Boultbee on Article VIII: Of the Three Creeds

The word rendered Creed is Si/mholum, the Greek deri- vation of which is obvious. Various suppositions rather than reasons have been given to explain the application of this particular name to the Creeds. The learned Bingham^ thus enumerates some of these : —

1. Symholum signifies a collection, so called because each Apostle contributed a clause to it.

2. The military sense of Symholum j a hadge of distinction^ is suggested.

3. Symholum signifies a collection or epitome of Christian doctrine.

4. The military oath of service, or

5. The password among the initiated into the ancient mysteries is alleged as a possible origin.

This diversity sufficiently shows that the origin of this

’ ’ Antiquities/ bk. z. ch. iii. 1. F2

68 ARTICLE Vm.

appellation is xinknown, nor is it of any real consequence. Bingham thinks the second suggestion the most probable.

Our English word Creed is an obvious corruption of the word Credo, the name usually given to it before the Refer- mation, from the word with which it begins in Latin.

Observations on Article VIIL

• We may here note the care with which the Reformers supplemented the Sixth Article with this. They had there laid down the doctrine that the Holy Scriptures are the sole rule of &ith. They now took the further precaution to state that the Creeds themselves were no exception to this, for that they derived their authority wholly from the Bible. The necessity for this statement may have arisen from the fact, already noted, that the Ten Articles of Henry VIH. made the Creeds together with the Scriptures the rule of faith. This observation is of considerable value in the face of assertions, often freely made, that it is the Church which gives authority to the Bible as well as the Creed. It may also be remarked that the Church of England here claims the right of exercising an independent judgment even on the two first General Councils which sanctioned the Nicene Creed. This is in strict accordance with Article XXL

History of the Creeds.

I. The Apostles* Creed,

It has often been asserted that this Creed came from the Apostles themselves, and some have added various apocryphal stories to this assertion. Bingham ^ shows how baseless this notion is. His arguments may be thus summed up : —

1. The New Testament is silent as to the existence of such A document.

2. The ecclesiastical writers of the first three centuries are similarly silent.

1 Bk. z. ch. iii. 4.

3. The ancient Creeds, although agreeing in the main, as setting forth the substance of the Christian faith, differ suffi- ciently in detail to show that there was no one acknowledged apostolical formula which none would have presumed to change.

4. The ancients call the Nicene and other Creeds aposto- lical as well as this. The epithet, therefore, referred to the subject-matter, not to the formula.

Unquestionably, however, a profession of feith was made in baptism from the very first (Acts viii. 37, and perhaps also 1 Tim. vi. 12 and 2 Tim. i. 13, 14), and it would naturally soon take a shape not very different from this Creed.

It is generally admitted, from a comparison of early Creeds, that the one which ultimately prevailed in the West, and which we call the Apostles’, is that which was used in the fifrh century in the Roman Church, though not in all other Italian Churches. The subsequent authority of Eome made it universal in the “West.

Bingham ^ says that it does not appear that the Roman or Apostles’ Creed was ever used in the Eastern Church. The latter section of the Church had several symbols re- sembling the Nicene, before that form was adopted.

II. The Nicene Creed,

It is assumed that the student has studied the history of the Councils of Nice and Constantinople, and the various phases of the Arian controversy.

Bingham ^ gives ancient Creeds used in different Churches of the East before the Council of Nice. They seem for the most part nearer to the elaboration of the Nicene than the sim- plicity of the Roman Creed.

The basis of the Nicene Creed is said to have been pre- sented to the Council by Eusebius, Bishop of Csesarea.’ The Council modified this by inserting some expressions more distinctly anti- Arian.

The Creed so sanctioned terminated with the words *I believe in the Holy Ghost.’

» Bk. X. ch. iv. 17. ’ Bk. x. ch. iv. 1-11.

[…] Eccl. Hist.* * Council of Nice.*

70 ARTICLE Vni.

The clauses which now follow those words are to be found in Epiphanius about a.d. 373, and had been probably used for some time in some Churches. They were, however, adopted by the Council of Constantinople, a.d. 381 ; for which reason this Creed is sometimes called the Constantinopolitan Creed.

We must refer to ecclesiastical history for the introduction of the &mous words filioque by the Western Church, and the bitter controversies which followed between the Greek and Eoman Churches. Some reference has been made to this imder Article V. (p. 40).

The practice of reciting the Creed in divine service dates from the middle of the fifth century in the Greek Church, and still later in the Latin Church. The early use of Creeds was for the instruction of Catechumens, and as a profession of faith in baptism, but not as a part of the ordinary service of the Church.

m. The AthancLsian Creed.

This Creed probably received its name because it sets forth so fuUy the Athanasian doctrine of the Holy Trinity. In the middle ages, and imtil the seventeenth century, it was almost universally believed to be the work of Athanasius himself. The progress of historical criticism showed this view to be imtenable. Gerard Vossius — 1642 — in his book * De tribus Symbolis,’ opened the controversy as to the origin of this Creed. Many learned critical treatises have since been written upon it. A compendious account of the criticism will be found in Bingham’s * Antiquities.’ ^ But Waterland’s learned * History of the Athanasian Creed ’ is the standard work on the subject, and some of his principal conclusions are sub- joined : —

1. Setting aside quotations from spurious works, the most ancient testimony to the reception of the Athanasian Creed is stated to be a decree of the Council of Autun, about a.d. 670.

2. The most ancient comment on this Creed is ascribed to Venantius Fortunatus, Bishop of Poitiers, about a.d. 670.

Bk. X. ch. iv. 18.

S, The earliest Latin MSS. of this Creed are ascribed to the seventh century. The Greek MSS. are much later, few, and disagreeing with each other.

4. This Creed was received in the Gallican Church in the seventh, or perhaps the sixth, century, and in the Spanish Church about the same time. Charlemagne held it in high esteem, and in his days its use extended into Germany, Italy, and England. It was probably received by the Roman Church early in the tenth century. Waterland thinks it has been only partially received by the Oriental Churches.

5. A careftil comparison of the controversial modes of ex- pression devised to meet the several heresies on the doctrine of the Holy Trinity in the fifth and sixth centuries leads to the conclusion that the Creed was composed after the Arian and Apollinarian heresies, and before the condemnation of the Nestorian and Monophysite opinions. It is also thought to have derived expressions from Augustine *De Trinitate.’ From these data, the years a.d 420-430 are assigned as including the probable date of its composition.

6. All the earliest notices of the Creed point to Gaul as the country in which it was written and obtained currency.

7. Out of the Gallic writers in that age, Hilary of Aries is selected as the most probable author of this Creed. What is known of his style, and his study of the works of Augustine, harmonises with this supposition. It is also affirmed by the writer of his life that he composed an admirable exposition of the Creed, ^ which probably refers to this very document. For it was rarely called in ancient times Symholum (as not ema- nating from a Council), but rather Expositio CatkoliccB Fidei, or some similar descriptive title. Upon the whole, Waterland concludes that this Creed was probably written in Gaul by Hilary, Bishop of Aries, about a.d. 430.

The controversy now pending questions the dates of Water- land’s chief authorities, and wishes to reduce the document to the age of Charlemagne. It also raises questions as to the mode of stating the equality of the Persons, and the accuracy of the English translation.

’ Symboli Expositio.’

->

f.

I*

Part m.

9. OF ORIGINAL OR BIRTH SIN.

10. OF FREE WILL.