§ 71. INTERNAL HISTORY OF DONATISM. 369
than the Donatists, could relinquisli the predicate of holiness for the church, found himself compelled to distinguish between a true and a mixed ^ or merely apparent body of Christ / forasmuch as hypocrites, even in this world, are not in and witli Christ, but only appear to be.' And yet he repelled the Donatist charge of making two churches. In his view it is one and the same church, which is now mixed with the ungodly, and will hereafter be pure, as it is the same Christ who once died, and now lives forever, and the same believers, who are now mortal and will one day put on immortality.^
With some modification we may find here the germ of the subsequent Protestant distinction of the visible and invisible church ; which regards the invisible, not as another church, but as the eoclesiola in ecclesia (or ecclesiis), as the smaller communion of true behevers among pi'ofessors, and thus as the true substance of the visible church, and as contained within its limits, like the soul in the body, or the kernel in the shell. Here the moderate Donatist and scholarly theologian, Tyclionius,' approached Augustine ; calling the church a twofold
' Corpus Christi verum atque permixinm, or veruni atque slmulatum. Comp. De doctr. Christ, iii. 32, as quoted below in full.
' Brevieulus Collationis cum Donatistis, Dies tertius, cap. 10, § 19 and 20 (Opera, ix. 564): "Deinde calumniantes, quod duas ecclesias Cntholici dixerint, unam quae nunc habet permixtos malos, aliam quae post resurrectionem eos non esset habitura : veluti non iidem futuri essent sancti cum Christo regnaturi, qui nunc pro ejus nomine cum juste vivunt tolerant malos. . . . De duabus etiara ecclesiis calumniam eorum Catholici refutarimt, identidem expressius ostendentes, quid dixerint, id est, non earn ecclesiam, quas nunc habet permixtos malos, alienam se dixisse » regno Dei, ubi non erunt mali commixti, sed eandem ipsam unam et sanctam ecclesiam nunc esse aliter tunc autem aliter futuram, nunc habere malos mixtos, tunc non habituram . . . sicut non ideo duo Christi, quia prior mortuus postea non moriturus."
' Or Tichonius, as Augustine spells the name. Although himself a Donatist, he wrote against them, " qui contra Donatistas invictissime scripsit, cum fuerit Donatista" (says Aug. De doctr. Christ. 1. iii. c. SO, § 42). He was opposed to rebaptism and acknowledged the validity of the Catholic sacraments ; but he was equally opposed to the secularism of the Catholic church and its mixture with the state, and adhered to the strict discipline of the Donatists. Of his works only one remains, viz., Liber regularum, or de septem regulis, a sort of Biblical hermeneutics, or a guide for the proper understanding of the mysteries of the Bible. It was edited by Gallandi, in his Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum, tona. viii. p. 107-129. Augustine notices these rules at length in his work De docui>-a C^iristiana, lib. iii. a 80
370 THIKD PERIOD. A.D. 311-590.
Jjody of ChHst^ of which the one part embraces the true Christians, tiie other the apparent." In this, as also in aekosvledgiug the validity of the Catholic baptism, Tychonius departed from the Donattsts ; while he adhered to their views on disci pline and opposed the Catholic mixture of the church and the world. But neither he nor Augustine pursued this distinction to any clearer development. Both were involved, at bottom, in the confusion of Christianity with the church, and of the church with a particular outward organization.
§ 72. The Roman Schism, of Damasus and Ursinus.
Rdfinxts : Hist. Eccl. ii. 10. HiEBOirrMUS : Chron. ad ann. 366. Socrates : H. E. iv. 29 (all in favor of Damasus). Fatjstixtjs et Marcellikus (two presbyters of Ursinus) : Libellus precum ad Imper. Theodos. in Bibl. Patr. Lugd. v. 637 (in favor of Ursinus). With these Christian accounts of the Koman scliism may be compared the impartial statement of the heathen historian Ammianus Makoellin-us, xxviL c. 3, ad ann. 367.
The church schism between Damasus and Uesenus (or Uesicintjs) in Rome, had nothing to do with the question of discipline, but proceeded partly from the Ai'ian controversy, partly from personal ambition.' For such were the power and splendor of the court of the successor of the Galilean fisherman,
B<iq. (Opera, ed. Bened. torn. iii. p. 57 sqq.). Tychouius seems to have died before the close of the fourth century. Comp. on him TiUemont, Memoires, torn. yi. p. 81 sq., and an article of A. Vogel, in Ilerzog's Real-Encyclopasdie, vol. xvi. p. 534-586.
' " Corpus Domini bi[)artitum." This was the second of his rules for the tiue understanding of the Scriptures.
'•• Augustine objects only to his mode of expression, Dc doctr. Christ, iii. .32 (torn. iii. 58): " Secunda [regula Tichonii] est de Domini corpore bipartito ; ron enim revera Domini corpus est, quod cum illo non erit in aetemum ; sed dicendura fuit de Domini corpore vero atque pennixio, aut vera atque simulate, vol quid aliud; quia non solum in Kternum, verum etiam nunc hypocritse non cum illo esse dicendi Clint, quamvis in ejus esse videantur ecclcsia, unde potorat ista regula ct sic appellari, ut diceretur dc permixta ecclcsia." Comp. also Dr. Baur, K. G. vom 4-C Jahi h., p. 224.
* Ammianus Marc, 1. c, intimates the latter : " Damasus et Ursi.ms supra hu. manum modum ad rapiendam episcopatus sedem ardentes scissis studiie aspcrrimc conilictabantur," etc