burned, holy books thrown into the flames, private houses burned too, people dragged from their homes, and, everything in them carried off or destroyed, they themselves beaten, mangled, blinded. Nor could they refrain from murder, although it is milder to take a dying man from this light than to take this light from a living man. They went for the people themselves, not to hold them and lead them off somewhere, but only to make them suffer these things. Yet we do not justify our people because they suffered these things, but because they suffered them for Christian truth, for the peace of Christ, for the unity of the church. But what of the kind do they suffer, under so many and such severe laws and under so great a power of the Catholic Church as the Lord has given it? For if they are ever punished with death, either they kill themselves or they are killed while their bloody violence is being resisted, not for the communion of the party of Donatus nor for the error of a sacrilegious schism, but for their most open crimes and wickedness, which they commit with monstrous fury and cruelty after the manner of robbers. For the party of Donatus they hardly suffer anything like what they said Caecilian suffered at the insistence of Donatus. ### Scripture references - Matt 5:10: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Augustine’s description of the Donatists and circumcellions is translated as written. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 22 (CSEL 53:120–121; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/22). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 23 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-23 - Source: CSEL 53:121–122 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Either persecution can be just or just punishment is not persecution; the Donatists who first appealed to the emperor cannot now demand freedom of choice. ### Latin text Aut ergo persecutio non omnis iniusta est aut non est persecutio dicenda cum iusta est. quapropter aut persecutionem pars Donati patitur iustam aut persecutionem non patitur, quia patitur iuste. non autem iuste passus est Caecilianus, quia innocens probatus et absolutus est. quod quidem illi negauerunt et potius ab imperatore damnatum esse dixerunt, et ideo maiores suos maximeque Donatum a se tanta praedicatione laudatum Caeciliano persecutionem fecisse confessi sunt. illum autem conuictum atque damnatum probare minime potuerunt, immo etiam, quod nos dicebamus, eum esse absolutum atque purgatum ipsi quoque multa contra se ipsos legendo firmarunt. et tamen liberum arbitrium sibi ab imperatore concessum esse iactant. uicti atque confusi id sibi etiam nunc flagitabant debere concedi, quod maiores eorum Caeciliano non concedebant, quem sic apud imperatorem accusarunt, quem illis accusantibus ab imperatore damnatum isti etiam mentiri uoluerunt. si uoluntas libera unicuique tribuenda est, Caeciliano prius tribueretur; si haec non homini iudici permittenda, sed deo potius dimittenda sunt, Caecilianus apud imperatorem prius non accusaretur. ### English translation (Claude) So either not all persecution is unjust, or it should not be called persecution when it is just. Therefore either the party of Donatus suffers a just persecution, or it does not suffer persecution, because it suffers justly. But Caecilian did not suffer justly, since he was proved innocent and acquitted. They indeed denied this and said rather that he had been condemned by the emperor, and so confessed that their forebears, and above all Donatus, whom they praise so highly, persecuted Caecilian. But they could by no means prove that he had been convicted and condemned; on the contrary, by reading many things against themselves they too confirmed what we said, that he had been acquitted and cleared. And yet they boast that free choice was granted them by the emperor. Defeated and confounded, they even now demanded that what their forebears did not grant Caecilian should be granted to them, whom they so accused before the emperor, and whom these men even wished to claim falsely had been condemned by the emperor on their accusation. If free will is to be granted to everyone, it should have been granted first to Caecilian; if these things are not to be committed to a human judge but rather left to God, Caecilian should not first have been accused before the emperor. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 23 (CSEL 53:121–122; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/23). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 24 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-24 - Source: CSEL 53:122–123 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Augustine urges the Donatists to wake and join the worldwide church, which Caecilian’s case cannot touch. ### Latin text Expergiscimini aliquando; non uos tartareus obliget somnus, non in profundum sacrilegi erroris adhuc impia consuetudo demergat; iam consonate paci, cohaerete unitati, adquiescite caritati, cedite ueritati; ecclesiam catholicam incipientem ab Hierusalem cognoscite usque quaque diffundi, cui non communicat pars Donati, cui causa non praeiudicat Caeciliani. totiens enim purgatus, totiens absolutus etiamsi non esset innocens, nec causa causae praeiudicat nec persona personae. haec uerba per orbem terrae uniuersa personat ecclesia, clamat etiam membrum eius in Africa: testimonium dei noui, negotium Caeciliani non noui; credo innocentem a uestris maioribus insectatum quem lego totiens absolutum, sed qualiscumque sit causa eius, causae meae nihil praeiudicat, qualiscumque sit persona eius, personae meae nihil praeiudicat. uos hoc dixistis, uos ad hoc suscripsistis: nec causa causae nec persona personae. ecce dominus dicit: per omnes gentes, incipientibus Hierusalem; diuinam ueritatem in una ecclesia teneamus et humanas lites aliquando finiamus. ### English translation (Claude) Wake up at last; let not a hellish sleep bind you, let not impious habit plunge you still into the depths of sacrilegious error. Now agree with peace, cleave to unity, rest in love, yield to truth; recognize the Catholic Church, beginning from Jerusalem, spread everywhere, with which the party of Donatus is not in communion, and which the case of Caecilian does not prejudice. For, cleared so many times, acquitted so many times, even if he were not innocent, neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person. These words the whole church sounds through the world; its member in Africa also cries out: “I know God’s testimony; I do not know Caecilian’s business. I believe him innocent, harassed by your forebears, since I read so many times that he was acquitted; but whatever his case may be, it does not prejudice my case at all; whatever his person may be, it does not prejudice my person at all. You said this, you signed this: neither does one case prejudice another nor one person another.” See, the Lord says: “Through all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.” Let us hold the divine truth in one church and at last put an end to human quarrels. ### Scripture references - Luke 24:47: quotation, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 24 (CSEL 53:122–123; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/24). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 25 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-25 - Source: CSEL 53:123–125 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The Donatists’ later gloss on their admission, that guilt passes down a “rope” of ordinations, is turned against them by their own reception of the Maximianist Felician. ### Latin text Numquid enim uerba ista, ubi dixerunt nec causam causae nec personam praeiudicare personae, ullo modo post ipsam conlationem defendere potuerunt ac non potius se multo perplexius implicarunt? sic namque in quibusdam scriptis suis locuti sunt: causam causae et personam non praeiudicare personae a nobis, inquiunt, dictum esse memoriter recensitum est, sed ad locum: (nobis non praeiudicari ab his qui a nobis uel reiecti sunt uel damnati'). hi autem, qui ex Caeciliani ordinatione descendunt, quos de praecessore origo numerat ad reatum, quemadmodum non possint ordinatoris sui criminibus obligari, cum per seriem protensus peccatorum funis, quoscumque communionis uinxerit uinculo, necesse est ut consortes faciat esse peccati? o mira defensio! tam densum et artum est lutum ubi eis adhaeserunt pedes, ut eos euellere conantes frustra et manus et caput figant et in eodem luto haesitantes artius inuoluantur. ex eis enim, quos uel reiecisse se uel damnasse commemorant, hoc est ex Maximianistis, secum habent Felicianum et damnatorem Primiani et a se damnatum in causa Primiani. quid est quod funem tam longum a Caeciliano usque ad haec tempora catholicae ecclesiae implicare contendunt et catenam suam tam in proximo non attendunt? praeclara quippe illa Bagaitana sententia de Maximiano et sociis eius: trahit, inquit, ad consortium criminis plurimos catena sacrilegii. Felicianus ergo ista catena trahebatur: si illis non praeiudicat Felicianus, quare nobis Caecilianus? an forte ubi uolunt praeiudicat, ubi autem nolunt causae non praeiudicat causa et pro libidine ipsorum fortior est funis antiquus quam noua catena? non praeiudicat Maximianus Feliciano a quo damnatus est, non praeiudicat Maximianus et Felicianus Primiano a quibus damnatus est, non praeiudicat Maximianus eis qui dilationem acceperunt, quibus in uno schismate sociatus est, non praeiudicat Felicianus parti Donati, a qua in eodem honore susceptus est nec baptismus quem in sacrilego schismate dedit ibi destructus est: et praeiudicat Caecilianus tot christianis gentibus, qui semel damnatus est absens quomodo Primianus et ter absolutus est praesens quomodo non Primianus. praeiudicat nobis olim defunctus ignotus: et istis non praeiudicat uiuus a quibus legitur paulo ante damnatus et quibus cernitur modo sociatus. nobis inuoluitur funis Caeciliani a quibus ignoratur: et illis non inuoluitur catena Feliciani quorum in eum sententia recitatur, ubi ipsa catena damnatur. illis licet dicere: suscepimus quos damnauimus pro pace Donati, quia nec causa causae praeiudicat nec persona personae: et nobis non licet dicere: propter eos quos damnastis non deserimus pacem Christi, Quia nec causa causae praeiudicat nec persona personae). o ferream frontem, o furoris tenebras, nocturnam sententiam iudici obicientes et in sui cordis nocte palpantes offendentes cadentes, contra nos rabide litigantes et pro nobis tanta dicentes! ### English translation (Claude) Could they in any way defend those words, in which they said that neither does one case prejudice another case nor one person another person, after the conference itself, and did they not rather entangle themselves much more intricately? For in some of their writings they spoke thus: “That we said ‘one case does not prejudice another case, nor one person another person’ was rehearsed from memory, but in the sense: ‘we are not prejudiced by those who have been either rejected or condemned by us.’ But how could those who descend from Caecilian’s ordination, whom their origin from their predecessor counts into guilt, not be bound by the crimes of their ordainer, since the rope of sins, stretched through the series, must make sharers in sin all whom it has bound with the bond of communion?” What a wonderful defense! So thick and tight is the mud in which their feet have stuck that, trying to pull them out, they plant their hands and head in it in vain and, sticking in the same mud, are wrapped in it more tightly. For of those whom they mention as either rejected or condemned by them, that is, of the Maximianists, they have with them Felician, both a condemner of Primian and one condemned by them in Primian’s case. Why is it that they strive to entangle the Catholic Church with so long a rope from Caecilian down to these times, and do not notice their own chain so near at hand? For that famous sentence of Bagai about Maximian and his associates says: “The chain of sacrilege drags very many into partnership in the crime.” So Felician was dragged by that chain: if Felician does not prejudice them, why does Caecilian prejudice us? Or perhaps one case prejudices another where they wish, but where they do not wish it does not, and at their pleasure an old rope is stronger than a new chain? Maximian does not prejudice Felician, by whom he was condemned; Maximian and Felician do not prejudice Primian, by whom they were condemned; Maximian does not prejudice those who received a period of grace, with whom he was associated in one schism; Felician does not prejudice the party of Donatus, by which he was received in the same rank, and the baptism he gave in a sacrilegious schism was not destroyed there: and Caecilian prejudices so many Christian nations, who was once condemned in his absence, as Primian was, and three times acquitted in his presence, as Primian was not. One long dead and unknown prejudices us: and one living, whom they are read to have condemned a little while ago and with whom they are seen to be associated now, does not prejudice them. The rope of Caecilian is wound around us, by whom he is unknown: and the chain of Felician is not wound around them, whose sentence against him is read, in which that very chain is condemned. They may say: “We received those whom we condemned for the peace of Donatus, because neither does one case prejudice another nor one person another”; and we may not say: “Because of those whom you condemned we do not desert the peace of Christ, because neither does one case prejudice another nor one person another.” O brow of iron, O darkness of madness, charging the judge with a night sentence while groping, stumbling, and falling in the night of their own heart, quarrelling rabidly against us and saying so much for us! ### Translation notes - The Donatist writing quoted and the sentence of the council of Bagai (394) against Maximian are Donatist statements, quoted as such. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 25 (CSEL 53:123–125; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/25). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 26 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-26 - Source: CSEL 53:125 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The prophets lived among the wicked without pollution, separating by conduct, as vessels for honor in a great house; Haggai shows that consent, not contact, pollutes. ### Latin text Insuper adhuc etiam modo commemorare audent prophetica et apostolica testimonia, quibus nos uniuersaliter in illa conlatione respondimus, ostendentes ipsos prophetas sanctos cum iniquis in uno templo, sub eisdem sacerdotibus, inter eadem sacramenta uersatos nec tamen a malis fuisse pollutos, quia nouerant inter sanctum et inmundum non, sicut isti sentiunt, corporaliter populum diuidendo, sed bene iudicando et bene uiuendo discernere. et hoc sine intermissione faciebant, ut in illa domo magna, ubi erant, sicut dicit apostolus, alia uasa in honorem, alia in contumeliam, se ipsos a talibus morum diuersitate mundarent et essent uasa in honorem, utilia domino, ad omne opus bonum semper parata. sed bene quod ipsi ex multis testimoniis, quae litteris suis non intellegentes inseruerunt, quas in conlatione protulerunt et legerunt, tamquam praecipuum de Aggaeo propheta testimonium modo post conlationem uicti commemorarunt. in isto ergo propheta multo euidentius quod uolumus demonstramus, quia non corporalis, sed spiritalis contactus, qui fit per consensionem, ipse polluit homines, quorum causam unam facit ipsa consensio. ### English translation (Claude) Moreover, they even now dare to cite prophetic and apostolic testimonies, to which we answered comprehensively at that conference, showing that the holy prophets themselves lived with the wicked in one temple, under the same priests, amid the same sacraments, and yet were not polluted by the bad, because they knew how to distinguish between the holy and the unclean, not, as these men think, by dividing the people bodily, but by judging well and living well. And this they did without ceasing, so that in that great house in which they were, where, as the apostle says, there are some vessels for honor and some for dishonor, they cleansed themselves from such people by difference of conduct and were vessels for honor, useful to the Lord, always ready for every good work. But it is well that, of the many testimonies which, not understanding them, they inserted in their letter, which they brought forward and read at the conference, they have now, defeated after the conference, cited as a principal testimony the one from the prophet Haggai. For in this prophet we demonstrate much more evidently what we want: that not bodily but spiritual contact, which comes about through consent, is what pollutes people, whose case consent itself makes one. ### Scripture references - 2 Tim 2:20–21: allusion, high confidence - Hag 2:11–14: allusion, medium confidence ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 26 (CSEL 53:125; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/26). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 27 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-27 - Source: CSEL 53:125–127 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: God himself separates the wicked visibly at his judgment; the guest without a wedding garment stands for the many bad who share the Lord’s table now with the few good. ### Latin text Nam quando impios dominus etiam uisibili poena perdere uoluit, ipse ab eis iustos admonitione separauit, sicut Noe cum domo sua ab eis, quos diluuio fuerat perditurus, sicut Loth ab eis, quos igne fuerat consumpturus, sicut populum suum a synagoga Abiron, quam mox fuerat extincturus. ideo et illum, qui non habebat uestem nuptialem, non illi qui inuitauerant, sed ipse dominus cuius erat conuiuium ligari iussit et proici. neque enim et ipse sicut piscis sub fluctibus erat et sic ab inuitatoribus quomodo (piscis) a piscatoribus uideri non poterat. proinde ne putaretur, sicut isti putant, quod uelut unus in turba latenter subrepsisset ignaris, continuo dominus in eodem ipso uno, quem ligatis manibus et pedibus in tenebras exteriores ex illo conuiuio proici iussit, multam societatem malorum esse intellegendam, inter quos pauciores boni in conuiuio dominico uiuunt, significare non distulit. nam posteaquam dixit: ligate illi manus et pedes et proicite eum in tenebras exteriores; ibi erit fletus et stridor dentium, continuo subiunxit: multi enim sunt uocati, pauci uero electi. quomodo hoc uerum est, cum potius unus e multis fuisset proiectus in tenebras exteriores, nisi quia in illo uno grande corpus figurabatur omnium malorum ante domini iudicium conuiuio dominico permixtorum? a quibus se boni corde interim ac moribus separant, simul manducantes et bibentes corpus et sanguinem domini, sed cum magna distinctione, quia isti in honore sponsi induti sunt ueste nuptiali, non sua quaerentes, sed quae Iesu Christi, illi autem non habent uestem nuptialem, hoc est fidissimam sponsi caritatem, sua quaerentes, non quae Iesu Christi. ac per hoc quamuis in uno eodemque conuiuio isti misericordiam manducant, illi iudicium, quia ipsius conuiuii canticum est quod et supra commemoraui: misericordiam et iudicium cantabo tibi, domine. ### English translation (Claude) For when the Lord wished to destroy the impious even by a visible punishment, he himself separated the righteous from them by a warning: as Noah with his house from those whom he was about to destroy by the flood, as Lot from those whom he was about to consume by fire, as his people from the congregation of Abiram, which he was soon to wipe out. So too the man who had no wedding garment was ordered bound and thrown out, not by those who had invited him, but by the Lord himself whose feast it was. For he was not, like a fish, under the waves, so that he could not be seen by the inviters as a fish cannot be seen by the fishermen. Accordingly, so that it would not be thought, as these men think, that he was one man who had crept in secretly in the crowd unnoticed, the Lord did not delay to signify at once that in that same one man, whom he ordered thrown out of the feast with hands and feet bound into the outer darkness, a great fellowship of the bad is to be understood, among whom the fewer good live at the Lord’s feast. For after he said, “Bind his hands and feet and throw him into the outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth,” he at once added, “For many are called, but few are chosen.” How is this true, when rather one out of many had been thrown into the outer darkness, unless because in that one man was figured the great body of all the bad mixed in the Lord’s feast before the Lord’s judgment? From them the good meanwhile separate themselves in heart and conduct, eating and drinking the body and blood of the Lord together with them, but with a great distinction: for these, in honor of the bridegroom, are clothed with the wedding garment, not seeking their own things but those of Jesus Christ; but those do not have the wedding garment, that is, the most faithful love of the bridegroom, seeking their own things, not those of Jesus Christ. And so, though at one and the same feast, these eat mercy, those judgment; since the song of that feast is what I recalled above: “I will sing of mercy and judgment to you, O Lord.” ### Scripture references - Gen 7:1: allusion, high confidence - Gen 19:12–17: allusion, high confidence - Num 16:23–27: allusion, high confidence - Matt 22:11–14: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:21: allusion, high confidence - Ps 101:1 (100:1 Vulg.): quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The editor’s addition “(piscis)” is translated. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 27 (CSEL 53:125–127; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/27). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 28 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-28 - Source: CSEL 53:127 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Discipline continues through degradation and excommunication, but where it cannot be applied without breaking peace the church tolerates the bad, as Cyprian did. ### Latin text Nec ideo tamen dormit ecclesiastica disciplina, ut corripiat inquietos. neque enim a populo dei separamus, quos uel degradando uel excommunicando ad humiliorem paenitendi locum redigimus. et ubi hoc facere pacis et tranquillitatis ecclesiae gratia non permittimur, non tamen ideo ecclesiae disciplinam refutamus, sed toleramus quae nolumus, ut perueniamus quo uolumus, utentes cautela praecepti dominici, ne, cum uolumus ante tempora colligere zizania, simul eradicemus et triticum. utentes etiam exemplo et praecepto beati Cypriani, qui collegas suos faeneratores fraudatores raptores pacis contemplatione pertulit tales nec eorum contagione factus est talis. unde et nos, si triticum sumus, eiusdem beati martyris uerba fidentissime dicimus, quia, etsi uidentur in ecclesia esse zizania, non tamen inpediri debet aut fides aut caritas nostra, ut quoniam zizania in ecclesia cernimus ipsi de ecclesia recedamus. haec uerba iustissime ac piissime dicerent maiores nostri, etiamsi Caecilianum et aliquos coepiscopos eius malos uiderent, quos tamen ab ecclesia separare non possent propter illos, quibus mali demonstrari non poterant et eos bonos innocentes putabant. haec uerba omnino dicerent, hoc omnino sentirent, ne, cum uellent temere zizania separare, simul et triticum eradicarent. ### English translation (Claude) Yet church discipline does not therefore sleep, so as not to correct the restless. For we do not separate from the people of God those whom we reduce, by degrading or excommunicating them, to the humbler place of penance. And where we are not permitted to do this for the sake of the peace and tranquillity of the church, we do not therefore reject the discipline of the church, but we tolerate what we do not want in order to come to what we want, using the caution of the Lord’s command, lest, when we wish to gather the weeds before the time, we root up the wheat with them. We use also the example and precept of the blessed Cyprian, who for the sake of peace bore with colleagues of his who were usurers, swindlers, and robbers, and was not made such by their contagion. Hence we too, if we are wheat, say most confidently the words of the same blessed martyr: “Even if there seem to be weeds in the church, our faith or our love ought not to be hindered, so that, because we see that there are weeds in the church, we ourselves should withdraw from the church.” Our forebears would have said these words most justly and piously, even if they had seen that Caecilian and some of his fellow bishops were bad, whom they still could not separate from the church because of those to whom they could not be shown to be bad and who thought them good and innocent. These words they would by all means have said, this they would by all means have held, lest, wishing rashly to separate the weeds, they should root up the wheat as well. ### Scripture references - Matt 13:29–30: allusion, high confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Cyprian, Laps. 6 (On the Lapsed): allusion, medium confidence - Cyprian, Ep. 54.3 (Letters): quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Cyprian on bad colleagues: On the Lapsed 6; the quotation is Letter 54.3. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 28 (CSEL 53:127; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/28). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 29 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-29 - Source: CSEL 53:127–128 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The prophet’s fast in Bethel was a special command; Elijah, the seven thousand, and Samuel with Saul show that the righteous were not defiled by living among the wicked. ### Latin text Quod ergo iussus est quidam propheta nec panem manducare nec aquam bibere in Samaria, quo missus fuerat, ut corriperet eos, qui uaccas constituerant adorandas more idolorum Aegyptiorum, hoc omnino facere debuit quod praeceperat dominus, cui tunc eo modo illos corripere placuit, ut nihil ibi alimentorum tangeret propheta quem miserat. neque enim in ecclesia non fit cotidie, quando [eos], quos acrius corripimus, etiamsi in eorum possessione sumus, nihil cibi apud eos contingimus, ut sentiant quantum eorum peccata doleamus. numquid tamen ideo etiam plebis discissio facienda est, ut sicut mollis herba indiscrete eradicentur infirmi, qui de cordibus hominum et ignotis factis, etiamsi nobis sint cognita, iudicare non possunt? nam in ipsa Samaria et Helias et Helisaeus erant, etsi ipsi in solitudine, non tamen deuiantes sacramentorum causa, sed quia persecutionem ab impiis regibus patiebantur. nam illic erant, non utique in solitudine separata, quae ipse ignorabat Helias, septem milia uirorum qui non curuauerunt genua ante Bahal. denique inter praecipuos sanctus habitus Samuhel et grauiter Saulem corripuit et cum eo tamen ad offerendum domino sacrificium sine excusatione perrexit nec peccatorum eius contagione pollutus est, sed omnino mundus meritorum suorum conseruatione permansit. ### English translation (Claude) As for the prophet who was ordered neither to eat bread nor to drink water in Samaria, where he had been sent to rebuke those who had set up calves to be worshiped after the manner of the idols of the Egyptians: he certainly had to do what the Lord had commanded, whom it pleased then to rebuke them in this way, that the prophet he had sent should touch no food there. Nor is this not done daily in the church, when, toward those whom we rebuke more sharply, even if we are on their property, we touch no food in their house, so that they may feel how much we grieve over their sins. But must the congregation therefore be split as well, so that the weak, who cannot judge of people’s hearts and of unknown deeds, even if they are known to us, should be rooted up indiscriminately like soft grass? For in Samaria itself were both Elijah and Elisha, even if they were in the wilderness, not however going astray on account of the sacraments, but because they were suffering persecution from impious kings. For there, and certainly not in a separated wilderness, were the seven thousand men, of whom Elijah himself did not know, who had not bowed the knee before Baal. Finally Samuel, held a saint among the foremost, both rebuked Saul severely and yet went with him without excuse to offer sacrifice to the Lord, and was not polluted by the contagion of his sins, but remained wholly clean by keeping his own merits. ### Scripture references - 1 Kgs 13:8–9: allusion, high confidence - 1 Kgs 12:28–29: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Kgs 19:18: allusion, high confidence - Rom 11:4: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Sam 15:30–31: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - The prophet forbidden to eat is the man of God in 1 Kgs 13:7–9 (sent to Bethel; Augustine says Samaria). The editor deletes “eos” after “quando”. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 29 (CSEL 53:127–128; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/29). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 30 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/17/#p-30 - Source: CSEL 53:128–130 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Haggai shows the restored people stirred by God and commended (“my Spirit is in your midst”), so they cannot be the people whose touch defiles. ### Latin text Sed istam nobis quaestionem, quamuis euidenter et in conlatione et modo soluta sit, euidentius tamen soluat Aggaeus, cuius testimonium prae ceteris legerunt, ut solum adhuc pro omnibus iactent. arguit dominus per Aggaeum prophetam populum ex Babylonia residuum, ubi captiuus tenebatur, quod domum domini neglegerent et suas domos excolerent, et dicit propterea se plaga sterilitatis eorum percussisse regionem. tunc Zorobabel filius Salathiel et Iesus filius Iosedec sacerdos magnus et omnis ille populus diuinitus inspiratus operari coepit in domo domini dei sui. sic enim eadem scriptura dicit: et suscitauit dominus spiritum Zorobabel filii Salathiel ex tribu Iuda, et spiritum Iesu filii Iosedec sacerdotis magni, et spiritum residuorum omnis populi, et introierunt et faciebant opera in domo domini omnipotentis dei sui, quarta et uicensima mensis sexti, secundo anno sub Dario rege. ecce et dies definitus est, quando intrauerunt ad operandum in domo dei. credo quod illi uiri et ille populus operans in domo dei non erat inmundus, praesertim quia dixerat ei dominus: ego uobiscum et suscitauerat spiritum eorum ad bene operandum in domo sua. denique uidete quid sequitur. contexit enim eadem scriptura et dicit: septimo mense, una et uicensima mensis, locutus est dominus in manu Aggaei prophetae dicens ad Zorobabel filium Salathiel ex tribu Iuda, et ad Iesum filium Iosedec sacerdotem magnum, et ad omnem populum residuum dicens: quis ex uobis qui uidit domum hanc in claritate illa sua pristina? et quomodo uidetis eam modo, tamquam non sit in conspectu uestro? et nunc praeuale, Zorobabel, dicit dominus, et praeuale, Iesus fili Iosedec sacerdos magne, et praeualesce, omnis popule terrae, dicit dominus omnipotens, et spiritus meus praeest in medio uestrum. bono animo estote, quoniam haec dicit omnipotens: adhuc semel, commouebo caelum et terram, mare et aridam, et concutiam omnes gentes, et uenient omnia electa gentium, et implebo domum hanc, dicit dominus omnipotens, et cetera quae addit etiam futura prophetans; quae de domini nostri Iesu Christi temporibus rectius intellegi solent, cuius populus uerissimum et sanctissimum est templum dei, non etiam in eis, qui permixti tolerantur, sed in eis solis, qui nunc interim a talibus bene uiuendo spiritaliter separantur, post uero etiam corporaliter separandi sunt. uerumtamen ille populus, cui prophetia ista praenuntiata est et qui tunc operabatur in domo dei, ubi erant et illi duo, Zorobabel filius Salathiel et Iesus filius Iosedec, quomodo sit exhortatus et commendatus a domino, satis in promptu est uidere in his uerbis prophetae, quae sicut dicta sunt inseruimus. numquidnam ergo istum populum inmundum possumus dicere, ad quem si quis accesserit inquinabitur, cui populo dicitur: et nunc praeuale, Zorobabel, dicit dominus, et praeuale, Iesus filius Iosedec sacerdos magne, et praeualesce, omnis popule terrae, dicit dominus omnipotens, et spiritus meus praeest in medio uestrum? quis dementissimus dixerit istum esse populum, ad quem si quis accesserit inquinabitur? ### English translation (Claude) But let Haggai, whose testimony they read above the rest so that they still boast of it alone in place of all, settle this question for us even more clearly, though it was clearly settled both at the conference and now. Through the prophet Haggai the Lord rebukes the people left over from Babylon, where they had been held captive, because they neglected the house of the Lord and adorned their own houses; and he says that for this reason he struck their land with the plague of barrenness. Then Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel, and Jeshua son of Jozadak the high priest, and all that people, divinely inspired, began to work on the house of the Lord their God. For so the same Scripture says: “And the Lord stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel of the tribe of Judah, and the spirit of Jeshua son of Jozadak the high priest, and the spirit of the remnant of all the people; and they came in and did work on the house of the Lord almighty, their God, on the twenty-fourth of the sixth month, in the second year under King Darius.” See, the day too is fixed when they came in to work on the house of God. I believe that those men and that people working on the house of God were not unclean, especially since the Lord had said to them, “I am with you,” and had stirred up their spirit to work well on his house. Finally, see what follows. For the same Scripture continues and says: “In the seventh month, on the twenty-first of the month, the Lord spoke by the hand of the prophet Haggai, saying to Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel of the tribe of Judah, and to Jeshua son of Jozadak the high priest, and to all the remnant of the people, saying: Who among you saw this house in that former glory of its own? And how do you see it now, as though it were not in your sight? And now be strong, Zerubbabel, says the Lord; and be strong, Jeshua son of Jozadak, high priest; and be strong, all people of the land, says the Lord almighty; and my Spirit presides in your midst. Be of good courage, for thus says the Almighty: Yet once more I will shake heaven and earth, the sea and the dry land, and I will shake all the nations, and all the choice things of the nations will come, and I will fill this house, says the Lord almighty”; and the other things which he adds, prophesying also things to come, which are more rightly understood of the times of our Lord Jesus Christ, whose people is the truest and holiest temple of God: not in those too who are tolerated while mixed in, but in those alone who now meanwhile are separated spiritually from such by living well, and later will be separated bodily as well. Yet how that people to whom this prophecy was announced, and which was then working on the house of God, where those two also were, Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel and Jeshua son of Jozadak, was exhorted and commended by the Lord is readily seen in these words of the prophet, which we have inserted just as they were spoken. Can we, then, call this people unclean, which anyone who approaches will be defiled, a people to whom it is said: “And now be strong, Zerubbabel, says the Lord; and be strong, Jeshua son of Jozadak, high priest; and be strong, all people of the land, says the Lord almighty; and my Spirit presides in your midst”? Who would be so utterly mad as to say that this is the people which anyone who approaches will be defiled? ### Scripture references - Hag 1:4: allusion, high confidence - Hag 1:10–11: allusion, high confidence - Hag 1:13: quotation, high confidence - Hag 1:14–15: quotation, high confidence - Hag 2:1–7: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Haggai is quoted from the Old Latin (from the Septuagint). ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 30 (CSEL 53:128–130; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/30). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 31 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/31/#p-31 - Source: CSEL 53:130–133 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Haggai 2:11–14 describes two peoples in one temple; the good were forbidden to approach the unclean by consent, not by separate altars, as with Moses and Samuel. ### Latin text Nunc ergo adtendite, quid post illam prophetiam, quae huic populo de Christi temporibus annuntiata est, consequenter scriptura contexat: quarta et uicensima noni mensis anno secundo sub Dario rege factum est uerbum domini ad Aggaeum prophetam dicens: haec dicit omnipotens: interroga sacerdotes legem dicens: si sumpserit homo carnem sanctificatam in summo uestimenti sui et attigerit summum uestimenti eius panem aut pulmentum aut uinum aut omnem escam, si sanctificabitur? et responderunt sacerdotes et dixerunt: non. et dixit Aggaeus: si tetigerit inquinatus in animam aliquid horum, si inquinabitur? et responderunt sacerdotes et dixerunt: inquinabitur. et respondit Aggaeus et dixit: sic populus hic et gens haec in conspectu meo, dicit dominus, et sic opera manuum ipsorum. et quicumque accesserit illo, inquinabitur propter praesumptiones eorum matutinas a facie laborum suorum, et odio habebatis (in portis) arguentes. quis est iste populus tam inmundus, ut quisquis illo accesserit inquinetur? numquid ille cui dictum est: praeualesce, et spiritus meus in medio uestrum? absit ut ille sit. duo igitur erant, unus inmundus et alter qui ad inmundum prohibetur accedere, qui exhortabatur praeualescere, quia spiritus dei erat in medio eorum. si ergo duo erant, ostendantur et duo templa, unum quo iste, alterum quo ille ingrediebatur; ostendantur et altaria duo, unum in quo iste, alterum in quo ille uictimas offerebat; ostendantur et sacerdotes, huius alii et illius alii, qui pro suo quisque populo separatim sacrificabant. si autem quisquis hoc adfirmare conatur insanit, sic erant isti duo populi in uno populo, sub uno sacerdote magno, unum templum intrantes, sicut erant etiam sub uno Moyse quidam deum offendentes, quidam deo placentes, de quibus dicit apostolus: non in omnibus illis beneplacitum est deo. neque enim ait: in omnibus illis non est beneplacitum deo, tamquam omnes displicuerint deo, sed ait: non in omnibus illis beneplacitum est deo, ergo in quibusdam, non in omnibus. et omnes sub eisdem sacerdotibus erant in uno eodemque tabernaculo, in uno eodemque altari hostias offerebant, et tamen distinguebantur, factis non locis, animo non templo, moribus non altaribus. sic alii ad alios non accedebant, ne ab eis inquinarentur, hoc est eorum malis factis non consentiebant, ne pariter damnarentur. non enim et illos malos Moyses tantus propheta nesciebat, quorum impia murmura et horrendas amaritudines cotidie sufferebat. sed istum nescisse faciamus: numquid et Samuhel Saulem nesciebat, quem per os eius aeterna sententia damnauerat deus? uerumtamen et ipsum et sanctum Dauid unum dei tabernaculum intrantes inter eadem sacrificia uidebat, sed distincte utique uidebat, quia distinctos uidebat et unum eorum in aeternum amabat, alium pro tempore tolerabat. sic et Aggaeus nouerat in uno populo duos populos unum templum intrantes, sub uno magno sacerdote uiuentes, et alterum ostendebat inmundum, alterum ad inmundum accedere prohibebat, et tamen nec illos nec se ipsum ab eodem templo et ab eisdem altaribus separabat. ergo spiritalem prohibebat accessum consensionemque factorum, quod et ipsa uerba clamant, si aures adsint, quas animositas furiosa non claudat aut strepitus uanae contentionis (non) impediat. ait enim propheta: omnis qui accesserit illo inquinabitur. uitium notauit quo accedi prohibuit, non homines ab hominibus corporali disiunctione seclusit. acceditur autem ad uitium corruptionis uitio consensionis. ### English translation (Claude) Now, then, notice what Scripture goes on to set after that prophecy announced to this people about the times of Christ: “On the twenty-fourth of the ninth month, in the second year under King Darius, the word of the Lord came to the prophet Haggai, saying: Thus says the Almighty: Ask the priests about the law, saying: If a man takes sanctified flesh in the fold of his garment, and the fold of his garment touches bread or stew or wine or any food, will it be sanctified? And the priests answered and said: No. And Haggai said: If one defiled in soul touches any of these, will it be defiled? And the priests answered and said: It will be defiled. And Haggai answered and said: So is this people and this nation before me, says the Lord, and so are the works of their hands; and whoever approaches there will be defiled because of their early-morning presumptions, in the face of their labors, and you hated those who reproved in the gates.” Who is this people so unclean that whoever approaches there is defiled? Is it the one to whom it was said, “Be strong, and my Spirit is in your midst”? Far be it that it should be that one. So there were two: one unclean, and the other which is forbidden to approach the unclean, which was exhorted to be strong because the Spirit of God was in their midst. If, then, there were two, let two temples also be shown, one which this people entered and the other which that one entered; let two altars also be shown, one on which this people offered victims and the other on which that one did; let priests too be shown, some of this people and others of that, each sacrificing separately for his own people. But if anyone who tries to affirm this is mad, then these two peoples were in one people, under one high priest, entering one temple; just as under one Moses too there were some who offended God and some who pleased God, of whom the apostle says, “Not with all of them was God well pleased.” For he does not say, “With all of them God was not pleased,” as though all displeased God; but he says, “Not with all of them was God well pleased”; therefore with some, not with all. And all were under the same priests, in one and the same tabernacle; they offered sacrifices on one and the same altar; and yet they were distinguished by deeds, not places; by spirit, not temple; by conduct, not altars. So the one group did not approach the other, so as not to be defiled by them; that is, they did not consent to their bad deeds, so as not to be condemned alike. For so great a prophet as Moses did not fail to know those bad people, whose impious murmurings and dreadful bitterness he bore daily. But suppose he did not know: did Samuel also not know Saul, whom God had condemned with an eternal sentence through Samuel’s own mouth? And yet he saw him and holy David entering the one tabernacle of God, among the same sacrifices; but he certainly saw them distinctly, because he saw them as distinct, and loved the one forever and tolerated the other for a time. So too Haggai knew two peoples in one people, entering one temple, living under one high priest; and he showed the one to be unclean and forbade the other to approach the unclean; and yet he separated neither them nor himself from the same temple and the same altars. So he was forbidding a spiritual approach and consent to deeds, as the very words cry out, if there are ears which furious animosity does not close nor the noise of empty contention hinder. For the prophet says, “Everyone who approaches there will be defiled.” He marked the vice to which he forbade approach; he did not shut people off from people by bodily separation. And one approaches the vice of corruption by the vice of consent. ### Scripture references - Hag 2:10–14: quotation, high confidence - Amos 5:10: echo, low confidence - 1 Cor 10:5: quotation, high confidence - 1 Sam 15:26–28: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Haggai 2:10–14 is quoted from the Old Latin (from the Septuagint), including the clause “you hated those who reproved in the gates” (cf. Amos 5:10), which is not in the Hebrew of Haggai. The editor’s additions “(in portis)” and “(non)” are translated. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 31 (CSEL 53:130–133; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/31). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 32 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/31/#p-32 - Source: CSEL 53:133–134 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: On the same day that Haggai called the people unclean, God promised to bless them, so the good and bad were mixed in one people and distinguished by will. ### Latin text Ac ne quisquam diceret illum populum, cui primo dictum est: praeualesce, quoniam spiritus meus praeest in medio uestrum, paucis interpositis diebus in deterius commutatum, ut audire mereretur: sic populus iste et gens ista, omnis qui accesserit illo inquinabitur — dies enim ferme nonaginta conputantur inter uerba illa, quae bona in populum dicta sunt, et ista, quibus eius inmunditia uitanda praecipitur —, ne quis ergo hoc putaret bonum illum populum quamuis hoc paruo temporis interuallo tam pessimum effectum, uidete quid sequitur, adtendite quid dicatur eo ipso die, hoc est uicensima et quarta noni mensis, quo die dictum est: sic populus iste et gens ista, omnis qui accesserit illo inquinabitur. cum enim hoc dixisset et mala eorum commemorasset, quorum merito demonstrarentur inmundi, addens etiam et dicens: odio habebatis in portis arguentes, continuo subiunxit: et nunc ponite in cordibus uestris a die hoc et supra, prius, quam poneretur lapis super lapidem in templo domini, qui eratis cum mittebatis in capsella hordei uiginti sata, et fiebant decem sata, et intrabatis in torcular exhaurire quinquaginta amphoras, et fiebant uiginti. percussi uos infecunditate, et uenti corruptione et grandine omnia opera uestra, et non estis conuersi ad me, dicit dominus. constituite igitur corda uestra a die hoc et deinceps, a quarta et uicensima noni mensis, et a die qua fundatum est templum domini ponite in cordibus uestris, si adhuc cognoscetur in area, aut si uitis aut malum aut ficus et malum granatum et ligna oleae quae non fecerunt fructum. a die hoc benedicam. ecce ipso die etiam benedici meruerunt. benedictio ergo haec puto quod non pertineat ad illos, ad quorum inmunditiam prohibet accedi, sed ad illos bonos, qui prohibentur accedere. in uno ergo fuerunt et permixti et separati, permixti quidem corporali tactu, separati autem uoluntatis abscessu. sed more suo scriptura loquitur, quae sic arguit malos, tamquam omnes in eo populo mali sint, et sic consolatur bonos, tamquam omnes ibi tales sint. pro nobis ergo episcopi uestri etiam in eo, quod post conlationem uicti scripsisse dicuntur, Aggaei prophetiam posuerunt, unde nos commemorarent euidentius probare quod dicimus, quia et in uno populo, in uno templo, sub eisdem sacerdotibus, inter eadem sacramenta hominibus dissimili uoluntate uiuentibus et diuersis moribus discrepantibus nec causae causa nec personae potest praeiudicare persona. ### English translation (Claude) And so that no one would say that the people to whom it was first said, “Be strong, since my Spirit presides in your midst,” had, after a few days, changed for the worse, so as to deserve to hear, “So is this people and this nation; everyone who approaches there will be defiled” (for about ninety days are counted between the words spoken in favor of the people and these, in which avoidance of its uncleanness is commanded): so that no one, then, would think that that good people had become so very bad in this short interval of time, see what follows, notice what is said on that very day, the twenty-fourth of the ninth month, the day on which it was said, “So is this people and this nation; everyone who approaches there will be defiled.” For when he had said this and recalled their evils, by whose desert they were shown to be unclean, adding also and saying, “You hated those who reproved in the gates,” he at once added: “And now set it in your hearts from this day and before, before stone was laid on stone in the temple of the Lord, you who were, when you put twenty measures of barley into the bin, and they became ten measures; and you went into the winepress to draw fifty jars, and they became twenty. I struck you with barrenness, and with blight of wind, and with hail all the works of your hands, and you did not turn to me, says the Lord. Set your hearts, therefore, from this day onward, from the twenty-fourth of the ninth month; and from the day on which the temple of the Lord was founded, set it in your hearts, whether it will still be known on the threshing floor, or whether the vine, the apple, the fig, the pomegranate, and the olive trees have not borne fruit. From this day I will bless.” See, on that very day they were even counted worthy to be blessed. This blessing, I think, does not belong to those whose uncleanness he forbids approaching, but to those good people who are forbidden to approach. So in one people they were both mixed and separated: mixed by bodily contact, separated by withdrawal of the will. But Scripture speaks in its own manner, which rebukes the bad as though all in that people were bad, and consoles the good as though all there were such. So your bishops, even in what they are said to have written, defeated, after the conference, set down Haggai’s prophecy for our benefit, so as to remind us to prove more evidently what we say: that even in one people, in one temple, under the same priests, amid the same sacraments, among people living with unlike wills and differing in conduct, neither can one case prejudice another case nor one person another person. ### Scripture references - Hag 2:4–5: quotation, high confidence - Hag 2:14: quotation, high confidence - Hag 2:15–19: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Haggai is quoted from the Old Latin. ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 32 (CSEL 53:133–134; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/32). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 33 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/31/#p-33 - Source: CSEL 53:134–136 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Paul praises the Corinthians as if all were holy and rebukes them as if all were divided, yet all shared one altar; “to himself” shows that unworthy eaters harm only themselves. ### Latin text Illud etiam quod ex apostoli epistula scriptis suis etiam modo commemorant, ubi ait: nolite iugum ducere cum infidelibus; quae enim participatio luci ad tenebras? et cetera, quae supra commemorauimus et quomodo recte intellegerentur ostendimus, quid aliud agunt, nisi ut nos commemorent, quibus hoc apostolus scripserit? in eodem quippe ipso populo Corinthiorum quod dicimus demonstramus, ne forte arbitrentur prophetarum tantummodo moris fuisse et non ad noui testamenti, sed ad ueteris consuetudinem pertinere sic arguere reprehensibiles, quasi omnes in eo populo arguantur, et sic adloqui laudabiles, quasi omnes ibi laudentur. ecce et ad Corinthios sic apostolus loquitur: Paulus uocatus apostolus Christi Iesu per uoluntatem dei et Sosthenes frater ecclesiae dei quae est Corinthi, sanctificatis in Christo Iesu, uocatis sanctis, cum omnibus qui inuocant nomen domini nostri Iesu Christi in omni loco, ipsorum et nostro: gratia uobis et pax a deo patre nostro et domino Iesu Christo. gratias ago deo meo semper pro uobis in gratia dei quae data est uobis in Christo Iesu, quia in omnibus diuites facti estis in illo, in omni uerbo et in omni scientia, sicut testimonium Christi confirmatum est in uobis, ita ut nihil uobis desit in ulla gratia. quis haec audiens credat in ecclesia Corinthiorum esse aliquos reprobos, quandoquidem uerba ista sic sonant, uelut ad omnes directa sit ista laudatio? et tamen paulo post dicit: obsecro autem, fratres, ut id ipsum dicatis omnes, et non sint in uobis schismata. rursus tamquam in hoc horrendo uitio uelut omnes arguens atque increpans dicit: diuisus est Christus? numquid Paulus crucifixus est pro uobis, aut in nomine Pauli baptizati estis? puto autem eos, qui in eo populo dicebant: ego sum Christi, non duxisse iugum cum eis, qui dicebant: ego sum Pauli, ego autem Apollo, ego uero Cephae, et tamen omnes ad unum altare accedebant, et eadem sacramenta communicabant qui eadem uitia non communicabant. his enim Corinthiis etiam illud dictum est: qui manducat et bibit indigne iudicium sibi manducat et bibit. quid enim aliud apostolus nisi istos uaniloquos cogitabat, ut ei non sufficeret dicere: iudicium manducat et bibit, nisi adderet sibi, ne hoc etiam ad illos pertineret qui pariter quidem, sed non iudicium manducabant? ### English translation (Claude) Again, as for what they now cite in their writings from the apostle’s letter, where he says, “Do not be yoked with unbelievers; for what participation has light with darkness?” and the rest, which we recalled above and showed how they are rightly understood: what else are they doing but reminding us to whom the apostle wrote this? For in that very people of the Corinthians we demonstrate what we say, lest perhaps they think that it was only the custom of the prophets, and belonged to the practice not of the New Testament but of the Old, to rebuke the blameworthy as if all in that people were rebuked, and to address the praiseworthy as if all there were praised. See, the apostle speaks thus to the Corinthians too: “Paul, called an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, to the church of God which is at Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints, with all who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place, theirs and ours: grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. I thank my God always for you for the grace of God which was given you in Christ Jesus, that in everything you were made rich in him, in every word and in all knowledge, as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you, so that you lack nothing in any grace.” Who, hearing this, would believe that there were any reprobates in the church of the Corinthians, since these words sound as though this praise were addressed to all? And yet a little later he says: “But I beseech you, brothers, that you all say the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you.” Again, as though rebuking and reproaching all for this dreadful vice, he says: “Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you, or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” I suppose, however, that those in that people who said, “I am of Christ,” were not yoked with those who said, “I am of Paul,” “and I of Apollos,” “and I of Cephas”; and yet all approached one altar, and those who did not share the same vices shared the same sacraments. For to these Corinthians too it was said, “Whoever eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgment to himself.” For what else was the apostle thinking of but these empty talkers, so that it was not enough for him to say “eats and drinks judgment” unless he added “to himself,” lest this should apply also to those who were indeed eating together with them, but not eating judgment? ### Scripture references - 2 Cor 6:14: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:1–7: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:10: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:12–13: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:29: quotation, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Augustine, Don. 33 (CSEL 53:134–136; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/augustine-post-collationem/33). ## To the Donatists after the Collation (Against the Party of Donatus after the Proceedings) 34 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/augustine-post-collationem/31/#p-34 - Source: CSEL 53:136–137 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: The church at Corinth, praised as lacking no grace, contained deniers of the resurrection, yet the faithful were not yoked with them. ### Latin text In ipsis etiam Corinthiis ibi erant, qui non credebant resurrectionem mortuorum, quae singularis fides est christianorum, quod eis ita dicit apostolus: si autem Christus praedicatur quod resurrexit a mortuis, quomodo dicunt quidam in uobis quia resurrectio mortuorum non est? non dixit (in hac terra uel (in hoc mundo, sed