President White Library, 
 
 CORNELL UNlVERSiTY. 
 
Cornell University Library 
 arV15189 
 
 A plea for time in dealing with the Atha 
 
 3 1924 031 305 885 
 olln,anx 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of tliis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924031305885 
 
A PlEA FOR TIME 
 
 IN DEALING "WITH THE 
 
 ATHANASIAN CEEED. 
 
 A LETTEB TO THE AECHBISHOP OP CANTBEBUBY 
 
 m ANTICIPATION OF THE MEETING AT LAMBETH, 
 
 ON DEC. 4, 1872, 
 
 WITH POSTSCEIPTS. 
 
 BT 
 
 C. A. SWAINSON, D.D. 
 
 CANON OF THE CATHEDBAL CHUEOH OJ CHICHESTEE, AND NOKBISIAH 
 PBOFESSOE IN THE DNIVEBSIXY OE CAMBBIDOE. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE: 
 
 DEIGHTON", BELL, AKD CO. 
 
 LONDON: BELL AND DALDY. 
 1873. 
 

 erambtiTige: 
 
 PUINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A, 
 AT THE UNIVEBSITY PKES3. 
 
POSTSCRIPTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 I. On the Colbertme Manuscript 3836, and the latter part 
 
 of the Creed 31 
 
 II. On the Vienna MS. 1261, &c., and the former part of 
 
 the Creed 39 
 
 III. On the Sarnm Manual and the commending clausea . 48 
 
 IV. On the Creed, as annotated in the Bodleian MS. 
 
 Junius 25 53 
 
 V. On the entire disuse of the true Kieene Creed. . . 58 
 
 VI. On the Utreeht Psalter 64 
 
 VII. On the time when the title Symbolum was given to the 
 
 Quicungue 77 
 
 VIII. On the charge that the Creed savours of heresy - . 79 , 
 
 VIII.* On the statement that the Creed is a document of uni- 
 versal authority 90 
 
 IX. On the choice of an Honorary Secretary by the Com- 
 mittee of Defence 94 
 
A LETTER, 
 
 Mt Lord Archbishop, 
 
 In your Grace's charge to the Clergy and 
 Churchwardens of the Diocese of Canterbury, as re- 
 ported in the Chiardian, I have noticed a reference to 
 the work on which the Professors of Divinitjr at 
 Oxford and Cambridge were requested to advise 
 the Committee of Bishops, who were in consulta- 
 tion this time last year on the subject of the Atha- 
 nasian Creed. And your Grace is reported as saying 
 that " if our friends in the University of Cambridge 
 " or elsewhere are enabled to throw any light on the 
 "original manuscripts, of course we are very grateful 
 "for their assistance. But (your Grace proceeds) still 
 "the plain fact of the question is, Is it desirable 
 " that this Creed with what are commonly called the 
 
 1 
 
"damnatory clauses should continue to be recited 
 " twelve times a year in the services of the Church of 
 "England?" 
 
 I venture to think that the two subjects will be 
 found to have an intimate connection with each other. 
 
 Before I begin, I would say that I have considered 
 it to be quite within the duty which I owe to the 
 Church of England in my position as Canon of the 
 Cathedral of Chichester to devote a very considerable 
 portion of the year, for many years past, to theological 
 research of such a character as I could not have under- 
 taken if I had been charged, in that capacity, with 
 any heavy duty of a simply Diocesan character :-^ 
 research which has required me to spend countless 
 hours in public libraries, and, during the last year, has 
 compelled me to travel much on the Continent. Some 
 people, I know, consider such work as unsuited to 
 a Cathedral Canon : for in their opinion he ought to 
 be in as constant residence in his Cathedral city as 
 a parochial clergyman is upon his cure. I hope I 
 may suggest that in any reform that may be intro- 
 duced affecting our Cathedrals, the literary needs of 
 the Church may not be overlooked. Time was when 
 the incomes of the Archbishops and some of the 
 Bishops were such that they could maintain in their 
 
suite men of research; time was when works of the 
 character of Walton's Polyglot could find patrons suffi- 
 cient to guarantee the cost of the printing. Those 
 incomes, as we all know, have been cut down ; and 
 some politicians consider that they are still too large. 
 But I trust that the time is not very near when our 
 Bishops will give general countenance to the notion 
 that the Church of England needs none save what 
 are called working clergy: when the wider office of 
 teacher is to be forgotten, as if it were merged in 
 that of pastor. Whilst I think with satisfaction on 
 the fact that it was a Canon of S. Paul's who defrayed 
 the expense of publishing the collection of Syriac 
 Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, made by our Cam- 
 bridge Ai'abic Professor, and so prevented it from 
 being appropriated by the German Oriental Society — 
 I cannot but express my regret that no public recog- 
 nition of any kind (so far as I am aware) has been 
 taken of the life-long labours of Dr Tregelles ; labours 
 which in other countries, and at other times in our 
 own country, would have been welcomed not only by 
 general recognition amongst competent men of their 
 great value — this has been unanimously given — but 
 with something more substantial from the Crown, or 
 the Government, or the Church. 
 
 1—2 
 
Passing however to the matter before me, I feel 
 almost challenged by your Grace's words to offer, 
 though in an imperfect form, the results of some of 
 my investigations. The publication of the evidence 
 on which these results are built must be deferred : 
 I hope early ia the year to present it and other matters 
 before the public. 
 
 The following facts then cannot be gainsaid. 
 
 1. The faith of the Church Catholic in regard to the 
 Incarnate Son of God, as it is enuntiated in our Second 
 Article and as it is laid down in the second part of the 
 Quicunque, was settled (I am speaking generally) at 
 the middle of the fifth century: i.e. about the year 
 451. Whilst in regard to the Trinity, the perfect 
 Deity of the Son of God and of the Holy Spirit having 
 been fixgd at the date of the Council of Constantinople, 
 the relations between the Three Persons were so deeply 
 thought out by S. Augustine, that the Dean of Canter- 
 bury was entirely justified when, in the Report of the 
 Ritual Commission, he stated that the Quicunque em- 
 bodied "that particular explanation of the doctrine of 
 " the Trinity in Unity which was gathered from Holy 
 " Scriptures chiefly by the logical mind " of that great 
 Father. Thus it may be taken as acknowledged that 
 the teaching of the Athanasian Creed on these two 
 
great subjects is, on tlie whole, as old as the date I 
 have given above. 
 
 But, although thus held in the Church, it is simply 
 a matter of fact that we must come down to a date 
 much later than the year 500 before we can say that 
 the language of Augustine was adopted generally hy 
 the Church. And we must come down to a later 
 period stiU before we find this language pushed and 
 urged and pressed with the earnestness which we find 
 in the Quicunque. 
 
 At all events this is undoubted : — the intensity of 
 the language used to enforce the changing forms of 
 words, which received from time to time the title " the 
 " Catholic faith," increased as years rolled on : and, as it 
 seems to me, the intensity increased in proportion to 
 the degree in which theologians felt themselves un- 
 willing or incompetent to investigate for themselves — 
 for such investigation always tends to make thinking 
 men considerate to the errors of others — and saved 
 themselves the trouble of seeking and thinking on 
 their own account, by putting forward the authority of 
 earlier seekers and thinkers. The progress of this 
 intensity may be noted by comparing the anathema 
 of the first four great Councils (when the anathema- 
 tizing of a layman was deemed to be a punishment 
 
commensurate with the deposition of a bishop or clerk — 
 that is, it was tantamount to excommunication) with that 
 of the fifth, which was supposed to affect the dead, 
 or with the terms used in the profession of faith of the 
 Bishops of Rome, which we find in the Liber Diumus 
 of the 8th century (Routh, Opmc. vol. II. p. 147). The 
 same progress may be noted in the canons or history 
 of the interesting succession of Spanish councils be- 
 tween the years 570 and 693 : in the last of which, 
 but not before, we find language approaching to that 
 of the last clause in our Quicunque. I will translate 
 it, as it may help us to understand what the final 
 clause of the Quicunque was meant to convey. After 
 concluding its version of the Faith with words relating 
 to our own resurrection and to the future judgment 
 and to the reign of the Church with its Lord, the 
 Council concludes : " And all who do not stand by it in 
 " every even the least degree, or have receded or shall 
 
 "recede from it or do not believe without the 
 
 " slightest shadow of doubt " what the four general and 
 other councils have decreed " shall be punished with the 
 " sentence of eternal damnation and in the end of the 
 "world shall burn with the devil and his angels in 
 "devouring flames." Thus we come to the year 693 
 before we find language like this recorded. And when 
 
it comes forward, it is in a somewhat remote corner of 
 Christendom. 
 
 Your Grace will see at once that I am shewing 
 that whilst the credenda of the Quicunque in regard 
 to the Trinity and the Incarnation were in their general 
 substance believed, at least privately, in the middle 
 of the fifth century, about two hundred and fifty years 
 elapsed before there is evidence that they were en- 
 forced anjrwhere in the terms with which we are now 
 familiar: two hundred and fifty years — ^years which 
 abound in information, and of the progress of thought 
 in which we have ample evidence in writers and coun- 
 cils of the period. 
 
 2. The next point to which I shall take the liberty 
 of calluig the attention of your Grace is the history 
 of the manuscript now generally known in England 
 as the Colbertine MS. (its number in the Paris Library 
 is 3836, not S816). I believe that Antelmi was the 
 first person who drew attention to the fragment of 
 the Quicunque which, in his opinion, was found in it. 
 The MS. attracted the attention of Montfaucon and 
 others in the I7th century; and in the third volume 
 of the Nouveaii Traits de Diplomatique of the Bene- 
 dictine Fathers, published in 1757, I have found 
 several notes regarding it. There is a summary of it 
 
8 
 
 in the work of Coustant, to which both Mr Ffoulkes 
 and Professor Stubbs have drawn attention ; but after 
 inspection, I consider that the best account of it is 
 contained in the great work of Professor Maassen of 
 Vienna, my introduction to which I owe to Mr Powell 
 of Trinity College, Glenalmond. 
 
 This manuscript contains a copy of one of the 
 many collections of canons and documents of historic 
 interest (Maassen calls it the Collection of Saint Blaise). 
 The editors of the Nouveau Traits were deeply interested 
 in it, and from internal evidence they concluded that 
 the writer had lived at Rome and that the collection 
 was of Italian formation. Professor Maassen however 
 questions the latter conclusion, because he has found 
 four other manuscripts which contain the same collec- 
 tion, and four out of the total number (five) are found 
 north of the Alps. One, the earliest of the series, is 
 of the sixth century ; the others are of the eighth and 
 ninth; the Paris copy, 3836, being, in the opinion 
 of every one who has examined it, of the early part 
 of the eighth; say about 730. In this Paris copy, 
 there are several marks to shew that the writer was 
 not a mere copyist. He made additions and notes 
 here and there to the MS. which he was copying : and 
 amongst them are the spurious decree on apocryphal 
 
9 
 
 works ascribed to Gelasius, and the interesting notice 
 to which, not for the first time, I would now draw 
 your Grace's attention. After concluding, in a fashion 
 which was not uncommon, the notes he had copied on 
 the council of Chalcedon, and adding the not uncommon 
 sentence Explicit sinodum mundanum id est universale 
 aput Galcedona, he, and he alone of the copyists, pro- 
 ceeds in another line, Haec invini Treveris in uno libra 
 scriptum sic incipiente. Domini nostri Jesu Christi et 
 reliqua. Domini nostri Jesu Christi fideliter credat. 
 And he proceeds as I print it in the postscript to this 
 letter. On this Professor Maassen, who (as I need 
 scarcely tell your Grace) has no interest in our pre- 
 sent English question, remarks that the writer was 
 a travelled man, " ein gereister Mann ; " and he was 
 a man who travelled with his eyes open — on the look- 
 out for documents which would illustrate the canons 
 that he was transcribing. Such a document he found 
 at Treves. He was sufficiently interested in it to copy 
 it out ; the transcribers of the other manuscripts not 
 knowing of it or taking no notice of it. — In an inter- 
 esting letter which appeared in the Guardian on 
 April 3, Professor Stubbs remarked that it seems clear 
 that the Athanasian Creed did not form part of 
 a clerk's education at the time when this MS. was 
 
10 
 
 copied, or the writer would not have spoken of his 
 discovery in the terms which he used. 
 
 At all events this fragment was discovered about 
 730 : and it was found at Treves. And the Benedictine 
 writers to whom I have referred suggest that to the fact 
 that this was found at Treves, — ^where it is known that 
 Athanasius spent some little time — inay probably be 
 traced the legend that Athanasius was its author. 
 I dare say that writers may be found in England who 
 will take up the suggestion : it is as reasonable as 
 Waterland's, that Hilary of Aries wrote the Quicunque 
 because he is said to have written " an admirable ex- 
 " position of the Apostles' Creed." 
 
 But leaving out of sight all thoughts of finding an 
 answer to the question. Who wrote this fragment ? we 
 must turn to the fragment itself, and your Grace will 
 at once perceive that, although there is some bad 
 spelling in it, there are none of those faults of gram- 
 mar which mark the composition of the travelled man 
 who discovered the document. " Haec inveni Treveris 
 " in uno libro scriptum." (I have others, taken from the 
 book of which this is a sample. "Habit codex iste 
 "sacri canonis quaternionis xiiii et folia quatuor. Et 
 "fiunt in summa folii cento sex.") But there is no- 
 thing like this in the extract : confitemus, minor patri, 
 
11 
 
 unitatem personae, are merely errors in the copying 
 and are not to be compared with the Saeo inveni 
 scri'ptiim. Thus, while 1 have no hesitation in accept- 
 ing the opinion of the paleographers that the MS. 
 must have been written in the century before Charle- 
 magne and Alcuin wrought their reformation in the 
 study of Latin, I am entirely disposed to believe that 
 the extract itself was, as it seemed to the copyist to 
 be, a fragment of far greater antiquity. There is no 
 reason to believe that, as was the case with other 
 documents, it was hidden on purpose to be redisco- 
 vered. In substance it agrees with the earlier declara- 
 tions of the faith : its commendatory clause breathes the 
 spirit of the sixth century rather than that of the eighth* 
 Now, my lord, if there were any other copy of the 
 Quicunque which could claim — without gainsaying — a, 
 date earlier than 750, I should of course hesitate to say 
 what I am about to say. But in the interests of his- 
 tory I must say that I entirely agree with the Dean of 
 Westminster in this — that the copy of which I am 
 treating is not a copy of what we call the Athanasian 
 Creed: it is another document. I have little doubt, 
 however, that the Dean will agree with me in this, that 
 the discovery of this fragment seriously affected the 
 subsequent formation of the " creed," probably (as the 
 
12 
 
 editors of the Nouveau TraiU seem to suggest) giving 
 the impulse to that formation as well as to the subse- 
 quent ascription of it to Athanasius. 
 
 3. I must here step on one side to say a few words 
 on the Utrecht psalter. From the time that Mr Brad- 
 shaw drew my attention to it, and we together identified 
 it as the long missing codex by which Ussher thought 
 he could upset the theory of his great friend Voss, it has 
 secured a great amount of my attention, and I think I 
 shall be able to prove from internal grounds alone that 
 it was written either in the ninth or tenth centuries. 
 I am well aware of the strong array of opinion that will 
 be brought against me — Ussher, Haenel, the editors of 
 the Utrecht catalogue, and the most distinguished 
 archivist who is understood to have furnished the 
 Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol with the statement 
 which his lordship put forward in Convocation on 
 July 2 : but I have on my side (if I may call it 
 mine) Professor Westwood, Sir Digby Wyatt and (I 
 may say), above all, the author of the only works on 
 Palaeography of later years that have fallen under 
 my notice. I mean the works of Professor Wat- 
 tenbach of Heidelberg. — Again I maintain that no 
 psalter of an earlier date than 850 has yet been ad- 
 duced whose contents in any way approximate to the 
 
13 
 
 contents of this Utrecht psalter, and I conceive that 
 this is, at least, as good an argument, as that which my 
 honoured friends on the other side will bring forward, 
 viz. that no book of a later date than 600 has yet been 
 adduced written throughout in the handwriting in 
 which the Utrecht psalter abounds. Into the details 
 of the argument I must not now enter : in justice to 
 my cause I simply vindicate myself from the charge 
 that in making the assertion I have done, I have shut 
 my eyes to the existence of this interesting document. 
 Again, on grounds on which I must not now enter, I 
 put on one side with equal calmness the date assigned, 
 without any authority, to the famous canon of the dio- 
 cesan synod of Autun. The date of the psalter which 
 Charlemagne is supposed (as I contend wrongfully) to 
 have given to Hadrian is of smaller moment. These 
 then being put on one side, we come to a date below 
 the year 790 before we have the earliest known copy of 
 the Quicunque as it is. And it is acknowledged by all 
 competent authorities that we have no reference to the 
 language of the Quicunque before that date. After 
 that date the references become numerous although 
 limited in regard to the language quoted. Indeed, I 
 think that I can prove that really and truly the Qui- 
 cunque grew — like many other documents — during the 
 
14 
 
 first sixty years of the ninth century, but I will not 
 rest my case on that I will concede for the moment 
 that the document to which the monks of Mount Olivet 
 referred in the case which they laid before Pope Leo III. 
 was the Quicunque as it stands — although it is some- 
 what hard to believe that the document to which they 
 referred already condemned in the terms with which 
 we are so familiar the Greeks who were worshipping 
 around them. And yet even so, I think I shall be able 
 to convince the unprejudiced that the framers of the 
 Quicunque combined two earlier documents which were 
 up to that time distinct, the one bearing on the Trinity 
 the other bearing on the Incarnation: that in their 
 action they modified these documents, adding more or 
 less to both of them, and above all they increased the 
 severity of at least the final commending clause. The 
 date of this could not be before the time of Charle- 
 magne — the character of the Latin seems to prove that. 
 Therefore, if it took place after the discovery of the 
 fragment at Treves, we cannot assign the transaction to 
 a date much before 800. That is to say, so far as this 
 creed is concerned, we come to a date nearly 350 years 
 after the reception of the Credenda contained in it, before 
 we find these Credenda pressed with the urgency to which 
 we object so strongly. 
 
15 
 
 The chief alteration was in the words : " This is the 
 "Catholic Faith which everyone who desires to attain 
 " eternal life ought to know entirely and to guard faith- 
 " fully;" this being the form discovered at Treves. 
 
 Thus, mjr lord, as bearing on the present contro- 
 versy I conceive that it is important that we can point 
 out the century in which this alteration took place. 
 The clause has been altered, and if so, we are at liberty 
 to alter it back, or adopt other words. The amount of 
 learning, piety and experience in the Church of Eng- 
 land in the present day is immeasurably superior to 
 the learning, piety and experience of the Church of 
 France about this year 800, That national Church, for 
 purpof.es which seemed to it to be dominant, felt itself 
 at liberty to modify phrases commending the faith 
 delivered to it : a fortiori may the Church of England 
 do so in the present day. The Church of France then 
 acted independently of the Church of Spain, in defiance 
 of the Church of Rome, and in opposition to the Church 
 of Greece. We are not acting without a precedent if 
 we claim a right to return to the earlier form, or even 
 adopt one of our own. The conception which is now 
 put forward, that no one Church can relax the terms of 
 any one of its formularies, without the consent of all 
 other Churches, did not prevail during what are called 
 
16 
 
 the best ages of Christendom. If we are to be tied to 
 the ritual of those early ages, let us at least enjoy their 
 freedom. If we enforce the faith of the first five cen- 
 turies, we are surely not bound to do so in the terms 
 used by a local church of the ninth. The Church at 
 large had no opportunity of consulting on those terms : 
 the Churches never came together to consider of the 
 matter. 
 
 I have mentioned that I consider that the Quicun- 
 que bears internal marks that it was compounded of 
 two distinct documents ; I consider that it grew in the 
 course of the century ending about the year 860. I 
 have not time to enter on the proof of this at present : 
 but I will print in my postscript three independent 
 versions of the first half of the creed. They are found 
 without any reference to questions on the Incarnation. 
 It will be noted that in each the clauses are absent 
 which the Bishop of S. David's, looking at the docu- 
 ment itself, declared were merely amplifications of its 
 earlier words. And these versions contain all the 
 passages which are quoted out of the Faith of Atha- 
 nasius in the early years of the ninth century. One of 
 them, taken from a manuscript at Vienna, has a pecu- 
 liar value. It has never been printed. And of it it can- 
 not be said, as it is said of Denebert and Hincmar, that 
 
17 . 
 
 merely so much of the creed is used as would serve the 
 purpose of the writer — ^your Grace will perceive that 
 here again the commendatory phrase at the end has 
 been altered. 
 
 4. Once more. I am urged to print again an extract 
 from the Sarum Manual — from the order for Visiting 
 of the Sick, which I met with some time ago in the 
 collection of Mr Maskell. The history of the document 
 is this: Archbishop Peckham in the year 1281 pub- 
 lished at Lambeth some Constitutions, amongst which 
 was one in which he attempted to guard against the 
 effects of the indolence and ignorance of the priests of 
 the day, by insisting that four times in the year, either 
 by himself or by deputy, each parish priest should 
 expound to his people, in the vulgar tongue, the four- 
 teen articles of the faith, the ten commandments of the 
 Decalogue, the two precepts of the Gospel, the seven 
 works of mercy, and so on. These fourteen articles of 
 the faith were deemed so important that they stand 
 out on the first pages of Lyndwood's Provinciale. They 
 are divided into two groups of seven; the first relating 
 to the Trinity and the operation of God, the otheu 
 seven to Christ's humanity. The two together form a 
 new series of credenda; new in the sense of a newly- 
 arranged order, new too in regard to some of their con- 
 
 2 
 
18 
 
 tents forming portions of the defined teaching of the 
 Church. They depart from each and every of the ear- 
 lier creeds; they depart from the Athanasian symbol 
 entirely. 
 
 If we now turn to the Sarum Manual for visiting 
 the sick, — we find these articles almost verbatim — I 
 notice only one difference of importance — used in this 
 Visitation service. The priest is advised that "it is 
 good and very expedient that he should lay before the 
 sick person the fourteen articles of the faith, of which 
 the first seven belong to the mystery of the Trinity, 
 the other seven to Christ's humanity.'' The articles of 
 Peckham's Constitutions are taken up and made the 
 vehicle for instructing the sick man. But what we 
 have been in the habit of calling the damnatory clauses 
 of the Athanasian Creed appear here once more in that 
 which I am bold to call their original character, viz. as 
 introducing and summing up the articles of the faith. 
 " He who is not firm in the faith is an unbeliever, and 
 without faith it is impossible to please God. Et ideo 
 si salvus esse volueris, ante omnia opus est ut teneas Ca- 
 thoUcam fidem : quam nisi integram inviolatamque ser- 
 vaveris, absque duhio in wternum peribis. Fides autem 
 CatJioUca hcec est, frater: Credere in unum Deum," 
 and so on, as in the first seven of Peckham's articles. 
 
19 
 
 This concludes, " Si vis ergo salvus esse, frater, ita de 
 mysterio Trinitatis sentias." The priest was then 
 directed to lay before the invalid the other seven arti- 
 cles pertaining to Christ's humanity, thus: "Similiter, 
 frater charissime, necessarium est ad ceternam salutem 
 ut credas et confitearis Domini nostri Jesu Christi incar- 
 nationem;" and Peckham's other seven articles follow, 
 and after them, " Ecec est fides Catholica, frater, quam 
 nisi fideliter firmitergue credideris, sicut Mater Ecclesia 
 credit, salvus esse non poteris." 
 
 I print the whole in my postscript. 
 
 The result of this, in the opinion of nfany of my 
 friends, is so important that they have urged me to 
 present it to your Grace and to the public without delay. 
 On the one hand, we find the great truths relating to 
 the Trinity and to the Incarnation separated from the 
 terms in which they were first commended by the 
 Church and set in a different frame-work. On the 
 other hand, we have that frame-work again detached 
 and another set of truths or other expressions of the 
 same truths enclosed within it. The one was done in 
 the ninth century ; the other in the 13th or 14th, and 
 kept up till the Reformation. It is represented to me 
 that if these acts are brought prominently before the 
 Church of the present day they must have weight. 
 
 2—2 
 
20 
 
 At the same time I would most respectfully urge 
 that time should be allowed for their truth to be in- 
 vestigated, so that the correct value of them, whatever 
 it may be, may be perceived. One thing is certain, that 
 the Quicunque cannot remain as it is : the greatest blow 
 that has been struck at the final clause was given by 
 the Oxford Professors of Divinity last year. The inter- 
 pretation that they put upon its wording is so far removed 
 from the plain grammatical sense, so far removed from 
 the construction which educated men must place upon 
 it, that in the interests of truth and accuracy that in- 
 terpretation cannot be accepted for a moment. The 
 difficulty has been increased not diminished by the 
 subsequent writings of Dr Pusey and Dr Liddon. The 
 former in his letter to the Times, which appears in 
 the Ouardian of August 14, 1872, page 1030, states 
 that he believes the warning clauses of the Creed "to 
 "be the only statement in our Church Services that a 
 " definite faith in the truths which our Lord revealed is 
 "essential to salvation in those who can have it;" in a 
 later letter ( Guardian, Aug. 28, p. 1085) he speaks of the 
 effort "to withdraw the only declaration which the 
 " Church of England has in her public Services that the 
 "belief in the Catholic faith is necessary to salvation in 
 "those who can have it." Now the warning clauses do 
 
21 
 
 not contain the statement or declaration whicli Dr Pusey 
 asserts they do. What they do state is this: that the 
 Catholic faith is identical with the faith of the docu- 
 ment, and whosoever shall not have believed that faith 
 shall perish. There is not a word of limitation. And 
 the same is to be noted in Dr Liddon's sermon. He 
 asks, p. 32, "Does Holy Scripture or do the warning 
 "clauses of the Creed condemn those who have never 
 "heard of the faith ? Certainly not : the Church like 
 "the Apostle cannot judge them that are without." 
 Again, "Do these clauses or does that text condemn 
 "those who have had difficulties to contend with, which 
 "God sees to have been insurmountable, but who have 
 "sincerely sought the truth which the Creed in its 
 "integrity asserts? Again, I say, Surely not. Nemo 
 "tenetur ad tmpossibile is a first maxim of natural 
 "morals." My remark is this : the authors whoever they 
 were that introduced the final clause, believed fully 
 that the unbaptized should perish everlastingly, and 
 that all that de facto did not hold the faith as taught 
 here should perish also. The one belief furnished the 
 reason for Charlemagne's offer of baptism or death to 
 his vanquished Germans : the other belief was enun- 
 tiated in the savage language with which Hincmar 
 describes the deathbed of Godeschalk. We have no 
 
22 
 
 right to interpret tlie words of one age by the feelings 
 of another : we have a right to hold up our hands in 
 astonishment at the threat which Dr Pusey has held 
 out, that he would leave the Church of England if the 
 Church should alter these phrases even so far as to 
 convey the meaning he puts upon them. 
 
 And your Grace must be aware ere now that for 
 the sake of maintaining these clauses in their integrity, 
 some defenders of the faith in the present day have begun 
 to undermine Scripture itself Alo, ttjv jrapaBoaiv avroop 
 aKvpovcri tov Xoyov tov deov. One of them has quoted 
 the words of St Paul that "no unclean person, nor 
 "covetous man who is an idolater hath any inheritance 
 "in the kingdom of Christ and of God;" he considers 
 this as equivalent to saying that such offenders shall 
 perish everlastingly, and then finding it hard to assert 
 that any covetous man shall "perish everlastingly," he 
 questions "whether the Apostle intended that his uni- 
 "versal proposition should have a particular applica- 
 "tion." What is this but trifling with the words of 
 Scripture? And for what purpose? The writer, un- 
 trained in the use of language, bringing to solemn 
 subjects the slashing spirit which he seems to have 
 encouraged in writing political pamphlets, avowing 
 distinctly that he himself has never felt the smallest 
 
23 
 
 difficulty in using the language of the damnatory 
 clauses, asks, Why, if immorality excludes from the 
 kingdom of God, it should be considered uncharitable 
 to say that heresy excludes from that kingdom ? He 
 does not notice that our Creed does not make the 
 one statement, nor does St Paul make the other. Both 
 speak of persons not of things: the one says that "a 
 " covetous man has no inheritance ;" the other that 
 "if a person does not believe this Catholic faith he 
 "cannot be saved." In his explanation of the latter, 
 this writer excludes the very persons who were origi- 
 nally intended to be included; he says that he can 
 declare without the slighest shock to his feelings of 
 benevolence that an Arian and a Sabellian shall perish 
 everlastingly, whilst he declines to say that his statement 
 can be made to apply to Arius or Sabellius individually. 
 Our answer is, and we point to documents to which 
 at least this writer should have been willing to bow, 
 that at all events in the time when these damnatory 
 clauses were invented, they were intended to condemn 
 Arius and Sabellius individually. 
 
 And why idoes this question come to the front now ? 
 It is because if there is one thing in which the Churches 
 of the West have improved during the last three hun- 
 dred years, it is in the value attached to veracity. This 
 
24 
 
 may have arisen from our increased knowledge of the 
 words of Scripture ; it may have been fostered by the 
 importance of accuracy in our legal and commercial 
 transactions ; the attention to scientific pursuits has 
 undoubtedly encouraged it; and under the increased 
 liberty of the subject it has had room to expand. Of 
 course it is due to the Spirit of Truth. Knowing as I 
 do the character for honour and truthfulness which the 
 old Eoman Catholic families, clergy, gentry, farmers, 
 have sustained for years in England, it was to me the 
 subject of unqualified surprise to find in Dr Newman's 
 "Histoiy of his religious opinions," the questions about 
 equivocation and evasion stirred up. His pages shew 
 the difference between the whole tone of thought 
 two or three hundred years ago, and the general tone 
 of thought now. The whole educated world is more 
 accurate and strives to be more truthful than it was 
 two hundred years ago. You cannot insult a man more 
 than by doubting his word : you cannot injure a Church 
 more than by shewing that it puts forward terms of 
 communion which it relaxes under the most trifling 
 pressure. A man says " I don't believe the Athanasian 
 "Creed : shall I perish everlastingly ? " And we have 
 been bidden to tell him, that the Creed does not refer 
 to those " who have an invincible prejudice against it." 
 
25 
 
 No Church can live long that requires such explanations 
 for its formula: I can compare the proposal of the 
 Oxford Professors only to the worm that smote Jonah's 
 gourd, — and it withered away. 
 
 But whilst I say this, I would heg most earnestly 
 that the substance of the Athanasian Creed may be 
 retained. I would beg most earnestly that the gem 
 may be retained even if the setting be altered or re- 
 moved. I cannot believe that the Creed exists for the 
 sake of these warning clauses. It exists rather to 
 guide our m^nds and thoughts on the great subjects of 
 which it treats : and the guide is needed now as much 
 as ever. It is needed even by those who come forward 
 in its defence. The Church of England is threatened 
 with a modified Eutychianism by some of those who 
 have taken up what they call "high views" of the effect 
 of consecration in the Eucharistic Service. In upholding 
 such views one man has almost avowed that he is a 
 Docetic. "Our Lord's body was in its essence always 
 "a spiritual body. So that it could be emancipated at 
 "will from the laws of matter and could retire within the 
 "sphere of spiritual laws." I conceive that the writer 
 who penned these words and others like them, would 
 three hundred years ago and more have been in danger 
 of being burnt as a heretic : as it is, he is associated 
 
26 
 
 •with Dr Liddon and Dr Pusey and others in defence of 
 the Faith. 
 
 I think the few friends with whom I have been 
 more immediately associated in my work on this subject 
 may take courage at the progress which may be noted 
 in what is called public opinion on the matter. It has 
 become recognised much earlier than I anticipated that 
 this Quicunque is not a Creed proper : there is no Credo 
 in it. It has been recognised much earlier than I an- 
 ticipated that it is a sermon — a discourse. The example 
 set I believe years ago by one who is now a dignitary 
 of the Church, that it is improper to recite it as we 
 recite the other Creeds, turning to the East, is spread- 
 ing. The custom of chanting it like a psalm, alternan- 
 tibus chart's, in the old way, is spreading. So the 
 persons who object to any part in it, hold their peace 
 when that part is uttered. There has been even talk 
 of asking that the clergy may read it, or such parts 
 as they can read with a safe conscience, from the pulpit. 
 Let us have time. And the gradual working of the Spirit 
 of God, for Whose help many prayers are going up con- 
 tinually, will lead us into the truth : we shall know the 
 mind of Him who is the Way, the Truth, the Life. As 
 it is, our opponents themselves being judges of the last 
 clause, it is generally becoming recognised that it does 
 
27 
 
 not come from Him. In a few years it will fall away 
 without a struggle, without a murmur. What to do 
 in the mean time it is not for me to suggest. I do not 
 think that the Faith is in. danger except from the action 
 of some of its defenders. If the statements of the 
 Creed proper convey the truth, they will remain: and 
 I believe they do convey the truth. But, after all, this is 
 Truth, allied rather to the Science of Christianity than 
 to. its Life ; here as elsewhere men may live and move 
 within the bounds of the Truth without entering into 
 the Science of it. This love of analysis has in many 
 minds already resulted in destroying their reverence. 
 To my own nothing is grander than the Gloria in 
 Excelsis in its appeal to the Trinity at its close. 
 
 On subjects of the wide character touched upon in 
 the end of Mr Ffoulkes' pamphlet I cannot enter. All 
 that I ask for is Time : Time to smooth down ruffled 
 feelings: Time to enable us to see more into each 
 other's difficulties : Time to investigate the historic 
 bearings of the subject. 
 
 "The chemist may analyse the fruit and flower. 
 "He separates them into their elements, names them, 
 " numbers them : but those elements weighed, mea- 
 "sured, numbered, are not the living thing; nor any- 
 " thing like it. Your science is very profound no 
 
 i ^4fe*^»«»»»ttpfcf'«*'***^%-' 
 
28 
 
 "doubt: but the fruit is crushed: the grace of the 
 "flower is gone." I accept with gratitude the results 
 of our theological science : but I see it in every 
 dogmatist around me, I feel it in myself, that Theo- 
 logy is not Life : it is of immeasurably more mo- 
 ment to me, to be known of God than to know all 
 that can be known about Him. To my own mind the 
 grandeur of the Quicunque consists in its being, as old 
 Luther viewed it, a Symbol as the Te Deum was a 
 Symbol : i. e. something to be reserved for the faithful. 
 It ought not to be made into a war-song of the faith — 
 this very title, which Dr Newman gave it, shews what 
 is the ordinary conception of it — it ought to be re- 
 garded as the watchword of the faithful. It is this 
 clause 42, this last clause, as used in public that gives 
 it a wrong complexion: not so the older clause as we 
 find it in the fragment from Treves. There is a warn- 
 ing, there is an encouragement to the believer there : 
 and to the believer only. 
 
 If the setting then of the jewel must go, the 
 question is, What is to be done with the jewel itself? 
 Are we to consider that the two are inseparable? 
 History tells us that the gem existed long before the 
 year 800; though perhaps it was polished and fixed 
 in its present place in the century which followed. 
 
29 
 
 History tells us again that in England at least, the 
 jewel was almost lost sight of about the year 1300, and 
 its setting used for another purpose with only slight 
 adaptation. How shall we treat them now? Shall we 
 with Dr Pusey consider that the jewel exists for the 
 sake of its casket ? or with Dr Liddon, that it is grotesque 
 for a national Church in the nineteenth century to 
 alter what a national Church prepared in the ninth? Or 
 shall we look up to the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Tnith, 
 to be our Guide? How can we hesitate? But, as your, 
 Grace is well aware, the Spirit does not now act " with 
 " observation." His o£&ce is to guide us, lead us by the 
 hand, shew us the way to truth. In this sense " Truth 
 " is the daughter of Time." Whatever then is done for 
 the purpose of relieving at once the spirits of those 
 who, are reasonably troubled, let us be content to wait 
 patiently for God's holy guidance. Even as we hope 
 ourselves to be led, not driven into truth, let us trust 
 that those thousands and tens of thousands who are 
 praying for the Spirit's aid may be led onwards and 
 forwards till we all know what the mind of the Spirit 
 is. " As far as we have attained, let us walk by the 
 " same rule," the rule of charity, the rule of gentleness, 
 the rule of considerateness, and the rule of truth — and 
 then we may look forward with the full assurance of faith. 
 
30 
 
 that ere long we shall "with one mind, and one mouth, 
 " glorify God, through Jesus Christ our Lord." 
 
 I have the honour to be, 
 
 My Lord Archbishop, 
 Your Grace's obedient faithful Servant, 
 C. A. SWAINSON. 
 
 November 25, 1872. 
 
31 
 
 POSTSCRIPT I. 
 
 1. Comparison of the fragment found at Treves with 
 the corresponding portion of the Creed as it exists in 
 Charles the Bald's Psalter at Paris. 
 
 EXPLICIT SINODUM 
 MUNDANUM ID EST 
 UNIVERSALE APUT 
 CALCEDONA. 
 
 HAEC INVINI TEE- 
 VERIS IN UNO LIBRO 
 SCRIPTUM. SIC INCIPL 
 ENTE DOMINI NOSTRI 
 JESU CHRISTI. ET RE- 
 LIQUA. DOMINI NOS- 
 TRI JESU CHRISTI FI- 
 DELITER CREDAT. Est 
 
 ergo fides recta ut credamus 
 et confitemus quia dominus 
 iesus christus dei filius. deus 
 pariter et homo est. deus est 
 de substantia patris ante sse- 
 cula genitus. et homo de sub- 
 
 Sed necessarium est ad 
 seternam salutem . ut incar- 
 nationem quoque domini nostri 
 iesu christi. fideUter credat. 
 
 Est ergo fides recta ut cre- 
 damus et confiteamur . quia 
 dominus noster iesus christus^ 
 dei filius deus pariter et homo 
 est. 
 
 Deus est ex substantia pa- 
 tris ante saecula genitus . et 
 homo ex substantia matris in 
 sseculo nalius. 
 
 Perfectus deus perfectus 
 homo . ex anima rationali et 
 humana came subsistens. 
 
 -iSIqualis patri secundum 
 divinitatem . minor patre se- 
 cundum humanitatem. 
 
32 
 
 stantia matris in sseculo natus. 
 perfectus deus. perfectus homo 
 ex anima rationabili. et hu- 
 mana came subsistens sequalis 
 patri ssecundum divinitatem 
 minor patri ssecundum hu- 
 manitatem qui licet deus sit 
 homo non duo tamen sed iinus 
 est christus. Unus autem non 
 ex 60 quod sit in carne. con- 
 versa divinitas. sed quia est in 
 deo adsumpta dignanter hu- 
 manitas. tinus christus est non 
 confusione substantise sed uni- 
 tatem personse qui ssecundum 
 fidem nostram passus et mor- 
 tuos ad inferna discendens. et 
 die tertia resurrexit adque ad 
 celos ascendit. ad dexteram dei 
 patris sedet sicut vobis in sim- 
 bulo tradutum est. Inde ad 
 judicandos vivos et mortuos. 
 eredinaus et speramus eum esse 
 venturum ad cujus adventum 
 erunt omnes homines sine du- 
 bio in suis corporibus resur- 
 recturi et reddituri de factis 
 propriis rationem ut qui bona 
 egerunt eant in vitam seter- 
 nam qui mala in ignem seter- 
 
 Qui licet deus sit et homo . 
 non duo tamen sed unus est 
 christus. 
 
 Unus autem non conver- 
 sione divinitatis in carne . sed 
 assumptione humanitatis in 
 deo. 
 
 Unus omnino non confu- 
 sione substantias . sed unitate 
 personse. 
 
 Nam sicut anima rationalis 
 et caro unus est homo . ita 
 deus et homo unus est chris- 
 tus. 
 
 Qui passus est pro salute 
 nostra . descendit ad inferos 
 resurrexit a mortuis. 
 
 Ascendit ad cselos . sedet ad 
 dexteram dei patris omnipo- 
 tentis. 
 
 Inde ventunis est judicare 
 vivos et mortuos. 
 
 Ad cujus adventum omnes 
 homines habent resurgere cum 
 corporibus suis . et reddituri 
 sunt de factis propriis ra- 
 tionem.. 
 
 Et qui bona egerunt ibunt 
 in vitam seternam . et qui vero 
 mala in ignem eeternum. 
 
33 
 
 num. Hseo est fides vera et Hsec est fides CathoHea 
 
 Cat]iolica quam omnes homo quam nisi quisque fideliter fir- 
 
 qui ad vitam reternam perve- miterque crediderit , saluus 
 
 nire desiderat scire integrse esse non poterit. 
 debet et fideliter custodire. 
 
 The thick black type is in the original in red capitals. 
 The E of the Est is very large, in the middle of the page, 
 covering two lines. This seems intended to mark the 
 beginning of the faith. I should suppose that the introductory 
 words, Domini nostri lesu Christi fideliter credat, were 
 in red in the original document. [I have endeavoured 
 to exhibit the character of the original punctuation, but 
 must note that in the Colbertine manuscript there is 
 only one stop, a "period." In the Prayer-book oi Charles 
 the Bald, the points are between the lines in the body 
 of each verse, and on the upper line at the end of each 
 verse.] 
 
 Aftee compaeing together these two versions of the 
 "Catholic Faith," I can have no doubt that this portion of 
 the Creed as found in the Psalter of Charles the Bald was 
 derived from the fragment found at Treves. Looking 
 through the "Rules of Faith" put forth at various councils 
 and by various Church writers, I find that, with one ex- 
 ception, they all follow the line of the Chalcedon definition 
 in speaking of the time of our Lord's Incarnation. The 
 terms used invariably are "in novissimis diebus" or some- 
 thing similar. Thus the words in the first Canon of the 
 Council of Aries, a.d. 813 (a Council and a Cation, on 
 
 3 
 
34 
 
 which Waterland in my opinion was most unjustifiably silent 
 — a reference to it at once blows into the air his strange 
 hypothesis that Hilary of Axles was the author of the 
 Creed), are that our Saviour "descendisse ultimo tempore." 
 In the fragment, however, we have in sceculo, a phrase used 
 by Vincentius of Lerins, but apparently driven out of use 
 by the language adopted at Ohalcedon, until it was redis- 
 covered here. It is used, as we all know, in the Quicunque : 
 "in sseculo natus." 
 
 Thus I am driven to the conclusion that this fragment 
 is of an earlier date than the Council of Chalcedon: i.e. 
 earlier than a.d. 451. Vincent is said to have published 
 his book in 434. (With this any one may compare Water- 
 land's argument in Chap, vii.) 
 
 But it is one thing to say that this portion of the Creed 
 was drawn from a writing of this early date, and another 
 thing to say that the Creed itself is of that date. For the 
 documents are not identical. 
 
 The points of difference are; (1) the Treves fragment 
 reads dominus where the Creed of Charles the Bald has 
 dominus nosier: "the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God;" (2) 
 it has de substantia, where the other has ex; (3) rationahili, 
 where the other has rationali; (4) qui licet deus sit homo, 
 where the other has qui licet deus sit et homo; (5) where 
 Treves has unus autem, non ex eo quod sit in came conversa 
 divinitas sed quia est in deo adsunita dignanter humanitas, 
 the Creed has the now well-known non conversione divinitatis 
 in came sed assumptione humanitatis in deo; (6) Treves has 
 unus Christus est in the next clause where we read unus 
 omnino; (7) the words and thought nam sicut anima rationalis 
 &o. do not appear in Treves. (On this more hereafter.) 
 
35 
 
 (8) We have two distinct references in Treves to the Creed, 
 the symholum ; Secundum ficlem nostram : Sicut vobis in 
 simhulo traditum est. (The volis is clear and distinct. 
 At the time it was uttered, the traditio symholi must have 
 been a real process.) The Quiounque then runs into the 
 wording of the Creed, nearly after the fashion of the frag- 
 ment: (9) in this the ad inferna descendens in Treves is 
 altered to ad inferos : a modern form as Dr Heurtley says, 
 p. 102, of which the earliest known instance seems to be of 
 the ninth century. (Junius 25 reads ad inferna ; Fortunatus' 
 exposition at Milan ad inferos) (10) Treves reads ad dexter am, 
 dei patris; Charles the Bald dei patris omnipotentis. (Dr 
 Heurtley, Harm. Symh. p. 138, says that the best MSS. of 
 the Athanasian Creed omit both dei and omnipotentis. 
 There is a slight mistake here ; only one MS. of the Creed, 
 the Ambrosian, omitting both: they are however both 
 omitted in all the MSS. of the exposition of " Fortuna- 
 tus.") To two things more I would draw attention. They 
 are, (11) the change from erunt resurrecturi to resurgere 
 hahent, an alteration which savours of the eighth or ninth 
 century: and (12) the most important, m.ost serious change 
 of the final aflSrmative clause. This is the true and Gatholia 
 faith, which every man who desires to attain eternal life 
 ought to know entirely and keep faithfully, to the negative 
 form : This is the Catholic faith, which except a Tnan shall 
 have believed faithfully and firmly, he cannot he saved. The 
 
 FORMER IS UNDOUBTEDLY EARLIER THAN THE LATTER. SOME 
 
 ONE ALTERED IT. Who was it? Had he any commission to 
 alter it ? 
 
 The word pariter which occurs in both versions was 
 ultimately omitted : both versions read et homo, where now 
 
 3—2 
 
36 
 
 we have el homo est. The reading rationabili hung on for 
 some little time; the readings in came and in Deo for a long 
 time: sedet...venturus est became sometimes sedit...venturus : 
 and, in the last clause but one, the et qui vero mala of 
 Charles the Bald assumed in one series of MSS. the form 
 et qui mala, and in another qui vero mala. 
 
 Perhaps I might here mention that the Utrecht version of 
 the Creed omits the pariter: reads et homo est: reads ratio- 
 nali: in came and in dec; ad inferos: sedit for sedet: del 
 patris omnipotentis : inde venturus (without the est) : and 
 et qui mala. Thus it generally has the later readings. 
 
 My main object in this postscript is to press forward this 
 fact, that there are numerous collections of Canons con- 
 taining generally what the Paris 3836 contains, (expositions 
 of the faith, books of the faith and so on,) five manuscripts 
 containing specially what Maassen calls the collection of St 
 Blaise, but of all these only one, this 3836, contains this 
 fragment. I am ready to leave it to the calm consideration 
 of my countrymen to decide whether the writer of 3836 was 
 not . the one person to bring forward the fragment of the 
 older and mutilated document he found at Treves; and 
 whether the latter half of the Quicunque was not derived 
 from this fragment. And I appeal to the weighty words of one 
 of the most trustworthy (because, accurate) of Oxford scholars 
 that the Quicunque could not have formed part of the 
 education of a Clerk, when that Manuscript, 3836, was 
 written. 
 
 The Corollary is, That this part of the Quicunque could 
 not have been put together as it stands until after 750: in 
 other words, that whilst the substance of the Faith on the 
 Incarnation is as old as Vincent, say 434, the clause com- 
 
37 
 
 mending it ■was not changed into its present damnatory 
 form for more than three hundred years. 
 
 In my next postsciipt I shall consider the origin and 
 growth of the_;?rsi part of the Quicunque. 
 
 [I mentioned on p. 34 that in the Treves jaannscript 
 the words nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est 
 homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus, are not found. 
 They are found in all the manuscripts of the Athanasian 
 Creed. Any one may see by referring to Waterland, chap, ix., 
 that these words are found almost verbatim in Augustine's 
 78th tract on S. John (vol. ni. part 2). How were they 
 introduced into the Quicunque ? 
 
 The question is not unaccompanied with difficulty. I 
 will offer my solution of it. 
 
 Alcuin was a great reader of S. Augustine, and in his 
 own comment on S. John's Gospel borrowed very largely 
 from that wonderful writer's homilies. In the course of his 
 work he thus came to the "tract" I have referred to, and 
 on John xiv. 28 he appropriated the words ; "Let us recog- 
 " nise the double substance in Christ : the divine, in which 
 " He is equal to the Father ; the human, in which the 
 " Father is greater : but each together ; not two, but one 
 "Christ ; that there be not a Quaternity but a Trinity, God. 
 "For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and 
 " man is one Christ." Thus Alcuin's reading for his work on 
 S. John brought him across the passage. — And he did not 
 forget it. For we find the thought again in Book iii. ch. 1 
 of his work Be fide Sanctcb Trinitatis. (This is the more 
 interesting, because the figure is not, as I believe, to be 
 found in Augustine's volumes on the Trinity, out of which 
 this other work of Alcuin was largely taken.) Alcuin, 
 
38 
 
 ha'^'ing in his mind the heresy of Felix and Elipandus, -writes 
 to the following effect; "From the time that Christ began 
 " to be Man, He did not begin to be anything else than Son 
 " of God, and that, Only, Only-begotten, Proper ; and, of 
 "course, God, because of the Word of God which was made 
 "Man : so that as each man, that is to say the reasonable 
 " soul and flesh, is one Person, so is Christ one Person, the 
 " Word and the Flesh." 
 
 It will be seen that the language of S. Augustine ulti- 
 mately prevailed over this. 
 
 Two points are here to be noted : (1) that Alcuin does 
 not here quote the words of the Athanasian Creed, which we 
 should expect him to have done, if they were familiar to him ; 
 (2) nor does he refer in either passage, in any way, to Atha- 
 nasius. And in my next postscript I shall shew that 
 Hincmar seeks for the teaching of clauses 11, 12, 14, 16, 
 18 in the writings of Sophronius, and of S. Augustine as 
 collected by Alcuin, not in the " faith of the blessed Atha- 
 nasius ; " although some document bearing that title was 
 familiar to him and to his readers.] 
 
39 
 
 POSTSCRIPT II. 
 
 Vienna MS. 1261, 
 
 folio 19. 
 
 De catholicafide 
 
 Quicimque uult sal- 
 uus esse ante omnia 
 opus est ut teneat ca- 
 tholicam fidem. Quam 
 nisi quisque integram 
 inuiolatamque seruauerit 
 absque dubio in eternum 
 peribit. Fides autem 
 catbolica beo est ut unum 
 deum in trinitate et 
 trinitatem in unitate 
 ueneremur. neque con- 
 fundantespersonasneque 
 Bubstantiam separantes. 
 alia est enim. persona 
 patris alia filii alia spiri- 
 tus sancti. sed patris 
 et filii et spiritus saneti 
 una est diuinitas equalis 
 gloria coeterna majes- 
 tas. Qui in bao trini- 
 tate nicbil prius aut pos- 
 terius niobil maius aut 
 minus eed tote tres 
 persone eoeteme sibi 
 sunt et coequales. Qui- 
 cunque ergo cupit sal- 
 
 Denebeet's Confession. 
 A.D. 798. 
 
 ...soriptum est, quicun- 
 que uult saluus esse ante 
 omnia opus est illi ut 
 teneat catholicam fidem. 
 Fides autem catbolica 
 baec est ut unum deum 
 in trinitate et trinitatem 
 in unitate ueneremur 
 neque confundentes per- 
 sonas neque substantiam 
 separantes. alia enim 
 est persona patris. aUa 
 filii alia spiritus sanc- 
 ti, sed patris et filii 
 et spiritus sancti una est 
 diuinitas iequalis gloria 
 coeterna maiestas. Pater 
 a nuUo factus est nee 
 creatus neo genitus. 
 Filius a patre solo est non 
 factus neo creatus sed 
 genitus. Spiritus sanctus 
 a patre et filio non factus 
 nee creatus nee genitus 
 Bed prooedens. In hac 
 trinitate nihil prius aut 
 posterins nihil maius aut 
 
 Hincmae's Teeatise 
 
 de non trlna deitate, p. 
 
 553. 
 
 Sic credo et confitere 
 eicut credit eonfitetur et 
 prajdicat sancta Catbo- 
 lica et apostolica ecclesia 
 dioens : Fides catbolica 
 bsec est ut unum deum 
 in trinitate personarum 
 et trinitatem persona- 
 rum in unitate deitatis 
 veneremur. neque con- 
 fundentes personas sicut 
 SabeUius ut tres non sint 
 neque ut Arius substan- 
 tiam separantes ut trina 
 sit, quia alia non aliud 
 est persona patris alia 
 non aliud est persona 
 filii aKa non aliud est 
 persona spiritus sancti: 
 sed patris et filii et 
 spiritus sancti una est 
 diYinitas sequalis gloria 
 coeterna majestas, et in 
 hac sancta et insepa^rabili 
 trinitate nihil est prius 
 aut posterius, nihil 
 maius yel minus sed totte 
 
40 
 
 nna esre et catholicns 
 hec teneat et credat et 
 iiita uiuet. Bed tamen 
 post hcc si ad celeste 
 regnnm desiderat per- 
 uenirn et eterna bona 
 conorpiscere contra dia- 
 boli insidias quotidie 
 necesse est certare, &c. 
 
 We find here clauses 
 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 25, 26 of 
 our present Creed. 
 
 minng sed totte tres 
 personse coeternse sibi 
 sunt et coequales. Ita 
 ut per omnia siont supra 
 dictum est et trinitas 
 in unitate et unitas in 
 trinitate ueneranda sit. 
 Suscipio etiam decreta 
 pontifioum, &c. 
 
 We find here 1, 3, 4, 
 5,6, 21,22,23,25,26,27 
 of our present Creed. 
 
 tres personse pater et 
 filius et spirituB sanotus 
 coeternse sibi sunt et 
 asquales, ita ut per om- 
 nia sicut jam supra dic- 
 tum est et trinitas per- 
 sonarum in unitate dei- 
 tatis et unitas deitatis 
 in trinitate personarum 
 venerauda sit. Et si 
 ita credideris in corde 
 tiio, &c. 
 
 We find.bere 3, 4, 5, 
 6, 25, 26, 27 of our pre- 
 sent Creed. 
 
 Of the preceding documents, the first is taken from a 
 manuscript at Yienna, considered to be not later than of 
 the twelfth century. At one time it belonged to Don 
 Eodrigo, by the grace of God King (?) of Castille, Toledo, 
 Leon, Galicia, &c. &c. It is entitled, in a hand which I 
 should say was contemporaneous with the MS., /S. Augus- 
 tini, and commences with this Father's sermon, de decern 
 chordis (Augus., Benedic. y. 48) : then it has parts of the 
 Pseudo-Augustine sermons de die judicii and quales dehent 
 esse christiani (said to be the same as in Appendix, Nos. 
 XXXIV. and ccLxvi.), then an article de fide catliolica, which 
 I hope to print ere long. (We meet here with the words 
 
 Fides Gatholica hcBc est veneremur, but no other part of 
 
 the Athanasian Creed.) Then comes in the middle of the 
 second column De duodecim ahusionibus, out of which the 
 Pseudo-Augustine treatise (vol vi. App. p. 206) has been 
 developed. (This is curious, for we know from Flodoard 
 that Hincmar wrote a book under this title.) This again is 
 followed on folio 19 by the passage I have given above. It 
 
41 
 
 concludes with a deeply interesting account of a possible 
 address of the Saviour and others on the day of judgment; 
 and after this comes something headed Augustinus de de- 
 cimis servitoribus ecclesice reddendis. It is quite clear that 
 the MS. contains a collection of documents of far more ancient 
 date than the twelfth century : and amongst these documents 
 was this complete and continuous teaching on the Trinity, 
 which is now incorporated in the Athanasian Creed in an 
 enlarged form. 
 
 The second column contains a portion of the profession 
 of Denebert when he was made Bishop of the Wiccii (i. e. of 
 Worcester) about the year 798. It is interesting because it 
 professedly quotes a written document, which commences 
 with the words Quicunque vult, and ends with the words 
 veneranda sit. It differs from the contents of the first 
 cohimnby the omission of our present clause 2, the insertion 
 of our clauses 21, 22, 23 and the addition of 27. Otherwise 
 the verbal identity is so marked that it is clear that the two 
 documents had a common origin. 
 
 The last column contains the longest passage in which 
 Hincmar quotes what he calls the faith of Athanasius. Other 
 quotations are found in the treatise against Godeschalk from 
 which this extract is taken, but none of them contain more 
 of our present Quicunque than this. Waterland's remarks 
 are well known : viz. that "Hincmar so often cites or refers 
 "to the Athanasian Creed as a standard rule of faith, that 
 "it were needless to quote particular passages." At another 
 page Waterland remarks that Hincmar in his quotations 
 "throws in, as explanatory notes, more than he ought to 
 "have done, to serve a cause against Godeschalk." For 
 myself, I question whether Waterland ever read a page of 
 
42 
 
 this treatise beyond those whicli contain the passages re- 
 ferred to in the index to Hincmar's works under the word 
 "Athanasius." It will be noted that the quotations of 
 Hincmar are confined to passages which are found in the 
 profession of Denebert ; one might limit this still more and 
 say, that, with the exception of adding clause 27, he merely 
 expands the verses found in the Vienna MS. 
 
 We thus have three witnesses to the existence of a 
 rule of faith similar to the first part of our A-thanasian 
 Creed, but in a much shorter form. In none of these is 
 there any allusion to tlie subject of the Incarnation. In the 
 case of HincTnar it may be said with truth that his con- 
 troversy did not call for it. But the same thing cannot be 
 said of the other two. The one positively limits the amount 
 of saving knowledge to the questions relating to the Trinity. 
 " Whoever therefore desires to he saved and to he a Catholic, 
 "let him hold and believe this, and he shall surely live." The 
 other proceeds, "I receive the decrees of the Pontiffs, and the 
 "synods and the rule (of faith) jjrofessed hy them.'" The 
 synods had treated of the Incarnation, and Denebert ac- 
 cepted their decisions : they had not treated of the Trinity 
 directly, and he received on this subject the scriptum de- 
 livered to him. It seems to me impossible to conceive that 
 Denebert knew the latter part of the Quicunque in the form 
 in which we now have it. He knew only a portion of the 
 former part of the Creed. 
 
 And any one who will take the trouble to examine, will 
 find that almost all the quotations professedly taken by others 
 from "the faith of Athanasius" in the early pai-t of the ninth 
 century, are to be found contained in the writing of 
 Denebert. The monks of Mount Olivet quote or refer to 
 
43 
 
 the clause, "Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Eilio:" so is 
 Alcuin said to quote the three : so does Theodulf, who adds 
 clause 24 : Agobard quotes 2. But there is no record of 
 any quotation from, or reference to, the great mass of this 
 former part of the Creed, beginning with clause 7 and ending 
 with clause 20: none whatever of anything from the latter 
 part of the Creed. 
 
 On the contraby : Alcuin had been urged, perhaps by 
 Charles, perhaps by his own love of enquiry, to go through 
 and make collections from Augustine's work on the Trinity. 
 He follows the lines of our present Athanasian Creed 
 without once referring to it. "No one can attain true bliss 
 "except by the Catholic faith. Every reasoning person of 
 "proper age ought to know the faith; how much more 
 "preachers and doctors." He enters on subjects which we 
 do not find in Denebert. "God by the immensity of His 
 "Nature fills and contains all His creatures : thus the Father 
 "fills all, the Son fills all, the Holy Spirit fills all. The 
 "Father is unbegotten, the Son begotten, the Holy 
 "Spirit neither begotten, nor unbegotten, but may be safely 
 "said to proceed from the Father and the Son. There is 
 "nothing before or after in God." He had said before, 
 "Whatsoever is predicated of the Persons of the Trinity, we 
 "must always keep before us the unus Deus.'" I cannot 
 reproduce allj but I call on my readers to note that this is 
 professedly taken not from Athanasius but from Augustine. 
 And on me the conviction comes with renewed force that the 
 impulse to the formation of the Quicunque was given now ; 
 that Mr Ffoulkes' opinion, slightly modified, will win the day, 
 viz. that the first step to its formation was taken in the court 
 of Charlemagne and under the eye of Alcuin. For we have 
 
44 
 
 no copy of the Creed known to be earlier than this; no 
 allusions to it : and the words of Paulinus at Aquileia point 
 to the felt necessity of having a new and authoritative rule 
 of faith. Thus we have the two halves in process of forma- 
 tion : the one, from the fragment at Treves, ancient in its 
 substance, though modern in its dress : the other, in process 
 of formation after Alcuin had devoted himself to Augustine's 
 writings on the Ti'inity : forming but not yet formed. (Mont- 
 faucon mentions that this had been the opinion of some 
 writers before his time, but MS. authority was then wanting.) 
 Not yet formed, I repeat; because this treatise of Hincmar to 
 which I have alluded presents the most singular diflSculty 
 in the way of our accepting an early reception in France of 
 the Creed as it now stands. Hincmar wanted to convince 
 his opponent of the Unity of the Deity. He quotes the 
 clauses 3, 4, 5, 6, 25, 26, 27 again and again as AthanasivJ. 
 He mentions that Alcuin had collected from Augustine 
 evidence that that great Father disapproved of any such 
 expressions as tres omnipotentes, tres boni, tres ceterni, ires 
 dii: he quotes Sophronius (to us an almost unknown name) 
 who contended for the same truth about the year 633 : this he 
 brings out again and again, wearying us with his repetitions : 
 but he never claims that these clauses are established parts 
 of the Catholic faith : he never quotes them as proceeding 
 from Athanasius. I can only come to one conclusion : viz. that 
 this " faith," as it stands, was not known to Hincmar at the 
 time he wrote: i.e. it was not known to him as we have it 
 now, when Godeschalk died in 869. The difEculty is not of 
 my invention. I have to acknowledge it and to face it. 
 And I call on others to do the same. The only solution 
 that occurs to my mind is this, that up to this time Hincmar 
 
45 
 
 kne-w only the document in tte form that we find in Denebert 
 and Vienna 1261. 
 
 But the Archbishop of Rheims was not a man to stick 
 at trifles. His was an age of literary forgery; he knew and 
 exposed the forgeries of the Decretals. But he is charged 
 himself with having falsified manuscripts. This charge is 
 brought against him quite irrespective of the present English 
 controversy j I learnt it from Wattenbach's PalcBography. 
 The process of expanding a document by adding phrases which 
 had the sanction of Augustine would not, at least in those 
 days, be considered a grievous crime. To attach to this 
 enlarged document, or to retain for it, the name of "S. Atha- 
 nasius" would not be considered very heinous. One do- 
 cument has come down to us in form.s slightly varying, 
 as the writing of Athanasius, of Augustine, of Damasus, 
 of the E'icene Council. I met with a copy of it in the 
 British Museum in which the writer avowed that he had 
 altered and enlarged it. All writers were not so open; and 
 such I think is the origin of the present " Athanasian Faith." 
 (Other documents, some not yet printed, bear the same title.) 
 But whether my theory is accepted or not is to me in- 
 different. The facts are these, 
 
 (1) "We have in the Treves manuscript the apparent 
 original of the latter half of the Creed. 
 
 (2) We have in Yienna 1261, and Denebert, the earliest 
 versions of the former half. 
 
 (3) We have Hincmar quoting clauses 3 to 6, 25 to 27 
 as Athanasius', and the substance of clauses 11, 12, 14, 16, 
 18 as Augustine's and Sophronius'. 
 
 ■My conclusion is simply this, that Hincmar did not then 
 
46 
 
 know the Creed in its present form. This was in the year 
 8G9. 
 
 And Hincmar was ArchbishojD of Eheims, and the friend 
 of Charles the Bald. 
 
 The Prayer-book of Charles the Bald which contains the 
 Creed professes to have been written in the year 870 or 871. 
 Here then is our difficulty. Had the document been grow- 
 ing either in Eheims or elsewhere into a form approaching 
 its present, of which we seem to have indications in the 
 exposition contained in the MS. Junius 2.5 at Oxford, and 
 the other copies of the same exposition, either entire or 
 fragmentary, at Florence and at Vienna 1 — an exposition 
 which, in my opinion, takes no notice of these clauses 11, 12, 
 14, 16, 181 or must we look to the curious Muratorian copy 
 as having been already completed ? The diflSculty is great, 
 but I think that I have reduced it to this narrow compass. — 
 As I have said just now, it is to me indifferent whether my 
 theory is accepted or not ; every one who knows aught of 
 the history of science knows that it is through many mis- 
 takes that the way to truth is forced : and so I enuntiate 
 my theory, and it is this : That Hincmar's controversy with 
 Godeschalk gave the impulse to the final completion of the 
 Creed, and thus whilst it grew to its present dimensions 
 between the years 750 and 870, the finishing move was 
 made in the last-named year. Por I do not think that the 
 man who put out the eyes of his nephew the Bishop of 
 Laon, at an age when such a deed was defended as an act of 
 mercy, — for if the uncle had acted more severely (it was 
 said) the nephew would bave died in bis sins : — the man 
 who took care that Godeschalk should be flogged durissimis 
 verberibus, because he had collected out of Aufustine's 
 
47 
 
 writings passages on Predestination of which Hincmar dis- 
 approved : tlie man who refused to give to the same unhappy 
 victim the last sacraments of the Church, because he declined 
 to subscribe to the words which I have printed above — was 
 an unlikely man to have attached to "the faith of Atha- 
 nasius" expressions which he knew came from Augustine. 
 Nor was he an unlikely man to have availed himself of the 
 words of the Council of Toledo which I have quoted in my 
 text, or in the fierceness of his oithodoxy to have adapted 
 them to commend his version of " the Catholic Faith," re- 
 moving for this purpose the milder form which we have 
 noted in the Colbertine fragment. 
 
 At all events I have found no other precedent for our 
 final clause than that contained in these words of the 
 Council of Toledo 693: no other contemporaneous exposition 
 of the final clause than that contained in Hincmar's words 
 "Godeschalk went to his own place." 
 
 [One point comes out very clear from this history : 
 the Credenda of the Creed, i.e. the "Faith of Athanasius," 
 is contained in clauses 3 — 27: 30 — 41. The other clauses 
 are " the setting" of these credenda. My next postscript 
 exhibits this with still greater clearness.] 
 
48 
 
 POSTSCEIPT III. 
 FROM SARUM ^MANUAL. 
 
 H Deinde priusquamungatur infirmus, aut communicetur: 
 exhortetur eum sacerdos hoc modo. 
 
 Prater cliarissime: gratias age omnipotenti Deo pro 
 universis ■!« beneficiis suis, patienter et benigne suscipiens 
 infirmitatem corporis quam tibi Deus immisit : nam si 
 ipsam bumiliter sine murmure toleraveris, infert animse tuse 
 maximum prsemiiim et salutem. Et, frater cliarissime, 
 quia viani universse carnis ingressurus es, esto firmus in 
 fide. Qui eniin non est firmus in fide, infidelis est : et s-ine 
 fide impossibile est placere Deo. Et ideo, si salvcs esse 
 
 VOLUERIS, ANTE OMNIA OPUS EST UT TENEAS CaTHOLICAM 
 fidem: quam nisi INTEGEAM INVIOLATAMQUE sertateeis, 
 absque dubio in ^teenum peeibis. 
 
 ^ Deinde honum et vcdde expediens est ut sacerdos ex- 
 primat infirmo .xiitj. articulos fidei : quorum .vij. prinii ad 
 mysterium Trinitatis, et .vij. alii ad Ohristi humanitatem 
 pertinent : ut si forte prius in aliquo ipsorum erraverit, 
 tituhaverit, vel dubiics fuerit, ante mortem, dum adhuc 
 spiritus unitus est carni, ad Jidem solidam reducatur : et 
 potest sacerdos dicere sic. 
 
49 
 
 Fides autem Catholica h^eo est, featee. 
 
 Credere in uimm Deum: lioc est, in Unitate Divinae 
 Essentise : in trium Personarum indivisibili Trinitate. 
 
 ij. Patrem ingenitum ese Deiim. 
 
 iij. Unigenitum Dei Filium: esse Deum per omnia 
 cosequalem Patri. 
 
 iiij. Spiritum Sanctum uon genitum, non factum, non 
 creatum : sed a Patre et Pilio pariter procedentem : esse 
 Deum Patri Pilioque consubstantialem etiam et sequalem. 
 
 V. Creationem coeli et terrce, id est, omnis visibilis et 
 invisibilis creaturse, a tota indivisibili Trinitate. 
 
 vi. Sanctificationem Ecclesise per Spiritum Sanctum 
 et gratise sacramenta ac csetera omnia in quibus communicat 
 .Ecclesia Christiana: in quo intelligitur, quod Ecclesia 
 Catholica cum suis sacramentis et legibus per Spiritum 
 Sanctum regulata, omni homini, quantumcunque facinoroso 
 peccatori, sufficit ad salutem: et quod extra Ecclesiam 
 Catholicam non est salus. 
 
 vij. Consummationem Ecclesise per gloriam sempiter- 
 nam, in anima et carne veraciter suscitandam: et per cujus 
 oppositum, intelligitur seterna damnatio reproborum. 
 
 Si VIS EEGO SALVUS ESSE, PEATER : ITA DE MYSTEEIO 
 
 Teinitatis sentias. 
 
 Deinde exprijnat ei sacerdos alios septem articulos ad 
 Christi humanitatem pertirhentes, hoc modo : 
 
 Similiter, frater charissime, necessarium est ad ^tee- 
 
 FAM SALTJTEM, UT CEEDAS ET CONFITEARIS DoMINI NOSTRI 
 
 Jesu Cheisti incaenationem, seu veram carnis assump- 
 tionem per Spiritum Sanctum ex sola Virgine gloriosa. 
 
 iJ. Veram incarnati Dei nativitatem ex Virgine in- 
 corrupta. 
 
 4 
 
50 
 
 iij. Yeram Christi passionem et mortem sub tyrannide 
 Pilati. 
 
 iiij. Veram Christi clescensionem ad inferos ia anima 
 ad spoliationem tartari, qniescente corpore ejus in sepulchro. 
 
 /v. Veram Christi Dei tertia die a morte resurrectionem. 
 
 vi. Yeram ipsius ad coelos ascensionem. 
 
 vij. Ipsius venturi ad judicium certissimam expeo- 
 tationem. 
 
 H^C EST FIDES CaTHOLICA, FEATEB, QUAM NISI FIDELITER 
 
 FiEinTEiiQUE CREDiDEEis, sicut sancta Mater Ecclesia credit, 
 
 SALVUS ESSE NON POTEHIS. 
 
 *^ Et si infirmus laicus vel simpKciter literatus fuerit : 
 tunc potest sacerdos articulos fidei in generali ah eo in- 
 quirere, sub hac forma. 
 
 Charissime frater : Credis Patrem et Pilium et Spiritum 
 Sanctum, esse tres Personas et Unum Deum, et ipsam 
 benedictam atque indivisibilem Trinitatem creasse omnia 
 areata visibilia, et invisibilia ? Et solum PUium, de Spiritu 
 Sancto conceptum, incamatum fuisse ex Maria Yirgine : 
 passum et mortuum pro nobis in cruce sub Pontio Pilato : 
 sepultum descendisse ad infema : die tertia resurrexisse a 
 mortuis : ad coelos ascendisse : iterumque venturum ad 
 judicandum vivos et mortuos, omnesque homines tunc in 
 corpore et anima resurrecturos, bona et mala secundum 
 merita sua recepturos ? Et remissionem peccatorum per 
 sacramentorum ecclesise perceptionem ? Et sanctorum com- 
 muuionem; id est, omnes homines in charitate existentes esse 
 participes omnium bonorum gratise quse fiunt in ecclesia : 
 et omnes qui communicant cum justis hie in gratia, com- 
 municare cum eis in gloria 1 
 
51 
 
 H Deinde respondeat infirmus. 
 
 Credo firmiter in omnibus, sicut sancta Mater credit 
 Ecclesia: protestando coram Deo et omnibus Sanctis con- 
 tinue hoc esse meam veram et firmam intentionem, quo- 
 modocunque aliquis spiritus malignus memoriam meam 
 aliter forte in futuro solicitaverit perturbare. 
 
 ^ Deinde dicat sacerdos. 
 
 Charissime frater : quia sine charitate nihil proderit tibi 
 fides, testante Apostolo qui dicit : Si habuero omnem fidem 
 ita ut montes transferam, charitatem autem non habuero, 
 nihil sum : Idee oportet te diligere Dominum Deum tuum 
 super omiiia ex toto corde tuo et ex tota anima tua : et 
 proximum tiium propter Deum sicut teipsum : nam sine 
 hujusmodi charitate nulla fides valet. Exeroe ergo charitatis 
 opera dum vales : et si multum tibi affuerit, abundanter 
 tribue : si autem exiguum, illud impartiri stude. Et ante 
 omnia si quern injuste Iseseris, satisfacias si valeas : sin 
 autem, expedit ut ab eo veniam humUiter postules. Dimitte 
 debitoribup tuis et aliis qui in te peccaverunt, ut Deus tibi 
 dimittat. Odientes te diligas : pro malis bona retribuas. 
 Dimittite (inquit Salvator) et dimittetur vobis. Spem etiam 
 firmam et bonam fiduciam, frater, oportet te habere in Deo, 
 et in misericordia sua : et si occurrerit oogitatui tuo multi- 
 tude peccatorum tuorum, dole : sed nullo modo desperes. 
 Imo cogita quoniam (ut testatur scriptura) misericordise 
 ejus super omnia opera ejus : et illi soli proprium est 
 niisereri semper et parcere : et quia, secundum altitudinem 
 coeli a terra, corroboravit misericordiam suam super timentes 
 se. Spera igitur in Deo et fac bonitatem : quoniam spe- 
 rantem in Domino misericordia circumdabit. Qui sperant 
 in Domino habebunt fortitudinem, et assument pennaa ut 
 
 4—2 
 
52 
 
 aquilae, volabunt et non deficient. Volabunt enim a tenebris 
 ad lumen : a carcere ad regnum : a miseria prsesenti ad 
 gloriam sempitemam. 
 
 IT Beinde stahilito sic injirmo in fide, charitate, et spe, 
 dicat ei sacerdos. 
 Et ccetera. 
 
53 
 
 POSTSCRIPT IV. 
 
 Amongst tlie "Junius manuscripts" at Oxford is one 
 numbered 25, whicla, when Waterland wrote in 1727, was 
 considered to be about 800 years old, i.e. to belong to the 
 early part of tlia tenth century. It contains a curious 
 farrago of works, amongst them something entitled, in a 
 modem hand, " Alcuini Rhetorica," and, on folios 72 5 and 
 73, a genealogy of rhetoric, entitled, also in. a modem 
 hand (?), " Hsec sunt Alcuini quse in nonnullis editionibus 
 " desiderantur." All the items in this are in rustic letters. 
 On folio 77 there is something more, marked as " Alcuini 
 " dialectica," of which almost all the headings are in rustic 
 letters: and (oddly enough) this is followed by a paper 
 entitled " Epistola Hieronymi ad Dardanum de generibus 
 " musicarum," where there is an account of an organ. The 
 " Expositio in fide catholica," mentioned by Waterland, 
 commences on folio 108. We have two complete copies of 
 this exposition; this and another which Montfaucon dis- 
 covered at Florence. I have discovered and have a tran- 
 script of a third copy (which is unhappily imperfect), at 
 Vienna. In none of these is the name of the author 
 mentioned. Another version of this, which Muratori found 
 
54 
 
 at Milan, is of a much, later period ; Waterland said " about 
 600 years old," i. e. of tlie early part of the twelfth century. 
 Its true date, as stated in the MS., seems to have been MVii. 
 This MS. contains three expositions of the Apostles' Creed, 
 the earliest being said to be " a fortunate prbo conscripta :" 
 three expositions of the Lord's Prayer : three expositions of 
 the "Catholic Faith": the last being entitled "expositio 
 " fidei catholicse Portunati." On this, written according to 
 his own account at least 530 years after the death of 
 Venantius Fortunatus, Waterland grounds his statement 
 that that Bishop was the author of the exposition, and so 
 throws the " Creed" back to a period before the year 570. 
 Such is the evidence which contented a scholar of the 18 th 
 century, who was anxious to settle a disputed point of 
 history. It is only one step removed from the wildness of 
 the suggestion which Muratori put forward, viz. that 
 Venantius Fortunatus was the author of the Creed. If 
 these two distinguished men knew of the existence of one 
 Fortunatus only, we cannot respect their learning : if know- 
 ing of more than one they were sUent as to the existence 
 of the rest, we cannot respect their openness : if they con- 
 sidered that the evidence of a manuscript of the eleventh 
 century was sufficient to fix the authorship of the document 
 on a man who lived in the sixth, we cannot respect their 
 judgment. However I learn from The Union Review, that 
 I do not stand alone in declining here to follow the opinion 
 of either the one or the other. 
 
 Speaking for myself, I have little doubt that this Ex- 
 position was originally a series of notes, in the margin of 
 a copy of the Quicunque. Such was undoubtedly the origin 
 of what is called Bruno's Commentarv. I think that I saw 
 
55 
 
 the germ of such a thing at St Gallen. This opinion will 
 modify, and indeed weaken, the force of the evidence it 
 brings as to the character of the document on which it 
 furnishes a comment, for we cannot argue absolutely as to 
 the absence of a verse in the text, because it is passed over 
 in silence in the notes. 
 
 Still the absence of a note on an important and dif- 
 ficult clause, as for example clause 2, is worthy of remark, 
 especially as clause 2 is de facto omitted in Denebert's 
 Profession. Again, the last three clauses of the Creed are 
 contained in this Exposition, though without any comment. 
 Thus, while I do not conceal this difficulty, I shall print the 
 portions of the Creed contained in "Junius.'' It will be 
 seen that the latter part of the document expounded agrees 
 with our present version of the Quicunque, except in a few 
 details which I shall notice : whilst, in the foi-mer parb, we 
 find clauses 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 15, 17, 19, 20, 24 added to the 
 version I have printed in postscript II. But still the clauses 
 11, 12, 14, 16, 18 are absent — which Hincmar had to seek 
 for in the writings of Alcuin or Augustine, and Sophro- 
 nius. 
 
 I will therefore print the Creed as it is noted in Junius : 
 adding in the margin the "numbering" of the clauses 
 specified. 
 
 [The collocation in the manuscript of this Exposition 
 with writings assigned to Alcuin is curious, and ought to 
 be noticed.] 
 
 1. Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut 
 3. teneat catholicam fidem. Ut unum Deum in Trinitate 
 i. et Trinitatem in TJnitate veneremur; neque confunr 
 
56 
 
 5. dentes personas, neque substantiam separantes. Alia 
 est enim persona Patris, alia persona Filii, alia Spiritus 
 
 6. Sancti. Sed Patiis et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est 
 
 7. Divinitas, sequalis gloria, coaeterna majestas. QuaKs 
 
 8. Pater, talis FUius, talis et Spiritus Sanctus ; increatus 
 Pater, increatus Filius, increatus et Spiritus Sanctus ; 
 
 9. inmensus Pater, inmensus Filius, inmensus et Spiritus 
 1 0. Sanctus ; seternus Pater, asternus Filius, setemus et 
 13. Spiritus Sanctus. Similiter omnipotens Pater, omni- 
 15. potens Filius, omnipotens et Spiritus Sanctus. Ita 
 
 Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus et Spiritus Sanctus. 
 17. Ita Dominus Pater, Domiaus Filius, Domiuus et Spi- 
 19. ritus Sanctus. Quia sicut singillatim unamquamque 
 
 Personam et Deum et Dominum confiteri Christiani 
 [20] veritate compellimur ; [ita in his tribus Personis non 
 
 tres Decs nee tres Dominos, sed unum Deum et unum 
 
 24. Dominum confiteor.J Unus ergo Pater, non tres Patres ; 
 unus FUius, non tres Filii; unus Spiritus Sanctus, non 
 
 25. tres Spiritus Sancti. Et in hac Trinitate nihil prius 
 
 30. aut posterius, nihil majus aut minus. Est ergo fides 
 recta ut credamus et confiteamur quia Dominus noster 
 Jesus Cliristu?, Dei Filius, Deus pariter et homo est. 
 
 31. Deus est ex substantia Patris ante ssecula genitus, et 
 
 32. homo est ex substantia matris in sseculo natus. Per- 
 fectus Deus, perfectus homo, ex anima rationali et hu- 
 
 33. mana came subsistit ; sequalis Patri secundum Divini- 
 
 34. tatem, minor Patre secundum humanitatem ; qui [licet] 
 Deus sit et homo, non duo tamen sed unus est Christus. 
 
 35. Unus autem non conversione Divinitatis in came, 
 
 36. sed assumptione humanitatis in Deo ; unus omnino, 
 
 37. non confusione substantia, sed unitate Personse. Nam 
 
57 
 
 sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est tomo, ita Deus 
 
 38. et homo unus est Christus ; qui passus est pro salute 
 nostra, descendit ad inferna, tertia die resurrexit a 
 
 39. mortuis, asoendit ad cselos, sedet ad dexteram Patris, 
 
 40. inde venturus est judicare vivos et mortuos. Ad cujus 
 adventum omnes homines resurgere habent cum cor- 
 poribus suis, et reddituri sunt de factis propriis ratio- 
 
 41. nem; et qui bona egerunt ibunt in vitam seternam, et 
 
 42. qui vero mala in ignem seternum. Hsec est fides Ca- 
 tholica, quam nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque credi- 
 derit, salvus esse non poterit. 
 
 It should be remarked that this Exposition seems to have 
 read tres Dominos in 20 : it read pariter in 30 : came and 
 Deo in 35, the Milan manuscript reading carnem and Deum. 
 Ad inferna in 38, the other reading ad inferos. Thus the 
 readings in the Milan Exposition are modern. 
 
 I hope that we shall henceforth hear no more of "Venan- 
 tius Fortunatus," in connection with the Quicunque except 
 as possibly having furnished illustrations of the truths it 
 teaches. For I must not forget to notice that, according to 
 Waterland, this " Venantius Eortunatus" who died about 
 570 quoted passages from Alcuin who lived about 800. 
 (These passages are not found in Junius.) 
 
 I am reminded by a friend that from an Explanatio of 
 the Athanasian Creed published by Mai (Soriptorum Veterum 
 Nova CoUectio, torn. ix. p. 396) from a manuscript of the 
 eleventh century (Mai does not give the number), it appears 
 that the copy of the Creed explained read "ad inferna." 
 It omitted clause 16 and read for clause 18, "Et tamen non 
 tres DLi aut tres Domini sed unus Deus et unus Dominus." 
 This is curious, comparing " Junius " above. 
 
58 
 
 POSTSCRIPT V. 
 
 At present great misapprehension prevails in England 
 on the relations between the Nicene and Constantinopolitan 
 Creeds. The question is not unaccompanied with difficulties, 
 but I believe that the following may be proved to be a true 
 statement of the case. 
 
 There will be found in the larger editions of the works 
 of Athanasius (appended to his letter on the decrees of the 
 Nicene Synod), and also in the first book of the History by 
 Socrates, a letter from Eusebius to his people at Csesarea — 
 which has been strangely quoted lately as if it were the 
 work of Socrates himself. In it Eusebius mentions that he 
 had recited at Nicsea the Faith into which he had been 
 baptized and states that this Faith had formed the basis of 
 the document put forth by the Council : in it they had 
 inserted the word homoousion, they had introduced the 
 words " of the substance of the Father " and other expres- 
 sions which Eusebius had accepted after full explanations : 
 and "as to the Anathematism, published by them at the end 
 "of the Faith," or " put forth by them after the Belief, that 
 "gave him no trouble, because it prohibited the use of 
 " language which was itself unscriptural." 
 
59 
 
 Athanasius makes use of this letter against the Eusebians, 
 but he does not in any way discredit the statements con- 
 tained in it. And I find that Mr Newman in his notes to 
 the Oxford translation of Athanasius' "Select Treatises" (p. 5) 
 speaks of the Council as establishing " the true doctrine by 
 " the insertion of the phrases ' of the substance ' and ' of one 
 " substance.'" So I must say that it is with great astonish- 
 ment that I find Dr Pusey in the Appendix to his late 
 sermon (p. 64) writing of "Eusebius suppressing Jbr the time 
 " the words ' of one substance,' " when he recited the Creed 
 which he received when he was baptized. — The meaning of 
 Dr Pusey's assertion I will discuss in a later postscript. 
 
 Thus, as any one may see, the formula put forth and 
 subscribed at Nicsea consisted of two parts ; the Belief of 
 the Fathers assembled, " We believe in one God (fee. ;" and 
 the Anathematism which follows. They were both subscribed 
 simultaneously, and I question whether the Belief is ever 
 found without the Anathematism. 
 
 From what we read in the Acts of the Council of Chalce- 
 don, we must conclude that this Nicene formula in its en- 
 tirety had become widely used as the Baptismal Creed. It 
 seems to have replaced the Eusebian Creed wherever that 
 had been used : it was delivered to the candidates for 
 baptism in many churches. When it was read "out of a 
 book " by Eunomius (and it was read out in its entirety) 
 the bishops at Chalcedon cried out "This is our Faith: 
 " in this we were baptized; in this we baptize." It had been 
 confirmed at Constantinople in 381: at Ephesus in 431: 
 it was confirmed now. It was repeated and put into the 
 front at the two next general Councils held at Constanti- 
 nople in 533 and 681 and at numerous synods of smaller 
 
60 
 
 dimensions. In point of fact no other document of sub- 
 apostolic times has received the amount of sanction which 
 ■was given to the Faith of Nicaea — to the Belief of the 318 
 Fathei-s and to the Anathematism of the Church appended 
 to it. 
 
 The history of the Creed of Constantinople is more 
 obscure, and I cannot here go into it at length. Sufficient 
 be it now to say that the first time we meet with a copy 
 resembling it, is in the Ancoratus of Epiphanius where he 
 represents his copy as the Belief of the Catholic Church. 
 This treatise was composed in the year 374, seven years 
 before the CouncU of Constantinople. To the Creed in 
 Epiphanius, an Anathematism is appended varying very 
 slightly from that of the Nicene Council. — It would require 
 some hardihood to assert that the Creed in Epiphanius was 
 not taken from the Nicene Creed, or that the Creed of 
 Constantinople was not taken from the Creed in Epiphanius : 
 and thus we are driven to compare the Creed of Constanti- 
 nople with the two documents which in order of time 
 preceded it. 
 
 "The Deacon Aetius read from a book" at the Council 
 of Chalcedon "the holy faith which the holy Fathers 150 in 
 " number put forth." This is the first exact copy that I 
 have met with of the Creed of Constantinople. 
 
 It varies from the Creed in Epiphanius in omission as 
 that difiers from the Creed of Nicsea by addition. And the 
 two omissions which I shall notice are these ; the words 
 "that is of the substance of the Father " had been left out, 
 and the Anathematism had been entirely removed. 
 
 This Creed had not been mentioned at Ephesus, but it 
 was embodied side by side with the true Nicene Creed, 
 
61 
 
 in the Definition of Chalcedon and in the general councils 
 ■which followed. 
 
 Thus, if we are to call this document the Creed of Con- 
 stantinople, it becomes an indubitable fact that the Fathers 
 there did directly omit the Anathematism found at the end 
 of the document in Epiphanius, and indirectly omit the 
 Anathem.atism at the end of the Niceoe formula. 
 
 And, in an argumentative point of view, what ensues 1 
 How does this bear on our present emergency 1 In a very 
 different way from that which some of our friends ai'e pre- 
 pared to expect. 
 
 The true Nicene Creed and its Anathematism gradually 
 but speedily fell out of use, even as a Baptismal formula. It 
 was clearly unsuited to be recited at Baptism, or in the 
 service of the Church, as the Belief of the assembled faithful; 
 it had been prepared for another object. I question whether 
 it ever was recited at any other service than Baptism. And 
 here it was replaced, first in one Church, and then in 
 another, by the Creed of the 160 j and this at last assumed 
 not only its place but its Name. 
 
 The last occasions on which I hear of its being used are 
 recorded by Honorius of Autun about the year 1130. It 
 was then used at Synods. Since then it has entirely dis- 
 appeared : it is not heard at our Baptisms, it is not recited 
 at our Eucharists, it is silenced at our Synods. — With these 
 facts before us, it seems really childish to talk of the im- 
 propriety of -that one Church in Christendom which has 
 introduced the fashion of treating the Quiounque as the 
 avowed Belief of all the faithful, reverting to older and 
 more Catholic usage. — Even if the Ritual of all the 
 
62 
 
 Churches in this agreed -with ours, the history of the Nicene 
 Symbol would give us ample precedent to begin the disuse 
 of the Athanasian Creed. As it is, we stand alone : and it 
 is asserted that our unique observance in this respect is the 
 proof and stay of our Catholicity ! 
 
 Let me however conclude with this : The Nicene Creed 
 
 AND ITS AnATHEMATISM HAVE VANISHED OUT OF SIGHT; A 
 DOCUMENT FRAMED AT ONE CECUMEOTCAL COUNCIL AND CON- 
 FIRMED AT THE OTHER FIVE HAS DISAPPEARED : a fact 
 
 worthy of consideration in these times of ours. It is replaced 
 by something more guarded : I will not say more true, I will 
 say more carefuUy worded and more helpful. 
 
 I mentioned just now that the words Jk -rq? ova-La's were 
 omitted when the Symbol of Constantinople was formed 
 from that of Nicsea or of Epiphanius. They had occurred in 
 the sentence " begotten from the Father, only-begotten, that 
 "is, from the substance of the Father." The Eusebians had ob- 
 jected to them: for they gave some pretextfor people to saythat 
 the Catholics held that the Godhead was capable of scission 
 or division : — anticipating in some respect objections which 
 might be brought against the Church of England, should 
 her Synods accept the Declaration regarding the iKTopevo/jLevov 
 which has been proposed by the Bishop of Lincoln. At aU 
 events, at Constantinople and Chalcedon the Church accepted 
 a document, from which these words, which might be mis- 
 taken and which were mistaken, were left out. The Fathers 
 had not attained to the modern view as to the inviolability 
 of a Creed once received. If a phrase was misunderstood, 
 they thought it was best to alter it. And so, " grotesque 
 " and immodest " although it may be styled, the Church of 
 
63 
 
 England altered at her Tleformation the words of the 
 Apostles' Creed. It had hitherto read for at least 1300 
 years, " The Resurrection of the Flesh." In our declaratory 
 form we gave up this, and adopted without a remonstrance, 
 "The Resurrection of the Body." 
 
64 
 
 POSTSCRIPT YI. 
 
 The valuable report ■wMcli has just appeared from the 
 pen of Sir Thomas Duffus Hardy on the Utrecht Psalter, 
 is likely to have so much influence on the public from the 
 well-known character of its Author, that I am obliged to 
 delay the publication of my letter to enable me (before a 
 definite opinion is formed upon the subject) to draw atten- 
 tion to some details regarding the MS. which seem to merit 
 attention. It is a pleasure to meet with a publication in 
 which opinions contrary to one's own are expressed in 
 language and in a spirit so calm and courteous as are to be 
 found in Sir Dufius Hardy's report : for any careful reader 
 will observe that Sir Dufius Hardy has done me the honour 
 of holding previous intercourse with me on this interesting 
 subject. 
 
 In November, 1871, I printed for private circulation, 
 and with special reference to a request for certain infor- 
 mation conveyed to me through the Bishop of Gloucester 
 and Bristol, some "Further investigations as to the origin 
 " and object of the Athanasian Creed." I mentioned there 
 that the MS. which was described by Usher as probably 
 belonging to the age of Gregory the Great, and the dis- 
 appearance of which from the Cotton Library in the time 
 
65 
 
 of Waterland had caused him and others much uncertainty, 
 had been clearly identified with one now resting in the 
 Librai-y at Utrecht. This MS. had attracted the attention 
 of Prof. Westwood, who had devoted some time to its ex- 
 amination; the results of which may be seen in his exquisite 
 volume of "Miniatures." Mr Bradshaw, in his entire de- 
 votion to his work, had been re-arranging some of the 
 pictures of this volume, and called my attention to the 
 account. We instantly identified the volume as Usher's, 
 and I immediately put myself into communication with the 
 authorities at the British Museum. I found there that in 
 addition to the volume of facsimiles to which Mr Westwood 
 referred, there was another such volume more recently 
 acquired. Through the kindness of Professor Mayor I then 
 obtained a collation of the Apostles' and the Athanasian 
 Creeds, by the intervention of the distinguished Mr Muller, 
 the bookseller of Amsterdam; and very speedily afterwards 
 I applied to Mr Muller to use his iafiuence to obtain me 
 a photograph. There was an unwillingness on the part of 
 the authorities to allow this photograph to be taken ; but in 
 the mean time Professor Jones of St Beuno's College, 
 St Asaph, informed me that he could procure a facsimile, 
 and from him I received three beautiful copies of his 
 chromo-lithograph on May 18. One of these was imme- 
 diately deposited ia our University Library: the rules of 
 the Post Office prevented me from transmitting another to 
 the British Museum at once, but I was enabled to take 
 one there in the middle of June. In the last days 
 of that month, another series of lithographs arrived, and 
 one was sent by Mr Jones to the Eecord Office: this was 
 produced by the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol in Con- 
 
 5 
 
66 
 
 vocation on Tuesday the 2nd July, wlio, most unfortunately 
 for me, in his speech, described it as a photograph, and 
 stated that the original had been stolen from the British 
 Museum. I had intended to go to Utrecht, and I dreaded 
 the effect of the Bishop's words ; in consequence I wrote to 
 the Ai'chbishop a letter which his Grace did me the honour 
 to read on Thursday the 4th of July. However the mis- 
 chief was done : an extract from the Bishop's speech found 
 its way into an Utrecht paper ; the authorities were indig- 
 nant at the statement that the book had been stolen from 
 the British Museum, because it had been in their Library 
 long before the Cotton Collection was transferred to our 
 great national institution : they were annoyed at hearing 
 that a photograph had been taken ; for if so, it had been 
 done surreptitiously. So when I arrived there on the 13th 
 of July, I was informed that the volume had been removed 
 from the Library, and that I should not be allowed to 
 see it. 
 
 However, disappointing though this was, the action of 
 the authorities enabled me to exhibit to eminent palaeo- 
 graphers on the continent copies, of the lithograph and so 
 learn from them what were the points to which I must 
 specially direct my attention if the embargo on the MS. 
 could be removed. Through the kindness of friends I was 
 permitted to see the MS. on my homeward way (I was 
 compelled to alter my route) and, on Aug. 28, to devote a 
 long afternoon to its examination. The main results of my 
 observations Sir Thomas Hardy has given in his valuable 
 report ; but there are some points which in my opinion are 
 so important that I must give a hasty account of them ; 
 the details must be reserved for my larger work. 
 
67 
 
 (1) By way of prelude I must say, that putting on one 
 side for the moment this Utrecht Manuscript, there is no 
 Psalter or collection of Hymns before the age of Charlemagne 
 which contains the Athanasian Creed. — Of such books there 
 are many more in existence than are generally known. — At 
 Stuttgart I saw two MSS., one considered to be of the 7th 
 or 8th century, the other of the 9th, which did not contain 
 the Quicunque. So of the famous Irish Psalter at St John's 
 College, Cambridge ; The two Psalters belonging to St 
 Augustine's Abbey, Canterbury, spoken of by Elmham ; The 
 book of Deer; The MS. at St Gall, No 19 ; Eoyal Library, 
 2 A. XX. ; Yespasian A. 1 (unless we are to consider this as 
 one of those spoken of by Elmham). To these I may add 
 Archbishop Usher's Hymn book, mentioned in the Appen- 
 dix to Archdeacon Lee's interesting Sermon. And I am 
 told that it is not found in either of the two Psalters printed 
 in Spelman and Thorpe ; or in the Durham Psalter published 
 by the Surtees Society. Then there is what is called " the 
 " AugTistiae Psalter" at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge : 
 wherever we have an old Psalter in Greek, there the 
 Athanasian Creed is missing. 
 
 I have not time to make a further collection, but with 
 this I am content. — ^My own greatest difficulty is in regard to 
 a Paris MS. which appears priTna facie to have been written 
 between 795 and 800 : this and the so-called Charlemagne 
 copy at Vienna, I shall notice on a future occasion. But 
 I say unhesitatingly that no Psalter has been adduced con- 
 taining the Athanasian Creed (except this Utrecht one), for 
 which an antiquity is claimed higher than the time of Charle- 
 magne. After the year 870 the Quicunque is rarely if ever 
 missing in Latin Psalters. 
 
 5—2 
 
68 
 
 (2) When the MS. came into the possession of Sir 
 Robert Cotton some documents were boiind up with it, 
 which have now been removed, the present binding bearing 
 Sir Robert Cotton's Arms. The Charter which at one time 
 was in the volume is written in a hand- writing totally dif- 
 ferent from the hand-writing of the MS. Neither do I think 
 that any argument can be drawn from the fragments of the 
 Gospels which are found in the latter part of the volume; 
 these must have originally formed parts of a more continuous 
 codex. The hand-writing, if I remember right, is much 
 ruder than that of the body of the Psalter; and there are two 
 columns, not three, on the page. Moreover I have never 
 found in any other Psalter any portions of the Gospels. 
 
 (3) Neither do I think that we must attach very great 
 importance to the difficulty of the handwriting. I believe 
 that the letters are called Rustic, because of their rude un- 
 finished character, and I think that if any person will tiy 
 to imitate them with an ordinary pen, he will find that he 
 very speedily will be able to write them with the greatest 
 ease. — At all events there was no difficulty in perpetuating 
 the character. Thus turning to the Palaeographie Uni- 
 verselle of Monsieur Sylvestre (unhappily the plates in 
 this are not numbered, and appear to be arranged diflferently 
 in different Libraries, according to the choice of the binder) 
 I find that in a Terence of the 9th century, in a Horace of 
 the 10th, in the Sacramentary of Gregory the Great pre- 
 served at Bheims of the 10th century, instances of this 
 hand-writing abound. Again at MUan, one of the Missals 
 said to be of the 10th century contains Anglo-Saxon Initials 
 and Rustic " Rubrics.'' At Salzburg I was shewn a mag- 
 nificent Antiphonary written about the year 1064 of which 
 
69 
 
 the "Rubrics" were in this Eustic writing. At Munich 
 again the " Evangeliarium " of Charles the Bald contains 
 many Rustic letters. — In point of fact almost all the more 
 heautiful part may be said to be in Rustic. So of the same 
 king's Prayer Book at Paris. Again, the St Gallen Psalter 
 No 19, said to be of the 9th century, contains much of the 
 same character. And, to conclude, in a copy of Boethius 
 Be consolatione in the University Library, Cambridge, con- 
 sidered to be of the 12th century, we find all the verse 
 written in this Rustic character. — I need not multiply in- 
 stances further. 
 
 (4) In regard to the pictures, I have expressed my 
 assent to the opinion that the general character of the build- 
 ings and of the vestments shews without doubt that their 
 originals were Roman. We have agaia and agaia the Hand 
 stretched out from Heaven, which is the earliest representa- 
 tive of God ; but this is not universal, and the photographs 
 of the drawings before the Gloria in Excelsis and the Apo- 
 stles' Creed seem to me to deserve very serious attention. 
 This Hymn and this Creed as a rule are not found in the 
 early Psalters ; on this account the artist here seems to have 
 been compelled to invent whereas elsewhere he had been 
 content to copy. With an amount of observation which 
 can only be acquired by years of devoted study Sir D. Hardy 
 has noticed that in the picture for the Apostles' Creed a 
 sketch of the round-roofed sepulchre appears in the lower 
 margin, — from this the drawing above has been taken. 
 Here seems to be a mark of originality, and of a later date, 
 Nor is this the only mark. We have in the same picture 
 the Crucifixion : and I am told that such a drawing could 
 scarcely have been made in the sixth or seventh century : we 
 
70 
 
 iave the Virgin and Child at the Eight Hand of God, the 
 appearance of which at the supposed date must startle many 
 observers : but, more than all, we have a representation of 
 God Himself. No instance of this attempt has been hitherto 
 noticed before an epoch lower even than the ninth century. 
 A similar characteristic may be found in the drawing pre- 
 ceding the Gloria in Excelsis. The Lamb is (as it were) at 
 the foot of God : the Redeemer appears again but as a Child 
 in His Mother's arms, on God's Eight Hand. 
 
 (5) Once more we have the Apostles' Creed in its com- 
 plete or modern form; the earliest known copy of this is 
 assigned by Dr Heurtley to the year 750. We know that 
 in Spain the form had not been received fifty years later. 
 In fact the order of Eatherius in 960 (to which I have not 
 seen attention drawn) seems to shew that the connection 
 between the " Galilean Psalter " and the completed Creed 
 was not established for a hundred and sixty years after 800. 
 This Bishop of "Verona directed that his clergy should "learn 
 "by heart the symbol or collation of the Apostles, as it is found 
 "in the corrected Psalters." (The GaUican Creed quoted by 
 Sir Duffus Hardy reads FUium ejus unigenitum sempitemum: 
 and it omits Dominum nostrum. It is scarcely parallel ; and 
 its date is uncertain.) 
 
 (6) Neither am I disposed to pass over the drawing 
 prefixed to the Athanasian Creed. What does it mean to 
 depict? Waterland omits in his summaries the curious 
 notice which Usher extracted from an Irish hymnal, viz. 
 that the Quicunque was composed by three Bishops at the 
 Nicene council, as well as the statement of one of Usher's 
 Greek Manuscripts that it was drawn up by the Council it- 
 self. I have collected one or two more proofs that such an 
 
71 
 
 opinion -was allo-wed to spread towards the end of -the tenth 
 century : for example I have obtained a photograph of the 
 Creed from a Latin Bible at Venice, where it is entitled 
 Fides GatJiolica cccxviii patrum. Passing from these facts 
 to our Utrecht picture, I can have no doubt as to the subject 
 of that picture. It represents the Nicene Council : the 
 Bishops in h circle : the two desks upholding the Gospels : 
 the scribes with their ink-vessels and their rolls : and it may 
 be Constantino in the center; or more probably, in the re- 
 moval of the man's stole or "orarium," we may see the 
 deposition of Arius from the priesthood depicted. On this 
 last surmise I am not prepared to insist, but that a Council 
 of the Church is represented I have no doubt ; that this 
 Council is the Niceae, the traditions I have referred to regard- 
 ing the Creed seem to establish; and the connecting of any 
 Council with the Creed would again favour the hypothesis 
 that a late date must be assigned to this part of the manuscript. 
 (7) And now I appeal without hesitation to my old 
 friend, the organ. That organs blown with bellows existed 
 in the time of Jerome and Augustine, no one doubts. That 
 something of the kind existed in the court of Nero, no one 
 who has read Suetonius can forget. That they are of still 
 earlier date — that Heron of Alexandria describes one, I 
 have been shewn by Mr Aldis Wright. There are many 
 drawings of early organs: thus the Dictionary of Antiquities 
 under Hydraula depicts one, taken from a coin. Pro- 
 fessor Westwood has kindly sent me a drawing of another, 
 found originally in the catacombs at Rome, very similar to 
 the figure on the coin. Dr Eimbault's book shews one which 
 seems to answer to S. Augustine's description : the wind 
 is supplied from an ordinary pair of bellows, the "nozzle" 
 
72 
 
 of which is inserted in the back of an instrument not unlike 
 the picture in the Dictionary. The Stuttgart Psalter depicts 
 another, where men or boys stand on inflated skins, appa- 
 rently alternating : the Manuel du Facteur des Orgues in the 
 Roret " EncyclopSdie " gives others. But none of these 
 could have a continuous equable stream of wind. And thus 
 the instrument generally continued very imperfect. But we 
 are told that towards the end of the reign of Charlemagne 
 an organ was sent to him from the East of a far superior 
 character : it made a revolution in the organ building of the 
 time : its powers are described in strong terms by his bio- 
 grapher, and a special feature was that it had " dolia ahenea," 
 " brazen jars." Such organs could not have existed at that 
 time at Rome or in Lombardy, or in his journeys thither 
 Charlemagne must have heard of them, fond, as he was, of 
 Church music. Now Charlemagne died in 814. Mr Yates in 
 the article to which I have referred says (on the authority of 
 QuLx, Mimster-Kirche in Aaclien p. 14) distinctly that a 
 water organ was erected by a Venetian in the church of Ai-y 
 in the year 826 : my recollection is that this was an efibrt to 
 imitate the Eastern model. 
 
 Turn we now to the pictures in the Utrecht Psalter, — 
 (they are reproduced in the Eadwine Psalter in Trinity 
 College, Cambridge, and thence in Dr Rimbault's book and 
 elsewhere) — and we see that the main difierence between the 
 organs there depicted and those of which we have drawings 
 elsewhere lies in the vnnd apparatus. We have now metal 
 cylinders, distinct from, yet of course communicating with, 
 the pumping apparatus. And these are Oriental : they 
 correspond in an extraordinary degree to the figures in 
 Heron. I believe that in a forthcoming work, Mr Chappell 
 
73 
 
 ■will explain this construction : I must not anticipate him. 
 I will only add that modern organs took their start from 
 the introduction of the instrument which came from the 
 East to Charlemagne, and ere long we hear that fifty or 
 seventy bellows-blowers were required for the organ at 
 Winchester. I cannot give up my position that these organs 
 in the Utrecht Psalter indicate that the corresponding 
 pictures were composed after the beginning of the 9th 
 century, even though my statement to that efiect on Jnly 4 
 may have caused "some merriment." My letter to the 
 Archbishop ought at least to have prevented the Bishop of 
 Gloticester from "conceiving that what had been thought to 
 " be an organ was only one of two desks on which the Book 
 " of Life and Book of Judgment are placed." (See debate 
 in Convocation on July 5.) 
 
 (8) But I am sorry to say I have not yet finished. A 
 careful examination of the photograph or lithograph will 
 shew that whilst, ordinarily speaking, the words run into 
 each other as the fashion was in and about the 6th century, 
 there are in the Athanasian Creed about a dozen clauses 
 where this continuity is broken, and where either a single 
 point is placed on a level with the centre of the letters thus ( • ) 
 or else an inverted semicolon (f). I think there are two 
 places where the point may be observed, about ten where the 
 inverted semicolon may be so noted. So it occurs once in 
 the Nunc Dimittis, once in the Lord's Prayer, and two or 
 three times in the Apostles' Creed. My attention was drawn 
 to this "stop" by a very distinguished Foreign Librarian 
 (whose name I scarcely feel at liberty to mention) who 
 asked me very pointedly whether it was contemporaneous 
 with the writing. Of course, on my homeward journey I 
 
74 
 
 examined the MS. very carefully in this respect, and I con^ 
 Tinced myself that it was so. I did not then know the 
 object of the enquiry — this I have discovered since. 
 
 I cannot find any instance, earlier than the copy of 
 Bede to which Sir J. D. Hardy refers, where this {'.) is to be 
 found. This " Bede " is considered at the British Museum to 
 be of the middle of the eighth century ; of course it cannot be 
 much earlier. I have turned over page after page of books 
 and manuscripts to discover instances of any earlier occurrence. 
 I have pored over (I dare say) a thousand specimens in the 
 Nouveau Traite and elsewhere, but I cannot find any speci- 
 mens earlier than this copy of Bede. It seems to have been 
 almost from the first a musical note, where the musical 
 pause was to be made, rather than a stop as affecting the 
 sense ; thus it corresponded to the (:) used in our " psalms 
 " pointed for chanting." But this is immaterial, our interest 
 is concerned in the date of its introduction. And small as 
 the object is, minute as is its character, I contend that it is 
 too momentous to be overlooked. And I think the fact that 
 it is occasionally though rarely anticipated by the (•) indicates 
 (1) that the new mode of "pointing" was not entirely 
 established when this Psalter was written ; and (2) that the 
 points were inserted by the original writer, and not by a 
 corrector afterwards. The tendency of a corrector would 
 have been to make everything uniform. A writer has other 
 things to think of besides his stops. It is to the writer 
 and not to the corrector that we owe the spaces in which 
 the (;) or the (•) were inserted. These spaces were left for 
 the purpose. 
 
 Now in the tenth and eleventh centuries the (f) became, 
 very popular ; as a musical pause, it was retained to ar 
 
75' 
 
 muck later date. The Britisli Museum alone furnishes 
 two interesting proofs that it came to be considered neces- 
 sary. In the magnificent Bible (Eoyal Library 1 E. viii.) 
 repeated instances may be noted where the old stop ( • ) in the 
 original hlack ink received the addition of (') in a later and 
 browner ink, thus becoming (f). And there is another case; 
 a Roman Psalter was carefully altered throughout into a 
 Galilean Psalter, and the stop ( • ) was altered simultaneously 
 into (f). 
 
 It would weary my readers to carry on this subject 
 further ; yet I have not once touched upon those peculiarly 
 palseographic grounds which affected M. Wattenbach's 
 judgment. These I must pass over very briefly ; they may 
 be found in his Schriptwesen im Mittelalter published at 
 Leipsic in 1871. He seems to attach importance to the 
 character of the lines drawn to receive the writing (which 
 are clearly exhibited in the Utrecht photographs) ; to the 
 position of the Initial letters of each, verse j to the wavy 
 character of the outlines in the pictures ; to that which 
 approaches a caricature in the bellows blowers of the organ. 
 I do not know that he has seen the MS. : he chiefly refers to 
 Professor Westwood's drawings and to Sir Digby Wyatt's 
 volume. Por his arguments I must refer to the book itself 
 and conclude my observations with this remark : — the evi- 
 dence as to the extreme antiquity of this Volume is so 
 much shaken that the age which is attributed to it prima facie 
 cannot stand in the way of my argument drawn from the 
 writings of Alcuin and Hincmar. Por myself I must plead 
 that I have examined the subject with the sole desire of 
 discovering truth, and my belief is, that the MS. was written 
 for Church use about the time when the charUing of the 
 
76 
 
 Quicunque was introduced into the Hour Services. The 
 earliest instance of this chanting of which we have record is 
 dated 997, but the custom must have been in use during 
 previous years. I cannot think that if " Hatto directed in 
 "820 that all his priests should know the Faith of Athana- 
 " sius by heart so that they might recite it at prime," he 
 could have contemplated them having to learn the document 
 in its present length. I must add too that there seems to 
 be some doubt hanging over the age and name of this Hatto 
 or Hetto, or Ahyto, or Heito, or Haito. There was a man 
 of the name Hatto to whom Regino of Prum dedicated his 
 Collection of Canons about the year 900. 
 
 [I have mentioned on page 36 that the Utrecht version 
 presents generally late readings in the Athanasian Creed.] 
 
77 
 
 POSTSCRIPT VII. 
 
 The Quicunque is so often referred to ia the present 
 day as a Symholum of the Universal Church that it will 
 be worth while to enquire when this title was introduced. 
 Waterland, in his Chapter VIII., speaks with some degree 
 of uncertainty of this, apparently questioning whether Hinc- 
 mar so described it. In his second chapter however he had 
 said with no hesitation that "Bincmwr scruples not to call 
 '■'■it (Symholum) a Creed" and quotes the passage " Athanasius 
 ' " in Symbolo dicens, &c. de Prcedestin." torn. i. p. 309. If 
 Waterland had gone on with the quotation he would have 
 exhibited the following, " Athanasius in Symbolo dicens se 
 "credere in Christum prsemissis aliis assumptum in Ccelis 
 "sedere in dextera patris inde venturum judicare vivos et 
 "mortuos expectamus in hujus morte et sanguine rerais- 
 "sionem peccatorum consecuturi" This cannot come from 
 our Athanasian Creed. It seems to come from the Creed of 
 Constantinople. This latter then appears to have been the 
 " Symbol of Athanasius," at the time of Hincmar; of course 
 lieing mistaken for the true Nicene Symbol. I can find 
 no subsequent instance in which the Quicunque received 
 
 mtmnttri-'i^''^ ' 
 
78 
 
 tiis name prior to the formation of the Breviary, that is 
 prior to the 11th or 12th century. Aquinas tells us 
 distinctly that it was a Pope who erected it into a Symbol. 
 This was written about 1250. I am told that Innocent III. 
 (1198 — 1216) did not regard it as a Creed. 
 
 [It will be noticed that Hincmar, in the passage cited, 
 omits the words Dei and om/nipotentis.^ 
 
79 
 
 POSTSCRIPT VIII. 
 
 To one who has in any way attempted to carry into 
 controversies on Christian subjects the spirit of Christ's 
 religion, it is extremely painful to have to notice the 
 carelessness with which in the eagerness of " strife " accusa- 
 tions are brought against men's characters, and still more 
 the persistency, with which acciisations are repeated, even 
 after the charges ought to be withdrawn. Dr Pusey, in 
 his sermon at Oxford and its appendix, spoke and wrote 
 of the " Satanic acuteness of Photius " because he resisted 
 the introduction into the Creed of Constantinople of a few 
 words which the Council had not sanctioned, and with wea- 
 pons which perhaps were scarcely fair ; but I find no re- 
 monstrance in Dr Pusey's sermon or elsewhere against the 
 " acuteness " by which our present diiferences regarding the 
 use of the Athanasian Creed have been fomented by the repre- 
 sentations of men to whom part of the Professor's language 
 regarding Photius may be applied : that " conscious as they 
 " must have been of the weakness of their other grounds of 
 " quarrel, they cast into the scale the charge of heresy . . . 
 *' although they could scarce be ignorant of the language " 
 really used. 
 
 A writer's distress of spirit at finding misrepresentation 
 as well as ungentle and uncourteous (James iii. 17) language 
 used in religiotis controversy, cannot be the less if it happens 
 
80 
 
 that he is himself the object of both. To discourtesy any one 
 who has lived for a dozen years withia the atmosphere of one 
 of our older Colleges where " he has been trained in mind and 
 disciplined in heart, where he has learnt that he may love 
 " those from whom he differs and see unity in the variety 
 "which God ordains," is, I am thankful to say, peculiarly 
 sensitive, even when another is its object. But of misre- 
 presentation they are of course the best judges whose words 
 and actions have been exhibited in a false discolouring light; 
 and, however anxious they may be to work on in silence, 
 because a notice of these mistakes may call them from other 
 and higher or at least more congenial duties, the time may 
 come when it may be needful for them to vindicate their 
 character, not for its own sake but for something dearer to 
 them than personal reputation. They must shake them- 
 selves from the dust, and clear away the dirt which has 
 " stuck " to them longer than they anticipated. 
 
 Such I conceive is my position now. During the Church 
 Congress at Leeds, a meeting was held to "consider what 
 " steps had better be taken to defend the present use of the 
 " Athanasian Creed." The Chair was taken by Lord Beau- 
 champ, and the meeting was addressed by others of the most 
 universally respected members of our Church : I will in- 
 stance, Mr Beresford Hope, Lord Salisbury, Lord Nelson, 
 the Dean of York, Eev. G. Williams, Lord Richard Caven- 
 dish, Professor Eawlinson. At this meeting Mr Hope de- 
 clared "it was his opinion that what opposition there was 
 "had been got up not because men disliked the form of 
 " words but because they disliked the doctrine those words 
 "enshrined;" adding that "the attack in reality proceeded 
 " from those who believed all statements upon such subjects 
 
81 
 
 "to be at best doubtful, and who in this instance -were 
 " making use of the theological ignorance of many of their 
 " countrymen." ISTow Mr Hope is one of the members for 
 the University of Cambridge; and he stated this as "his 
 "opinion," knowing at the time that his colleague in the 
 representation of the University, as well as all the Divinity 
 Professors in his University had given expression to their 
 disapproval of the use of the Creed as it at present stands, 
 and being at the same time on friendly terms with all of 
 these gentlemen and on intimate terms with some. Thus 
 his words must be considered to have a very serious import, 
 and to exhibit in a very serious light his view, after en- 
 quiry, of the theological teaching of his University. More- 
 over, as three out of the four Professors had stated in a 
 document that had been for some time before the world, 
 their opinion that " the admonitory clauses " might and ought 
 to be " modified without in any Way touching what is de- 
 " Glared in the Creed to be the Catholic Faith," it seems to 
 me that the language which Mr Hope used might have, and 
 probably has had, the effect of representing to outsiders 
 that of these Professors some or all are either the dupes 
 of cleverer men than themselves, or else have ulterior ob- 
 jects which they have not had the honesty to avow. 
 
 I have felt therefore under the necessity of reviewing 
 my own position, and of asking whether I have done, or 
 left undone, anything which has permitted Mr Hope to 
 entertain the sentiments which he has expressed. A. know- 
 ledge of each other, now of many years' duration, assures me 
 that Mr Hope is the last man to invent a statement of such 
 ji character, to give point to a speech, or to further a move- 
 ment. " The opposition is got up, not because men dislike 
 
 * C 
 
82 
 
 "the forjn of words, but laecause they dislike the doctrine 
 " those words enshrine." 
 
 Has Mr Hope been led to believe this of me ? I am 
 afraid that he has been so led. 
 
 And thus I am driven to do that, from which I hav6 
 shrunk for the last sixteen months, and enter on a personal 
 defence. 
 
 In the autumn of 1870 I was alarmed at the state of the 
 controversy regarding the Athanasian Creed. I was afraid 
 of what might be the consequences of the continued attacks 
 upon it. "With distinct reference to the action of the Dean 
 of Westminster on the subject, I put out a letter which I 
 was permitted to address to .the Dean of Chichester, in which 
 I attempted to combat Dr Stanley's opinions on our Articles : 
 in which I analysed some of his objections to the recitation 
 of the Creed, and to the Creed itself : in which I shewed that 
 of the real difficulties he propounded some were due to 
 changes introduced into our translation at the time of our 
 Reformation, and others to the displacing of the Apostles' 
 Creed by the Athanasian in our Morning Prayer, which 
 was authorized for the first time in 1662. I spoke in 
 grateful terms of the advantage to my own mental and 
 spiritual growth, which I traced to the recitation of the 
 document at Church : I begged that we might have a re- 
 vised translation, in which once more the Latin must be 
 used as the original ; and, also, that we might return to 
 that older usage, in which the Apostles' Creed ought not 
 to have been omitted. The view which Dean Stanley took 
 of my proposals may be learnt by the reader of his sub- 
 sequent allusions to them : to him they were not palatable, 
 as I knew they could not be. I looked, I must confess, for 
 
83 
 
 some assistance from those who profess a desire to follow 
 the rites of the Mediaeval (or, it may be, modem E/oman) 
 Church: from them I certainly expected at least some 
 sympathy. I thought they would prefer the Latin versiga 
 of the Creed to the Greek ; thefy would prefer the Latin 
 usage of the Creed to the English, 
 
 It is immaterial to me to notice the scorn with which 
 my suggestions were received j it is not my object here 
 to notice the inconsistencies of others. One gentleman has 
 been consistent throughout ; the Dean of "Westminster, in 
 private as in public, has declared that he could not be 
 satisfied with my proposals; and, practically, they have been 
 rejected. 
 
 But I was assailed in an unexpected manner. The Kev, 
 J. S. Br«wer, who is Preacher at the Rolls, an Honorary 
 Tellow of Queen's College, Oxford, a Professor at King's 
 College, London, and who is employed largely in literary 
 work of a kind in which habits of accuracy and care are 
 especially needed and in which habits of inaccuracy and 
 carelessness must render his labours worse than useless, 
 came forward to attack me. He published a book in the 
 autumn of 1871, entitled "The Athanasian Creed vindi- 
 " cated from the objections of Dean Stanley and other 
 "members of the ritual commission," in which I came in 
 for ridicule and for misrepresentation. For ihe personal 
 ridicule I do not care ; if any controversialist thinks that 
 the sacred subjects of the Athanasian Creed furnish fit 
 vehicles to hold up to scorn a person who has not attackad 
 him, — but from whom he differs on points which are really 
 of little moment compared with the great subjects at 
 stake, — ^that is his concern. Such ridicule inJust injure the 
 
 6—2 
 
84 
 
 ethical character of the writer: it may affect his reputation. 
 It cannot injure its object — in the opinion of those whose 
 opinion is worth anything. But misrepresentation on the 
 part of any one is another matter ; and misrepresentation, 
 on the part of a writer who has achieved some reputation 
 in the literary world, may become serious. I cannot quarrel 
 with Mr Brewer's description of his own characteristics 
 when he called himself "a desultory and haphazard reader" 
 (p. 63); but, unhappily for me, or rather for the cause of 
 truth, that description of himself has been overlooked in the 
 halo with which his position has surrounded him. Many, 
 probably most of his readers, have overlooked this account 
 of his qualifications for the work, or works, which he has 
 undertaken. 
 
 Of this style of reading my book became the object. 
 
 It came within my view (as I have said) to consider 
 and to carry out an investigation started by Waterlafid 
 (whom Mr Brewer calls "Dean "Waterland") as to the influ- 
 ence exerted on our English translation of the Creed, by 
 a certain Greek copy which had become known, and (as 
 Waterland thought) printed, at the time of the Reforma- 
 tion. My chief interest here lay in collecting proofs that 
 Waterland was right in the explanation which he gave 
 in the notes to his tenth chapter, that here and there 
 our "translators followed Bry ling's Greek copy." It was 
 worthy of an effort, I conceived, to reproduce " BryUng's " 
 text. I had materials enough to do this, if only my 
 materials could be trusted. More than one writer had 
 printed several copies of the Greek Creed, and professed 
 to give the various readings in Bryling's copy. The thing 
 was simple and easy, but as I could not entirely depend 
 
85 
 
 on my autliorities, I called my version "a first approxi- 
 "mation." Here then I came in for Mr Brewer's ridicule; 
 — it was immaterial to iim that he was at the same time 
 ridiculing Waterland also: in his mode of reading, this 
 .result no doubt escaped his notice. He says indeed, "it is 
 " morally (!) certain that the Eeformers could not have 
 "seen Dr Swainson's Bryling as it did n'ot exist until 
 " 1870, and their work was done in 1549." The question 
 is whether they saw Bryling's Bryling ; or rather, whether 
 they saw and were deceived by any Greek version which 
 had the characteristics which Genebi^ard and Gundling assign 
 to Bryling. "It is morally certain" that they saw such 
 a version and used it. Such a version was common enough 
 in the 16th and 17th centuries; the copy which Dr Irons 
 has printed from Stephens' Greek Testament is identical 
 in all its main features (I except of course the unscholarlike 
 inaccuracies which Dr Irons has introduced) with the ver- 
 sion which I had printed a year and a half before. 
 
 This copy of Robert Stephens, of the year 1622 (1), is 
 the same no doubt as that which (as I had stated) was 
 printed by Henry Stephens in 1565 : this again is said by 
 Genebrard to have been nearly allied to the copy which 
 Bryling had published at Basle and to the MS. which 
 Lazarus Baiff had brought to Paris from Yenice in 1533. 
 I have had the assurance of a gentleman (who was to me a 
 perfect stranger and who has since gone to his rest) that a 
 MS. of which he gave me information at Florence and of 
 -which he subsequently sent me a collation, contains a text 
 almost identical.i I know that it is almost identical with 
 that which was printed by Wolfius Cephaleus at Strasburg, 
 1524. This last, Mr Brewer in his "desultory and h^p- 
 
86 
 
 " hazard fashion " attributed to the Eeformer Capito ; a very- 
 slight degree of attention would have prevented him from 
 making this somewhat immaterial blunder. More unjusti- 
 fiable was it to describe this text as "substantiating that 
 "which approaches nearest to the Latin Version" (p. 61). 
 What is the fact? It contains every feature which I noticed 
 as of vmporta/nce in influencing our English translation of 
 1649. 
 
 Now Waterland had marked four points where this 
 influence might be traced : I noticed four others. Of one 
 of these I wrote as follows : " My next is more serious. In 
 "1539 the translation of clause 19 was: 'For as we are 
 "'compelled by the Christian verity to confess separately 
 " ' every Person to be God and Lord; ' but now our version 
 "savours of "heresy, ' confess every Person by himself.' The 
 " error (for such I hold it to be) might (I thought) be traced 
 " to a misprint in Bryling's copy. For Genebrard gives it 
 "thus: 'oTi cos tStav fjitav kK.a.(TTqv virocrTacnv 6eov koI Kvpiov 
 " ' o/ioXoyetv ^la^o/xeSa.' In Henry Stephens' copy, as 
 " Montfaucon tells us, for ' tSt'av was read iSta, correctly.' 
 " "We may speak of a separate confession in regard to One 
 " or Other : but it is wrong to speak of One or Other as 
 " being by Himself" 
 
 Of another I said : "In clause 25, the somewhat offensive 
 "mode of speaking, savouring of tautology, so that in all 
 "things as is aforesaid, is to be traced to the Greek... The 
 " Latin is not tautologous j it calls renewed attention to the 
 " restrictions of the earlier clauses, Ita ut per omnia sictct 
 ''jam, supra dictum est. And the Teneranda sit," which had 
 been translated may he worshipped, " is altered to Is to he 
 "worshipped," again following the Greek, To six out of 
 
87 
 
 the eiglit alterations I raised no objection ; I adduced tliem 
 all to illustrate the fact that our Reformers had considered 
 the Greek to be the original. On this wa,s based my plea 
 for a revised translation. * 
 
 Now for Mr Brewer's account of this. He wrote, page 
 33, that I spoke "so very gingerly that he was not sure 
 " whether he grasped my meaning or whether there was any 
 " meaning to grasp : " but, notwithstanding his uncertainty, 
 he assumed that he had " grasped my meaning," and ex- 
 tended the objection which I had raised to one change ia 
 our version, so as to represent it as said of all. Thus (page 
 35) he says that " Professor Swainson, with all the gravity 
 "of Sancho Panza's physician in the Island of Barataria, 
 " assures me that whilst the word separate strengthens the 
 "stomach and is healthy of digestion, the word divide 
 "savours of heretical pravity and is naught." He adds, 
 "What is worse." On my "authority it must go forth to the 
 " world that we must no longer say the Holy and undivided, 
 " but the Holy and unsepartUed Trinity." On another point 
 he says (pp. 37 and 38) : " Dr Swainson labours hard to 
 " establish a similar discrepancy or offensive departure from 
 "the Latin in another clause with even less success :" Mr 
 B. refers to the "Veneranda sit," and accuses the transla- 
 tion of 1542 "of bad grammar" and me of making it. 
 On the same page 38 he speaks of a gentleman whom 
 I wUl not name, as "being perfectly willing to- go along 
 "with Dr Swainson in his attacks on the Athanasian 
 " Creed." Again (page 54), Dr Swainson " has accused the 
 " Reformers of introducing errors, tautology, and heretical 
 " assertions into the Oreed.^" On pages 33 and 34 he has 
 represented as my meaning, that by dngillatim compdlimwr 
 
88 
 
 (he spells it, singulatim), I understand "we are individually 
 " compelled," " which indeed is absurd both in fact and in 
 "grammar." Such are the colours with which Mr Brewer 
 paints up the statements I made. Other numerous errors 
 I pass over, and leave to my readers to decide whether his 
 description of himself is not essentially correct that he is, at 
 least so far as I am concerned, " a desultory and hap-hazard 
 " reader," careless as to whose feelings he may hurt, indifferent 
 to the effect which his words may produce. As it is, it has 
 gone out to the world that "Dr Swainson considers the 
 " Athanasian Creed savours of heresy." This crops up from 
 tinle to time. It was produced by Archdeacon Denison in 
 Convocation on the 24th April, 1872. I explained it to the 
 House that I referred only to a particular word in the 
 "translation."' The Archdeacon was satisfied: he said, "I 
 "hope we shall hear nothing more about it; if I meant 
 " to speak only of the translation I should carefully guard 
 " myself against being supposed to wish to interfere with 
 " the doctrine of the Creed." This I have ever done. It is 
 not my fault if Mr MacColl has once more repeated the 
 phrase; it is not my fault that after Mr Brewer had received 
 a personal explanation of my meaning, which he did on 
 July 6th, 1871, he should have revived the charge against 
 me in his book published in the October of that year. 
 
 I hope however that I have said enough to remove the 
 scruples of Mr Hope, and have so far set myself at one with 
 some of those from whom it is my sorrow now to differ. 
 
 In speaking of mistakes and misrepresentations I must 
 add something from Dr Irons {Athanasius contra Mundum, 
 p. 112). He connects the names of Mr Ffoulkes and myself, 
 and says, " I will not imitate their manner : but I would say 
 
89 
 
 " very sacredly, that I hoW them to the statement that 
 " " Alcuin ' lied ' and ' hnew that he was lying! ' See Efoulkes, 
 "p. 258; and that our great divines from Hooker and 
 " Andrewes till now, have given us in the Creed what 
 " ' savours of heresy.' " I never said that Alcuin Ked: I never 
 said thsit Alcuin knew that he was lying. I never said that 
 Hooker and Andrewes gave us in the Creed what savours of 
 heresy. Yet these are the statements by which the laymen 
 of the country are urged to action : these are the weapons 
 with which the meeting at Leeds was armed. 
 
90 
 
 posTSCKiPT vni. 
 
 I FIND that both. Dr Liddon and Dr Pusey speak of the 
 Athanasian Creed as being of universal authority. So 
 far as relates to the doctrines enunciated in it (with the 
 exception of the Procession of the Holy Spirit) I accept 
 their position, — except perhaps that its statements con- 
 cerning the Human Nature of our Lord are rejected im- 
 plicitly by some of our modern so called Ritualists and 
 others. The language -which these divines use of it how- 
 ever so far varies that it is worthy of consideration. The 
 former in his recent sermon (p. 19), speaking of the creed as 
 a whole, describes it as "a document of world-wide autho- 
 rity." On a later page (30) he stated this : "If the argument 
 " should be obtruded that no CEcunienical Council had 
 " sanctioned this Creed, or that its place in the Services of 
 " the East was doubtful or insignificant, it would be replied 
 " that the Apostles' Creed, too, could point to no formal 
 " (Ecumenical decisions in its favour, — ^to nothing but the 
 " separate reception of the severed branches of the Church, 
 " and that it also is used nowhere in the Eastern Services." 
 Does Dr Liddon suppose that our position is, that we will 
 believe nothing except what comes to us on the sanction of 
 an (Ecumenical Council 1 that we will use no document in 
 
91 
 
 our Services unless it lias a place in tlic Services of the 
 Eastern Churcti? I thiuk he may look through all the 
 letters -which have been written on the subject before he 
 finds any proposition so absurd as this. He must have had 
 a poor appreciation of the reasoning powers of an Oxford 
 University congregation when he put forward from the 
 University pulpit the sentence I have quoted. 
 
 Now the " argument " that the Athanasian Creed is a 
 Catholic confession, that it is of world-wide authority, comes 
 from Dr Liddon, not from us. Are we prohibited from 
 questioning this " argument "1 What then if we deny the 
 feet implied i What if we deny that the Athanasian Creed 
 is a Creed of the Greek Church 1 What if we repeat the 
 well-known truth, that the Greek Church owns no Symbol 
 but one — that of Constantinople ? 
 
 Dr Liddon answers : " You must give up the Apostles' 
 Creed." 
 
 Why? 
 
 And this is " argument " worthy of the Oxford pulpit ! 
 
 Dr Pusey descends to particulars (p. 82) : "The Apostles' 
 " and the Athanasian Creed Jiave alike been received into the 
 " public service of the Western Church : the Athanasian 
 " Creed has received the distinct approval of the Eastern 
 " Church j and so have the authority of the whole Church, 
 "which everywhere, although separately, has borne and 
 " bears witness to the truth." (I print the sentence ver- 
 batim: a note is appended.) "The Eev. G. Williams tells 
 « us : — n ) that in a kiud of Appendix to the Horolo- 
 "gium, in which the Athanasian Creed is printed, it is 
 "stated to be 'consonavi with the doctrine of the orthodox 
 " ' church.' (2) In the Sifvoi/ris tepa, being an abbreviation 
 
92 
 
 " of the Hours, it is described (with the rest of the contents 
 " on the title-page) as useful to each Christian. (3) Macarius, 
 " a Russian divine of repute, places the Athanasian Creed 
 " among the ' exposiUons of the Faith, which, though not ex- 
 " ' amined and expressly approved by a general council, are yet 
 "' received hy the whole Catholic Church.' " With reference 
 to this, I must repeat, what I have stated in the Guwrdiam, 
 newspaper, that I have it on the best authority that no 
 Horology is known of the many editions before 1787 in 
 which the Athanasian Creed is printed. It occurs for the 
 first time in one which was pubKshed in Venice in that year. 
 The general truth of this statement may be examined by any 
 person who has access to the Library of the British Museum. 
 I have also stated that the Horologies, in their modern 
 form, printed at Venice, are essentially unauthorised publi- 
 cations : and that the appearance of the Athanasian Creed, 
 in 1787 and since, in no way compromises the Greek Church. 
 I have stated on the authority of the Vice-Librarian at St 
 Mark's, Signor Veludo, that in an authorised copy of the 
 Horologium printed at Constantinople in 1869, the Athana- 
 sian Creed is omitted as not necessary, and as having no 
 part in the office of the Church. Thus, if I may revert to 
 Dr Liddon's words in the University pulpit, " the place of 
 " the Athanasian Creed in the Services of the Eastern 
 " Church cannot be described as doubtful or insignificant.'' 
 So far as the evidence goes, it has no place at all in those 
 services. (2) Its position in the sacred Synopsis may be dis- 
 missed at once. And (3) the judgment of Macarius does not 
 bear upon the question. I wUl repeat that the Eastern 
 Church knows only one Creed, and that is the Creed of 
 Constantinople. 
 
93 
 
 Dr Pusey speaks of the Athanasian Creed being received 
 into the Public Service of the Western Church. With this I 
 must contrast the statement of Dr Newman (see Mr Mac- 
 Coll, p. 24) : "It is no sound argument that you should 
 " remove it from your Common Prayer because we haven't 
 " it in our Common Prayer, for we have no United Vocal 
 " Common Prayer'''' (sic) ; " The Athanasian Creed is im- 
 " posed upon our Clergy." Thus its position in the use of 
 the Church of England is unique. 
 
94 
 
 POSTSCEIPT IX. 
 
 I HAVE spoken in my letter of tlie surprise I felt when 
 I found, associated together on the Committee for the De- 
 fence of the Athanasian Creed, the names of Dr Liddon, 
 Mr MacCoU, and Dr Pusey. I must confess that I am 
 now surprised at learning that Mr MacColl was appointed 
 Honorary Secretary of this Committee. 
 
 Of course I cannot blame the members of the Com- 
 mittee for their ignorance that in his letter to Mr Gladstone 
 on the Damnatory Clauses of the Athanasian Creed, Mr 
 MacColl had revived against me a charge, the truth of 
 which had been again and again repudiated by me. This, 
 although it has its importance in my own judgment, cannot 
 injure my estimate of the Committee. But I cannot close 
 my mind to the painful conviction that in their appoint- 
 ment of their Secretary, the Committee will be viewed as 
 essentially expressing their approval of the work which 
 Mr MacColl had contributed to the Athanasian contro- 
 versy ; and it is in this light that certain features of this 
 letter assume an importance which most certainly they 
 coald not claim from any other oosisideration. 
 
 It is not enough however that the Committee in select- 
 ing as their Secretary one who avows that " the damnatory 
 
95 
 
 " clauses tave never presented the smallest difficulty to his 
 " mind" {Letter, p. 41), have signified their want of sympathy 
 with the Deans, Archdeacons, Professors, Masters and Fel- 
 lows of Colleges, Heads of Schools, and Clergy of the Me- 
 tropolis and elsewhere, who have expressed their anxiety 
 "to have some change either in the rubric or damnatory 
 " clauses, so that the Creed in its present form shall no 
 " longer remain a necessary part of the public worship of 
 " the Church of England :" they have also exhibited their 
 unwillingness or inability to listen even with courtesy to our 
 complaints or to our arguments. As the difficulty we feel 
 is not of the slightest moment to their Secretary, it must 
 be considered that it is not of the slightest moment to them- 
 selves. " They jest at scars who never felt a wound." The 
 character of some of these jests I will now exhibit. 
 
 Dr Westcott, Dr Lightfoot, and I had described the Atha- 
 nasian Creed as consisting of two parts : " the Exposition 
 " of the Catholic Faith and the Admonitory Clauses, which 
 '^ are the setting." On this : " All that has been said of, the 
 " damnatory clauses being only the setting of the creed is 
 "mere rubbish," is the remark of the person whom the 
 Committee have chosen to conduct their correspondence 
 (p. 29). Information had been given from many quarters 
 as to the non-use of the Creed in the Greek Church, its 
 partial use in the Boman Church. "All that has been 
 " said or written on the point may be dismissed as irrele- 
 "vant rhetoric" (p. 28). So "Dean Stanley will not be 
 "offended if I take the liberty of expressing my humble 
 "opinion that his strong feeling against the Athanasian 
 " Creed has in some degree made him colour-blind " (p. 54). 
 Then we read of Mr Ffoulkes' "historic vagaries;" his 
 
96 
 
 " antipathy to the creed amounts to a kind of craze " (p. 65). 
 A passage from an article in the Contempora/ry Review — 
 (signed, I may say in passing, with a nom-de-plume which 
 had caused it to be falsely attributed to a distinguished 
 ecclesiastic) — shews that "much of the feeling against the 
 "Athanasian Creed is based on the grossest ignorance of 
 "the very rudiments of moral science;" whilst the writer 
 of that article, " with the innocent ingenuousness of igno- 
 " ranee, coolly propounds a doctrine which strikes at the 
 "very foundation of both theology and morality" (p. 74). 
 These phrases occur in the first 74 pages of a letter which 
 runs over about 212, and are the most prominent features 
 of this part of Mr MacColl's book. Over the remainder of 
 the letter such language is spread with a more sparing 
 hand. But I find that Dr Vogan, a defender of the Atha- 
 nasian Creed, is equally exposed to this kind of treatment. 
 In his work on the Tribe Doctrine of the Euoliarist — the 
 value of which is at present eclipsed by the prominent 
 position of the controversy relating to the Quicunque — the 
 learned Bampton Lecturer of 1837 has expressed his opinion 
 that when our Lord appeared to His disciples, " the doors 
 " having been shut," the doors were opened by a miracle. 
 This was I believe the explanation of Jerome ; but the re- 
 marks which it draws forth from Mr MacCoU are these: 
 " That is to say, instead of our Lord's Body being supematu- 
 " ral, and therefore independent of the laws of nature. He 
 " possessed some talismanic Sesame which could open closed 
 " doors and close the open eyes of the multitude. By a 
 " parity of reasoning, Dr Vogan would hold that our Lord 
 " ascended from Mount Olivet in an etherial balloon. I do 
 " not consider it necessary, nor would it be reverent, to discuss 
 
97 
 
 "puerilities of reasoning like these" (p. 139, note). Once 
 more, language used by the Eev. James Martineau — whom 
 he calls, p. 146, "an ahle and cultivated writer," — ^is on 
 p. 148 described as "pure unmitigated rant.'' Such is the 
 language with which a "rational explanation" of the 
 Damnatory Clauses was offered to one of the most accom- 
 plished of English statesmen, and through him to the English 
 Chutch and to English society. I have not quoted the 
 words in which the supposed action of the Bishop of St 
 David's towards Mr Newman was presented to us : my 
 complaint is that the Committee constituted at Leeds se- 
 lected the writer of such language as peculiarly fitted to 
 serve them in the position of honorary secretary. Such is 
 the amount of consideration they have for the feelings of 
 their opponents : such are the weapons with which they 
 think that the convictions or the prejudices (whichever 
 they may. call them) of Deans, Archdeacons and Clergy 
 are to be overcome. 
 
 But the book has a further ioterest. 
 
 I am led by the contents of the volunie to test what 
 the gentlemen who met at Leeds meant when they avowed 
 their repugnance to any change which might seem to " mili- 
 "tate against the importance of dogmatic truth," or shake 
 "the conviction of the members of the Church in the 
 " necessity of a right faith to eternal salvation." "We hear 
 much of the "well-instructed" members of the Church, 
 and receive hints how competent such "well-instructed" 
 persons are to teach us "groping professors" as to the 
 meaning of the* English language. I must presume there- 
 fore that the really distinguished statesmen and members 
 of Parliament, who came forward at Leeds to uphold the 
 
 7 
 
98 
 
 importance of dogmatic 1/ruih and tlie necessity to salvation 
 of a right faith, ought to know something both of dogmatic 
 truth and of the right faith. Let us now test the sound- 
 ness of the views to which they have given their approbg.- 
 tion. 
 
 If there is one heresy regarding our Lord's Person which 
 cuts at the foundation of all right faith, not only in the 
 , Atoning Sacrifice, but also in the Sympathy of our Blessed 
 Redeemer, it is the heresy that our Lord's Body was not 
 a Body of human flesh, and that, when He arose from the 
 dead, He did not take again that Body with flesh and bones 
 and all things pertaining to the perfection of Man's nature. 
 The truth on this subject is stated in our Articles; it is 
 stated in our Athanasian Creed; and "we should at least 
 expect that they who say that they va]«e the Creed should 
 know this part of its contents. Contrast with this the 
 following passage of "the letter to Mr Gladstone on the 
 " Damnatory Clauses." 
 
 " But it is evident that whatever is meant by the Flesh 
 " and Bones of our Lord's Resurrection-Body they are 
 " generically different from our flesh and bones. What we 
 " call flesh and bone is simply a consolidation of certain 
 "gases which may be resolved into their original elements, 
 "and then they cease to be flesh and bone. But while 
 "they remain flesh and bone they are subject to decay, and 
 •'the ceaseless waste of tissue requires to be repaired by 
 "the assimilation of congenial nutriment. Therefore, a 
 " body of such flesh and bone as we have any experience 
 "of cannot subsist without food ; nor can it pass through 
 •' material substances, such as a closed door, nor mount up 
 " into the air contrary to the law of gravity, nor become 
 
99 
 
 "visible and invisible witliout apparent caiise. But our 
 " Lord's Body did all this. It is incorruptible, and there- 
 " fore needs no food. It passed repeatedly through a closed 
 " door. It ascended through the air in a manner contrary 
 "to all the known properties of a human body. It apr 
 " peared suddenly, and as suddenly vanished out of sight. 
 " Even before His Resurrection our Lord's Body appears to 
 "have possessed properties ■which ours do not possess, or 
 ".possess only in germ. He walked upon the waves, and 
 " gave Peter power to do so till his faith failed him. He 
 " made Himself invisible on more than one occasion when 
 " His enemies were about to seize Him ; and He was 
 " transfigured on Mount Tabor. This seems to show that 
 " His Body was in Its essence always a spiritual body. So 
 " that It could be emancipated at will from the laws of mat- 
 " ter, and could retire within the 'sphere of spiritual laws. 
 " Of course His absolute sinlessness, and the union of His 
 " Sacred Humanity with His Divine Person, must always 
 "have made a certain difference between His Body and 
 "those of ordinary men. But sin, with its consequences,' 
 " does not belong to the integrity of human nature, though 
 "it suppresses the natural development of our bodies, so 
 "that they cannot realize their perfection without the 
 " violent dissolution which we call -death. But surely the 
 "properties of the spiritual body are even now latent in 
 " our mortal frame, and, but for sin, might, show themselves 
 "independent of the laws of matter, as our Lord's Body 
 "did occasionally before His Eesurrection, and normally 
 '■' after that event. 
 
 "When, therefore, the Fourth Article affirms that 
 *' i Christ did truly rise again from death, and took again 
 
 7—2 
 
100 
 
 " ' His Body, with flesh, bones, and all things pertaining 
 " ' to the perfection of man's nature, ■wherewith He ascended 
 " ' into Heaven,' it does not at all follow that the phrase, 
 " ' His body, with flesh and bones,' connotes the same 
 "thing as it does in the case of our bodies. In fact, it 
 "cannot do so; for 'flesh and blood cannot inherit the 
 "'kingdom of God, neither doth corruption inherit in- 
 "' corruption.' Our Lord's Body possesses, of course, 'all 
 " ' things pertaining to the perfection of man's nature.' But 
 " it is certain that flesh and blood, bone and muscle, do not 
 " belong ' to the perfection of man's nature.' They belong 
 " to the region of decay and death, and therefore our Lord 
 "has them not. The terms may express the nearest ap- 
 "proach which our minds can now make to the conception 
 "of a spiritual body; but they cannot be pressed literally 
 " without violence both to Holy Scripture and to right 
 "reason." 
 
 I have given the whole of this remarkable passage in 
 order that I may escape the danger of quoting only that 
 which may seem to suit my purpose. I will however now 
 repeat the clauses which are fuU of moment. " "Whatever 
 " is meant by the Plesh and Bones of our Lord's B,esurrec- 
 " tion-Body, they are generically different from our flesh and 
 " bones." In a note the writer says (as I have quoted also) 
 that His Body was " supernatural and therefore independent 
 " of the laws of nature." " Even before His Resurrection 
 " our Lord's Body appears to have possessed properties 
 " which ours do not possess, or possess only in germ. He 
 " walked upon the waves." " His absolute sinlessness and 
 "the union of His Sacred Humanity with HLs Divine 
 " Person must always have made a certain difference betweeli 
 
101 
 
 " His Body and those of ordinary men." " It is certain that 
 "flesh and blood, bone and muscle, do not belong to the 
 " perfection of man's nature." " The terms [of our article] 
 " cannot be pressed literally without violence both to Holy 
 " Scriptures and right reason." 
 
 Now, in some respects, I am prepared to hold that the 
 subjects of the Athanasian Creed are of a kind which belong 
 to scientific theology, in which the enunciation of the truth 
 is of more importance to those who go below the surface 
 than to those who are content to walk in the simpler faith 
 of the Apostles' creed. But the character of our Lord's 
 Body ; the fact that Jesus Christ came in the Flesh ; the 
 fact that He had what He called Flesh and Bones after His 
 Resurrection ; these lie on the surface of our Faith : and 
 any questioning of that seems to me to come painfully near 
 to a kind of teaching which was condemned in St John's 
 Epistles. Moreover this writer seems to me to contradict 
 the direct assertion of our Lord. Mr MacColl says : " Flesh 
 " ...and bone... belong to the region of decay and death, and 
 "therefore our Lord has them not : " Our Lord's words had 
 been : " Handle Me, and see, that it is I myself : for a Spirit 
 " hath not flesh and bones as ye see Me have.'' 
 
 Here is the contradiction. — Mr Hope has said, " that 
 " the attack upon the Creed proceeds from those who are 
 " making use of the theological ignorance of many of their 
 " countrymen." Who, I ask, is attacking the Creed of the 
 Church ? Whose theological ignorance is here made use of ? 
 Who was it that wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury not 
 long ago on the necessity of a right faith to salvation 1 Is 
 this the right faith, which the noble letter-writer has taken 
 under his patronage? Or am I to question the salvability of 
 
1G2 
 
 tliis nobleman t the salvability of his secretary ? Or am T 
 to suppose that the plea of " unavoidable ignorance " will be 
 Tised to save them both ? But (I quote now the language of 
 Mr Brewer) : Faith is necessary to salvation — -faith whole 
 and undefiled hy error of any hind ! — In his sermon on the 
 Eule of Faith we were told by Dr Pusey that " The caprice 
 " and self-will of innovators, the iStos vovs and the iSta irpoaC- 
 "pco-is, are what are condemned by the Ancient Church; not 
 " the reverent investigation of antiquity with implicit sub- 
 " mission to its authority" (p. 48). "Where is the implicit 
 submission here 1 Mr MacColl seems to plume himself 
 upon his knowledge of antiquity ; he has discovered that 
 deference is due to the Six CEcumenical Councils. Has he 
 forgotten the definition of the Fourth, and the letter of St Leo 
 which received the sanction of that Council ? I cannot 
 quote it all, but I will refer the laymen on the committee 
 to words with which they may compare the language I have 
 quoted above. " In our Lord's person (says St Leo) the pre- 
 " perties of each Nature were preserved.". .." To hunger and 
 " thirst and be weary was human : to walk over the surface 
 " of the sea with unsinking feet was undoubtedly divine. 
 " To enter within the closed door was the mark of His 
 "Deity: to give His Body to be handled and His wounds 
 
 " to be touched was a mark of His Humapity When 
 
 " Eutyches gi'ows dark concerning the nature of Christ's 
 " Body, it follows of necessity that he wanders in darkness 
 " in regard to His passion." Compare this with the language 
 which the Defence Committee have taken under their 
 patronage — and note the differences. According to this 
 language, it was our Lord's Body " that was independent 
 " of the laws of matter : " our Lord's Body that " passed 
 
103 
 
 "througli the closed doors;" our Lord's Body tiat "was; 
 " in its essence always a Spiritual Body." St Leo says that 
 " His Flesh never left the nature of our race." — ^The very- 
 words which the Committee have accepted, " the union of 
 " His Sacred Humanity with his Divine Person," show how 
 unaccustomed they are to the carefully guarded language of, 
 Chalcedon; that speaks of "the two Natures, the Divine and^ 
 " the Human, being united in the One Person of our Lord." 
 Again ; the words which have been accepted relative to 
 the Ascension call for a. similar remonstrance. They have 
 been referred to by another; I cannot pass them over. To 
 those who hold " imperfect views on the Incarnation " (the 
 views, that is, of St Leo and Chalcedon!) "the Sacrament is. 
 " only a symbolical picture of the death of Christ," " but the 
 " God-Man is absent — far away beyond Sirius and the MUky. 
 "Way," and, in this writer's sarcasm, "we are to ascend 
 " where He is in imagination and feeling" (p. 153). Have 
 the Members of the Committee ever attempted to do this 1 
 Is the effort deserving of 'such scorn ? " If ye then were. 
 ^' raised together with' Christ, seek the things above, where 
 " Christ is, seated at the right hand of God." Sursum corda 
 meets with poor response in the heart of the modern 
 ritualist. Mr Bennett has spoken of " the visible presence 
 " of our Lord upon the altars of our churches," Mr Shipley, 
 of "God's presence now shortly to be manifested on His 
 " Altar." — Have they ceased to attempt to realise the con- 
 ception of the Apostle : ''When we were dead in trans- 
 "gressions God quickened us together with Christ and 
 " raised us up together, and seated us together in the 
 "heavenly places, in Christ Jesus"? This modern school 
 seems to have given up aU attempt to raise its scholars up 
 
104 
 
 to Chirist : and the ethical effect of this their tendency is 
 seen in the character of their writings ; in the columns of 
 the Church Times, and in the letters of which we complain. 
 
 The clauses which, looking at their historical character 
 I have called " commendatory," have been spoken of again 
 and again as being outworks of the truth. At times, 
 for the sake of protecting the citadel, it is necessary to 
 evacuate an outpost; it may become untenable. Such 
 is my conception of these clauses now. The opinion of 
 others is different. At present, my complaint is this, that 
 the figure is reversed, and the Creed is represented as if it 
 existed for the sake of its outposts. In this view I cannot 
 acquiesce. In my Letter I have represented the danger we 
 are in; it comes more and more vividly before me as I 
 draw these remarks to a close. I see that the outpost is now 
 used for the purpose of firing into the citadel; the Faith is 
 in danger from those who speak of the importance of main- 
 taining it. The fact is, that the modern ritualistic views 
 of the Eucharist are inconsistent with the statements of the 
 Council of Chalcedon. The Eutychianism with which the 
 Lutheran dogma of ubiquity was charged has spread among 
 some of our English clergy : they little know of the channel 
 through which it comes to them. — It is our business to re- 
 sist its deadly consequences; our business to maintain the 
 perfect Humanity of our blessed Lord. We may be called 
 infidels for this our effort, but we must persist; And why? 
 Because we have compared the decisions of these early coun- 
 cils on doctrinal matters with the Holy Scriptures, and are 
 satisfied that those decisions are correct. "We plead for their 
 truth. We maintain their integrity, even while we dare not 
 63.y that except a man keep them whole and undefiled, witlv- 
 
105 
 
 out doubt lie shall perish everlastingly. Imperfect we ac- 
 knowledge their faith to be who know them not : dangerous 
 their position to be who, having known them, have delibe- 
 rately rejected theai : but these commending clauses in their 
 present damnatory form hinder rather than promote the 
 truth, and therefore we wish to see them altered. They have 
 been compared to a warning bell; but the amiable writer 
 forgot that a warning bell may produce the very danger 
 which it was intended to avert. Without it men may be 
 on their guard : but, if its voice is heard to a distance far 
 beyond the sphere of danger, the sailor becomes careless in 
 his weariness of false alarms : its echoes may come upon 
 him in a delusive, bewildering fashion, and thus he may 
 make shipwreck. Unjustifiable was it to separate the words 
 of Mark xvi. 16 from their context, and attach them to the 
 Athanasian Creed : dangerous was it to put the Creed in its 
 bare form, as the creed of the laity. The proceedings at 
 Leeds would show that this it can never be; the subjects 
 touched upon are essentially too professional : whilst the use 
 of the commencing and concluding clauses has thrown dis- 
 credit on the words of Scripture : and men wUl not believe 
 Mark xvi. 16 because they cannot believe their application 
 in the Quicunque. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
 OAMBKIDGE : PBINTED B1 C. J. CLAI, M.A. i.1 THE UHIYEKSII1 PBES8. 
 
By the same Writer. 
 
 An Essay on the History of Article XXIX., and of 
 the 13th Elizabeth, cap. 12. Is. 6(Z. 
 
 The Creeds of the Church in their Relations to the 
 Word of God and to the Conscience of the Individual Chris- 
 tian. 9$. 
 
 The Hvilsean Leotvires for the' Tear 1857. 
 
 The Authority of the !New Testament. The Convic- 
 tion of Eighteousness. The Ministry of Beconciliation. 12s. 
 
 The first two Courses being the Hulsean Lectures for 1858 ; 
 the last, a Course preached before the UniTersity of Cambridge in 
 December, 1848. 
 
 &c, &c. 
 
 MACMILLAN AND CO. 
 
:i 
 
 M] 
 
 I