Donatism

Not surprisingly, when those who'd renounced Christianity wanted to rejoin the church, there was considerable hostility towards them, and this came to a head in AD 315, when the Bishop of Carthage, called Donatus, refused to allow lapsed clergy to rejoin the Church.

His viewpoint was rejected by the Bishop of Rome, and the bishops were split between those who supported Donatus – hence the name the Donatists, and those who didn't.

When the Bishop of Rome asked Constantine to decide who was right, Constantine was flattered and saw an opportunity to make himself head of this rapidly growing new religion.

And in AD 325, he followed up on this with the Council of Nicaea, which was the first council of the entire Christian church.

And you don't think, you didn't think we were going to do a show on papal supremacy in the first 400 years and forget optatus, did you? I don't think you did, did you? Or maybe you did, but we're here at optatus and the Episcopal chair was first given to Peter.

Around 8367, St. Optatus of Miletus is attacking the Donatist schism.

You know, you better get your act in order.

We need to establish real unity.

For concerning arguments negative, taken from human authority, they are here proved to be in some cases very strong and forcible.

They are not in our estimation idle reproofs when the authors of needless innovations are opposed with such negatives as that of Leo.

How are these new devices brought in which our fathers never knew? When their grave and reverend superiors do reckon up unto them, as Augustine did to the Donatists, large catalogues of fathers wondered at for their wisdom, piety, and learning, amongst whom for so many ages before us no one did ever think so of the church's affairs as now the world doth begin to be persuaded.

Surely by us they are not taught to take exception hereat because such arguments are negative; much less when the like are taken from the sacred authority of Scripture, if the matter itself do bear them.

For in truth the question is not whether an argument from Scripture negatively may be good, but whether it be so generally good that in all actions men may urge it.

Yea, but we doubt what the will of God is.

Are we in this case forbidden to hear what men of judgment think it to be? If not, then this allegation also might very well have been spared.

In that ancient strife which was between the Catholic fathers and Arians, Donatists and others of like perverse and froward disposition, as long as to fathers or councils alleged on the one side, the like by the contrary side were opposed.

For concerning arguments negative, taken from human authority, they are here proved to be in some cases very strong and forcible.

They are not in our estimation idle reproofs, when the authors of needless innovations are opposed with such negatives as that of Leo.

How are these new devices brought in which our fathers never knew? When their grave and reverend superiors do reckon up unto them, as Augustine did to the Donatists, large catalogues of fathers, wondered at for their wisdom, piety, and learning, amongst whom for so many ages before us no one did ever think so of the church's affairs as now the world doth begin to be persuaded.

Surely by us they are not taught to take exception hereat, because such arguments are negative.

Much less when the like are taken from the sacred authority of Scripture if the matter itself do bear them.

Yea, but we doubt what the will of God is.

Are we in this case forbidden to hear what men of judgment think it to be? If not, then this allegation also might very well have been spared.

In that ancient strife which was between the Catholic fathers and Arians, Donatists and others of like perverse and froward disposition, as long as to fathers or councils alleged on the one side The like by the contrary side were opposed.