Christopher who thrust Leo the Fift out of his Chaire in the yeare 908. and after seaven Moneths was in like manner dejected by Sergius But Baronius gives a reason to the contrary Anno 888. Nullo pacto possunt tribui ista Christophoro qui invasor Apostolicae Sedis mox sede pulsus perbrevi tempore eam tenuit tumultuosè That is This Addition cannot be ascribed to Pope Christopher who having invaded the Apostolick See was quickly thrust out againe having held it but a very little while and that in great troubles Wherefore with more probability we may attribute this Addition to Pope Sergius his Successour who made this businesse of the Procession his first and chiefe work and sent unto the French Bishops to gather the most solid Arguments they could find against the Errour of the Greekes upon the Receipt of which letters a Synod was called at Soissons 6 Cal. Jul. Aº 909. Wherein Herivaeus Archbishop of Rheimes earnestly exhorts the Clergy to prosecute the question against the Photian Errours and Blasphemies Hortamur vestram Fraternitatem saith he ut unà me cum secundum admonitionem Domini Romanae sedis presidis singuli nostrum perspectis Patrum Catholicorum sententiis de divinae Scripturae pharetris acutas proferamus sagittas ad conficiendam belluam monstri renascentis ad terebrandum Caput nequissimi Serpentis And this may be the reason why the ancient Romane writers never delivered to posterity the name of that Pope who contrary to the Precept and Practise of his Predecessor Leo 3. undertook to adde this Particle to the Creed namely because they were ashamed of such an Author as Sergius an usurper of the See and one of a most infamous life whom if they had alleadged they had laid both themselves and their cause open to the scoffes and railings of the Greekes who would greedily have laid hold on such an advantage Otherwise it were a Thing extreamly improbable that the Clergy and Notaries of the Romane Church should be so grossely negligent as not to insert a matter of this consequence into their publique Registers and that all the Ecclesiasticall Writers of that and the next Age should quite passe over it in silence Especially it being done in a great Synod of Westerne Bishops as the forenamed Bishop of Colosse witnessed in the Councell of Florence when he there disputed in this cause on behalfe of the Romane Church His words are these Cyrillus literis mandavit Sanctum spiritum esse per Filium ac Filii esse ab ipso profluere quam profecto sententiam non dixisset nisi coactus fuisset haereticorum ipsorum opinionem evertere quemadmodum etiam Romanae Ecclesiae contigit nam maximo in Gallia in Hispaniis Schismate imminente cum jam ex filioque passim celebraretur Romano Pontifici fuit necesse in multorum Occidentalium amplae Dignitatis magnique Consilii Patrum Conventu addito ex Filioque Symbolum magis illustrare That is Cyril hath wrote that the Holy Ghost is by the Sonne and of the Sonne and that he proceedeth from him which he had not declared unlesse he had been compelled thereby to overthrow the opinion of the Hereticks as it fell out also in the Romane Church for a great Schisme being now ready to breake forth in the Churches of France and Spaine when as the particle Filioque was commonly used it was necessary for the Bishop of Rome to illustrate the Creed by the Addition of that particle which he did in an Assembly of many Westerne Bishops and those of the greatest Dignity and judgement Sess 7a. About 165 years after the ejection of the Patriarch Photius Michael Cerularius vehemently set himselfe against the Latines accusing them not only concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost but also concerning Traditions and Ceremonies as for Communicating in unleavened bread fasting on Saturday c. Leo Achridenus Metropolitan of Bulgaria seconded him Michael Psellus Tutor to Michael Ducas the Emperour surnamed Paropinaceus pursued the quarrell and so did Theophylact who flourished about the yeare 1070. Thus began and thus continued the deplorable Schisme between the Churches of East and West the causes whereof were these that follow 1. The Addition of this particle Filioque to the Nicene or Constantinopolitan Creed not only without but against the Consent of the Easterne Churches who had composed that Creed but were never called to that Synod wherein this Alteration was made yea still protested against it But which was more this Addition was made in contempt of the third generall Councell held at Ephesus which expressely forbad it and denounced an Anathema against him whosoever should dare to alter this Creed by Addition or Diminution cap. 7. For though an Oecumenicall Synod cannot absolutely prescribe to another Oecumenicall whence the first Councell of Constantinople added much by way of explication to the Nicene Creed yet it may prescribe Lawes to Inferiour Synods whether Provinciall or Nationall so that nothing ought to be done in the common cause of the Faith but by the common Judgment and determination of the Catholick Church Thus did the Greeks complaine And when the Latines afterward urged the Authority of the Romane See now growing daily greater that the Bishop of Rome by a peculiar priviledge derived from St Peter the Prince of the Apostles was to take care that the Church received no Damage that he had an infallible Judgment by the speciall Gift of the holy Ghost in all controversies of Faith and authority to decide them so that there was no necessity he should expect the judgment of the Easterne Churches and that this was the Priviledge of the first See which had received the Primacy from S. Peter Christs vicar on Earth The Greeks replyed First that S. Peter never chalenged that priviledge to himselfe to judge alone and to be judged of none for being called in question that he had conversed with the Gentiles he was faine to make an Apology for himselfe in the publick audience of the Church Act. 11. And when the Controversy arose whether the Gentiles should be circumcised and observe the Ceremoniall Law no Appeale was made to S. Peter but a Synod was called wherin though he spake first yet Iames as Bishop of Jerusalem the place where the Synod was called decided the question and seemes to have sate therein as President Besides S. Paul resisted him to his face at Antioch and publickly rebuked him for causing others to Judaize by his example as we Read Galatians 2. 14. Which he would not have presumed to doe if he had conceived him endued with such a supereminent priviledge So then there appeares nought in Peter above the rest of the Apostles but a Primacy of order or of Dignity at the most such as is acknowledged to be fit in the Church of God and this Primacy conferred on him either for that he was first called or for his Age or Zeale or that he was commonly the first Speaker
and so rather the Mouth than the Head of the Apostles but there appears no Primacy of order or Jurisdiction over his fellow-Apostles But suppose we should grant said they that Peter had such an unerring paramount privilege yet this might well be personall and annext to his Apostleship not derivable to any Episcopall successour and if derivable why should the Bishop of Rome rather arrogate it to himselfe than the Bishop of Antioch in which City S. Peter first sate Or the Bishop of Alexandria a See instituted by the same Apostle under S. Marke before he ever appointed any Bishop at Rome As for the Grounding of this priviledge on S. Peters martyrdome at Rome where appears any such Dependance or legacy bequeathed by S. Peter that his Infallibility and Supremacy should be annexed to that Chaire alone as to the place of his Death and Buriall 'T is true they confest that the Bishop of Rome was of old accounted Primae Sedis Episcopus The Bishop of the Principall See but withall they said that there was a vast difference between Primacy and Power for if by this pretence he should challenge any Authority or Jurisdiction over the Bishop of Constantinople the Second See Why should not he of Constantinople likewise claime the same Power over the Bishop of Alexandria which is the third And so in like manner Alexandria over Antioch Antioch over Ierusalem An opinion never heard of or entertained in the Church of God The Bishop of Rome therefore had this primacy not by divine right but by humane or Ecclesiasticall that is not from any Apostolicall Priviledge derived from S. Peter but by the graunt of Emperours and Decrees of Councells It was fit that one Bishop should be chiefe for order sake this Honour was given to the Bishop of Rome for the Dignity of his Seat Rome beeing the Head of the Roman Empire For which cause Alexandria had of old the Second place as beeing Praefectura Augustalis the Peculiar of the Romane Emperour so ennobled by Augustus Caesar Antioch the third as the Metropolis of Syria and the Eastern Countryes adjoyning whereas if the preeminency of Sees had been derived from S. Peter the City of Antioch where he sate seven years in person should have beene preferd before Alexandria whether he only sent an other viz S. Marke and appointed him for the first Bishop And for this cause Caesarea too was made the Metropoliticall See of Palestine because it was the seat of the Roman Governor untill the Fathers of the Nicene Councel in honour of Jerusalem where S. James was made the first Bishop of the Christian world and whence the Gospell spread into the whole earth gave the Bishop therof a Patriarchall title that rather of dignity thē Authority for thus runs the seventh Canon of that Councell Quoniam mos antiquus obtinuit vetusta Traditio ut Aeliae id est Hierosolimorum Episcopo honor Deferatur habeat consequenter honorem manente tamen Metropolitanae Civitatis Caesareae propriâ Dignitate that is Because from an old Custome and Tradition honuor hath been given to the Bishop of Aelia that is of Jerusalem let him have Honour accordingly provided that the Dignity of the metropolitan City Cesarea remaine entire For the same cause also when Constantinople was reedifyed made the seat of the Empire and called new Rome by Constantine the Great it was thought fit by the Emperours and succeeding Councells that the Bishop of Alexandria should no longer have the Second but the third Place Constantinople now succeeding in that honour for thus runs the fift Canon of the first Councell of Constantinople Constantinopolitanae Civitatis Episcopum habere oportet Primatus honorem post Romanum Episcopum propter quod sit nova Roma that is The Bishop of Constantinople ought to have the next place of honour after the Bishop of Rome because his City is new Rome And because there could not be two Sedes primae two first or chief Sees the same Councell ordeined that the Bishop of Constantinople should be styled the second Patriarch but in all other things should be of equall Dignity and Authority with the Bishop of Rome So in all the rest whosoever will please to compare the Prelates Sees with the Notitia Imperii shall find that the Church still accommodated her Hierarchy of Mertropolitās Archbishops Bishops unto the state of the Empire the distinction of Provinces and the Dignity of the Cityes according to that ancient Rule Ecclesia est in Republicâ non Respublica in Ecclesiâ The Church is in the Commonwealth not the Common-wealth in the Church 2. The second cause of the Schisme was the Deposition and Excomunication of the Patriarch Photius and of the other Prelats and Abbots his adherents in a great Synod at Constantinople held under the Emperour Basiliu◠and the Patriarch Ignatius in the yeare 869 which businesse was mainly urged and furthered by two Bishops of Rome successively viz. Nicolas the first and Adrian the second 3. The third cause was the Rash and Inconsiderate Zeale of the said Patriarch Photius who first dared to accuse the Romane Church of Heresy because it held that the holy Ghost proceeded from the Sonne as well as from the Father whereas in all former disputes between the Greeks and the Latines whether by word or writing neither party accused his Adversary of Heresy for holding either opinion Yea the Latines Demōstrated that some of the Greeke Fathers spake as they did neither could the Greekes deny it And since this precipitate Censure of Photius not a few of the Romane Divines have in requitall accused the Greeke Church of the same Crime for holding the Contrary 4. The fourth cause was the contention about the Primacy between the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople For Iohn surnamed Iejunator and Cyriacus his successour Patriarchs of Constantinople were very earnest with the emperour Mauritius to obteine the Title Authority of Oecumenicall Patriarchs thereby challenging a Superiority over the Bishops of the whole Christian World from the Dignity of their City which was then the Head of the Romane Empire that of the West being utterly broken and Rome the Ancient Seate thereof for that Cause loosing its former Dignity Now against these their endeavours Gregory the great then Bishop of Rome publickly opposed himselfe and taxed them in expresse Termes of Antichristian ambition saying withall that Dato uni Episcopi universalis Titulo reliquos Sacerdotes honore debito privari The giving of the Title of Universall Bishop unto one doth deprive the other Bishops of their due Honour Yet with in lesse than two years after his Death Boniface the Third his Successour abtained the same Title of the Emperour Phocas which Gregory had so much Decried But the Greeke Prelates would never yeeld to it 5. The fift cause was the busines of Images which brake out after this contention about the Primacy For the Emperour Leo Isaurus and his sonne Constantinus Copronymus
the Publick view Yet to excuse my selfe in part from Temerity and Presumption in this particular I ventured not on it before I had the approbation of some Learned Friends who were pleased not only to peruse the Worke but solicited me also to the Publication which if it shall awaken some more able Pen to perfect what I have thus rudely drawn I shall not a little applaud my selfe as the Instrument of presenting so fortunate an Occasion But I have almost seemed to have forgot your Lordship whilst I have been thus particular in relating to you the Occasion the Beginning the Progresse and the end of these imperfect labours of mine which I am now bold to offer unto your Patronage that so they may have the same Protection with the Author that presents them For as the many Favours and Civilities which I have received from your Lordships hands oblige me to a Publick acknowledgment so your approbation of the Work which hath had the Honour of your Perusall also in good part hath encouraged me to present that acknowledgement in this kind Besides not only Gratitude but strict Justice seems to require this oblation at my Hands the first-borne of my Pen and entitleth your Lordship more peculiarly unto it for though it were begotten elsewhere it was borne under your Roofe and so belongs unto you as to the Lord of the House and the Father of the Family There remaines nought else but that as I now present this Treatise to your Patronage so to present my Prayers to God for your Person for that of your Noble Lady together with all the Branches of your ancient Family that they may constantly Live and comfortably Dye in the true Christian Apostolick Faith which was once delivered unto the Saints This as it still hath so shall continue to be a constant part of the dayly Orisons of MY LORD Your Lordships Most Faithfull and Affectionate Servant to Command GEO ASHWELL The Contents of the CHAPTERS CAP. I. THE Dogmaticall part of Theologie most necessary to be established and in that most especially the Creed as the Foundation of the rest and this for three Reasons A double abuse of the Creed which occasioned this Treatise together with the abuse of Catechismes The five Heades of the ensuing Treatise The Creed conteines all and only Fundamentalls The Trinity and Incarnation of the Sonne of God cleared out of it CAP. II. The History of the Apostles Composing the Creed out of Ruffinus Five Reasons why the Apostles delivered it to the Church not in Writing but by an Orall Tradition An Objection against the preserving of it by Tradition Answered CAP. III. Testimonies of Scripture touching the Composure of the Apostles Creed especially out of S. Pauls Epistles as the places are accordingly interpreted by Diuines of good note both Ancient and Moderne Some Doubts against these Testimonies solved CAP. IV. Testimonies concerning the Creed and the Composure thereof by the Apost taken out of the Greek Fathers who beare witnesse for the Eastern Churches some Objections against these Authorities partly Answered partly Prevented CAP. V. Testimonies of the Creed and the Composure thereof by the Apostles taken out of the Latine Fathers who beare witnesse for the Western Churches Some Objections to the contrary Answered CAP. VI. Testimonies of the Authors and Authority of the Creed taken out of the Protestant Divines who have unanimously received and acknowledged this Creed of the Apostles together with the Nicene Creed and that of Athanasius CAP. VII Six Reasons evincing the Apostles to have been the Composers of the Creed which commonly bears their Name Some Objections against these Reasons Answered The place where the Creed was Made Of Fundamentalls and Traditions CAP. VIII Severall Objections which some have alleadged against the fore-assigned Authors of the Creed Answered at large Certaine Creeds compared together whereby their Conformity appears to one another and to that of the Apostles CAP. IX The second Head of this Discourse namely the Grounds on which and the ends for which the Apostles framed the Creed The Sufficiency also of the Creed for the Rule of Faith is proved by the Testimonies of Divines as well Moderne as Ancient and those both Romish and Reformed CAP. X. The third Head of this Discourse namely the severall reasons or significations of the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Creed beares in the Originall Greeke CAP. XI The fourth Head of this Discourse namely the Division or Parts of the Creed CAP XII The fift Head of this Discourse touched in Generall viz. the supplementall or exegetticall Creeds framed in succeeding Ages The Grounds whereon they were Framed and their use Some Copies of Creeds set downe as well of the Hereticks as Orthodox both consonant to this of the Apostles Appendix the first of the Athan. Creed CAP. I. Two Reasons why this Creed hath been more oppugned than the rest It s Authority and Author are vindicated in generall more especially touching the severity of the Preface CAP. II. Severall Testimonies concerning the Author and Authority of the Athan. Creed CAP. III. The Time and Place wherein Athanasius wrote his Creed together with the Person to whom The Cause wherefore he wrote it and the Language wherein CAP IV. Some Objections against what hath been laid downe Answered Especially Nazianzens Testimony concerning the Athanasian Creed is farther cleared and vindicated Appendix the second of the Nicene and Constantinopolitan Creed CAP. I. The Reason of the double name of this Creed The Composure thereof The Additionall or Exegeticall Particles inserted into it When and by Whom it was conveied to other Churches and brought into Divine Service CAP. II. When and by whom the Particle Filioque was added to the Nicene Creed is historically delivered and at large Severall other causes of the breach betweene the Churches of Greece and Rome To the Christian and Catholick Reader OUR Blessed Saviour speaking of his second Comming maketh this question or complaint when the Sonne of man commeth shall he find faith on the Earth Luke 18. 8. Now he puts this question to put it out of question for this seeming doubt is a strong Affirmation and amounts to a vehement Complaint that when he shall come to Judgement he shall find little or no faith amongst men No faith in matter of Practise each man will be false to his Brother Homo homini Vulpes as well as lupus the wisdome of the world so generally counted and esteemed being nought else but overreaching the ancient Christian simplicity will be quite lost and the Serpent expell the Dove nothing but insinuating Complements and faire speeches like those of the Serpent to our Grandmother Eve will every where practise to deceive under pretence of friendship Nor on the other side will there be faith found in matter of Doctrine Religion shall be lamentably torne and mangled by intestine Combats of the Tongue and Pen New opinions shall be in Credit as new fashions till faith of one by
succeeding Creeds which the whole Church hath for many Ages imbraced they were Framed in generall Councels or confirmed by Generall Practise Now the Catholick Church which received the Creed from the Apostles and preserved â—t as an inviolable Depositum may justly be presumed best to know the meaning of it the Common Mother of Christians can best informe us which is the true sence of the Common Faith and hath sufficienâ— authority to impose it upon Her Children Reas 4. Those Fathers who wrote since the Nicene Councell set downe and explaine that Creed which beareth the Apostles name not that which was framed in the Councell of Nice as appeares by the fore-cited Testimonies Now this they would not nor could have done if the Nicene Creed had been the first The first Father whom we find to meddle with or handle the Nicene Creed is St Cyril Patriarch of Alexandria who flourished an whole Century after the making of it Doth not this plainly shew that the Church had still the prime if not the sole respect to that Symbole or Rule of Faith which the Apostles left her as the maine Basis on which the Faith of her Children was built the Root whereout other Creeds as so many Branches sprung the Fathers who since the celebration of that Councell have explained and commented on the Apostles Creed I have already mentioned viz. Chrysostome Augustine Chrysologus Venantius Eusebius c. Reason 5th It is a received Rule which S. Augustine laies downe lib. 4. De Baptismo cont Donat. cap. 24. Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi authoritate Apostolicâ traditum rectissimè creditur That is That which the universall Church holdeth and hath alwaies retained not being ordained by a Councell is most justly believed to have been derived unto us by the Authority of the Apostles And this rule is grounded upon good Reason besides the Authority of the deliverer for a generall effect must have as generall a cause they must be both of the same latitude and extent now there is no Generall cause imagineable of a publiquely received Doctrine Goverment Ceremony or Discipline in the Catholicke Church such especially as is derived to it from hand to hand time out of mind but the Authority of a Generall Councell which is the Church Representative or the concordant preaching of the Apostles who first planted Christianity in the Churches of the whole world So then to apply this Rule unto our present purpose That the whole Church holds the Apostles Creed experience demonstrates that it hath been alwayes reteined in the Church the Testimonies of the fore-aleadged Fathers shew and that it was not Framed in any Genenerall Councell sufficienty appears both by the copies of those Creeds which were framed in them found varying from that of the Apostles as also by the writing of those Fathers who lived before the first General Councel held at Nice wherein they make mention of a Rule of Faith derived downe to them from the Apostles which some of them also set downe as Irenaeus Tertullian Origen Reason 6th Before the Nicene Creed was framed both the Easterne and Westerne Churches had an Ancient Symbole or Creede Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 6. Which could be no other than that of the Apostles since no other is assigned or mentioned by any good Author First That the Westerne or Romane Church had such an Ancient Symble appeares 1. By the words of Vigilius Byshop of Rome lib. 4. De Eutiche Roma antequam Nicena Synodus conveniret a temporibus Apostolorum usque all nunc ita fidelibus Symbolum tradidit viz. in Jesum Christum Filium ejus Dominum nostrum leaving out the Particle Vnicum That is The Church of Rome even before the Nicene Councell from the very Apostles times till this present in these termes delivered the Creed unto Believers And in Jesus Christ his Sonne our Lord leaving out the Particle Only 2. By Ruffinus in his Tract on the Creed who compares the Aquilean Creed with the Romane and withall tells us that the Creed was believed so ancient in his time that it was then held for an Apostolicall Tradition Now this Ruffinus was a man of note in the Church nine yeares before the first Councell of Constantinople viz. in the yeare 372. when he went with Melama from Rome to Alexandria about which time also S. Ierome wrote letters to him namely his Epist 5. 41. Secondly that the Easterne Churches had an ancient Creed too before the Nicene Councell appears by the same Ruffinus who compares the Aquilean Creed with that of the East as well as with the Romane The same appears by Cyril of Ierusalem who explaines it at large in his Catecheses and this Creed of his explaining we shall find much consonant to that which we now call the Apostolicall only cutting off some few exegeticall Particles which were added to fore-arme his Auditors and other orthodox Christians against succrescent Heresies to which Creed of his he adjoynes also some practicall Grounds for the more compleat instruction and Preparation of them against the time of Baptisme This Cyril was first Catechist then Patriarch of Ierusalem and sate afterwards in the first Councell held at Constantinople where the Easterne Bishops were only present and composed a Creed almost in the same termes with this of Cyril He composed these Catecheses in his youth about the yeare 350 and died in the yeare 386 five years after the celebration of that Councell as the learned Vossius demonstrates out of Leo and S. Jerome compared with a passage in his sixt Catechesis Now as the Fathers of the first Councell at Constantinople laboured not to frame a new Creed but were contented to enlarge the Article concerning the Holy Ghost against Macedonius who perverted it so we may justly suppose that the Nicene Fathers retained the words of that Creed which had been of old received in the East least they might otherwise seeme to have framed a new Faith amplifying only the Article concerning the Divinity of our Saviour which was then called in question by Arius that so it might appeare to the World quaedam tantummodo explicatius dici as the same Vossius rightly conceives Cut off therefore from the Nicene or Constantinopolitan Creed or from that of Cyril which much symbolizeth with it the Additionals unto those two Articles and you have the whole Creed of the Apostles for the Communion of Saints is not a distinct Article but a part or Paraphrase of what goes before Saints being implyed in in Holy and Communion in Church or Congregation Ecclesia which is an Assembly of selected People and Christs descent into Hell is presupposed to the Article of his Resurrection Therefore to think that Cyril in his old Age or Iohn the Patriarch his Successor added all that to the Jerosolymitan Creed which followes the Articles of the Holy Ghost is nothing probable because Cyril doth not barely
none other as the Confession or Creed of Athanasius whose judgment ought to prevaile with us above the the rashnesse of some Novellists who have questioned both the Authority the Author But because this Recrimination of Sabellianisme is but obscurely set downe in the writers of that Age and utterly denyed by some of ours I shall endeavour in a few worrdes to clear it First It was the custome of that Age that when any was advanced to a Bishoprick but more espepecially to a Patriarchall See such as Alxandria was whereof Athanasius was Bishop he sent about his Literae Formatae or Encyclicae wherein he testifyed his Faith unto the Christian world and his communion with the Catholick Bishops and this was in use whether the new Bishop were suspected of heresy or not Now there was far greater Cause for this in the case of Athanasius when he appealed to Iulius Bishop of Rome as the most Eminent Patriarch of the Church and one not engaged in the quarrell between him and the Eusebians For it had litle stood with the gravity impartiall uprightnesse of such a Judge to have presently with an overforward affection received a man into his Communion laden with so many and so heavy Accusations before he had given an Account of his Beliefe which that it was the custome then observed and particularly in the case of Athanasius and his fellowes is plainly set downe by Sozomen lib. 3. cap. 7. where having premised that Athanasius and three other Bishops being thrust out by the Arian faction fled unto Julius for succour he subjoynes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is The Bishop of Rome having learned the crimes objected against each of them after that he found them all agreeing in the Doctrine of the Nicene Councell he received them into his Communion as persons of the same judgement with himselfe Secondly Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra who was the chiefe of those three Bishops that were thrust out by the Arian faction and fled to Rome with Athanasius having formerly accused the Eusebians of the Arian Heresy and convicted them in the Nicene Councell was himselfe also scandalized with the crosse imputation of Sabellianisme whereupon he freely made an Orthodox Confession of his Faith at Rome such as the Synod lately held at Sardica had imbraced Now that Athanasius who was principally hated by the Eusebians had the charge of Heresy recriminated also upon him appears by a passage of the same Julius in his Letter to the Easterne Bishops then Assembled at Antioch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now as concerning Marcellus saith he seeing ye have wrote touching him also as of one who thinkes impiously of or against Christ where the particle Also necessarily implies that the Orientall Bishops had accused the rest of the same crime and who but Athanasius as the principall of the Accused See the place in Athan. Apolog. 2. pag. 548. Edit Comm. And his Epistle ad Solitarios two leaves from the beginning Epiphanius also in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Her 72. tels us that this Marcellus being accused by the Arians of Sabellianisme to Iulius Bishop of Rome voluntarily came to Rome and having long but in vaine there expected the appearance of his Adversaries upon his departure left an Epistle with Iulius wherein he sets downe a Confession of his Faith His case is just parallell to that of Athanasius who was accused of the same Heresy as Epiphanius there witnesseth and in like manner cleared himselfe Thirdly this imputation of Sabellianisme was so pertinaciously urged upon Athanasius by his Arian persecutors that Liberius successor to Julius in the Romane See was constrained to send a short Epistle to him for farther satisfaction wherein having set downe his own Faith concerning the Trinity he addes by way of Antithesis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherefore I condemne the opinions of Sabellius and Arius and all the forementioned Heresies to everlasting punishment according to the voyce of our Saviour Then he concludes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If thou then agreest with mee Brother Athanasius in this Confession which is the only true Faith received in the holy Catholick and Apostolick Church as in the presence of God and his Christ write unto me thy consent agreement therin with me that so I may be ascertained thereof and without scruple performe thy commands This Epistle of Liberius with the rescript of Athanasius we find extant in the first Tome of Athanasius his workes The same Athanasius in his forecited 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or exposition of the Faith vindicates himselfe from Sabellianisme in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is We neither make the Father and the Sonne the same Person as the Sabellians doe in this destroying the relation of the Sonne neither doe we attribute to the Father that passible Body which the Sonne tooke on him for the Salvation of the whole world Fourthly Sulpitius Severus lib. 20 hist Tels us that Athanasius was condemn'd of Sabellianisme in a certain Councell by the Arians Adde hereunto that Arius himselfe in his Disputation before Probus the Judge taxeth Athanasius in these words somtimes saith he he makes three appeare One saying But these three are one God then I know not by what strang mixtion he makes them Triforms triple saying And this one God is the Trinity So Geneb To prevent such mistakes and cavils Athanasius hath a chapter in his Workes entitled Quod non tres Dii that there are not three Gods Thirdly As to my last Query in what Language this Creed of Athanasius was originally written I Answer it is most probable that Athanasius first wrote it in Latine as being a Language which he well vnderstood although some have been pleased to deny it and the Creed being exhibited unto Julius Bishop of Rome in a Synod of Latine Bishops My reasons are these First The Latine edition of this Creed is the same in all Copies whereas the Greek Copies vary as Translations use to doe Genebrard in his third booke De Trinitate hath set downe three severall versions there of out of the Latine into the Greeke namely Vulgatam Dionysianam Constantinopolitanam The first is that which is commonly Printed The last is that which the Church of Constantinâ—ple useth The middlemost is so called from Dionysius a Grecian Bishop entitled Zienensis Firmiensis who gave the foreeited Manuscript of the Procession to Lazarus Bayffius the Booke was fairly written by the Learned Nic. Sophianus And to these three which are set downe and compared by Genebrard we may adde a fourth found in an Horologium of Greeke hymnes composed by Thechara a Monke of Constantinople and is set downe by the R. Armach in his Tract de Symb. which besides that it hath much inserted heere and there by the Greeke Translator very much differs in the residue from all the three former as they also doe from each other Secondly As the Bishop of Rome wrote in Latine to the Bishops of the East
so those Bishops wrote their Formulae Fidei and Paenitentiae libelli to him in Latine as Serrarius informes us in his Discourse on this Creed Much more reason had Athanasius to write this his Creed in Latine it being exhibited at Rome in a Synod of Latine Bishops on purpose to satisfy them concerning his Beliefe most of whom in all likelihood understood not the Greek Tongue Thirdly The foresaid reason is fortified by this other that Athanasius himselfe well understood the Latine Tongue and therefore needed not to communicate with them by an interpreter Which skill of Athanasius is not only made probable from the example of other Greeke Bishops as Eusebius Caesariensis Photinus and others of this latter Age also who joyned the study of both Tongues together and from his long abode in the Westerne Parts at severall times as at Triers above two years at Millain and Aquileia and at Rome above 18 moneths but clearly proved from that forecited passage of Nazianzene Orat. 21. Num. 46 47. Which I brought by way of Answer to the eight Objection against the Apostles Creed where he tells us how Athanasius composed the difference between the Greek and Latine Churches about the words Hypostasis and Essentia verborum sententiâ diligenter accurate perpensâ having diligently and accurately weighed the meaning of the wordes at length peswading both Parties that it was but a Logomachia a contention about Termes since both ment the same Thing Now such a Controversy as this could never have been stated with so full a satisfaction to both Parties unlesse he had been furnished with more than ordinary skill as well in the Latine as the Greeke CAP IIII. Some objsctions against what hath beene laid downe answered Especially Nazianzens Testimony concerning the Athanasian Creed is farther cleared and vindicated THus far have I proceeded By way of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a positive and demonstrative way to assert the Author and Authority of the Athanasian Creed and by the way have enervated most of those Arguments which I have found brought against either But least I should seeme to leave the Tract unperfect by passing by any considerable objection which hath to my knowledg been alleadged against it I shall set downe the objections distinctly and subjoyne some light Strictures by way of Answer Object 1. Thay who ascribe this Creed to Athanasius agree not either about the Time or place Durandus saith it was written in his first Banishment at Triers where he lay hid in a Well to avoid the treacheries of the Arians Manuell Caleca and Baronius say it was wrote to P. Iulius either from his Diocesse at Alexandria or given in writing to him and the Roman Synod when he pleaded his Cause before them that so he might be received into the Communion of the Church of Rome wherein Baronius is deceived more wayes than one first because not only heere but in the the whole worke of his Annals he laboures to prove that in all Ages the Bishop of Rome had full Power to cite absolve or condemne the Bishops of the East and of the whole World Secondly because Athanasius was not accused for matter of Doctrine by the Arians but for matter of fact and his restitution to his Bishoprick opposed by them for Politicall inconveniencies as that his returne had once already caused seditions Slaughters in Alexandria that he had been restored to his See contrary to the Canons as one condemned by the Synod of Tyre and not yet absolved Thirdly because if he had needed to render an account of his Faith to Maximus Bishop of Triers or Iulius of Rome Hee would have used none other than the Necene Creed it being not opportune to have used any other at that Time for feare he migt have been thought to imitate the Arians and Semi-Arians who ever and anon framed new Confessions in their Synods ante-Synods on purpose to depreciate the Nicene Creed as false imperfect or obscure and for this very reason were chiefly hated by the Catholicks Answer 1. The severall opinions about the Time and Place where and when Athanasius Published his Creed are but circumstantiall differences and therefore not destructive of the main busines except we wil therefore deny an Hell because Divines differ about the Place where it is seated and the Time when it was prepared Besides all these differences are easy enough to be reconciled as I have shewed already taking my rise from Possevins judgement As for the Well at Triers what ever Baronius may judge of it yet if it beare that Inscription which Possevine witnesseth it may probably enough have been the Place where Athanasius at first composed this Creed of his either lying in it there for shelter at his first coming to Triers till he had made his innocency known to Constantine the younger and to Maximus the Bishop of the place or inscribing that Title on it in imitation of the Apostles Creed which was framed in a like place as we find it recorded by Fr. Quaresmius an Eye-witnesse in his forecited Testimony 2. What though Baronius ascribe more authority to the Bishop of Rome than in truth is due to him or than Iulius challenged in that Age What if Athanasius acknowledged him not for universall Bishop Neverthelesse he might prudently appeale to him as the chiefe Patriarch of the Christian Church sitting in the head City of the Empire as to a Person disengaged in his quarrell so not to be justly excepted against by his adversaries The appeale was not out of duty but discretion 3. That Athanasius was accused for matter of Doctrine I have already proved and therefore he had good reason to make confession of his faith 4. The Arians and Semi-Arians were hated by the Catholicks for not assenting to the Nicene Councell and for rejecting the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Consubstantiall in explaining the Divinity of the Son of God whereupon they framed new Formes or Confessions of their own contrary to the Decrees of that Councell Yet for all this Athanasius the great Patron of the Nicene Faith might very well compose a larger explanation of those two materiall and mysterious Points of the Trinity and Incarnation then questioned an explanation not contrary as the Arians Confessions but concordant to the Nicene Creed and this he might doe without any more derogation thereto than came afterwards from Ierome Leo other succeeding Fathers who made Confessions of their Faith or Creeds of their own private cōposure at this day extant in their workes Creeds not to be imposed on all Churches but to manifest their owne Beliefe or for the use of some particular Diocesse The Authorities produced to the contrary speake against the fraudulent destructive Symboles of hereticall Synods Ob. 2. This creed is usually left out of the Manuscripts of Athanasius his workes or at least hath not his name prefixt Answ This is not a sufficient Argument to disprove the Author because the other workes
interdicted the worship thereof and commanded them to be broken Both of them for this Cause being very hatefull to the Church of Rome 6. A sixt cause was the Pride Pompe and Covetous Exactions of the Popes Legates who were yearly sent from Rome to carry the Chrisme unto Constantinople 7. The seventh and last cause was the Division of East and West Empire caused by Leo 3. Bishop of Rome who seeing Italy and more especially his owne Church and City dayly vexed and in danger of imminent Ruine by the incursions of the Saracen◠on the East the oppression of the Lombardes from the West and seeing that the Greeke Emperour at his earnest solicitation either would not or could not protect him In fine he perswaded the Senate and people of Rome to elect Charlemaigne Emperour of the West which they did he accordingly crowned him at Rome in St Peters Church uppon Christmas Day Aº Dni 800. Thus this great Breach had its originall both from Prince and Prelate The Emperours became odions to the Popes for the businesse of Images and the Popes to the Greeke Emperours for the Division of the Empire Then for the Clergy The contention about the Primacy made way for the Schisme The Pride Pompe and Avarice of the Romane Legats fomented it Then the Doctrine of the Procession accōpained with the Deposition of Photius and the adding of the particle Filioque to the Nicene Creed on the one side with the retortion of Heresy wherewith Photius charged the Latine Church on the other brought it to the Height And when the Differences were thus high then every petty diversity in matter of Ceremony or opinion was a sufficient occasion of Cavill and served to make the Breach wider For to insist a little upon this last The Greeks celebrate the Eucharist in both kindes and give it to Infants presently upon their Baptisme but the Romanists doe neither They give it also in leavened bread and condemne the contrary use whereas the Church of Rome usually delivers it in light Wafer-cakes They admit of Preists marriages that is the use of those wives whom they married before ordination which the Romanists do not They prohibite the fourth mariage in any Christian as a thing intollerable They solemnize Saturday festivally in memory of the Creation and eat flesh therein forbidding as unlawful to fast any Saturday in the yeare except Easter Eve in memory of our Saviours then lying in the Grave They Eate no bloud nor any thing strangled in observation of that Decree of the Apostles Act. 15 28 29. They observe foure Lents in the yeare They reject the religious use of massy Images or statues in their Churches though they admit of Pictures or plaine Images They disallow private Masses and the sale of Indulgences and Pardons with the Adoration of the elevated Host lastly they have their service in a knowne Tongue In these and some other small particulars they differ in practise from the Romane Church And as in matter of practise so in opinion too as about Transubstantiation Purgatory the State of Soules departed c. But too much of the causes and the sad effects that followed The great head of his Church unite all his members to himselfe and each other in Verity and Unity in the same Faith and the same Love He who is the Wisdome of his Father supply his Church with that VVisdome from above which is first pure then peaceable that so it may seeke and seeking obtaine those two inestimable Blessings Truth and Peace The Great Physitian of Soules in his due time apply an effectual Salve to heale up these Wounds of his torne mangled Spouse The Great Shepheard of his Church who came to binde up that which was broken to seeke that which was lost to recollect the dispersed ones and who once brake downe the partition-wall between Iew and Gentile bring his Scatterd Sheep into one Fold heere and hereafter set them at his right Hand in his Heavenly Kingdome FINIS ERRATA PAge 3. lin 24. for sunt read sicut p. 9. l. 24. r. 2 Cor. 1. 24. p. 17. l. 21. r. Marcellus Ancyranus p. 88. l. 16. r. Contextio p. 102. l. 32. r. Heb. 6. 1. p. 105. l. 20 21. r. this testimony p. 117. l. 19. r. his comments p. 118. l. 14. r. where p. 122. l. 12. r. this p. 116. l. 25. r. discessuri p. 128. l. 19. r. confinem p. 141. l. 17. r. Melania p. 145. l. 31. r. God p. 157. l. 6. r. forme p. 159. l. 23. r. out of p. 161. l. 31. r. Test p. 173. l. 29. r. this p. 174. l. 27. r. Moscovitish p. 175. l 34. r. Act. 8. 37. p. 179. l 21. r is p. 181. l. 12. r. spake p. 183. l. 22. r. generality p. 189. l. 16. r. or p. 193. l. 15. r. words l. 25. thus p. 196. l. 20. r. ita p. 204. l. 12. r. commonly p. 205. l. 12. f. in the. r. to be p. 207. l. 34. r. unjust p. 209. l. 11. r. Areop p. 210. l 9. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 214. l. 31. r or p. 223. l 18. Creed made by p. 245. l 34. r. Lauraeus p. 252. l 9. r Haymo
to taxe all those of Socinianisme who denie or doubt of the received Authours of the Creed so this I may safely say that unawares they may make way for it as they doe also who decry or debilitate the Authority of the Church and Fathers I have endeavoured therefore in this following Treatise to vindicate as well the Authours as the Authority of the Apostles Creed as being the maine Basis of the Christian Religion to which all succeeding Creeds are in the nature of Paraphrases or Superstructures a worke I conceive too suitable unto the Disease of this Age and so most unhappily requisite an Age wherein the very Principles of Christianity are called in Question and Faith derided as the Portion of deluded Fooles and Idiots An Age wherein some have taken upon them to Correct the Old Creed and others to frame new Ones An Age wherein some accuse our Mother the Church of England for Beleeving too much as the Socinian with some other Sectaries and others for Beleeving too little as the Romane Catholick whose Church hath added to the Creed severall other Articles to be beleeved by all Christians as of necessity to Salvation a Catalogue whereof we may find in the Bull of PIUS 4th among the Acts of their late Tridentine Councill as also in the Romane Catechisme Wherefore I shall indeavour withall to cleare my much honoured Mother from this double crosse-imputation by asserting as well the sufficiency as the necessity of the Creed for Salvation This is the summe and end of my Thoughts which I never intended to make publick when I first composed these notes some yeares agoe for my Collegiate Catechisticall Lectures But when I since daily found many little or nothing to regard the Authority of the Creed and some of no meane note to write against both the Authority and the Authours I reviewed and enlarged them by farther Testimonies of Divines both Ancient and Moderne amongst whom finding an unexpected Harmony and Consent in this matter I undertook to examine the Reasons produced to the contrary which as I hope upon due triall will not be found so weighty and convincing as to overthrow so Old so Generall so Received a Tradition Now having proceeded thus farre and taken no small paines in the Search I presumed to expose them to a more publick view not knowing any who hath hitherto handled this Argument Polemically and in a set Discourse wherein if I have any way failed the Truth I hope will not suffer by my weake Defence but meet hereafter with an abler Patron But if I have so handled it that I can revoke any erroneous Christian fixe the wavering or confirme him that stands I shall have great Cause and good opportunity to rejoyce in contributing the least Mite to the profit of the Christian Church or the praise of Christ our common Saviour who is stiled by the Apostle The Author and finisher of our Faith Heb. 12. 2. To whose blessed Guidance and Protection I commit both thee and my selfe in these darke dangerous and unsetled Times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Symbolum D. Athanasii QVicunque vult salvus esse ante omnia opus est ut teneat Catholicam fidem quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit absque dubio in aeternum peribit Fides autem Catholica haec est ut unum Deum in Trinitate Trinitatem in unitate veneremur neque confundentes Personas neque substantiam separantes Alia est enim Persona Patris alia Filii alia Spiritus Sancti sed Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti una est Divinitas aequalis Gloria coaeterna majestas Qualis Pater talis Filius talis Spiritus Sanctus Increatus Pater increatus Filius increatus Spiritus Sanctus Immensus Pater immensus Filius immensus Spiritus Sanctus Aeternus Pater aeternus Filius aeternus Spiritus Sanctus Et tamen non tres Aeterni sed unus Aeternus sicut non tres Increati nec tres Immensi sed unus Increatus unus Immensus Similiter Omnipotens Pater omnipotens Filius omnipotens Spiritus Sanctus tamen non tres Omnipotentes sed unus Omnipotens Ita Deus Pater Deus Filius Deus Spiritus Sanctus tamen non tres Dii sed unus est Deus Ita Dominus Pater Dominus Filius Dominus Spiritus Sanctus tamen non tres Domini sed unus est Dominus Quia sunt sigillatim unamquamque Personam Deum Dominum confiteri Christiana veritate compellimur Ita tres Deos aut Dominos dicere Catholicâ Religione prohibemur Pater a nullo est factus nec creatus nec genitus est Filius à Patre solo est non factus nec creatus sed genitus Spiritus Sanctus à Patre Filioque non factus nec creatus nec genitus est sed procedens Unus ergò Pater non tres Patres unus Filius non tres Filii unus Spiritus Sanctus non tres Spiritus Sancti Et in hac Trinitate nihil prius aut posterius nihil majus aut minus sed totae tres Personae coaeternae sibi sunt coaequales ita ut per omnia sicut jam dictum est unitas in Trinitate Trinitas in unitate veneranda sit Qui vult ergò salvus esse ita De Trinitate sentiat Sed necessarium est ad aeternam Salutem ut Incarnationem quoque Domini nostri Jesu Christi fideliter credat Est ergò fides recta ut credamus confiteamur quia Dominus noster Jesus Christus Dei filius Deus Homo est Deus est ex substantiâ Patris ante Secula genitus Homo est ex substantiâ matris in Seculo natus Perfectus Deus Perfectus Homo ex animâ Rationali humanâ Carne subsistens aequalis Patri secundùm Divinitatem minor Patre secundùm Humanitatem qui licet Deus sit Homo non duo tamen sed unus est Christus unus autem non conversione Divinitatis in Carnem sed assumptione Humanitatis in Deum unus omninò non confusione substantiae sed unitate Personae nam sicut anima Rationalis Caro unus est Homo ita Deus Homo unus est Christus Qui passus est pro Salute nostrâ descendit ad Inferos tertiâ die resurrexit à mortuis ascendit in Coelos sedet ad dextram Dei Patris Omnipotentis Inde venturus est judicare vivos mortuos ad cujus adventum omnes Homines resurgent cum corporibus reddituri sunt de factis propriis rationem qui bona egerunt ibunt in vitam aeternam qui verò mala in ignem aeternum Haec est fides Catholica quam nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque crediderit salvus esse non poterit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of the Authours and Authority of the APOSTLES CREED CAP. I. The Dogmaticall part
of Theology most necessary to be established and in that most especially the Creed as the Foundation of the rest and this for three Reasons A double abuse of the Creed which occasioned this Treatise together with the abuse of Catechismes The five Heads of the ensuing Treatise The Creed containes all and only Fundamentals The Trinity and Incarnation of the Sonne of God cleared out of it AMongst the severall parts of Divinity which brancheth it selfe forth so largly and variously the Positive or Dogmaticall is Best and most necessary As for Controversies it had been happy for the Church if shee had never been exercised with any they arose as accidentally as unfortunately for Ignorance or Malice hath been the Mother of them All Ignorance when men could not Malice when they would not see and acknowledge the Truth Truth it selfe is still but one which requires establishing rather then questioning for whilst we call all things into Dispute even the maine Grounds of our Religion some begin to doubt others deny Now amongst the Dogmaticks in Divinity which are reducible to these foure Heads the Principles of the Christian Catechisme viz. The Creed the Commandements the Lords Prayer and the Sacraments I have thought good to pitch upon the first named the Creed as the most necessary and Fundamentall Part of Christianity and so most requisite to be premised unto the other three for without a right Faith whereof the Creed is the Rule and Ground we can neither Pray nor Obey nor use the the Sacraments as we ought this it is which directs our Prayers which quickens our Practice and disposeth us aright for all Sacred Mysteries But this necessity is more pressing in these distracted Times and that for these following Reasons 1. Some we have and those who would be thought the most Orthodoxe Reformers who dare cavill at the Authority of the Creed and question the letter of it yea not only question but dash out and abolish the Article of Christ's Descent into Hell either in words or in the ancient and received Sense though generally attested by the Verdict of Antiquity and guarded by the third Article of our Church on purpose inserted as we may in all likelyhood suppose for setling the minds of her Children in this particular because it began to be controverted or at least perverted in the exposition thereof by some Divines in those Dayes 2. Others we have of a farre higher straine who overthrow the very Foundations of Religion especially in the Articles of the Sacred Trinity and the Incarnation of our Blessed Saviour the eternall Sonne or word of God made flesh by which he became 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both which are asserted in the Creed as will appeare by the following Discourse And that they might the more boldly vent their desperate Tenents have slighted the authority of the Creed as an humane Invention or Compilemēt as falsly bearing the Apostles name in the Front so the followers of Servetus Valentinus Gentilis Socinus and others The Framers of which Sects were not ashamed to divulge their project to the world as well by the Pencill as the Pen. They drew a Picture wherein the Church of Rome was described under the forme of a great Edifice on the Roofe whereof sate Luther and his Assistants throwing away the Tiles the Roofe being thus bared Zwinglius Calvin and others beate downe the Walls when this was done to perfect the worke come these Tritheits Photinians Arians with the rest of their Consorts armed with Spades and Pick-axes to digge up the Foundation Here be Rooters with a witnesse whose designe it is not to Prune the Tree by cutting of some superflous Branches but utterly extirpate it that they may plant a new Gospell of their owne such who instead of repairing fall to ruining and instead of of restoring the Decayes of Gods Church by a deliberate and well-ordered Reformation indeavour to erect a new Building in the Desolations of the old 3. The Age miserably labours with as many Religions almost as men every one strongly confidently pretending to the True and Excommunicating as Reprobates all those who are either contrarily or but diversly minded in a word who agree not with them in every Point though of the smallest Concernment Amongst which various Sects and Divisions it concernes us first to search out then to adhere unto some constant Rule whereby to regulate and establish our Faith Now this Rule is at Hand for the Creed was anciently stiled and I hope is still accounted by all good Christians Regula Fidei A short plaine certaine and Compleat Rule Short without Tediousnesse Plaine without Perplexednesse or Obscurity Certaine without Crookednesse or Errour and Compleat without Defect It comprehends the whole Body of our Beleefe omnes Articulos all the Joynts or Members of that Body no one wanting If all Christians would but hold to this as the Primitive Church did then all Heresies and Sects would soone vanish and the severall Members of the Church which now lie distracted and torne asunder like the Bones in Ezekiels vision the severed Parcels of a Skeleton rather then a Body would quickly come together Bone to his Bone the sinewes flesh and skinne would soone cover them and then the Breath of the Lord the Spirit of Christ who is the Head of this Body would Reenter into them and give them life There have been two Grand Causes as I conceive of these miserable Divisions both sprung from an abuse of the Creed what by adding to it what by altering of it 1. The Church of Rome contrary to S. Peters Rule from whom shee boasts to derive her Prerogative Lording it over Gods Heritage 1 Pet. 5. 3. And contrary to that of S. Paul her Joynt Founder taking upon her to have Dominion over our Faith 2 Cor. 14. hath added new Articles to these of the Apostles especially in her last Councill of Trent and these she hath enjoyned to be beleeved under an Anathema and made the so beleeving necessary to Salvation Which domineering carriage of hers hath bred many heart-burnings and stirs in the world that otherwise would never have arisen if she had kept her self entirely unto the old Rule which only was required to be profest by the Genuine Orthodoxe Sons of the Chuerh in the Primitive and Best Times for the Nicene Chalcedon other succeeding Creeds were only expositions of not Additions to the Apostles Creed as will be made appeare 2. Bold Sectaries under the specious Title of Reformers taking occasion and advantage from hence what from the Tyranny and what from the example have fil'd the world with Institutions and Catechismes and I know not what severall Tracts of their false hereticall Tenents arrogating the name of Truth and of the true Church unto themselves Some Tenents they have urged all to beleeve which are besides and not a few quite contrary to this Creed of the Apostles promised Salvation to their own Disciples but denounced damnation not
Luke in the Acts was not altogether so necessary it being enough that it was otherwise testified that lastly S. Luke probably omitted it because it was a thing so vulgarly knowen in the Christian Church the Apostles delivering it to be kept and used wheresoever they Preached Secondly though S. Luke make no expresse mention of this Creed of the Apostles yet S. Paul in diverse of his Epistles not obscurely alludes unto it under severall Formes Phrases of Speech as hath bin shewen at large before so also doth S. Jude v. 3. Thirdly S. Luke sets downe the Apostles Decree concerning the ceremoniall Law because it was the Result of a Generall Councell and that Councell occasiond by a great Dissention in the Church of Antioch which sent to the Apostles about the Resolution of this question Now matters of dissention are the chiefe Theme of Histories and that Councell with the Proceedings and Formes thereof is set downe on purpose as a patterne to all succeeding Ages As for the Creed or Canon of Faith there was no such occasion for the mentioning of it seeing no Cavill then arose about it nor any generall Councell concurred to the Composure of it but only a private meeting of the Apostles Ob. 2d. Not one of the Ancient Fathers who lived within the three first Centuries spake of any such thing in any of their writings and yet they should best know it whose Times were nearest unto the Apostles Then of so many Church-historians who studiously gathered together the confessions of Synods and Anti-Synods not one makes mention of this though a matter of the greatest consequence as being the Rule of Faith and mother of all following Confessions I Answer First That the Ancient Fathers who lived within the three first Centuries make mentiō of the Creed and the Composure thereof by the Apostles I appeale to the former Testimonies cited out of Irenaeus Tertutullian and Origen who all lived within two hundred yeers after our Saviours Assension Secondly Though we have not any Comments extant on the Creed written by the Fathers of the three first Centuries Origen excepted who largely expounds it in his Bookes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet it is more than probable that more of them expounded it paraphrastically First because Ruffinus who lived in the next Age in the Preface to his Exposition of the Creed tels us of those before him comperi saith he nonnullos illustrium Tractatorum aliqua de his pie breviter edidisse That some famous Authors had wrote piously and briefly on this Subject And a litle after Tentabimus quae omissa videntur a prioribus ad implere That he would endevour to supply what had been omitted by former Writers Secondly because it was the custome of the Ancient Bishops to expound the Creed unto Catechumeni when they came to Baptisme at those two solemne times of the year Easter Pentecost as appears by those Homilies or Catecheticall Sermons now extant of Cyril Chrysostome Austin Chrysollogus and others many more doubtles there were framed by former Bishops which either were never committed to paper or being then writen are now lost 3ly As to the silence of Ecclesiastical Historians touching this subject a little observation will informe us that nouell strange singular Passages are the usuall Arguments of their Pens not things Publick knowne and received such as the Creed is was common then in every Novices mouth So the Romane Historians set not downe their lawes customes court-proceedings as things vulgarly known and of daily practice amongst them the omission whereof rendring their Histories obscure to strangers they are set downe distinctly by Dionysius Halycarnasseus 'T is sufficient that severall Fathers in most Ages occasionally make mention of it when they had to deale with Hereticks who denied or perverted it But that Ancient Church-Historians mention the severall Confessions of Faith which were framed in severall Synods and Anti-Synods as Socrates and others in the businesse of the Arian faction hath this double Reason That they were New and contrary to each other whereas the Apostles Creed was an Old known Tradition and received verbo-tenùs by the Arians as well as the Catholicks whence it was that to unmaske their false Glosses the Catholicks were faine to adde by way of explication unto the second Article of the Creed the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so to cleare the true meaning thereof and distinguish themselves from the corrupters of the Faith Ob. 3d The very Language of the Creed convinceth it to be yonger than the Age of the Apostles for the word Catholick was not knowen in their Time as witnesseth Pacianus in his Epistle to Sympronianus It is likly it was added in after Ages to distinguish the Vniversall Church spred through out the whole world from the Canventicles of Hereticks and Schismaticks suth as the Novatians and Donastists for if it be said this word was added to distinguish the Christian Church from the Jewish Synogogues circumscribed within the limits of the land of Canaan 't is an improbable Reason because in the Apostles Age there were as many if not more Jewes out Palastine than in it as apeares by the History of the Acts. I Answer 1. Some one word might possibly be added in succeeding Times by way of explication to distinguish the True Church from the Conventicles of Hereticks and yet not prejudice the Antiquity of the whole So St Austin seemes to include it in the Epethete Holy for when he comes to this Article hee addes by way of explication to Sanctam Ecclesiam Vtique Catholicam In case of reply that if one word be added why not many and if the Church might doe so in one Age why not at other times I rejoyne That one word might be added then but by way of explication only not to supply a mutilous member or defective Article but the Forme being now setled for so many hundred years such liberty is taken away together with the cause of it the full and genuine sence of the Creed having been abundanty delivered to the Church in succeeding Exegeticall Creeds and expositions of the Fathers so that there is now no need of coyning new words or Phrases by way of explication But Secondly We have no need to make use of this supposall for the word Catholick might very well be placed in the Creed from the Original composure of it notwithstanding whatsoever is produced to the contrary from the testimony of Pacianus for this Pacianus Bishop of Barcelona and contemporary to S. Jerome in his first Epistle to Sympronianus the Novatian which is entituled De Catholico Nomine after he had dealt with him very gently in the begining superscribing his Epistle thus Pacianus Symproniano Fratri to winne him over the more effectually to the Communion of the Church in the Body of his Epistle he useth these words Sub Apostolis inquies nemo Catholicus vocabatur Esto sic fuerit vel illud indulge cum post Apostolos haereses
13. his words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is They the Fathers of that Synod added to that Divine Confession of Faith made at Nice The Glory of the most Holy Spirit as a Person of equall Honour and Glory with the Father and the Sonne Gregory of Nyssa supplying what was defective in that Sacred Creed Not that they were the first framers of those additionall particles for we find them extant before the celebration of this Councell in Epiphanius his Anchoratus and for the most part in Cyrils Catecheses but the first who by their Synodicall Authority confirmed the entire Forme having left out something of the Nicene Creed viz. those three fore mentioned Passages but added more and so commended yea prescribed the whole unto the Christian Church This Creed so enlarged was presently received into the Publick service of the Church for Platina in the life of Damasus tels us Mandavit ut in principio celebrationis quam missam vocant Confessio diceretur ut hodie fit that is Damasus who lived at the time of the Constantinopolitan Creed commanded that in the Begining of Common-service this Creed or Confession should be rehearsed as now we use it And Walafridus Strabo de Reb. Eccles cap. 22. informes us that this was done in imitation of the Greeke Church Illud Symbolum quod nos ad imitationem Graecorum intra missas adsumimus Et mox Ab ipsis ergo ad Romanos ille usus creditur pervenisse Yet for some yeares though it were received into the Greeke Liturgy it was not Constantly used till the Time of Timotheus Patriarch of Constantinople who came to that See in the yeare 511. So Theodorus Lector in the Second Booke of his Eclogae or Collectanea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. that is Timotheus at the desire of his Friends tooke order that the Creed of the 318 Fathers should be rehearsed at every Communion and this in reproofe of Macedonius who had not received it whereas before it was rehearsed only once in the yeare to wit on the Eve of the Passion at the Time when the Bishop Catechized By this it appeares that it was used Publickly in the Easterne Church though but once in the yeare whereas this Timotheus caused it to be constantly rehearsed at every Communion Not long after this we find it commanded to be used in the third Councell of Toledo a Nationall Councell of 78 Bishops assembled under K. Recaredus whereof Leander Bishop of Sevil was one This Councell was celebrated in the yeare 590 the second canon whereof runs thus Pro reverentia sanctissimae Fidei petitione Recaredi Regis constituit Synodus ut per omnes Ecclesias Hispaniae Galliciae secundum formam Orientalium Ecclesiarum Concillii Constantinopolitani hoc est 150 Episcoporum Symbolum fidei recitetur prius quam Dominica dicatur oratio voce clarâ— praedicetur quo fides vera sit manifesta testimonium habeat ad Christi corpus sanguinem praelibandum pectora populorum fide purificaâ—a accedant that is Out of a venerable regard of the most holy Faith and upon the motion of K. Recaredus the Synod hath ordeined that the Creed of the Constantinopolitan Councell that is of the 150 Bishops should be rehearsed after the use of the Eastern Churches throughout all the Churches of Spaine and Gallicia and that it be openly published before the saying of the Lords Prayer that so the true Faith may be manifested and witnessed and that the Hearts of the People being purifyed by Faith may come to the participation of Christs Body and Bloud From Spaine in likelihood it came over the Pyrenees into France part whereof namely Languedoc and the Country adjacent was then under the Dominion of the Gothish Kings of Spaine And as it was commanded to be rehearsed in the Spanish Churches on purpose to profligate the Arian heresy wherewith all their Princes had bin infected until K. Recaredus so was it more generally received in the Churches of France in the latter end of the 8 Century when Elipandus Archbishop of Toledo and Felix Bishop of Urgell had been condemned of Nestorianisme in two Synods namely at Ratisbone in the yeare 792. And at Frankfort where Charles the great was present in the yeare 794. So Walafridus Strabo de Rebus Eccles c. 22. Apud Gallos Germanos post dejectionem Felicis haeretici sub gloriosissimo Carolo Francorum Rege idem Symbolum latius crebrius in Missarum caepit officiis iterari that is The same Creed viz. the Nicene began to be used amongst the Galles and Germans after the deposition of the heretick Felix under Charles the most glorious King of the French more often and throughout more Churches in the Communion-service And the Synod of Frankfort to prevent the spreading of this Heresy tooke order that together with the Apostles Creed the Nicene also should be diligently delivered for the publick use of the Churches the thirty third Canon of which Synod set forth by Sermondus runs thus Vt fides Catholica sanctae Trinitatis id est Symbolum Constantinopolitanum oratio Dominica atque Symbolum fidei Apostolorum omnibus praedicetur ac tradatur That the Catholick Faith of the holy Trinity that is the Nicene or Constantinopolitan Creed and the Lords Prayer and the Apostles Creed be Preached and Delivered unto All. As for our Church of England it was probably brought hither by Augustine and his fellow Preachers who were sent to convert the Nation by Gregory the Great then Bishop of Rome CAP. II. When and by whom the Particle Filioque was added to the Nicene Creed is historically delivered and at large Severall other causes of the breach betweene the Churches of Greece and Rome IT will not be amisse for a close unto the Discourse on this Creed to shew as far as good Authors give us light the Time when and the Person by whom the Particle Filioque and from the Sonne was added to this Creed which declares the holy Ghost to Proceed from the Sonne as well as from the Father And this I thought fit to adde partly for that the matter is obscure and not generally knowne partly for the compleating of my discourse on this Creed and partly also for to shew the Originall and progresse of so chiefe a cause of Difference betweene the Churches of East and West which hath now lasted for some hundreds of years to which I shall adde some other causes of the Breach and so give a conclusion of the whole Treatise My collections on this Argument I have cheifely from the Learned Vossius who with his wonted industry and fidelity hath acquainted us with what he found recorded concerning it out of the best witnesses of Antiquity viz. Dissert 3a. De 3 bus Symb. The Churches of Spaine where the first who added this Particle to the Creed in a Synod held in Gallicia in the yeare 447 as it is cited by the R nd Armachanus The French Churches