[1] Dr Hodgkin's suggestion (_Italy and her Invaders_, vii. p. 153)
that the _Constitutum_ may have been originally a mere pious romance,
recognized as such by its author and his contemporaries, and laid up
in the papal archives until its origin was forgotten, is wholly
inconsistent with the unquestioned results of the critical analysis
of the text.
[2] Leo of Vercelli, the emperor Otto III.'s chancellor, protested
that the _Constitutum_ was a forgery, but without effect. The attacks
upon it by the heretical followers of Arnold of Brescia (1152)
convinced neither the partisans of the pope nor those of the emperor.
[3] So Langen (1883) and E. Mayer (1904).
[4] This is also W. Mayer's view in his later work. In his _Die
romische Frage_ (1881) he had placed the forgery in 805 or 806.
DONATISTS, a powerful sect which arose in the Christian church of
northern Africa at the beginning of the 4th century.[1] In its doctrine
it sprang from the same roots, and in its history it had in many things
the same character, as the earlier Novatians. The predisposing causes of
the Donatist schism were the belief, early introduced into the African
church, that the validity of all sacerdotal acts depended upon the
personal character of the agent, and the question, arising out of that
belief, as to the eligibility for sacerdotal office of the _traditores_,
or those who had delivered up their copies of the Scriptures under the
compulsion of the Diocletian persecution; the exciting cause was the
election of a successor to Mensurius, bishop of Carthage, who died in
311. Mensurius had held moderate views as to the treatment of the
_traditores_, and accordingly a strong fanatical party had formed itself
in Carthage in opposition to him, headed by a wealthy and influential
widow named Lucilla, and countenanced by Secundus of Tigisis, _episcopus
primae sedis_ in Numidia. There were thus two parties, each anxious to
secure the succession to the vacant see. The friends of the late bishop
fixed their choice on Caecilian, the archdeacon, and secured his
election and his consecration by Felix, the bishop of Aptunga, before
the other party were ready for action. It had been customary for the
Numidian bishops to be present at the election and consecration of the
bishop of Carthage, who as metropolitan of proconsular Africa occupied a
position of primacy towards all the African provinces. Caecilian's
party, however, had not waited for them, knowing them to be in sympathy
with their opponents. Soon after Caecilian's consecration, Secundus sent
a commission to Carthage, which appointed an interventor temporarily to
administer the bishopric which they regarded as vacant. Then Secundus
himself with seventy of the Numidian bishops arrived at Carthage. A
synod of Africa was formed, before which Caecilian was summoned; his
consecration was declared invalid, on the ground that Felix had been a
traditor; and finally, having refused to obey the summons to appear, he
was excommunicated, and the lector Majorinus, a dependant of Lucilla's,
consecrated in his stead. This synod forbade the African churches to
hold communion with Caecilian, the schism became overt, and in a very
short time there were rival bishops and rival churches throughout the
whole province.
It was soon clear, by the exclusion of the "Pars Majorini" from certain
privileges conferred on the African church, that the sympathies of
Constantine were with the other party (Eusebius, _Hist. eccl._ x. 6, 7).
To investigate the dispute an imperial commission was issued to five
Gallic bishops, under the presidency of Melchiades, bishop of Rome. The
number of referees was afterwards increased to twenty, and the case was
tried at Rome in 313.[2] Ten bishops appeared on each side, the leading
representative of the Donatists being Donatus of Casae Nigrae. The
decision was entirely in favour of Caecilian, and Donatus was found
guilty of various ecclesiastical offences. An appeal was taken and
allowed; but the decision of the synod of Arles in 314 not only
confirmed the position of Caecilian, but greatly strengthened it by
passing a canon that ordination was not invalid because performed by a
traditor, if otherwise regular. Felix had previously been declared
innocent after an examination of records and witnesses at Carthage. A
further appeal to the emperor in person was heard at Milan in 316, when
all points were finally decided in favour of Caecilian, probably on the
advice of Hosius, bishop of Cordova. Henceforward the power of the state
was directed to the suppression of the defeated party. Persistent
Donatists were no longer merely heretics; they were rebels and incurred
the confiscation of their church property and the forfeiture of their
civil rights.
The attempt to destroy the sect by force had the result of intensifying
its fanaticism. Majorinus, the Donatist bishop of Carthage, died in 315,
and was succeeded by Donatus, surnamed Magnus, a man of great force of
character, under whose influence the schism gained fresh strength from
the opposition it encountered. Force was met with force; the
Circumcelliones, bands of fugitive slaves and vagrant (_circum cellas_)
peasants, attached themselves to the Donatists, and their violence
reached such a height as to threaten civil war. In 321 Constantine,
seeing probably that he had been wrong in abandoning his usual policy of
toleration, sought to retrace his steps by granting the Donatists
liberty to act according to their consciences, and declaring that the
points in dispute between them and the orthodox should be left to the
judgment of God. This wise policy, to which he consistently adhered to
the close of his reign, was not followed by his son and successor
Constans, who, after repeated attempts to win over the sect by bribes,
resorted to persecution. The renewed excesses of the Circumcelliones,
among whom were ranged fugitive slaves, debtors and political
malcontents of all kinds, had given to the Donatist schism a
revolutionary aspect; and its forcible suppression may therefore have
seemed to Constans even more necessary for the preservation of the
empire than for the vindication of orthodoxy. The power which they had
been the first to invoke having thus declared so emphatically and
persistently against them, the Donatists revived the old world-alien
Christianity of the days of persecution, and repeated Tertullian's
question, "What has the emperor to do with the church?" (_Quid est
imperatori cum ecclesia?_) Such an attitude aggravated the lawlessness
of the Circumcellion adherents of the sect, and their outrages were in
turn made the justification for the most rigorous measures against the
whole Donatist party indiscriminately. Many of their bishops fell
victims to the persecution, and Donatus (Magnus) and several others were
banished from their sees.
With the accession of Julian (361) an entire change took place in the
treatment of the Donatists. Their churches were restored and their
bishops reinstated (Parmenianus succeeding the deceased Donatus at
Carthage), with the natural result of greatly increasing both the
numbers and the enthusiasm of the party. A return to the earlier policy
of repression was made under Valentinian I. and Gratian, by whom the
Donatist churches were again closed, and all their assemblies forbidden.
It was not, however, until the commencement of the 5th century that the
sect began to decline, owing largely to the rise among them of a group
of moderate and scholarly men like the grammarian Tychonius, who vainly
strove to overcome the more fanatical section. Against the house thus
divided against itself both state and church directed not unsuccessful
assaults. In 405 an edict was issued by the emperor Honorius commanding
the Donatists, under the severest penalties, to return to the Catholic
church. On the other hand, Augustine, bishop of Hippo, after several
years' negotiation, arranged a great conference between the Donatists
and the orthodox, which was held under the authority of the emperor at
Carthage in 411. There were present 286 Catholics and 279 Donatist
bishops. Before entering on the proceedings the Catholics pledged
themselves, if defeated, to give up their sees, while in the other event
they promised to recognize the Donatists as bishops on their simply
declaring their adherence to the Catholic church. The latter proposal,
though it was received with scorn at the time, had perhaps ultimately as
much influence as the logic of Augustine in breaking the strength of the
schism. The discussion, which lasted for three days, Augustine and
Aurelius of Carthage being the chief speakers on the one side, and
Primian and Petilian on the other, turned exclusively upon the two
questions that had given rise to the schism--first, the question of
fact, whether Felix of Aptunga who consecrated Caecilian had been a
traditor; and secondly, the question of doctrine, whether a church by
tolerance of unworthy members within its pale lost the essential
attributes of purity and catholicity. The Donatist position, like that
of the Novatians, was that the mark of the true church is to guard the
essential predicate of holiness by excluding all who have committed
mortal sin; the Catholic standpoint was that such holiness is not
destroyed by the presence of unworthy members in the church but rests
upon the divine foundation of the church and upon the gift of the Holy
Spirit and the communication of grace through the priesthood. In the
words of Optatus of Milevi, _sanctitas de sacramentis colligitur, non de
superbia personarum pondera_. And the much wider diffusion of the
orthodox church was also taken as practical confirmation that it alone
possessed what was regarded as the equally essential predicate of
catholicity.
The decision of Marcellinus, the imperial commissioner, was in favour of
the Catholic party on both questions, and it was at once confirmed on an
appeal to the emperor. The severest penal measures were enforced against
the schismatics; in 414 they were denied all civil rights, in 415 the
holding of assemblies was forbidden on pain of death. But they lived on,
suffering with their orthodox brethren in the Vandal invasions of the
5th century, and like them finally disappearing before the Saracen
onslaught two centuries later.
AUTHORITIES.--1. Contemporary sources: Optatus Milevitanus _De
Schismate Donatistarum adversus Parmenianum_, written c. 368 (Dupin's
ed., Paris, 1700), and several of the works of Augustine. 2. Modern:
C. W. F. Walch, _Entwurf einer vollstandigen Historie der Ketzereien_
(Leipzig, 1768); Hauck-Herzog, _Realencyk. fur prot. Theol._, art.
"Donatismus" by N. Bonwetsch, who cites the literature very fully; W.
Moller, _History of the Christian Church_ (vol. i. pp. 331 ff., 445
ff.); D. Volter, _Der Ursprung des Donatismus_ (Freiburg, 1883).