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
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
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
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
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
substance with the Creed for so all Creeds and Confessions of Faith if true might be called the Apostles Creed nay the Scripture of the New Testament contains nothing else in Substance the Apostles Creed is that only which is delivered in this Forme and in these wordes which distinguish it from all other Creeds If any now among us who receive it as framed by the Apostles should even for explication or under any other pretence offer to alter the least word or tittle we should count it and that justly high Presumption and Sacriledge and should not esteem it so altered though containing nothing but Truth to be the Apostles Creed Answ The fore-cited places of Scripture evince thus much that a Forme containing the Heads of Religion was delivered not after but before the New Testament was written for else the New Testament could not have born witnesse of it Now the Church saith the Apostles Creed is that Forme for she hath delivered us none other nor entitled any other to the Apostles name in any age past therefore let the Objectours either produce another or subscribe to the Churches Testimony The like Argument may be urged touching any Book of Scripture As for Instance Antiquity tels us that S. Paul wrote an Epistle to the Romans the Church tels us that the Epistle we now have so entitleed is that Epistle and none other therefore if any man will doubt of or deny it let him ether shew another Epistle which S. Paul wrote to the Romans or accept this upon the Church's word As for what the Expositours say on the fore-alleaged Places of Scripture hath been already shewen Those Principles mentioned Heb. 6. 1 2. are some of them Practicall Heads of Christianity which were taught the Catechumeni together with the Creed and because Practicall Points not included in it the Creed being composed for a Summary of pure Doctrinals yet they all refer to the Tenth Article of the Creed namely to Remission of sinnes Repentance as the Antecedent or preparative Baptisme as the outward means and Imposition of Hands in Confirmation as the Complement or Perfection thereof As for other Summaries of Faith they cannot be either so truely or so properly called the Apostles Creed because they want the Attestation of the Church which never acknowledged them for such though otherwise perhaps in substance they agree with it as Paraphrases or parts thereof The New Testament containes many things besides the fundamentall Articles of Beleefe as smaller Doctrinall Points Evangelicall Rules of Practice matters of History Disputes Prophecies c. All extra Fidem besides the Creed the Forme and wordes whereof were delivered by the Apostles as well as the Heads and Substance of the Faith though some now doubt which they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in expresse wordes As for explicating or altering the Creed we may safely paraphrase or comment on it now though not alter the Text thereof in wordes or sense because it hath been delivered to us totidem verbis by a confest evident Tradition of above 1200 years as the Oppugners of its Authors are forced to yeeld Before it was thus setled there was more liberty of expression because diverse Churches somewhat varied the Forme by reason of succresent Heresis but now it hath triumphed over all and is long agoe setled in full possession of the Christian Faith Besides in all those former variations though the Forme was changed in some few Particulars yet the heads or Articles of Beleefe continued the same It was not therefore sufficient for any confession of Faith to gaine the Title of the Apostles Creed in that it contained nothing but Truth CAP. IV. Testimonies concerning the Creed and the composure thereof by the Apostles taken out of the Greeke Fathers who beare witnesse for the Easterne Churches Some objections against these Authorities partly answered partly prevented YOU have seene what light the Holy Scripture gives us concerning this Creed of the Apostles but this Truth will be farther cleered and confirmed by the concordant Testimonies of the Fathers and most of those the most ancient for Time as living neerest the age of the Apostles and the most venerable for Authority who therefore may best be credited in this matter and well speake for the rest Now in reciting their Testimonies when I produce some of them who in their writings set downe the Creed or Rule of Faith not agreeing totidem verbis expressely in every word and tittle with that which the Church now receives for the Apostles I shall desire my Reader to take notice of these three things 1. First that diverse of the Fathers writing against the Heretickes of their Times mentiond only or chiefly those Articles which were then cald in question by those against whom they wrote whence it is that they doe not alwaies set the Creed downe whole and entire which by the way may well be one Reason why the Article of Christs descent into Hell was omitted in many latter Creeds because never question'd by any of the Hereticks of those dayes The same reason induced the Nicene Fathers to proceed no farther in their Creed than this Article in Spiritum Sanctum And I believe in the Holy Ghost although the old Creed was larger as will appeare more fully in what I shall produce hereafter namely because the Arian controversy required no more 2. Secondly That the Fathers maine care in setting down this Rule of faith was to keep themselves to the same Heads or Articles of the Creed giving themselves somtimes liberty to vary words phrases whence it is that though they alwayes set downe the Creed wheresoever they mention it as the only necessary unchangeable Rule of faith the immoveable Basis of Christianity the distinctive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or assured marke of a true orthodoxe Christian contradistinguishing him to Pagans Jewes and Hereticks yet somtimes as learned Discoursers they enlarge the parts of the Creed by way of Paraphrase otherwhiles as short Comprisers thereof they contract the sum of it into fewer words according as they saw cause or had occasion offered So Tertullian though he lay downe this for a ground that Regula fidei una omninò est sola immobilis irreformabilis The Rule of faith is only one soley immoveable and umchangeable De Virg. vel chap. 1. Yet whereas he thrise rehearseth it in three severall Tracts he never useth the same words exactly but varyeth his expression now extending now contracting it at pleasure Besides there is an other reason why some of the Creeds end with the Article of the Holy Ghost viz because the four following Articles are virtually included in it which appeares by S. Chrysostomes first Homily on the Creed as shall be shewen by and by As for us of this Age we are not unjustly abridged the like liberty in varying of words or phrases First because these are suspected times wherein the very Grounds of Faith are by many very doubtfully held and by
Emes tels us Hom. 1. in Symb. which appellation agrees to those who lived in latter Times So Canones Apostolorum are called by the Apostles Names though not compiled by them but by Clemens as the Title of those Canons witneseth Yea both Greeke and Latine Fathers have communicated the name Apostle to others to any Bishop the Church of Rome keepe the old stile still The Apostolick See The Apostolick Bulles Our Saxon Predecessours gave the Bishop of Rome the Title of Apostle and Apostolicall Pope Bed hist lib. 2. c. 2 11. Austin the Monke is called Anglorum Apostolus Philip the Deacon is called an Apostle by Tertullian and Epaphroditus by St Paul Phil. 2. 25. So many others besides the Twelve whom St Chrysostome by way of Distinction calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostles by way of Eminency were called Apostles who might give name to the Creed as well as the Twelve therefore it is no concluding or necessary Argument It is called the Apostle Creeds Ergo it was made by the Twelve Then for the Title Symbolum that doth not signify such a Collation or Feast in Common but rhe word Symbola and therefore cannot imply or allude to any such composing of the Creed by the joynt concurrence of the Apostles Besides Cajetan ad 2am 2ae qu. 1. art 8. Tels us that Aquinas thinking fit to number the Articles ex parte rei creditae with relation to the matter not the makers of the Creed for this cause passed by that famous distribution of them according to the number of the Apostles because it is accidental to the Articles of Faith whether they be gathered by many or by one as that of Athanasius Answ Good Authors indeed assigne that for the reason and etymology of the Apostolick Symbole that it was an Apostolicall Collation or Collection of the Fundamentall Points of Beliefe by the twelve Apostoles yet not as the principall argument but by way of Appendix and Congruity unto the forementioned Tradition But this distinction saith the objectour or Collation of severall Articles might be made by Apostolick Men and their Disciples out of the holy Scripture and from thence obtaine the name of the Apostolick Symbole But it might be so and it was so are two things If it might be so it might be otherwise sure this private groundles conjecture may well give place to the constant assertion of so many Ancient and learned Authors who affirme the Apostles to have been the Composers of the Creed and give that for the reason of the name which it beares As for the Testimony of Eusebius Hom. 1. in Symb. who is there produced to say that the Creed was written not by the Apostles but by the Fathers of the Churches he hath no such exclusive words as non ab Apostolis quidem but saith that the Fathers of the Churches whom a litle after he calls Magistri the Masters of the sayd Churches Composed the Creed Now who be these but the Apostles exprest by way of Periphrasis for they and they only may properly be called the Fathers or Masters not of this or that Church in particular but of all the Churches in the World their Comission Being generall Goe and Teach all Nations Math. 29. 19. Whereas others were limited to this or that Church as the Apostles pleased to dispose of them and were the Sonnes or Disciples of the Apostles as St Paul termes Timothy and Titus in his Epistles which he wrote unto them 1 Tim. 1. 2. Tit. 1. 4. Hence also it is that St Paul tels his Corinthians 1 Cor. 4. 15. Though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ yet have ye not many Fathers for in Christ Jesus I have Begotten you through the Gospell And St James in his Epistle to the dispersed Jewes secretly taxing the proud-conceited Rabbins who affected the highest seats in the Synagogues the office of teaching their Brethren My Brethren saith he Be not many Masters Jam. 3. 1. This conjecture therefore deserves as litle faith as it hath foundation that is none at all for the Fathers constantly say it was called The Apostles Creed because Framed by and derived to the Christian Church from the Apostles of Christ and this may justly sway us in this Case for the Title prefixt doth not only beare this construction but more directly points out and inclines us to this meaning Titles being therefore given that they may designe the Authors or Composers of that worke unto which they are prefixt and the Fathers living in the first Ages should best know the Tradition the Title then of the Apostles Creed is not nakedly produced as a convincing Argument but as backt and seconded with the Attestation of Antiquity As for the contrary Instance of the Canons of the Apostles although they beare the name of Clemens in the Inscription who first gatherd them into one Body yet they may well challenge the Apostles for the Authors who first instituted and put them in Practise Then as to the promiscuous use of the name Apostle and Apostolick and the applying of them to the Ancient Bishops it will not hurt at all or prejudice the Title of the Creed Because the Fathers entitle it to the Apostles so cal'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of Eminency some of them expresly naming the Twelve as Ambrose Ruffine and Augustine others decyphering them by such circumstances as can agree to none other than The Apostles who left the Srciptures to us so Irenaeus Such Apostles who received this Rule from Christ their Master at the very begining of the Gospell and before the rise of any Heresy so Tertullian Such who left us the Faith per successionis Ordinem by a continued line of Episcopall successours so Origen And all the rest name the Apostles indefinitly not limited to a particular See charge or place by any determining circomstance now it is a knowne Rule in Logick concerning ambiguons Termes Analogum per se positum stat pro famosiori Analogato Neither indeed do the instances alleadged shew that the Name was commonly given to every Bishop at large but either to some Episcopall See which the Apostles had personally founded as to that of Rome founded by Peter and Paul or to some speciall Person who planted a New Church or converted a whole Nation to Christianity which is a worke properly Apostolicall as to Epaphroditus of Collosse and Augustin of our Saxon nation in his sense did our Saxō Kings probably give the Title of Apostolick to the Bishop of Rome as well as for the former reason because Gregory the Great sent over Augustine hither with certaine coadjutors to convert our Ancestours from Paganisme The like may be said in proportion of Philip the Deacon who was sent by the holy Ghost with a speciall Commission to convert the Eunuch of Queene Candace and by his meanes the whole Nation of Ethiopia as Church-story tels us But to the criticall quarrell against the word Symbolum that not it but Symbola
whom the objectour cites I shall returne a more particular Answer First Cyril indeed in that place tels us that the mysteries of the Faith ought not to be delivered unto the Catechumeni simply nakedly but as clothed with scripture and that they should not simply believe him unlesse he brought proofes from thence for what he delivered because the safety of our Faith saith he depends not on the pleasingnes of Rhetorick but on the demonstration of Gods Word written The reason whereof he assignes in the begining of the same Homily 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Disciples of the Hereticks by their elegancy of speech and fair soothing tongues under the name of Christians deceive the hearts of the simple they hide the poysoōusdartes of their ungodly Doctrines with sugred expressions of all whom joyntly our Lord saith beware least any man deceive you then he goes on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this cause the doctrine of Faith is delivered with expositions thereon So that he would not have the Creed or himselfe believed without Scripture not that the Creed but the Times required such proofe for the Heretickes of those Dayes partly framed new Creeds of their own partly added to altered and perverted the old withall indeavouring to make their doctrine good by seeming probabillities of Reason and flourishes of Rhetorick It was necessary therefore in this case to discover these false Creeds and Interpretations by bringing all unto the Text of Scripture Secondly The other Father Paschasius in the begining of his Booke De Spiritu Sancto written against Macedonius taxeth a false reading of the Creed crept into it through the ignorance of some Transcribers who wrote I believe in the holy Church for I believe the holy Church by this error enervated an Argument usually alleadged by the Fathers for the Deity of the holy Ghost against Macedonius and his Followers Paschasius therefore proves by certeine Places of Scripture that they are commanded to believe in God alone but never in man wherefore seeing the Church consists of a company of men that reading of the Creed must consequently be false which enjoynes us to believe in the Church But what of all this He appealed not in this from the Creed unto Scripture but by Scripture corrects a false reading of the Creed as the Fathers in their polemicall writings against Hereticks frequently correct their corrupt quotations of some places of Scripture by other undoubted places Ob. 8th The Reason assigned why the Apostles composed this Creed discovers the vanity of the Tradition what was that That it might be forsooth to the Apostles a Canon or Rule according to which they should square and conforme their Preaching what to the Apostles to whom Christ promised his Blessed Spirit that should lead them into all Truth Certeinly they needed it not for their owne sakes amongst whom there was no ground of difference nor doubt of the Principles of Christianity And whereas others more probably say it was framed for the Churches sake that shee might have a short plaine yet full confession of Faith as a Formula of Beliefe to be publickly recited at the Time of Baptisme neither will this hold for in the Apostles Age the Confession of Faith was plaine and simple when they came to be Baptized namely in Jesus Christ or in the Father Son and holy Ghost as appeares by the History of the Acts so that the Church had then no need of such a Formula It began not to be required till diverse Heresies brake into the Church Answ First It is readily confest that the Apostles needed no Rule of Faith whereby to square their Preaching as if otherwise they should have erred yet they might well agree one a Canon or Rule of Fundamentals wherewith they thought fit to acquaint all Christians as with Points necessary to Salvation whereas otherwise they might have Preached more at large and intermixt matters of lesser Consequence As for the Authors who bring the Reason alleaged in the objection they lay it downe not in these Termes least the Apostles being seperated each from other ipsi inter se in varias scinderentur partes much lesse thus ne subinde alii abaliis in doctrinâ abirent as is odiously alleaged but Ruffinus renders the reasō thus Ne diversum aliquid his qui ad fidem Christi invitabantur exponerent S. Austin in like words Ne diversum vel dissonum praedicarent his qui ad fidē Christi invitabantur Now diversum and abversum dissonum and absonum are two things there was no feare that the Apostles by being severed each from other should Preach ought contrary to the Truth or to one Another if they had not before agreed uppon a Forme yet they might have Preached somewhat diverse from the Fundamentalls of Christianity namely other Points of inferiour concernment or at least the same in other wordes if they had not agreed on this Rule at their setting forth whence their Auditours might have taken occasion to suspect and argue them of falsehood not believing they were all guided by the same Spirit or to part themselves into factions as it fell out in the Church of Corinth about Paul and Apollos although they taught the same Gospell And what stirres arose in the Church about a Ceremony viz. the time of observing Easter derived frō a different tradition of S. Iohn to the Churches of Asia frō the rest of the Christian world though they all agreed in the main the keeping of the Feast Eusebius others will sufficienly informe us But to come closer to our Subject A notable instance in the very same kind namely in matter of of Doctrin such as the Creed is we find in the Greek and Latine Church about the middle of the fourth Century touching the Grand mystery of the Trinity which yet upon due examination proved only a difference of the tongue language The Controversie is thus set down by Greg. Naz Orat. 21. written in praise of the Great Athanasius Num. 46. 47. The Orientals saith he held one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Essence and three Hypostases or or subsistences The Latines by Reason of the barrennesse of their Tongue and the narrownesse of expression could not distinguish Hypostasis from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Subsistence from Essence therefore insteed of Hypostasis brought in the new-coind word Persona Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signify the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the proper distinctive Relations of the Three as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signified the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Nature what was the effect of this saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The effect deserved laughter or rather Lamentation this small difference of wordes seemed a diversity of Beliefe for the Orientals suspected the Westrne Church of Sabilianisme because they would not acknowledge three Hypostases but caled them by the name of three Persons And the Western Church suspected the Orientals of Arianisme for holding three Hypostases
word or title Gennadius alluding in his rehearsall of the Athanasian Creed calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Confessor as we have already shewed Lastly Nicetas Metropolitan of Heraclea in his notes on this Oration understands it of this 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 HAving produced these Testimonies in vindication of the Author and Authority of this Creed I shall in the next place for the farther Illustration of this Argument examine in briefe these three Particulars First When Where and to whom this Creed was written To whom viz. To P. Iulius Liberius or the Emperour Iovianus Where At Rome Triers or Alexandria When In the yeare 340 before or after Secondly The Ground or Cause whereupon it was written Thirdly The Language wherein it was Written First As to the Time Place and Person to whom Pelargus will have it wrote in a Synod at Alexandria and sent to the Emperour of the East And others say it was wrote in a Well at Triers as the Inscription of that Well testifyes so Possevine in his Apparatus Genebrard also tels us that in an Ancient Manuscript in the Library of the German Monkes at Paris he found an imperfect Copy of the Synods taken forth by a namelesse Author which testifyed the same in these wordes Fertur Athanasius Patriarcha Symbolum praedictum edidisse apud Treverim in quodaÌ„ puteo latitans propter gravissimam persecutionem Arianorum praecipue Constantii Imperatoris Ariani qui eum ubique perquiri faciebat ad mortem quia nolebat haeresi Arianae consentire Nauclerus reports the same in his Chronology Seculo 12 mo But the more rceeived opinion is that Athanasius gave in this his Creed in writing unto Julius BP of Rome in in a Synod of 50 Western Bishops there Assembled in his Cause So Baronius ad An. 340. Athanasius Romam citatus quantumlibet ipsius Fides Catholica omnibus innotuisset ut nulla penitus potuerit suboriri suspicio tamen Romanae Sedis communicationem haud habere licuisset alioruÌ„ EpiscoporuÌ„ qui ad Synodum convenissent nec plane audiendus esset qui reuâ— advenerat nesi edita Publicè Catholicae fidei Professione eademque ex more latino sermone coram Pontifice ei assidentibus recitata Athanasius saith he being cited to Rome although the Catholicknesse of his Faith were well knowen to all so that there was no suspition at all to the contrary yet he would not have obtained Communion with the See of Rome nor the other Bishops who came unto the Synod neither indeed was he to be heard being a person accused before he had made a Publick profession of the Catholick Faith and that according to custome in the Latine Tongue before the Bishop of Rome and his Assessours Of the same opinion is Binius who in the first Tome of the Councels sets downe for one the second Roman Councell held by Iulius and above 50 Bishops when Athanasius had now expected the coming of the Eusebians to Rome above eighteene monethes At the same time saith he Publicam Catholicae Fidei professionem quae Symbolum Athanasii appellatur latino sermone coram Pontifice eique assidentibus recitavit Hanc Pontifex ab ipso cognitam atque susceptam unà cum actis Synodi in amplissimo Romanae Ecclesiae Archivo collocari mandavit that is Athanasius then made a Publick Profession of the Catholick Faith which is called his Creed rehearsing it in the Latine Tongue before the Bishop of Rome and his Assessours This Creed so acknowledged and received the Bishop of Rome commanded to be put in the Archives of the Roman Church together with the Acts of the Synod Manuell Caleca in his forecited Booke against the Greeks agrees in Substance with Bâ—nius and Baronius though he seeme to place the writing of this Creed a yeare sooner and sayeth that it was sent to P. Iulius not delivered him in presence These are his words Gregorius Theologus in Athanasii laudibus ipsius meminit dicens Solus ille vel cum paucis admodum ausus est veritatem in Scriptis confiteri c. quam tunc temporis conscriptam ad Iulium Romanum Pontificem misit cum insimulareâ—ur non rectae esse fidei Now all these opinions may well agree according to Possevins Conjecture who in his Apparatus verbo Athanasius thinks it probable ut sanct Trinitatis acerrimus propugnator hymnum illum he meanes his Creed because sung hymne-wsie in the Church-service locis quibus potuit omnibus scripser it cantaverit disseminaverit So that he might write it at severall times in all the forementioned Places First At Triers as the Inscription of the Well there is said to witnesse when he was first banisht about the yeare 336. Secondly He might send it in writing to Iulius Bishop of Rome when the Eusebian faction sent Legates unto him with letters to accuse Athanasius Anno Domini 339. Thirdly He might give it in writing to the Synod at Rome of which Iulius was president to satisfy them all concerning his beliefe A. D. 340. Lastly He might send it from a Synod at Alexandria to the Emperour of the East either to Constantius in his Synod held A. D. 339. Or rather to Iovianus in his last Synod held about the yeare 364 together with the Synodicall Epistle before mentioned which Nazianzen seemes to imply in the forecited Oration where he opposeth Emperour to Emperour as well as Doctrine to Doctrine that is the Catholick Jovians to Constantius the Arian as well as the Orthodoxe Creed to the Hereticall Confessions Except we will say that this Creed was exhibited in the Councell of Sardica a famous City in Illyricum held in the yeare 347 and called by Constans the Emperour of the West who favoured Athanasius and by Constantius joyntly or to Valentinian the successour of Iovianus in whose time Athanasius lived seaven or eight years but for this wee have no Authors Testimony The same Creed was probably sent also to Liberius Bishop of Rome as we shall shew anon Secondly As to the Ground or Cause whererupon Athanasius Framed his Creed I answer that he wrote it to give an account of his Faith to vindicate himself from the recrimination of his Adversaries who accused him of Sabellianisme as he did them of Ariniasme Indeed who can with any likelyhood suppose but that Athanasius in his so many years persecutioÌ„ by the Arians set forth some where the Confession of his Faith to cleare himselfe and that the Orthodoxe might see for what cause they so pertinaciously vext him Now that this Creed is that Confession will appeare besides what hath been already alleaged by the Agreement thereof both in words sense with those more full large Treatises of his against the Arians whereof this seemes a Compendium and by the Constant Tradition of the Church which hath received this and
reason challenge a belief contrary to the verdict of so many grave Authors so much Ancienter than he especially in a matter of fact such as this is But I suppose Meletius in those words absolutely denies not that Athanasius was the Author of the Creed now entitled to him but that it is not to be fathered on him as 't is now read in the Westerne Church with the Appendix filioque added thereto by the Bishops of Rome but not Originally inserted as he conceives by Athanasius of which I have already spoken Ob. 8. Nazianzens Testimony concerning Athanasius his Creed or Confession of Faith is to be understood of the latter end of that Synodicall Epistle which he sent to the Emperour Jovianus wherein after he had set downe the Nicene Creed he addes these wordes Nonnulli hanc Fidem a Patribus in Concilio Niceno confirmatam antiquare non sunt veriti alii vero simulant assentiri illi reipsâ autem pernegant dum hanc vocem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perversè interpretantur iisdemque in Spiritum Sanctum loquuntur blasphemè asserendo eum creatum esse factum per filium That is Some have not been afraid to abrogate this Faith Established in the Nicene Councell others there be who feigne to receive it but in truth reject it whilest they interpret the word Homâ—ousion in a perverse sense the same men speake also blaspheamously against the Holy Ghost affirming that he was created and made by the Sonne Then in the close they say Quinetiam neque Spiritum Sanctum a Patre Filio separârunt sed ei unà cum Patre Filio in unâ sanctae Trinitatis fide propterea quod una est in sancta Trinitate Divinitas gloriam tribuerunt That is Neither did they separate the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne but ascribed glory to him together with the Father and the Sonne in the same faith of the holy Trinity because there is but one Divinity in the holy Trinity Theod. hist lib. 4. cap. 3. Answ Whether or no this fragment this foot this Appendix of an Epistle deserve the Title of a Confession of Faith so venerably esteemed by the Churches of East and West of Libellus a Declaration of a Guift truly Royall and Magnificent with which Titles Nazianzen in that place honours Athanasius his Creed let the impartiall Reader judge Besides we may observe for our fuller satisfaction in this particular 1. That these words which the Objector calls Athanasius his Creed referre not to him and to the Bishops of his Patriarchate who wrote the said Epistle but to the Fathers of the Nicene Councell for they run in the third Person neque separarunt gloriam tribuerunt not in the first neque separavimus gloriam tribuimus Therefore they relate to those Fathers who made the Nicene Creed which is immediatly prefixt not to the Bishops who sent this Synodicall Epistle 2. That this Synodicall Epistle was sent in the name of all the Bishops of Egypt Thebais and Lybia whereas the Confession of Faith written by Athanasius was attested by him only or by very few besides So witnesseth Nazianzen in his forecited Oration Primus ille solus aut cum admodùm paucis veritatem palam apertisque verbis promulgare non dubitavit unam trium personarum Divinitatem essentiam scripto confessus quod multis illis Patribus circa Filium prius concessum fuerat idem ipse postea in asserendâ Spiritus Sancti Divinitate superno afflatu consecutus Atque Imperatori donum vere Regium magnificum offert c. That is He first of all and alone or accompanied with very few doubted not to publish the Truth openly and in expresse Termes professing in writing one Deity and Essence of three Persons and that which God had formerly granted to many Fathers viz. the Nicene concerning the Sonne Athanasius obtained the same afterwards by an inspiration from above to assert the Divinity of the Holy Ghost And he presents the Emperour with a Gift truly Royall and Magnificent c. Of what Creed or Confession of Faith can these Words be understood but of that which now bears the name of Athanasius wherein he so clearely and at large asserts the great mystery of the Trinity in Unity and in particular the Divinity of the Holy Ghost in these words The Holy Ghost also is God such as the Father is such is the Holy Ghost The Holy Ghost is of the Father and the Sonne neither made nor created nor begotten but Proceeding Whereas the Nicene Fathers had only vindicated the Divinity of the Sonne then called in question by Arius and his Adherents as Nazianzen heere tels us 3. Nazianzen informes us here of the Time when Athanasius wrote his Creed when very very few 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 durst openly professe the true faith which must needs be meant of the Times immediatly succeeding the Death of Constantine the Great or when he was first deposed by the Synod of Tyre and banished to Triers by the importune calumnies and violence of the Arian Party in the latter end of his Reigne for then there appeared but three Bishops in the cause with him who were in like manner faine to fly into the West as Sozomen witnesseth lib. 3. cap. 7. Whereas after this in the yeare 347. there was a Synod of Orthodox Bishops called together at Sardica a City of Illyricum who professed the Nicene Faith and when Athanasius sent the forenamed Epistle to the Emperour Jovianus his whole Patriarchate subscribed together with him to the Nicene Creed therein inclosed the Emperour being then a Catholick Wherefore it is most probable that Athanasius first wrote his Creed at Triers or when he fled to Iulius Bishop of Rome for succour which Creed he afterwards sent also with that Synodicall Epistle to the Emperour Iovianus by whom he was restored to his See thereby to confute his Adversaries who would have had the World believe that he was justly condemned as erroneous in the Faith The Epistle he sent in the name of the whole Synod The Creed in his own THE SECOND APPENDIX OF THE Nicene or 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 THIS Creed hath a double name from a double Councell whereof the one began and the other finisht it It was begun in the First generall Councell held at Nice in Bithynia in the yeare 325 thence called the Nicene Creed But it was recited approved and enlarged as now wee have it by the second generall Councell held at Constantinople in the yeare 381 thence called the Constantinopolitan Creed by many latter writers The Nicene Fathers being 318 in number all subscribed to it except five who adhered to Arius and would not acknowledge the Sonne to be of the same Essence or
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