Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume IV/Donatist Controversy/On Baptism/Book IV/Chapter 10

15.&#160; But some one may say that the tares within may more easily be converted into wheat.&#160; I grant that it is so; but what has this to do with the question of repeating baptism?&#160; You surely do not maintain that if a man converted from heresy, through the occasion and opportunity given by his conversion, should bear fruit before another who, being within the Church, is more slow to be washed from his iniquity, and so corrected and changed, the former therefore needs not to be baptized again, but the churchman to be baptized again, who was outstripped by him who came from the heretics, because of the greater slowness of his amendment.&#160; It has nothing, therefore, to do with the question now at issue who is later or slower in being converted from his especial waywardness to the straight path of faith, or hope, or charity.&#160; For although the bad within the fold are more easily made good yet it will sometimes happen that certain of the number of those outside will outstrip in their conversion certain of those within; and while these remain in barrenness, the former, being restored to unity and communion, will bear fruit with patience, thirty-fold, or sixty-fold, or a hundred-fold. &#160; Or if those only are to be called tares who remain in perverse error to the end, there are many ears of corn outside, and many tares within.

16.&#160; But it will be urged that the bad outside are worse than those within.&#160; It is indeed a weighty question, whether Nicolaus, being already severed from the Church, or Simon, who was still within it, was the worse,—the one being a heretic, the other a sorcerer.&#160; But if the mere fact of division, as being the clearest token of violated charity, is held to be the worse evil, I grant that it is so.&#160; Yet many, though they have lost all feelings of charity, yet do not secede from considerations of worldly profit; and as they seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ&#8217;s, what they are unwilling to secede from is not the unity of Christ, but their own temporal advantage.&#160; Whence it is said in praise of charity, that she "seeketh not her own."

17.&#160; Now, therefore, the question is, how could men of the party of the devil belong to the Church, which has no spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, of which also it is said, "My dove is one?" &#160; But if they cannot, it is clear that she groans among those who are not of her, some treacherously laying wait within, some barking at her gate without.&#160; Such men, however, even within, both receive baptism, and possess it, and transmit it holy in itself; nor is it in any way defiled by their wickedness, in which they persevere even to the end.&#160; Wherefore the same blessed Cyprian teaches us that baptism is to be considered as consecrated in itself by the words of the gospel, as the Church has received, without joining to it or mingling with it any consideration of waywardness and wickedness on the part of either minister or recipients; since he himself points out to us both truths,—both that there have been some within the Church who did not cherish kindly Christian love, but practised envy and unkind dissension, of whom the Apostle Paul spoke; and also that the envious belong to the devil&#8217;s party, as he testifies in the most open way in the epistle which he wrote about envy and malignity.&#160; Wherefore, since it is clearly possible that in those who belong to the devil&#8217;s party, Christ&#8217;s sacrament may yet be holy,—not, indeed, to their salvation, but to their condemnation, and that not only if they are led astray after they have been baptized, but even if they were such in heart when they received the sacrament, renouncing the world (as the same Cyprian shows) in words only and not in deeds; and since even if afterwards they be brought into the right way, the sacrament is not to be again administered which they received when they were astray; so far as I can see, the case is already clear and evident, that in the question of baptism we have to consider, not who gives, but what he gives; not who receives, but what he receives; not who has, but what he has.&#160; For if men of the party of the devil, and therefore in no way belonging to the one dove, can yet receive, and have, and give baptism in all its holiness, in no way defiled by their waywardness, as we are taught by the letters of Cyprian himself, how are we ascribing to heretics what does not belong to them? how are we saying that what is really Christ&#8217;s is theirs, and not rather recognizing in them the signs of our Sovereign, and correcting the deeds of deserters from Him?&#160; Wherefore it is one thing, as the holy Cyprian says, "for those within in the Church, to speak in the name of Christ, another thing for those without, who are acting against the Church, to baptize in His name." &#160; But both many who are within act against the Church by evil living, and by enticing weak souls to copy their lives; and some who are without speak in Christ&#8217;s name, and are not forbidden to work the works of Christ, but only to be without, since for the healing of their souls we grasp at them, or reason with them, or exhort them.&#160; For he, too, was without who did not follow Christ with His disciples, and yet in Christ&#8217;s name was casting out devils, which the Lord enjoined that he should not be prevented from doing; although, certainly, in the point where he was imperfect he was to be made whole, in accordance with the words of the Lord, in which He says, "He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad." &#160; Therefore both some things are done outside in the name of Christ not against the Church, and some things are done inside on the devil&#8217;s part which are against the Church.