^^mmm ¦BJj^^SHHH ^ , .¦ [ *S*"& ¦o ^^^^"'"^''^' -^ .^f. . ^S-- 4 ^ #^|kAf-r ^*^ » "n.^^ «<->:i *':! ^5 ^V' '- I--' A CRITICAL DISSERTATION ON THE ATHANASIAN CREED OMMANNEY HENRY FROWDE Oxford University Press Warehouse Amen Corner, E.G. the macmillan CO., 66 fifth avenue A CRITICAL DISSERTATION ON THE ATHANASIAN CREED ITS ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, DATE, AUTHORSHIP, TITLES, TEXT, RECEPTION, AND USE G. D. W. OMMANNEY, M.A. PREBENDARY OF WELLS Author of 'The Atlianasian Creed,, an examination of recent theories respecting its Date and Origin^^ and of ' Early History of the Aihanasian Creeds the results of some original research -upon the subject ' AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 1897 Oxfotb PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS BY HORACE HART PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY Om(a PREFACE Many years ago the late Dean Burgon suggested to me, as a work which I might usefully undertake, to supply the desideratum of a complete account up to date of the Athanasian Creed. The following pages are the result of a very humble but I trust honest attempt, so far as it goes, to reach the high ideal thus set before me. Of its imperfections I am fully sensible. It is almost needless to say that I have derived great assistance from the well-known work of Water- land upon the subject, which, though it necessarily falls short of our present standard of knowledge, possesses a permanent value. But I have not accepted his statements and conclusions without examination, and in some cases have been unable to follow him ; as, for instance, in regard to the Commentary ascribed by him to Venantius Fortu- natus, but which seems to me to be of uncertain authorship. vi Preface. Another book which has furnished me with in formation is the late Dr. Swainson's work on the Creeds, and I am all the more ready to make the acknowledgement, as I differ entirely from the author's theories with respect to the origin, con struction, and date of the Qidcunque vult. This was my introduction to the important MSS. of the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris — Latin 13,159, 1,451, and 3,848 B. The information thus acquired has been sup plemented by the results of study and research carried on, as opportunity lias permitted, for more than twenty years in our own public Libraries and in some foreign collections, viz. the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris, the Public Library at Troyes, the Ambrosian Library at Milan, and the Vatican. It will be seen that I have divided the work into two parts, the first treating in detail of the various authorities and documents on which the history of the Creed rests, the second stating the conclusions to be drawn from them in regard to the several points of principal interest and importance. Any person, not largely endowed with the gift of patience, may do wisely to proceed at once to the second part, and if he wishes to examine the grounds of any particular conclusion as explained in the first, he will be able to do so by means of reference to the list of contents and the foot-notes. Preface. vii The present volume comprises, together with much additional matter, the substance of two volumes previously issued by me on the same subject. My sincere thanks are due to the Rev. C. E. Plumb, Principal of St. Stephen's House, Oxford, for kindly undertaking the troublesome but useful task of compiling Indices. To others, who have assisted me by advice or information, I have expressed my grateful acknowledgements in the various passages of my book where they are called for. G. D. W. OMMANNEY. Oxford, Koveinber, 1896. CONTENTS PART I. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. PAGE Introductory ......... i CHAPTER I. Testimonies ........ 2-46 I. Avitus, Bishop of Vienna. 2. Sermon on the Apostles' Creed addressed to Catechumens at the ' Traditio Symboli.' 3. Another Sermon of the same class, attributed to Caesarius, Bishop of Aries. 4. A fragment of a third, sometimes inaccurately described as the Colbertine manuscript of the Athanasian Creed, in this volume generally referred to as the ' Treves fragment.' 5. Confession of Faith of the Fourtli Council of Toledo. 6. Confession of Faith of Denebert, Bishop of the Wiccii or Worcester. 7. Alcuin, Libellus de Processione Spiiitus Sancti. 8. Theodulf, Bishop of Orleans, De Spiritu Sancto. g. Letter of Franl< monies of Mount Olivet at Jerusalem. 10. Agobard, Bishop of Lyons. 11. Cata logue of Abbots of Fleury on the Loire. 12. Letter of Floras the Deacon to Hyldrad the Abbot. 13. Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims. 14. Anscharius, Archbishop of Hamburg and Bremen.. 15. Ratramn or Bertram, Contra Graecorum opposita. 16. .^neas, Bishop of Paris, Liber adversus Graecos. 17. Confession of Faith of Adalbert, Bishop of Morinum. 18. Ancient Charter, quoted by Martene. 19. Udalric, Consuetiidines Cluniacenses. 20. Ratherius, Bishop of Verona. 21. K\>\>o'S\ox\a.QeDSii,Apologeiicus. 22.^1fric, Homily De Fide Catholica. 23. Irish document edited by the late Bishop Reeves. 24. Honorius of Autun, Gemma am'mae. 25. Abelard, Epistolae i. and x. 26. Otto, Bishop of Freisingen, Chronicle. 27. Henry, Abbot of Brunswick, quoted in the Chrotiicle of Arnold, Abbot of Liibeck. 28. Treatise ascribed to Robert Paululns of Amiens. 29. John Beleth, Rationale. 30. Letter of the Legates of Pope Gregory IX respecting their mission to the Eastern Church. 31. Alexander Hales, Summa Theologiae. 32. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae 33. Johannes Janu- ensis, sometimes called Balbus, Catholicon. 34. Gulielmus Du- randus or Durantus, Rationale. 31;. Ludolphus Saxo, De vita Christi. X Contents. CHAPTER II. PAGE Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions . . . 47-92 1. Epistola Canonica. 2. Canon of Autun. 3. Theodulf, Capi- tulare, also Capitula ad Presbyteros. 4. Other evidence of the use of the Athanasian Creed being enjoined by authority in the time of Charlemagne. 5. Hatto or Hetto or Ahyto, Bishop of Basle, Capitulare. 6. Capitulare drawn up during the reign of ^ the Emperor Lothair. 7. Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, Capitula Synodica. 8. Riculfus, Bishop of Soissons, Capitula. 9. Regino, Abbot of Prum, Libri duo de Eccksiasticis disciplinis. 10. Ad- monitio synodalis. 11. Atto, Bishop of Vercellae, Capitulare. 12, Ratherius, Bishop of Verona, Synodica. 13. Walter de Canti- lupe. Bishop of Worcester, Constitutiones. 14. Walter de Kirkham, Bishop of Durham, Constitutiones. 15. Peter Quivil, Bishop of Exeter, Constitutiones. 16, Confession of Faith in the Sarum Ordo ad visitandum infirmiim. CHAPTER III. .Manuscript Copies ....... 93-165 I. Milan Ambrosian Library, O. 212, of the eighth century — a brief collection of Confessions of Faith and works upon dogma. 2. MS. of the same century, mentioned by Montfaucon as belonging to the Abbey of St. Germain-des-Pres in Paris, but now lost. 3. Another, probably belonging to the same century, mentioned by Mabillon, also lost. 4. Codex numbered xxviii in Denis' Catalogue of Theological Manusciipts in the Imperial Library at Vienna — a Psalter written in the latter part of the eighth century. 5. Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin MS. 13,159 — a Psalter dating between Christmas 795 and Christmas 800. 6. Another MS. in the same Library, Latin 4,85iS. Xn this book, owing to its mutilation, the Athanasian Creed is imperfect. It is of the same epoch as the Vienna Psalter mentioned above. 7. In the same Library, Latin MS. 1,451, of the beginning of the ninth century — a collection of Canons. 8. In the same Library, Latin MS. 3,848 B, also of the early part of the ninth century. It includes inter alia the Herovall collection of Canons. 9. Psalter written in honour of the Emperor Lothair probably about 834. 10. The Utrecht Psalter, probably written early in the ninth century. 11. British Museum, Cotton MS. Galba A. xviii, sometimes described as King ^thelstan's Psalter. In this book the Psalms and Canticles, including the Athanasian Creed, were written in Germany between 817 and 850. 12. Rome, Vatican Library, Palat. MS. 574, of the ninth century — a collection of Canons. 13. No. 269 in Denis' Catalogue of Theological MSS. in the Vienna Imperial Library. In this book the Athanasian Creed follows the two books of Isidore of Seville addressed to Florentina, and it is foUowed by the original Nicene Creed and another Confession of Faith. 14. The Psalter of Charles the Bald, written between 842 and 869. It is deposited in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris. 15. Parker MS. 272. O. 5, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge — a Psalter dating probably 883. 16. A quadruple Psalter deposited at Bamberg, dating 909. 17. British Museum MS. Bib. Reg. 2. B. v — Psalter written in Contents. xi page England early in the tenth century. i8. Lambeth MS. 427 — Psalter written in England about the middle of the tenth century. 19. Salis bury Cathedral Library MS. 150 — Psalter written in England in the second half of the tenth century. 20. Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin MSS. 2,341 and 2,076, both assigned to the tenth century. The Athanasian Creed occurs in -a. series of Confessions of Faith, preserved in these two codices. 21. Rome, Vatican Library, Vat. MS. 82 — Psalter probably compiled in the Province of Liguria and in the tenth century. 22. In the same Library, Vat. 84 — Psalter assigned to the tenth century, and probably com piled in Central Italy. 23. Cambridge University Library, Ff. T. 23, written shortly before the Norman Conquest in England, probably at Canterbury. 24. Parker MS. 391, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge — Psalter written about the time of the Norman Conquest in England, probably at Worcester. 25. British Museum, Arundel MS. 60 — Psalter written at Winchester at the end of the eleventh century. 26. Oxford Bodleian Library, Canonici MS. Patr. Lat. 88 — Psalter of the tenth century written in Italy. 27. Paris, Cod. Mazarin, 364 — Breviary written at Monte Casino in 1099. CHAPTER IV. Commentaries or Expositions ..... 166-269 I. Commentary sometimes attributed to Venantius Fortnnatus. 2. The Troyes Commentary. 3. The Oratorian. 4. The Bouhier. 5. The Paris. 6. The Stavelot. 7. Commentary from an Orleans MS. attributed, but on uncertain grounds, to Theodulf. 8. Com mentary drawn partly from the Stavelot and partly from the Oratorian. 9. Commentary in the form of question and answer. 10. Commentary in Boulogne MS. 20. 11. Commentary in Bruno's Psalter. 12. Two expositions in Milan MS. M. 79. 13. Inter rogative Commentary in British Museum MS. Reg. 8. B. xiv. 14. Commentary in Milan MS. 1. 152. 15. Abelard's Commentary. 16. Discourse of Hildegardis, Abbess of St. Rupert near Bingen. 17. Commentary in Phillipps MS. 1655. 18. Commentary in Merton College, Oxford, MS. 208. 19. Commentary of Simon Tomacensis. 20. Of Alexander Necham. 21. Of Alexander Nequam. 22. Of Alexander Hales. 23. Of Richard Rolle of Hampole. 24. Of John Wyclif or one of his followers. 25. Of Dionysius Carthusiensis. 26, Of PetrusdeOsma. 27. Of Jacobus Perez. CHAPTER V. Versions ......... 270-332 I. Greek versions : (a) The first of four Greek versions edited by Montfaucon in his Diatribe de Symbolo Quicunque ; {B) the second ; {f) the third ; {d) the fourth ; (e) the first of two Greek versions edited by Professor Caspari ; (/) the second ; {g) the version in the Appendix to the Greek Horology. 2. English ver sions, including that in the Prayer Book. 3. German. 4. French. 5. Spanish. xii Contents. PART II. CONCLUSIONS. CHAPTER I. PAGE The Language .....••• 334-335 CHAPTER II. The Date 336-374 CHAPTER III. Authorship ........ 375-391 CHAPTER IV. Titles 392-406 CHAPTER V. The Text 407-419 CHAPTER VI. Reception and Use 420-459 APPENDIX. A. TfiivES Fragment ...... 461-462 B. Extract from Admoniiio synodalis . . . 462-463 C. Confession of Faith in Sarum Ordo ad visiiandum infirmum ........ 463-464 D. Latin Psalters ....... 465-472 E. The Text of the Athanasian Creed, as it appears in Waterland's Critical History, with Various Readings from seventeen Manuscripts 472-478 F. The Troyes Commentary from the Troyes MS. 804 478-491 G. The Oratorian Commentary from the same MS., with Collations from Mai's Edition . . 492-514 H. Preface to the Oratorian Commentary as edited BY Cardinal Mai, with Collations from the Vatican MS. Reg. 231 ..... 514-515 Contents. xiii I. The Bouhier Commentary from Troyes MS. 1,979, with Collations from Troyes 1,532 and British Museum Addit. 24,902 515-531 J. The Paris Commentary from Paris Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin MS. 1,012 .... 531-539 K. Greek Version of the Athanasian Creed from ^ilpai rfjs aeLTiapOivov Mapias kut' 'iOos rjjs 'Poj/naiK^? avA^s, printed by Aldus at Venice A. D. 1497 540-541 L. Portion of a Greek Version of the same from Vat. MS. 81 541 M. Early English Version of the same from British Museum MS. Addit. 17,376 .... 542-544 N. Wycliffite Version of the same from British Museum MS. Addit. 10,046 .... 544-546 General li^DEx 547 Index of Manuscripts ...... 554 ERRATA. p. 183, 1. ih'/"'' E. A. read A. E. Bum. P. 189, 1. 1 8, /«- controversy rea^ heresy. ]'. 212, 1. ^^^for is read in. P. 486, 1. 13./0'' montem read mortem. PART I. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. INTRODUCTORY. The evidences of the ancient history of the Athanasian Creed must be sought firstly in passages of ancient authors or documents containing express references to it or quoting or adopting its language : also in Canons and authoritative injunctions relating to it : also in manuscript copies of it now existing, or which are known to have existed, though now lost: also in Commentaries or expositions upon its text : lastly, in the different versions or translations into which it has been rendered. I propose first to review these several classes of evidence categorically, and then to consider the conclusions to be drawn from them with respect to the language in which the Creed was composed, its date and authorship, the titles applied to it, its text, its use and reception in the Church. In regard to the three first of these points it will be necessary also to take into consideration the internal evidence supplied by the document itself. CHAPTER I. TESTIMONIES. Passages of ancient authors or documents containing express references to the Creed or quoting or adopting its language. These I will classify as ancient testimonies. I. The earliest writer who can with good reason be alleged as a witness to the existence of the Quicunque and its reception in the Church as a work of authority is Avitus, who became Bishop of Vienna in Gaul, A.D. 490, and is believed to have died A.D. 518. In a fragment of a work De Divinitate Spiritus Sancti, written contra Gundobadttm Arrianuvi regent, he quotes, and that as from a well-known work of authority, the very language of the Athanasian Creed respecting the Holy Spirit : * quem nee factum legimus nee genitum nee creatum,' adding shortly afterwards : ' Nos vero Spiritum Sanctum dicimus a Filio et Patre procedere.' What makes the matter still more clear, if that is possible, is that in another fragment of the same book he refers, as it appears, to some formulated confession of the Catholic Faith as teaching this doctrine of the Double Procession : ' Sicut est proprium Spiritui Sancto a Patre Filioque procedere, istud Catholica Fides etiamsi renuentibus non persuaserit, in suae tamen disciplinae regula non excedit.' If a Con fession of Faith is here alluded to, what else but the Quicitnqite could be intended, the Filioqne not having been inserted, at least so far as we are aware, in the Constantino- Testimonies. 3 politan Creed so early as the commencement of the sixth century? We shall find too, as we proceed, that the Athanasian Creed was entitled sometimes ' Catholica Fides,' and that this was probably its earliest title ^. 3. Evidence of the early existence of the Athanasian Creed is supplied by Sermons on the Apostles' Creed addressed to Catechumens at the ' Traditio Symboli ' previous to Baptism. The first of these which I shall adduce, as being probably the earliest, is preserved in two MSS. of the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris; Latin 3848 B. and 2123^. It commences: 'Rogo vos et ad- moneo, fratres karissimi, quicunque vult salvus esse fidem rectam catholicam firmiter teneat inviolatamque conservet : quam si quis digne non habuerit, regnum Dei non possi- debit.' The resemblance here to the two first verses of the Creed is such, as to produce the conviction either that the Creed borrowed from the Sermon or the Sermon from the Creed. The latter is clearly the most probable alternative. In two other places the language of the Quicunque crops up — in the comment upon the Articles, ' conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary : ' ' Hoc est sine matre de Patre Deus ante secula, et homo de matre sine patre carnali in finem seculorum,' and in the exposition of the doctrine of the Trinity : ' Pater Deus est et Filius Deus est et Spiritus Sanctus Deus est et non sunt tres Dii, sed unus est Deus.' This discourse may be considered to be coeval with Avitus, the Creed which it expounds being of a type which cannot be assigned to a later date apparently, as it ' See Baluzii Miscellaneorum liber primus. Paris, 1678. Baluze published these fragments, as appears from the list of contents, from an ancient MS. of the Abbey of St. Gall in Switzerland. ^ The expository portion of it is printed in Appendix G of my volume entitled EaiHy History of the Atlianasian Creed. It was also edited by Caspari, Kirchenhistorische Anecdota, p. 283. B a 4 Documentary Evidence. \^^- did not contain the words ' passus ' or ' mortuus ' or ' omni- potentis,' nor yet the articles ' descendit ad inferna,' ' sanc torum communionem,' 'vitam aeternam.' In all probability it was preached in Gaul, but the author is unknown. 3. The second of these Sermons which I shall refer to as adopting the terminology of the Quicunque was at first published among the works of St. Augustine, but was relegated by the Benedictines to the Appendix of their edition, and assigned to Caesarius, who was Bishop of Aries from A.D. 50a until his death in 542 A.D.^ The commencement corresponds almost word for word with that of the previously-mentioned Sermon : ' Rogo et ad- moneo vos, fratres carissimi, ut quicunque vult salvus esse, fidem rectam ac catholicam discat, firmiter teneat, inviola tamque conservet.' The word ' discat ' introduced here is noticeable, as possibly suggested by the requirement to learn the Athanasian Creed by heart, which was imposed upon the clergy, as we shall see by-and-by, in places as early as the seventh and sixth centuries. The preacher then continues his address in terms apparently borrowed both from the first part of the Quicunque relating to the Trinity, and from the second relating to the Incarnation : ' Ita ergo oportet unicuique observare, ut credat Patrem, credat Filium, credat Spiritum Sanctum. Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus et Spiritus Sanctus ; sed tamen non tres Dii, sed unus Deus. Qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis et Spiritus Sanctus. Attamen credat unusquisque fidelis, quod Fihus aequalis est Patri secundum divinitatem et minor est Patri secundum humanitatem carnis.' 4. The third Sermon of this class which I must appeal to as a witness to the antiquity of the Athanasian Creed 1 S. Augustini Opera, Appendix tomi quinti, Sermo ccxliv : Migne, Patrol. Latina, torn, xxxix, 2 1 94. i-J Testimonies. 5 exists at present only in a fragmentary state. The frag ment is contained in No. 3836 of the Latin MSS. of the Paris National Library — a manuscript assigned by Palaeo graphers, without a single dissentient voice, to the eighth century, written in Lombardic characters and comprising an ancient collection of Canons. Montfaucon, in his Dia tribe de Symbolo Quicunque, says that experts of his time dated this MS. about the age of Pepin, i. e. the middle of the eighth century ; and such was his own opinion. The authors of the Nouveau Traits Diplomatique affirm that ' the Latinity and faulty spelling prove clearly enough that it was written before the revival of letters in the time of Charlemagne \' A facsimile of the writing, which in cludes the fragment we are referring to, appears in the third volume of the publications of the Palaeographical Society ; and the editors describe the MS. as belonging to the eighth century. This fragment is introduced after a reference to the Council of Chalcedon with the following note : ' Haec invini Treveris in uno libro scriptum sic incipiente Domini nostri Ihesu Christi et reliqua.' In it the author of the Sermon adapts and modifies several verses of the Athanasian Creed, for the purpose of in structing his hearers in the doctrine of the Incarnation. It begins abruptly with the words of the twenty-ninth verse : ' Domini nostri Ihesu Christi fideliter credat ; ' and all the verses following down to the thirty-ninth inclusive are thus dealt with. The text of the Creed is not followed literally and exactly. No verse is reproduced without some variation, and in some places the divergence is very great. The thirty-fifth verse is almost passed over. Still the re semblance between the two documents is sufficiently obvious to show beyond a possibility of doubt the close ' Tom. iii. p. 73. 6 Documentary Evidence. [c^^- relationship between them. One must have been framed from the other ; the Creed from the fragment or the reverse. The late Dr. Swainson and Dr. Lumby, following in his steps, believed the former to be the case, that the fragment was the embryo out of which the latter part of the Quicunque grew ; and very naturally they did so, con sidering the exigencies of their hypothesis respecting the Creed, that it is a work of the ninth century, not earlier. Notwithstanding these high authorities, I venture to main tain on the other hand, and with the fullest confidence, that the Treves fragment was built upon the Creed as its basis ; and I believe this to be the conclusion to which nine out of ten persons qualified to form an opinion on the subject would be led by a careful comparison of the two documents. As this is a point of great importance, I think it expedient to reproduce here as briefly as possible some particulars of the proof which on a previous occasion I produced upon the subject. Let the verses 34 and "^^ of the Creed be contrasted with the corresponding passages from St. Augustine and the fragment. ' Ut quemadmodum homo ' Unus omnino non ' Unus Christus est est anima et caro, sic esset confusione substantiae, non confusione substan- Christus Deus et homo, sed unitate personae. tiae, sed unitatem per- Idem Deus qui homo et qui Nam sicut anima ratio- sonae qui . . . passus,' Deus idem homo : non con- nalis et caro unus est etc. ( Treves f?-agment : fusione naturae sed unitate homo, ita Deus et homo see Appendix A.) personae.' (S. Augustini unus est Christus. Qui Sermo clxxxvi. cap. i.) passus est,' etc. {Atha- ' Sicut enim unus est nasian Creed, verses 34, homo anima rationalis et 35, 36.) caro, sic unus est Christus Deus et homo.' (IA. Tract. ill Johannis Evan., Ixxviii. sect. 3.) The reading ' unitatem ' may be passed by as of no significance. Probably it was owing to the io-norance or i-J Testimonies. 7 carelessness of the scribe, and was not originally in the Sermon. On comparison of the above passages it must be evident that the verses of the Creed could not be drawn from the fragment, because they contain important matter which is not to be found there, also that they were drawn from the passages of St. Augustine. In verse 34, ' unus omnino ' is an abbreviated rendering of ' idem Deus qui homo et qui Deus idem homo ' in the first passage of St. Augustine, and ' substantiae ' in the former is sub stituted for ' naturae ' in the latter. Verse 'i,^ is nothing but the second passage of St. Augustine with a similar transposition of words in each member of the sentence. It is still further clear that the fragment, or to speak more accurately, the author of the Sermon, of which it originally formed a part, drew immediately from the Creed, not from St. Augustine, because he adopts the ' substantiae ' of the former, not the ' naturae 'of the latter ; and, wishing to avoid using the illustration of Christ's unity which appears in verse 0,^, he still borrows from it ' Christus est,' and sub stitutes this for the ' omnino ' of the Creed in order to make clear the reference of ' qui . . . passus.' Obviously the verses of the Creed supplied the materials with which this passage of the fragment was constructed. This is quite sufficient proof of the point I contend for ; but I will add two others in confirmation. In the thirty-sixth verse the Athanasian Creed has ' ad inferos,' for which the fragment substitutes ' ad inferna ' — a change which the homilist would naturally make in discoursing at the ' Traditio Symboli,' for the Catechumens whom he was addressing would have just before been taught to repeat the latter words in the Apostles' Creed. On the other hand, if the Quicunqtie was drawn from the fragment, as Professors Swainson and Lumby have asserted, why did not the former retain the 8 Documentary Evidence. C^"- ' ad inferna ' of the latter ? The use of ' ad inferos ' in Con fessions of Faith is so very rare, comparatively speaking, that the substitution of it for the more common and familiar expression would be perfectly unaccountable. Once more the Creed reads ' resurgere habent ' in the thirty-eighth verse — a peculiar idiom, but one of common occurrence in the writings of St. Augustine. In its place the fragment gives ' erunt resurrecturi,' which savours of the corrupt Latinity of the sixth or seventh centuries. Had the author of the Creed drawn from the fragment, he would probably have substituted for this barbarism ' resur recturi sunt,' but it is most improbable that he would have put in its place such a peculiar expression as ' resurgere habent.' This Treves fragment is a document of such import ance • in the history of the Athanasian Creed, that we have great reason to be thankful for being furnished with an accurate copy of it in the facsimile of the Palaeo graphical Society. From this source I have printed it in Appendix A. It has been very frequently, indeed commonly, described as the Colbertine MS. of the Athanasian Creed — Colbertine, because the MS. containing it belonged originally to the Library of Colbert, the Minister of Louis XIV. And the result of this has been that an undue weight has been attached to it for determining the true readings and text of the Creed. But this view is entirely erroneous ; and it is specially necessary to note the error on account of the mischievous consequences with which it is fraught. The fragment, it is important to remember, is not a copy of the Athanasian Creed, nor yet of a part of it : but it is a copy of the conclusion of a Sermon delivered to Catechumens at the ' Traditio Symboli ' — the ceremony preparatory to 1.] Testimonies. 9 Baptism in which they were instructed in the Apostles' Creed ; and the preacher, as I have already said, therein gives an exposition of the doctrine of the Incarnation, which obviously, though not avowedly, is built upon the lines of the Quicunque, and to a certain extent, indeed a large extent, employs its very language. That this is the true nature of the document, is obvious in the first place from the remarkable variations which it presents when contrasted with the text of the Athanasian Creed as found in all ancient MSS., among which the diversity is notably small. And next, this is obvious from the fact of its modifying the words of the Creed for the purpose of a discourse. Thus instead of ' inde venturus iudicare vivos et mortuos ' we find, ' inde ad iudicandos vivos et mortuos credimus et speramus eum esse venturum.' And thirdly, it contains a distinct allusion to the ceremony of the ' Traditio Symboli ' in the words introduced immediately after the article 'ad dexteram Dei Patris sedet,' viz. 'sicut vobis in symbolo traditum est' It must be remarked also that these words occur immediately before the words — ' inde ad iudicandos,' &c. — ^just quoted, taken in connexion with which they show very plainly and vividly that this fragment was not only part of a Sermon, but of one addressed to Cate chumens at the ' Traditio Symboli.' Such being the true account of the Treves fragment, it follows that although it is not a copy of the Athanasian Creed nor of a part of it, still it is of the greatest value as evidence of its antiquity, the Creed being the basis, as we have seen, and supplying to some extent the very wording of the doctrinal teaching on the Incarnation contained in it or rather in the Sermon, of which it formed a part. What was the date of this Sermon ? This it would be important to ascertain, if possible, in order to arrive at a true estimate ID Documentary Evidence. L"^"- of its testimony to the antiquity of the Creed. And thus much may be asserted with safety, that it could not have been composed later than the seventh century, the MS., in which a portion of it is preserved, belonging to the eighth. We do not know what was the document found by the writer of the Paris MS. at Treves, whether it contained the whole Sermon or only the fragment which he transcribed ; nor yet how long it had been there, nor how long before it was written, nor yet whether it was the autograph, i. e. the original copy, in whole or part, or a copy from that, or one of a succession of copies. It is very improbable that it was the autograph. The writer of the Paris MS. does not seem to have considered it a recent contemporary docu ment. Some period must have elapsed — we may reasonably believe not less than fifty years — between the composition of the Sermon and the time when the scribe met with this fragment of it at Treves. And while the Sermon must thus be a work of the seventh century at the latest, there is some internal evidence which points to the sixth century as the more probable era of its production. According to the preacher or homilist, the article of the Apostles' Creed respecting our Lord's session at the right hand of the Father at the time of his preaching the Sermon was as follows : ' ad dexteram dei patris sedet ' ; for he refers his hearers to these words as just delivered to them in the symbol or Apostles' Creed — 'sicut vobis in symbolo tra ditum est.' But in the seventh century this article of the Creed is generally found with the word omnipotentis annexed to it. Dr. Heurtley says^: 'We do not meet with Dei Patris omnipote7itis till it occurs in the Creed of Eusebius Gallus, nor again till it occurs in the Creeds of the Codex Bobiensis in the middle of the seventh century. From that ^ Harmonia Symbolica, p. 138. •] Testimonies. II time it may be considered established.' The Creed of Eusebius Gallus, by the way, is referred to the sixth century : the Creeds of the Codex Bobiensis are contained in a Galilean Sacramentary found by Mabillon in the Monastery of Bobio in North Italy. If he is right in assigning the MS. to the middle of the seventh century, the type of the Creed which it presents cannot be of a later date, and may have been used earlier. The usual earlier form is 'ad dexteram Patris.' 'Ad dexteram Dei Patris ' is very unusual. Hahn, in his Bibliothek der Symbole, cites three instances of it, one of which occurs in St. Augustine's Sermo iu Redditione Symboli, ccxv. It occurs also in the discourse on the Apostles' Creed previously noticed as contained in two Paris MSS. No instance seems to be known of this article being used in the seventh century or after without omnipotentis. Nor is the occurrence of the words ' ad inferna descendens,' in obvious reference to the Apostles' Creed, inconsistent with the hypothesis that this' Sermon was a work of the sixth century, inasmuch as ' descendit ad inferna ' was an article of the Aquileian Creed in the time of Rufinus, and appears also in a Spanish Creed of the sixth century, and in the Creed as expounded by Caesarius, Bishop of Aries, in the same century, and as commented on by Venantius Fortu- natus, Bishop of Poictiers, in the latter part of the same century. Nor can a later date be assigned to the Creed printed by Blanchini from a Verona MS., in which this article is also found. Thus we arrive at the conclusion that the Sermon, a fragment of which is preserved in the Latin MS. No. 3836 of the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris, and which adapts and modifies much of the language of the Athana- ' See Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole, pp. 25, 28, 35, 42. 12 Documentary Evidence. L^"- sian Creed on the subject of the Incarnation, was certainly not composed later than the seventh century, and prob ably belongs to the sixth. 5. In the Confession of Faith, which was composed and promulgated by the Fourth Council of Toledo A.D. 633, several expressions occur bearing an obvious resemblance to the Athanasian Creed, viz. : ' Nee personas confundi- mus nee substantiam separamus. Patrem a nullo factum vel genitum dicimus ; Filium a Patre non factum, sed genitum asserimus ; Spiritum vero Sanctum nee creatum nee genitum, sed procedentem ex Patre et Filio pro- fitemur : ipsum autem Dominum lesum Christum Filium Dei ... ex substantia Patris ante secula genitum — aequa lis Patri secundum divinitatem, minor Patre secundum humanitatem — perferens passionem et mortem pro nostra salute — descendit ad inferos. — Haec est Ecclesiae Catho- licae fides, hanc confessionem servamus atque tenemus, quam quisquis firmissime custodierit, perpetuam salutem habebit ^.' I used to be of opinion that the resemblance between these expressions of the Confession of Faith of the Fourth Council of Toledo and the corresponding passages of the Quicunque was nothing more than the result of both Confessions of Faith giving utterance to the common terminology of Catholicity. More mature consideration has convinced me of the correctness of Waterland's view, that the relationship between the two confessions is of a much closer nature, the Toledan being drawn from the Athana sian. My grounds for this conclusion are as follows : — Firstly, in two of the above instances the terminology is of too unusual and peculiar a nature to be set down as the common language of Catholicity. Thus in the words ' perferens passionem et mortem pro nostra salute ' of the ' Labbe, Concilia, torn. x. p. 615. Florentiae, 17^4. i-J Testimonies. 13 Toledan confession, and in the obviously corresponding expression of the Quicunque, ' passus pro salute nostra^, we find a terminology, which I believe I may assert with safety is all but peculiar to these two Confessions of Faith. In other confessions, with one exception, where any men tion is made of the saving benefits of Christ's work, it is made in connexion with His mission into the world and Incarnation, not His Passion, and we have propter salutem nostram not pro salute nostra. In the Nicene and Con- stantinopolitan Creeds we say ' for us men and for our salva tion \ ' He came down from heaven and was incarnate,' &c. ; and the language of the Union Creed of the Antiochenes, A. D. 433, and of the Synod of Constantinople, A. D. 448, was the same. The Creed of the Western Church, or Apostles' Creed, simply mentions the fact of our Lord's Passion under Pontius Pilate. Confessions of Latin doctors assert with the Greek Creeds, that He came down from heaven, ' propter nostram salutem,' or the like. So that of Auxentius of Milan, the Damasi Symbolum, the Fides Ro- manorum. In one only can I find exactly the same phrase, viz. in the Confession of Pelagius I, which has ' pro nostra salute passum^.' The other instance of doctrinal terminology peculiar wellnigh to the Confession of the Fourth of Toledo and the Quicunque is in the words ' descendit ad inferos', which occur in both. It has been already mentioned that in the seventh century the article of the Descent into Hell had found its way generally into the Creed of the West, but differently expressed, in the form, namely, ' descendit in inferna,' or ' ad infernum,' or ' ad inferna.' The only Confession of Faith in which 'descendit ad inferos' appears, ^ 5*' ii^ias Toils dvSpdiiTovs Kal Std. t^v ^fieripav aorrrjpiav ; in the Latin trans lation, ' propter nos homines et salutem nostram.' ' See Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole, pp. 78, 83, 137, 139, 197, 204, 270. 14 Documentary Evidence. \S-^- besides the two we are specially referring to, is Irish — it appears in the Antiphonary of Bangor, which is preserved in an Irish MS. of the eighth century belonging to the Ambrosian Library at Milan i. The fact of this peculiar terminology being found in these two confessions points clearly to the existence of a close connexion between them — closer than that of a common Catholicity. Either the Quicunque must have drawn from the Toledan Confession or the Toledan Confession from the Quicunque. That the latter was the case we are led to believe by the com mencing words of this very Toledan Confession, in which the bishops and doctors, by whom it was formulated and subscribed, affirm it to be ' in accordance with the Divine Scriptures and the doctrine or teaching zvhick we have re ceived from the holy Fathers^.' And I am confirmed in this belief by finding, on a closer examination of the Toledan Confession of Faith, that besides the expressions bearing an evident resemblance to the language of the Athanasian Creed it contains others, clearly derived, as from their sources, from two other ancient Confessions of Faith, which are distinct documents, though possessing much in common, the one sometimes described in MSS. as ' Fides Romanae ecclesiae,' sometimes as ' Fides Romanorum,' sometimes attributed to Augustine, sometimes to Athanasius, the other commonly known as ' Damasi Fides,' but frequently attributed to St. Jerome in ancient MSS. These two Confessions, together with the Athanasian Creed, are found in a series of twelve ancient Confessions of Faith which appears in two MSS. of the Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin 2076 and 2341 ; the Athanasian Creed being de- ' Hahn, p. 41. ^ 'Secundum divinas Scripturas et doctrinam, quam a Sanctis Patribus accepimus.' I-] Testimonies. 15 scribed as ' Fides catholica dicta a sancto Athanasio epi- scopo Alexandrino,' the ' Damasi symbolum ' as ' Fides catholica dicta a sancto iheronimo presbitero,' and the ' Fides Romanorum ' as ' Fides catholica ab ortodoxis patribus exposita,' also as ' Exemplar fidei catholice.' The Toledan fathers must have had these three documents before them, and gathered from thence the materials for the construction of their own confession ^. 6. The next document I desire to refer to as affording evidence of the antiquity of the Athanasian Creed is the profession of obedience made by Denebert to Ethelheard, Archbishop of Canterbury, at his consecration as Bishop of the Huiccii, i. e. of Worcester, A.D. 798. After avowing his purpose of obedience, Denebert proceeds to declare his faith in the Holy Trinity in terms obviously culled from the Creed : ' Orthodoxam, catholicam apostolicamque fidem, sicut didici, paucis exponam verbis, quia scriptum est qui cunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est illi ut tejteat catholicam fidem. Fides autem catholica haec est, ut umnn Deum in Trinitate et Trinitatem in Unitate veneremur ; 7teque confundentes personas neqtie substantiam separantes. Alia enim est persona Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti: sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est Divinitas, aequalis gloria, coaeterna majestas. Pater a nullo f actus est, nee creatus nee genitus : Filius a Patre solo est, non f actus nee creatus, sed genitus : Spiritus a Patre et Filio, non f actus nee creatus nee genitus, sed procedens. In ' For some account of the ' Fides Romanorum ' and the ' Damasi Symbolum,' I may refer to my book entitled Early History of the Athanasian Creed, pp. 202-212. Copies of both from Paris MSS. are printed in Appendix H of the same volume. They are also to be found in Hahn's Bibliothek, the former as the ' Erste Formel ' of the symbols ascribed to Damasus, the latter as the ' Zweite Formel,' pp. 204 and 207. The 'Fides Romanorum' is the com bination of two shorter confessions, which appear in their separate form in the same MS., as the Treves fragment. i6 Documentary Evidence. ["="• hac Trinitate nihil prius aut posterius, nihil majus aut mifius, sed totae tres personae co-aeternae sibi sunt et coaequales. Ita ut per omnia, sicut supra dictum est, et Trinitas in Unitate et Unitas in Trinitate veneranda sit. Suscipio etiam decreta Pontificum et sex synodos catholicas antiquorum heroicorum virorum, et praefixam ab iis regu- 1am sincera devotione conservo. Haec est fides nostra, evangelicis et apostolicis traditionibus atque auctoritate firmata, et omnium quae in hoc mundo sunt catholicarum ecclesiarum societate fundata ; in qua nos per gratiam Dei Omnipotentis permanere usque ad finem vitae hujus con- fidimus et speramus. Amen ''.' It will be noticed that Denebert introduces his brief abstract from the Quicunque by the term ' scriptum est ^,' indicating that he was quoting from a well-known and authoritative document — one, too, which apparently, if we may judge from the expression ' ut didici,' he had learnt by heart. Brevity of exposition being avowedly his object, he does not go on to employ the language of the Creed for expounding his faith in the Incarnation, deeming it suffi cient for this purpose to declare his adhesion to the six Oecumenical Councils. Hence his omission to quote the latter part of the Creed can afford no presumption in support of the hypothesis that in his time it existed only in an imperfect, embryo state. 7. Among the works of Alcuin is printed a Libellus de Processione Spiritus Sancti ad Carolum Magnum. The work consists of quotations from the Fathers ; and the Athanasian Creed is twice quoted, on both occasions as the work of Athanasius. ' The blessed Athanasius, the most ' See Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents, edited by A. W. Haddan and W. Stubbs, vol. iii. p. 525. ' The use of this term iu St. Matt. iv. 4, 7, 10, may be considered. ¦] Testimonies. 17 reverend bishop of the city of Alexandria, ... in the " Ex position of the Catholic Faith," which that eminent doctor himself composed, and which the universal Church [xtni- versalis ecclesia) confesses, declares the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son, thus saying, " The Father is made of none," ' &c. The twentieth and two following verses down to ' but proceeding,' are then quoted. The other quotation is not noticed by Water- land : ' " For such as the Father is," as the blessed Athana sius, bishop of the city of Alexandria testifies, " such also is the Son, such also is the Holy Ghost, for in this Trinity none is before," ' &c. The quotation is continued to the end of the twenty-sixth verse, ' Let him thus think of the Trinity^.' The editor of Alcuin, Frobenius, places this treatise among his genuine works upon the authority of a MS. of the ninth century, in which it appears with the title, ' Alcuinus de Processione Spiritus sancti.' The codex was given to the cathedral church of Laon by Dido, who was bishop of that see in the latter part of the ninth century, his death having occurred in 891. So that it could not have been written long after the time of Alcuin. There seems therefore good ground for attri buting the treatise to him ; and, if it is his work, it must have been written between the year 800, when Charle magne was crowned Emperor — for it is dedicated to him in that character, ' Serenissimo Augusto Carolo' — and the year 804, when Alcuin died. It may very well have been written at that epoch, as the Procession was a prominent subject of discussion at the close of the eighth century, having been mooted at the Council of Gentiliacum in 867. If it is not genuine, the dedication still shows it to have ' Migne, Patrologia Latina, torn. ci. pp. 73, 82 ; Alcuini Libellus de Processione, cap. i. and cap. iii. C i8 Documentary Evidence. L^"- been written before the year 814, the date of Charle magne's death. Thus, whether it was composed by Alcuin or not, it affords a remarkable testimony to the wide spread reception of the Quicunque at the commencement of the ninth century, as well as to the fact that it was then considered to be the work of Athanasius. 8. Side by side with the last-named work may fitly be adduced another of the same age and dealing with the same subject, The Procession of the Holy Spirit, written by Theodulf, Bishop of Orleans, at the command of Charle magne. This also consists of a series of quotations from the Fathers, and it quotes the Qtiicttnque as the work of Athanasius, citing from the twentieth to the twenty-sixth verses inclusive, from the words ' The Father is made of none ' to ' let him thus think of the Trinity ^' 9. In the year 809, the Latin monks of Mount Olivet at Jerusalem wrote to the Pope respecting a dispute which had arisen between themselves and some Greek monks headed by John of the monastery of St. Sabas. The letter alludes particularly to the introduction of the Filioque into the Nicene or rather Constantinopolitan Creed, as one of the subjects of debate and adduces several authorities in support of the assertion of the double procession, among them the Athanasian Creed, which it entitles 'Fides S. Athanasii ^.' 10. After the death of Felix of Orgel in 818, a document was found among his papers reaffirming the errors of Adop- tionism which he had abjured; and with the view of confuting them Agobard, Bishop of Lyons, composed a treatise consisting mainly, like those of Theodulf and Alcuin already mentioned, of citations from the Fathers. ' See Migne, Patrol. Lat., tom. cv. p. 247. =¦ The epistle of the Franck monks is edited in Baluzii Miscellanea tom ii p. 84. i-j Testimonies. *9 The third section asserts the necessity of a belief in the Catholic Faith in the very language of the Creed : ' But he who does not condescend to read what proceeds from ourselves, may rest satisfied with the judgements of the holy Fathers here annexed, because the blessed Athana sius says. Except a man keep the Catholic Faith whole and undefiled without doubt he shall perish everlastingly ^. No one can doubt that it is the second verse of the Qtii- cunque which is here quoted by Agobard ; and he quotes the words as those of Athanasius. II. Baluze in his Miscellanea'^ has printed 'Ex veteri codice MS. Bibliothecae Colbertinae,' a catalogue of the first fourteen abbots of the celebrated Benedictine monas tery of Fleury on the Loire, subjoined to which is a brief notice respecting Theodulf, the last-named in the list, con taining several particulars of his life and writings which are not found elsewhere. Among other things it states that he wrote expositions of the Mass and the Athanasian Creed. My principal reason for drawing attention to this interesting and important document here, lies in the in cidental mention which it makes of the daily recital of the Creed at the hour of Prime as the contemporaneous prac tice of monks : ' explanationem edidit,' it says of Theodulf, ' symboli sancti Athanasii, quod a monachis post tres regu- lares psalmos ad primam cotidie canitur.' This passage is adduced by Martene as evidence of the ancient use by the Benedictines of the Quicunque in the office of Prime ^. The document is clearly subsequent in date to ' ' Beatus Athanasius ait, Fidem Catholicam nisi quis integram inviola tamque servaverit, absque dubio in aeternum peribit.' Agobardus adversus Felicem : see Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cv. p. 35. ^ Baluzii Miscellaneorum liber primus, pp. 491, 492. ' Martene, De antiquis tjionachorum ritibus, lib. i. cjip. iv. p. 17, ed. 1788. C 2 20 Documentary Evidence. ["^h- the abbacy of Theodulf, which it mentions as having con tinued nineteen years and a half. In all probability it was drawn up soon after its termination, during the time of his successor, his name being the last, as already men tioned, in the series of abbots which it contains. This appears all the more probable from the fact of the author being himself a monk of Fleury, as is shown by his descrip tion of a place named Germaniacus, the modern Germigny, where Theodulf had built a magnificent church, as being three miles distant from our monastery ^. The terms of admiration which he uses, and the particulars he states respecting Theodulf, would seem to indicate a personal knowledge and attachment. For these reasons we may believe that this document was composed not many years after the death of Theodulf, which took place in 8ai. The MS. from which Baluze printed it, being represented as ancient, cannot be supposed to be later than the tenth century, and might be of the ninth. Monsieur Cuissard, in his recent Life of Theodulf, refers to the latter date another MS. of it— No. 306 in the Library of Berne 2. This is the earliest notice extant of the use of the Athanasian Creed by Benedictines, we may say of its monastic use, for it is not in the Rule of St. Benedict, i. e. it was not inserted by him in the Ofifices drawn up for his order "". Of course it does not follow from thence that the Quicunque was not in use among the Benedictines ^ Monsieur Lebeuf, in 1755, speaks of the church as situated the same distance from the Abbey of Fleury. In 1839 it was placed in the class of historic monuments, and in 1861 was renovated and restored. See Thiodulfe savie et ses ceuvres, par Ch. Cuissard. Orleans, 1892, pp. 121, 122. ' U. b. p. I20. 'So Meratus states: 'In regula S. Benedicti nulla eius fit mentio.' Observationes ad Gavanti Commentarium ; see Gavanti, Thesaurus, tom ii. p. 173. So also Grancolas, La Liturgie de I'Qffice divin, p. 333. Paris, 1752. •J Testimonies. 21 prior to the epoch to which this catalogue of Fleury abbots belongs : and it is far from improbable that it was recited by them before the ninth century, though we cannot affirm it as a fact. Martene, while adducing the above evidence of the early admission of the Quicunqite into the Benedictine Office, mentions also two other in stances in point. The first of them testifies to its use at Prime in the Abbey of St. Aper or St. Evre at Toul in Lorraine, the second bears the same testimony in regard to the Abbey of St. Denis near Paris ; in both too it appears to have been recited daily, but certainly in the former ^- 12. A letter from Florus the Deacon to Hyldrad the Abbot is of great interest and importance, as proving that in the first half of the ninth century the Athanasian Creed was generally admitted into Psalters and had been so admitted for some considerable time. This document was first edited by Cardinal Mai in 1828 from a manuscript in the Vatican Library^. The writer of the letter, several of whose works are extant, flourished from about A. D. 830 to the middle of the century, and was esteemed one of the most learned men of his day. It appears that Hyldrad had sent him a Psalter with a request that he would correct it. Florus in his reply dwells upon the difficulty of the task, arising from the great and increasing number of faulty ' ' Tribus hisce psalmis subinngebant olim nostri ' — i. e. the Benedictines, to which order Martene himself belonged — ' Symbolum S. Athanasii dictum, ut diicimus ex catalogo Abbatum Floriacensium. . . . Idem patet ex TuUenSi S. Apri ordinario " Omnibus diebus Dominicis infra preces post Domine exaudi dicat Quicunque vult ; ceteris autem diebus dicatur Quicunque vult ante antiphonam. Et infra in feria i. ad primam hymnus lam lucis." Idem videre est in MS. S. Dionysii consnetudinibus.' Martene, De antiquis mona- chorum ritibus, lib. i. cap. iv. tom. iv. p. 17, ed. 1788. ^ Mai, Scriptoru7n veterum nova Collectio, tom. iii. pp. 251-255. Rome, 1828. 22 Documen.tary Evidence. L^"- copies, but says that he had done his best to correct the text by collating Jerome's translation, the Septuagint and the original Hebrew. He adds that he was aware of Hyldrad's wish to produce a new Psalter, and after giving some advice in regard to the execution of the book proceeds as follows with regard to the contents : ' Psalmis vero sola cantica copulentur^- Hymnis [sic), symbolum, oratio dominica. Fides. Compunctum^, orationes, et si quae alia, libello altero conscribantur. Quanquam a nobis ex his omnibus solum symbolum, oratio evangelica, fides catholica, atque hymni correcti sunt ; reliqua vel superstitiosa vel falsa vel parum necessaria iudicantibus ; unde, et si vultis, po- teritis Psalmis CI., canticis propheticis, evangelicis duobus, ea quae supra nos correxisse diximus, eo, quo a nobis commemorata sunt, ordine copulare. Alia abicite, ac velut quasdam vestri sordes psalterii fullonis vecte decutite ; ut libelli illius corpus, omni labe detersa, purum et nitidum resplendeat.' The spelling and punctuation are given here as they are in Mai. That by ' Fides ' and ' Fides catholica ' in the above passage the Athanasian Creed is especially, though it may be not exclusively, intended, it is impossible to doubt, as each of them is distinguished from 'symbolum,' the Apostles' Creed, and the Qtiicunque is sometimes en titled ' Fides Catholica,' for instance, in the Utrecht Psalter, which may be probably assigned to the same epoch as this letter of Florus, and it is generally found in Psalters, while the Nicene, or Constantinopolitan, Creed appears in them seldom, comparatively speaking. It appears that in Florus's time some superstitious and spurious and unnecessary matter had found its way into Psalters. In his anxiety to exclude everything of a question- ' This fuU-stop must be an error of the press. "^ An error probably for 'computum.' I-] Testimonies. 23 able nature, he recommends Hyldrad to subjoin nothing to the Psalms but the scriptural Canticles — Cantica — and to relegate all other matter usually annexed to Psalters to a separate volume. But he suggests an alternative plan, which he seems to prefer. He would separate the sound metal from the dross. He had therefore selected the Apostles' Creed, the Lord's Prayer, the Athanasian Creed, and the Hymns, i.e. doubtless the Te Deum and the Gloria in Excelsis, and corrected their texts. These Hyldrad might, if he thought fit, subjoin to the Psalms and Canticles from Scripture. All besides should be un sparingly rejected. That the Athanasian Creed, with the Apostles' Creed, Lord's Prayer, and Hymns, were found in Psalters generally in Florus's time, is evident first from his primary recom mendation that they should be included in a separate volume together with the objectionable and unnecessary matter. Such a recommendation to separate them in this particular case from the Psalter implies that usually they were annexed to it, and would have been needless, unless this had been the case. This is evident also from his alternative advice. What was thus rejected from the Psalter must have been previously attached to it, and what was not thus rejected must have been simply retained in its usual position. Florus's advice throughout proceeds upon the assumption that there was nothing novel or unusual in the admission of the Quicunque to a Psalter. It is placed in the same category with the Apostles' Creed and Lord's Prayer, marked out by a clear line of distinction from the superstitious and spurious and unnecessary. This testimony to the use of the Quicunque was necessarily unknown to Waterland. 24 Documentary Evidence. L^"- 13, In his work De una et non trina Deitate, written A.D. 857, Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, the leading ecclesiastic of the day, repeatedly quotes the Athanasian Creed. He quotes it as the work of Athanasius, and applies to it apparently the title ' Fides Catholica.' The verses quoted are the first to the sixth inclusive, the twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth. This treatise was written for the purpose of confuting the opinions on the subject of the Holy Trinity asserted by Gotheschalcus with special reference to the term 'trina Deltas,' occurring in a hymn, the use of which, though forbidden by Hincmar, had been persistently maintained by Gotheschalcus. At the conclusion is subjoined a doctrinal formula, drawn up by Hincmar, and presented by him to Gotheschalcus on his death-bed with the promise of restoration to Catholic Communion on condition of its sincere acceptance : for the latter had incurred the penalty of excommunica tion. The portion of this document relating to the Trinity consists simply of verses 3-6, 24 and 25 of the Quicttnque, with some explanatory words thrown in here and there : it is preceded by the following introduction : — ' Sic crede et confitere, sicut credit, confitetur et praedicat sancta catholica et apostolica Ecclesia dicens.'^' In the De una et non trina Deitate, Hincmar quotes necessarily from the first part of the Creed only, that being alone relevant to his purpose ; but in his Explanatio in ferculum Salomonis, which refers to the Incarnation as well as the Trinity, he quotes from both parts. It is perfectly evident that the Athanasian Creed was familiar as household words to Hincmar ; and the language of the schedule or formula addressed to Gotheschalcus, which is quoted above, ' Migne, Patrologia Latina, tom. cxxv. ji. 6i6. I-] Testimonies. 25 shows that in his time it was considered to be a Creed of the Catholic Church. 14. In the account of the death of Anscharius, Arch bishop of Hamburg and Bremen, which took place in the year 865, it is mentioned that on the night before his death, whilst the ministering priests were singing the Litany and the Psalms usually recited for the departing, he requested them also to sing the Te Deum and the Athanasian Creed ^. 15. Ratramn or Bertram, a monk of Corbie in France, in his work Contra Graecorttm opposita, quotes the twentieth and two following verses of the Creed — 'The Father is made of none,' &c. — in reference to the doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit, and he describes it as ' the little book respecting the faith, which the blessed Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, published and proposed for the acceptance of all Catholics ^.' Ratramn's treatise was written in consequence of a letter, addressed by Pope Nicholas in 867 to Hincmar and the other archbishops in the kingdom of Charles the Bald, drawing their attention to several objections which the Greek Emperors and Eastern Bishops had raised to tenets and observances of the Latin Church, one of them being the doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son. ' ' Fratres vero qui aderant, cum litaniam facerent et psalmos ex more pro eius exitu decantarent, admonuit ipse, ut etiam hymnum ad laudem Dei com- positum, id est Te Deum laudamus, pariter cantarent,yfife;« quoque catholicam a beato Athanasio compositam.' Vita S. Anscharii auctore S. Remherto eius discipulo et successore, apud Mabill. Annates ordinis S. Benedicti, tom. vi. See also Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. cxviii. pp. 959-961. Rembertus, the biographer of Anscharius, was his successor in the Archbishopric of Hamburg and Bremen. Waterland's account of this circumstance is clearly inaccurate. ^ ' Beatus Athanasius Alexandrinus episcopus ... in libello de fide, quem edidit et omnibus catholicis tenendum proposuit, inter caetera sic ait : Pater a nullo est factus,' &c. Ratramni Contra Graecorum opposita, lib. ii. cap. iii. See Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. cxxi. p. 247. 26 Documentary Evidence. C^"- 16. At the same epoch, and in reference to the same controversy, ^neas, Bishop of Paris, wrote a treatise in opposition to the Greeks. He also quotes the Creed upon the subject of the Procession, describing it by the title 'Fides catholica,' and as the work of Athanasius. He quotes more largely than Ratramn— the twentieth down to the twenty-sixth verse inclusive \ 17. To the same period must be assigned the Profession of Faith made by Adalbertus to Hincmar, as Archbishop of Rheims, upon his consecration to the Bishopric of Morinum. This document shows the high estimation in which the Athanasian Creed was then held, as an authority upon dogma, and also that its use in the services of the Catholic Church was then regarded as an old and estab lished custom. Adalbert describes it as ' the discourse of the blessed Athanasius, which the Catholic Church has been accustomed to repeat in solemn worship, and which begins thus : Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith'''! He then proceeds to refer distinctly to both parts of the Creed, that relating to the Trinity and that relating to the Incarnation, adopting and using some of their language. 18. We have previously noticed a mention of the daily recital of the Athanasian Creed by the monks of Fleury, if not by others in the ninth century. Martene states, on the authority of an ancient charter, that in the celebrated ^ ' Item idem,' i. e. S. Athanasius ' iu Fide catholica ; Quod Spiritus Sanctus a Patre procedat et a Filio : " Pater a nullo est factus ... ita de Trinitate sentiat." ' Aeneae Parisiensis Liber adversus Graecos, cap. xix. See Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. cxxi. p. 701. ^ ' Sicut et in sermone beati Athanasii, quem Ecclesia Catholica venerando usu frequentare consuevit, qui ita incipit : Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat Catholicam Fidem! Professio Adalberti futuri Epi- scopi Morriiensis Hincmaro Remorum Archiepiscopo ante ordinationem oblata. Baluzii Capitiilaria, tom. ii. pp. 616, 617. Paris, 1677. I-] Testimonies. 27 church of St. Martin at Tours it was resolved in the year 922, with the consent of the whole Chapter, 'that the brethren should all sing at the hour of Prime, as well on Festivals as ordinary days, the Catholic Faith, which the holy Athanasius composed by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, that is, Whosoever will be saved^.' This would imply that even before then the Quicunque had been said daily, Festivals excepted, at St. Martin's. 19. And the daily recital of the Creed was the rule of the Cluniac Order, which was founded in the tenth century, according to Udalric^. 2C. Ratherius, who was consecrated Bishop of Verona in the year 931, and died in 978, several times quotes the Athanasian Creed or refers to it. In his Praeloquia, written during his imprisonment at Pavia, he adopts much of its terminology in a Confession of his Faith, and after alludes to it as ' ea fides, quam Athanasii dicimus ' ; in his Itinerariitm he quotes the second verse ; in his second sermon for Lent the thirty-seventh and thirty-ninth, en titling it ' confirmatio catholicae fidei ' ; and in his treatise ' ' Ut cantarent fratres generaliter ad horam primam tarn festis diebus quam et quotidianis Catholicam Fidem, quam S. Athanasius Spiritu Sancto inspirante composait, id est, Quicunque vult salvus 'esse.' Martene, De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus, lib. iv. cap. viii. tom. iii, ed. 1788. '' ' Textus fidei, scilicet Qtiicunque, a S. Athanasio conscriptus, cuius nonnuUae ecclesiae nee meminerunt nisi in sola Dominica, nullo die omittitur, ut non dicatur a nobis.' Consuetudines Chtniacenses per Udalricum. Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. cxlix. p. 646. The churches mentioned here by Udalric, who wrote in the eleventh century, as saying the Athanasian Creed only on Sunday, were clearly not Cluniac churches, as Martene supposes. The unvarying custom of the Cluniacs at that time in saying it daily, is put in strong contrast with the custom of some churches — plainly not belonging to their order — who used it only on Sundays. But it may be noticed, that none are mentioned as omitting it altogether. Martene adds : ' Ipsi nihilominus tam Cluniacenses ex eodem Udalrico quam Carthusienses ex antiquis eorum statutis quotidie symbolum illud ' — i. c. Athanasiannm— ' persolvebant persolvuntque hactenus Carthusienses et Mediolanenses.' Martene, De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus, lib. iv. cap. viii. 28 Documentary Evidence. L'^"- De contemptu Canonum, referring to the refusal of the Canons to recite it, he quotes the last two verses i- To his synodical injunction requiring the recitation of the Creeds, including the Quicunque, by his clergy, special reference will be made in the chapter upon Canons. 21. Towards the close of the same century Abbo Floria- censis, Abbot of the important monastery of Fleury in France, incidentally mentions the fact of the Athanasian Creed being sung antiphonally in the English Church as well as in France^. He was a competent witness in regard to the ritual of the English Church, having passed some time in the Abbey of Ramsey in Huntingdonshire, which was founded in the reign of Edgar, A.D. 969, where he presided over the schools, and was occupied in the promotion of discipline and literature. At the request of St. Dunstan he wrote the Passion of St. Edmund the Martyr. Abbo was considered one of the most dis tinguished men of his age for learning and piety, and died in 1004. 22. To the same epoch belongs another evidence, and a very interesting one, of the use and reception of the Athanasian Creed in the early English Church — one too which escaped the notice of Waterland. At the commence ment of the last century Dr. Wotton drew attention to the ' Ratherii Praeloquiorum lib. iii. sec. 31, 32; Ltinerarium, num. 10; Sermo LI de Quadragesima, sec. 19 ; De contemptu Canonum, pars i, 24. Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxxvi. ^ ' Primitus de fide dicendum credidi, quam alternantibus choris et in Francia et apud Anglorum Ecclesiam variari audivi. Alii dicunt, ut arbitror, secundum Athanasium : Spiritus Sancttis a Patre et Filio, non factus nee creatus nee genitus, sed procedens ; alii vero tantum : Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus nee creatus, sed procedens — qui, dum id quod est nee genitus sub- trahunt, synodicam domni Gregorii se sequi credunt, ubi est scriptum : Spiritus Sanctus nee genitus est nee iitgenitiis, sed tantum procedens' Abbonis Apologetieus , ad Hugonem et Rodbertum reges Francorum. Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxxix. p 470. I-] Testimonies. 29 fact that an Anglo-Saxon Homily, de Fide Catholica, which had been published from a MS. belonging to the Cambridge University Library in the previous century, by Abraham Wheloc in his edition of Bedes History, to gether with a Latin version, contained several expressions clearly drawn from the Creed ; and in this fact he found an evident proof of its use and reception in the English Church about the middle of the tenth century ^. Neither Wheloc nor Wotton appear to have known who was the author of this discourse ; but it proves to be one of a series of Sermones Catholici or Homilies written by one ^Ifric, monk and mass-priest, and expressly intended for popular use and instruction in the Church at the successive sacred seasons. They were edited by Benjamin Thorpe for the iElfric Society, together with an English version, in 1846. The Homily commences by stating that it declares ' the faith which stands in the Creed according to the wise Augustine's exposition of the holy Trinity.' The following passages, which I reproduce as rendered in the English version of Thorpe and the Latin of Wheloc, may be con sidered in proof of Wotton's assertion that it draws expres sions from the Quicunque. ' For the Father is one, the Son is one, and the Holy Ghost is one : and yet of these three there is one Godhead, and like glory, and coeternal majesty.' ' Alius est Pater, alius Filius, alius Spiritus Sanctus : nihilo secius trium illorum una est Divinitas, aequalisque gloria, et majestas ' 'Circiter decimi saeculi medium Symbolum illud,' i.e. Athanasiannm, * Ecclesiae Anglicanae civitate donatum esse dixi, quod porro mihi constare videtur ex sermone Saxonico de Fide Catholica, quam (p. 41) Bedae sui historiae Ecclesiasticae inseruit Whelocus. Etenim in egregio isto ad populum sermone multa leguntur, quae homilista ex Symbolo Athanasiano sumpsisse videtur, ut phrases ipsae probant.* Linguaruni veterum Septentrionalium thesauri . . . auctore Georgio Hickesio, conspectus brevis per Gul. Wottonum. Notae, p. 75. London, 1708. 3° Documentary Evidence. L^"- aequaliter aeterna.' Compare verses 5 and 6 of the Athanasian Creed. 'The Father is Almighty God, the Son is Almighty God, the Holy Ghost is Almighty God : and yet there are not three Almighty Gods, but one Almighty God.' ' Om- nipotens Deus Pater est, Omnipotens Deus Filius, Omni- potens Spiritus Sanctus : nihilo secius non sunt tres Dii Omnipotentes, sed unus Omnipotens Deus.' Compare verses 13 and 14. 'The Father is God of no God. The Son is God of God the Father. The Holy Ghost is God, proceeding from the Father and from the Son.' ' Pater est Deus a Deo nullo, Filius Deus est a Deo Patre, Spiritus Sanctus Deus est a Patre et Filio procedens.' The Father is ' Almighty Creator not created nor born^.' ' The Son is neither made nor created, but He is begotten.' ' The Holy Ghost is not made nor created nor begotten, but He is proceeding.' 'Quid est Pater? Omnipotens Creator nee factus nee genitus.' ' Filius nee factus est nee creatus, sed genitus.' ' Spiritus Sanctus nee factus est nee creatus nee genitus, sed procedens.' Compare verses 20, 21, 22. 'The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God, not three Gods, but they all three are one Almighty God.' ' Pater est Deus, et Filius est Deus, et Spiritus Sanctus est Deus, non tres Dii, verum tres omnes unicus Omnipotens Deus.' Compare verses 15 and 16. ' There is so great likeness in this holy Trinity that the Father is no greater than the Son in the Godhead, nor is the Son greater than the Holy Ghost, nor is one of them less than the whole Trinity. ... No one of them is greater ' The Saxon word is the same which is translated ' begotten ' in reference to the Son. !¦] Testimonies. 31 than the other, nor one less than other, nor one before other, nor one after other.' ' Tanta quidem similitudo est in sacro-sancta Trinitate, ita ut Pater maior Filio in divinitate minime sit, nee Filius Spiritu Sancto maior, neque horum aliquis unus tota ipsa Trinitate minor existat. . . . Nullus horum maior est altero, neque ullus minor altero, nee ullus altero prior, nullusque altero posterior.' Compare verse 24. The close resemblance of the terminology in these pas sages between the Homily and the Creed shows that the author of the former must have been perfectly familiar with the latter. The date, when the composition of these Anglo-Saxon Homilies or Sermons was completed, is determined within a very few years by the fact of their being dedicated, so- to speak, to Archbishop Sigeric, sometimes called Siric, who was Archbishop of Canterbury from 990 to 994. Their author has been frequently identified with .^Ifric, Archbishop of Canterbury from 994 to 1006, upon no other ground apparently than that they both share in the same name. Thorpe identifies him with ^Ifric, Archbishop of York from 1023 to 1051, first apparently because he con siders that the name points him out as one or other of these prelates, and then because, to quote his editorial Preface : ' From the words of his own Preface, where he,' i. e. ^Elfric, ' speaks of King Ethelred's days as past, and informs us that in those days he was only a monk and mass-priest, it follows that he was not ^Ifric, Archbishop of Canterbury, who died in the year 1006, ten years before the death of King Ethelred.' But in the first place, .^Ifric being a common name at the period when the homilist lived, the mere fact of his being so called does not prove him to be either of the prelates above-mentioned. And then it is 32 Documentary Evidence. [ch. not compatible with the particulars which he tells us respecting himself to suppose that he was either of them. For we learn, as has been already said, from the dedication of his Homilies, contained in the Latin Preface to Arch bishop Sigeric, that they must have been completed and published between the years 990 and 994 ; and further, he there speaks of himself as a pupil of ^thelwold, Bishop of Winchester, who died in 984. Now as ^Ifric, Archbishop of York, died in the year 1051, supposing him to have died at the age of seventy, we are forced to the conclusion, if the homilist is identified with him, that he was not more than thirteen years of age when his Homilies were com pleted, a work displaying considerable learning, being translated, as he says, and drawn in substance from Holy Scripture and the Fathers, particularly Augustine, Jerome, Bede, Gregory, Smaragdus, and Haymo — a work too which must have cost much time and labour in the execution; and, moreover, upon this hypothesis we must conclude that he was not more than three years old when he was under the instruction and tuition of Bishop ^thelwold ! Nor could he have been the same person as .^Ifric, the Arch bishop of Canterbury. Had he been so, in the Preface to his Homilies, which were issued, as we have seen, during the archiepiscopate of Sigeric and dedicated to him, he would scarcely have described himself as ' ^Ifric, monk and mass- priest,' he must have written himself ' bishop.' For the ^Ifric, who succeeded Sigeric afterwards in the primacy, succeeded him also in the bishopric of Ramsbury in Wilt shire, which the latter vacated on his promotion to Can terbury. It is clear that Thorpe misunderstood the passage of ^Ifric's Preface which seemed to him to imply that the Homilies were written after the death of Ethelred. Such an interpretation is not only unnecessary but inadmissible, the !•] Testimonies. 33 contrary being certain from the fact of the completion of the Homilies during Sigeric's archiepiscopate, which ended twenty-two years bfetore the death of Ethelred. .^Ifric does not speak of Ethelred's days as past, but of an event in his own life as occurring in that king's reign. He ' was sent ' are his words, according to Thorpe's version, ' in King Ethelred's day from Bishop ^Ifeah,' or ^Ipheage, ' ^thel- wold's successor, to a minster called Cernel at the prayer of .iEthelmane the thane.' As the authorship of these Anglo-Saxon Homilies is a question of some interest and importance in regard to their date, I will conclude by quoting Lingard's final opinion upon the subject. He had been disposed to accept the common belief of their being the work of .^Ifric, the Archbishop of Canterbury, but he adds : ' A more minute and patient inquiry has convinced me that there exists no sufficient reason to believe that ^Ifric the translator was ever raised to the episcopal bench, much less to either of the archiepiscopal thrones 1.' 23. In the year 1872, Dr. Reeves, at that time Dean of Armagh, afterwards Bishop of Down, Connor and Dromore, drew attention to an Irish MS., containing inter alia the Athanasian Creed accompanied by a short preface, which is written partly in Irish and partly in Latin, and possesses a special interest as recording a tradition that the Creed was composed at the Council of Nice by three bishops, Eusebius, Dionysius, and another, whose name was unknown to the writer. The following is Dr. Reeves's version of this curious document : — ' The Synod of Nice that made the Faith Catholic ; and three bishops of them only that made it, i. c. Eusebius and Dionissius, et nomen tertii nescimus. But it is said that it is the whole Synod that made it, for it was it which published it. In Necea vero nrbe it was made. And in Bethinia is that city, i. e. a territory in Little Asia. Now to expel the error of Arius it was made ; ' Lingard, Anglo-Saxon Chu7-ch, vol. i. p. 453. D 34 Documentary Evidence. [ch. for it was his belief that the Pater is greater quam Filius, and that the Filius is greater quam Spiritus Sanctus. The Synod was therefore assembled by Constantine at Nicea, namely three hundi'ed and eighteen bishops ; and they were not able to overcome him (Arius) because of his eloquence, until God overcame him. Exiens enim de coitu (coetu) ut purgaret ventrem suum, ei contigit ut omnia viscera cum stercore foras exirent, ut Judae atque Agitofel contigit '.' The learned Irish scholar who has called our attention to the above-mentioned MS. states his opinion, formed after inspection, that it is ' written uniformly in a hand which is not later than the year iioo.' Archbishop Ussher, who saw and examined it, speaks of it as ' codex vetustissimus ' in his letter addressed to Voss prefixed to his treatise on the Creeds. It embodies a collection of Hymns written partly in the Irish language and partly in Latin, and it possesses a varied history, for in the early part of the seventeenth century it belonged to the Franciscan Convent of Donegal. In the year 1647 it was at Louvain. From thence it was transferred with Colgan's Irish collections to the Irish Franciscan Convent of St. Isidore at Rome ; and there it remained till 1872, when the whole manuscript library of that house was removed to Ireland and deposited in the Church of the Franciscans on Merchant's Quay in Dublin. Waterland deems it certain that Eusebius of Vercellae is the Eusebius of the legend recorded in this preface to the Quicunque. Ussher rightly considers the point not so clear. Still there are some traces of a kindred legend, connecting Eusebius of Vercellae either with the composition or the translation of the Creed. According to Bona, in a manuscript history of Piedmont preserved in the library at Turin, he was represented as assisting Athanasius either in drawing it up or else in rendering it from Greek into Latin. ' See Appendix by the Rev. William Reeves to a Sermon on the Athanasian Creed, preached on Sunday, May 12, 1872, by William Lee, D.D., Dublin, 1872. J-] Testimonies. 35 Bishop Jewell, in the second part of his Apology, says that he was believed by some to be the author ; but he says this without specifying who they were who thus ascribed the authorship. Voss in his treatise De tribus Symbolis simply accepts Jewell's assertion ^ It only remains to add that there can be no doubt as to what is meant by the Faith Catholic described as being made by three bishops at the Council of Nice, inasmuch as the document giving this description is immediately followed by the Athanasian Creed entitled Fides Catholica. 24. At the commencement of the twelfth century Honorius of Autun, a priest and scholastic divine of considerable repute who flourished from about 1090 to 1 1 20, in his work Gemma animae, under the head of the Faith enumerates four Creeds, as then received by the Catholic Church, the fourth being the Quicunque. ' First,' he says, 'the Apostles' Creed, to wit, / believe in God, it,' i.e. the Catholic Church, 'lays down as its foundation, singing it every day at the commencement of the day and at the commencement of the hours, namely, at Prime ; by this it completes its works, reciting it at Compline. Next, the Faith / believe in God the Father, which is read in Synods, and which the Nicene Synod issued. Thirdly, the Faith / believe in One, which was published by the Council of Constantinople, it chants in the congregation at Mass. Fourthly, the Faith Whosoever will, which Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, issued at the request of the Emperor Theodosius, it repeats daily at Prime.' The historical ' ' In hoc Symbolo,' i. c. Athanasiano, ' componendo sive e Graeco in Latinum traducendo adiutorem fuisse Athanasio Eusebium Vercellensem Episcopum refert Gulielmus Baldesanus in historia Pedemontana, quae raanuscripta Taurini asservatur in Bibliotheca Ducis Sabaudiae ex tabulario Vercellensis Ecclesiae. Imo solum Eusebiuni eius auctorem aguoscunt aliqui, ut testatur \'os5ius.' Bona, De Divina Psalmodia, cap. xvi. § l8. D 2 36 Documentary Evidence. [ch. error in regard to Theodosius cannot affect the credibility of this testimony to the use and reception of the Athanasian Creed at the beginning of the twelfth century. And elsewhere Honorius thus expresses his sense of its value : ' By means of the Quicunque vult we declare our faith, in which we sum up all besides, and through which we believe ourselves to be associated with the angels'.' 25. The teaching of the famous Abelard attracted great attention in the first half of the twelfth century ; and the estimation in which the Athanasian Creed was then held may be amply illustrated from his history. He repeatedly quotes it in his works Introductio ad theologiam and Sic et non, describing it as ' Symbolum fidei ' and attributing it to Athanasius. And when he was arraigned in 1120 before a Council at Soissons on a charge of heterodoxy, he was required to make a public recital of it in his vindication ^. And when accused by St. Bernard of having sanctioned an innovation in ritual, he retorts by enumerating a variety of innovations in the celebration of divine service charge able upon the Order to which St. Bernard belonged, i.e. ^ 'Fidem catholicam quatuor temporibus editam, immo corroboratam, Ecclesia Catholica recipit, et in quatuor mundi climatibus cnstodit. Primo Symbolum Apostolorum, scilicet Credo iii Detim, fundamentum sibi ponit, dum hoc quotidie in principio diei et in principio horarum, scilicet ad Primam, canit; per hoc opera sua consummat, dum hoc ad Completorium recital. Delude fidem Credo iti Deum Patrem. quae in synodis legitur, quamque Nicaena synodus edidit. Tertio fidem Credo in Unum in conventu populi ad Missam modulatur, quae per Constantinopolitanum concilium propalatur. Quarto fidem Quicunque vult quotidie ad Primam iterat, quam Athanasius, Alexandrinus episcopus, rogatu Theodosii imperatoris edidit.' Honorii, Gemma Animae, lib. ii. cap. 59, De fide quatuor temporibus edita, Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. clxxii. p. 634. Also ' Per Quicunque vult fidem nostram depro- mimus, in qua reliqua omnia concludimus, et per quam angelis associari credimus.' Ibid. lib. ii. cap. 58, De Prima dominicis diebus. ' Abaelardi Opera, Epist. i. seu Historia calamitatum, Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. clxxviii. pp. 145, 146. '•] Testimonies. 37 the Cistercians, one of them being that they had ' decreed that the Creed of Athanasius was to be recited on Sundays only^.' This, as it is explained by, so it confirms the testimonies of Udalric and Honorius in regard to the daily recital of the Creed being customary at the time when they wrote. 26. Otto, Bishop of Freisingen, in his Chronicle notices the tradition, but not as being generally received or credited, that Athanasius put forth the Creed during his residence at Treves ^. Otto's chronicle was commenced in 1143 and finished in 1147. He died in 1158. 27. In the Chronicle of Arnold, Abbot of Liibeck, who died in 1213 or the commencement of the following year, an account is given of a journey made by Henry, Duke of Saxony and Bavaria, in the year 1172 for the purpose of visiting the Holy Sepulchre. The duke made a short stay at Constantinople en route ; and whilst he was there a discussion took place between the ecclesiastics, who formed part of his suite, and some Greek theologians on the subject of the Procession. The Greeks at first turned a deaf ear to the arguments of their opponents ; but at last Henry, Abbot of Brunswick, who is described as a man of the greatest learning and eloquence, convinced them of the truth of the Western doctrine, first by adducing proofs from holy Scripture, and then by quotations from their own doctors. The first quotation is the twenty- second verse of the Quicunque, which he cites as the words of ' Athanasius in Symbolo Fidei ^.' The duke is described ' Abaelardi Opera, Epist. x. ^ ' Ibidem,' i. c. Athanasius, ' manens in ecclesia Treverorum sub Maximino eiusdem ecclesiae sacerdote Qtiicunque vult a quibusdam dicitur edidisse.' Ottonis Frisingensis Chronicon, lib. iv. cap. 7, apud Perlz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, tom. xx. p. 399. Hanover, 1868. ^ 'Vestri doctor es . . . professi sunt Spiritum Sanctum procedere a Filio, 38 Documentary Evidence. [ch. as starting upon his journey from Brunswick. It was possibly this which occasioned Waterland's mistake in calling- him the Duke of Brunswick, not of Saxony and o Bavaria. 28. The appendix to the dogmatic works of Hugh of St.Victor contains a treatise upon Ceremonies, Sacraments, Ecclesiastical Offices and Observances, ascribed to Robert Paululus, Presbyter of Amiens, who flourished in the latter half of the twelfth century. Speaking in reference to the services at the Hours, the writer says that the devotion of the faithful had added to the three Psalms sung at Prime the Quicunque vult, ' in order that at no hour we may be forgetful of the Articles of the Faith which are necessary to salvation '.' 29. John Beleth, rector of the theological school at Paris, in his Rationale reckons, like Honorius of Autun, four Creeds — ' the least, that which is said by all in com mon in daily prayer and which the Apostles jointly composed ; the second is that which is recited at Prime, Whosoever will be saved, which was composed by Athana sius the Patriarch of Alexandria in opposition to the Arian heretics, notwithstanding the false opinion of very many that Anastasius was the author ; the third is that which the Council of Constantinople issued, to wit, that sicut a Patre. Unde Athanasius in Symbolo Fidei : Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus nee creatus, nee genitus, sed procedens' Amoldi Chronica Slavorum, lib. i. cap. 5, apud Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, tom. xxi. p. 120. ' ' Isti tres Psalmi obsequium nostrum Domino praesentant per tres horas, Primam scilicet, Secundam et Tertiam, ut in his tribus Domino custodiamur . . . His addidit fideliirm devotio : Quicunque vult salvus esse, ut articulorum fidei, qui sunt necessarii ad salutem, nulla diei hora obliviscamur.' Appendix ad Hugonis opera dogmatica, De Caeremoniis, Sacramentis, Officio, et Observa- tionibus Ecclesiasticis, auctore ut videtur Roberto Paululo, lib. ii, De officiis ecclesiasticis, cap. i, Dehora Prima, apud Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. clxxvii. p. 408. ¦] Testimonies. 39 which up to the present time has been usually sung at Mass ; the fourth is that which was put forth by the Nicene Council, . . . and ought to be read in every synod either wholly or at least in part '.' Beleth's work is assigned to some date between the years 1183 and 11 90. There is a doubt respecting his nationality, whether he was an Englishman or Frenchman. 30. In the thirteenth, as in previous centuries, the Atha nasian Creed necessarily comes into notice in connexion with the controversy between Eastern and Western Chris tendom. Four legates, two selected from the Dominican Order and two from the Franciscan, were sent in the year 1233 by Pope Gregory IX to the Patriarch of Constanti nople forthe purpose of effecting, if possible, the restoration of unity ; and they met the representatives of the Eastern Church in conference at a synod, assembled first at Les- chara, afterwards transferred to Nymphaea in Bithynia. In their letter to the Pope, describing the result of their mission, they quote the twentieth and two following verses of the Creed, and speak of it as 'the exposition of the Faith which the holy Athanasius composed in Latin during his exile in the West ^.' ^ ' Notandum est quatuor esse symbola ; minimum quod a cunctis com- muniter in quotidiana oratione dicitur et quod Apostoli simul composuerunt : secundum est, quod in prima recitatur, Qtiicunque vult salvus esse, quod ab Athanasio Patriarcha Alexandrino contra Arianos hereticos compositum est, licet plerique eum Anastasium fuisse falso arbitrentur : tertiiim est, quod Constantinopolitana synodus edidit, videlicet, quod in Missa hactenus cani consuetum est : quartum est, quod ex Niceno concilio prodiit . . . ac legi oportet in omni synodo vel totum vel saltem eius aliqua particula ' Beleth, Rationale divinorum officiorum, cap. xl, Quid symbolum, quando canendum, et quot sint nnmero ? Apud Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. ccii. p. 49. '' ' Ideo qui credit, quod Spiritus Sanctus non procedit a Filio, in via perditionis est. Unde sanctus Athanasius, cum in partibus occidentalibus exularet, in editione fidei, quam Latinis verbis e.vpressit, sic ait : Paler a nullo . . . sed pro cedens.' Charta Apocrisiorum D. Papae, apud Concilia Labbe et Cossart, tom. xxiii. p, 299. Venetiis, 1779- 4° Documentary Evidence. [ch. 31. Ample notice of the Athanasian Creed is found in the writings of the doctors of the two great orders of friars which the thirteenth century gave birth to. Alex ander de Hales — Hales in Gloucestershire — an Englishman and Franciscan, celebrated as the irrefragable doctor, who spent the best of his years in teaching theology at Paris, and died there in 1245, treats of h fully in his Summa Theo logiae. It is entitled by him ' Symbolum Athanasii,' and ' Symbolum fidei,' and classed as the third of the Creeds ; for it must be observed that the divines of this century, unlike Honorius and Beleth in the preceding one, reckoned only three Creeds, confounding the Nicene proper and the Constantinopolitan, and applying to the latter the title of the former — a classification which has been continued ever since. ' The first Creed,' he says, ' which is said silently, drawn up according to tradition by the Apostles themselves ; the Creed which is sung at Mass, / believe in one God, which was drawn up by the Fathers at the Council of Nice, and the Creed of Athanasius which is sung at Prime.' In reference to the cause of the multi plication of Creeds or Symbols, he states that ' the ex planation of the Faith in relation to doubtful questions which had emerged was the cause of the composition of the Creed of the holy Fathers, which is sung at Mass. But the exclusion of error, rendered necessary by the growth of manifold heresies, was the cause of the Creed of Athanasius, which is sung at Prime.' The reasons he gives for the Qttictmque being sung at Prime are notable. They are twofold : ' namely, for the sacred meaning, to signify that faith is the first illumination of the mind and the first of virtues ; and for utility, for we are armed by the Symbol of the faith according to what is said in Ephes. vi, In all things taking the shield of faith. Therefore at the •] Testimonies. 41 first hour we take the armour of God, that we may be able to vanquish all the invisible temptations of the enemy ^' 32. Thomas Aquinas, the angelical doctor, the greatest of the Schoolmen, who lived a little later in this century than Alexander — he died in 1274 at the age of fifty — also reckons only three Creeds, and the Athanasian as one of them, and he entitles it ' Symbolum,' ' Symbolum fidei,' and ' Manifestatio fidei,' and regards it as the work of Athana sius. He treats of the question whether it pertains to the chief pontiff to sanction a Symbol of the Faith ; and some of the premisses, which he adduces in solving this question in the affirmative, are no less applicable for the defence of the Creeds, and in particular the Quicunque, in the nine teenth century than they were in the thirteenth, and are such as may be used in argument by Anglo-Catholics no less than Roman Catholics. The same objections, which are urged in the present age to the use of the Creeds, seem to have been urged in the days of Aquinas and the School men. Thus he says ' that in the teaching of Christ and the Apostles the verity of the Faith is sufficiently explained ; but because men of perverse minds pervert the apostolic and other teaching and the Scriptures to their own de- ' ' Primum Symbolum dicitur in silentio, ab ipsis Apostolis conslitutum, sicut tradunt ; Symbolum quod cantatur in Missa — Credo in unum Deum — quod fuit a Patribus in Nicaeno concilio constitutum ; et Symbolum Athanasii' — in Laud MS. Mis. 493, Anastasii — 'quod cantatur in Prima.' Also 'Fidei explanatio circa dubitationes emergentes fuit causa compositionis Symboli sanctonim Patrum, quod cantatur in Missa. En oris vero exclusio propter haereses puUulantes causa fnit Symboli Athanasii' — Laud MS. Mis. 493, Anastasii — ' quod cantatur in Prima.' And ' Dicendum quod propter duo, scilicet propter significationem ut designetur quod fides est prima illiiminatio mentis et prima virtutum, et propter utilitatern : armamur enim Symbolo fidei, secundum quod dicitur ad Ephes. vi. . In omnibus sumentes scutum, fidei. Propterea in hora prima arma Dei sumimus, ut omnes tentationes invisibiles inimicorum expugnare valeamus.' Alexander de Hales, Summa Theologiae, Pars iii, Qnaestio l.\ix, De ratione Symboli. 42 Documentary Evidence, [ch- struction, on that account the more explicit declaration of the Faith became necessary in process of time in order to combat the errors which arose.' In reference to the Canon of Ephesus forbidding any one to produce or compose any other Creed than the Nicene, that is, clearly, the original Nicene Creed, he asserts that this prohibition ' applies only to private persons to whom it does not belong to determine matters of faith.' It will be recollected that this canon was confidently alleged in the recent con troversy respecting the Athanasian Creed as furnishing an irresistible argument against its acceptance and use. And lastly, he states that ' Athanasius composed ' it ' not in the form of a Symbol, but of a doctrinal exposition,' and that it ' contains in brief the whole truth of the Faith '.^ 33. Towards the conclusion of the same century Johannes Januensis, or Genuensis rather — i. e. of Genua or Genoa — sometimes called Balbus, sometimes de Balbis, who was a professor of the same Order as Thomas Aquinas, viz. the Preachers or Dominicans, issued his Catholicon — a universal vocabulary. This work was printed repeatedly even in the fifteenth century, a proof of the great esteem in which it was then held, as also we may presume in the century preceding ; and under the head of ' Symbolum ' it treats of the Creeds. Genuensis follows Hales and Aquinas in reckoning three Creeds or Symbols — the Atha- ' ' Dicendnm est . . . quod in doctrina Christi et Apostolorum Veritas fidei est sufficienter explicata. Sed quia perversi homines Apostolicam doctrinam et caeteras doctrinas et Scripturas pervertunt ad sui ipsorum perditionem . . . ideo necessaria fuit temporibus procedentibus explicatio fidei contra insurgentes errore-..' Also ' Prohibitio et sententia Synodi '—i. e. of Ephesus—' se extendit ad privatas personas, quarum non est determinare de fide.' And ' Athanasius non composuit manifestationem fidei per modum Symboli, sed magis per modura cuiusdam doctrinae.' And ' Integram fidei veritatem eius doctrina breviter continebat.' D. Thomae Aquinatis, Summa Theologiae, Secunda secundae. Quaest. i, De Fide Art. x. I-] Testimonies. 43 nasian as the third. He states, as the reason why the Apostles' Creed was said in silence at Prime and Comphne, whereas the two others were recited aloud, one after the Gospel and the second at Prime, that ' the Apostles' Creed was issued when the Faith was not yet spread abroad, and on that account is said secretly ; and also that it was issued with the object of propounding the doctrine of the Faith, and on that account is said daily at Matins, at Prime and Compline, as if at the beginning of the day and the night, to signify that all our work should take its beginning from faith, and that by it we are protected against the dangers of adversity and prosperity. But the other Creeds were issued when the Faith was already spread abroad, and therefore are sung openly. And because they were issued, not for the purpose of propounding the Faith but of defending and elucidating it, therefore they are not said now every day, but on days when people are accustomed to resort in the largest numbers to church, and which are marked by some special solemnity in reference to matters concerning the articles of the Faith. And because the Nicene Creed was issued for the declaration of the Faith, it is said immediately after the Gospel, as it were its exposition. But the Creed of Athanasius, which was issued for the refutation of heretics, is said at Prime, as it were just after the darkness of heresy has been driven away.' Then he adds that it might be objected that 'this Creed is proposed as a rule of Faith requiring assent ; but, as Augustine in his epistle to Jerome says : To Apostles and Prophets solely is this honour due, that whatever they said those very things are to be believed as true, therefore after the Apostles' Creed other Creeds ought not to have been made.' To this he replies, ' that the Fathers, who issued other Creeds after the Apostles, added nothing of their 44 Documentary Evidence. [ch. own, but gathered those things which they added from the holy Scriptures ; and because some things are difficult in that Creed of the Apostles, on that account, in order to explain it, the Nicene Creed was issued, which treats more fully of the Faith as regards certain articles : and because some things were contained implicitly in those Creeds, which on account of the heresies which arose required to be explicitly enunciated, to that end the Creed of Atha nasius, the special antagonist of heretics, was issued ^.' These passages from Alexander Hales and Thomas Aquinas ¦^ ' Scias quod tria sunt Symbola, — Symbolum Apostolorum quod dicitur in Matutinis, in Prima, et in Completorio, — item Nicenum, quod dicitur in Dominicis diebus post Evangelium, — item Athanasii, quod dicitur in Prima Dominicis diebus alta voce. Et, si quaeras quare Symbolum Apostolorum dicatur submisse in Prima et in Completorio ; alia vero duo dicantur alte, unum post Evangelium, alteruro sicut : — Quicunque vult salvus esse in Prima, respondeo : — Symbolum Apostolorum fuit editum, quando hides non erat propalata, et ideo in secreto dicitur; et quod editum fuit ad proponendam Fidei doctrinam, ideo quotidie dicitur in Matutinis et in Prima et in Comple torio, ^juasi in principio diei et noctis in signum, quod omnis nostra operatio a fide debet accipere initium, et quia per ipsam contra adversa et in prosperis protegimur. Alia autem Symbola edita fuerunt tempore Fidei propalatae, et ideo publice cantantur. Et quia non ad proponendum {sic) Fidem sed ad defendendum vel ad elucidandum edita fuerunt, ideo nunc non in singulis diebus dicuntur, sed in illis, in quibus homines maxime ad ecclesiam venire con- sueverunt, et in quibus fit aliqua sollemnizatio de his quae ad articulos Fidei pertinent. Et quia Symbolum Nicenum editum est ad manifestationem Fidei, dicitur statim post Evangelium quasi expositio ipsius. Symbolum autem Athanasii, quod contra hereticos editum est, in Prima dicitur, quasi iam piilsis hereticorum tenebris. Sed potest queri : — hoc Symbolum proponitur ut regula Fidei cuius actus est assentire ; sed, sicut Aug. in ep. ad Hiero. ; Solis Apostolis et Prophetis est hie honor exhibendus, ut quaecunqiie dixerunt haec ipsa vera esse credantur, ergo post Symbolum Apostolorum non debuerunt fieri alia Symbola. Ad hoc dico, quod Patres qui alia Symbola post Apostolos edi- derunt, nihil de suo apposuerunt, sed ex sacris Scriptnris ea quae addiderunt excerpserunt : et quia quaedam difificilia sunt in illo Symbolo Apostoloram, ideo ad eius explanationem editum est Symbolum Nicenum, quod diffusins Fidem quoad aliqnos articulos prosequitur : et quia quaedam implicite contine- bantur in illis Symbolis, quae oportebat propter insurgentes hereses explicari, ad id editum est Symbolum Athanasii, qui specialiter contra hereticos se opposnit.' Catholicon seu universale vocabularium Johannis Genuensis. Lugduni, 15 14. Sub voce • Symbolum.' I-] Testimonies. 45 and Johannes Genuensis are important as showing that in the age of the Schoolmen, and we may say in the Western Church of the Middle Ages, the Qtiicunque was received as a Creed and recited in the offices of worship together with the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds, and also as showing the relative value in the estimation of those divines who spent their lives in the study of theology, of holy Scripture, and the Creeds ; the former being deemed by them sufficient as containing all things needful to be believed, the latter necessary, not as adding to God's word, but explaining, defending, elucidating its true meaning, the exponents and safeguards of revealed truth. The Schoolmen and our own articles are here at one. 34. William Durandus, or Durantus, the author of the famous Rationale, was a contemporary of Genuensis. He was a Frenchman by birth, and appointed Bishop of Mende in the south of France in 1285, but during the greater part of his life he was employed in Italy in offices of trust and responsibility under successive Popes. He died at Rome in 1296, and was present as Legate at the Council of Lyons in 1274. Durand, in common with the divines of the thirteenth century, reckons only three Creeds, but with Beleth he places the Athanasian Creed second in order, though he adds that possibly it may be described as the third, inasmuch as the Nicene was drawn up prior to it at the first Nicene Council. He speaks of the Quicunque as the work of Athanasius, composed at Treves ^. ' 'Nota quod triplex est Symbolum : — Primum est Symbolum Apostolorum. Secundum est Quicunque vult salvus esse &^c., ab Athanasio Patriarcha Alex andrino in Trevirensi civitate compositum. Hoc tamen potest diei tertium, nam Nicenum, de quo sequitur, fuit prius in prima Nicena synodo compilatum. Tertium est Nicenum, scilicet Credo in unum Deum, quod Damasus Papa ex condicto universalis Synodi apud Constantinopolin celebratae instituit in Missa cautari patenter, quanquam et Marcus Papa statuisset illud alta voce cantari, et 46 Documentary Evidence. 35. In the fourteenth century Ludolphus Saxo, a school man and monk of the Carthusian monastery at Strasburg, in his Life of Christ, reckons three Creeds, the Athanasian as the third. The ends for which they were made he states to be severally instruction in the Faith, its explanation, and its defence ^. According to Sixtus Senensis, Ludolph had belonged for thirty years to the Dominican Order before his reception into the Carthusian monastery at Strasburg, but on this point there is some difference, another authority — Philip Bergomas — speaking of him as an Augustinian Eremite. He flourished about the year 1330: his work was very popular, as appears from its passing through several printed editions in the fifteenth century and being translated into various modern lan guages. It is needless to adduce any further evidence under the head of Testimonies. vocatur Symbolum mnius.' Durandi Rationale, lib. iv. cap. 25 De Symbolo, p. 207, edit. Neapoli 1859. ' ' Sunt tria Symbola. Primum Apostolorum ; secundum Niceni Concilii ; tertium Athanasii. Primum factum est ad Fidei instiuctionem ; secundum ad Fidei explanationem ; tertium ad Fidei defensionem.' Ludolpns Saxo, /J^ vita Christi, secunda pars, cap. 83, edit. Ven. 1581, p. 730. CHAPTER II. CANONS AND ECCLESIASTICAL INJUNCTIONS. I. The earliest document, applicable to our subject under this category, is entitled ' Epistola Canonica ; ' apparently so to speak an episcopal charge, containing a series of canons or capitula with reference to the duties of the clergy, and authoritatively declaring ' quae debeant adimplere presbyteri, diaconi seu subdiaconi.' The first of these canons or capitula was adduced by the brothers Ballerini, the editors of the works of St. Leo, A.D. 1753-57, in proof of the antiquity of the Athanasian Creed. It is as follows : — ' Primum omnium Fidem Catholicam omnes Presbyteri, Diaconi, seu Subdiaconi memoriter teneant, et si quis hoc faciendum praetermittat, xl diebus a vino abstineat ; et si post abstinentiam neglexerit com- mendandum, replicetur in eo sententia.' These learned canonists think it certain that the Quicunque is described here under the term ' Fides Catholica ;' firstly, because that was its earliest title ; secondly, because it is so termed in the heading of Fortunatus's commentary ; and thirdly, because neither the Apostles' Creed nor the Nicene could be intended — not the former, which would have been more fitly called ' Fides Apostolica ' and was required to be learnt by heart not by the clergy only but by the laity as well ; not the latter, which was usually designated ' Fides 48 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Nicaena'^.' They maintain that the Epistola Canonica must have been issued in the early part of the sixth century, inasmuch as it is found in a collection of canons of that epoch, also that it is an Italian document, as is .shown by the fact of its appearing in three different collections, all Italian : and it may be added that in all probability it was drawn up for some diocese in the north of Italy, the original home of several of the MSS. in which it is preserved. We have some external evidence of the antiquity and authenticity of this document. Thus the first capitulum or canon quoted above is incorporated into the Capitulare drawn up by Atto, Bishop of Vercellae, in the middle of the tenth century, A.D. 945 to 960. Atto, who is described by D'Achery as a most learned theologian and canonist, had met with the Epistola Canonica in a MS. belonging to his cathedral library, and having found it to be of the greatest use wrote to a priest of Milan, by name Ambrose, to make inquiry respecting its age and authorship ^. But the latter was unable to give the desired information ; and the fact that in the tenth century the date when it was drawn up was unknown to men of learning, shows that at that time it could not have been a recent production. Similarly the ninth capitulum, forbidding the alienation by the clergy of church estates, forms the forty-second chapter, bearing the title De bonis ecclesiasticis. Ex epistola canonica, in the second appendix to the Collection of ReginO: Abbot of 1 See Migne, Patiol. Latina, tom. Ivi. p. 890. Also Editorum observationes in P. Quesnellei dissertationem, § 111, De auctore Symboli Quicunque, quod S. Athanasii nomine inscribitur, printed in the De vetustis Canonum Collec- tionibus dissertationum Sylloge, edited by Gallandius, tom. i. pp. 842-7. Magontiaci, 1790. Also Baluzii Capitularia, tom. ii. p. 1374, note. Paris, 1780. ^ Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. Ivi. p. 862. Also Spicilegium Dacherianum, tom. i. p. 439. Paris, 1723. H-J Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 49 Prum in the Diocese of Treves. This collection was compiled A. D. 906 ; the two appendices were, in the opinion of Baluze, ancient additions, though not the work of Regino. Both the collection and appendices were drawn from earlier sources ^. And the Epistola Canonica bears internal evidence of authenticity : its contents are such as we should expect to find in a document of the class and epoch to which it is assigned. The first capitulum has been already produced ; another censures presbyters, who admit to Communion persons who have contracted incestuous marriages — some marriages of near affinity being specified ; another enacts a penalty to be inflicted upon presbyters who should persistently receive to Communion persons guilty of partaking in certain pagan superstitions and idol worship — a proof of the common prevalence of paganism at the time in the diocese where this epistle was issued ; another requires that in every parish where Baptism was celebrated the presbyter should be assisted by a deacon ; another, as already mentioned, forbids the alienation or sale of church estates by the clergy ; another denounces some married clergy possessed of churches, in which they exercised their ministry ^, of whom it was reported that they had allowed their wives and daughters to appropriate to their own use the sacred vestments, and it imposes a severe penalty for the offence, if proved. Here is a distinct proof that at the time parochial clergy, having charge of and serving churches, were not unfrequently married men, living with their wives and families. The last requires all clergy, who are subject to the bishop, to submit their case to his ^ See Baluze's Preface to Regino's Collection in Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxxii. p. 175, &c. ^ ' Quidam coniugati habentes tilulos, in quibus deserviunt.' E 50 Documentary Evidence. [ch. decision, in the event of any difference, and by no means to resort to a secular tribunal. This ' Epistola Canonica ' is printed by the Ballerini the fourth among ' Documenta iuris canonici veteris ' in the Appendix to their edition of the works of St. Leo ^, it is also printed by Baluze from the papers of Sirmond, with the title : ' Capitula data Presbyteris, Diaconis, et Subdiaconis,' in the Appendix to his edition of the Capitularia ^. It is found, as one of the documents comprised in the ante- Dionysian Collection of Canons already mentioned, in two Roman MSS., Barber. 2,888 and Vat. 1,342, of which the Ballerini have given some account in their treatise De antiquis collectionibus Canonum'^. The Barberini MS. belonged for some time to the monastery of St. Saviour at the Monte Amiata in Tuscany, and is assigned by Reifferscheid to the ninth or tenth century ; the Vatican MS., described by Montfaucon as elegantissimus et antiquissimus and considered by Maassen to have been executed at the end of the ninth or the beginning of the following century, is believed to have been one of the books of the ancient Lateran Library. It is also found, as a constituent of another Italian Collection called the Additions of Dionysitts, in the following MSS. :— Vat. 1,343, '^y'ii'i^ 5,845. Vallicellan A. 5, and the MS. already mentioned as being consulted by Bishop Atto in the tenth century, which is probably still in the Cathedral Library at Vercelli, for it was there, as stated by the Ballerini, at the time when they wrote in the last century. Of these MSS. all but the Vallicellan may be distinctly traced to the ' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. Ivi. p. 890. ^ Baluzii Capitularia, tom. ii. p. 1374. Paris, 1780. ^ Pars ii. cap. 7. See Galland's De vetustis Canonum collectionibus Dissertationum Sylloge, tom. i. "¦] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 51 north of Italy, a fact which evidently points to the conclusion that there must be sought the birthplace of the collection common to them. Vat. 1,343, a MS. of the tenth century, belonged originally to the church of Pavia, as appears from the last document, which it contains — an official letter from a bishop of that city respecting a priest who had been subject to his jurisdiction to the Archbishop of Milan. At the commencement too a fragment has been inserted from another MS., which likewise preserves a Pavian church document, viz. a copy as it seems of a citation to archpresbyters and clergy of other orders to attend a Synod at Pavia bringing with them their sacred vestments and books. This though inserted by the authorities of the Vatican, as appears by the papal stamp marked upon it together with the number of the MS., must have been so inserted because they considered the codex to to be a Pavian book. Vat. 1,353 is a copy written in the year 1441 of an older MS. at Bergamo, and was presented to Cardinal Peter Barbo, who afterwards succeeded to the papacy under the title of Paul II. He was pope from 1464 to 1471. Vat. 5,845 is written in Lombardic minus cules, which points to the probability that it was executed either in the north of Italy or at any rate by a North- Italian scribe. Holstenius calls it ' codex Longobardicus vetustissimus.' The Ballerini assign it to the time of Charlemagne, because it contains an account of the conference between Leo III and the envoys of the Frank Emperor respecting the insertion of the Filioque in the Creed. Having inspected the MS. myself, I may add that this is the latest document which it includes. From a note written at the bottom of the first page, we learn that this codex was in private ownership in the early part of the seventeenth century. It is as follows : ' P. Constanteinus Abbas E 2 52 Documentary Evidence. [ch, Caietanus, T. P. anno Domini 1629, mense Octobris.' The Vallicellan MS., so called because it is deposited in the library attached to the church of S. Maria in Vallicella at Rome, is believed by the Ballerini to have been written during the pontificate of Nicholas I in the middle of the ninth century, inasmuch as it gives a list of the popes which closes with that pope, his name being written in the original hand of the manuscript, while the years, months, and days of his reign are added in a later hand. It bears a close resemblance as regards its contents to the Vercelli MS. and to Vat. 1,353, in all three the additions of Dionysius being preceded by the Hadrian Collection. The other codices in which the Epistola Canonica is found are a MS. of Monte Casino and a Vatican MS., the two MSS. in which Sirmond discovered it, as stated by Baluze in his notes on the Capitularies, though possibly the latter may be identical with one of the Vatican MSS. previously mentioned ; also a MS. at Lucca, used by Mansi in editing the document in the Supplement to the Councils. These are also Italian MSS., and it may be presumed comprise the third collection in which, according to the Ballerini, this Epistola is preserved 1. It must be remembered that Waterland wrote his book several years before the Ballerini drew attention to the Epistola Canonica in connexion with the Athanasian Creed. Hence, no doubt, his silence upon the subject. 24 The next canonical authority in reference to the Athanasian Creed which calls for attention, as being next in point of antiquity, is the well-known Canon of Autun. Waterland spoke with hesitation of this canon, not ven turing ' to propose it as clear and undoubted evidence but 1 See Admonitio in Collectionem, 4 Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. Ivi, pp. 861, 862. "•] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 53 probable only ^- But in his time it was only known through the single MS. in the Library of St. Benignus at Dijon, in which Sirmond discovered it in the early part of the seventeenth century^. But our knowledge upon the subject has been considerably enlarged by Professor Maassen's account in his History of the Sources and Litera ture of Western Canon-Law of the two ancient collections, in which this canon is preserved ; and its authenticity is thus firmly established, so far at any rate as to accredit its testimony to the use of the Quicunque under Church authority in one diocese of France at least as early as the seventh century, and to the fact also of its being esteemed the work of Athanasius at that period. These two col lections of canons are called the Angers and Herovall Collections — the first being so called by Professor Maassen from the place where Sirmond first met with a manuscript copy of it, the Library of the Cathedral Church of Angers ; the second receiving its title from the name of a former owner of the codex, through which it first became gene rally known, Antony Vion d'Hdrouval. They are both systematic collections, the canons being arranged not under the headings of the Councils at which they were severally enacted, but according to their subject-matter. The Angers, being the basis of the Herovall Collection, is necessarily the older of the two ; at the same time the Herovall, while it has incorporated the Angers, has drawn its materials from other and independent sources also. The MSS. of the Angers Collection at present known are, according to Maassen, six in number:— i. A Cologne MS., Darmstadt, 2,179, of the eighth or ninth century. 2. Paris, Lat., 1603, of the ninth century. 3. Burgund., 10,127- ' History of the Athanasian Creed, chap. ii. ' Concilia antiqua Galliae opera Sirmond), tom. i. pp. 506, 507, ed. Paris, 1629. 54 Documentary Evidence. [ch. 10,144, a MS. in the Burgundian Library at Brussels, of the ninth century. 4. Einsiedeln, 205, of the ninth century. 5. Sangall, 675, of the ninth century. 6. Vienna, 2,171, of the ninth century. Whether the codex in which Sirmond found this collection is still in existence seems unknown. The MSS. of the Herovall Collection, according to the same authority, are as follows: — i. Paris, Lat., 3,848 B, of the beginning of the ninth century. 2. Vercelli, 175, of the ninth century. 3. Paris, Lat., 2,123, of the ninth century. 4. Paris, Lat., 4,281, of the ninth century: this appears from the following advertisement written on the flyleaf to have belonged originally to St. Martial's Abbey at Limoges, from which it passed to the Royal Library at Paris, now the Bibliotheque Nationale : ' Hie est liber sancti Martialis si quis eum furaverit sit cum datan et abiram in infernum responderunt omnes. amen.' 5. A codex at Ivrea, in Piedmont, of the tenth century. 6. Paris, Lat., 2,400, of the eleventh century — this also origin ally belonged to St. Martial's at Limoges. 7. Sangerm. Lat., 1,363, of the eleventh century — this is the MS. which was owned by Monsieur d'Herouval, from whom it passed to James Petit, and the latter presented it in 1709 to the Abbey of St. Germain-des-Prds at Paris. It is in all probability now in the Bibliotheque Nationale, to which wellnigh all the Sangerman. MSS. were transferred at the time of the French Revolution. From this MS. Petit edited a selection of the Herovall Canons as an appendix to Theodore's Penitentiale: it is printed in vol. xcix of Migne's Patrologia Latina. I have been the more particular in specifying the dates of these MSS., inasmuch as they indicate to a certain extent the antiquity of the collections — that neither of them could have been compiled later than the close of the II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 55 eighth century. But we may form a nearer approximation to the several epochs of their composition, and upon surer grounds. Both Petit and the Ballerini conclude from the internal evidence of its contents that the Herovall Collec tion must have been drawn up prior to the reign of Charle magne. On the other hand, the earliest period possible for its compilation is determined by the latest document contained in it, the date of which is certain — the anathemas of Gregory II, and the Roman Synod of 721. Another of its contents, the decretal In Epistola or responses of Stephen II, who was pope from 752 to 757, would necessarily be dated later if its genuineness could be relied upon, but this is not the case. Thus the Herovall Collection could not have been compiled later than the year 770 or there abouts on the one side, nor earlier than 721 on the other. It may safely be considered a work of the middle of the eighth century. And the Angers Collection, being the earlier of the two, as already stated, must be assigned to the early part of the same century or the close of the pre ceding one. It could not have been compiled earlier, the latest document included in it being the Autun Canons, subscribed, as we shall see, by Leodegar or St. Leger, Bishop of that city, who died in the year 678. The Angers Collection, being the earlier of the two and the source in a great measure of the other, is necessarily the most important in reference to the canon enjoining the recitation of the Athanasian Creed, and requires to be first considered. In the two earliest MSS. of this collec tion, the Cologne MS. of the eighth or ninth century and the Paris MS., which though assigned by Maassen to the ninth century generally, belongs indeed to the early part of it, the first chapter or capitulum has for its subject-title ' De fide catholica et symbolo,' and it contains two canons. 56 Documentary Evidence. [ch. the first being as follows in the Paris codex, from which I have copied it : 'Si quis presbyter aut diaconus sub- diaconus clericus symbolum quod sancto inspirante spiritu apostoli tradiderunt et fidem sancti Athanasi presolis irre- prehensibiliter non recensiverit ab episcopo condamnetur.' ' If any of the clergy, presbyter, or deacon, or sub-deacon, shall fail to recite correctly the Symbol which the Apostles delivered by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and the Faith of the holy Athanasius, let him be censured by the bishop.' This is introduced by the title, written in large rubricated capitals, as follows : ' Incipiunt canones Agus- todininsis hira prima ' — the word hira in this connexion obviously meaning number. The other canon is the thirteenth of Agde, which refers to the ' Traditio Symboli ' or instruction of catechumens in the Creed. In the Vienna, Einsiedeln, and Sangall MSS. this chapter respecting the Creeds is omitted, and the two canons which it contains appear with other pieces at the commencement, before the list of the titles of the chapters. The Brussels MS. varies from the rest, not only omitting this first chapter with these three MSS., but also that which forms the first chapter in them and the second in the Cologne and Paris codices ; and it appears that neither of the above-mentioned canons is to be found in it. The Cologne MS. is described by Maassen, I may mention, as giving the collection in its most authentic form. Besides the canon upon the Creeds in "its first chapter, this collection contains in another chapter — the forty-fourth, which is appropriated to the subject of monastic discipline — several other Autun Canons referring to that topic. They are numbered i, 8, 6, 5j 10, 21, the numbers showing that there must have been other canons enacted at the same Synod which passed these ; and they are expressly attributed to Leodegar, the II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 57 first being thus described in the Paris MS.: 'Canon Agustodoninsis hira • i • Leudegarii episcopi.' This might suggest that the canon enjoining the recital of the Apostles' and Athanasian Creeds, which is simply described as the first of the Autun Canons without being attributed to Leodegar, was drawn up at some other Autun Synod, not presided over by him nor held during his episcopate. But at the end of the collection, in a chapter bearing the title De episcopis qui sitprascriptos canones consenserunt et firma- verunt, a list is added of the different Councils, at which the canons comprised in the collection were enacted, together with the numbers of the bishops present at each several Council, and the names of many of them. There are twenty-six paragraphs in all referring to the several Councils, one paragraph for each Council ; and the last is somewhat different in form from the rest — it simply records the consent of Bishop Leodegar, and adds totidem verbis the very terms of his subscription. It appears thus in the Paris MS. : ' Consensum domno Leutgario episcopo agus- tiduninsis Ego Leutgarius acsi peccator episcopus cum con sensu fratrum meorum polliciti sumus et perpetualiter placuit conservandum.' No other Synod of Autun being mentioned in the table, the unavoidable conclusion is that this subscription applies to all the Autun Canons contained in the collection ; that referring to the Creeds as well as the others concerning monastic discipline. We are led by it to understand that these were the canons authorized and enacted by St. Leger, as bishop in a Diocesan Synod, over which he presided. It has been objected that the canon on the Creeds cannot belong to the same Council as the canons relating to monastic discipline, because it is termed the first of the Autun Canons, and one of the latter set is thus numbered also. But the first of the canons 58 Documentary Evidence. [ch. relating to monastic discipline is expressly described in the Angers Collection as the first of its class—' Primus titulus hie est monasticae disciplinae' — which would seem to imply that in the original Autun Collection it was preceded by others on different subjects. And this appears to be the opinion of Sirmond, who refers the canon on the Faith to the Synod of Leodegar, which enacted these disciplinary canons. It is very observable that the compiler of this collection gives his notice of the Autun Canons in a peculiar form. In other instances he simply mentions the particular Council which enacted the several canons, together with the names of some or all of the bishops present. In regard to the Autun Canons not only is Leodegar's name recorded as the consenting bishop, but also the very terms in which he gave his consent. This may have been done partly because in this case a peculiar importance and authority would attach to the presiding bishop's subscrip tion, the Council being Diocesan — the only Diocesan Council mentioned in the table — and partly it may have been owing to the weight and veneration with which Leodegar's memory was invested. But the subscription thus recorded seems to have a further significance, implying that the compiler probably had access to the archives of the Church of Autun, and was himself a member of it. As the Synod in all probability occurred within his own life time and memory, he may have been himself present on the occasion — one of the brethren who declared their placet in favour of the canons which he has preserved. Our belief in the antiquity and genuineness of the canons under our consideration receives full confirmation from the Herovall Collection, which, as we have before said, is based upon the Angers Collection and comprehends its contents H-] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 59 almost entirely. In the first place this collection, like the Angers according to the two earliest and most reliable MSS., has for the subject of its first chapter the faith with the title De fide catholica et simbolo; and this chapter contains the Autun Canon concerning the Apostles' and Athanasian Creeds, clearly drawn from the Angers Collec tion with a remarkable abbreviation, as follows : ' Canon agustudinensis hira • i • Si quis presbyter diaconus sub- diaconus vel clericus simbolum apostolorum et fidem sancti Athanasi episcopi irreprehensibiliter non recensierit, ab episcopo condemnetur.' This is absent from none of the existing MSS., I believe, certainly from none of those at Paris. Then in its chapter respecting monastic discipline it reproduces the Autun Canons on the subject, which appear in the corresponding chapter of the Angers Collec tion, with some verbal alterations ; but what is worthy of notice is that it omits to ascribe them to Leodegar, simply describing them as Autun Canons, the last one, however, being numbered differently — 15 instead of ai — probably by a mere clerical error. Then in a later chapter it gives in an abbreviated form the Angers Table of Councils, the last paragraph or number consisting merely of the mention of Leodegar's consent to the canons without his subscription — thus, according to Paris 3,848 B and 2,123 : ' Consensio et confirmatio Leodegarii episcopi augustu- dinensis.' Lastly, prefixed to this collection — the Herovall — is its own Table of Councils, i.e. a list of the various Councils at which the canons included in it were passed, together with the numbers of the bishops present and in many instances their names. The last number or paragraph in this table is ' Canones Augustodunensium sancti Leode garii episcopi,' which varies in form from the last paragraph in the Angers Table, but harmonizes with the other para- 6o Documentary Evidence. [ch. graphs in both tables. What are these Autun Canons of St. Leger? Clearly all the Autun Canons in the collection, that in the first chapter relating to the Creeds, as well as the others in the chapter concerning monastic discipline. This is the more plain in the present case, because the monastic canons are not attributed, and that solely, to Leodegar, as they are in the Angers Collection or at least in the Paris codex of it. These two Tables of Councils, appearing side by side almost, as they do in Petit 's edition of a selection of the Herovall Canons ^, have occasioned great confusion in the minds of persons unaware of the fact that they belong to two different, though kindred, collections, and many groundless objections have arisen in consequence. To sum up the evidence of these two collections to the genuineness and antiquity of the canon in question. In the two earliest and most reliable MSS. of the Angers it is found in the first chapter which has the faith for its subject, and is described as the first of the Autun Canons. Other Autun Canons, referring to monastic discipline, appear in another chapter, and they are ascribed to Leodegar ; but this does not forbid our believing the canon in the first chapter to have been his also, and we are induced to attribute it to him by the Table of Councils and of bishops who passed the canons contained in the collection, inasmuch as the last number gives the name of Leodegar as consenting to certain canons together with his subscription as Bishop of Autun, and this subscription must be understood to apply to all the Canons of Autun in the collection — that on the Creeds as well as the rest — no other Council of Autun being mentioned besides that, the canons of which were thus subscribed by him. In three other of the MSS. of this collection it does not appear in the same place, the ' Migne, Patrol, Latina, tom. xlix. pp. 1075, 1076. II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 6i first chapter concerning the faith being omitted ; but it is found among some prefatory matter. In this case also the Table of Councils which is met with in these MSS., as well as those before mentioned, points to the conclusion, though not with equal clearness and directness, that the canon was one of those sanctioned by Bishop Leodegar. Thus there is but one existing MS. of the Angers Collection which omits this canon entirely. Of the seven MSS. of the Herovall Collection none is known to omit it. It appears, as in the Cologne and Paris MSS. of the Angers Collection, in the first chapter relating to the faith : in the chapter concerning monastic discipline the Autun Canons on that subject, which are met with in the earlier collection, are reproduced, but not ascribed, as there, to Leodegar : and the Table of Councils belonging to this collection in its last number or paragraph mentions the Canons of Autun, and that simply as the Canons of St. Leodegar, clearly implying that all the Autun Canons in the collection were enacted at the Council over which that bishop presided. Nothing can be more distinct than the testimony of this collection to the fact that the canon we are considering was thus authorized by him. And this, bearing in mind that the Angers Collection was the principal source from which the Herovall was drawn, is a cogent reason for believing that in the judgement of the compiler of the latter collection this canon was an original element of the former and not a subsequent addition, and was thus originally inserted in the primary collection as being one of Leodegar's Canons. Clearly in the copy of the Angers Collection which he used, and which he must have deemed authentic, he found the canon in the first chapter relating to the faith as it appears in the Paris and Cologne codices ; and he evidently understood Leodegar's subscription recorded 62 Documentary Evidence. [ch, in the Angers Collection to apply to this as well as the other Autun Canons respecting monastic discipline. More over, had this canon been a subsequent addition, it would have been placed at the end of the collection, not at the beginning in the first chapter. The omission of it therefore from the Brussels MS. has no material significance ; and the original type of the Angers Collection is to be found in the Paris and Cologne MSS. rather than in that codex. Thus we have sufficient grounds for holding this Autun Canon requiring the recitation of the Athanasian as well as the Apostles' Creed by the clergy to have been enacted by a Council presided over by Bishop Leodegar. But whether it were his or not is a point of no material importance in regard to the value of its testimony to the antiquity of the Quicunque. For if it was not drawn up at a Synod held under Leodegar it must have emanated from some other Autun Synod held prior or subsequently to his episcopate, but still in the seventh century. It cannot be put later, the Angers Collection in which it is found having been compiled, as we have seen, in the early part of the eighth century at the latest. The date would thus be postponed some twenty years only, or at the outside thirty. As the history of MSS. is always interesting and often important, I must not omit to add that Paris, Lat., 1,603, to which I have made frequent reference, for some time belonged to the Abbey of St. Amand near Tournay, described by Martene as one of the most illustrious abbeys of the Low Countries, and even of the Benedictine Order. This appears from a memorandum on the first page of the collection — fol. 7 of the codex — 'Pertinet monasterio S. Amandi in pabula ordinis sancti Benedicti tomacensis diocesis.' From thence— as we learn from another note, ' Codex Tellerianus Remensis, 264, Reg. 4,483 ' — it seems to II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 63 have passed into the Library of Letellier, Archbishop of Rheims from 1671 to 1710, and next into the Royal Library. It is highly probable that Autun or some place in Burgundy was the birthplace of this MS., from whence it may have been transferred to St. Amand during the period when the Low Countries formed part of the dominions of the Dukes of Burgundy, as intercourse between the two countries must have been frequent at that time. The Brussels MS. copy of the Angers Collection was formerly the property of the Abbey of St. Peter at Ghent, of which it contains a memorandum written in a hand of the twelfth or thirteenth century : ' Liber S. Petri gandensis ecclesiae. Servanti benedictio • toUenti maledictio. Qui folium inde tulerit vel contrectaverit anathema sit.' There is a note of its passing into the possession of the Jesuits in 1599 by the gift of an abbot, as follows: ' Societatis Jesu ex dono R. D. P. Columbani abbatis D. Petri Gandensis, 1599 ^' Two other points remain to be considered in reference to the Autun Canon — whether the ' Fides sancti Athanasii ' which it mentions was indeed the Quicttnque, and what was the precise date of Leodegar's Synod ? In regard to the first of these points, it was argued by Papebrochius that the Faith of Athanasius in this canon nust refer not to the Quicunque, but the Nicene Creed *, by which he means, no doubt, what is commonly called so by modern Western theologians, though it would be more accurately described as the Constantinopolitan Creed. But the position is manifestly untenable. The title ' Fides sancti Athanasii ' or the like was commonly applied to the Quicunque, and that beyond a question, as early as the ^ Maassen, Bibliotheca Latina iuris canonici manuscripta. See Sitzungs- berichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie, tom. Ivi. ^ Muratori, Anecdota, t'm. ii. p. 223. 64 Documentary Evidence. [ch. ninth century. On a former occasion, if I may venture to say so, I have produced evidence, and shall by-and-by reproduce it, from the Preface to the Oratorian Commentary i, showing that is was probably so applied in the seventh century, inasmuch as the Quicunque was at that time attributed to the great opponent of Arianism. But I apprehend not a single well-accredited instance can be found in the whole of antiquity of the Nicene Creed, whether the Nicene Creed proper or the Constantinopolitan, being thus entitled. How these two Creeds were described in the seventh century is shown very remarkably by a MS. we have alluded to — the earliest MS. of the Herovall collection — Paris, Latin, 3,848 B, where they are inserted just before the Autun Canon together with the other definitions of the Faith of the five earliest General Councils as recited and re-affirmed at the Lateran Synod held A.D. 649. The first of the two is there entitled 'Fides Niceni Concilii cccxviii episcoporum,' the second ' Sym bolum apud Constantinopolim cl patrum.' On the other hand, the Athanasian Creed, which appears in the same MS. among other documents preceding the Herovall Collection, is entitled as in the Autun Canon ' Fides sancti Athanasii episcopi.' Moreover, that the compiler of the Herovall Collection did not understand the Autun Canon to refer to the Constantinopolitan, or Nicene Creed as we call it, is plain from this, that for the Canon of Agde relating to the ' Traditio Symboli,' which immediately followed the Autun Canon in the Angers Collection, he substituted the second canon of the Third Council of Toledo, which required that Creed to be recited at the Holy Communion ^. ' Early History of the Athanasian Creed, p. 37. ^ Canones selecti, caput primum, apud Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xcix. pp 991, 992. II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 65 The late Professor Swainson,while rejecting Papebrochius's hypothesis, being unwilling to admit the Quicunque to be the ' Fides Athanasii ' of the Autun Canon, suggested that a Confession of Faith,frequently met with in ancient collections of canons and described by various titles, — for instance ' Ex positio Fidei Catholicae,' 'Fides Eomanorum,' ' Fides Eccle siae Romanae,' and attributed to several different authors, St. Athanasius for one, — might be the document intended ^- But this suggestion is also untenable. No doubt the Con fession alluded to was attributed to Athanasius as early as the ninth century, for it is quoted as his work by Hincmar and Ratramn in the latter half of that century, but it never attained to such a position of authority and esteem as to be recited in the offices of the Church and to be required to be learnt by heart by the clergy. Indeed it is altogether unsuited for use in Church services. Nor can it be said that it was ever commonly called the Faith of Athanasius, as the Quicunque was beyond question ^- The conclusion therefore of Waterland on this point may well be accepted, that ' there is no reasonable doubt to be made but that the Coun cil of Autun in the canon intended the Athanasian Creed ^.' With regard to the date of the Autun Synod, over which Leodegar presided, much variety of opinion has been ex pressed, and it is impossible to fix it precisely, our know ledge of the Council being derived solely from the canons belonging to it, which are contained in the Angers and Herovall Collections, and another edited by Delalande * ' The Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, by C. A. Swainson, pp. 257, 271, note. ' This Confession is printed in Appendix H of Early History of the Atha nasian Creed by G. D. W. Ommanney ; and some account of it may be found in the same volume, pp. 202-209. ' History of the Athanasian Creed, p. 23. Oxford edition, 1870. ' Conciliorum antiquorum Galliae a Sirmondo editorum supplementa opera et stadio P. Delalande, pp. 70, 71. Paris, 1666. F 66 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Sirmond assigns the year 670 as the date ; Mansi 677 ; D. Ruinart, the authors of Gallia Christiana, and Pagi, who are followed by Dom Pitra in his life of St. Leger, 661. Of these Sirmond's opinion seems the most probable, as in 670 Leodegar was at the zenith of his power, being at that time, according to his biographer Ursinus, Mayor of the Palace under Childeric. At any rate it is very improbable that the Synod took place after the year 673, when he was disgraced by the king, compelled to leave Autun, and placed in confinement at Luxeuil. The rest of his life with a brief interval was a continuous course of trouble and hardship, and was spent for the most part in prison. Both of his contemporary biographers make mention of a Synod, which was summoned by King Theodoric in 677 and attended by a large number of bishops. But this Synod was not held at Autun, but at the royal palace, and it appears to have been called for political purposes solely. Nothing is said of the transaction of any ecclesiastical business. Several bishops were deposed, but apparently for political offences. Leodegar, who had been for two years in prison at Fiscamnus, was cited to appear, not to take part in the Council, for he had previously been deposed from his bishopric, but to answer the charge, brought against him by his foe Ebroin who was then in power as Mayor of the Palace, of being concerned in the murder of Childeric. He was condemned and treated with indignity, and in the next year 678 he was put to death ^. 3. In a Capitulare or Episcopal charge addressed to the Presbyters of his Diocese by Theodulf, Bishop of Orleans, the first in order of the admonitions or in- ' See the Life of Leodegar by Ursinus, and an anonymous life dedicated to his successor in the bishopric of Autun, Ermenarius, in Mabillon, AA. o. s. Ben. saec. II, and Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xcvi. "•] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 67 junctions is as follows: 'Therefore we admonish you, O priests of the Lord, that you both commit to memory and thoroughly understand the Catholic Faith, that is, I believe, and. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith^.' The precise date of this Capitulare is uncertain, but it must necessarily have been issued some time in the epis copate of Theodulf, which probably commenced shortly before the Council of Frankfort, A.D. 794, at which he is believed to have been present, and closed with his death in the year 821. It must be distinguished from the Capitula ad presbyieros of the same Bishop, which were first edited by Baronius in his Annals, and afterwards by Sirmond. In these, presbyters are instructed to learn the Catholic Faith and to preach it to the people, every one in his own Church. The term Catholic Faith used in this connexion can have but one meaning ^. 4. There is other evidence, which calls for our attention, of the authorized use of the Athanasian Creed in the age and dominions of Charlemagne, besides that furnished by the Capitula and Capitulare of Theodulf In October, 802, a large convention of the counts and bishops of his realm was held by Charlemagne at Aix-la-Chapelle, in which among other things he issued a general command to the clergy to live in accordance with the canons, and all the laws of his dominion were read, explained, and amended. Pertz subjoined to his notice of this convention, the ' 'Itaque vos, o sacerdotes Domini, admonemns ut fidem catholicam et memoriter teneatis et corde intelligatis, hoc est, Credo, et Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat catholicam fidem.' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cv. p. 209. See also Baluze, Miscellanea, tom. ii. p. 99. The document was edited by Baluze from a MS., No. 4310,10 the library of Colbert, of which he was the custodian. ^ ' Discite fidem catholicam, praedicate diligentissime, et earn populo praedi- cate, unusquisque in ecclesia vestra.' Migne, u. »., tom, cv, p. 206. F 2 68 Documentary Evidence. [ch. acts of which he remarks had never been published, four documents, two of which are pertinent to our subject ^ There is no reason to suppose that these two documents were enactments of the council or convention of Aix ; nor does Pertz appear to have regarded them as such, but rather to have produced them for the purpose of illustrating the ecclesiastical discipline and requirements imposed upon the clergy generally of Charlemagne's realm, at least in Gaul and Germany. The first is entitled Capitula examinationis generalis, and was copied from a MS. of the commencement of the ninth century, marked G. 1 1 1, among the MSS. of St. Emmeram at Ratisbon, now deposited in the Royal Library at Munich. From the date of the MS., clearly the docu ment must have been extant in the time of Charlemagne, and possibly yet earlier. It consists of a series of episcopal visitation articles or inquiries, the first being as follows: ' Interrogo vos presbyteri quomodo credetis {sic) ut fidem catholicam teneatis, seu simbolum et orationem dominicam quomodo sciatis vel intelligitis (sic).' That the Athanasian Creed is described here as ' Fides Catholica ' I have no doubt ; firstly, because this was in all probability the earliest title applied to it, and still more because it was so described in other contemporaneous documents, for instance, as we have just seen, the Capitula and Capitulare of Theodulf, and in the Orleans MS. of the Commentary attributed to that Bishop, in the Oxford MS. of the so- called Fortunatus Commentary, and the Utrecht Psalter; and lastly, because other authoritative documents, the Autun Canon, the Capitulare of Theodulf already noticed, the Capitula of Hetto of Basle, and the Capitula of Hinc mar to be noticed, expressly require it to be learnt by the clergy, and a similar inquiry to that before us with ' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xcvii. pp. 246-249. ".] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 69 respect to their knowledge of it is proved by a continuous line of evidence to have been made by the bishops at their visitations throughout the ninth century. Moreover, it is evident that the Apostles' Creed, which is referred to as simbolum, cannot be intended ; had the Nicene Creed or the Constantinopolitan been intended, in either case a more full and distinctive title might have been expected ^. These inquiries of the bishops at their visitations re specting the faith of their presbyters were expressly ordered to be made by the Capitularies of Charles, which were, it should be recollected, codes of statutes of Church and State enacted by the sovereign with the consent of the dignitaries both civil and ecclesiastical, and of the people of his realm assembled in obedience to his sum mons '''. The other document referring to the Athanasian Creed subjoined by Pertz to his notice of the Capitulare of the ' In the expression ' fidem catholicam teneatis ' as ' fidem catholicam ' obviously denotes a formulated Creed, being contrasted with ' simbolum,' ' teneatis ' no less obviously refers to the learning that formula by heart. In that sense the verb tenere is distinctly used more than once by St. Augustine. Thus, in a sermon on the Lord's Prayer, addressed to the candidates for Baptism just before Easter — Sermo Iviii — he says : ' Symbolum reddidistis . . . Quia ergo quomodo credatur in Deum et accepistis et tenuistis et reddidistis,' i.e. you have received and learnt by heart and recited the Creed, ' accipite hodie quomodo invocetur Deus.' Afterwards he continues : ' Tenete ergo et hanc Orationem quam reddituri estis ad octo dies. Quicunque autem vestrum non bene Symbolum reddiderunt, habent spatium, teneant.' This use of the word is no less clear in the next discourse : it occurs also in Ser. ccxii and ccxiii. The word ' memoriter ' is therefore not absolutely necessary to the sense here, but it occurs in a similar connexion in Theodulf and Regino, and may have been omitted by a copyist's or printer's error. ' ' Ut episcopi diligenter discutiant per suas parochias presbiteros, eorum fidem, baplisma, et missarum celebrationes, ut et fidem rectam teneant, et baptisma catholicum observent et missarum preces bene intelligant et ut psalmi digne secundum divisiones versuum modnlentur.' Capitulare of 789 A. D. cap. 69. This is repeated in the Capitulare of March, 802, cap, 28 ; Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xcvii. pp. 174 and 238. 70 Documentary Evidence. [ch. year 802 is headed, 'Capitula de doctrina Clericorum. Haec sunt quae iussa sunt discere omnes ecclesiasticos.' He gives as his authority for the text two Freising MSS. in the Munich Library — C. K. 3 of the ninth century and C. I. 26 of the tenth — containing copies of Isidorus de Officiis, one taken from the other, at the end of which on a spare leaf this document occurs. It is not in any sense a Capitulare or collection of authoritative injunctions or canons, but simply a list, with no sign of authorship or date, of formulae, offices, books of instruction, and other things, which, as stated by the heading, the clergy were required to learn, the first in order being ' Fidem catho licam sancti Athanasii et cetera quaecunque de fide,' the two next the Apostles' Creed and the Lord's Prayer with its exposition. Rather more than twenty years ago, the Rev. E. S. Ffoulkes made the startling announcement that the Quicunque was first published by Charlemagne in the year 802, and that as the work of Athanasius, though he knew all the while that it had been recently compiled by Paulinus Archbishop of Aquileia : and as his authority for the statement, he produced the above memo randum printed by Pertz from the Munich Library, describing it as contained in the Capitulare of Charles^. Upon this Professor Stubbs, now Bishop of Oxford, wrote to Dr. Halm, the Royal Librarian at Munich, to ask him to look at the MS. The latter replied ' that it was undated and without historical context,' that it did 'not contain the slightest indication which should lead us to regard it as a Capitulare of Charles ; Pertz in fact had not done so ^.' Professor Stubbs stated subsequently that the MS. ' The Athanasian Creed, by whom written and by whom published, p. 233. * Letter to ' the Guardian ' by Professor Stubbs, April 3, 187a, II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 71 does not contain even the title Capitula &c. Still the document, though clearly not a Capitulare, nor a part of one, may probably be considered from the date of the MS. containing it, as it was plainly considered by Pertz, to belong to the age of Charlemagne : consequently it is another evidence of the use of the Athanasian Creed under authority at that epoch. From these two documents we pass naturally to the consideration of the thirty-third Capitulum adopted at the Council of Bishops and Priests of Charlemagne's realm, which was held at Francfort under his presidency in 794. It is as follows : — ' Ut fides catholica sanctae Trinitatis et oratio dominica atque symbolum fidei omnibus praedicetur et tradatur.' As there can be no doubt that the Apostles' Creed is here represented as " symbolum fidei,' it is obvious that either the Constantinopolitan, commonly called the Nicene Creed, or the Athanasian, must have been intended under the term ' fides catholica sanctae Trinitatis.' In the opinion of Voss the former was referred to, in that of Waterland the latter. Probably Waterland was right. Besides being described by its most ancient title of ' The Catholic Faith' the Athanasian Creed might also be fitly described as 'The Catholic Faith of the Holy Trinity' — more fitly indeed than any other Creed — on account of its more explicit statement of that doctrine. It declares at the commencement of its dogmatic exposition ' The Catholic Faith' to be ' this, that we worship one God in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity.' Accordingly we shall find Regino in his disciplinary collection, compiled at the beginning of the tenth century but drawn expressly from earlier sources, applying to it a similar title, 'Sermo Athanasii episcopi de fide Sanctae Trinitatis' ; and so also later in the same century Ratherius Bishop of Verona in 72 Documentary Evidence. [ch. his admonition to his clergy. In the two last-mentioned documents we saw that the Quicunque was ordered, as well as the Apostles' Creed and Lord's Prayer, to be learnt by the clergy ; here it is ordered, as well as the Creed and Lord's Prayer, to be recited in the congregation and explained by instruction and comment. Such appears to be the meaning of this Capitulum ^. Accordingly we find these three formularies inserted in the three extant Psalters of the time of Charlemagne — the Vienna Psalter, Paris Lat. 131 59, and the Utrecht Psalter — after the Canticles. Had the Nicene Creed so-called been intended, we should have supposed that some more distinctive and appropriate title would have been chosen. 5. The Capitulare of Hatto or Hetto or Ahyto, as he is variously described, Bishop of Basle, calls for notice in the next place. The fourth of his Capitula requires the Athanasian Creed to be learnt by heart by priests and recited in the Office at Prime on Sunday^. Hetto was ' Praedico is used in this sense of reading or reciting in the Church. Isidorus, de Officiis, lib. i. cap. i6, speaks of the Nicene Creed as 'Symbolum, quod tempore sacrificii populo praedicatur.' The passage is incorporated in the work de Divinis Officiis — cap. Ivi — ascribed but wrongly to Alcuin. And the word is thus used in Theodnlf's address to his clergy, printed at the end of his Capitula — Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cv. p. 206 : ' Discite fidem catho licam, praedicate diligentissime, et earn populo praedicate, unusquisque in ecclesia vestra' • also in the sixtieth capitulum of the Capitulare of 789 A. D., and the twenty-ninth of that of March 802. Trado is used in the sense of expounding, explaining ; thus in the seventy-sixth cap. of the Capitulare of 789, ' canonici libri et catholici tractatus et sanctorum dicta legantur et tradantur.' And the Chronicon Moissiacense in its account of the proceedings at the Council or Convention held at Aix in October 802, states that Charles the Great ' ibi fecit episcopis cum presbyteris seu diaconibus relegi universes canones, quos synodus praecepit, . . . et pleniter iussit eos tradi ' ; also that ' similiter ipse synodo congregavit universes abbates et monachos qui ibi aderant, et ipsi inter se conventum faciebant, et legerunt regulam sancti patris Benedicti et eam tradiderunt sapientes in conspectu abbatum et monachorum.' Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Scriptorum, tom. i. pp. 106, 107. ^ ' Quarto, ut Fides sancti Athanasii a sacerdotibus discatur et ex corde die II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 73 consecrated Bishop of Basle A.D. 806, and he died in 836. He was Abbot of the monastery of Augia the rich, or Reichenau, in the diocese of Constance. 6. We have seen that the use of the Athanasian Creed was the subject of episcopal admonitions and inquiries in the time of Charlemagne, and that too apparently under the sanction and authority of his capitularies. Its use was also enjoined upon the clergy in the reign of the Emperor Lothair as a matter of canonical duty respecting which they were bound to give account to the bishop in synod, and were liable to incur censure in the event of dis obedience. Of this I have found evidence, which has hitherto escaped notice, in the British Museum MS. Addit. I9> T^5> which in the judgement of Mr., now Sir E. M. Thompson, as he kindly informed me, was written in Ger many in the early part of the tenth century. On f 63 v. there is the following rubric : ' Incipit exposicio de xv capitulis de canon (sic) de quo' (sic) sacerdos rationes red- dere debet in sinodo.' The first of these capitula has for its subject the nature of a canon and its contents : ' Quid sit canon vel quid contineatur in canone.' The second has for its subject : ' Qualiter fides catholica et credatur et observetur'; and it concludes: 'Secundum fidem quia^ exposita est in Nicena sinodo a tricentis decem et hocto (sic) episcopis continens hanc (sic) modum : Credimus in tinum Deum Patrem omnipotentem omnium visibilium et in- visibilium factorem ; fidem enim ^ Athanasii episcopi in hoc opere censuimus observandam et simbolum Apostolorum con^ tradicionibus et exposicionibus sanctorum patrum in his sermonibus adnotatis.' The direction to observe the Dominico ad horam primam recitetur,' Labbe, Concilia, tom. xiv. p. 391, edit. 1769, Venetiis. ' Probably a mistake for 'quae,' ' Possibly an error for ' etiam.' '' Clearly for ' cum,' 74 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Athanasian Creed no doubt implies that it should be learnt by heart and recited by the clergy, as enjoined by the Canon of Autun, and the Capitulum of Hetto or Hatto, just referred to, and that of Hincmar, which we shall notice next ; and this, it must be remarked, is imposed as a matter concerning which the priest must render account to the bishop in synod or visitation, as we should say, according to the title of these capitula quoted above, the neglect of which too would subject him to canonical cen sure, as we find expressly stated in the last of the series ^ The date of these capitula and the locality of their enactment are indicated approximately by the thirteenth of the series, which has for its subject, ' Prayers for the Lord King and his faithful people,' and directs that ' in Psalters and Prayers and Masses ' supplications should be made for ' the most pious and serene Emperor Lothair and his sons, that the Lord would grant them life and health and peace and victory for the government of the Church and our perpetual peace ^.' Clearly then these capitula must have been composed between the year 840 when Lothair became sole Emperor on the death of his father Louis the Meek, and 855 the date of his own death, unless ' The fifteenth capitulum says ; ' Haec, fratres karissimi, quae supra scripta sunt, admonemns et deprecamur, ut cum bono animo ac fide devota teneatis. Qui vero neglexerit, sciat se canonicis interdictis subiacere,' These capitula were clearly issued under episcopal authority. " ' De oracionibus quae pro domno rege et filiis eius vel pro omnibus fidelibus eius admonicionem facimus ut in salmis et oracionibus ac missis cum summa devocione Deum deprecare studeatis una nobis ut vitam et sanitatem et pacem et victoriam piissimi et serenissimi imperatoris Lotharii et filiis eius dominus tribuat ad gubernacionem ecclesie et ad nostram perpetuam pacem.' In Litanies, at the end of Psalters, petitions sometimes occur for the reigning Sovereign or Pope ; and these are obviously a clue to the date of the books in which they appear and the locality which gave birth to them. We shall have occasion to adduce some instances in point by-and-by. A similar remark might be made in regard to names mentioned for the purpose of intercession in Missals. II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 75 they were drawn up in 833 and the following year when he reigned for a short time as sole Emperor during the depo sition and imprisonment of his father. And in all proba bility they were enacted at some place situated between the Mouse and the Rhine, as by the treaty of Verdun, A.D. 843, his dominions were limited to the long strip of country bounded by the Mouse, the Sa6ne, and the Rhone on the west, and by the Rhine on the east, and to Italy. There is no reason to suppose that the last-named country was the original home of this collection. It must be remarked that the two first of these fifteen capitula appear to be drawn from documents which must have existed prior, perhaps considerably prior, to the com pilation of the series in the reign of the Emperor Lothair. Both of them bear internal evidence of a higher antiquity ; and it is remarkable that in the printed editions of the works of Jesse, Bishop of Amiens, they are found at the end of his ' Epistola de Baptismo,' as forming part of it, although they have no connexion with the subject of which it treats. Galland has added the following note with re spect to them : ' Fortasse haec ad alium auctorem per- tineant, qui ante synodum v vixit ^.' No doubt his conjecture as to their date was based upon the mention which the first of the two makes of the first four General Councils, as the exponents of the P"aith. A similar docu ment drawn up after the Sixth Council would have noticed the six Councils in the same connexion. Whether the second Capitulum was from the same source as the first, and therefore contemporary, must be uncertain. But it is evident from its language, which we have quoted, that it must have been drawn from an authoritative work con taining directions concerning the use of the Creeds, together ' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom, cv. pp. 793, 794, 76 Documentary Evidence. [ch, with expository discourses upon them. And hence it is a clear testimony, not only to the canonical use of the Athanasian Creed in the time of Lothair, but also to its use under Church authority at some earlier period, though we cannot determine for certain the date of the injunction nor its author. Why these two capitula were edited in this close con nexion with the treatise of Jesse respecting Baptism, we are not informed. The reason may be simply that the first edition found them in a MS. placed immediately after that work, and hence concluded that they formed part of it ; and other editors have blindly followed the leader. 7. Our next instance carries us into the dominions of Charles the Bald, brother of Lothair. At a Synod held at Rheims in the year 852, under Archbishop Hincmar, certain capitula were enacted to be committed to memory and carefully observed. The first of these requires every presbyter to learn the exposition of the Creed and Lord's Prayer in accordance with the traditions of the orthodox Fathers, and from thence diligently to instruct the people entrusted to his care ; also to understand the preface of the Canon of the Mass and the Canon itself, and to be able to say it distinctly and from memory as well as the prayers of the Offices ; he must also be able to' read well the Apostles — i. e, the Epistle — and Gospel, and to i*ecite in regular course and by heart the Psalms with the usual Canticles. And it concludes : ' Moreover, let every presbyter commit to memory the discourse of Athanasius concerning the Faith, commencing Whosoever will be saved, and understand its meaning and be able to enuntiate it in common words,' i. e. no doubt in the vernacular \ Necnon et sermonem Athanasii de fide, cuius initium est : Quicunque vult salvus esse, memoriae (Juisque commendet, et sensum illius intelligat, et II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 77 8. In the year 889 Riculfus, Bishop of Soissons in Bel- gica Secunda or the ecclesiastical Province of Rheims, addressed a series of capitula or authoritative instructions to his clergy, not only exhorting them to obedience, but warning them of its necessity by the threat of deposition in the event of wilful negligence. The fifth is as follows : ' Likewise we admonish each one of you, that he apply himself to learn by memory and with truth and accuracy the Psalms and the discourse of the Catholic Faith com mencing Whosoever will be saved, and the Canon of the Mass, and the ordinary Offices and the Order of the Calen dar \' Riculfus is believed to have died in the year 902. 9. Early in the tenth century, according to Morinus in the year 906, Regino Abbot of Prum, by the command of Rathbod Archbishop of Treves, edited a manual of ecclesiastical discipline. The work consists of a collection of episcopal visitation articles — inquiries, which it was the duty of bishops to make either personally or by their officers respecting the ecclesiastical and religious condition of the parishes of their several dioceses. It is expressly drawn from various councils of the holy Fathers and decrees of the Roman Pontiffs, and is divided into two books, the first relating to the clergy, the second to the laity. The eighty-fifth article or capitulum of the first book is as follows : ' Whether he,' i. e. the priest, ' learn by memory verbis communibus enuntiare qiieat.' Hincmar! Capitula Synodica, T. cap. i. See Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxv. p. 773. ' ' Item monemus ut unusquisque vestrum Psalmos et sermonem Fidei Catholicae, cuius initium Quicunque vult salvus esse et Canonem Missae ac Cantum vel Compotum memoriter et veraciter ac correcte tenere studeat.' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxxi. p. 1 7. Probably ' cantum ' here is an error for ' canticum.' ' Canticum nocturnum atque diumum noverit ' is the corre sponding direction in the ' Admonitio synodalis,' which I shall refer to by-and- by. These capitula are entitled ' Riculfi statuta.' 78 Documentary Evidence. [ch. the discourse of Bishop Athanasius concerning the Faith of the Holy Trinity, commencing Whosoever will be saved, and understand its meaning and know how to enunciate it in common words,' i. e. the vernacular ^. The book is concluded by a note declaring that ' the inquiries above arranged in capitula should be confirmed by canonical authority.' Regino, according to Pertz, was Abbot of Prum from 892 to 899. During the rest of his life he resided in the monastery of St. Maximinus in the suburbs of Treves ; and the fruits of his literary leisure there enjoyed are seen in his book-; on Ecclesiastical Discipline, his Chronicon, and an Epistle addressed to Rathbodus. There also he died. His sepulchral stone, found in the year 1580, seems to assign 915 as the date of his death ^- Trithemius describes him as a man of the highest erudition in the divine Scriptures and honourably distinguished by his learning in secular literature, the facile princeps among the doctors of his age. It must be added that Waterland claims for the above article of inquiry quoted from Regino respecting the Athanasian Creed so high an antiquity as the age of Boniface — the middle of the eighth century, alleging the authority of Baluze ^- How far he can be safely followed in this particular we shall have occasion to consider in our next section. ID. A document, closely connected with Regino's work ' ' Si sermonem Athanasii episcopi de fide sanctae Trinitatis, cuius initium est Quicunque vult salvus esse memoriter teneat et sensum illius intellegat et verbis communibus enuntiare sciat.' Reginonis Libri duo de Ecclesiasticis Disciplinis. S. Baluzius edidit Parisiis, 1671. Also Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxxii. p. 192. ^ Pertz, Monumenta, tom. i. p. 537. Preface to Reginonis Chronicon. ' Waterland's History of the Athanasian Creed, Oxford edition, 1870, p. 25. II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 79 and therefore illustrative of it, now demands attention. In the Appendix veterum actor um annexed to his edition of Regino's books on Ecclesiastical Discipline Baluze has printed three forms of an ' Admonitio synodalis ' or episcopal charge or injunction to the clergy, a document of the same kind as the capitula of Theodulf of Orleans, of Hatto of Basle, of Hincmar of Rheims, and the statutes of Riculf of Soissons ; we may add also the Epistola Canonica, but of a more comprehensive and complete character. The difference between the three forms is not one of substance, but only of language and detail — such as would be the natural effect of the lapse of time, perhaps also of the variety of locality, in a document used during several ages and in several countries. It is the same document in all three forms. In the first, which is apparently the oldest, edited by Baluze from two MSS. — one dated A.D. 1009, the other described by him as very ancient — it is headed : ' Admonitio synodalis antiqua a Diacono post Evangelium legenda Episcopo et ceteris in ordine sedentibus ' ; in the second, ' Admonitio synodalis nova quae post Evangelium legebatur ab Episcopo sedente in faldistorio. Ex Pontificali Romano Augustini Patricii de Picolominibus Episcopi Pientini'; in the third, 'Admonitio synodalis novissima ab Episcopo legenda post Evangelium. Ex Pontificali Romano.' In the first the direction respecting the Athanasian Creed is : ' Sermonem Athanasii de fide sanctae Trinitatis, cuius initium est Quicunque vult, memoriter teneat et omni die cantet'; in the second, ' Simbolum Athanasii de Trinitate et fide Catholica memoriter teneat'; in the third, ' Simbolum Sancti Athanasii de Trinitate et fide Catholica memoriter teneat ^.' ' Regino, de Disciplina Ecclesiastica, S. Baluzius edidit Parisiis, 1691, pp. 602-607. Also Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxxii. pp. 455-458. 8o Documentary Evidence. [ch. There is a note of Baluze on the subject, which is of so great interest for the light it throws not only upon this particular document, but upon the condition of ecclesiastical discipline in antiquity, that I cannot forbear reproducing it in substance. He begins by stating it to be certain that in ancient times bishops held a yearly visitation of their dioceses, either in person or by presbyters or deacons of approved character. It was the custom for priests of country parishes to assemble every year in the city on Maundy Thursday, for two reasons — to answer the necessary inquiries respecting their ministry and to receive the chrism. And an order was issued by Karloman at the Synod where Boniface was present requiring every presbyter to render to his bishop every year in Lent a formal account of his ministry, whether as regards Baptism or the Catholic Faith, or the prayers and the Order of Masses. Afterwards this was changed, priests being no longer required to assemble in Lent for this purpose. But they were still required to attend the bishop's visitation once a year, and at this synod the ' Admonitio ' was read by the deacon. At a later period, as appears by the Ordo Romanus, it became the custom for the bishop himself to read it, if he wished. Baluze deems it to be unquestionable that the form of inquiry — the ' inquisitio ' — as well as the ' admonitio,' was not confined to one diocese, but was in general use throughout the West. He believes the latter document, though held by some to be the work of Pope Leo IV, to whom it is attributed in some ancient codices, to be of higher antiquity and to have emerged at the same period as the 'inquisitio.' And it is his decided opinion that the 'inquisitio,' inasmuch as it contains references to pagan habits and superstitions, was compiled in the time of Boniface Archbishop of Mentz, or certainly not much later, II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 8i being subsequently enlarged and amended to meet the needs and customs of various Churches and provinces ^- The Ballerini agree with Baluze in the opinion that both the ' inquisitio ' and ' admonitio ' are as old in substance as the age of Boniface. They believe them to be by the same hand, and deny that the latter is the work of a pope, deeming it to be of Gallic origin ^ The ' inquisitio ' and ' admonitio ' are co-ordinate docu ments, as is evident from the close connexion and cor respondence existing for the most part between them as regards the subjects dealt with arrangement, and language. In form necessarily they vary, the one being a series of inquiries, the other of orders or exhortations. The correspondence is particularly observable in the closing part relating to ritual, which I print from the latter document in Appendix B. In the former, it should be added, there seem to be a few subjects noticed, which are passed over in silence by the latter.. The question which presents itself for our consideration is, to what period we can trace the witness of these documents in reference to the Athanasian Creed. Can we with Waterland allege it, and that on the authority of Baluze, to be as early as the time of Boniface or the middle of the eighth century ? To this it must be answered, firstly, that, inasmuch as Baluze held that these documents, though originating in the time of Boniface, received subsequently additions and emendations, it is impossible to claim his authority for attributing that antiquity to any particular contained in them, as for instance the clause relating to the ' Note by Baluze in his edition of Regino, p. 534. Also Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxxi. pp. 405-408. ^ See 'Admonitio in Ratherii Synodicam," Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxxvi. p. 551. 82 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Athanasian Creed. And secondly, there are three varieties of the ' Admonitio synodalis ' or ' Sermo synodalis,' which contain no mention of the Quicunque. They are printed in Labbe's Concilia in three parallel columns^. The first is entitled ' Commonitorium,' from Martene, by whom it was originally edited from two MSS. of the thirteenth century, with the title, ' Commonitorium cuiusque episcopi ad sacerdotes sibi subditos exterosque ministros cuiusque ordinis ecclesiastici ^.' The second is entitled, ' Homilia Leonis Papae IV.' From what MSS. it is edited is not stated. The third, 'ex codice Lucensi saeculi xii,' is entitled ' Epistola Leonis in Synodo legenda.' The two last of these omit altogether the closing part of the 'Admonitio' as edited by Baluze relating to ritual — beginning ' De ministerio ' and ending ' confitentem ' ; but with this exception, they are the same document as the ' Admonitio.' It would seem probable that this omitted portion, which includes — it will be observed — the clause relating to the Athanasian Creed, formed no part of the original document, but was a subsequent addition. That clause however, and indeed much besides of the omitted portion, may be distinctly traced up to the time of Hincmar of Rheims, if not earlier. Baluze, taking into consideration the close resemblance, or rather identity, between some of the capitula of Hincmar, the first of which has reference to the Qtiicunque, and the correspond ing portion of the ' Inquisitio ' of Regino and therefore also of the ' Admonitio,' both being the same, mutatis mutandis, arrives at the conclusion, either that Regino made use of ' Labbe, Concilia, edit. Florence, 1769, tom. xiv. pp. 890-898. ^ Martene et Durand, Amplissima Collectio, tom. vii. It is also edited by Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xcvi. pp. 1375-1379, and described as ' Anonymi saeculi viii. commonitorium episcopale.' II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 83 some more complete capitula of Hincmar than those now existing, or else that both drew from a more ancient formula as their common source. The latter alternative he holds to be nearer the truth. I confess it appears to me not merely to be nearer the truth, but the truth. There is no reason to suppose that Hincmar's capitula are but an abbreviation of others more complete and copious, once issued by him, but now lost^- The peculiar title too — ' Sermo Athanasii de fide,' or ' de fide Sanctae Trinitatis ' — found in the ' Inquisitio ' of Regino, the ' Admonitio,' and the capitula of Hincmar, also in the Statutes of Riculfus and the profession of Adalbert of Morinum, but not occur ring before the time of Hincmar, would seem to indicate the use of some common source. We cannot indeed adduce any document prior to the capitula of Hincmar as containing the clause relating to the Athanasian Creed, which is common to them and to the ' Inquisitio ' of Regino ; nor can we affirm with certainty when it was united with the 'Admonitio synodalis' in its present form. But we know from the capitula of Lothair that in the reign and dominion of that monarch the ob servance of the Quicunque — implying the knowledge and recitation of it — was a matter concerning which priests were bound to render account to the bishop ^. We know further from the evidence of Theodulf's capitulare, which was in point of fact an episcopal admonition or charge^, and of the two Munich manuscript capitula *, that in the time of Charlemagne this was one of the subjects of admonition and inquiry by bishops at their visitations. And probably it ' For the opinion of Baluze above stated, see Reginonis Libellus de Ecclesias ticis Disciplinis — Admonitio ad lectorem by the editor ; Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxxii. ' Above, sec. 6. ^ Above, sec. 3, ' Above, sec. 4. G 2 84 Documentary Evidence. [ch, was so before his time : for in the first capitulare of that monarch, dated 769-771, some capitula originally passed at a synod held under Karloman in 742 are incorporated and re-enacted, among them that quoted by Baluze and before referred to, which decreed that every presbyter should always in Lent render a formal account of his ministry to the bishop, whether as regards Baptism, or the Catholic Faith, or the prayers and order of masses ^ Now as this capitulum was not a new enactment on the part of Charlemagne, but a portion of the ecclesiastical legis lation inherited from his predecessors, so it seems probable that the procedure which was practised in his time in compliance with its terms was nothing new either, but the same which had existed previously ever since its primary enactment, that as in his reign the account, which priests were obliged to render respecting their faith, involved an account of their knowledge of the Athanasian Creed, so it had been previously under Pepin and Karloman. II. Our next instance is connected with the north of Italy, Atto, already mentioned with reference to. the ' Epistola Canonica ' as Bishop of Vercellae in the middle of the tenth century and a very learned theologian and canonist, addressed a capitulare to his clergy consisting of a hundred chapters or capitula. The fourth of these is word for word the first capitulum of the ' Epistola Canonica,' of which, as I have before said, he had found a copy in his cathedral library. Having previously ' ' Decrevimus iuxta sanctorum canones, ut unusquisque presbyter in parrochia habitans episcopo subiectus sit illi, in cuius parrochia habitat, et semper in quadragesima rationem et ordinem ministerii sui, sive de baptismo, sive de fide catholica, sive de precibus et ordine missarum, episcopo reddat.' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xcvii. p. 123. Boniface, Archbishop of Mentz, was present at the synod from which this capitulum originally issued, as stated above, and mentions it in his epistle to Cuthbert. II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 85 quoted that capitulum I feel it unnecessary to quote it again here ; but it is clearly very pertinent to draw atten tion to the remark of D'Achery with regard to the meaning of the term ' Fides Catholica ' which it requires the clergy to learn by heart, or rather the meaning attached to the term by Atto. ' In Attonis Capitulari,' he says, ' animadvertenda sunt : primo haec verba fides catholica signant symbolum Athanasii.' That such was the mean ing in which Atto employed the words in this capitulum is the more clear, because in two passages of his Capitulare the Apostles' Creed is described as ' Symbolum ' ; and when it is considered that before this it was no uncommon thing for bishops to require the Athanasian Creed to be learnt by priests, as we have seen by several instances, the matter can no longer admit of doubt. Atto's Capitulare was first edited by D'Achery in his Spicilegium^ from a Vatican MS., No. 4332, a copy being sent to him from Rome in 1664 by Johannes Bona. 12. Another episcopal injunction of the tenth century also relates to North Italy. In Lent, 966, Ratherius, Bishop of Verona, held a visitation of his clergy, at which he made the usual inquiries respecting their faith. The result, as stated by himself was that he found by far the majority of them to be ignorant even of the Apostles' Creed. With a view to correct this gross state of clerical ignorance he addressed a charge or ' synodica ' to his clergy, which is still extant and is described by the Bal lerini, the editors of his works, as 'of all the documents of the tenth century relating to ecclesiastical discipline the most excellent and celebrated^.' This charge commences with a direction to learn without delay the three Creeds ' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxxiv. pp. 10-23. ' Admoniiio ad Synodicam ; Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cx.\xvi. p. 551. 86 Documentary Evidence. [ch. by heart, which the bishop emphasizes by adding : ' Who ever wishes to be or to become or to continue a priest in our diocese let him recite to us by memory these three Creeds when next he shall be cited by us to attend here'.' Subsequently, by way of instructing his clergy more fully in their duties, he repeats, but without acknowledging the source of his materials, the ' Admonitio,' or ' Sermo Syno dalis,' adding the words ' as I before said ' to its direction for learning the Athanasian Creed. How these commands were received by his clergy we learn from his own words : ' When I saw that they were disobedient, and inquired what measures I could adopt canonically in consequence, fear took possession of some of them, so much so that they promised me assistance for my journey^, and engaged that henceforth they would sing the definition ^ of the blessed Athanasius, and to the best of their power would fulfil the rest of my requirements.' He thanks God that the clergy both of the city and country churches were prepared to do this. Not so the Canons of the Cathedral, who were per sistently contumacious, and he tells them his mind plainly : ' As for you, O Cardinals, who after the example of the Scribes and Pharisees of old are guiding these people into the way of perdition, I see that you still continue so rebellious as to choose rather to be damned for ever with Arius the enemy of this same faith, than by consenting to sing it publicly like the clergy of other Churches to yield ^ ' Ipsam fidem, id est, credulitatem Dei, trifarii parare festinatis hoc est, secundum Symbolum, id est, coUationem Apostolorum, sicut in Psalteriis correctis invenitur, et illam, quae ad Missam canitur, et illam Sancti Athanasii, quae ita incipit : Quicunque vult salvus esse. Quicunque vult ergo sacerdos in nosti'a parochia esse aut fieri aut permanere illas tres memoriter nobis recitet, cum proxime a nobis hue vocatus fuerit.' Ratherii Synodica, uti supra. ^ He was contemplating a journey to Rome. ^ ' Descriptionem.' II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 87 to my wishes, and thus yielding to save your souls '.' From these words of Ratherius it appears that the neglect of the Veronese clergy to use the Quicunque in the Church services was an exception to the general rule in the tenth century ; and being a travelled man he was a competent witness upon the subject. The reluctance of the clergy generally and the positive refusal of the Canons to comply with the injunction of Ratherius need not be imputed to any objection on their part to the Athanasian Creed. Their conduct was but the natural consequence of the relations existing at the time between him and them, which were of the most hostile character ; and the causes which produced this state of things are clearly traceable to the extraordinary circum stances of his long episcopate. Indeed, it might be questioned whether at this period he was Bishop of Verona de iure as well as de facto. Originally a monk of Lobbes on the Sambre in the diocese of Cambrai, he was con secrated Bishop of Verona in 931 in compliance with a letter of recommendation to the office, which he obtained from the Pope and the Roman Church. In 935 he was put in prison at Pavia by Hugh, King of Italy, for a poli tical offence. On his release, which occurred two years after, he was banished to Como ; from thence he went into ^ ' Vos, Cardinales ... ita hinc manere adhuc cerno rebelles, ut eligatis cum inimico eiusdem fidei Ario in aetemum damnari quam hoc publice, ut aliamm ecclesiarum clerici, cantando salubriter vinci.' Ratherii Ilinerariutn, n. 7. There are three classes of clergy mentioned in the above passage — Titularii, Illi de plebibus, and Cardinales. The first, the Ballerini say in a note, were the clergy of the town and suburban Churches, the second those of the country Churches, country parishes being called plebes, and the third the Cathedral Canons. They add that the Canons of Milan, Aquileia, Naples, Lucca, and very many other cathedrals, were likewise called cardinales. That such is the meaning of the term here is moreover clear from the fact of Ratherius after wards sarcastically alluding to the title canonici. 88 Documentary Evidence. [ch, Gaul, and in 944 found his way back to his old monas tery of Lobbes, where he stayed until his return to Verona in 946. There he was able to recover his bishopric by the favour of Count Milo, another bishop, who had occupied the see in his absence, being obliged to relinquish it. But in two years he was compelled once more to leave, owing to the determined opposition he encountered from the clergy, and the superseded bishop returned to power. This time he took refuge in Germany. After an ineffectual attempt to recover his see in 951 he virtually abdicated his claim to it by getting himself appointed to the bishopric of Liege through the influence of Bruno, Archbishop of Cologne ; but Li^ge, following the example of Verona, would not away with him ; and in 961 he was reinstated in the bishopric of Verona by the strong hand of Otho, then king, soon after Emperor of Germany, the occupant of the see at the time being necessarily in this as in the former in stance extruded. And this expelled bishop, backed as he must have been by a powerful party of friends and sup porters among the clergy, would prove, and he did indeed prove, a thorn in the side of Ratherius, a constant element of disquiet. If the circumstances of Ratherius's restoration to the bishopric of Verona were most inauspicious, his manner of administration was not calculated to smooth down matters. He questioned the validity of the orders of the clergy who had been ordained by the bishops who occupied the see during his absence, he told the married clergy who had their wives living with them — it appears this was not uncommon — that they must put away their wives ; above all, he gave deadly offence to the Canons by attempting to deal with their property. The result was that in the beginning of the year 965 the exasperation of the clergy burst out into unjustifiable acts of violence. ii.j Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 89 They seized Ratherius and placed him in custody. It was only a year after this happened that, having recovered his liberty, he addressed his Synodica to his clergy, urging upon them the full discharge of their canonical duties, particularly as regards the Creeds. Was it to be expected, considering the situation, and especially the antecedents of the bishop, that his injunctions, albeit they were in accord ance with the law of the Church, and its practice too in well-ordered dioceses, would be received with willing ears and obedient hearts? It only remains to add that after a lapse of two years more the measure of his troubles was complete : forbidden by the Pope to meddle with the property of the Canons and abandoned by his patron and friend the Emperor, in 968 he quitted Verona, never to return ; and, as before, the bishop who had been removed to make way for him, was restored to the see. But he found a patron in the then bishop of Li6ge, by whom he was appointed in 971 to the abbacy of Lobbes, where in early life he had embraced the monastic profession. There he died soon after. The strange vicissitudes of his life are summed up in a distich of his epitaph : — ' Veronae praesul, sed ter Ratherius exsul ; Ante cucuUatus, Lobia, postque tuus'.' 1^. There are three synodical injunctions issued under episcopal authority for English dioceses in the thirteenth century which demand attention in reference to the Atha nasian Creed. The Constitutions of Walter de Cantilupe, Bishop of Worcester, are a series of episcopal injunctions or directions for the clergy, similar to the Capitularia of Theodulf, and Hetto of Basle, and Hincmar and Hatto of Vercelli, and the Admonitio Synodalis. They are described by Wilkins ' See Ratherii Vita, Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxxvi. pp. 27-142, go Documentary Evidence. [ch. as ' Constitutiones venerabilis patris Walteri de Cantilupo, Dei gratia Wigornensis episcopi, in sancta synodo sua in Cathedrali ecclesia promulgatae in honorem Dei et sanctae ecclesiae in crastino S. lacobi Apostoli anno Domini MCCXL anno pontificatus sui tertio.' The article relating to the teaching of priests directs that ' each of them should have at least a simple understanding of the Faith according to what is contained in the Psalm which is called Quicttnque vult, and in the greater as well as the lesser Symbol, that in these they may know how to instruct the people com mitted to their care '.' 14. The Constitutions of Walter de Kirkham, Bishop of Durham, issued A.D. 1255 or thereabouts, are a document of the same nature as the Constitutions of Walter de Cantilupe. The clause of the former relating to instruction in the Faith so closely resembles in language the corre sponding clause of the latter, as to show either that the one was drawn from the other or else that they both had a common source ^- 15. The Constitutions of Peter Quivil, Bishop of Exeter, were published at a synod summoned by him and held in Exeter Cathedral in the year 1287. In the twenty-first chapter, which relates to the inquiry to be made respecting the literary knowledge of ecclesiastical persons, he enjoins ' ' Habeat etiam saltem quilibet eorum fidei simplicem intellectum secundum quod continetur in psalmo, qui dicitur Quicunque vult t:^ tam in maiori quam minori Symbolo, ut in his plebeni sibi commissam noverint informare.' Wilkins, Concilia, vol. i. p. 669, Londini, 1737. ' ' " Habeat quoque unusquisque eorum simplicem intellectum fidei, sicut in Symbolo tam maiori quam minori, quod est in psalmo Quicunque vult et etiam in Credo in Deum expressius continentur, necnon in Oratione Dominica, quae dicitur Pater nosier, et salutatione beatae Mariae." Constitutiones Walteri de Kirkham episcopi Dunelmensis.' Wilkins, Concilia, vol. i. p. 704. The text has obviously undergone some corruption, which has rendered it nngrammatical - and unintelligible. II.] Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions. 91 the archdeacons to be diligent in such inquiries — to make and hold frequent trial of parish priests, whether they know the Decalogue . . . also the seven deadly sins . . . also the seven Sacraments' of the Church . . . and whether they have a simple understanding of the articles of the Faith of Christians, as they are contained in the Psalm Quicunque vult and in both Symbols, in which articles they are bound to instruct the people committed to their care with all the greater earnestness, since none who believes not firmly the Catholic Faith can be saved '.' This is probably the usual form of inquiry made by the officials of English bishops at their visitations in the thirteenth century, and it may be earlier, from which it would appear that Walter de Canti lupe and Walter de Kirkham drew the language of their injunctions. The former declares that in his directions he follows in the footsteps of his predecessors. From these codes, so to speak, we learn that the Athanasian Creed was a subject of episcopal inquiry and direction in the middle ages in our own country as well as on the Continent. The Quicunque is here termed a Psalm, because it was at the time sung as a Psalm, and with the Psalms in the service of the Church, and had been so sung for ages ; and the fact of its being so called is an evidence of this use. That these bishops of the thirteenth century regarded it at the same time as a Creed is shown by their speaking of the Articles of the Faith or the Faith being contained in it as ' ' Singulis Archidiaconis iniungimus ut diligenter inquirant, qui rectores, vicarii, aut sacerdotes in literatura enormem patiuntur defectum . . . De paro- chialibus sacerdotibus frequenter assumant experientiam et habeant, an sciant decalogum . . an etiam sciant septem peccata mortalia . . . sciant etiam septem sacramenta ecclesiastica . . . et an articulorum fidei Christianorum simplicem habeant intellectum, prout in psalmo Quicunque vult et in utroque Symbolo continentur; in quibus plebem sibi commissam tanto tenentur studio- sius informare, quanto quilibet, qui Fidem Catholicam firmiter non crediderit, salvus esse non poterit.' Wilkins, Concilia, vol. ii. p. 144. 92 Documentary Evidence. well as in the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds. Waterland refers to instances of the Apostles' Creed, and even the Lord's Prayer, being called a Psalm. 16. In the ' Ordo ad visitandum infirmum ' according to the old Use of Salisbury, printed in Maskell's Monumenta Ritualia^, the dying man, if a priest, is called upon to express his assent to a form of Faith consisting of the fourteen Articles issued in Archbishop Peckham's Con stitutions, the seven first of which relate to the Trinity, the remainder to the Incarnation, the condemnatory clauses of the Quicunque being annexed. These Articles are described in Peckham's Constitutions as a comprehensive and brief summary of ' the Articles which all the Ministers of the Church are bound to know,' and hence, it may be presumed, were considered a fitting Confession of Faith to be made by a priest in his last moments : that they are supplemented by the minatory clauses of the Quicunque in order to enforce the necessity of a belief in the Catholic Faith, thus summarily expressed, can only be regarded as another proof that at the time when this Office for the Visitation of the Sick was compiled, the language of the latter was familiar as household words to all who took part in the services of the Church. This formula will be found in Appendix C. It cannot be deemed earlier than the Constitutions of Peckham, which were enacted at the Council of Lambeth held A.D. 1281. ' 2nd edition, Oxford, 1882, vol. i. p. 89. CHAPTER III. MANUSCRIPT COPIES NOW EXTANT, OR WHICH, THOUGH NOW LOST, ARE KNOWN TO HAVE EXISTED. . Owing to the use of the Athanasian Creed from a remote period in the services of the Western Church, MS. copies of it are exceedingly numerous, as it is commonly found together with the Scriptural Canticles, which were also sung in the congregation, at the end of Psalters. It is found also in some collections of Canons and Formulae of Faith. For the purpose of illustrating its antiquity and early use and reception it will be sufficient to notice a very few comparatively, including of course the oldest. I. The earliest known MS. of the Athanasian Creed is contained in a thin 4to volume of a few leaves deposited in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, and bearing the press mark O. 212. Muratori, who was custodian of the library, gives some account of the MS. in the second volume of his Anecdota, published in 1698, and describes it as 'most ancient, written a thousand years ago and more,' i. e. before the eighth century. Montfaucon, who saw and examined the MS. when he visited the library in the course of his literary tour in Italy in 1698, pronounced it to be written in the eighth century '^. The present librarian, Dr. Ceriani, agrees with Montfaucon as to the date. Nor has any ' Diarium Italicum, p. 18. 94 Documentary Evidence. [ch. palaeographical authority, to the best of my knowledge, ever placed it later. On the fly-leaf of the volume is a list of contents in a modern hand : ' In isto libro continentur Dogmatum fidei liber, Bachiarii Fides, Fides Catholica seu simbolum S. Athanasii, ut aiunt, De ascensione Domini Sermo, D. Hieronymi fides. Codex seculi VI.' This ' Dogmatum fidei liber ' is the ' Liber de ecclesiasticis dogmatibus ' commonly ascribed to Gennadius of Marseilles, sometimes to St. Augustine, and printed in the Appendix to his works; the 'Hieronymi fides' is not the confession which is generally thus entitled, but the ' Damasi Sym bolum.' Then follows a memorandum, apparently of the first Librarian, giving a somewhat amusing account of the acquisition by Cardinal Frederick Borromeo of this MS. for the Ambrosian Library, which he founded : ' Hunc codicem, qui ex Bibliotheca Bobii a S. Columbano insti- tuta prodiit, Illustrissimo Cardinali Federico Borrhomae, B. Caroli patrueli, dum Ambrosianam bibliothecam manu- scriptis codicibus undique conquisitis instrueret, religio- sissimi patres Ordinis S. Benedicti, simillimo prius munere compensati, humanissime tradiderunt anno 1606. Antonio Olgiato eiusdem bibliothecae Ambrosianae, quam primus omnium tractavit, Praefecto.' The monastery of Bobbio on the river Trebbia in North Italy, it should be noticed, was of Irish origin, founded by St. Columbanus in the year 613. The MS. we are speaking of is written in an Irish hand, and probably in Ireland ; so Dr. Ceriani thinks. The Ambrosian Library received from the same source other Irish MSS., among them the very interesting Antiphonary of Bangor. On the first page of the MS. appears another list of contents, written in an ancient hand, but not that of the MS., which includes in addition to the documents named in the list on the fly-leaf five others, viz. ' Ambrosii Ill .] Manuscript Copies. 95 Confessio Fidei, Hieronymi regula Catholica Fidei, Libellus de Trinitate, Ambrosii de Trinitate libri tres, Eiusdem libellus Fidei.' These are not to be found in the MS., nor were they in the time of Muratori, and he adds that to all appearance they never were included in it, ' inasmuch as it is complete and shows no sign of mutilation anywhere^,' The Athanasian Creed commences on f. 14. v., without any title or introduction, immediately after the conclusion of the ' Bachiarii Fides.' The text presents no material diversity from the ordinary type. The only one which really calls for notice is the addition of the words ' patri et filio coaeternus est ' after 'procedens' in ver. 22. But this is sufficiently accounted for by the fact that in the three other Confessions of Faith contained in this MS., two of them it should be borne in mind preceding the Quicunque, the Holy Spirit is described as 'patri et filio coaeternus.' If my memory serves me right, the words occur twice in the ' Bachiarii Fides.' What more natural under these circumstances than that the copyist should insert them in the Quicunque to bring it into harmony with the other confessions then before him ? He may have thought they had been erroneously or inadvertently omitted. Or he may have wished to emphasize the point. Besides, he was evidently an inaccurate person. He was guilty of two omissions which have been supplied by another hand, one between the lines, the other in the margin — ' sed patris et fill et sps sci' in ver. 6, and 'ante saecula genitus' in ver. 29. He certainly wrote ' conversatione ' in ver. 7,'^, the letters at being obviously erased. These of course are mere inaccuracies, the results probably of carelessness, but they are significant as showing that we have here not the autograph of the author, but a mere copy of an earlier ' Anecdota, vol. ii. p. 224. 96 Documentary Evidence. [ch. document. Muratori, it must be added, has not given an accurate transcript of this text, and has thus misled Waterland. The words in ver. 38, ' resurgere habent cum corporibus suis et,' are not omitted as he states, only ' in' is read for 'cum': 'prohibemur' is read in ver. 19, not ' prohibemus,' I have printed collations of the MS., which I have twice examined, in Appendix E. The Creed is immediately followed by this apostrophe to the Blessed Virgin : — ' Lacta, mater, eum qui fecit te, quia talem fecit te, ut ipse fieret in te. Lacta eum, qui fructum fecunditatis tibi dedit conceptus, et decus virginitatis non abstulit natus.' I have sometimes suspected that this might be a fragment of some lost sermon or other work of St. Augustine ; it reflects so clearly his teaching respecting the Incarnation and also his terse and antithetic style. The resemblance might be illustrated abundantly ; but the subjoined passages will suffice for the purpose. ' Panem nostrum ilia ' i. e. Maria ' lactabat.' S. Aug. Ser. clxxxiv. ' Quid mirabilius virginis partu ? Concipit et virgo est, parit et virgo est.' Ibid. Ser. clxxxix. ' Nullo modo Christus matrem nascendo faceret deteriorem, ut cui munus fecundi tatis attulerat, decus virginitatis auferret.' Ibid, con. Faustum, lib. xxix. cap. 4. Especially the following apostrophe in one of his sermons on the nativity of St. John the Baptist : ' Fit in te, qui fecit te, fit in te, per quem facta es : imo vero, per quem factum est caelum et terra, per quem facta sunt omnia, fit in te Verbum Dei caro, accipiendo carnem, non amittendo divinitatem. , . . Invenit te virginem conceptus, dimittit virginem natus. Dat fecunditatem, non toUit integritatem.' Ibid. Ser, ccxcii. A passage in a sermon, which appears among St. Augustine's printed sermons, but marked as one of doubtful genuineness, should be noticed in this connexion for the obvious III.] Manuscript Copies. 97 resemblance it bears to the above antiphon, so to call it, in the Ambrosian MS. : ' Lacta eum, qui talem fecit te, ut ipse fieret in te, qui tibi et munus fecunditatis at- tulit conceptus, et decus virginitatis non abstulit natus.' This sermon v/as probably the work of a disciple and imitator of the great Latin Doctor, not St. Augustine's own. 2. In his ' Diatribe ' Montfaucon speaks of a copy of the Athanasian Creed belonging to the Abbey of St. Germain- des-Pres at Paris, his own monastery, as having been executed in the eighth century and before the time of Charlemagne. He describes it as ' Sangermanensis noster num. 257,' and adds that it was written in a Saxon hand and had for title ' Fides Sancti Athanasii Episcopi Alexandriae.' Waterland gives _ several collations of the text^ This MS. seems to be now lost, unless it found its way to St. Petersburg with a few of the St. Germain MSS. at the close of the last century. It cannot be identified with the Latin MS. 13159 of the Bibliotheque Nationale, which we shall notice by-and-by, as the readings of the two MSS. do not agree, judging from Waterland's collations. And yet we should expect to find it in the Bibliotheque Nationale, if anywhere, as the great bulk of the St. Germain MSS. were transferred to that collection at the time of the French revolution. 3. Mabillon in his book De Re Diplomatica prints as a specimen of Saxon handwriting the first three verses of the Athanasian Creed from a Corbie MS., No. 267 ^. He does not assign any date to the MS. ; but as far as we can judge from the facsimile, the character of the writing '¦ See Waterland's History of the Athanasian Creed, y^. 176-191. Oxford edit. 1870. ' Mabillon, De Re Diplomatica, Neapoli, 1789, tom. i. p. 366. H g8 Documentary Evidence. [ch. would seem to point to the eighth century as the date. I should be sorry however to rest any argument upon a judgement thus formed, facsimiles made before the invention of photography not being always very accurate. This MS. appears also to be lost: at least if it is still in existence, its domicile is not known. The 300 MSS. remaining at Corbie in Mabillon's time were taken to Amiens in 1791. Of these, sixty-five were removed in 1803 to the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris and formed into a distinct collection called ' Fonds de Corbie.' Those left at Amiens were entirely neglected for years, and many disappeared. The residue were at length arranged and catalogued in 1828 1- 4. The earliest extant MS. Psalter, in which the Athanasian Creed occurs, or known to be extant, is the celebrated and costly Psalter, written apparently by command of Charlemagne before he became Emperor, and sometime in the Pontificate of Hadrian I, which lasted from A.D. 772 to 795. It belongs to the Imperial Library at Vienna : and an account of it is given by Lambecius, the custodian of that collection at the close of the seventeenth century, who discovered the MS. in the private library of the Emperor Leopold I, in the year 1666^. Denis also, custodian of the library at the close of last century, in his catalogue of the MSS. has furnished a description of this codex, which is of value as corroborating his predecessor's estimate of it, and supplementing some omissions on his part. It is numbered 28 among the theological manuscripts of that catalogue. ' See Recherches sur I'ancienne Bibliothique de Corbie, par M. Delisle. Paris, i860. ' Lambecii Commentariorum de Bibliotheca Caesarea Vindobonensi Mer secundus. III.] Manuscript Copies. 99 The MS. is written in an ornate style, adopted no doubt to do honour to the distinguished and royal personage to whom as we shall see it is dedicated — ' in letters of gold,' says Silvestre, ' on white vellum intermingled with leaves of purple and ornamented with some rich capital letters.' On the first folio appear two sets of dedicatory verses. The first is addressed by King Charles to Pope Hadrian, the second by Dagulfus the writer of the MS. to King Charles. These we will refer to more fully by-and-by, after mentioning the contents of the volume, as we learn them from the descriptions of Lambecius and Denis. The dedicatory verses are not followed immediately by the Psalms, but by a variety of documents, which are described by Lambecius as prolegomena and printed by him in extenso. First we have five confessions of Faith — the Nicene Creed proper, including of course the anathema annexed to it ; the Faith of St. Ambrose ; it begins ' Nos patrem et filium et spiritum sanctum confitemur,' and ends 'adversus veritatem rebellis est'; the Faith of Pope Gregory the Great ; the Faith of Gregory, Bishop of Neo-Caesarea, here called Martyr; and the Faith of St. Jerome. To these succeed immediately a metrical para phrase of the Lord's Prayer in hexameters, the first line being ' Sydereo Genitor residens in vertice caeli,' and the ' Gloria in excelsis ' without any title. The occurrence of these confessions of Faith, especially in the prefatory docu ments of the Psalter, is very remarkable and unusual. I cannot recollect meeting with any similar instance. As a rule, the Creeds which appear in Psalters are limited to the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene, the Constantinopolitan, and the Athanasian, the last being seldom omitted and frequently appearing alone : and they follow the Canticles. But this H 2 ICG Documentary Evidence. [ch. Psalter possibly, being written for such an eminent person as Charlemagne, may be considered exceptional. A similar remark may be made in reference to the ' Gloria in excelsis.' I know of no other instance of it being placed, as it is in this case : it is generally, if it occurs at all, placed after the Canticles and before the Confession or Confessions of Faith. After the ' Gloria in excelsis' in our MS. come several documents relating to prophecy or inspiration, particularly that of the Psalms, also to their origin, authorship, use, excellence ; some of which docu ments are not uncommonly found in the prefatory matter of Psalters, at least of those which are of a more full and elaborate character : — the treatise ' Origo Prophetiae David,' beginning 'David Filius Jesse'; St. Jerome's preface to the Galilean Psalter beginning ' Psalterium Romae dudum'; a tractate ' De Prophetia,' and three documents which in the opinion of Lambecius are drawn from SS. Jerome, Augustine, and Isidore of Seville ; the epistle of Pope Damasus to St. Jerome, and the reply of the latter, denied to be genuine by Baronius ; some responsive verses, Damasus and Jerome being represented as the interlo cutors ; a piece ' de libro sancti Isidori qui incipit Liber Psalmorum'; and Ruffinus's version of St. Basil's Preface to the Psalms, here attributed to St. Augustine, and beginning ' Canticum Psalmorum animam decorat, invitat angelos in adiutorium.' It is a Galilean Psalter ; and the Psalms are followed immediately' by the usual Old Testa ment Canticle.s, viz. : — the song of Isaiah, ' Confitebor tibi Domine,' the song of Hezekiah, ' Ego dixi, in dimidio dierum,' the song of Hannah, ' Exultavit cor meum,' the song of Moses, ' Cantemus Domino,' the song of Habakkuk, ' Domine, audivi auditionem tuam,' and the song of Moses, ' Audite caeli.' It may be well to mention, that in Latin Ill-] Manuscript Copies. loi Psalters, except those of the Ambrosian and Mozarabic rites, these Canticles, which were sung severally on week days at Lauds with the Psalms, always appear in the above order immediately after the Psalms^. It will be sufficient to describe them henceforward as the usual Old Testament Canticles- In some MSS. they are appropriated to the several days on which they were used. Thus in the Bod leian Library Psalter of the eleventh century — Canonici, Eccl. 88 — we have ' FR. II. Can. Esaie prophete. Confi tebor tibi &c. FR. III. Can. Ezekie Regis. Ego dixi &c.,' and so on. In the Mozarabic and Ambrosian rites the Canticles were different, so also in the Office of the Greek Church. In the Vienna Psalter the Old Testament Canticles are followed by the Benedicite entitled ' Hymnus trium puerorum,' the Te Deum entitled ' Hymnus quem S. Ambrosius et S. Augustinus invicem condiderunt,' the Benedictus entitled ' Canticum Zachariae Prophetae,' the Magnificat entitled ' Canticum sanctae Mariae,' the Nunc dimittis entitled ' Canticum Simeonis,' the Lord's Prayer entitled 'Oratio Dominica,' the Apostles Creed entitled ' Symbolum Sanctorum Apostolorum,' and the Athanasian entitled ' Fides S. Athanasii Episcopi Alexandrini.' Here the book closes, as it would appear from the account of Lambecius. It is obvious that whenever evidence of date is supplied by the contents of an ancient MS., this must needs be the most reliable kind of evidence for ascertaining the epoch when it was written. In this point of view the dedi catory verses inscribed on the first leaf of this Psalter are specially important and interesting. It is not necessary to quote them in full, only so much as is relevant to our ' See Dictionary of Christian Antiquities , under articles on Canticles and Psalmody. I02 Documentary Evidence. [ch. purpose. In the first set. Pope Hadrian is thus addressed by King Charles : — ' Hadriano snmmo papae patrique beato Rex Carolus salve mando valeque pater. Praesul Apostolicae munus hoc sume cathedrae. Hoc vobis ideo munus pie dedo sacerdos, Filius ut mentem patris adire queam. Ac memorere mei precibus sanctisque piisque Hoc donum exiguum saepe tenendo manu. Incolumis vigeas Rector per tempora longa Ecclesiamque Dei dogmatis arte regas.' In the second, the scribe Dagulfus thus addresses King Charles : — 'Aurea progenies, fulvo lucidior anno. Carle, iubar nostrum, plebis et altus amor. Rex pie, dux sapiens, virtute insignis et armis, Quem decet omne decens, quicquid in orbe placet. Exigui famuli Dagulfi sume laborem, Dignanter docto mitis et ore lege. Sic tua per multos decorentur sceptra triumphos, Davidico et demum consociare chore' That Hadrian the Pope and Charles the King of these verses were none other than Hadrian I and Charlemagne was the unanimous opinion of the learned, until it was re cently suggested by the late Rev. E. S. Ffoulkes, that they might be identified with another Pope Hadrian and another King Charles, viz., Pope Hadrian II, whose pontificate lasted from 867 to 872, and King Charles the Bald. The suggestion suited the exigencies of Mr. Ffoulkes' theory: for if this MS. was written during the Pontificate of Hadrian I which terminated A.D. 795, inasmuch as it contains the Athanasian Creed in its entirety, we have here a clear disproof of that scholar's assertion that the Creed was first published to the world in the year 802. But the suggestion has nothing else to recommend it. HI.] Manuscript Copies. 103 The verses may be unquestionably understood with most fitness in the sense universally received until Mr. Ffoulkes's theory saw the light. According to Charlemagne's bio grapher, Eginhard, his relations with Hadrian I were those of the closest friendship, so much so, that he was moved to tears by the tidings of that Pope's death : he grieved, as though he had lost a brother or a son. And this grief found a lasting expression in a metrical epitaph which he composed in his friend's memory : — ' Post patrem lacrymans Carolus haec carmina scripsi, Tu mihi dulcis amor, te modo plango, pater ^' Three times during the pontificate of Hadrian he visited Rome, and the second occasion in the year 781 was rendered memorable by the baptism of his son Pippin, at which the Pope stood Godfather. Eginhard also relates that on several occasions Charlemagne was very munificent to the Pontiffs^, so that nothing can be more probable than that he should have sent, or at least intended to send, this costly Psalter, a present to Hadrian I. On the other hand, the relations between Charles the Bald and Pope Hadrian II, so far from being of a friendly character, were certainly strained. There is but one instance on record of the former sending any presents to the latter, when Charles, in defiance of Hadrian's remonstrances, having taken possession of the kingdom of his deceased nephew Lothair, sought to appease the Pope's displeasure by addressing to him a letter, and at the same time requesting his acceptance of ' a cloth for the altar of St. Peter's made out of his own golden robes, together with two golden crowns decked with jewels ^.' The presents ' opera Caroli Magni, Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xcviii. p. 1331. ^ Einhardi Caroli Magni vita, sec. 2 7. ' Annates Bertiniani, annus 870. Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom cxxv. p. 1261. I04 Documentary Evidence. [ch. being mentioned, it is natural to conclude that none others were sent. The verses of Dagulfus too are far more applicable to Charlemagne than to Charles the Bald. They may be compared with some verses which were inscribed on a book of the Gospels, written by one Godescal at the command of the former sovereign, and which refer particularly to his second visit to Rome and the baptism of his son Pippin in the year 781 1. The language employed by Godescal respecting Charlemagne bears an evident simi larity to the terms in which Dagulfus addresses the king Charles to whom he dedicated this Psalter. By Godescal Charlemagne is described as ' Orbe bonus toto passim laudabilis heros, inclytus in regno, fretus caelestibus armis .... humili pietate superbus, providus ac sapiens, studiosus in arte librorum ' and 'rex plus': by Dagulfus Charles is addressed as 'Rex pie, dux sapiens, virtute insignis et armis, quem decet omne decens, quicquid in orbe placet,' and he is requested to read the Psalter ' docto ore.' "What conclusion can be drawn from this resemblance, but that the king Charles of Dagulfus is none other than the king Charles of Godescal? Eginhard too dwells upon Charle magne's literary accomplishments, and his skill in the arts of reading ecclesiastical books and singing the service, particularly the Psalter. Nor are these dedicatory verses the only documentary evidence of Charlemagne's connexion with this Vienna Psalter. Prefixed to it is a document subscribed by John Henseler, a public Imperial notary, which attests that it had been originally used by Hildegardis, the wife of Charlemagne, who after her death presented it A.D. 7H8 to the Church of Bremen, where it had been kept as ' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xcviii. pp. 1353, 1354. Ill .] Manuscript Copies. 105 a sacred treasure for 800 years and more, and publicly exhibited once a year together with the other relics of the Church. In proof of which are subjoined two clauses copied word by word, as he certifies, from ancient manuscripts of that Church ; one of which gives a list of the posses sions and articles of value bestowed by Charlemagne upon the Church, the last being ' Psalterium divae ipsius coniugis Uteris aureis bene et subtiliter confricatum.' The other, written in German, mentions the Psalter as one of the sacred relics of the Church which were annually exhibited. There is an obvious difficulty in reconciling the history of the Psalter, which is thus attested on the authority of the ancient records of the Church of Bremen, with the first set of dedicatory verses, if they are understood to mean, as they do apparently, that it was actually given or sent as a present to Hadrian by Charlemagne. But the diffi culty is not insurmountable. Lambecius cuts the knot by denying altogether that Charlemagne gave the book to the Church of Bremen ; and he supposes that the Frank king sent it to Hadrian at Rome as a present on occasion of his elevation to the papal throne in the year 772, and that it remained there till 788, when Hadrian presented it to St. Willehad upon his consecration as the first Bishop of Bremen. This hypothesis is accepted by Waterland ; but, as Pagi remarks, it is entirely unsupported by evi dence, and it is highly improbable that the Pope should have parted with a present conferred upon him by so great a monarch, and that too in order to bestow it upon a subject of that monarch. Pagi^ therefore conjectures that Hadrian, having originally received it from Charlemagne, afterwards gave it to Hildegardis, when she accompanied the latter to Rome in 781 ; and that thus it reverted to ' Pagi, Critica in Annates Baronii, an. 783. io6 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Charlemagne on her death, which took place two years after. But this is also improbable. The simplest solution of the difficulty appears to be that suggested by the authors of the Nouveau Traits de Diplomatique, — that the Psalter, though dedicated to the Pope, from some cause or other was never actually sent to him ^. Whatever be the right reconciliation of the apparent discrepancy between the dedicating verses of this interest ing Psalter and the ancient records of the Church of Bremen as regards its history, their combined evidence may be accepted as proving thus much — that it was written during the pontificate of Hadrian I (not necessarily at its commencement) for Charlemagne and in his honour by one Dagulfus, and was presented by that monarch together with other gifts to the Church of Bremen. -And the date, which thus rests upon documentary evidence, is confirmed by palaeographical authorities. The opinion of Lambecius, who must have had a large acquaintance with ancient MSS., has been already mentioned and is entitled to consideration, though he may have been in error in regard to the precise year to which he assigned the MS., viz. A.D. 772. Denis too, the Vienna librarian at the close of the last century, dates it in his elaborate catalogue as belonging to the eighth century, and in the most positive manner asserts its antiquity as well as value ^. The Bene dictine authors of the Nouveau Traitd de Diplomatique, who seem to have been well acquainted with the MS., place it at the latter part of the eighth century. And ^ 'Le Psautier dedid par cet empereur au pape Adrian I., quoiqu'il ne I'ait pas refu : peut-etre parceqn'il vint a mourir dans la circonstance, oil il devoit lui etre presente' ; u. s. tom. ii. p. 100. But it could not have been the death of the Pope, which occurred A. D. 795, that prevented his receiving it, as it was presented to the Church of Bremen in 788. ^ Codices manuscripti theologici Bibliothecae Palatinae Vindoionensis Latini, vol. i. pp. 54-70. Recensuit M. Denis a. 1793. III.] ' Manuscript Copies. 107 more recently Silvestre and his coadjutors express the same opinion, founded apparently on a personal examina tion of the book. ' The writing,' they say, ' is a good specimen of the renovated Roman or Caroline characters in general usage from the end of the eighth century ' ; and ' the general appearance of the volume at once indicates it to be of the latter part of the eighth century 1.' No com petent palaeographer, to the best of my knowledge, has dated it later. As I have described this Psalter as a Galilean Psalter, and shall have occasion to use that term repeatedly, and to mention Roman Psalters also, with the view of explaining these terms, which are not familiar to many persons, I have added in Appendix D a note on Latin versions of the Psalter. 5. Next to the Vienna Psalter, it is desirable to draw attention to another Psalter connected with Charlemagne. It is deposited in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris, to which collection it was transferred from the Abbey of St. Germain-des-Pr^s, and has for its press-mark Latin 13159. This is also a Galilean Psalter, and it is remarkable for the evident care bestowed upon its execution and the richness of its decoration, which would lead us to suppose that it was written for some person of distinction. The volume is at present in a soiled and mutilated condition, imperfect at the end with several leaves lost. Each Psalm is preceded by a title called 'Titulum,' and followed by a prayer. The initial letters are large and elaborately ornamented, more especially that of the first Psalm, which occupies a whole page. By the side of the commencing leaf the corresponding leaf of another Psalter, with an initial B of Hiberno-Saxon form, has been inserted. Dr. ' Universal Palaeography, by M. J. B. Silvestre. Translated by Sir F. Madden. London, 1850. Vol. i. pp. 331, 33a. io8 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Swainson by the way, not perceiving that the latter was inserted, mistook the B for the original initial letter of this Psalter. In regard to the contents, the 150th Psalm is followed by the apocryphal 151st— the ' Pusillus eram.' The usual Old Testament Canticles then commence ; but these are imperfect at present, owing to the loss of some— probably two— leaves. This is evident, inasmuch as at the bottom of the verso side of one folio appear the words ' quia non in fortitudinem roborabitur vir,' which are found in the Song of Hannah, the third in order of the Canticles ; and the commencing words on the next page — 198 recto- are 'quomodo persequetur unus mille' from the Song of Moses in Deuteronomy, which is always the last in order. After this come the Benedicite, the Benedictus entitled ' Canticum Zacharie Prophete,' the Magnificat entitled ' Hymnum Sanctae Mariae,' the Nunc dimittis headed ' Huic loco Simeon,' and then the Te Deum without a title. The last-named is imperfect, ending with the words ' Te glo- riosus apostolorum chorus' in the last line off 160, verso. The commencing words on the next page — f 161, recto — are those of the Constantinopolitan Creed, ' Deum de Deo ' ; and at the termination of this Creed, on the verso side of the same leaf, the Quicunque commences without a title. This leaf, it should be noticed, is written in a different hand from almost all the rest of the volume ; for it appears in one other place only — in a prayer on f. 28. So that here again two of the original leaves would seem to be missing, one for which f 161 was apparently inserted as a substitute, and another containing the matter clearly omitted, viz. the greater part of the Te Deum and the commencement of the Constantinopolitan Creed, possibly also the Apostles' Creed and the Gloria in excelsis. But why only one leaf was inserted to supply the place of III.] Manuscript Copies. 109 those which had been lost is a difficulty which cannot now be solved. Certain it is that the commencement of the Athanasian Creed, which is written on the verso side of this leaf as far as the words ' nee tres inmensi,' must have been in the volume originally, because the Creed is con tinued on the next folio in the original hand, and this hand is maintained to the end of the MS. The initial word ' Finit ' of the Rubric at the conclusion of the Creed is alone legible at present, the rest being obliterated by rough and careless usage. Then follow several Litanies, which require special notice, as they supply indisputable evidence of the date of this Psalter. The first of these commences : ' Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat ; III. Exaudi Christe. Leoni summo pontifici et universali pap? vita. Salvator mundi, Tu ilium adiuva ; Sancte Petre, Tu ilium adiuva.' And after similar invocations addressed to SS. Paul, Andrew, Clement, and another, it continues : ' Exaudi Christe, Carolo excellentissimo . . . es (sic) a do coro (sic) . . . atque magno et pacifico regi Francorum et Longobardorum ac patricio Romanorum Vita et victoria ; Redemptor mundi, Tu ilium adiuva,' &c. Then after similar invocations of saints and angels we have : ' Exaudi Christe, nobilissime proli regali vita. Sancta virgo vir- ginum, Tu illam adiuva.' Then after more invocations occurs : ' Exaudi Christe, Omnibus iudicibus vel cuncto exercitui Francorum Vita et victoria.' Again, we have towards the end : ' Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat ; Rex regum Christus vincit.' The end is as follows : ' Christe, Te rogamus. Kurie eleison, Te rogamus. Feliciter Feliciter. Tempora bona habeas (sic), Te rogamus multos annos. Amen.' By the above petitions the date of this national Frank Litany, in which the notes of jubilant exultation are mingled with those of supplica- no Documentary Evidence, [ch. tion, seems clearly determined to the period between the accession of Leo III to the pontificate at the close of the year 795 and the coronation of Charlemagne as Emperor at Christmas, A. D. 800. Charles is prayed for as ' Rex Francorum et Longobardorum ac patricius Romanorum,' the title usually applied to Charlemagne from the time of his conquest of Lombardy in 774 until his coronation as Emperor, after which he was commonly designated as ' Augustus ' or ' Imperator Romanorum.' And if Charle magne is the king here prayed for, Leo III must be the Pope. What other King Charles and Pope Leo could be in tended ? It is true that Leo IV (who was Pope from 847 to 855) and Charles the Bald were contemporaries, but the latter was never called and never was king of the Lombards and Patrician of the Romans. What confirms the con clusion that this Litany was composed before the accession of Charlemagne to the imperial dignity is the petition added for the royal family : ' Exaudi Christe, nobilissime proli regali vita.' It should be noticed that 'Carolo' is the last word in the third line from the bottom on the recto side of the leaf (f. 163), and a great portion of the two last lines of the page, comprising no doubt originally some complimentary epithets or titles, has been obliterated by excessive wear. The words ' es (sic) a d5 coro ' — clearly for ' coronato ' — looked to me like a conjectural attempt to retrace some of the lost portion, and between them and ' excellentissimo ' at the beginning of the last line but one on one side and ' atque magno et pacifico ' (which come at the end of the last line) on the other there is a blank space. Then in the first line on the reverse of the leaf follow immediately, written distinctly in the original hand, ' regi Francorum et Longobardorum ac patricio Romanorum.' What were the obliterated epithets or titles it is impossible III.] Manuscript Copies, m now to ascertain ; but it is very improbable that ' augusto ' or ' imperatori ' should have been among them, as ' patri cius Romanorum ' is never found associated with either of the titles ' augustus ' or ' imperator,' and seems to have been supplanted by them when Charlemagne received the imperial dignity. And if this Litany belongs to the period between the accession of Leo III to the popedom and the coronation of Charlemagne as emperor, such must be the date also of the Psalter. Not improbably the Psalter was written specially with a view to this Litany, which seems to have been composed for the purpose of imploring the Divine favour upon Charles the Great while celebrating his victories. The above conclusion in regard to the date of the MS. is confirmed by the two other Litanies immediately suc ceeding, both of which contain petitions for Pope Leo and King Charles. The first of the two, entitled apparently ' Tetania Falilla,' has the following : — ' Ut doinnum apostolicum Leonem in sanctitate et religione conservare digneris, Te rogamus, audi nos ; Ut ei vitam et sanitatem dones, Te rogamus. Ut domnum Carolum regem conservare digneris, Te rogamus : Ut ei vitam et sanitatem atque victoriam dones, Te rogamus. Ut proles regales conservare digneris, Te rogamus ; Ut eis vitam et sanitatem dones, Te rogamus.' The other, entitled apparently 'Tetania Callica,' and in tended, it would seem, for use in a school or college, has : — ' Exaudi Deus. RP.' Leoni pape vita. Exaudi Christe. RP. Carolo regi vita. Exaudi Deus pro liberis regalibus vita. Exaudi Christe exercitui Francorum vita.' The Litanies are followed by some reference to the Authentic and Plagal musical tones or modes, described as Autentus Protus, Plai Protus, Autentus Deuterus, Plai ' i.e. ' Responsum.' 112 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Deuterus, &c. Then on the last leaf is a ' Hymnum die dominico,' commencing ' Deus qui caeli luminis satorque lucis,' and on the verso side near the bottom of the page occurs, ' Hymnum ad prima. Post matutinis. Laudibus quos trinitate psallamus psallamus rursus admonet pater verus familias.' The hymn is not concluded, so that the volume is obviously imperfect at the end owing to mutilation. It must be added that M. Dehsle, the learned Director of the National Library at Paris, places this MS. between 795 and 8co — accepting the date clearly indicated by internal evidence ^. The codex, important as it is in relation to the history of the Athanasian Creed, was unknown to Waterland, A collation of the text of that Creed, which is contained in it, will be found in the Appendix. 6. Another Paris MS. — Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin 4858 — contains on the verso side of the last leaf a fragment of the Athanasian Creed, the portion from the beginning to the words ' tres aeterni ' of the eleventh verse inclusive. This follows without any title the Chronicon of Eusebius, as translated by Jerome, which is the only other document comprised in the volume. The cause of the Creed appear ing in this fragmentary condition is obviously nothing but the mutilation of the MS,, which originally must in all probability have contained the whole of the formulary. Beyond this it is necessarily impossible to form even a conjecture in regard to the contents of the last leaves. This is one of the MSS. noticed by Montfaucon in his Diatribe in Symbolum Quicunque , and he ascribes it without hesitation to the same epoch as the Vienna Psalter already mentioned belongs to in his judgement— the close of the eighth century ^. The old printed catalogue ' See Swainson, Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, cScc, p. 354. ^ Regius codex num. 4908, annorum nongentornm nullum habet titulnm III.] Manuscript Copies. 113 attributes it, but doubtfully, to the ninth century : ' Nono saeculo exaratus videtur.' But the present authorities agree with Montfaucon as to the date. We may therefore safely accept the verdict of that experienced palaeographer. A collation of the text will be found in Appendix E. 7. The Athanasian Creed appears in manuscript collections of canons as well as psalters. My first instance under this head is from a MS. comprising a Galilean collection of canons, assigned by Professor Maassen in his Bibliotheca Latina iuris canonici to the ninth century, but probably written, as we shall shortly see, at its commencement. This is also a Paris MS., Bibliotheque Nationale, Lat. 1451. It begins with a tree of consanguinity. Then comes a notice of the first six Oecumenical Councils. Then on f 6, verso, a list of the popes is commenced, headed with the title: 'Hie sunt Pontifices sancte Romanae Ecclesiae Beati Petri apostoli.' The duration of each pontificate is specified in years, months, and days : and the first five are Petrus, Linus, Cletus, Clemens, and Aneclitus. The list is concluded on f. 7, verso, the last being: 'xcvil. Adrianus s. an. XXIII. m. X. d. XVII.'; or in full: ' Adrianus sedit annos XXIII. menses X. dies XVII.' This was Adrian I, who died on Christmas Day, A.D. 795. Between this and the next line there has been inserted in another hand the following : ' xcviil. Leo papa.' That this insertion was made after the completion of the codex is evident from the fact of its being thrust in between the lines. And it must have been made before the death of Leo III, the successor of Adrian I, which took place nullumque auctoris nomen. Aequalis ipsi est, qui memoratur a Lambecio exstatque in Bibliotheca Caesarea Caroli Magni iiissu conscriptus, cuius titulus sic habet, Fides Sancti Athanasii episcopi Alexandrini.' Montfaucon, Diatribe in the Appendix to his edition of St. Athanasius, published at Paris, A. D. 1698. This MS. was numbered 4908 in the old Royal Library of France. I 114 Documentary Evidence. [ch. A.D. 8i6: had it been made after, the duration of his pontificate would have been specified in all probability, as has been done in the case of Adrian and all the other popes on the list. Thus we are led to believe that the MS. was not written later than the year 8i6; that itwas not executed prior to the death of Adrian is obvious from the length of his occupation of the Papal See being stated to a day. The list of popes is immediately followed by some chronological notes : — ' Ab exordio mundi usque ad diluvium sunt.anni duo milia CCXL. et II. A diluvio usque ad nativitatem Abrahe sunt anni dccccxlii. Passum autem dominum nostrum lesum Christum peractis (sic) ab ortii mundi quinque milia CCXX. et VIII. anni. A passione domini nostri lesu Christi usque ad sedem beatissimi Marcellini pape Romae anni CCLXXVI. menses vim. De apostolato iam facto Christi martyris Marcellini usque tempus glorio- sissimi domni Caroli regis xxv. anni regni eius hoc est usque vin. Kalendas Apriles sunt anni CCCCXC. et menses III.' At first I thought that these notes determined the date of the MS., but on further consideration it appears to me that they cannot be taken as proving more than the negative conclusion that it was not written before the epoch indicated by them, which seems to be the eighth of the Kalends of April or the twenty-fifth of March in the year 796, not, as Maassen states, 793. Apparently Maassen, in accordance with the usual computation, placed the commencement of Charlemagne's reign in October 768, when upon the death of his father he succeeded to the kingdom in conjunction with his brother Carloman. But, in the first place, the year 793 falls within the pontificate of Adrian, whose death is virtually recorded, as we have seen, in the list of popes, to which these notes are subjoined: and next, it cannot be made to synchronize with the whole sum of the successive periods which are here stated to have Ill .] Manuscript Copies, 115 elapsed from the Creation to the date intended. Thus 5,228 years from the Creation to the Passion -I- 276 years and nine months from the Passion to the Pontificate of Marcellinus -f 490 years and three months from Marcellinus to March twenty-fifth of the twenty-fifth year of the reign of Charlemagne = 5,995 years. And according to the Eusebian chronology, which is followed in these notes, as it was generally in the Middle Ages, and which placed the Nativity of our Blessed Lord in the year 5,199 from the Creation, the year 5995 from the Creation would coincide not with 793 A.D. but with 796. Hence it is clear that Charlemagne's reign is not reckoned here as commencing in 768 A.D. Is there any other computation of his reign which will solve the difficulty? Einhard in his life of Charles relates that upon his brother Carloman's death, with whom he had reigned conjointly, he was constituted sole king with the consent of all the Franks '^. This took place in December, A.D. 771 • and this the 'Poeta Saxo' in his metrical life of Charles regards as the occasion when the Frank monarchy was conferred upon him by the right of divine authority: accordingly it is placed at the very commencement of his Annals of the acts of Charles ^- And if Charlemagne's reign is reckoned as commencing in December 771, clearly March twenty-fifth, 796, falls within its twenty-fifth year. We have shown that the year ' ' Karolus fratre defuncto consensu omnium Francorum rex constituitur.' Vita Caroli, sec. 3 ; see Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xcvii. p. 29. ° ' Salvator mundi, postquam de Virgine nasci Dignatus, nostri se corporis indnit artus, Evolvit septingentos rota temporis annos, Et decies septem, sed et unus paene peractus Insuper annus erat, cum iure monarchia regni Francorum Carolo divinitus est data magno.' Poetae Saxonis Annalium de gestis Caroli Magni libri quinque, see Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xcix. p. 685. I 2 ii6 Documentary Evidence. [ch. 796 A.D. harmonizes with the sum of the periods calculated in these chronological notes from the Creation. On the reverse of the same leaf, on the recto side of which these notes appear, the Athanasian Creed commences, introduced by the title : ' Incipit exemplar fidei cht sci Athanasii ep Alexandrine ecclesie. 'It is concluded on the next page, f 8, recto. The contraction cht is clearly for chatholice or chatholicae, the word being thus spelt in the text of the Creed. The various readings are printed in the Appendix ; but one of them I cannot forbear to draw attention to here — it is so interesting and peculiar. Verses 8-10 appear thus : ' Aeternus pater, aeternus filius, aeternus et spiritus sanctus ; Increatus pater, increatus filius, increatus et spiritus sanctus ; Inmensus pater, inmensus filius, inmensus et spiritus sanctus.' It will be observed that this reading seems to receive support from the two succeeding verses : ' Et tamen non tres aeterni, sed unus aeternus ; sicut non tres increati, nee tres inmensi, sed unus increatus, et unus inmensus.' But I have not met with it in any other MS. Among the other contents of this codex are the Confession of Faith commonly entitled ' Fides Hieronymi,' also a list of the ecclesiastical provinces of Gaul, also a collection of canons and decretal epistles, in course of which other confessions of faith occur — the original Nicene Creed, with its anathema, necessarily included among the acts of the Nicene Council, the confession most commonly described as ' Fides Romanorum ' or ' Fides Romanae Ecclesiae,' another called ' Libellus de fide catholica contra omnes hereses Augustini,' and that commonly known as ' Gennadius de dogmaticis ecclesiasticis,' but here, as well as the last mentioned, attributed to Augustine. The latest Council contained in this collection is the Third of Toledo, III.] Manuscript Copies. 117 A.D. 589, celebrated as the occasion when the Visigothic kingdom of Spain and Gallia Narbonensis abjured Arianism and accepted the Catholic Faith : and the acts of that council are the last document in the volume, but it is incomplete owing to the mutilation of the codex. The latest papal epistle is by Innocent I. The collection may therefore have been compiled at the end of the sixth century or the beginning of the seventh. It is clearly a Galilean collection, and the MS. must have been written in France. As the history of a MS. is always interesting and some times important, it is worth while mentioning that this volume formerly belonged to Colbert's Library ; and the name of an earlier owner appears at the bottom of the first page : ' Fuit Nicolai Fabri.' Another memorandum on the verso side of the first leaf, written in a hand of the fifteenth century, points to its ancient, possibly original, home : ' Iste liber est sancti Petri fossatensis.' The Abbey of St. Peter des Fosses or Fossatensis — also called the Abbey of St. Maur des Fosses, because the remains of St. Maur were transferred to it from the Abbey of Glan- feuil in Anjou in the time of Charles the Bald — was situated on the river Marne, at a distance of two leagues from Paris. As it was founded in the middle of the seventh century, the MS. may have been written within its walls. 8. Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, No. 3848 B. of the Latin MSS. has been previously referred to, as comprising among its contents two discourses on the Apostles' Creed preached at the ' Traditio Symboli ' and the Herovall Collection of Canons, in the first chapter of which it will be remembered the Autun Canon enjoining the recitation of the Athanasian Creed upon the clergy is found. This MS. also produces in extenso the Quicunque, introducing ii8 Documentary Evidence. [ch. it apparently among several testimonies respecting the Faith from the Fathers between the Sermons and the Collection. The Fathers thus quoted are St. Hilary, St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostom, Theophilus, St. Cyril of Alexandria, — his epistles to Nestorius and Bishop John, — and St. Isidore of Seville, who is, it will be observed, the latest of the number. The title of the Quicunque is ' Fides sancti Athanasii episcopi.' A collation of the text will be found in Appendix, Note E. This MS. is assigned to the ninth century by the Catalogue of the Paris MSS., to the beginning of that century by Professor Maassen in his Bibliotheca Latina iuris canonici. 9. Psalter of the Emperor Lothair. This Psalter has on its first three leaves portraits of Lothair as the prince in whose honour or at whose request it was written, of David as the inspired author of the Psalms, and of St. Jerome by whom the Galilean or amended version of the Latin Psalter contained in the book was elaborated. Each of these pictures is followed by a set of ten verses. The third of them expressly states that the volume was executed from a motive of deep veneration for the king, — clearly meaning Lothair, who is represented by his picture with all the circumstances of royal dignity, seated upon a throne, wearing a crown and mantle both of gold and studded with jewels, his right hand resting upon a staff or sceptre, his left grasping the hilt of his sword. And the verses which are subjoined to his picture distinctly refer to the most remarkable epoch in his life — the short-lived triumph which by the aid of his brothers Louis and Pippin and of a powerful party among the nobles and bishops he achieved over his father, Louis the Meek, in the year 833. In a national diet or assembly held at Compiegne in October of that year, as sole Emperor or Caesar of the in .] Manuscript Copies. 119 West, he received the homage of princes and people with the assurances of their fidelity, and ambassadors from the Eastern Emperor came to treat with him. Never after wards did his sovereignty extend over the vast extent of country which at that time acknowledged his rule. The following are the lines, in which all this is evidently alluded to — it might even be said, described : — ' Inclyta Caesareum diffundit fama triumphum ' Hlotharii, celebrat quem maximus ambitus orbis. Hunc oriens recolit, mittens veneranter Achivos, Qui veniam curvi poscant et foedera pacis, Syderis occidui populi sua iura tremiscunt, Et tanto gaudent proni se subdere regi '.' It is natural to conclude that the MS. was written soon after the events which it thus commemorates, at the end of 833 or beginning of 834, especially as the latter year, before it was far advanced, brought with it a reverse of fortune to Lothair. Popular favour veered round ; his brothers, alarmed by the dimensions his power was as suming, changed sides ; his father was restored to liberty and reinstated in the empire ; the title of Emperor was taken from him and his authority confined within the boundaries of his own kingdom of Italy. It is not at all likely that a Psalter designed apparently to celebrate the triumph of Lothair, an event necessarily full of painful and degrading memories to Louis the Meek, would have been executed and used after the return of the latter to power and within his dominions, nor yet at any time during the remainder of his life, which terminated in 840. The Psalter itself like the Vienna Psalter, previously mentioned, is written in letters of gold, an indication of its connexion with some royal personage ; and the usual Canticles, which follow, are written in the same ornate ' See Voyage littiraire de deux Binidictins, vol. i. p. 137. I20 Documentary Evidence. [ch. style. Among these, according to the account of the Voyage Littiraire, are the Te Deum, the Athanasian Creed, the Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed, and accord ing to the account of the Palaeographical Society, the Magnificat also. The position of the Athanasian Creed is very unusual, coming before the Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed and Magnificat : it is entitled ' Fides Catholica tradita a sancto Athanasio Alexandrino episcopo.' In a later hand, dating as appears from internal evidence between A.D. 908 and 920, are prayers 'pro statu sanctae Dei ecclesiae ' and others. At the beginning — also written in a different hand from the Psalms and Canticles— on the inside of the cover is another prayer headed ' Oratio pro vivorum,' which must have been used, if we may judge from its language, by a daughter of Lothair when an inmate of some religious house, the names of her brothers Lothair, Charles, and Louis being mentioned, also of Charles the elder, probably Charles the Bald, among her uncles, as living, and those of Lothair, Hyrmingarde, and Theobert, as departed seemingly. As Louis of Bavaria and Charles, the brothers of Lothair the Emperor, died, the former in 876 and the latter in 877, we have here a clue to the date of this prayer. It supplies obviously an additional indication of the connexion of the volume with Lothair. This MS. belonged formerly to the Abbey of St. Hubert in the Forest of Ardennes and Diocese of Liege ; and in a Chronicle of the Abbey, known as the ' Cantatorium,' of the twelfth century, is described as having been presented to it by Louis le Debonnaire or the Meek, on occasion of the translation of St. Hubert's remains, A.D. 835. Ac cordingly, this date has been assigned to the codex, though doubtfully, by the Palaeographical Society. But the state- III.] Manuscript Copies. 121 ment of the Chronicle can only be regarded as legendary, if the encomiastic verses refer, as they clearly do, to events which occurred in 833 ; nor does it appear likely that a Psalter, in which Lothair is represented as the sole reigning Emperor, would have been compiled at a time when he was merely associated with his father in the imperial dignity. Still the fact of such a tradition existing in the twelfth century proves that even then the Psalter had been the property of St. Hubert's Abbey for a con siderable period. It may have been written there. When the two French Benedictines, Martene and Durand, in the course of their literary journey visited the abbey in 171 8, they found it still there ; and in the delightful narrative of their travels they describe it as the most precious among the manuscript treasures of the abbey, and give an account of it, together with copies of the portrait of Lothair and of several of the documents which it contains, among them the verses which accompany the pictures^. The Psalter remained in its ancient home till the French Revolution of the last century, when it was carried off by the Prior, Dom Nicholas Spirlet, and Dom Etienne, together with other treasures of their house. The Prior died on his journey, and Dom Etienne then became possessor of the volume, which he bequeathed to his nephew, of whom it was purchased in or about the year 1875 by Messrs. Ellis and White of New Bond Street. By this firm it was sold to a gentleman who did not wish his name to be known. Thus this valuable and interesting MS., though still extant, is lost to the public ; and it cannot but be a subject of regret that the Trustees of the British Museum were unable to secure it for the nation. The Palaeographical Society have however rescued it from total oblivion by ' Voyage littiraire de deux religieux Binidictins, vol. i. pp. 135-144. 122 Documentary Evidence. [ ch. publishing — it may be presumed through the courtesy of Messrs. Ellis and White — two facsimiles of the hand writing, and another of the portrait of Lothair, with some account of the codex ^. Waterland was unacquainted with this Psalter, which is of real importance in relation to the history of the Athana sian Creed, his book being written before the publication of the Voyage Litteraire. ID. The Psalter commonly described in England of late years as the Utrecht Psalter calls for some notice. For in the first place, though not written in the same costly style as the Lothair and Vienna Psalters, it is still remarkable for the care and labour evidently employed in its execution and decoration, the body of the text both in the Psalms and Canticles being written in rustic capitals,— in this respect I think I may say it is unique among extant manuscript Psalters, — and the Psalms and Canticles being all preceded by illustrative drawings of a peculiar char acter. And its history is remarkable in connexion with the modern controversies relating to the Athanasian Creed. Archbishop Ussher in the preface to his work De Symbolo, published in 1647, mentions that he had seen the MS. in the Cotton Library, that it contained the Athanasian Creed and the Apostles', the latter having as many articles as in modern times ; and he judged it, both from the ancient character of the drawings and the somewhat large form of the letters, to be not later than the time of Gregory I ^. ' Palaeographical Society, Facsimiles of Manuscripts, vol, ii. Plates, 69, 93. 94. ^ 'Latino-Gallicum illud Psalterium in Bibliotheca Cottoniana vidimus: sicut et alia Latina duo longe maioris antiquitatis ; in quibus praeter hymnum hunc (sc. le Deum) sine uUo authoris nomine Hymni ad Matutinas titulo inscriptum, et Athanasiannm habebatur Symbolum, et Apostolicum, totidem omnino quot hodiernum nostrum continens capitula. In priore, quod Ill .] Manuscript Copies. 123 And since Ussher's time this Psalter has frequently been appealed to by the learned in proof of the antiquity of the Quicunque. But it disappeared mysteriously from the Cotton Library. Waterland says that in his time it was not there, and speaks of it as lost ^ It appears to have been lent to the Earl of Arundel between the years 1625 and 1 63 1, and not to have been returned at the latter date. Nothing more was heard of it until it transpired not many years since that it was in the Utrecht Library, to which it had been presented by one Ridler in 1718. Professor Westwood saw it there and examined it carefully in 1858. Public attention was invited to it by the late Professor Swainson in 1872, when the controversy respecting the retention of the Athanasian Creed in the Church of Eng land was raging ; and its reappearance on the arena was the occasion of eliciting a most noteworthy diversity of opinion among palaeographers in regard to the date when it was written. Sir Thomas Duffus Hardy, an experienced palaeographer and antiquarian, in a report drawn up at the request of Lord Romilly, then Master of the Rolls, confidently maintained, in agreement with Ussher, that the volume belonged to the sixth century, and he adduced two other authorities, Haenel and Baron von Westreenen, in support of his position^. To counteract this, Dean Stanley produced a formidable array of opinions in favour of a much later date from other palaeographers, who were also men of the highest eminence in their particular Gregorii I. tempore non fuisse recentius, turn ex antiquo picturae genere colligitur, tum ex literarum forma grandiuscula, Athanasiannm quidem fidei Catholicae . . . alterum vero Symboli Apostolorum praefert titulum.' Ussher, de Symbolo, Praef. p. 4. ^ History of the Athanasian Creed. Oxford, 1870, pp. 68, 71. 2 The Athanasian Creed in connexion with the Utrecht Psalter, a Report by Sir T. D. Hardy. 124 Documentary Evidence. [ch. line. Mr. Bond, then Keeper of the Manuscripts in the British Museum, considered 'it impossible to refer the Psalter to an earlier time than the end of the eighth cen tury,' and was ' more disposed to assign it to the ninth.' Sir E. M. Thompson, at the time Assistant Keeper of the Manuscripts in the British Museum, could ' not assign it to an earlier age than the close of the eighth century.' The Rev. H. O. Coxe, Bodleian Librarian, saw ' no reason to conclude that the MS. was written before the com mencement of the ninth century.' The Rev. S. S. Lewis, Librarian of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, did ' not feel warranted in assigning it to an earlier date than the ninth century.' Sir Digby Wyatt felt strongly that the Psalter ' was probably done at or about the middle of the eighth century.' Professor Westwood of Oxford re ferred it ' to the eighth or ninth century ^.' Lastly, the Utrecht Librarian placed the MS. between A.D. 750 and A.D. 850. In the face of this preponderance of palaeo graphical authority it is impossible any longer to maintain that the Psalter possesses the high antiquity which Ussher attributed to it. And yet if we turn for guidance to the advocates of a later date, their opinions take such a wide range and differ so much that it is difficult to base any definite conclusion upon them. The most definite con clusion we can arrive at seems to be that the Psalter was written either in the eighth or ninth century, and most probably belongs to the first half of the latter. Nothing certain appears to be known of the history of this MS. prior to its coming into the possession of Sir Robert Cotton. It has been supposed to have been brought by Bertha, the wife of ^thelbert, King of Kent, ' The Utrecht Psalter, Reports on the age of the Manuscript, with a preface by A. P. Stanley, Dean of Westminster. Ill .] Manuscript Copies. 125 from France, and by her to have been bequeathed to the monastery of Reculver, and thence removed to Canter bury. But the evidence for this is of the frailest possible description. Sir E. M. Thompson however is of opinion that it was probably written in the north-east of France. And this receives some confirmation from the fact that the Psalter is of the Galilean version. The Athanasian Creed occurs in the usual place. After the six usual Old Testament Canticles follow the Bene dicite, the Te Deum entitled ' Hymnum ad matutinis,' the Benedictus entitled ' Canticum Zacharie Prophete ad Ma- tutinum,' the Magnificat, the Nunc dimittis entitled ' Canticum Simeonis ad Completorium,' the Gloria in ex celsis without any title, the Lord's Prayer according to St. Matthew but without the Doxology, the Apostles' Creed entitled ' Symbolu (sic) Apostolorum,' the mark of abbreviation over the u in Symbolum being probably omitted through inadvertence, and the Athanasian Creed entitled ' Fides Catholicam ' (sic) ; and then comes the apocryphal 151st Psalm — a very peculiar arrangement, as it usually follows the 150th Psalm. It is observable that the Canticles here are the same, and in the same order, as in the Vienna Psalter previously noticed, except that the Gloria in excelsis is omitted by the latter from the Can ticles and placed among the preliminary documents at the beginning. A collation of the text will be found in the Appendix. II. The Cotton MS. Galba A. xviii, generally known as King .^thelstan's Psalter, is a very interesting book ; and Sir E. M. Thompson's account of it has thrown a fiood of light upon its construction and history "¦. This is my ^ Catalogue of Ancient Manuscripts in the British Museum, by E. M. Thompson, Part ii. Latin, p. i 2. 126 Documentary Evidence. [ch. authority for the dates to which the several parts of the codex may be assigned. The MS. originally comprised the Psalter and Canticles only, including of course the Lord's Prayer and Creeds, with a few prefatory documents, and was written on the Continent, probably in Germany, in the ninth century, in Caroline minuscules. That this part was written abroad and in the ninth century is shown not only by the character of the handwriting, but also by the fact that on a leaf at the beginning, what was a flyleaf of the original volume, are noted the obits of ' Karolus piissimus imperator,' ' Pip- pinus gloriosus rex,' ''Bernhardus gloriosissimus rex,' ' Uvoradus dux,' and ' Himildruda comitissa,' followed by a direction for the due celebration of their memories and a prayer for their eternal rest. Charlemagne died A.D. 814; Pippin his son. King of Italy and of Bavaria and part of Germany, in 810; Bernhard, who succeded to the dominions of his father Pippin, in 817 ; Uvoradus was ' comes palatii ' under Charlemagne, and shared with two others the command of an army sent to quell an insurrec tion of Saxons A.D. 782 ^. Himildruda was a concubine of the same monarch ^ ; and it is not probable that either of the two last-named persons survived Charlemagne long, as he attained to the full age of man : possibly both died before him. Hence we may infer that the MS. was not written later than A.D. 850, as it is not likely that the direction for the solemn observance of the anniversaries of the deaths of the great Emperor, his royal son and grand son, his courtier, and his concubine would have been issued many years after their decease. The Psalter is Galilean and is marked with obeli and asterisks. The usual Old Testa- ' Einhardi Annates, apud Pertz, vol. i. p. 163. ^ Annates Laureshamienses , apud Pertz, vol. i. p. 35. III.] Manuscript Copies. 127 ment Canticles are followed by the Benedicite, Benedictus, Magnificat, Nunc dimittis, Te Deum, Gloria in excelsis en titled ' Hymnus in die dominica ad matutinas,' the Lord's Prayer, the Apostles' Creed entitled ' Symbolum,' and the Athanasian entitled 'Fides sancti Athanasii Alexandrini.' Professor Westwood in his account of this MS. in his Palaeographia Sacra appears to agree with Sir E. M. Thompson with respect to the date of the Psalter with its prefatory matter and Canticles and the locality which produced them. The Canticles here, it may be observed, are the same as in the Utrecht Psalter. To the MS. as thus originally constituted were added, both at the beginning and end, ' on the spare leaves and on supplemental leaves '^,' some prayers ; and these additions, being in Caroline writing, must have been made on the Continent — in the same place no doubt, probably a monas tery, where the book was written and first used. After this the volume mu.st have been transmitted to England, where apparently it received yet further additions both at the beginning and end. For at the present day it com mences — and this seems to have been the case in Sir Robert Cotton's time also — with a calendar, followed by rules for calculating the seasons, this part being written in an English hand of the tenth century, and immediately preceding the first set of prayers in Caroline writing. And it concludes with some prayers intended to be used with the Psalms and the following documents in Greek, but written in Latin characters, viz. a Litany, the Lord's Prayer, the Apostles' Creed, and the Ter-sanctus. This part, like that at the commencement, is in an Anglo- Saxon hand of the tenth century, and it immediately follows the second set of prayers in Caroline writing. All ' Thompson, u. s. 128 Documentary Evidence. [ch. this is very curious and interesting. The Apostles' Creed, as it appears here, is of a very ancient type. It has been printed by Dr. Heurtley in his Harmonia Symbolica. Two particulars remain to be noticed respecting the Calendar and the rules subjoined to it. That the Calendar was written in the tenth century, not earlier, is clear not only from the character of the writing, but from the fact of its containing the obit of King Alfred, who died A.D. 900. ' Aelfred rex obiit septenis et quoque amandus.' ' King Aelfred, a man likewise to be loved, died on the seventh of the Calends of November.' Next, the mention of the year 703 in the Appendix, so to call it, to the Calendar was for some time regarded as a proof that the whole MS. was written at that date^; and it has been a subject of some perplexity, since that position was proved to be untenable by the discovery of King Alfred's obit in the Calendar. But the solution of the difficulty is simple and obvious. The date occurs in a rule given for finding the year A.D. from the Indictions, which is as follows : — ' Si vis nosse quot sint anni ab Incarnatione Domini, scito quot fuerint ordines indictionum, ut puta, V. anno Tyberii cesaris eius XLVI. hos per XV. multiplica fiunt DCXC. adde semper regulares Xll. quia IIII. indictionum secundum Dionissiura dominus natus est, indictionem quoque cuius volueris ut puta in presenti .1. fiunt DCCIII. isti sunt anni nativitatis domini.' It is obvious that the date A. D. 703 here mentioned is simply the date when the rule was drawn up, being adduced by the author for the purpose of illustration. It proves nothing in regard to the epoch ^ This was Archbishop Ussher's view ; and in a list of contents written on the verso-side of the fly-leaf of the MS. the first note is : ' Calendarium vetustis- simum Uteris Saxonicia cum ciclis ecclesiasticis. Scriptum fuit anno 703, ut apparet in codice.' HI.] Manuscript Copies. 129 at which the volume was executed, beyond the fact that the part in which it appears could not have been written earlier. This rule is found word for word at the com mencement of the fourteenth chapter of Bede's work De Temporibus, and a few more of the rules contained in our codex are subjoined, slightly abbreviated, which would lead us to suppose that the whole set was probably from his hand. It seems clear from the last chapter (de sexta aetate) of that work that it was written, or at any rate concluded, in the year 708 of our era, for it begins with the statement that that number of years of the sixth age were then past ^ ; and Bede himself dates the commencement of the sixth age from the Nativity of our Lord ^. It is remarkable that the appearance of this rule for finding the year A.D. in this work of Bede's should have escaped notice hit'nerto. Cotton's ownership of the book is attested by his auto graph on the fly-leaf: ' Robertus Cotton Bruceus 1612.' It appears again at the bottom of f 3 r. The fly-leaf also contains the record of an earlier ownership : ' Psalterium regis Ethelstani emptum per Dominum Thomam, Rectorem de Colbrok, Wynton, 1542.' Sir E. M. Thompson says that Thomas Dakcombe, Rector of St. Mary's Colbrok, Winchester, was also Minor Canon of the cathedral. The church of St. Mary Colbrok has I believe perished, and the parish is absorbed in that of St. Maurice. And with regard to the connexion of the book with King ^thelstan, it is described as having been once his property in the table of contents, which is written on the verso side of the fly-leaf of the MS., and which Sir E. M. Thompson apparently regards as authorized, if not drawn up, by Cotton : ' Liber fuit quondam Ethelstani Regis.' Again, ' 'Sexta aetas contiriet annos praeteritos DCCVIII.' ^ Liber de Temporibus, cap. xvi. K 130 Doctimentary Evidence. [ch. on the back of another earlier miniature — f 2 of this volume- has been pasted, probably by Sir R. Cotton, a miniature executed at the end of the fifteenth century, and on this was inscribed in gilt letters, now all but illegible, the title, ' Psalterium Ethelstani regis.' These memoranda are our only authorities for the belief that the book be longed at one time to King Ethelstan. Whether in regard to this Cotton simply followed Dakcombe, or not, must be uncertain. He may not, he may have had some other evidence before him. He was not in all respects a good preserver of the ancient character of the manuscripts which he collected, as his habit of putting them in new bindings necessarily involved sometimes the destruction of the old covers, perhaps also the cutting away of leaves ; and thus indications and traces and records of their early history would be lost. Then the earlier purchaser, the Rector of Colbrok, must have had some grounds for de scribing the book as the Psalter of King Ethelstan. What were they? Looking to the date of his purchase and to the fact of his being a clergyman of Winchester, it is natural to suppose that the book had been the property of one of the recently dissolved abbeys in that ancient, royal, Saxon capital, that in describing it as he did he was but re-echoing the title by which it had been known in its former home, and that this title was based upon the memory, preserved in the traditions and written records of the society, of its being originally the gift of Ethelstan. True this is all conjecture, but I trust legitimate and probable conjecture. Sir E. M. Thompson thinks that this Psalter may have been sent by Otho the Great as a present to Ethelstan, whose sister he married, and that thus it may have come into the possession of the latter sovereign ; and Professor Westwood expresses himself in .] Manuscript Copies. 131 more positively to this effect. Otho is known to have sent another volume to England, which also belongs now to the Cotton Collection. Of course the question concerning the ownership of Ethelstan, interesting as it is, cannot affect in any way the date of the MS. What should be borne in mind in regard to it with reference to our subject, is that originally it consisted only of the Psalter with some preliminary matter and the Canticles, including the Athanasian Creed, and that this was written in the ninth century on the Continent, probably in Germany, the rest of the volume being written in the tenth century, partly abroad and partly in England. A collation of the text of the Quicunque in this MS. will be found in Appendix, Note E. 12. The next MS. copy of the Athanasian Creed, to which I wish to draw attention, is found in a Vatican MS., Pal. 574, containing not a P.salter, but a collection of canons. This codex is assigned by Reifferscheid to the ninth century^ ; and so also it is dated in the authorized catalogue of the Palatine MSS. recently issued^- According to the Ballerini, the collection of canons contained in it is Galilean, and was compiled a little before the middle of the sixth century. And to this are subjoined in the same handwriting some additional documents, including in their number the Athanasian Creed with the title written in capital letters, 'Incipit fides catholica beati atanasi episcopi^.' As this appendix contains no document of ' ' Die Rbmischen Bibliotheken,'- von Dr. Aug. Reifferscheid, in Sitzungs- berichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften^Philosophisch- Historische Classe, Band Ivi. pp. 493-499. '' Codices Palatini descripti a Cardinali Pitra, recensuit Henricus Stevenson. Romae, 1886. ' De antiquis collectionibus canonum tractatus auctoribus Petro et Hiero- K a 132 Documentary Evidence. [ch. a later date than A.D. 756, the above-mentioned learned canonists are of opinion that it was drawn up in the eighth century. The MS. may therefore be adduced as evidence of the existence of the Qtiicunque in that century, though not written till the ninth. It may be worth noticing, particularly as the' Ballerini have passed it over in silence, that the document imme diately preceding the Athanasian Creed is a narrative of the acts of the third Council of Aries, which was held in or about A. D. 455, with respect to a dispute concerning jurisdiction — grande sc and alum it is called — which had arisen between Theodore Bishop of Friuli on the one hand, and Faustus the Abbot and the brethren of Lerins on the other. The Creed is followed by a Capitulare of the year 756, respecting incestuous marriages, and the interrogations addressed by Augustine of Canterbury to Gregory the Great, with the answers of the latter. But the document which is described by the Ballerini as the last in the volume — an excerpt from the Rule of St. Benedict — is no longer to be found : nor could I find, when I inspected the MS. in 1886, the note 'codex S. Nazarii in Laurissa' which, according to the same authorities, was written on the last leaf In fact it is evident on examination that since the time of the Ballerini one or more leaves at the end have been wantonly cut away — a striking proof but I am afraid not a solitary one, how the destruction of ancient documents is continually going on even in large libraries. My chief reason for making mention of this lost note is that it throws light on the earlier history of the MS., showing that it was once the property of the nymo fratribus Balleriniis, pars ii. cap. x. in Galland's De vetustis canonum collectionibus dissertationum sylloge, tom. i ; also in Migne, Patrol. Latino., tom. Ivi. HI.] Manuscript Copies. 133 monastery of St. Nazaire at Lorsch or Lauresham in the diocese of Worms — a monastery which is said to have been unsurpassed as regards the wealth of its manuscripts by any religious house in Germany. Many of these trea sures, our codex no doubt among them, went to enrich the Palatine Library at Heidelberg, which was transferred to the Vatican in 1623, being presented by Maximilian Duke of Bavaria to Pope Gregory XV. The various readings of the Athanasian Creed in this MS., which are very notable, will be found in Appendix, Note E. 13. Denis, in his catalogue of MSS. in the Imperial Library at Vienna, gives an elaborate account of a MS. of the ninth century, containing a dogmatic treatise by Isidore of Seville, and three Confessions of Faith, including the Athanasian Creed ^- It is numbered 269. The volume commences with Isidore's work addressed to Florentina his sister, in two books. This is followed by the title, ' Incipit delude (sic) catholica Athanasi.' Denis suggests that deinde is an error for de fide ; but possibly the copyist may have omitted the word fides inadvertently. Then comes, preceded by a short introduction, the original Nicene Creed, and then a Confession of Faith sometimes, as in the Paris MSS. 2341 and 2076, entitled ' Fides sancti Ambrosii episcopi,' but in Paris 3836, the same manuscript which contains the Treves fragment of a discourse based on the Quicunque, simply headed ' de fide catholica.' Here it has no title. It is as follows : ' Nos patrem et filium et spiritum sanctum unum Deum confitemur. Ita in trinitate perfecta, ut et plenitudo divinitatis sit et unitas potestatis. Nam tres Deos dicit, qui divinitatem separat. Trinitas Pater Deus et Filius Deus et Spiritus Sanctus Deus, et ' Denis, Codices manuscripti theologici Bibliothecae Palatinae Vindoboncnsis, Vindobonae, 1793, vol. i. part i. pp. 962-966. 134 Documentary Evidence. [ch, tres unum sunt. Tres itaque personae, sed una potestas. Ergo diversitas plures facit. Unitas potestatis excludit numeri quantitatem. Quia unitas numerus non est. Sic itaque unus Deus, una fides, unum baptisma. Si quis vero hanc fidem non habet, catholicus non potest dici. Qui catholicam non tenet fidem, alienus est, profanus est, contra veritatem rebellis est.' Immediately after this .comes the Athanasian Creed, likewise without title; and that is succeeded by the commentary upon it, commonly attributed to Venantius Fortunatus, in this case, like the preceding documents, having no title. It is incomplete, ending with the words of the nineteenth verse, ' veritate compellimun' The only other document is a brief tractate concerning the fourfold meaning of Holy Scripture. Denis adds the following note, which is interesting in reference to the earlier ownership of the manuscript : ' Fol. 2, p. I orae inferiori adscriptum : Liber Hegen ecclesie. Hege- nense Collegium Can. Reg. initia sumsit circa an. ii.'35^ Hegenekense Coenobium O. Cist, in Hassia fortasse anti- quius fuit. Utriusque tamen aetatem praestans hie codex, ut dictum, longe excedit.' 14. In the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris is a costly Psalter, written for Charles the Bald when king by one Luithard, whose name is recorded in a verse upon the last page. It belonged for a long time to the Dean and Chapter of Metz, and was presented by them in the year 1674 to the minister Colbert, whose library passed eventually to the Bibliotheque Royale. The date of the volume is determined by the petitions in the Litany, which follows the Canticles and Creed. Charles prays : — ' Ut mihi Karolo a te coronato vitam et prosperitatem et victoriam dones : Ut Hirmindrudim coniugem nostram conservare digneris : Ut liberos nostros conservare digneris.' III.] Manuscript Copies. 135 As Charles married Hirmindrudis in 842, and she died in 869, it is clear from the petition that she might be spared to him that the MS. could not have been written earlier than the former year, nor subsequent to the latter. Silvestre considers the petition for his children a formula rather than an expression of date ; but if it is interpreted literally, we gather from it that the MS. could not have been written before 846, when Charles' eldest son, Louis le Begue, was born ^. The Athanasian Creed occurs in this Psalter in the usual position at the end of the Canticles, and is entitled ' Fides sancti Athanasii.' 15. Another French Psalter, written later in the ninth century, and a book of some importance in reference to its contents as well as the evident care bestowed on its execution, is preserved in the Parker Library at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, the press mark being 272. O. 5. On the top of the first folio is a note in a modern hand : 'hie codex scriptus temporibus Marini et Carlomanni a" Dm 885 ut infra in Litania.' There is some prefatory matter, which is not uncommonly found in Psalters, as in two already mentioned — the Psalter of Charlemagne at Vienna, and the Ethelstan Psalter, viz. the document entitled ' Origo prophetiae David regis,' and commencing ' David filius lesse,' the preface of St. Jerome to the corrected or Galilean Psalter commencing ' Psalterium Romae dudum,' and the preface to the Psalter, sometimes ascribed to St. Augustine, but really Rufinus' translation of St. Basil's preface commencing ' Canticum psalmorum animas decorat.' The Psalter is of the Galilean version. At the end of the 150th Psalm the following appears in ' See Universal Palaeography by M. J. B. Silvestre, translated and edited by Sir F. Madden, vol. i. pp. 339-34 1. 136 Documentary Evidence. [ CH. gold uncials : ' Achadeus misericordia dei comes hunc psalterium scribere iussit.' This occurs on the recto side of a leaf the verso being blank. A long Litany, occupying several leaves, succeeJs, in which it may be noted as an indication of locality that among the saints invoked, Remi- gius, Columbanus, and Abundus are specially honoured, their names being written in gold. Then comes the apocryphal 151st Psalm, but imperfect, beginning ' Pas- cebam oves patris mei ' ; then successively the usual Old Testament Canticles, the Benedicite, the Benedictus, the Magnificat, the Nunc dimittis, the Te Deum entitled ' Hymnum die dominico ad matutinas,' the Gloria in excelsis entitled ' Hymnum Angelicum,' the Athanasian Creed entitled 'Fides Catholica,' the Lord's Prayer, and the Apostles' Creed entitled ' Symbolum.' It will be noticed here that the Athanasian Creed is placed before the Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed, instead of after them according to the usual order. The Canticles are fol lowed by a large collection of prayers, some in particular for use at the several Hours, and by responsories to be sung throughout the year at the various sacred seasons. Some of the petitions in the Litany clearly denote its date and the locality which produced it. Thus— ' Ut Marinum Apostolicum in sancta religione conservare digneris : Ut Karlomannum regem in perpetua prosperitate conservare digneris : Ut Folconem episcopum cum omni grege sibi commisso in tuo apostolico servilio conservare digneris.' Marinus died on January 18, 884, having occupied the papal throne a year and twenty days '. Carloman, son of Louis II, or the Stammerer, became King of Aquitania and part of Burgundy in 880, and sole King of France on the 1 Nolitia historica, apud Mansi, quoted by Migne, PatroL Latina, tom. cxxvi. p. 966. HI.] Manuscript Copies. 137 death of his brother Louis in 882. He died in 884 of a wound received in hunting. Fulco, or Folco, became Bishop or rather Archbishop of Rheims in succession to Hincmar, who died in December, 882. Hence the Litany must have been written in the diocese of Rheims and in the year 883. And hence it would follow that the Psalter also belongs to the same date and locality, were it certain that the Litany was part of the same volume as the Psalter originally. But it is not so. The Litany, coming as it does between the 150th Psalm and the apocryphal 151st, which almost always follows immediately, is apparently an insertion, the normal position for the Litany being after the Canticles, including of course the Creed or Creeds. And what supports this view, is that the leaf containing the initial B of the first Psalm is an insertion, as the Librarian, the Rev. S. S. Lewis, pointed out to me. The 151st Psalm too is imperfect at the commencement, from which it may be inferred that a leaf bearing the title and initial words has been extracted to make way for the Litany. The handwriting also is smaller here than in the leaves immediately preceding and succeeding. Still the handwriting of the Litany corresponds in character with that of the book generally, and the resemblance is particularly marked in the latter part containing the orationes. Both would thus appear to have issued from the same scriptorium and to belong to the same epoch. Possibly the Litany was originally annexed at the end, or was intended to be so ; but for security was afterwards inserted in the place which it now occupies. However this may be, the volume itself is shown by independent evidence to be of the same date and locality as the Litany. For among the orationes for Compline, there is one for King Carloman, who was sole King of France from 882 to 884, 138 Documentary Evidence. [ch. as before mentioned : ' Exaudi Deus Karlomanno regi vita,' Thus the Psalter may be more accurately dated A. D, 883 than A. D. 885, the date assigned to it by the modern note on the first folio. And the fact of the Psalter being written by order of Count Achadeus seems to connect it with Rheims or its neighbourhood, if as we may reasonably suppose, this Count Achadeus was none other than a Count bearing the same name who, according to Flodoard, was threatened with excommunication by Hincmar in the event of his plundering the property of the Church of Rheims'. It will be remembered that Hincmar died in December, 882. That the Psalter was used, as it was no doubt written, in an abbey, we learn from a prayer pro abbate ndstro. 16. At Bamberg in Bavaria is a Psalter of considerable interest, which for several reasons requires to be noticed. It belongs to the beginning of the tenth century, having been finished in the year 909, as appears from some verses on fol. lib. It is a quadruple Psalter, containing the three Latin versions of the Psalter by Jerome, viz. the Galilean, Roman and Hebraic, and in the fourth column the Greek of the LXX written in Latin characters. The Canticles follow, the Te Deum coming after the Apostles' Creed, which is peculiar. The Apostles' Creed is accom panied by a Greek version, and so also is the Te Deum as far as the words ' venerandum tuum.' Then a Litany, the Gloria in excelsis entitled ' Hymnus Angelicus,' and the ' ' Achadeo comiti pro rapinis, quas audiebat ab eius hominibus fieri in ipsius comitatu, et pro villa Spantia, qua ille annonam ecclesiae Remensis auferre disponebat, notificans ei quod, si aliquid inde raperet, tam ipsum quam suos excommunicaret et alienos ab omni Christianitate faceret.' This refers to Hincmar. Flodoardi Historiae Remensis lib. iii. cap. 26, apud Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. cxxv. p. 249. Flodoard drew the materials of his history, Mabillon says, partly from the archives of the Church of Rheims. He also describes it as a work of the greatest merit. Ill •J Manuscript Copies. 139 Nicene Creed entitled 'Fides catholica Niceni concilii,' these three documents being all both in Latin and Greek. The Athanasian Creed closes the volume and has no Greek version, which is noteworthy. It ends with the words ' non confusione substantiae sed,' one or more leaves being lost. The title is ' Fides Catholica a sancto Athanasio episcopo ' : some variant readings of the text will be found in Appendix E ; for these, as for some other particulars respecting this MS., I am indebted to the kindness of the Rev. E. C. S. Gibson, late Principal of the Wells Theological College. On the modern fly-leaf of a Vatican MS., Pal. 39, a note appears signed ' P. Martinucci,' which refers obviously to this quadruple Psalter and throws some light upon its history : ' Folium 43 huius codicis est extractum ex codice praestantissimo Bibliothecae Bambergensis in Bavaria qui est autographus clarissimi Neugarli episcopi Constantiensis et abbatis Gallensis. In praedicto codice Bambergensi continetur Psalterium quadruplex quattuor columnis dis- tinctum et in quarta columna legitur Psalterium Graecum iuxta LXX, Latino tamen charactere conscriptum. Codex ex abbatia Sangallensi ab Henrico Imperatore Sancto nuncupato Cathedrali Bambergensi donatus fuit et modo inter cimilia eiusdem Cathedralis asservatur.' The verses written on this inserted leaf have been printed by Blan- chinius ^. They commence ' Quos sibi pontifices legit Constantia dives, Praesul et Abba simul,' and go on to describe the four versions of the Bamberg Psalter. Pal. 39, it should be added, is also a Psalter, and among its con tents, which are very complete, is the Athanasian Creed : it is assigned in Stevenson's catalogue to the eleventh century, and judging from the saints commemorated in the ' Vindiciae Lanonicarum Scripturarum, Romae, 1740, p. cell. 140 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Calendar, must have been written in Germany, probably in Bavaria. 17. I must next draw attention to some MSS. containing the Athanasian Creed which were written in England in the tenth century, and which are necessarily important in reference to the early use of the Creed in our own Church and country. The first to be noticed, as it is probably the earliest, is a British Museum MS., Bib. Reg. 2. B. v. The greater part of this volume is occupied by a Psalter, written in the early part of the tenth century and in a distinctly English hand, at one time the property of Archbishop Cranmer, whose autograph — Thomas Cantua- rieiis — appears at the top of its initial page. The autograph of a later owner. Lord Lumley, is written at the bottom of the same page. The Psalter does not commence the book, being preceded by six leaves containing hymns and prayers, which could not have belonged to it originally, inasmuch as they are written in a different and a later hand, believed by Mr. Bond, formerly Keeper of the MSS. in the British Museum, as he stated to me, to be of the eleventh century. Probably these leaves were not united to the Psalter till after Cranmer's time, whose autograph is not found upon them. On the other hand, as the first of them bears the autograph of Lord Lumley, they may have been bound up with it by him. The Psalter is Roman, and it has an interlinear Saxon gloss or version, and marginal notes in Latin. It is worth noting that the apocryphal 151st Psalm is omitted. The Old Testament Canticles are assigned respectively to the various week-days on which they were used, as for instance, ' Canticum Ezechi^ regis feria ii.' Then follow the Benedicite entitled ' Hymnus trium puerorum in camino cantantium,' Benedictus, Magni ficat, Nunc dimittis entitled ' Canticum Symeonis quando Ill ] Manuscript Copies. 141 portavit Ihesum Christum in ulnis suis.* Next the Athana sian Creed with the remarkable title, ' Hymnus Athanasii de fide Trinitatis, quem tu concelebrans discutienter in- tellege.' At the end of the second verse, but written in the margin, occurs the rubric, ' Incipit de fide.' Dr. Swainson considered the position of these words to be very significant, as implying that the two first verses are of a supplementary character, a mere setting of the Creed. But there can be no doubt they were placed where they are simply for convenience sake. It is not uncommon in MSS. to find a word or two, which could not be brought in at the end of the line to which they properly belong, inserted in a vacant space at the end of another line, where of course they are separated from their context. That this was the case here, we have a proof in the fact that in a Salisbury tenth-century Psalter, which we shall very shortly notice, where the Athanasian Creed has the same peculiar title as in this MS., it is immediately followed by these very same words, ' Incipit de fide.' A collation of the text of the Creed will be found in Appendix E. It is accompanied by marginal notes, which bear an obvious connexion with a Commentary upon it, or rather collection of notes, which I printed on a former occasion from a Paris MS. of the beginning of the tenth century^, and I have now reproduced in Appendix I. After the Quicunque comes the Gloria in excelsis, which has also a peculiar title, ' Oratio pura cum laudatione.' It will be noticed that the Lord's Prayer, the Apostles' Creed, the Te Deum and the apocryphal 151 st Psalm are all absent from this Psalter. All the Canticles, including the Quicunque and Gloria in excelsis, have an interlinear Saxon version or gloss. ' Early History of the Athanasian Creed, by G. D. W, Ommanney, pp, 42, 43, and Appendix to the same volume, pp. 376-386. 142 Doctimentary Evidence. [ch. 18. Lambeth, 427. If this manuscript belongs to the ninth century, the date assigned to it by the catalogue of MSS. at Lambeth, it is the earliest MS. written in England which contains the Athanasian Creed. But Wanley in his account of Anglo-Saxon MSS. places it in the time of Edgar or a little before^. And as Edgar came to the throne A.D. 959, it may be fairly set down as belonging to the middle of the tenth century, supposing this opinion to be correct. The MS., which is imperfect at the begin ning, commences with the treatise respecting the Psalms, which is frequently found in Psalters among the pre liminary documents — Rufinus' translation of St. Basil's preface to the Psalms having for initial words, ' Canticum psalmorum animas decorat.' After a prayer to be used before the recital of the Psalms comes a Calendar, which is apparently an insertion, being written in a different and later hand. Then the Psalter, with an interlinear Saxon version or gloss. It is Galilean, and has the obeli and asterisks. The apocryphal 151st Psalm follows, but with out any interlinear Saxon gloss. Then a form of Con fession, both in Latin and Saxon, entitled ' Confessio pro peccatis ad Deum.' This is written in a different hand. The Canticles follow in the original hand, first the usual Old Testament Canticles, then successively the Te Deum entitled ' Hymnum ad matutinis diebus dominicis,' Bene dicite, Benedictus, Magnificat, the Lord's Prayer entitled ' Oratio Dominica secundum Mattheum,' the Apostles' Creed, Gloria in excelsis entitled ' Canticus angelicus,' and, lastly, the Athanasian Creed entitled ' Fides catholica sancti Athanasii episcopi.' All these have an interlinear 1 ' Codex membranaceus Eadgari regis Anglo-Saxonum temporibus aut paulo ante exaratus.' Humfredi Wanleii Librorum septentrionalium Catalogus, p. 269. It is subjoined to Hickes' Thesaurus. Ill .] Manuscript Copies. 143 Saxon version or gloss. A Litany is added in a later hand, containing among the saints invoked some English names, as Dunstan, Odilo, Guthlac, Margareta, and some petitions which show the conventual use of the book, viz. ' Ut episcopos et abbates nostros et omnes congregationes illis commissas in sancta religione conservare digneris : , Ut regularibus disciplinis nos instruere digneris, Te rogamus : Ut locum istum et omnes habitantes in eo visitare et consolari digneris.' 19. A third English Psalter of the tenth century is deposited in the Cathedral Library at Salisbury, numbered 150. It is little, if at all, later than the Lambeth Psalter, the date being indicated not only by the handwriting but by a table of epacts and indictions extending from A. D. 969 to 1006. Hence Sir E. M. Thompson, in the catalogue of the Salisbury MSS., which is his work, assigns it to the second half of the tenth century. The account of this MS. in the second volume of the Palaeographical Society's publications describes it as ' written in Saxon minuscules about A.D. 969.' The Psalter is preceded by a Calendar as well as the table just mentioned : it is Galilean with an interlinear Saxon gloss, and is followed by the ' Pusillus eram' or the apocryphal 151st Psalm, which has no gloss. Then comes a prayer to be used after reciting the Psalter, beginning ' Omnipotens et misericors Deus.' This is marked as the conclusion of the Psalms by the rubric ' Explicit Liber Psalmorum,' Then follow in succession the Benedicite, Magnificat, Benedictus, Te Deum, Nunc dimittis, Gloria in excelsis, the Lord's Prayer, the Apostles' Creed, and the Athanasian Creed. All these have an interlinear Saxon version or gloss. It is worthy of notice that although the order of the New Testament Canticles and Quicunque and Gloria in excelsis in this Psalter differs from that in the British Museum Psalter, Bib. Reg. 2. B. v, 144 Documentary Evidence. [ch. and although the latter omits the Te Deum, the Lord's Prayer, and Apostles' Creed, while the former contains them, and although further the latter is a Roman and the former a Galilean Psalter, still those Canticles as well as the Athanasian Creed and Gloria in excelsis, which are common to the two books, have in both the same peculiar titles. This is a striking proof that the Galilean and Roman Psalters both existed and were both in use in England in Saxon times ; and it also shows a certain con nexion between these two books. Possibly they both proceeded from the same scriptorium ; or the writer of the Salisbury book may have had before him at once a Gal ilean Psalter which he followed in the Psalms and a Roman Psalter similar to the British Museum book from whence he derived these peculiar titles of the Benedicite, New Testament Canticles, the Quicunque, and Gloria in excelsis. In the MS. before us, as before mentioned, the words ' Incipit de fide ' immediately follow the title of the Athanasian Creed, ' Hymnus Athanasii de fide Trinitatis quem tu discutienter intellege.' The two sentences are written together in three lines before the commencement of the Creed. The Athanasian Creed is succeeded by a Litany, which contains petitions similar to those which I quoted from the Lambeth Psalter. The inference of course is that this also was a monastic Psalter. The Litany comprises names of both French and English saints. Among the latter are ^Elfeagus, Albanus, Eadmundus, Os- waldus, Cuthbertus, Dunstanus, Guthlacus ; and as jElfeage was martyred in the year i0J2,the Litany cannot be earlier than the eleventh century. It appears to have been com menced by the original hand ; but this was erased. Sir E. M. Thompson says, and it was recommenced and finished in a hand of the twelfth century. .] Manuscript Copies. 145 III Some passages from the book of Job are added at the end in handwriting of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Two facsimiles of this interesting MS., one from the Calendar, the other from the Psalms, are printed in the second volume of the Palaeographical Society's publica tions, plates 188, 189. According to the description of the catalogue, which is, as I have already said, by Sir E. M. Thompson, the interlinear gloss from the beginning of the Psalms to the beginning of the Litany is of contemporary date, A note respecting it, which I think worth recording, appears on the fly-leaf signed ' H. Hatcher, Salisbury, Jan. i, 183 1.' It is as follows: 'The Anglo-Saxon interpretation is not a literal translation, but merely the Anglo-Saxon word answering to the Latin word without any regard to the sense or the structure of the former language.' Similarly our eminent English scholar, Mr. Skeat, remarks : ' The object of the gloss was to enable an Englishman reading to understand it. It is not a translation, nor could it be used inde pendently of the Latin, as the words are out of order ; for they follow the Latin order, and do not receive their proper inflexional endings, such as would allow them to form sentences. Yet the meaning is quite clear, and we can hence infer what a translation would have been like ^.' These remarks are of great value as showing the nature and use of the gloss in these Psalters of the tenth century, and also found in Psalters of the succeed ing century, as Arundel 60 and Cambridge University Library Ff i. 23, A collation of the text of the Quicunque in this MS. will be found in Appendix E. 20. The next copy of the Athanasian Creed I shall refer ' The Creeds of the Church, by C. A. Swainson, p. 484. L 146 Documentary Evidence. [ch. to does not appear in a Psalter, but in a collection of Formularies or Confessions of Faith. Paris Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin 2341, is a bulky volume comprising apparently three originally distinct parts, but written throughout in handwriting of the same character. It is assigned to the ninth century by the catalogue, but by the present authorities of the MS. de partment in the Bibliotheque is not considered to be earlier than the tenth. The second part of this volume contains first the ' Tractatus contra quinque haereses ' attributed to St. Augustine. Its genuineness is denied by the Bene dictine editors of that Father's works, who have in con sequence relegated it to their Appendix^. Then comes ' Altercatio Athanasii episcopi contra Arrium,' which is edited among the works of Vigilius Tapsensis. This is succeeded by a series of Confessions of Faith preceded by the following list of titles : ' i. Exemplar fidei catholice Niceni concilii. ii. Fides catholica a san.ctis patribus exposita. iii. Damnatio blasphemiae Arrii. iili. Fides catholica dicta a sancto Athanasio episcopo Alexan drino. V. Fides catholica dicta a sancto Iheronimo (sic) presbitero. vi. Fides catholica dicta a sancto Gregorio Caesariensis (sic) episcopo. vii. Fides catholica ab orto doxis patribus exposita. viii. Fides catholica sancti Valeriani episcopi. villi. Fides catholica sancti Gregorii maioris. x. Fides catholica a Sanctis patribus exposita. xi. Fides catholica sancti Ambrosii episcopi. xii. Dogma sanctorum patrum trecentorum x. et viii. episcoporum. The fourth of these is of course the Quicunque, which occurs on f 149 with the title, slightly varied from the above, ' Fides dicta a sancto Athanasio episcopo. The fifth, the title of which in the heading of its text ' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xlii. p. iioi. Ill J Manuscript Copies. 147 similarly varies from that which it bears in the above list, catholica being omitted, is not, it must be noted, the confession commonly described as ' Hieronymi fides,' but another generally designated ' Damasi Symbolum.' It represents the Holy Spirit as proceeding ' de Patre.' The sixth entitled in the heading of the text ' Exemplar fidei catholicae Gregorii Caesariensis episcopi,' is the Confes sion of Gregory Thaumaturgus which was translated by Rufinus. The seventh, entitled in the heading of the text ' Exemplar fidei catholice,' is the Confession frequently entitled ' Fides Romanorum ' or ' Fides ecclesiae Romanae.' It has much in common with the ' Damasi Symbolum,' but is still a distinct document ^- The eighth commences 'Audi Israel,' and asserts the equality of the Three Divine Persons. The eleventh, ' Fides catholica sancti Ambrosii episcopi ' — previously referred to — is sometimes entitled in MSS. ' Expositio fidei catholicae contra haeresim Ar- rianam V sometimes ' De fide catholica ' as in Paris, Latin, 3836. It begins ' Nos patrem et filium et spiritum sanc tum confitemur,' and ends ' Adversus veritatem rebellis.' The last, the title of which is more fully given in the heading of the document ' Dogma sanctorum patrum trecentorum decem et octo episcoporum congregatis (sic) aput Niceam Bithiniae,' is none other than the Liber de ecclesiasticis dogmatibus commonly attributed to Gennadius, and frequently in MSS. attributed to St. Augustine, but printed in the Appendix to his works by the Benedictine editors, as not being genuine. The title is remarkable, and ^ For some account of these two Confessions I may be permitted to refer to my work. Early History of the Athanasian Creed, pp. 202-212 : in the same volume. Appendix H, pp. 398-402, the text of both is printed from Paris MSS. ^ See Quesnelli, Dissertatio II de variis fidei libellis, printed by Galland in De vetustis Canonum collectionibus dissertationum sylloge, tom. i. Magontiaci, 1790. L 3 148 Documentary Evidence. [ch, seems to be an amplification of a similar title applied to the same document in another and earlier Paris MS., Latin, 10612: 'Doctrina dogma. (sic) ecclesiastica secundum Nicenum concilium.' If so, we are led to understand it as intended to imply no more than a doctrinal agreement of this formulary with the Nicene Council. These Confessions or Formularies of Faith are followed in this MS. by several works relating to doctrine and dogma which it is needless to mention in detail. The same series of Confessions of Faith appears in another Paris MS., No. 2076 — of the tenth century. The two MSS. clearly have a close connexion, as they not only share in common these formularies, but other documents also, arranged in the same order. At the same time each has some matter not found in the other. A collation of the text of the Athanasian Creed from Paris, 2075, is supplied in the Appendix, Note E. 21. Vat. 82 is an absolutely unique Psalter. It is so in the first place as regards the text, which is quite peculiar, having been constructed for the occasion, as we learn from the preface, in which the compositor states the principles on which his revision was based, and explains the meaning of certain signs adopted for the purpose of indicating his alterations of the text. His object was to remove what was superfluous, and to insert what was congruous ; and in the work of emendation he had been guided by the authority of Greek Psalters, where they were not at variance with Jerome. This Psalter is unique, secondly, in regard to the Canticles, their selection and arrangement, as well as their text. They are entitled ' Cantica prophetarum,' and are as follows: i. 'Canticum Esaie prophete,' being Isaiah xxvi. verses 9-20 inclusive, beginning < De nocte vigilat spiritus mens.' 2. ' Canticum seu oratio Annae,' the song HI.] Manuscript Copies. 149 of Hannah. 3. ' Canticum seu oratio Abbacuc prophetae.' 4. ' Canticum lonah prophetae,' beginning ' Clamavi ad dominum deum meum.' 5. ' Canticum Deuteronomii,' the song of Moses beginning 'Attende caelum et loquar.' 6. ' Canticum Exodi,' the song of Moses beginning ' Cantemus Domino.' 7. ' Canticum beatae Mariae,' the Magnificat. 8. ' Hymnus trium puerorum,' beginning ' Benedictus es domine deus patrum meorum,' ending ' Benedicant te caeli, maria, et omnia quae in eis sunt, et laudabilis et super- exaltatus es in saecula.' 9. 'Ymnum trium puerorum,' beginning ' Benedicite omnia opera,' ending ' Hymnum benedicamus et superexaltemus eum in saecula.' 10. ' Hymnum in honore trinitatis,' the Te Deum ending 'gloriam munerari. Per singulos dies benedicimus te, et laudamus nomen tuum in eternum et in saeculum saeculi. Salvum fac populum tuum, domine, et benedic hereditatem tuam. Et rege illos, et extoUe eos usque in aeternum. Benedictus es domine deus patrum meorum et laudabilis et gloriosus in saecula saeculorum.' It will be observed that these do not correspond, whether in selection or order, with the ordinary Canticles in Latin Psalters, nor yet with those usually found in the Office of the Eastern Church, which I shall mention by-and-by. But they are all, with the exception I believe of the Song of Moses in Deutero nomy, used in the Ambrosian Office, and the four first are appointed under that rite to be said at Matins on Sunday^ The text of the Canticles is no less peculiar than that of the Psalter itself, being constructed apparently upon the same principles, and characterized alike by the various signs of emendation, which are described in the Preface. And lastly, this Psalter is unique as regards the position of the Athanasian Creed. The Te Deum is followed by ' See article on Psalmody in Dictionary of Christian Antiquities. 150 Documentary Evidence. [ch. a variety of hymns for the Hours, for the great festivals, for the commemoration of particular saints, of saints in general, and confessors and virgins, for the dedication of a church, for imploring fine weather and rain, and in time of war. And then comes the Athanasian Creed entitled ' Fides catholica quam sanctus Athanasius dicta- vit.' For a collation of the text I refer to the Appendix. The last documents are ' Exorcismus sancti Ambrosii,' ' Consideratio psalmorum in causis diversis,' apparently a classification of the Psalms according to their subject- matter, and ' Confessio sancti Augustini episcopi.' The preface to this Psalter has been printed by Vezzosi in his edition of Thomasius's works, the second volumel In the same volume he has also printed the text of some of the Canticles and collations of others. He describes the 128th as ' Psalterii antiquam versionem Origenianis aliisque signis notatam exhibens.' What was the locality which produced this singular and therefore interesting Psalter? Its obvious unlikeness to Roman and Galilean Psalters clearly forbids us to seek for its home in Southern or Central Italy, or England, or Germany, or Gaul. The compositor expresses a desire to adhere to the custom of his province, which would appear to imply that it possessed a peculiar traditional use of its own. He does not mention the province by name ; but it would seem to be identified with that of which Milan was the head and metropolitical Church, by ' Thomasii Opera omnia, tom. ii., continens Psalterium, recensuit A. F. Vezzosi, Romae, 1747. The preface commences on page xx, with the following foot-note referring to it : ' Nullo praemisso titulo aut inscriptione illud anti quitatis fragmentum legitur in nostro iam indicato Vaticano MS. Idem frag- mentum inscriptum Prologus Psalterii habemus beneficio amplissimi Cardinalis Passionei ex apographo ipsius cura descripto anno 1723, ex codice x. secuh Bibliothecae Bavaricae.' HI.] Manuscript Copies. 151 the fact of the close relationship of the Canticles as found in this book with those of the Ambrosian rite, and also by the fact of several Milanese saints being commemo rated in the hymns. Thus there are hymns in honour of Victor Nabor and Felix, who are described as 'pii Mediolani martyres,' of Nazarius and Celsus also martyrs of Milan, of ' sanctus Dionysius episcopus ' and ' sanctus Simplicianus episcopus,' both of whom were early Bishops of Milan, the former before 360 A.D., the latter in 400. It is impossible to assign a precise date to the compilation of this Psalter ; but, as the Bavarian MS. from a copy of which Vezzosi printed the preface belonged to the tenth century, it is a necessary inference that the Psalter could not have been compiled subsequently to that epoch, and probably was in existence prior to it. I cannot quote any palaeographical authority in regard to the date of the Vatican MS. ; it did not appear to me to be earlier than the tenth century. 22. Vat. 84 is a very complete and magnificent Psalter, according to Vezzosi ' circa x. seculum scriptus ^.' The Psalms are preceded by a variety of documents, embracing ' Sancti Hieronymi epistola ad Sunniam et Fretelam de Psalterio,' ' Prologus Hieronymi Presbyteri ad Paulam et Eustochium,' ' Sermo sancti Hieronymi de Psalterio,' ' Epistola Damasi episcopi urbis Romae ad Hieronymum Presbyterum,' ' Rescriptum eiusdem,' ' Epistola Hieronymi ad Damasum Papam,' ' Dicta sancti Augustini de propria eloquejitia Psalterii,' ' Item Sancti Augustini quid sit Psalterium,' ' Item dicta sancti Augustini de virtute Psalmo rum ' — the preface of St. Basil commencing ' Canticum Psalmorum animas decorat,' ' Consideratio Psalmorum in causis diversis,' ' Exordia vel tituli Psalmorum.' The ' See Thomasii Opera, Romae, 1747, vol. ii. p. xviii. 152 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Psalms are preceded by a picture of the Lamb bearing the Cross surrounded by four saints. They are of the Roman version with some Galilean readings ; and each one has a prologue and is followed by a prayer. After the Psalms, or rather the apocryphal 151st Psalm, come the usual Old Testament Canticles, and then successively the Benedicite, the Te Deum entitled ' Canticum Sancto rum Ambrosii et Augustini,' the Benedictus, the Magnificat entitled ' Canticum beatissimae Genitricis Dei Mariae,' the Nunc dimittis, the Athanasian Creed entitled 'Fides Catho lica edita a beato Athanasio episcopo,' the Lord's Prayer, the Gloria in excelsis, the Apostles' Creed entitled 'Simbolum Apostolorum,' the Constantinopolitan Creed with the Filioque entitled very remarkably ' Perfecta credulitas.' All these, including the Old Testament Canticles, are followed by a prayer. Then comes ' Prologus Prudentii de flores (sic) Psalmorum,' and then a picture of the Crucifixion, which is followed by the title ' Orationes ad adorandam crucem sive ad deposcenda suffragia sanctorum.' But before the devotions to the saints another series of prayers to be used in connexion with the several Canticles and Creeds, including the Quicunque vult, occurs. Among the prayers to the saints the following addressed to St. Benedict calls for notice : ' Obsecro te, beatissime Bene- dicte dilecte Dei, intercede pro servo tuo abbate et omni hac congregatione et loco isto et pro omni populo Christiano, ut nos omnes hie sub tuo magisterio congregati .... custodiantur (sic) in omni religione et sanctitate. Intercede etiam pro me servo tuo, ut purget Deus cor meum et actus meos a cunctis viciis. Tribuat mihi servare cuncta, quae docuisti et custodire sanctae regulae tuae tramitem, quem me servaturum spopondi, ut mee professionis ex- secutor effectus merear ad superna celorum gaudia cum Ill ] Manuscript Copies. 153 Sanctis perpetuum victurus pervenire.' Then follow a prayer of St. Gregory (Pope), prayers for the Hours, and a Litany. From the prayer quoted above for obedience to the rule of St. Benedict, taken in connexion with the fact of the Psalms belonging to the Roman version and with the names of the saints invoked in the Litany, it is evident that this Psalter must have been used in a Benedictine monastery situated in Central Italy, and not improbably in Rome or its neighbourhood. A collation of the text of the Athanasian Creed in this MS. also will be found in Appendix E. 23. As the use of the Athanasian Creed in our own country is a subject necessarily of special interest to our selves, I am unwilling to close my notice of MSS. con taining it without drawing attention to a few English Psalters of the eleventh century in which it is found. In the Cambridge University Library is a Psalter described by Wanley, and considered by him to have been written shortly before the Norman Conquest '. It is sometimes placed a- little earlier. The press mark is Ff i. 23. On the inside of the cover of this volume appear the arms of Sir Nicholas Bacon, Lord Keeper of the Great Seal in the reign of Elizabeth, and underneath is written a memo randum of his presentation of the book to the University Library, as follows : ' N. Bacon eques auratus et magni sigilli Angliae custos librum hunc Bibliothecae Cantabrig. dicavit. 1574.' From a note on the fly-leaf made appa rently by Bacon himself we learn that it was bequeathed to him by Archbishop Parker : ' This booke was be queathed by the right reverend father Matthewe archbishop of Canterburye to Sir Nicholas Bacon knight, L. Keeper &c., 1 Wanleii . . . catalogus, p. 152. 154 Documentary Evidence. [ch. who do give the same to the University of Cambridge.' The date therefore assigned to the presentation of the book to the Library must be inaccurate, as Archbishop Parker did not die till May 17, 1575, and his will is dated April 15 in the same year. The Psalter, it must be noted, is a Roman Psalter, and is accompanied throughout by an interlinear Saxon gloss written in rubric. It is preceded by a picture of David playing on a harp, with Asaph, Eman, Ethan, and Idithun, There is no preliminary matter beyond some ' Orationes et preces ante Psalterium.' Just before the fifty-first Psalm, or the fifty-second according to our own version, occurs another picture — a representation of the Crucifixion : the Blessed Virgin and St. John stand on either side of the cross, and the sun and moon, as is commonly the case, are pourtrayed above. The apocryphal 151st Psalm is omitted. The usual Old Testament Canticles, the Bene dicite, the Magnificat, the Benedictus follow in order, all of them without titles, but all accompanied, like the Psalms, by a Saxon gloss. The Te Deum, the Nunc dimittis, the Gloria in excelsis, the Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed, which come next, it is remarkable are not glossed, but the last four have their usual titles. The Athanasian Creed, which follows that of the Apostles', has an inter linear Saxon gloss, but no title. This gloss or version of the Quicunque was printed by Dr. Swainson in his work on the Creeds^ from a copy made by Mr. Skeat. A Litany succeeds to the Athanasian Creed, containing invocations to several English saints, in which the usual petition for the Pope is followed immediately by another for 'our Archbishop and the flock committed to him,' and this is in turn followed by another in the usual form for the ' pp. 484-486. III.] Manuscript Copies. 155 religious house where the Litany was used and its in habitants. This petition for our Archbishop followed by another suitable to a monastic establishment, coupled with the fact of the book having been at one time the property of Archbishop Parker, leads to the inference that either St. Augustine's Abbey, or Christ Church, i. e. the Cathedral Church at Canterbury, which was also it must be re membered a monastery at least from the end of the tenth century, was its birthplace. The circumstance of its being a Roman Psalter would dispose us to think that it may with more probability be assigned to the former. The Cotton MS. Vespasian A. i, commonly called St. Augustine's Psalter, which formerly belonged to St. Au gustine's Abbey, and is believed to have been written there about A.D. 700, is a Roman Psalter. On the other hand, Arundel 155, which certainly had its original home in Christ Church, Canterbury, and was probably written there, is a Galilean Psalter. A collation of the text of the Athanasian Creed in this MS. is given in Appendix E. 24. The Parker MS. CCCXCI. in the Library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, is also a Psalter, written about the time of the Norman Conquest according to Wanley, who gives the following account of it : ' Codex crassus in 8™ circa annum Domini 1064 exaratus, ut fas est coniicere ex tabulis nonnullis et ex scriptura codicis, qui quondam pertinuit etiam ad ecclesiam Wigorniensem, sicuti fidem facit haec inscriptio super imam partem paginae primae Uteris recentioribus Liber sanctae Mariae Wigorniensis ecclesiae per sanctum Oswaldum.' Then he adds : ' Verba quaedam abrasa quorum loco haec scripsif lohannes locelinus : Est ementita inscriptio, nam post Oswaldi 156 Documentary Evidence. [ch. mortem librum fuisse scriptum hinc patet, quod in eo sunt preces dicendae in festo translationis Oswaldi^'. This description has been borrowed evidently by Nasmith in his catalogue of the Parker MSS., with the two exceptions that he inserts between codicis and qtti the words cui titulus Portiforium Oszvaldi et and omits etiam after pertinuit. The title ' Portiforium Oswaldi ' Wanley prefixes to his description. The inscription referred to by him appears still at the bottom of the first page of this book. That it never belonged to St. Oswald is clear from the facts that the feast of his translation and also that of Arch bishop .^Ifeage, whose martyrdom took place a.d. 1012, are mentioned in the Calendar. St. Oswald was Archbishop of York and Bishop of Worcester, and died A. D. 992. He left his mark in the cathedral of the latter city by removing the secular clergy and introducing monks in their place, as ^thelwold did about the same time at Winchester. Jocelin, who notices as stated by Wanley the error of the inscription in implying that the cathedral church at Worcester was indebted to the munificence of St. Oswald for the Psalter, was the Secretary of Archbishop Parker. The Psalter is preceded by a Calendar, which would appear from the numerous festivals of English saints contained in it to have been compiled in England. The Psalms belong to the Galilean version. In no case are they preceded or followed by a prayer, and some are without a title. They are followed by the apocryphal 151st Psalm. Then follow in succession the usual Old Testament Canticles, the Te Deum, the Benedicite, the Benedictus, the Magnificat, the Gloria in excelsis, the Apostles' Creed, and the Athanasian — all without title. ' Wanleii Librorum Septe7itrionalium . . . catalogus, p. no. It is the second volume in Hickes' Thesaurus printed at Oxford, 1705. HI.] Manuscript Copies. 157 After the Quicunque a Litany is added containing invocations to numerous English saints, and immediately after the petition for the Pope and all orders in the Church the following : ' Ut episcopum nostrum et gregem sibi commissum ; ut congregationes omnium sanctorum in tuo sancto servitio conservare ; . . . Ut locum istum et omnes habitantes in eo visitare et consolari digneris te rogamus.' The Litany is written in a different hand apparently from the preceding part. Some hymns follow, in which the original hand seems to be resumed, headed by the title : ' Hymni Ambrosiani per singulas horas secundum constitutionem patris nostri Benedicti.' The book is con cluded by a large collection of collects, prayers, capitula, embracing prayers for use in every part and chamber of the monastery. While it is perfectly clear that the note on the first page is in error in connecting this psalter with St. Oswald, on the other hand there are no grounds whatever for rejecting the testimony therein given that it was 'Liber sanctae Mariae Wigorniensis ecclesiae.' On the contrary it contains much to confirm us in thinking that the cathedral church of Worcester, which was dedicated to St. Mary, and the Benedictine monastery connected with it, were the home where it was written and used. The petitions of the Litany which I have quoted, one being for our Bishop, the other the usual formula in a monastery — the hymns for the Hours in accordance with the rule of our Father Benedict — the prayers for use in the several parts of the religious house — the feast of the translation of St. Oswald Archbishop, which does not appear to have been generally observed in England, if we may judge from its non occurrence in the Calendar of the Sarum Breviary — these are all evidences pointing in the same direction. 158 Documentary Evidence. [ CH. For a collation of the text of the Athanasian Creed in this MS. also I refer to Appendix E. 25. A third English Psalter of the same epoch as the two last mentioned I am desirous to notice, because its birthplace can be traced to a different locality — a place of greater importance and influence at the time both civilly and ecclesiastically than Worcester or even Canterbury. Arundel 60 is assigned by the Catalogue of the Arundel MSS. in the British Museum to the end of the eleventh century ; Wanley is of opinion that it was written during the reign of Edward the Confessor. It begins with a Calendar which is remarkable as containing a great number of festivals of early Winchester bishops or saints or of events connected with them — not only the well-known Winchester bishop and saint, Swithun, but ^Ifgytha regina, Haedda episcopus, Rumpaldus confessor, Byrnstanus episcopus : we have also 'Translatio sancti Birini episcopi,' 'Translatio sancti .(EJ^elpoldi episcopi,' and ' Depositio sancti Birini episcopi.' The Psalms are preceded by a picture of the Crucifixion ; the Blessed Virgin and St. John stand at the foot of the cross on either side, the sun and the moon are represented above, and our Lord's body is vested from the waist to the knees ; the feet too are separately nailed. The Psalms are of the Galilean version, and they are accompanied throughout by an interlinear Saxon gloss or version. The fifty-first Psalm — the fifty-second in our version — is preceded by another picture of the Crucifixion : in this St. Mary and St. John do not appear, and in their places on either side of the cross are what seem to be intended as representations of stems of trees without leaves ; the usual symbols of the sun and moon are also wanting ; the body of our Lord is bent, and is vested, as in the other case from the waist to the knees. The picture is ni.] Manuscript Copies. 159 surrounded by a decorated border. Professor Westwood in his Facsimiles has given an account of these two pictures and a facsimile of the second. The apocryphal 151st Psalm follows the Psalms: then come the usual Old Testament Canticles, the Benedicite, the Magnificat, the Benedictus, the Te Deum with the remarkable title 'Ymnum sancti Viceti episcopi diebus dominicis ad matutinis,' the Nunc dimittis, the Gloria in excelsis, the Lord's Prayer, the Apostles' Creed, and the Athanasian with the title ' Fides Catholica Athanasi Alexandrini.' All these, as well as the Psalms, have an interlinear .Saxon gloss or version. A Litany follows containing numerous invocations to English saints : the Welsh saint Congar and the Irish saint Patrick are also among the saints addressed: the name of the latter, it may be added, is found too in the Calendar. After the usual petition for the Pope in the Litany there follows immediately, as might be expected in a Litany used in the royal and capital city of Winchester, a petition for our King and princes, and then another for ottr Bishop and the flock committed to him. It is not so in the two last-mentioned Psalters. In the first of these, used at Canterbury, the petition for the Pope is, as we saw, followed immediately by a petition for the Archbishop and his flock, and in the second used at Worcester it is followed immediately by a petition for the Bishop and his flock. After the Litany some prayers are added. The end of the Litany and some of the leaves containing the prayers are written in a different, and apparently rather later, hand from the preceding portion of the book. The last leaf written in yet another hand, comprises, first notes respecting the six ages of the world, and then a list of West Saxon Bishops: 'Nomina episcoporum occidentalium Saxonum.' These are arranged in two divisions, the first of which i6o Documentary Evidence. [ch, obviously consists of the Bishops of Dorchester, beginning with Birinus and ending with Hsedda, both of whose names appear, as has been noticed, in the Calendar of this Psalter, Haedda, Dean Kitchin says ^, migrated to Winchester, carry ing with him the bones of St, Birinus : and the ' Translatio' and ' Depositio ' of the Apostle of Winchester and first Bishop of Wessex were necessarily famous events in the early annals of the Church of Winchester, and noted in her Calendar, The second division of this list of West-Saxon Bishops after a few words, some of which are illegible but which refer apparently to the transference of the bishopstool to Winchester, commences with Daniel and ends with Walkelin, who became Bishop soon after the accession of William the Conqueror and died A.D. 1098. In this divi sion are found the names of Rumpald, Byrnstan, Aj^elpold, which are also in the Calendar. I have mentioned these particulars as clearly connecting the book with Winchester. And it would be natural to assume that they connect it also with the cathedral church of Winchester, the Old Minster of St. Swithun. But I have noticed a further trace of this connexion, which does not appear to me insignificant. Among the prayers which follow the Litany is a long one addressed to St. Nicholas, who is also com memorated in the Calendar, his name being distinguished by being written in capital letters. A few days after I first inspected this Psalter I happened to visit Winchester Cathedral, and my attention being necessarily drawn to the very interesting Norman font, I was informed that the curious sculptures carved upon it have for their subject the legendary history of that saint. With this evidence of a common cultus before me, the thought was brought home to my mind in a very real manner that the designer of the ' Historic Towns, Winchester, p. 8. III.] Manuscript Copies. i6i font and the compositor of the British Museum MS., which had interested me so recently, must have been, if not one and the same person, at any rate members and brethren of the same household — that which formerly had its home beneath the walls of the glorious temple where I was standing, and worshipped at its altars. It only remains to add, that Professor Westwood in his notice of this book, before alluded to, speaks of the drawings and decorations with which it is enriched being in the .style of Winchester volumes. 26. The Bodleian MS., Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, is a very complete Psalter, assigned by the catalogue to the eleventh century, originally used, as it appears, in some Benedictine monastery in Central or Northern Italy, but not in the diocese of Milan. The Psalms are preceded by several documents, including a Calendar, nearly all of which are found also in Vat. 84, previously noticed, but they are not arranged in the same order. It is a Roman Psalter ; and each Psalm is accompanied by the proper title, and an exposition and prayer The apocryphal 151st Psalm follows. Then the usual Old Testament Canticles, each with a note of the day of the week on which it is used, and to each a prayer is appropriated. They are entitled ' Cantica prophetarum.' Then successively the Benedicite, the Benedictus, the Magnificat, the Gloria in excelsis, each likewise with a prayer annexed. Then the Nunc dimittis, the Apostles' Creed, the Constantinopolitan Creed, with the Filioque clause entitled ' Fides patrum,' the Lord's Prayer, the Te Deum, and lastly, the Athanasian Creed with the noteworthy title ' Fides Anathasii episcopi.' After the Athanasian Creed comes the rubric, ' Consumatio psalmodie ' : so that the Canticles and Lord's Prayer and Creeds are included in the psalmody. The following is M i62 Documentary Evidence. [ch. subjoined to the Athanasian Creed, but without any rubric describing it as ' Oratio,' which it may be presumed was omitted inadvertently : ' Domine Deus Omnipotens, qui es trinus in personis et unus in deitate, conditor, nutritor, gubernator, et moderator mens, Te adoro, Te laudo, Te glorifico, Tibi gratias ago, Tibi sit laus et gloria et omnis honor per aeterna et sempiterna saecula saeculorum. Amen.' Similarly the following is subjoined to the Te Deum : ' Te decet laus, Te decet ymnus, Tibi gloria Deo, Patri et Filio cum Sancto Spiritu, in saecula saeculorum. Amen.' It is interesting to note that in the Gloria in excelsis the clause, ' Qui sedes ad dexteram Dei Patris, miserere nobis,' is preceded by the rubric, ' lacob frater Domini Hierosalymitanus addidit,' and similarly the conclusion ' Quoniam Tu solus sanctus &c.' by the rubric ' Cyrillus Alexandrinus adiunxit.' At the Apostles' Creed the names of the Apostles to whom the several clauses are attributed are added in the margin in rubric. After the rubric ' Consumatio psalmodie ' an intercessory prayer follows, and then a prayer preparatory for the Litany. In the Litany it is worthy of notice that among the saints invoked St. Benedict is the only one whose name is distinguished by being written in capitals, and his name is followed by those of Maurus and Placidus, though not written Hke his in capitals. They were both famous as his disciples. There are petitions similar to those usually found in Litanies for monastic use, of which I have quoted some instances, only the petition immediately succeeding that for the pope is not for our bishop or archbishop as the case might be, but for ' our bishops and abbots and the flocks committed to them ' ; and there is no petition for king or princes. After the Lord's Prayer occur the versicles: 'Pro pastore nostro : Beatus qui intelligit super egenum et Ill •] Manuscript Copies. 163 pauperem. Pro imperatore nostro : Domine, salvum fac imperatorem nostrum. Pro episcopis et abbatibus nostris: Dominus conservet eos et omnes sibi commissos.' The Litany is followed by several prayers for private use to be said after the Psalter ; ' Orationes po!3t finitum Psalterium pro semet ipso.' The subjoined is interesting as evidence in addition to that above produced of this being a Bene dictine Psalter, and also of the sacramental efficacy attached to the recitation of the Psalter in the middle ages : ' Exaudi me indignum famulum tuum et peccatorem ; et per hos psalmos, quos decantavi, da mihi et parentibus meis et omnibus, pro quibus debitor sum exorare, veniam de omnibus peccatis nostris ; et concede nobis semper cogitare, loqui, et agere, que placita sunt tibi et nobis expediunt, ut omnes actus nostri in tua dispositione firmentur ; et, inter- cedente beata et gloriosa semperque virgine Dei genitrice Maria et beato Michahele Archangelo et sancto Benedicto cum omnibus Sanctis, ab omnibus nos absolve peccatis et a cunctis defende periculis,' &c. Maria and Benedicto are written in capitals. A marginal note in a different hand from that of the text is added upon the words cum omnibus Sanctis, as follows : ' sanctissimis Apostolis Barto- lomaeo et lacobo ac gloriosissimo yheronimo (sic) et sancto Sebastiano.' The ' Planctus ' of St. Isidore concludes the volume. On the fly-leaf is a note in a modern hand saying that the Litanies are for the Benedictine use, and that from the saints of the Calendar and the Litanies the Psalter appears to have belonged to some monastery of Gaul. That the book was used in a Benedictine monastery is sufficiently clear from the evidence I have adduced from the Litany and prayer at the end, which is confirmed by the appear ance of the names Benedictus and Maurus in the Calendar M 2 164 Documentary Evidence. [ch. in capital letters. But that the monastery where it was used was situated in Gaul is a hypothesis, which is dis proved, first by the fact of the Psalms belonging to the Roman version of the Psalter which was not accepted in Gaul, but was used in Italy more or less down to the pontificate of Pius V, also by the supplication in the versicles of the Litany for the Emperor, and lastly by the character of the handwriting, which is distinctly Italian, as I am informed by Mr. Macray and Mr. Madan of the Bodleian Library. And the names of the saints which appear in the Calendar and Litany, as well as the version of the Psalms and the character of the handwriting, point to Italy as the original home of the book ; for among them the Italian names have the preponderance, there are but few comparatively belonging to Gaul and Germany, and I believe there is not a single one that is English. The petition for the Emperor would be perfectly consistent and appropriate in a Psalter written in Central or Northern Italy in the eleventh century, especially if written before the pontificate of Gregory VII, considering the relations of the German Emperors to those countries at that epoch '. 27. Our notice of MSS. may be fitly closed with the mention of one, which is described by M. BatiffoP as the oldest manuscript Breviary extant. This book, the property of the Mazarine Library at Paris (Cod. Mazarin. 364), possesses a special interest in reference to the history of our document, showing that, as belonging to the canonical office, it was admitted from the very first into Breviaries. From internal documentary evidence it appears to have been written at the celebrated Benedictine Abbey at Monte Casino in the year 1099 ; and it is a beautiful ' See Hallam's Middle Ages, vol. i. pp. 332, 333. ^ Histoire du Brhiiaire Romain, Paris, 1893, p. 195. in .] Manuscript Copies. 165 manuscript, executed in a Lombardic hand, and decorated with rich initial letters and pictures. After the Calendar comes a Psalter followed by the Canticles, Gloria in excelsis, Te Deum, Lord's Prayer, Apostles' Creed, Athanasian Creed and Litanies. For the'other contents it may suffice to refer to M. Batiffol's account. This must be the same book which is noticed by Waterland as a Breviary and Psalter for the use of the monks of Monte Casino, men tioned by Pagi and Quesnel. He adds that the title assigned by it to the Quicunque is ' Fides Catholica edita ab Athanasio Alexandrinae sedis Episcopo.' It is needless and would be tedious to notice any more MSS. of the Athanasian Creed. The number of extant copies of it in Latin is very great ; and those to which I have drawn attention are but a selection, and must not be regarded as a comprehensive and exhaustive series even for the period which they embrace — from the eighth to the eleventh century. But they sufficiently illustrate the early use and reception of the Quicunque in the Western Church. They are found in books of various kinds, collections of Canons, of Formularies of the Faith and Dogmatic treatises, and Psalters ; and the Psalters are typical of various countries, Gaul, Germany, Italy and England. At the risk of being tedious I have described in some degree the contents of these books, inherited by us from antiquity, with the view of showing their nature and importance and the position in them of our Creed, and more particularly of tracing, where possible, the age and locality which produced them. CHAPTER IV. COMMENTARIES OR EXPOSITIONS. The Athanasian Creed in the ancient Western Church was frequently made the subject of comment and exposi tion for the purpose of instruction in the fundamental truths of the Trinity and Incarnation. These expositions, which seem to have originated in a series of notes upon the text, are often found in manuscript Psalters written .by the side of the Creed in a separate column, or in two marginal columns with the Creed in the centre, the several verses being accompanied by their respective comments, but they are also found as distinct documents, especially in collec tions of dogmatic and doctrinal treatises and expositions. I. The earliest is probably the Commentary attributed to Venantius Fortunatus, an Italian by birth who migrated into France about the year A.D. 565, and became Bishop of Poictiers late in the sixth century. He must have died very early in the succeeding century, but the exact date of his death is not known. Both Muratori (who was the Librarian of the Ambrosian Library at Milan in the early part of the eighteenth century) and Waterland assign the work without doubt to him, and the latter thinks that the date of it may be fixed with probability about the year 570, or even higher^. But there is great diversity of ' Muratori, Anecdota, vol. ii. p. 331 ; Waterland, History of the Aihanasian Creed, pp. 43-45, Oxford edition, 1870. Commentaries or Expositions. 167 opinion upon the subject, the authorship of Venantius Fortunatus being denied for instance by the writers of the Literary History of France : it is also denied by the editor of his works, Michael Angelus Luchi, who considers that the style of our Commentary is dissimilar from that gene rally observable in the writings of Venantius ; and recently Professor Heurtley, who at first accepted without hesitation the opinion of Muratori and Waterland, afterwards avouched himself to be ' less satisfied than formerly ' upon the point. It must be acknowledged that the evidence for the author ship of Venantius is not conclusive. It rests upon a single MS., and that a MS. not earlier than the eleventh century — with one exception the latest of the MSS. in which the Commentary is found. In that Codex the Commentary is entitled ' Expositio fidei catholic^ Fortunati.' There can be no doubt that the expositio, not the fides catholica, is here referred to as the work of Fortunatus. Even if this were not the obvious sense of the words, it would be sufficiently proved by the fact that the Athanasian Creed is not unfrequently described as ' Fides Catholica ' simply : some instances of which have been already noticed. Neither can there be any reasonable doubt that the Fortunatus here intended is Venantius Fortunatus, for in this same volume, which is of great bulk and contains a variety of documents, the Commentary of that author upon the Apostles' Creed -also occurs, and that previously, and it is described by the title ' Expositio a Fortunato presbitero conscripta.' For- tunatus presbiter is the well-known appellation of Venantius Fortunatus. Thus the testimony of this MS. seems clear enough ; but of the other known MSS. of the Commentary not a single one attributes it to Fortunatus, nor indeed to any author. To turn to internal evidence, there is on the one hand a certain resemblance of thought between the i68 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Commentary of Venantius Fortunatus on the Apostles' Creed and our Commentary on that of St. Athanasius, arising probably from their both being drawn in some degree, directly or indirectly, from Rufinus's Commentary on the Apostles' Creed, and there is also in two instances a remarkable coincidence of expression between the two documents, which would suggest that if they were not both by the same hand, one must have been borrowed from the other ; and on the other hand, there is at least one im portant discrepance between the two works, which seems to forbid us regarding them as written by the same person^ ' The pairs of passages containing this verbal resemblance are as follows : — (i) ' Nee quaeratur quomodo genuit filium? quod et angeli nesciunt, pro phetis est incognitum. Unde illud dictum est, Generalionem illius quis enarrabit ? . . . Nee a nobis discutiendus est sed credendus,' &c. — Venantii Fortunati Expositio Symboli. ' Nee quaeratur quomodo genuit Filium, quod et angeli nesciunt, prophetis est incognitum, unde eximius propheta Esaias dicit Generalionem eius quis enarrabit? . . . Nee inenarrabilis et inaestimabilis Deus a servulis snis discu tiendus est, sed fideliter credendus.' — Expositio f dei catholicae Fortunati. The Oxford Junius MS. for genuit Filium reads getiitus sit, but the Milan MS. and Paris 1008 ies.d genuit Filium. (2) ' Quod vero Deus maiestatis de Maria in carne natus est, non est sordi- datus nascendo de Virgine. . . . Denique sol aut ignis, si lutum inspiciat, quod tetigerit purgat, et se tamen non inquinat.' — Venantii Fortunati Expositio Symboli. ' Etsi Deus, Dei filius, nostram luteam et mortalem carnem . . . adsumpsit, se tamen null.itenus inquinavit. , . . Quia si sol aut ignis aliquid immundum tetigerit, quod tangit purgat, et se nuUatenus coinquinat.' — Expositio fidei catholicae Fortunati. In both these cases the idea of the two documents seems to be derived originally from Rufinus, but the verbal resemblance between them is far closer than between either of them and that author. The passages referred to above as presenting an important discrepance are the following : — ' ludicaturus vivos et mortuos : Aliqui dicunt vivos iustos, mortuos vero iniustos ; aut certe vivos, quos in corpore invenerit adventus Dominicus, et intelligamus mortuos iam sepultos. Nos tamen vivos et mortuos, hoc est, animas et corpora pariter iudicanda.' — Venantii Fortunati Expositio Symboli. A note in the edition of Venantius printed at Rome in 1786 states that intelligamus in the above is omitted by some MSS. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 169 The authorship of the Commentary being thus uncertain cannot be taken as determining the date of its composition. Are there any other criteria by which we may arrive at an approximate conclusion upon the point ? In the first place, from the fact of there being known to us six, if not seven, manuscripts of the document belonging to the ninth century — one of them to the early part of it — the inference is un avoidable- that it must have existed prior to that century, unless indeed the earliest was the original copy of the author, which there is no reason for believing it to be. And this inference receives a very clear confirmation from a Commentary lately — in 1892 — printed for the first time from a MS. at Orleans and attributed by the editor to Theodulf 1, which in two passages, one of which I shall produce iu extenso by-and-by, evidently borrows from and follows our document. We have here a clear proof that the latter must have been composed prior to the ninth century, inasmuch as the Orleans exposition, even though it be not the work of Theodulf which is indeed very doubtful, cannot be of a later date, the MS. being assigned to that century by M. Delisle. Thus external evidence points to the conclusion that the Fortunatus Commentary belongs to a higher antiquity than the ninth century. Internal evidence supplies us with grounds for a nearer approximation to its date, as the late Dr. Heurtley, Margaret Professor of Divinity at Oxford, And ' Inde venturus iudicare vivos et mortuos. Vivos dicit eos quos tunc adventus Dominicus in corpore vivendos invenerit, et mortuos iam ante sepultos ; et aliter dicit vivos iustos et mortuos peccatores.' — Expositio Fidei catholicae Fortunati. It will be observed that Venantius accepts neither of the alternative inter pretations mentioned by the commentator on the Athanasian Creed, as by St. Augustine in several places. In the interpretation which he adopts he follows apparently Rufinus. ' Thiodulfe, sa vie et ses ceuvres, par M. Cuissard. Orleans, 1892. 170 Documentary Evidence, [ch. pointed out in an able pamphlet written in 1872 ^ In the first place he argued that the Commentary could not have been written during the period when the doctrine of the double Procession and the heresy of Adoptionism were the prominent subjects of controversy in the Western Church, that is, the early part of the ninth and the close of the preceding century. Had it been composed at that time, in all probability it would have referred to these controversies either by employing the peculiar terminology which they evoked or by dwelling emphatically upon the points at issue. But this is not the case. In regard to the first, the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son is twice stated, ' but only simply and incidentally,' says Dr. Heurtley, ' without one word of vindication or enlarge ment, such as might assuredly have been expected had any controversy on the subject been on foot.' And this is not all, for the three verses which formulate the relations between the three Divine Persons, including that which declares that ' the Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son,' are not quoted at all, nor made the subject of com ment. This, I may add, is especially remarkable consider ing that at this very epoch these same verses were quoted by Theodulf, Bishop of Orleans, in his treatise written by express command of Charlemagne with reference to the controversy in question. True, the commentator may have thus passed over these verses because he had incor porated them in sum and substance in his comment on the fifth verse ; nevertheless it is most unlikely, had he constructed his exposition at a time when the question of the Procession was exercising men's minds, that he would have failed to draw attention to the one passage in the ' The Athanasian Creed, reasons for rejecting Mr. Ffoulkes's theory, by C. A. Heurtley, D.D. Oxford, 1872. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 171 Creed obviously and directly relevant to the point at issue and to make it the subject of remark. The Commentary is also noticeable for its omission of all reference to the Adoptionist controversy. ' No work touching upon the subject of the Incarnation,' says the writer before cited, 'written between 785 and 825, would have avoided reference to it. Yet in Fortunatus's Commentary the reader will search in vain for any trace of those critical expressions — the repudiation of the doctrine that our Lord was in one respect not the proper but only the adopted, nuncupative Son of God — which one might naturally expect to meet with in writings of the age ^.' It should be added that the controversy respecting the Procession was a subject of discussion at the Council of Gentili held as early as A. D. 767. We are thus led to the conclusion that the Commentary was drawn up at some time previous to the latter part of the eighth century. These are negative arguments. Dr. Heurtley also draws attention to a positive and ' express indication ' contained in the document, ' not indeed of the precise time at which it was written, but of the limit on the later side within which it must have been written. Expounding the clause in ver. 29 of the Quicunque vult, " Homo ex substantia matris in saeculo natus," the commentator observes, "Id est, in isto sexto milliario in quo nunc sumus." ' Thus we learn that the Commentary was written some time in the sixth period of a thousand years from the Creation ; this being unquestionably the meaning of the term the sixth milliary or millenary. And this sixth millenary referred to by the commentator must have terminated coincidently with the eighth century of the Christian era. For what system of chronology did the writer follow ? Clearly not that based ' Heurtley, u. ». p. 13. 172 Documentary Evidence. [ch. upon the Hebrew text of the Old Testament which placed the Nativity of our Blessed Lord in the year of the world 3953> 'completis ab Adam annis 3952,' and therefore before the termination of the fourth millenary, whereas he alludes to it plainly as occurring in the sixth. Then there were the chronologies computed in accordance with the LXX — the Constantinopolitan, used by the Greeks, which assigned the Nativity to the year 5509 from the Creation; the Alexandrian, which assigned it to 5500 ; and that of Eusebius, which assigned it to 5200. We cannot suppose that the writer of the Commentary followed either the first or second of these systems ; had he done so, in either case the Commentary must have been written previous to the sixth century, and such an early date is inadmissible. We must conclude therefore that he followed the Eusebian chronology, as indeed, apart from the reason just stated, appears probable ; for this mode of computation was adopted by Orosius in the fifth century, by Bede early in the eighth, and by Western theologians generally in the middle ages. Upon these grounds Dr. Heurtley asserts that the year 799 A. D. ' is the limit on the later side within which the Commentary must have been written.' And he adds : ' But a writer conscious that he was on the extreme verge of a period would hardly have expressed himself in such a context as that ' above cited, ' without some qualifying word indicating its nearly approaching close. St. Augus tine in his De Civitate Dei, writing' at a considerable distance of time ' from the close of the millenary, qualifies his computation in this way: " Ab ipso primo homine nondum sex millia annorum complentur." Elsewhere his language is still more to the point ; for discussing the meaning of the thousand years in the Apocalypse, in which ¦IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 173 Satan is said to be bound, he assigns this as one expla nation, " Quia in ultimis annis mille ista res agitur, id est, sexto annorum milliario, tanquam sexto die, cuius nunc spatia posteriora volvuntur." Fortunatus says simply : "In isto sexto milliario, in quo nunc sumus!' ' The following is the conclusion of his argument : ' This note of time then, furnished by Fortunatus himself is an additional reason, — I do not hesitate to say a conclusive reason, — even assuming the latest possible period for the close of the sixth mil lenary, for believing his Commentary to have been written earlier than the close of the year 799, and a very probable reason, even on the same assumption, for believing it to have been written considerably earlier ; while it is perfectly consistent with the supposition that it may have been written earlier by two or three centuries.' Before quitting this point it is desirable to notice the clear distinction which exists between the sixth millenary, sextum milliarium, and the sixth age, sexta aetas, the two terms being sometimes confounded. Some of the Fathers, especially St. Augustine, and after him Bede, divided the whole period of the world's existence into six ages, cor responding with the six days of the Creation, and the six stages of man's life : the first extending from the Creation to Noah, the second from Noah to Abraham, the third from Abraham to David, the fourth from David to the carrying away to Babylon, the fifth from the carrying away to Babylon to the first Advent, the sixth from the Birth of Christ to His last coming at the end of the world. None of these ages consisted of a thousand years : the sixth obviously was of indefinite duration. This was clearly distinct from the sixth milliary or millenary, which had the recognized meaning of the sixth period of a thousand years from the creation of the world, and in this sense it is 174 Documentary Evidence. [ch.- alluded to by St. Augustine in the second of the passages above quoted. It was a very familiar expression, because in the belief of the Chiliasts it was the closing period of the world's existence ^. Mention is occasionally found in documents respecting events which occurred subsequently to the eighth century as taking place in the sixth age. The late Dr. Swainson, confounding the sixth age with the sixth millenary, conceived such passages to be fatal to Dr. Heurtley's argument. But they do not touch it. The point to which we have been brought by Dr. Heurtley's argument, it must be remembered, is this, that the Commentary was written before the close of the eighth century — very probably a considerable time before, pos sibly as much as two or three centuries earlier. The question is, how much earlier ? I think we may arrive at a closer approximation on this point. In the first place, by a similar argument to that by which Dr. Heurtley has proved it to have been composed before the commencement of the controversies respecting Adoptionism and the Pro cession of the Holy Spirit, it may be shown also to have been produced before the Monothelete heresy attracted attention. Commencing about the year A. D. 630, this con troversy was the prominent, almost absorbing, subject of debate among theologians of the West as well as the East during the remainder of the seventh century, and it had not subsided in the early part of the following century. Had the Commentary been written during that period, it could scarcely have failed to employ the peculiar termino logy then in vogue and to refer more or less emphatically to the prevalent error of the age. For there are passages in the Creed which would certainly invite, almost necessi tate, such reference. For instance, we have the following ' See St. Aug. Ser. xciii. vii ; also Bede, De Temporum ratione, cap. Ixvii. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 175 comment upon the verse, ' Who although He be God and man,' &c. : ' Id est, duae substantiae in Christo, Deltas et humanitas, non duae personae, sed una est persona.' While thus asserting the two natures of Christ, the author, had he been writing during the Monothelete controversy, would naturally have gone on, in accordance with the wont of the age, to assert also as a necessary corollary His two wills and operations ^. Similarly in commenting on the words ' perfect God and perfect man ' he would naturally have insisted upon the two wills and two operations as needful to the perfection of His two natures, for this was a current argument of the epoch ^. Again, when dwelling upon the unity of our Lord's person, as he does in a marked manner, and as he was led to do by the repeated assertions of the doctrine in the Creed, the commentator would have guarded himself against the inference which a Mono thelete opponent might have fastened upon him, had the controversy in question been in agitation at the time. But we find nothing of the kind : there is a marked absence throughout the document of any of the critical terms used in reference to Monotheletism, an absolute silence upon the subject. The necessary conclusion is that it was produced before the rise of the controversy. That it emerged after the controversy had passed away, we are precluded from ' 'In una persona domini nostri lesn Christi . . . sicut duas naturas, ita et duas natuiales volunt'ates duasque naturales operationes eius regulariter confi temur.' Confession of Pope Agatho, A. D. 680 ; Hahn's Bibliothek der Symbole, p. 285. ^ ' Ita quoque et duas naturales voluntates et duas naturales operationes habere, utpote perfectum deum et perfectum hominem, unum eundemque ipsum dominum nostrum lesum Christum pietatis nos regula perstruit." Con fession of the Synod of Milan, A. D. 680 ; ibid. p. 181. So also the Confession of the Roman Synod of the same date ; ibid. p. 183. From the use not only of these words, but of others as well, in the Athanasian Creed, I cannot avoid the impression that, if not actually before the members of these synods, it must at any rate have been familiar to their minds. 176 Documentary Evidence. [ch. supposing by the reasonings of Dr. Heurtley. The above argument is very much confirmed by the fact which I drew attention to some years since, and which I must again draw attention to now, that not fewer than three commen taries on the Athanasian Creed are extant which contain marked and emphatic references to the Monothelete con troversy. A further reason for believing this Commentary to be earlier than the Monothelete controversy is, that another Commentary, which bears internal evidence of having been composed at the time of that controversy, was in part drawn from it and well-nigh founded upon it as its basis, and consequently must have been of later date. As that will be the next Commentary which will claim considera tion, it is needless to dwell upon it here. Thus there are sufficient grounds, even though we cease to attribute our Commentary to Venantius Fortunatus as its author, for holding it to have been written not later than the early part of the seventh century, possibly at the close of the sixth. There appear to be no grounds for assigning to it a higher antiquity; and we are precluded from doing so if as seems probable, it has drawn directly in some passages from Venantius's Commentary on the Apostles' Creed, which is believed to have been composed soon after his migration into Gaul in 564 or ^6^. The earliest known manuscript of this Commentary is preserved in the Bodleian Library, No. 25 of the Junius MSS., and was assigned by Mr. Coxe, the late Librarian, to the early part of the ninth century. The volume in which it is contained comprises a great variety of docu ments, and several different handwritings appear in it. Our Commentary commences on p. 108 r., with the title Expositio in fide Catholica ; and it is immediately succeeded IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 177 by the Profession of F'aith, here entitled Fides Catholica Hieronymi, and this in turn by two expositions of the Lord's Prayer. These are all in the same hand. A collec tion of hymns, ending with the Te Deum, follows, also apparently in the same hand, or one very similar ; and these, it should be noted, are accompanied by an inter linear German gloss. It is needless to particularize further the contents of the volume. On a blank space of fol. '^•^ of the Latin and German Vocabulary, which immediately precedes the Expositio in fide Catholica, the following dated appeal for the prayers of the readers of the book appears : ' Legentes in hoc libro oretis pro Reverendo domino bartholomeo de andolo cuius industria pene dilapsus renovatus est anno MCCCCLXI.' And on the old vellum flyleaf at the end there is a similar appeal written by the same hand thus : ' Oretis legentes pro domino bartholomeo de andolo morbacensi abbate.' Also on the old vellum flyleaf at the beginning there is in the same handwriting a brief and imperfect list of contents. These inscriptions of the fifteenth century — in all probability written by Abbot Bartholomew himself for had he been dead at the time some intimation of the fact would have appeared — are very interesting for the light they throw upon the history of the book, acquainting us with its ancient home — the abbey of Murbach or Morbach in Alsace, one of the most considerable abbeys in Germany, and one of great antiquity, having been founded in the year 731. The two corresponding vellum flyleaves on which Abbot Bartho lomew's list of contents and his second request for the prayers of his readers are written had evidently formed part of a devotional book of earlier date, as may be judged from the traces of handwriting which they bear, some of them quite legible, and including a portion of the Office N 178 Doctimentary Evidence. [ch. for the Adoration of the Cross. Presumably the leaves were used by him as a covering for the book, which he found in a well-nigh shattered condition and repaired. The list of contents and his request for the prayers of his readers are inserted in the blank spaces between the lines of the earlier handwriting. Bartholomew de Andolo was probably a member of the ancient noble family of Alsace bearing the surname of Andlau, or Andelau, or Andlo, which may have been derived from a synonymous small town and castle situated upon a synonymous river in Alsace ^. Another manuscript copy, belonging to the ninth century, of this Commentary, but imperfect, for it ends with the nineteenth verse of the Creed 'veritate compellimur,' is contained in a MS. of the Vienna Imperial Library, No. 269 in Denis's Catalogue of Latin Theological Manu scripts'^. It follows immediately the Athanasian Creed without any title. It is unnecessary to repeat here what I have already said respecting the contents of that MS. under the head of MS. copies of the Creed, No. 13. Why the scribe did not complete the Commentary it is of course impossible to divine : but its fragmental condition does not appear to be owing to the mutilation of the book, as another document immediately follows. It may have been simply the result of indolence. The same fragment is also found in Laud, Codd. Miscel. 234, in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, a MS. of the twelfth century. This, as several other of the Laud MSS., came originally from the monastery of Eberbach or Ebbirbach, near the Neckar in Baden, as we learn from a memorandum on the last leaf : ' Liber sancte Marie virginis in Ebbirbach ' See Universal Lexicon, Halle, 1732. ^ Vol. i. Pars i. pp. 962-966. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 179 Deo gracias.' Denis's account of the Vienna MS. just referred to, which is very full and minute, produces the suspicion, I may rather say conviction, that it was the original from which this Laud MS. was in a large measure copied. This appears not only from the fact that all the contents of the former codex, with the exception of the Athanasian Creed, are found also in the latter in the same order, but from a remarkable coincidence of details between the two, and from some peculiarities in the latter which are plainly accounted for upon the above-mentioned hypo thesis. The printed catalogue of the Laud MSS. is, I regret to say, very misleading with regard to this particular volume, not only describing wrongly the Athanasian Creed, which it does not contain, as one of its contents, but also omitting all mention of the incomplete copy of our Com mentary, which it does contain. Some years ago I found three copies of our Commentary in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris, the first in the Latin MS. 2826 of the end of the ninth century, the second in Latin 17448 of the end of the tenth century, the third in Latin 1008 also of the end of the tenth century. In the first the Exposition commences on f 142 with the title ' Expo sitio super fide catholica.' The volume belonged formerly to the Abbey of St. Martial at Limoges. No. 17448 passed into the Royal Library from the College de Navarre at Paris. On the flyleaf is a note stating that it is a literal transcript of No. 2826 — a statement of which I can confirm the correct ness as far as regards the Exposition. The Commentary is the last in order of the contents, commencing on f 11 6, the others according to the catalogue being : ' Isidorus de Mysteriis Christi — De concordia veteris et novi Testamenti — luliani prognostica — Dialogus de Trinitate — Alcuinus ad Georgium Hierosol., ad Leonem Papam, ad amicos, ad N 2 gw^ i8o Documentary Evidence. [ch. Karolum imperatorem — Alcuini epitaphium.' In both these MSS. the Commentary is incomplete, terminating with the word ' rationem ' of the thirty-eighth verse of the Creed. The third Paris MS., No. 1008, which was in the Colbert collection before it was received into the Royal Library, appears to have been a manual for the use and instruction of priests. It begins with an exposition of the Canon of the Mass. Then follows the canonical ' inquisitio ' at epis copal visitations, headed, ' Qualiter requirendi sunt sacer dotes secundum canonicam institutionem.' In this the priest is required to make a statement of his faith, he gives an exposition of the Lord's Prayer and Creed ; and next comes the title in uncials, ' De fide catholica,' to which is subjoined, ' Quicunque vult salvus esse ante omnia opus est ut teneat catholicam fidem. Fides dicitur credu litas sive credentia catholica et cetera ' — the commencement obviously of our Commentary. Hence a knowledge of it would appear to have been a matter of canonical obliga tion : then follows an account of the various ecclesiastical orders. The next document is ' Breviarium ex nomine apostolorum ' — an account of the several Apostles with reference to their feast-days. The next a dogmatic trea tise, ' Opusculum de essentia divinitatis Dei et de invisibili- tatem adque inmensitatem eius et suam potentiam.' Next our Commentary in extenso from f 49 to f 94, introduced by the title, ' Expositio super fidem catholicam.' Next an exhortation to priests commencing ' Fratres karissimi, Spiritus Sanctus per prophetam sacerdotes et levitas et omnes doctores ecclesiae catholicae admonet dicens': it appears to be a cento of texts of Scripture. The last documents are some Penitential Canons and Leidrad's Treatise upon Baptism. In Appendix F to my work Early History of the Athanasian Creed I have printed IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. i8i collations made by me of the text of the Commentary in these three Paris MSS. In the year 1875 two other manuscript copies of this Commentary were found by the Rev. W. D. Macray of the Bodleian Library in the Library at Bamberg ; one of the ninth century or the beginning of the tenth having the press mark A. 11. 16, with the title 'Expositio fidei,' the other of the twelfth century with the press-mark Ed. or B. II. 16. Other manuscript copies, as my friend the Rev. A. E. Burn, Rector of Kynnersley in Shropshire, informs me, are preserved in St. Gall. 27 and 241, both of the ninth century ; others again in the Munich Library, in Cod. Lat. 19417 from the Tegernsee Abbey of the ninth century, the title being ' Expositio super fides catholica,' Cod. Lat. 3729 and 14508, both of the tenth, in the latter the title being ' De Fide Catholica,' and Cod. Lat. 14501, of the twelfth. In three of these, viz. St. Gall. 27 and Munich 3729 and 1450 1, my informant tells me, the Commentary is incomplete. Another copy is comprised in a MS. of the Ambrosian Library at Milan, marked M. 79. This codex is a large and bulky volume of 252 leaves written in double columns, and it contains a great number and variety of documents. It is ascribed to the eleventh century by a note on the flyleaf ' Codex seculi XI. sive anno MVII. ut in fine Kalendarii in tabella,' but the latter part could not have been written before the commencement of the twelfth century, as in the list of contents among the documents at the end there are, '46. Concilium Florentinum sub Urbano II. an. 1095'; also '50. Concilium Lateranense sub Paschali an. II 12.' Our Commentary occurs early in the volume, commencing on f 36 v., and it is the last we may say of a collection of commentaries or expositions, being preceded i82 Documentary Evidence. [ch. by three expositions of the Apostles' Creed, — the first, as already mentioned, entitled ' Expositio a fortunato presby- tero conscripta,' — by three of the Lord's Prayer, and by two of the Athanasian Creed, the first with the title ' Ex positio fidei catholice,' the second without any title. The title of the exposition, with which we are concerned at present, ' Item expositio fidei catholic^ fortunati,' written in rubric, occurs at the end of a line, and the word for- tunati is written above, apparently because there was no room for it in the same line : it did not strike me as being by a different hand, and the full stop following it, while there is none after catholice, seems to show that it was not a later addition. The Commentary ends on f. 38 v., with the rubric ' Explicit expositio fidei catholice.' The following is immediately subjoined : ' O beata, O gloriosa, O benedicta et amplectenda fides, quae humanum genus sola vivificas, quod sola de diabolo triumphum reportas, quae sola disperatis salvationis ianuam reseras : tu sola terrenos homines cives angelorum facis: tu sola pro Deo peregrinantibus celeste imperium tribuis : tu sola te aman- tibus portas inferi claudis, et extinctis peccatis eos qui te diligunt suo Creatori perpetuo letaturos coniungis.' Lastly, Franciscus Antonius Zaccharia met with a copy of this Commentary in a MS. of the fourteenth century at Florence ; but no author's name was added. This is mentioned in his Excursus literarius per Italiam, p. 307. The Milan MS. contains two passages from Alcuin and two from Isidore, which are clearly later insertions, none of them being known to occur in any earlier manuscript. The two passages from Alcuin and one of the two from Isidore appear to be found also in the Florence manuscript of the fourteenth century, judging from Zaccharia's colla tions of the text. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 183 This Commentary, so far as I am aware, was first printed at Frankfort in 1610, in a little book entitled Manuale Biblicttm, a copy of which may be seen in the Bodleian Library^. The exposition is headed by the title, Eu- phronii Presbyteri Expositio Fidei Catholicae S. A thanasii. The anonymous editor says that he transcribed his text from a codex of the St. Gallon monastery. The text follows closely that of the Junius MS. in the Bodleian. This book seems to explain the reference of Parous in a passage noticed by Waterland ^, where the former quotes some words of our Commentary, as those of ' Euphronius Pres byter in expositione huius Symboli Athanasii.' For my knowledge of this book, as well as for the information above mentioned respecting St. Gallon and Munich manu scripts, I am indebted to the Rev. E. A. Burn. Another edition of the Commentary was produced by Muratori from the Milan MS. in his Anecdota ex Ambrosianae Biblio thecae codicibus, Milan, 1679. A combined text from the Milan and Junius MSS., discriminating their several read ings, was edited by Waterland in his Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, published first in 1723. Waterland, owing to his following Muratori, who was an inaccurate editor, in several particulars misrepresents the Milan text. In 1786 Luchi edited at Rome the works of Venantius Fortunatus, with the Commentary subjoined, Zaccharia's collations of the fourteenth century MS. being added in the notes. This edition of Venantius, together with the appendix, so to speak, containing the Commentary, ascribed to him, has been reprinted in Migne's Patrologia Latina, ' Manuale Biblicum sive Enchiridion S.S. Scripturae a Catholicae Apos tolicae veteris Ecclesiae Patribus compendiatum et nunc primum ex vetustis memltranis MSS. colleetum. 1610, Francofurti, p. 76. '^ History of the Athanasian Creed, chap. iii. 184 Documentary Evidence. [ch. tom. Ixxxviii. In our own age and country a transcript of the Bodleian Junius text was printed by the late Pro fessor Swainson in his work on the Creeds, pp. 436-442 ; and Professor Heurtley has edited the document in accord ance substantially with that text in the third edition of his De fide et Symbolo. 2. The second Commentary on the Athanasian Creed, to which I wish to draw attention, was edited by me some years ago from a MS. in the Troyes Public Library, together with two other expositions from the same collection and a fourth from the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris ^, and for the convenience of distinction I described it as the Troyes Commentary. As no other printed copy of this important document is extant to the best of my knowledge, and the book in which it appeared may not be met with readily now, I think it better to reprint it in the present volume '^. The codex Troyes 804 containing it — I believe the only ancient manuscript which is known to contain it — is a thick 4to volume of 243 leaves, written according to the printed catalogue in the ninth or tenth century, but in the opinion of the present Librarian in the latter, intended apparently as a compendium of dogmatic theology for the use of some monastery, and comprising twenty-four documents in all, among which, besides works of St. Augustine, Fulgentius, Theodulf are the Confession of Faith commonly described as Fides Hieronymi, two expositions of the Lord's Prayer, the first being the work of St. Augustine, three exposi tions of the Apostles' Creed, and of these also the first is by St. Augustine, and two of the Quicunque^. This MS. prior to the French Revolution belonged to the ' Early History of the Athanasian Craf;^, Appendix. " Appendix F. ^ Catalogue des Manuscrits des Bibliothiques Publiques, tom. ii. pp. 334- 336. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 185 College de I'Oratoire at Troyes, into which it passed from the collection of the learned Pithou, who was a native of that place. So it appears from the note : ' De la Biblio theque du College de I'Oratoire de Troyes. Ancien fonds de Pithou.' The Commentary with which we are concerned at present is the first of the two expositions of the Athanasian Creed, and is entitled Expositio fidei Catholicae. Apparently it has for one of its sources the Commentary of Fortunatus so-called. In the earlier portion the connexion is close and obvious, sometimes literal, and this is the case particularly at the commencement. In the latter part, relating to the Incarnation, this is not so obvious ; still, a similarity of thought is traceable, and here and there the language of the earlier Commentary crops up in the later. But they are distinct documents, each containing much which is not to be found in the other. A long passage for instance towards the end respecting the identity of the risen body and the last judgement is peculiar to the Troyes Commentary, as well as another concerning Monotheletism which we shall immediately refer to. In this, as in the preceding case, the authorship being uncertain can afford no clue to the date of the document. External evidence is a guide to a certain extent upon the point, enabling us to fix the limit on the later side of the period within which it must have been composed. Thus we are led to determine this to the eighth century by the fact that the Commentary at present before us, like the previous one, was one of the sources from which the Com mentary attributed to Theodulf lately brought to light, was drawn, this last being certainly a work of the ninth century, not later. For proof that such was the case in two instances I must refer to my notice of the latter i86 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Commentary ^. But we have a closer indication of date from internal evidence in an emphatic and express repudia tion of the Monothelete heresy : and this clearly points to the inference that it was drawn up some time during the prevalence of the controversy on that subject, which com menced soon after the year 630, culminating in the sixth Oecumenical Council in 681, and not ceasing entirely until nearly 720, Then it died away, and the subject of image-worship became for a while the absorbing topic of theological discussion. It has never been revived. The conclusions of the Sixth Council have been tacitly accepted, rather than continually reasserted. The two wills and two operations of our Blessed Lord have not been insisted upon with the same explicitness as His two natures, the latter being assumed to imply the former. Thus Alcuin, who died A. D. 804 — the leading theologian of the age of Charle magne — in his work De fide S. Trinitatis is perfectly silent respecting the two wills, although he carefully maintains the verity of the two natures, divine and human, in the unity of our Lord's Person. The compiler of the Troyes Commentary on the other hand, in declaring his faith in the two natures and forms and nativities of Christ, deems it necessary to add that he believes also in the two wills and operations in the unity of His Person : ' Duas quippe in Christo credimus esse naturas duasque formas duasque nativitates, duas etiam voluntates atque operationes in singularitatem personae.' Moreover, he goes on to adduce the Scriptural authorities for the doctrine of the two wills and operations, as well as of the two nativities. This declaration of faith and these arguments, distinctively characteristic of the Monothelete controversy, lead us to believe that the Commentary was compiled during that ^ See section No. 7 of this chapter. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 187 controversy, and probably when it was at its height — between A.D. 549, when the prevalent heresy was condemned at the Lateran Synod under Martin I, and A.D. 681, when it was finally condemned by the sixth Oecumenical Synod held at Constantinople. We are confirmed in so thinking by the fact that the Oratorian and Bouhier Commentaries — which will be noticed next — employ language drawn from the definition adopted by the last-named synod for the purpose of repudiating the Monothelete hypothesis. Had the Troyes Commentary been composed after that Synod, we may presume it would have done the same. Further, our document contains nothing inconsistent with this con clusion respecting the epoch which produced it in its present form. For it exhibits no traces of the terminology peculiar to the several theological controversies of the two suc ceeding centuries. At the close of the eighth century and the early part of the ninth the mind of Western Christendom was deeply agitated respecting Adoptionism, and works written at the time, as those of Alcuin for instance, are replete with the subject ; but not the faintest notice of it occurs here — we find none of the critical language in common use among theologians of that age. In the middle of the ninth century Predestination was the topic of vehement discussion in Gaul and Germany : had this Commentary, which was probably written in one of those countries, been produced then, we might have expected to find in it the distinctive terms which the debates elicited, especially as the very explicit references to the final con dition of the elect and the reprobate would naturally occa sion, if not induce, the use of such terms ; but they are conspicuous by their absence ; the writer contents himself with repudiating the errors of Origenism. The attention of Western theologians was directed to the doctrine of the i88 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Procession of the Holy Spirit contemporaneously with Adoptionism in the latter half of the eighth century and the beginning of the ninth : in our document the doctrine is stated more than once, as held and taught by the Western Church, but it is only stated incidentally and naturally, not dwelt nor enlarged upon nor made the subject of argument or comment or of reference to authorities, as would be the case in a time of controversy upon the subject ; no appeal is made in reference to it as there is in reference to the two wills, divine and human, of our Lord. 3. The other Commentary on the Athanasian Creed, contained in the Troyes MS, No. 804, follows immediately after that last noticed, and is introduced by the heading ' Item alia expositio.' It is constructed upon a distinctly different type. The whole Creed is quoted verse by verse, and to each verse a comment is subjoined. This exposition is described by its author as being drawn from earlier sources, and that not only in respect of the matter, but the very language. I have myself been able to verify many of the passages employed in the compilation, and I have no doubt that any person more learned in the Fathers than I can pretend to be would succeed in verifying several more. The sources which I have identified are as follows : St. Augustine, Tractatus in lohannis Evangelium, De Tritiitate, De pracsentia Dei, Lib. con. Maximinum, Epis. ad Volusianum, De Genesi ad Liter am ; Prosper, Liber sententiarum ex Aiigustino ; St. Leo, Epistles ad Flavianttm and ad Constantinopolitanos ; St. Cyril of Alexandria, Synodical Epistle translated by Dionysius Exiguus ; Fulgentius, Liber de Fide ad Petrum; Pela gius I, Epistle to Childebert ; Vigilius Tapsensis, Contra Eutychetem and De veritate Trinitatis ; Hieronymi Fides IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 189 so-called ; and the Definition of the Sixth Oecumenical Council according to the old Latin translation. St. Augus tine's writings are evidently the principal source. The Definition of the Sixth Council seems to be the latest document which was drawn from. There is indeed much resemblance as regards thought and matter, and in a few passages a verbal correspondence, between this Commentary and Alcuin's treatise De fide SS. Trinitatis. But this is clearly the consequence of both works being derived from the same sources. Alcuin was not an original writer, and borrowed largely from his predecessors, especially St. Augustine ; and in no case is there any reason for sup posing that the commentator drew from him directly : on the contrary, it is evident that such was not the fact, as I have pointed out in my notes on the text of the Commentary printed in the Appendix. As this, like the Troyes Commentary, contains an express repudiation of the Monothelete controversy, the arguments which I adduced for referring the latter docu ment to the period during which the controversy on that subject was carried on as the probable epoch of its pro duction will apply with equal force to the former. Only the former, i. e. the exposition at present under our con sideration, must have been constructed subsequently to the Sixth Council, the very language of which it adopts for repudiating the heresy. We may therefore believe it to have been composed some time between A. D. 681, when the Sixth General Council was held, and the close of the Monothelete controversy at the end of the seventh or the commencement of the eighth century. For convenience sake I shall describe this commentary in future as 'the Oratorian Commentary,' a title which I applied to it when I first published it in memory of the 190 Documentary Evidence. [ch. circumstance that the MS. from which it was printed belonged to the College de I'Oratoire at Troyes. It is reprinted in Appendix G of the present volume. Our document has been also preserved in a MS. of the Vatican Library, having for its press-mark No. 231, lat. Reginensis. From this codex it has been twice edited, first by Pinius in the second volume of his Liturgia Antiqua Hispanica, Gothica, Isidoriana, Mozarabica, Tole- tana. Mixta, printed at Rome in the year 1 746 ; and secondly at a more recent date by Cardinal Mai in his Scriptorum veterum nova collectio, tom. ix. p. 369. The former of these editors in regard to the date of the MS. says ' scriptus videtur IX. vel x. saeculo ' ; the latter places it about the eleventh century, ' ex codice saeculi circiter XI.' Arevalus in his Isidoriana, or preface to his edition of Isidore of Seville, gives some account of the MS. and assigns it to the tenth century. Professor Jones, of St. Beuno's College, in a pamphlet on the Athanasian Creed published in 1872, stated that in the opinion of Professor Bollig, described by him as ' one of the most learned members of the Society of Jesus and an official writer in the Vatican Library,' that portion of the MS. which contains this Commentary was written in the beginning of the eleventh or in the tenth century. Considering this variety of opinion on the subject we may fairly set the date at the tenth century. Professor Bollig's opinion was based upon a special examination of the MS., and his mention of ' that portion of the MS. which contains ' our Commentary no doubt has reference to the fact of its being clearly distinguished by the handwriting and other circumstances from the first forty leaves of the volume which contain works of Prosper and Cassiodorus, and from the concluding leaves which IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 191 comprise the Apocalypse. Probably the three portions did not originally belong to the same book, and were only united together by the modern binder after they reached the Vatican ; so at least it would appear from the Papal arms being stamped upon the binding. The Commentary on the Athanasian Creed is immediately preceded by one on that of the Apostles' commencing ' Quando beatum legimus Paulum,' and it is followed by a short tractate having for its subject ' quomodo intelligendum est illut quod in libro deuteronomium scriptum est ego sum dominus.' In the same portion with it are included also works of Alcuin and Isidore of Seville and an exposition of the Lord's Prayer. The Commentary on the Quicunque is introduced without any title, so that the title ascribed to it by Mai, ' Symboli Athanasiani explanatio,' is not found in the MS. From the character of the handwriting, which is described by Arevalus as ' clarus Gallicus,' the book would appear to have been written in Gaul : it may have belonged to the celebrated Abbey of Fleury on the Loire, the original home of many of the MSS. in the Alexan- drina or Reginensis collection of which it forms a part. This collection, which was founded by Christina Alexandra, Queen of the Swedes, was added to the Vatican Library in 1690. Prefixed to our Commentary in the Vatican Reginensis MS. is a short preface by the author, which for more reasons than one deserves special consideration. It is addressed obviously to his Bishop, who, he says, had en joined him for the benefit of the presbyters of the diocese, — ' parrochiae nostrae,' — who were in great want of books, so much so that it was difficult for them to obtain even such as were required for the celebration of Sacraments and Offices, viz. a Psalter, Lectionary and Missal, to draw up in 192 Documentary Evidence. [ch. the words of the holy Fathers — ' sanctorum patrum sen- tentiis ' — an exposition of that little work of the Faith — ' illud fidei opusculum,' the Quicunque vult clearly — which was recited in churches here and there, and was studied by the presbyters of the diocese more than other similar works. The exposition thus drawn from the Fathers it was the Bishop's wish that the clergy should be compelled to study ; and it would be very helpful in promoting a knowledge of the Faith. The little work of the Faith was ascribed by tradition to the most blessed Athanasius, by whom it was intended to be a bulwark of defence for Catholics against the assaults of Arianism. He — i. e. the author of the Com mentary — had always seen it so ascribed in old manu scripts — ' in veteribus codicibus ' — by the title written at the head. This document is so important that I have thought it desirable to reprint it in Appendix H. It does not appear in the Troyes MS., the scribe having passed it over probably for the sake of brevity as not forming part of the exposition. Its authenticity as the preface to the Oratorian Commentary does not admit of doubt. We have proof of this not only in its being found in the Vatican MS., but also in the fact that the latter part of it, com mencing with the words ' Traditur quod a beatissirao Athanasio,' forms the introduction to another Commentary on the Athanasian Creed which was largely drawn from the Oratorian, viz. the Bouhier, the next in order to be noticed. In this preface there are two particulars which seem to me to add confirmation to the early date assigned by me to the Oratorian Commentary. In the first place, the lamentable state of clerical ignorance and the great scarcity of books necessary for the celebration of Divine Service, which the author describes as existing in his own time and IV.] Commentaries or Expositions, 193 diocese, indicate a state of things which could not be sup posed at all likely to have existed in any country where this Commentary might have been produced during the ninth century, nor yet some years prior to its commence ment. Under the fostering care of Charlemagne there was a revival of literature, especially sacred literature, through the wide extent of his dominions ; the art of calligraphy was improved, and its practice more largely cultivated. That scarcity of ecclesiastical books which is emphasized in this preface could scarcely have found place in his time nor that of his descendants, when books were multiplied, sometimes written with a high degree of skill and elabora tion, as we know by some specimens which have survived the wreck of ages. Moreover, in the ninth century every presbyter was under obligation to provide himself with the necessary books for Divine Service. Thus in the ' Admo nitio synodalis,' before mentioned, or episcopal instruction and charge so to speak, which according to Baluze was read once every year to the clergy in Synod either by the bishop in person or by the deacon in his presence, and that universally in Western Christendom, and which in his opinion existed before the time of Pope Leo IV, to whom it is attributed in some MSS., — but wrongly, as he thinks, being in substance as old, or nearly as old, as the time of St. Boniface or the middle of the eighth century, — every presbyter is ordered to have in his possession a Missal, Lectionary, and Antiphonary ^. And in the ' Inquisitio,' or, so to speak, episcopal visitation articles of inquiry, the corresponding document to the ' Admonitio,' — inasmuch as it contains the same particulars, only in the form of inquiry ' See notes of Baluze upon Regino in Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. cxxxii. pp. 531-534, Also Admoniiio synodalis antiqua in Appendix ii. to Regino, u. s., PP- 455-458. O 194 Documentary Evidence. [ch. instead of direction,— inquiry is made of each presbyter whether he possesses the same books. In the Statutes of Riculfus, Bishop of Soissons in France, late in the ninth cen tury a larger collection of service books is required. What is to be noticed here is first, that if the clergy in the ninth century were under obligation to provide themselves with the books requisite for the celebration of Sacraments and Offices, then the difficulty of doing so could not have been so great as it appears from the preface to the Oratorian Commentary to have been at the time when that document was drawn up. And next it is to be noticed that the Antiphonary was included among the books necessary for presbyters to possess, and which they were therefore under ecclesiastical obligation to provide themselves with in the ninth century, and probably some time before. Had the Oratorian Commentary been composed during that period, the preface would have included that book together with a Missal, Lectionary, and Psalter among the books neces sary for the clergy. But no mention is made of it, and the necessary inference is that the Commentary belongs to an earlier epoch. It is remarkable that neither in the ' Admonitio ' nor the ' Inquisitio ' is there mention of a Psalter as ordered and required together with a Missal, Lectionary, and Antiphonary. Possibly as in these docu ments the presbyters were ordered and required to recite the Psalter word for word by heart together with the Canticles usually subjoined to it, the express mention of the book, the possession of which was necessary to enable them thus to acquit themselves, was deemed superfluous. That Psalters were plentiful enough in the early part of the ninth century there can be no reasonable doubt. In the Statutes of Riculfus the Psalter and Antiphonary are both mentioned among the books which the clergy were IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 195 required to possess. The second particular in this preface which appears to me indicative of an early date is that it speaks of the Athanasian Creed as being at the time recited in churches here and there only — in some places and dioceses, not in others ; in some districts, perhaps provinces, not in others — if this is the correct meaning of passim in mediaeval Latin ; whereas we have reason to believe that in Gaul and Germany at least, in one of which countries the Commentary was in all probability composed, the Creed was very generally if not univer-. sally used in the service in the early part of the ninth century. 4. The next Commentary which claims consideration is that to which I applied the title for convenience sake of the Bouhier Commentary, from the name of the former owner of the Troyes MS. through which I first became acquainted with the document. This Commentary has a close connexion with the Oratorian, a great part of which is reproduced in it in an abbreviated and condensed form. At the same time it is a distinct document, more than a mere abridgment of the Oratorian exposition, inasmuch as besides the matter derived from that source it contains also much which is not to be found there at all. Such being the relation of these two expositions, as I venture to think I have fully shown upon a former occasion^, the Bouhier must necessarily be the later, and the commence ment of the eighth century may be fixed as the limit before which it could not have been drawn up. On the other hand, as it contains an abstract of the passage in the Oratorian relating to Monotheletism, we are led to believe that it was composed before the memory of the controversy ' Early History of the Athanasian Creed, by G. D. W. Ommanney, pp. 14-22.^ O 2 196 Documentary Evidence. [ch. relating to that heresy had died away. Hence the date of the work may with probability be placed between A.D. 710 and A.D. 750. In this, as in the Oratorian Commentary, the whole of the Creed is quoted successively, each passage being followed by its appropriate note or comment. It is preceded by a short prologue, which commences with the words ' Tra ditur quod a beatissimo Athanasio,' and is in point of fact the latter part of the Oratorian prologue, the first part being omitted as clearly suitable only to the exposition from which it was originally written. Our document is found in two MSS. of the Troyes Library. The earliest of these — numbered 1979 in the catalogue — is assigned to the tenth century. From a note written on the flyleaf — 'Codex MS. Bibliothecae Buherianae, F. 14, MDCCXXI.'— we learn that it belonged formerly to the collection of the Bouhier family, which was transferred to Troyes from Dijon. It is remarkable that in this codex our Commentary is attributed to St. Augustine by the title which heads it, as follows : ' Incipit expositio sancti Augustini Fidei sancti Athanasii Episcopi in veneratione . Sanctissime Trinitatis individuaeque Unitatis omnipotentis- simi universitatis Dei.' Whatever may have been the cause which induced the scribe thus to assign the authorship of this Commentary — whether it was that he found it mixed up with genuine works of the great Latin Father, or whether it was owing to its being so deeply impregnated with his teaching, or to its adopting so largely his very language — the fact is notable as tending to confirm our belief that it is a work of the eighth century. It cannot be supposed that he would have attributed a contemporaneous or recent work to a writer who had died five centuries before. The following note in reference to the title, appears IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 197 in the MS. in the handwriting of a former owner, Bouhier : ' Symbolum fidei sub Athanasii nomine editum . . . sed cuius est ista in hoc symbolum expositio sub S. Augustini larva publicata? Ego facile crediderim illam esse ipsius Vigilii ^' This conjecture of Bouhier respecting the author ship clearly is not less untenable than the attribution of it by the writer of the MS. The fact of the Commentary containing a passage from the Definition of the Sixth Oecumenical Council is alone a proof that it was not com piled either by Augustine or Vigilius. Besides our docu ment, which occurs first in the order of contents, Troyes 1979 comprises works of Alcuin, Rhabanus Maurus, and St. Augustine. It appears also in another Troyes MS. — No. 1532, assigned to the twelfth century — where it is immediately preceded by ' Incerti explanatio Symboli Apostolici ' commencing ' Quando beatum legimus Paulum apostolum ' and ' Fides sancti Hieronymi presbyteri,' other contents being ' Sancti Gregorii liber pastoralis,' works of Prosper and St. Augustine, and ' Orosii questiones et re- sponsiones Augustini ^.' It is introduced by the title ' Expositio fidei catholice Sancti Athanasii episcopi.' Both of these are well-written MSS. and in good condition. The latter, like No. 804 in the same library, belonged previously to the French Revolution at the close of the last century to the College d'Oratoire at Troyes. A third manuscript copy of the same epoch as the last-mentioned is preserved in the Public Library at St. Omer ^. In this volume it is interest ing to notice that the Commentary is preceded by the same two documents as in Troyes 1532, and it is followed by ' Orosii questiones,' another of the contents of that codex. Another manuscript copy is deposited in the British Museum ' Catalogue des Manuscrits des Bibliothiques publiques, tom. ii. pp. 8io, 8i i , '^ Ibid, pp. 644, 645. ^ Ibid. tom. iii. pp. 302, 303. 198 Documentary Evidence. [ch. — No. 24902 of the Additional MSS. This manuscript, as Sir E. M. Thompson informed me, may be dated about A.D. 1000: he assigns it to the early part of the eleventh century, but thinks it might belong to the tenth : and he believes it to have been written in France. A former owner coincided with this opinion in regard to the date, as appears by the following note on the flyleaf : ' L'ecriture me parait etre du xi^ sinon du x".' In this codex our document is entitled ' Expositio fidei catholicae,' and it is immediately preceded by the exposition of the Apostles' Creed commencing ' Quando beatum legimus Paulum apostolum,' which is here attributed to St. Augustine by the title ' Explanatio beati Augustini episcopi de Symbolo Apostolico.' It also con tains ' Interrogationes Orosii '' and works of SS. Augustine, Jerome, Ambrose, Gregory the Great. It is interesting to notice that the same Commentary on the Apostles' Creed, which is found in three of these four MSS. containing the Bouhier Commentary, is also found in the Vatican MS. Reg- 231, immediately preceding the Oratorian Commentary, from which, as I have pointed out, the Bouhier was largely drawn. What was the cause of this association between the exposition of the Apostles' Creed on the one hand, and the two kindred expositions of the Athanasian on the other, it is of course impossible to say for certain. Possibly all three were compiled in the same monastery. There can be no doubt that the Vatican MS. was written in Gaul, as the MSS. containing the Bouhier appear to have been also. And the Commentary on the Apostles' Creed may have been a work of the same epoch as the Oratorian, or even earlier. For the former has for its subject-matter an early type of the Creed — giving the article on the Incarnation in the form qtd natus est de Spiritu Sancto et Maria virgine, and passing over the IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 199 words mortuus and sanctorum communionem ; from which it may be inferred that it was certainly not drawn up later than the eighth century, and may have been drawn up earlier. This Commentary I have also thought it desirable to reprint in the present volume \ the volume in which I pub lished it being now I fear difficult to meet with. 5. Another Commentary, which I have also reproduced in the Appendix ^, was transcribed by me from a MS. in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris — Latin loi 2— assigned by the old printed catalogue to the ninth century, but by Monsieur Delisle to the commencement of the succeeding century. The manuscript belonged formerly to the Abbey of St. Martial at Limoges, and from its contents would appear to have been intended as a manual for the use of priests, for it contains, besides the document under our con sideration, ' Expositio ceremoniarum Baptismi,' ' Evangelium cum homilia S. Gregorii Papae,' ' Instructio sacerdotum super sacramenta,' ' Expositio Missae,' ' Expositio super Symbolum,' ' Canon Silvestri Papae,' ' Sermones de Nativi- tate Domini,' ' Sermo S. Augustini, qui est potius Caesarii,' ' Admonitio B. Gregorii Papae,' ' Sermo exhortatorius,' and ' Homilia S. Augustini episcopi.' The Commentary on the Athanasian Creed follows immediately that upon the Apostles' Creed, and it is introduced by the title, ' Incipit fides chatolica (sic) cum exposicione.' Like the two exposi tions last noticed, it quotes the various verses of the Creed in succession, but as regards its subject-matter differs from them, as also from the Troyes Commentary, entirely, being of a more simple and elementary character. And this greater simplicity may be naturally regarded as an indica tion of greater antiquity; but in its present form the exposition cannot be prior to the commencement of the ' Appendix I. * Note J. 200 Documentary Evidence. [ch. seventh century, as it includes a passage from the writings of Gregory the Great who died A. D. 604. Still, many of the notes which it contains may have existed at an earlier date. On the other hand, as the MS. belongs to the beginning of the tenth century, and it is perfectly clear from the corruptions and errors with which the text abounds that it was copied from an earlier codex, it is impossible to suppose that the Commentary was compiled later than the latter part of the ninth century. Thus the commencement of the seventh century and the close of the ninth are the limits on either side of the period within which the compilation of this document must be placed. The text is remarkable for the grammatical peculiarities, or rather barbarisms, found in it, as well as its corruptions : how far the former were due to the copyist, and how far to the author of the document, it is of course impossible to say. But the exposition is itself remarkable and deserving of attention in connexion with the history of the Qtiicunque, apart from this particular copy of it. When I first drew attention to it, I described it as the Paris Commentary for convenience sake, and I shall continue to refer to it by that title. I am not aware of any manuscript copy of it extant besides that at Paris. It only remains to add that the marginal notes to the Quicunque in the interesting tenth- century Psalter in the British Museum — Reg. 2. B. v. — which was certainly written in England, were for the most part drawn from this exposition as their source. In printing this Commentary it has been my endeavour to follow as closely as possible the text of the MS. in all its peculiarities of spelling and diction, but the contractions and punctuation I have not attempted to reproduce. And this has been my rule in regard to the other Commentaries which are printed in the Appendix. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 201 6. In his Diatribe de Symbolo Quicunque, which was first published in the second volume of his edition of the works of Athanasius in 1698, Montfaucon printed 'ex codice Bibliothecae sancti Germani a Pratis numero 199 quingen- torum circiter annorum ' a Commentary on the Athanasian Creed entitled ' Tractatus de Fide Catholica ^.' There cannot be the least doubt that the Latin MS. No. 12020 of the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris is identical with this codex. It is assigned to the twelfth century, and has among its contents the Commentary edited by Montfaucon, and on the first page appears the note 5. Germani a pratis, showing that the Abbey of St. Germain de Pres was its original home. The other contents of the MS. are some works of Bede and St. Jerome and St. Augustine. The same Commentary was edited by Pinius in the second volume of his Liturgia Antiqua Hispanica, Gothica, Isidoriana, Mozarabica, Toletana, Mixta, published at Rome in 1746. The title he states to be according to the MS. ' Expositio Athasii (sic) de fide '; but this is all the informa tion he supplies in regard to the source from which his text was derived. In all probability the MS. was deposited in the Vatican or some other Library at Rome. Our document is printed in the same volume with the Oratorian Com mentary, and immediately after it ; and hence the late Dr. Swainson inferred that it was contained in the same MS., viz. the Vatican MS. Reg. Alex. 231. That such is not the case I can testify from my own knowledge. Pinius describes these two documents as more precious than gold and jewels. The following MSS. may also be mentioned as containing our document : — British Museum, Addit. 18043, of the tenth century — ' i". Athanasii Opera, tom. ii. p. 735. Paris, 1698. 202 Documentary Evidence. [ch. a Psalter followed by the Canticles of the Old and New Testaments, a Litany, the Lord's Prayer, the Apostles' Creed, and lastly the Athanasian Creed, entitled ' Fides Catholica Sancti Athanasii,' with this Commentary. The book belonged originally to the important abbey of Stavelot in the Ardennes near Liege, as appears by a memorandum on the first leaf 'Liber monasterii Stabu- lensis,' and another in a later hand on f 187, 'Psalterium glossatum spectans ad monasterium sancti Remacli Sta- bulensis.' Bodleian Library, Laud Lat. 17, a Psalter written in the twelfth century in three columns, the text in the centre, the notes on each side. After the usual Old Testament Canticles the Athanasian Creed follows, entitled 'Fides sancti Athanasii episcopi catholica,' together with the notes forming our Commentary, and next a Litany and Prayers. It is remarkable that there are no New Testament Canticles : the Lord's Prayer, and the Apostles' Creed, arid the apocryphal 151st Psalm are also wanting. The volume has been mutilated at the beginning, the commencing words being ' meum et exultavit lingua mea ' of the fifteenth Psalm, or sixteenth in our version. It is interesting to notice that this is an English book, as appears from the fact of the Litany containing invocations to English saints, and some legal documents written at the end show that it belonged to the abbey at Cirencester. A very complete and richly decorated Psalter in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge — bearing the press mark R. 17. I — also of the twelfth century, and assigned by Wanley in his description of it to the reign of Stephen ^ It is a triple Psalter — Galilean, Roman, and Hebraic— with ' Humfredi Wanleii . . . catalogus historico-criticus. Oxon. 1705, pp. 168, 169. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 203 notes and prefaces and prayers referring to each Psalm. In addition to the Latin marginal notes or comments the Roman Psalter has also an interlinear gloss or version described by Wanley as Normanno- Saxon; and the Hebraic Psalter has an interlinear gloss or version described by him as Normanno-Gallic. The Psalter is followed by the Canticles, first the usual Old Testament Canticles, and then Canticum trium puerorum, Te Deum, Benedictus, Magni ficat, Nunc dimittis, Gloria in excelsis. Pater noster, Symbolum Apostolorum, Quicunque vult, and the apo cryphal 151st Psalm, all of these being equipped with notes as well as Normanno- Saxon and Normanno-Gallic glosses or versions. As with the other documents, so in the case of the Athanasian Creed the linguistic versions are written between the lines, the notes in the margin. These notes constitute our Commentary. Neither the Creed nor its Commentary has any title. At the end of the book appears a picture of the monk by whom it was written and decorated — Eadwin of Christ Church or the Cathedral at Canterbury. This then may be believed to have been the original home of the volume. I must add that in the arrangement of the Canticles in the volume as it is at present, there appears at first sight to be great confusion. This, however, is evidently the consequence of a transposition of some of the leaves, and my examination of the book convinced me that they must have stood originally in the order above stated. The same Canticles &c. and in the same order are found in the Utrecht Psalter. The coincidence evidently suggests a connexion between the two Psalters, especially considering the very unusual position assigned in both to the apocryphal 151st Psalm, which almost invariably occurs after the 150th. I doubt if any other instance can be produced of its being placed after 204 Documentary Evidence. [ch. the Canticles. Again, every Psalm and Canticle in both these Psalters is preceded by an illustrative drawing; and the drawings are the same in both, only in the Eadwin Psalter they are better finished and they are coloured. Must it not have been, that when Eadwin the monk wrote and decorated his magnificent book, he had the Utrecht Psalter before him ? It is impossible to help thinking so with such evidences before us of a close connexion between the two books. Balliol College, Oxford, No. 32 — assigned to the end of the twelfth century. In this volume the Athanasian Creed with its Commentary immediately follows the usual Old Testament Canticles, which are also accompanied by notes or comments. Neither the Canticles nor Creed have any titles. The documents which precede the Canticles are described by the list of contents written on the modern flyleaf as ' Augustini prologus in Psalmos,' and ' Petrus Cantor Parisiensis in Psalmos.' By a memorandum on the old vellum flyleaf it appears that the book was the gift of William Gray, Bishop of Ely from 1454 to 1478, who was a considerable benefactor to Balliol College. Before his appointment to the bishopric he was the King's Pro curator at Rome. St. John's College, Oxford, No. loi, erroneously printed 31 in Waterland's Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, Oxford edition, 1870, p. 50. The MS. is assigned by the Catalogue, which was drawn up by the late Mr. Coxe, to the thirteenth century. The two documents preceding the Athanasian Creed with its gloss or comment are, according to this Catalogue, ' S. Marci evangelium cum glossa instruc- tum,' and 'S.Lucae evangelium quoad capita xill.priora cum glossa instructum': it is followed by 'Symbolum SS. Apos tolorum cum glossa,' ' Expositio in Orationem Dominicam, IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 205 some sermons of St. Augustine, and other documents, the last being ' S. lohannis evangelium cum glossis. Deficit in cap. VII. verbis tempus meum nondum impletum est' The Athanasian Creed with its gloss or comment commences on folio 1 27 ; and that, as well as the Apostles' Creed and Lord's Prayer, with their comments, is written in a different hand from the rest of the volume, and in three columns, the text in the centre, the gloss or notes at the sides, but occasionally inserted between the lines of the text. The Quicunque and its comment are introduced without any title, being probably copied from a Psalter. The latter is clearly identical with that which occurs in the MSS. just mentioned, and which was edited by Montfaucon and Pinius. I am informed by my friend the Rev. A. E. Burn that there is another manuscript copy of our Commentary in the Cathedral Library at York. It has for its press-mark xvi. 7. .4 ; and is assigned to the beginning of the thirteenth century. This must be the MS. which was seen by Water- land, described by him as a copy of Bruno. And there is yet another copy, as the same friend informs me, in the Cathedral Library at Durham. This is stated to be of the twefth century. The Commentary at present under our notice has been hitherto confounded with that which appears in the Psalter drawn up by Bruno, Bishop of Wurzburg. But although the two documents have a general resemblance which proves a mutual connexion, there are numerous and notable diversities between them, by which they may be clearly discriminated. The following difference may be especially mentioned : three passages, clearly drawn from the Com mentary of Fortunatus so called, which are found in Bruno, are conspicuous by their absence from our document, 2o6 Documentary Evidence. [ch. viz. in the note on the first verse, 'Dicitur igitur fides credulitas sive credentia. Catholica universalis dicitur, id est, recta, quam universa Ecclesia tenere debet. Ecclesia vera congregatio Christianorum sive conventus populorum dicitur'; in the note on the thirteenth verse, 'Ergo si omnia potest, quid est quod non potest ? Hoc non potest, quod non convenit omnipotenti posse. Falli non potest, quia Veritas et sapientia est. Aegrotare aut infirmari non potest, quia sanitas est. Mori non potest, quia immortalis est. Finiri non potest, quia infinitus et perennis est' ; and in the note on the seventeenth verse, ' Quia si me interro- gaveris quid est Pater, ego respondeo Deus et Dominus ; similiter si interrogaveris, quid est Filius, ego dico Deus et Dominus ; et si dicis quid est Spiritus Sanctus, ego respondeo Deus et Dominus ; et tamen in his tribus per sonis non tres Deos nee tres Dominos, sed in tribus, sicut iam supra dictum est, unum Deum et Dominum confiteor.' Instead of the last we have, ' De Patre si quis te interro- gaverit, responde Deus et Dominus ; si autem de Filio, similiter Deus et Dominus ; si vero de Spiritu Sancto, indubitanter responde plenum Deum et Dominum esse.' Another important difference between the two documents is the presence in the one under our consideration of a remark able note defining the meanings severally of substantia, subsistentia, and essentia : this is wanting in Bruno. There are many other variations, some significant, such as could scarcely be considered mere clerical errors. But notwithstanding these diversities the substantial agreement observable throughout the greater part of the two Commentaries leaves no room to doubt that one must have been drawn from the other. Was this Commentary the source from which Bruno derived his materials, the basis on which he bqilt? Or was the reverse the case? IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 207 The British Museum MS. Addit. 18043, which was neces sarily unknown to Waterland, being a recent acquisition of our National Library imported from France, and was un noticed in connexion with the present subject until I drew attention to it a few years ago^, gives an answer of no uncertain kind to this question. It is a MS. of the tenth century. This is the date assigned to it by the Catalogue ; and, as there is every reason to believe, correctly assigned. Sir E. M. Thompson the present Librarian, formerly the Keeper of the MSS., than whom we have no better judge of the date of handwriting in ancient documents, expressed to me a confident opinion to that effect. The MS. being written in the tenth century, it is obvious that the Com mentary which it contains must have existed prior, and indeed long prior, to Bruno's Psalter, which was a work of the eleventh century, compiled between the years 1034 and 1045. And the work existing before his time, it is a mere truism to assert that he could not have been the author of it. He simply introduced it in substance into his Psalter, inserting the three passages above cited from the Fortu natus Commentary, omitting the note of definitions which I referred to, and making several alterations of the text. What he did in this instance is in exact accordance with the system which he followed in the construction of the other Commentaries contained in his Psalter. He was not an original writer, but a compiler and manipulator of earlier materials. His Commentaries on the Psalms and the Canticles are compilations of notes gathered from the Fathers ; and those on the Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed, in the form of question and answer, are borrowed word for word from the eleventh and twelfth chapters of a work entitled Disputatio Puerorum, which is placed ' Early History of the Athanasian Creed, p. 67. 2o8 Documentary Evidence. [ch. by Frobenius among the doubtful works of Alcuin. Its genuineness is very uncertain ; but, whoever was the author of the work, it must have been composed long before the time of Bishop Bruno, being found in a MS. of the ninth century i. Another reason for believing that our Commentary was composed considerably before the time of Bruno is, that it was evidently the source, as we shall soon see, from which another Commentary, not compiled later than the tenth century, was partly drawn. What was the date of the composition of our document, and who was its author? Have we any clue to guide us to any positive conclusions on these points ? The mere fact of its being found in a MS. of the tenth century proves that to be the latest period at which it could possibly have been written. The other fact I have mentioned, viz. that it is in part the source of another Commentary which cannot be placed later than that period, clearly forces us to the conclusion that it was itself the work of the ninth century at the latest, probably of the early part of that century. And it bears some internal evidence confirmatory of the conclusion thus arrived at. In its note on the twenty-sixth verse of the Creed it makes use of the follow ing language : ' Necesse est ut incarnationem Domini nostri lesu Christi fideliter credamus. QnovaoAo fideliter ? Non adoptivum sed proprium Dei filium, sicut dixit Apos tolus : Proprio Filio suo non pepercit Deus, sed pro nobis omnibus tradidit ilium.' This is strictly the terminology prevalent during the Adoptionist controversy which raged . with the greatest intensity at the close of the eighth century, but did not entirely cease till about 820 A.D. Thus Paulinus, Bishop of Aquileia, who was one of the ' Migne, Patrologia Latina, tom. ci. pp. 1097, 1098, 1136, and 1143. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 209 leading opponents of the Adoptionist heresy, in his first book against Felix of Urgel, says : ' Pater . . . non peper cit, sed pro nobis omnibus tradidit ilium ; quem Apostolus proprium non adoptivum filium confitetur.' Then he goes on to quote, as the Commentary does, the passage from the Epistle to the Romans. And he uses similar language in the second book of the same work ^. The occurrence in the Commentary of a terminology thus distinctively character istic of the Adoptionist controversy points clearly to the belief that it emerged some time during the prevalence of that controversy. And this seems to be confirmed by the very emphatic manner in which it insists upon the Divinity of the Holy Ghost in one of the passages, which dis criminate it from Bruno's Commentary : ' De Patre si quis te interrogaverit quid est in persona, responde Deus et Dominus ; si autem de Filio, similiter Deus et Dominus : si vero de Spiritu Sancto, indubitanter responde plenum Deum et Dominum eum esse.' Alcuin, in his work de Fide Trinitatis^, written at the commencement of the ninth century and dedicated to Charlemagne, employs the very same epithet in reference to the Holy Spirit : ' Spiritus Sanctus, sicut Pater et Filius, //^;2?/.j est Deus et perfectus.' And he goes on to dwell with some stress upon the pleni tudo of the unity of the Spirit with the Father and the Son, being obviously induced thus to emphasize the point, on account of its connexion with the doctrine of the Pro cession of the third Person which was, simultaneously with the heresy of Adoptionism, a prominent subject of discussion at the time. There are several other notable similarities, indeed coincidences, of expression between this treatise and ' S. Paulini conti'a Felicem Urgellitanum lib. i. cap. 53; also lib. ii. cap. 12. Migne, Patrologia Latina, tom. xcix. pp. 410, 432. " Lib. ii. cap. xix. Migne, Patrologia Latina, tom. ci. p. 35. P 2 to Documentary Evidence. [ch. our Commentary, which I abstain from stating at length, and which tend to show that the two documents, if not the productions of the same author, were at any rate the pro ductions of the same epoch. This verbal resemblance would dispose us to think that both proceeded from the same hand, had Alcuin ever been credited with the com position of a Commentary on the Athanasian Creed. But he has not, so far as I am aware. On the other hand, there is ancient authority for ascribing such a work to another leading theologian of the same age, a contemporary of Alcuin, who survived him nearly twenty years, and must have been well acquainted with his treatise upon the Faith of the Trinity, and probably heard it read at the Council of Aix, held in the year 802, which he attended as one of the bishops of Charlemagne's dominions, and may have borrowed from it the terms and phrases which the Com mentary shares with it in common, who moreover took an active part in the controversies of the epoch, and, what is especially to our purpose, issued a Capitulare requiring the presbyters of his diocese to learn by heart, and acquire an intelligent knowledge of the Athanasian as well as the Apostles' Creed ^- This is Theodulf Abbot of Fleury and Bishop of Orleans, who in a Catalogue of Abbots of Fleury, described by Baluze as being ex veteri codice MS. biblio thecae Colbertinae, is stated to have produced an Exposition of the Creed of Athanasius "- Our Commentary has never ' See Migne, Patrologia Latina, tom. cv. p. 209 : ' Vo5, O sacerdotes Domini, admonemns, ut Fidem Catholicam et memoriter teneatis et corde intelligatis, hoc est, Credo, et Quicunque vult salvus esse ante omnia opus est ut teneat Catholicam Fidem.' '' ' Quartus decimus Abbas Theodulfus annos xi.x et dimidium, qui a glorio sissimo Imperatore Karolo ex Hesperia propter eruditionis scientiam qua poUebat in Gallias inductus Floriacensibus Abbas et Aurelianensibus datus est Pontifex. Hie itaque, cum, ut diximus, eruditione praecipuus doctrinaque haberetur, explanationem edidit Symboli Athanasii.' Catalogus Abbatum IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 211 yet been identified with this work, indeed, as I have already said, has been hitherto confounded with the Com mentary of Bruno, but considering that it certainly was in existence some time before, and may very probably be assigned to the early part of the ninth century, I venture to think that it may also with great probability be re garded as none other than the exposition drawn up by Theodulf The few MSS. of this Commentary which I have men tioned as having fallen under my own notice must not be supposed to form an exhaustive list. Doubtless there are many more extant. It appears to have been of all the Expositions of the Athanasian Creed the most widely circulated and the most generally used in the Middle Ages, and it became the basis of other Commentaries. As I shall have several occasions for referring to it, I propose to describe it for convenience sake as the Stavelot Com mentary, from the former home of the earliest known MS. in which it is preserved. 7. Since I wrote the above my attention has been drawn to a Commentary which has been edited for the first time from MS. No. 94 in the Library of Orleans by Monsieur Cuissard, the Sub-Librarian of that city. Together with an Exposition of the Canon of the Mass from the same MS., it is subjoined to a notice by the editor of the Life and writings of Theodulf and a photograph facsimile of the first page of the codex containing the Commentary is prefixed to the volume as a frontispiece^. The Rev. A. E. Burn, to whom I am indebted for my acquaintance Floriacensium, printed in Baluzzii Miscellaneorum liber primus, p. 491. Paris, 1678. Theodulf is the last of the abbots in the list. ' Thiodulfe, £v^que dOrlians, sa vie et ses ceuvres, par Ch. Cuissard, Sons- Bibliothecaire de la ville d'Orleans. . Orleans, 1892. P 2 212 Documentary Evidence. [ch. with this Exposition, has also kindly informed me that Monsieur Cuissard has the authority of Mons. Delisle, the Director of the National Library at Paris, for assigning the MS. to the ninth century, and that Mr. Scott of the British Museum, judging from the facsimile in Mons. Cuissard's book, places the date in the tenth century. The title of the document is ' Explanatio fidei catholicae,' but there is no mention of the name of the author or compiler. M. Cuissard has no hesitation in identifying this with the Commentary of Theodulf mentioned in the ancient Catalogue of Abbots of Fleury before referred to, which was edited by Baluze ; and in so doing he follows the authors of the Histoire litteraire de la France i. Apparently he considers the fact of its being found is a MS. which belonged originally to the Abbey of Fleury-on-the- Loire, of which Theodulf was Abbot, a sufficient proof that it was his work ^. But this clearly cannot be maintained, as it is quite within the bounds of possibility that a Commentary by some other author of the ninth century should have found its way at some time to the library at Fleury. The external evidence for Theodulfs authorship being thus slender, it is natural to turn to the document itself and inquire what sup port it derives from thence. The Commentary is very brief ten verses of the Creed having no gloss or note at all, and many of the notes not extending beyond a few words. This, however, proves nothing. What is ' See u. s., pp. 73, 74. * At the capture and plunder of Orleans by the Huguenots in 1562 most of the Fleury MSS. fell into the possession of one Daniel, a lawyer of the place ; and these treasures eventually reached the Vatican by different routes, some as part of Queen Christina's collection, others as part of the collection of the Prince Palatine. An account of the vicissitudes through which they passed may be seen in Mabillon, de Liturgia Gallicana, Praefatio, xii. Some however appear to have been left at Orleans, among them the one which interests us. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 213 more to the point, is that it is a rude and unpolished composition, apparently not the work of a learned and cultured man, such as Theodulf was by reputation, and as for the age in which he lived he would seem to have been from the few works of his at present extant. The terminology also is somewhat different from that used by Theodulf The Commentary has ' Filius percepit — accepit — apprehendit humanitatem.' In the same connexion in the seventh chapter of his treatise de Ordine Baptismi, which is in fact an exposition of the Apostles' Creed, Theodulf employs the more usual words suscipere and assumere. The Commentary has ' Catholica Graecus sermo est in nostra locutione universalis,' and again ' Christus in nostra locutione unctus.' Theodulf in a similar connexion has Latine. What is more notable still, in reference to the Sonship of our Lord the Commentary describes Him as proprius Filius simply. In a work by Theodulf consider ing the active part which he took in the Adoptionist controversy, we should have expected to find the more distinctive phraseology which the heresy prevalent in his time elicited and by which it was repudiated, such as Filius proprius, non adoptivus, or the like. And so in fact in his Exposition of the Creed just quoted he speaks of our Lord as ' verum Dei Filium, non factum aut adoptivum! Con sidering all this, I cannot help thinking it very doubtful whether this document was the genuine work of Theodulf ; it seems to me that the Stavelot Commentary may be with greater probability ascribed to him, especially as the latter contains the critical terminology condemnatory of Adoptionism, which in the former is conspicuous by its absence. But whoever was the compiler of this Commentary, whether it was Theodulf or not, its discovery is of impor- 214 Documentary Evidence. [ch. tance and interest in relation to the history of the Athanasian Creed, because it is evidently drawn from not fewer than four of the earlier Commentaries, which we have already noticed, viz. the Fortunatus so-called, the Troyes, the Paris, and the Stavelot. This connexion is proved by the verbal coincidence and resemblance which it bears to all of them, and which is traceable in several instances. And this fact necessarily confirms our belief in the antiquity of these four Expositions. For our document must have been compiled in the ninth century at the latest, considering the date of the MS., which, as I have already said, M. Delisle, no mean authority, has examined and assigned to that century. Besides, it is clear from some palpable and gross errors, which this Orleans copy contains, such as are obviously attributable to the carelessness or ignorance of a copyist, that it was not the autograph of the author or compiler : so that a certain period must have elapsed, though possibly a very brief one, between the composition of the Commentary and the writing of this copy of it. Possibly too it may not have been transcribed from the autograph ; and the errors may be due to more than one copyist. The Oratorian Commentary was, I believe, also a source from which this Commentary was drawn, but not so obviously as the four Commentaries above mentioned, the connexion being traceable in two instances only, though distinctly traceable, whereas in the other four it appears more frequently. The same two passages of the Oratorian Commentary which are thus connected with our docu ment are found also in the Bouhier, being no doubt transferred to the latter from the former. The compiler of our Commentary may have drawn them from either, but probably he drew from the former. In either case he must IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 215 have been acquainted with five out of the six Commentaries already noticed, and gathered his materials from them. In order to show the nature and construction of the Commentary, and how the text has been corrupted by the errors of the copyist or copyists, I subjoin three of the notes, together with their respective sources. {a) Note upon ' neque substantiam Troyes Commentary. separantes; ver. 4. 'Arrius . . . Filium Dei minorem ' Arius . . . credebat Patrem maiorem esse dixit Patri . . Spiritum autem quam Filium et Filium minorem quam Sanctum . . . plusquam minorem quam Patrem et Spiritum Sanctum minis- Filium et Patris et Filii ministnim simum {sic). Dicebat Patrem quasi asserunt {sic') . . . quasi quosdam gradus aurum, Filium quasi argentum, Spiri- impietatis suae in Deum, qui unus est, tum Sanctum quasi aeramentum.' arbitratus ; Patrem scilicet ut aurum. Filium vero quasi argentum, Spiritum autem Sanctum erameutum {sic).' The former of these two passages is clearly drawn with some abbreviation from the latter. The barbarism minis- simum is one of the copyist's errors, to which I referred as occurring in the Orleans MS. It must have been based on the word ministrum of the Troyes Exposition. It could not have been from the hand of the compiler. Patri in the Troyes extract can scarcely be regarded as a wrong reading, e and i being so frequently interchanged ; but asserunt I should conjecture to be a copyist's error for asseruit. The illustration of the Arian hypothesis respect ing the Trinity from the three substances of gold, silver and brass, seems to have been derived by the Troyes commentator directly from St. Augustine. See note on the passage in Appendix F. [b) Note on ' Descendit ad inferos,' The Commentary attributed to ver. 36. Venantius Fortunatus. 'Propter hoc ibidem descendit, ut 'Ut protoplastnm Adam et patri- patriarchas et prophetas qui ibidem archas et prophetas et omnes iustos, iniuste detinebantur propter ilia orient- qui pro originali peccato ibidem de- alia {sic) delicta, ut eos liberaret a tinebantur, liberaret. . . . Reliqui, qui 2i6 Documentary Evidence. [ch. potestate diaboli. Memor sit illius supra originale peccato principalia verbi prophetae : 0 mors, ero mors crimina commiserunt, ut adserit Scrip- iua, morsus tuus ero, inferne. Partem tura, in poenali Tartaro remanserant : abstulit, partem reliquit, et postquam sicut in persona Christi dictum est per pugnavit cum diabolo et pergit illud prophetam : Ero mors tua, 0 mors, bellum et exspoliavit infernum.' id est, morte sua Christug humani generis inimicam mortem interfecit et vitam dedit. Ero morsus tuus, in ferne. Partem morsit infernum pro parte eorum, quos liberavit : partem reliquit pro parte eorum qui pro principalibus criminibus in torraentis remanserunt.' Here it may be observed that the note has been formed mainly by the same process of selection and abbreviation as in the former case. The words propter ilia orientalia delicta are very remarkable : orientalia being evidently a copyist's erratum for originalia. The compiler probably substituted propter originalia delicta or peccata for pro originali peccato, which appears in the Fortunatus extract. It cannot be supposed that he wrote orientalia. The quotation from Hosea xiii. 14 is evidently taken imme diately from that passage, and so also are the words which follow — Partem abstulit, partem reliquit — morsit being changed into abstulit by the compiler, as con trasting more strongly with reliquit. These words, which are obscure as they stand in the note, are explained by reference to Fortunatus. And so much of the note as finds no correspondence in the Fortunatus extract may be traced with more or less distinctness to other sources. The word iniuste, it may be noticed, has been inserted before detinebantur. Considering that the compiler certainly had before him the Troyes Commentary, I cannot help feeling a strong suspicion that this was suggested to his mind by the statement which it contains that the Son of God took upon Him the nature of man for this end, ' ut diabolum IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 217 . . . vinceret et prostraret, . . . quatinus et diabolus per iusti- tiam victus cederet, et, quos iniuste retinebat, amitteret.' The reference appears to be to our Lord's descent into hell, as well as His death and burial. And if this was the case, the same passage probably also suggested the allusion towards the close of the nott— pugnavit cum diabolo et pergit — possibly written originally peregit — illud bellum. The final words are clearly either from the Oratorian Commentary or the Bouhier, probably from the former, which borrowed the ex pression directly from the translation by Dionysius Exiguus of the Synodical Epistle of St. Cyril of Alexandria. {c) Note on the last verse. Troyes Commentary. 'Haec est fides catholica quam univer- ' Haec est fides catholica, quam uni- salis ecclesia cum electis suis corde versalis ecclesia in electis suis corde creait, ore profitetur, et bonis actibns credit, ore profitetur, et bonis operibus exsequitur. De qua fide, quicunque exequituv. De qua fide quicunque ex et ii, qui christiano nomine censentur, his, qui christiano nomine censentur, qnicquam detraxerit aut credere nolu- quicquam detraxerit aut credere nolu- erit, procul dubio christianus non erit, erit, proculdubio catholicus non erit, sed, intra ecclesiam positus sub nomine sed intra ecclesiam positus sub nomine christianitatis recte catholicus, ut christianitatis recte catholicus, ut haereticus reputabitur.' hereticus deputabitur.' It is plain that this note was drawn entirely from the corresponding passage in the Troyes Commentary. The second sentence has been rendered unintelligible by the sub stitution of et ii for ex his — a mistake which a copyist would be very likely to make — and also from the change of catholicus after proculdtibio into christianus. Whoever made this change — whether the compiler or a copyist — he seems to have been led into making it by the words recte catholicus occurring after christianitatis. They are evidently pleonastic, and in all probability formed no part of the original text of the Troyes Commentary. Such an insertion might have been easily made, the manuscript copy 2i8 Documentary Evidence. [ch. of it at Troyes — the only one I believe known of — being certainly a transcript from an earlier codex. 8. For my knowledge of the next Commentary calling for notice, as being probably the next in date, I am indebted principally to a MS. of the Canonici collection in the Bodleian Library, written, as Mr. Macray and Mr. Madan assure me, in Italy in the thirteenth century — Canonici, Bibl. 30. The volume contains a Psalter with a gloss or comment annexed, written in three columns, the text in the centre, the notes or comment in the marginal columns, and occasionally inserted between the lines of the text. The Psalms are followed by the Old Testament Canticles and the Athanasian Creed, all having likewise a gloss or comment attached, and written in the same manner as the preceding part of the book. The apocryphal 151st Psalm is omitted. The Quicunque is followed by the Benedicite and some hymns ; but these have no notes and are in a different hand. The Athanasian Creed is entitled ' Fides catholica Athanasii episcopi.' The Commentary upon it or notes is entirely drawn from the Stavelot and Oratorian Commentaries. There is not a single note, I believe, which may not be traced to one or other of these sources. Sometimes, but rarely, a note is partly from the one and partly from the other ; and sometimes the original is condensed or abbreviated. The initial words are: ' Hec ratio fidei catholice traditur etiam in veteribus codicibus a beato Athanasio Alexandrino conscripta, et puto quod idcirco tam piano et brevi sermone,' &c. This must be discriminated from the commencement of the Bouhier Commentary, which bears an obvious resemblance to it : ' Traditur quod a beatissimo Athanasio Alexandrine ecclesie antistite istud fidei opusculum sit editum,' &c. The resemblance is owing to the initial notes in both cases IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 219 being drawn from the latter part of the preface to the Oratorian Commentary. Another copy of this Commentary is to be found in the Bodleian MS. Laud, Misc. 40. The book belonged originally to the Benedictine monastery or cathedral at Rochester, as we learn by a memorandum on f. i, verso : ' Liber de claustro Roffensi per Leonardum monachum.' It contains a large miscellaneous collection of documents, and is ap parently divisible into three parts, written by different hands and at different periods. The Athanasian Creed with its comment but without any title, arranged as in the previous case in three columns, occurs in the second part, which, as Mr. Macray tells me, may be assigned to the latter portion of the twelfth century. It commences on f. 107, preceded by a variety of hymns and followed by the Apostles' Creed and Lord's Prayer, both of which have a comment annexed. A third copy is deposited in the British Museum — Addit. MSS. 10924. The book is a Psalter 'cum glosa ordinaria et interlineari,' written like Canonici 30 in three columns, the text occupying the centre column, and is dated by the Catalogue about the year A. D. 1 200 — written therefore in the twelfth or thirteenth century. It belonged originally to St. Peter's, Erfurt, as we learn from a rubric at the commencement, ' Psalterium glosatum sancti Petri in Erfordia ' — a proof of the wide circulation of this composite Commentary, the first copy that we noticed being Italian, the second English, and now we find a third, which was used in central Germany. Here, as in the Canonici MS., the Athanasian Creed with its comment immediately follows the Old Testament Canticles, the New Testament Canticles being omitted ; and it is headed by the title ' Athanasius ' simply, of which I do not recollect to have met with another 220 Documentary Evidence. [ch. instance. The volume closes with the Quicunque. It is a handsome and decorated codex, but the Commentary contains several omissions and inaccuracies, the results evidently of carelessness on the part of the copyist. A fourth copy is in a Psalm ' cum glossa,' i. e. with notes or comment, which formerly belonged to the Cathe dral at Metz, and is now deposited in the Public Library of that city, numbered 14, and ascribed to the tenth century in the printed Catalogue ^. The Athanasian Creed, entitled ' Fides Catholica,' occurs with its comment among the Canticles, and is followed by the Nunc Dimittis, Apostles' Creed, Te Deum, and Gloria in excelsis. A fifth is in a Psalter at Brussels of the twelfth century, numbered 9 191 in the Catalogue. I have not seen this nor the Metz Psalter myself but I have been informed by a friend who has inspected them, the Rev. Dr. Gibson, Vicar of Leeds, that in both the gloss on the Quicunque commences with the initial words of the Commentary at present under our notice — a sufficient evidence of its identity. In Swainson's work, The Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, there is mention^ of a Psalter in the Library at Turin — No. (16 — of the thirteenth century containing ' Declaratio Fidei Catholicae ' with a gloss. In this case too the Com mentary is identified by the initial words. For the same reason I have no doubt that the three copies of a Commentary which are referred to by Waterland on the authority of Tentzelius^ as severally preserved in the libraries at Gotha, Basle, and Leipsic, were also copies ' Catalogue des manuscrits des Bibliothiques Ptibliques, vol. v. p. 7. ' Page 459- ^ Waterland, Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, chap. iii. p. 54- Oxford edition, 1870. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 221 of this Exposition. The Leipsic MS. was described by Tentzel's informant, Joachim Fellen, as belonging to the twelfth century, not later, and written in three columns, like the Bodleian MSS. just mentioned. The title applied by it to the Quicunque was ' Fides Anastasii papae.' The fact of this Commentary being found in a MS. of the tenth century is obviously sufficient proof that it was extant at that epoch and could not have been com piled later. 9. In the Ambrosian Library at Milan my attention was drawn by Dr. Ceriani, the Librarian, with his usual kindness, to a MS. having the press-mark T. 103, which he told me was written at Milan in the tenth century. The first document in this book is an Exposition of the Athanasian Creed, entitled ' Tractatus Catholicae Fidei,' in the form of question and answer, which to my great regret I had not time to examine thoroughly, nor to copy com pletely. I was able, however, to copy the following passages. First, part of the preface, which is remarkable : — 'Int. Quid est fides? R. Fides est credulitas illarum rerum, quae non videntur, ut illud Apostoli : Fides est sperandarum et cet. Int. Quae sunt illae res, quae non videntur ? R. Non videtur Pater, non videtur Filius, non videtur Spiritus Sanctus, tamen creduntur. . . . Int. Quis composuit hanc fidem? R. Beatus Athanasius Alexandriae urbis episcopus. Int. Ubi com posuit ? R. In Niceno concilio urbis Bithiniae. Int. Quando composuit ? R. Composuit quando conflictum habuit cum Arrio.' Also,— ' Deus dicitur a dilectione, quia diligit omnia que creavit et ipse diligitur a Sanctis suis : dicitur a timore, quia timetur ab omnibus, adoratur a cunctis. Adoratur quidem a bonis angelis, timetur a malis. Et Deus dicitur a divinitate, quia divinus est et omnia cognoscit, antequam fiunt. Ergo Deus Pater dicitur, quia diligit omnia quae creavit, et quia timetur ab omnibus, adoratur a cunctis, et quia cognoscit omnia antequam fiant.' Also on the verse commencing 'Unus autem,' -where by the way we find the readings carnem and deum : — 'Quia non est conversa divinitas in carne, sed humanitas assumpta est in 222 Documentary Evidence. [ch. divinitatem. Ista, id est, humanitas est augmentata; illud, id est, divinitas non est minorata. Ista cepit esse quod non erat ; ilia non desiit esse quod erat.' Also on the word ' passus ': — ' Int. Et fuit semper Patre {sic) cum Filio ? R. Semper. Int. Et, si semper fuit Pater cum Filio, ergo, quando passus est Filius, passus est Pater ? R. Non. Int. Quare non? R. Quia divinitas impassibilis est. iNT. Et deseruit aliquando divinitas humanitatem ? R. Non : semper enim fuit divinitas cum humanitate, et eam non deseruit etiam nee in ipsa cruce. Int. Ergo patiebatur divinitas ? R. Non : humanitas patiebatur, divinitas non ; sicut diximus, impassibilis erat. Verbi gratia, elevat homo manum ut percutiat arborem aut lignum cum securi. Verberatus radius solis, sed non patitur. Sic et divinitas impassibilis erat.' This illustration appears also in Alcuin, de fide Trinitatis, lib. iii. cap. xvi. And on ' Descendit ad inferna ': — ' Int. Quomodo descendit ad inferna ? R. In anima sola. Int. Et quare descendit ? R. Ut eos qui detinebantur ab inferno eriperet.' The document ends abruptly with the words ' ab inferno eriperet,' which are at the bottom of a page, so that it is imperfect. On the next page is an Exposition of the Lord's Prayer, but the commencement is wanting. Clearly the leaf which originally contained the end of the Expo sition of the Athanasian Creed and the commencement of that of the Lord's Prayer is missing. The Exposition of the Lord's Prayer is followed by ' Traditio simboli,' an exposition no doubt of the Apostles' Creed on occasion of that ceremony ; and that by an ' Expositio misse cano- nice.' The book also contains, according to the list of contents written on the flyleaf ' Manuale Ambrosianum sive Antiphonas.' This it is interesting to notice as con necting the book with Milan and the Ambrosian rite. It is very observable that the preface states that the Creed was composed by St. Athanasius at the Nicene Council, which is an advance upon the tradition as it appears in the preface to the Oratorian Commentary. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 223 The Bodleian MS. Laud, Codd. Latini, 105, contains a Commentary on the Athanasian Creed, which I believe to be identical in substance at least with this Milan Com mentary. It is also in the form of question and answer, and is introduced without any title immediately after a similar interrogative Exposition of the Apostles' Creed. A vacant space was left for the rubricated title ; but it was never filled up — an omission occasionally noticeable in MSS. These two Commentaries follow immediately after, and are written in the same hand, as a series of Sermons in three books by Bishop Maurice. In addition to these documents, which are first in order, the volume comprises several others which it is unnecessary to specify, written in a variety of hands. The Catalogue assigns a double date to it, the thirteenth century and the twelfth — indicating no doubt that part belongs to the one epoch and part to the other. My belief in the substantial identity of the Commentary on the Quicunque in the Milan MS. with that in the Laud MS. is based upon the amount of coincidence which certainly exists between them. All the passages which I copied from the former, and which I have here reproduced with the exception of those from the prologue, which strictly does not belong to the body of the Exposition, are found also in the latter; and it is most unlikely that the coincidence is limited to these passages. Rather the presumption is unavoidable, that, if the two documents were placed before us in their en tirety, we should find a similar coincidence pervading them throughout, although possibly there might be variation in some particulars. And this conviction will be strengthened when we meet with a third codex, to be noticed by-and- by, which contains all the passages cited from the Com mentary in the Milan MS. including the prologue, and the 224 Documentary Evidence. [ch. whole of that in the Laud MS. We may safely conclude that in the two MSS. we have but different copies of the same Commentary — a Commentary distinct from any hitherto noticed. There appears to be another copy of it in the Vienna Imperial Library, judging from some extracts printed by Dr. Swainson in his book on the Creeds ' ; but I have not been able to identify it in Denis' Catalogue by the number which he assigns to it, 701. Either he has made a mistake or has followed a different mode of numbering. One or two things remain to be said about the Laud MS. It is a German MS., having belonged originally, in common with several other MSS. of the Laud collection in the Bodleian Library, to St. Mary's Church or Monas tery at Eberbach or Ebberbach in Baden. This is notified by a memorandum on one of the blank leaves, 'Liber sancte Marie Virginis in Ebberbach.' In Mr. Coxe's Cata logue the Sermons which precede the two Commentaries on the Creeds are described as ' Mauricii de Soliaco epis copi Parisiensis Sermones ' ; and if this is correct, the portion of the MS. containing them could scarcely have been written before the thirteenth century, Mauricius de Soliaco having been Bishop of Paris from 1164 to 11 96. But the description does not appear to be borne out by the MS., the rubric heading the first sermon being ' Sermo Mauricii episcopi in synodo,' and there is a similar rubric to another sermon. Besides, according to Oudin^ the sermons of Mauricius de Soliaco are preserved in the Bodleian MS., Digby, 149. and the sermons in that codex are entitled ' Sermones Mauricii episcopi Parisiensis,' &c., and they appear to be different from those in our Laud MS. ' Page 454, note. " Commentarius de scriptoribus ecclesiasticis, torn. ii. p. 1581. Lipsiae, 1722. iv.J Commentaries or Expositions. 225 It would seem then that the latter must have been the work of some other Bishop Maurice ; and the name was not uncommon. The point, however, is of little or no importance in reference to our subject, as it would not follow from the mere fact of the Commentaries on the Apostles' and Athanasian Creeds being subjoined to the sermons that they were by one and the same author. 10. A Commentary on the Athanasian Creed contained in the MS. 20 of the Boulogne Library — a glossed Psalter executed at the conclusion of the tenth century or very early in the eleventh — here demands notice. The compiler of this Exposition appears to have used the Stavelot Commentary as the main element in its con struction. He evidently follows it throughout, though very freely, frequently adopting its language, but without adhering to it invariably or accurately, omitting much entirely, and introducing also other matter, most of which is apparently original. And in this fact, considering that the manuscript is undoubtedly prior in date to Bruno, we clearly see an additional proof that the Stavelot Com mentary existed before, and considerably before, his time ; so that it cannot be regarded as identical with his Com mentary, much less as founded upon it, the truth being that he used it as the groundwork and main source of his own Exposition. And our document may be traced to other sources besides that just mentioned. In two instances notes are drawn from the so-called Fortunatus Commentary, one of them being of some length — the remarkable passage re lating to the Holy Trinity in which the doctrine is illus trated by analogies observable in natural objects. Another note seems drawn partly from this source, partly from another Exposition. In one instance, if not more, the Q 226 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Troyes Commentary is borrowed from — in the pas sage illustrating the Arian doctrine of the Trinity by comparison with the various metals of gold, silver, and brass. It cannot be supposed that these were the only cases where the compiler of our document made use of earlier materials ; and no doubt others might be discovered by any one more learned than myself. One of the plates in the publications of the Palaeo graphical Society is taken from this MS.', and the grounds for assigning the date are stated by the editors as follows : ' At the beginning of the volume are some Latin acrostics, from which it appears that the MS. was written for the Abbey of St. Bertin in St. Omer by the monk Heriveus, in the time of the Abbot Odbertus. The period of the Abbacy of Odbertus is from A.D. 989 to 1008 ; and in the chartulary of the monastery under the year 1005, mention is made of his having had manuscripts written for him.' It is obvious to remark that it does not follow from the fact of Heriveus being the writer of the manuscript that he was also the compiler of the Commentary on the Qui cunqtie which it contains. For my knowledge of this Commentary I am indebted to the kindness of the friend whose name I have already mentioned more than once in common with similar acts of kindness — the Rev. A. E. Burn, who lent me a copy of it. II. The true nature of Bruno's Commentary has been already noticed. It is not an original work, but a recen sion of an earlier Commentary, edited by Bruno as part of his glossed or annotated Psalter, some time between the year 1034 when he became Bishop of Wurzburg, and 1045 the year of his death. The distinctive differences by which ' Vol. iii. plate 97. IV.J Commentaries or Expositions. 227 it may be discriminated from the Stavelot Commentary, on which it was based, were also specified ^- The Psalter was dedicated by its compiler to Kilian, the Irish Apostle and Patron Saint of Wiirzburg, who was martyred in 689, in the following verses : — ' Sit coUega tuae sortis. Pater O Kiliane, Antistes dono qui te veneratur in isto.' The Bodleian Library at Oxford possesses two early copies of it, both of the eleventh century, and both well written and richly decorated books in good condition — Rawlinson B. N. 163, and Laud Lat. 96. They are in fact duplicate volumes. Not only are the original contents of both the same, but in other respects — dimensions, character and style of handwriting and decoration, and arrangement — they present a most remarkable and close resemblance, which conveys the impression that they are works of the same epoch and scriptorium, and not im probably executed by the same scribe and the same artist. Both are written in two columns, one containing the text, the other — written in a smaller hand — the comment or gloss, and the columns are of similar dimensions in the two volumes, that in which the text is written comprising invariably I believe twenty-three lines ; the ruling also of the leaves corresponds in both. They must both have been of the same size originally, but at present the Rawlin son MS. is a trifle the smaller of the two, owing evidently to the leaves having been cut away by the modern binder, whereas those of the Laud MS. are untouched. On the verso side of each leaf in the Rawlinson MS. the word Bruno is written in capitals at the top, and on the recto eps ; but this is wanting in the other volume. These two ' Section 7 of this chapter. Q2 228 Documentary Evidence. [ch. codices must have been written within fifty years at the utmost of Bruno's death, and may possibly have been copied, at least as regards the Psalter and Canticles, from his autograph, which was deposited at Wiirzburg; but neither of them can be the autograph itself inasmuch as both comprise much matter which was not included in that book, and the dedication above cited, by which it was headed, is absent from both. These two books supply some internal evidence with regard to the domiciles to which they originally belonged and where they were used. From the petitions at the end of the Litany, which follows the Canticles, it appears that they were each used in a monastery. Thus we have: ' Ut istam congregationem in sancta religione conservare digneris'; 'ut pontifices et abbates in tuo sancto servitio confortare digneris ' ; and ' Oremus pro omni gradu ecclesie — pro pastore nostro — pro rege nostro — pro abbate nostro.' And in the second of the prayers to be used after the recitation of the Psalms intercession is made ' pro salute regis et episcopi nostri et abbate nostro et pro universa congregatione nostra sive pro omnibus qui locum istum honoraverunt elemosinis.' There is some indication of the locality of the monasteries where they were severally used. The prayers to be said after the recital of the Psalms are followed by another series of prayers addressed to the three Divine Persons, and several saints. These, like the Litany and the preceding prayers, are the same in both our MSS., with the exception of one remarkable variation which de serves to be noticed. After the prayer to the Apostles in the Rawlinson MS. is one to St. Quirynus containing the following words : ' Mente et corpore provolutus ante aram in tuo honore, domine, consecratam et tibi, sancte Quiryne, martyr Christi . . . tuum in hac hora levamen orationum IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 229 imploro . . . per eum qui solus est omnium delictorum re- missor Ihesum Christum,' &c. In the Laud MS. this same prayer occurs in the same position ; but instead of being addressed to Quirynus it is addressed to Kilianus. This variation is very striking and clearly points to the conclu sion that the Rawlinson MS. must have been used in some monastery where the special cultus of St. Quirynus was observed, and it was observed at the Benedictine Abbey at Tegernsee in Bavaria after the translation of his remains to that place from Rome in the eighth century, whilst on the other hand the Laud MS. was in all probability a manual of devotion at Wiirzburg where the memory of St. Chilian was had in peculiar veneration and his relics were de posited in the tomb over which the cathedral had been built. This conclusion is confirmed by the fact that the latter volume is one of forty-six Latin MSS. which were 'e Collegio Herbipolensi ^ in Germania sumpti A.D. 1631, cum Suecorum regis exercitus per universam fere Ger- maniam grassarentur,' and which formed a portion of the first of the munificent gifts with which Archbishop Laud enriched the Bodleian Library ^. Waterland enumerates ten MSS. of Bruno's Commentary, as he supposes ''. Of these. No. 2, the Eadwine Psalter at Trinity College, Cambridge; No. 4, Bodleian Laud 17; No. 6, St. John's College, Oxford loi ; No. 7, Balliol College, Oxford 32 ; and No. 9, the St. Germain's MS., now Biblio theque Nationale Paris Lat. 1 2020, I have noticed above '' as copies of the Stavelot Commentary. No. 8, the MS. in the Cathedral Library at York, I have reason to believe is ' The College of Wurzburg. ' Macray's Annals of the Bodleian Library, p. 61. ' Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, pp, 49-51. Oxford, 1870. ' Section 6 of this chapter. 230 Documentary Evidence. [ch. also a copy of that Commentary, and I have been informed by my friend the Rev. A. E. Burn that it is so. Waterland wonders at the great variations between the York, the Trinity College, and the St. Germain's MSS. — the others he had not seen himself— and the printed copies of Bruno. But clearly his perplexity was owing to his not perceiving that these MSS. all contain copies of another, though cognate. Commentary. The British Museum MS. Addit. 18043, which was necessarily unknown to him, would have solved his difficulty. There remain four other MSS. men tioned by the same scholar, as copies of Bruno. With respect to No. 10, now Harleian 2953, in the British Museum, which he states to have been copied from Bruno by order of Peutenger, he was certainly misinformed. It is a Psalter written at the beginning of the sixteenth century, and contains the Athanasian Creed in its usual place at the end of the Canticles, but without any gloss or comment. It is interesting for the marginal notes which occur in it of contemporary events, and particularly of the births and deaths of members of the Peutenger family at Augsburg, to whom it belonged. No. 5 — Merton College, Oxford, 208 — will be noticed by-and-by : the Commentary is drawn partly from the Stavelot Commentary, partly from the Oratorian, and partly from another source. No. i — the autograph copy of Bruno — in the year 1533 was preserved in the library of the Church of Wiirzburg, as we learn from the preface of Cochlaeus to his edition ; but according to the latest editor of Bruno — Denzinger, who was a Professor of the University of Wiirzburg — it was well-nigh destroyed, or at any rate so much injured as to be no longer of any use or value, during the Swedish war or in popular tumults in the sixteenth century^. No. 3 is our Laud MS. Thus ' Prolegomena to S. Brunonis Opera. Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. cxlii. p. 28. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 231 of the ten MSS. mentioned by Waterland, two only are really copies of Bruno, and of these one has long since perished, or nearly so. The Rawhnson MS. was necessarily unknown to him, having come to light since his time. There have been several printed editions of Bruno's Psalter, including of course the Athanasian Creed, with his Commentary upon it. The first was printed by Jeorius Reyser, probably in 1480 or about that time. A copy of this book is preserved in the British Museum. It is in folio, printed in two columns, the text in one, the gloss or com mentary in a much smaller type in the other ; the titles and initial letters of Psalms and Canticles are rubricated. It is without title or colophon or date. The date assigned by the Catalogue, but doubtfully, is 1486-: 1480 is the date assigned to the edition by Denzinger, and with more prob ability. On the flyleaf of the British Museum copy is the following memorandum by a former owner : ' This book is perfect, without title, beginning corrigendi and ending poterit. It is the first printed edition typis Reyseri. No date.' It is added that the book was in its original binding when purchased by the signatory, and he had had it re bound. This is signed ' E. Stanfield, June 22, 1821 ? ' An editorial preface commencing ' Corrigendi emendandique ' contains a notable passage with reference to Bishop Bruno : ' Thesaurisans posteris filiis suis memorabilem et sanctum psalmorum librum — ex quo ille impressus est — sumptuose scriptum, quasi hereditatis spiritualis non minimam por- tionem reliquit. Quod et apostolo nostro beatissimoque civitatis Herbipolensis primo episcopo Chiliano offerens eundem sanctum patronum nostrum versiculis exorat Sit collega tuae sortis, pater O Kiliane, Antistes dono qui te veneratur in isto! This possesses special interest as in forming us that Reyser's edition was printed from Bruno's 232 Documentary Evidence. [> CH. original copy then preserved at Wiirzburg. The Athanasian Creed in this book is entitled ' Fides Catholica sancti Athanasii episcopi.' The Commentary upon it I have examined, and it appears to me to contain all the peculiar passages and readings which distinguish Bruno's recension from the Stavelot Commentary. The Bodleian Library possesses three copies of this book, the press-marks being Laud Lat. o,'^, Auct. M. infra 16, and Auct. M. infra 15. The second edition was printed by Antony Koberger at Nuremberg in 1494. Of this also there is a copy in the British Museum, and another in the Bodleian. It seems to be a reprint as regards the matter of Reyser's edition, in cluding his preface. It is arranged in three columns, the text occupying the centre, the comment those on each side. The third was also issued by Koberger at Nuremberg in 1497. There is a copy of this in the Bodleian. Two editions were produced by Johannes Cochlaeus, the first in 1531 at Wiirzburg, the second in 1533 at Leipsic. This was reproduced in the Bibliotheca Magna Patrum at Cologne in 161 8, tom. xi, and again in the Bibliotheca Maxima Patrum at Lyons in 1677, tom. xviii. The latest edition, I believe, is that of Henry Denzinger, Professor of Theology in the University of Wurzburg. This is printed in Migne's Patrologia Latina, tom. cxlii, and is therefore easily accessible. 12. In the Milan MS. M. 79, assigned to the eleventh century, which I have previously alluded to as containing a copy of the so-called Fortunatus Commentary, there are, immediately preceding it, two other Expositions of the Athanasian Creed. I regret that during my visits to the Ambrosian Library I was unable to examine these docu ments fully ; but I copied a few passages from each. The IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 233 first follows immediately three Expositions of the Lord's Prayer, commencing on f 33, and is introduced by the rubric, ' Expositio fidei catholice.' It is very short and simple, and therefore probably of early origin. Some opinion respecting it may be formed from the two following passages, the commencement ' Quicunque homo vult salvus esse ante omnia id est super omnia : opus est itt teneat id est retineat vel intelligat : catholicam id est universalem : fidem id est credulitatem '; and the note on the words ' de propriis factis ' as follows : ' et erimus tunc reddituri rationem de propriis factis nostris quicquid egimus in hoc saeculo, non solum de factis, sed etiam de pravis et immundis cogita- tionibus, si non fuerimus ex his per penitentiam et per opera bona exercenda abluti.' The second is much longer, and is introduced without any title, it being considered apparently that the title in the first case applied equally to this Exposition. It is preceded, as is frequently the case, with a prologue on Faith, commencing with the words, ' Fides est illarum rerum, que non videntur, credulitas, ut illud Apostoli ; Est fides sperandarum! &c. This very definition occurs, as we have before noticed ^, in the pro logue to an interrogative Commentary which is found in another Milan MS. — T. 103. The prologue ends with the following account of the origin of the Quicunque : ' Mani- festum est hanc fidem, que catholica dicitur, Spiritum Sanctum per hos (sic) beati Athanasii Alexandrini episcopi tempore Arrii heresiarchi edidisse, per quam non solum ipsius Arrii sed etiam cunctorum hereticorum perversum dogma destrui posset.' This may be compared with the account in the Oratorian prologue, as well as that just mentioned in Milan T. 103. The description of the Atha nasian Creed — 'fides que catholica dicitur'— is worthy of ' See above, sect. 8. 234 Documentary Evidence. [ch. notice. The exposition strictly speaking begins : 'Quicumque id est unusquisque : vult id est cupit : salvus esse ante id est super omnia : opus est id est necesse est : ut teneat id est manu mentis.' This gloss or note on ut teneat is remarkable, especially as it occurs also in an interrogative Commentary in Laud Lat. 105 — ^ ut teneat non manu cor poris, sed mentis ' — a Commentary which I have already noticed ^ as substantially identical with that in Milan T. 103. Further, the doctrine of the Trinity is illustrated in our document by the analogous relations of ' sol, splendor et calor ' — an illustration which is also found in the inter rogative Commentary in those two MSS. and in a third to which I shall soon draw attention. Lastly, I copied a long passage referring to the categories, which for fear of pro lixity I forbear to transcribe at length : suffice it to say that part of it appears to be based upon a passage in the Oratorian Commentary, which is drawn word for word from St. Augustine, while the rest has an evident relation to the fifteenth chapter of the first book of Alcuin, de Trini tate. Thus it would seem that the second of these Exposi tions must have been connected with the interrogative Commentary in the Milan and Laud MSS., the Oratorian Commentary, and Alcuin's Treatise on the Trinity. 13. The British Museum MS. Reg. 8. B. xiv. comprises with a variety of documents an interrogative Commentary on the Athanasian Creed, entitled ' Interrogaciones et re- sponsiones de Fide Catholica super Symbolum beati Athanasii Alexandrinae urbis episcopi.' This document is clearly drawn partly from the Stavelot Commentary cast into the form of question and answer, and partly from the interrogative Commentary in Milan T. 103 and Laud Lat. 105, including the prologue respecting faith and the ' See above, sect. 8. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 235 composition of the Creed, which appears in the former MS. only. It contains, I believe, very little which may not be traced to one or other of these sources. The correspon dence is literal and distinct. The British Museum volume includes, as I have stated, several other documents written in a variety of hands and at different times. Our document is assigned by the catalogue to the twelfth century : in the judgement also of Sir E. M. Thompson, kindly expressed to me, it was written at that epoch and in England. It commences on fol. 145, recto. 14. At the same time when Dr. Ceriani drew my atten tion to Milan T. 103, he placed in my hand another MS. containing a Commentary on the Athanasian Creed. It belongs in his opinion to the twelfth century, and has the • press-mark I. 152. The Commentary commences on fol. 133, and is entitled 'Expositio fidei catholice.' In this case also I was only able to transcribe a few passages. The first of these is from the prologue: 'Hanc fidem, que catholica dicitur, edidit Athanasius Alexandrine urbis ecclesie episcopus tempore diaconatus sui propter hereticos et maxime propter Arrium.' This is evidently similar to the preface of the second Commentary in Milan M. 79. Two passages seem to be connected with the Exposition in Milan T. 103 and Laud 105, and three appear to be based upon the Fortunatus Commentary. The readings of ver. 33 are deserving of notice : ' Unus autem non conversatione divinitatis in carne, sed assumptione humanitatis in deum.' Conversatione is notable, as it was originally written in the ancient Bobio MS. now in the Ambrosian Library : it is also the reading of the tenth-century Psalter at Salisbury. The error therefore was one of early date. In all prob ability the mark of contraction over the e in carne signifying the omission of the final m has been left out 236 Documentary Evidence. [ch. inadvertently, as deutn is certainly the reading, and the Exposition immediately after adds: 'Domini nostri Ihesu Christi divinitas non est conversa in carnem . . . Ipsa tamen divinitas carnem, id est, humanitatem adsumsit.' This, like Milan T. 103, before noticed, is peculiarly a book of Milanese Church offices and ritual. Among the contents, as stated in a list written in a modern hand on the flyleaf are ' Ordo et cerimonie primitivae Medio- lanensis ecclesiae per totum annum,' ' De recuperatione Ambrosiani officii facta ab Eugenio,' ' Expositio matutini officii facta a Theodoro Archiepiscopo,' or, according to the more full and correct description of the rubric heading the document, ' Expositio matutini officii Sancte Ambrosiane Mediolanensis hecclesie (sic) edita a sancto Feodoro archi episcopo eiusdem ecclesie.' This is followed by the Com mentary on the Athanasian Creed, then comes 'Expositio misse Ambrosiane' ; and next ' Expositio Symboli.' The list is headed ' Liber appellatus Beroldus in quo diversa notabilia ecclesiae Mediolanensis continentur.' It is clear that these two Milan MSS. are of special value, as evidence of the close connexion of the Quicunque with the ancient Milanese Church and the Ambrosian rite. 15. Among the works of the celebrated Abelard is a Commentary on the Athanasian Creed, entitled in the printed editions ' Petri Abaelardi expositio fidei in Sym bolum Athanasii.' It is easily accessible in Migne's series ^. It is very short, and passes over in silence by far the greater part of the Creed. It bears the impress of an independent and thoughtful mind ; but some of the glosses and notes are obviously drawn from pre-existing Commentaries. That on neque confutidentes coincides with the Exposition in Laud 105. In the derivation of persona the Oratorian ' Patrol. Lat. tom. clxxvii. pp. 629-632. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 237 Commentary is followed : ' Persona . . . per se una dicitur, non rei alii in unam substantiam sociata.' Some of the opinions expressed are worth noting. Those who shall be found alive at Christ's coming shall undergo, it is declared, a momentary death, and their restoration to life will be their resurrection. Ignem aeternum is explained thus : 'Summum atque indeficientem cruciatum, sive ille ignis cor- poreus tantum sit atque materialis, sive quicunque interior animae cruciatus.' As Abelard died A.D. 1142 at the age of sixty-three, the Exposition must obviously be placed in the early part of the twelfth century, probably between A.D. mo and 1142. 16. The document which appears among the printed editions of the works of Hildegardis Abbess of St. Rupert near Bingen on the Rhine, with the title ' Explanatio Sym boli Sancti Athanasii ad congregationem sororum suarum \' is not strictly speaking a Commentary or Exposition of the Athanasian Creed, and I can scarcely suppose that the above title was applied to it by the author. It is rather a discourse of a very wide and comprehensive nature, addressed by Hildegardis to her nuns, in course of which, for the purpose of expounding 'the doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation, she employs the language of the Qui cunque. A great part of the discourse, perhaps the greater part, has no reference to the Creed whatever ; but, though it cannot be classed as a Commentary, from which it differs in purpose and construction, it may be adduced in proof of the value attached to the Athanasian Creed at the time as an exposition of the Faith. This document must have been composed after the year 11 48, when Hildegardis became Abbess of St. Rupert ; she died in 11 79 or 1180. 17. No. 1655 of the Phillipps or Middlehill collection — ' Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. cxcvii. pp. 1065-1081. 238 Documentary Evidence. [ch. a MS. of the thirteenth century- -in addition to other documents contains the Athanasian Creed entitled 'Fides Catholica edita a sancto Athanasio,' with a Commentary. The Commentary is short, and most of the notes are evidently derived from the Fortunatus Commentary ; amongst the notes are inserted some quotations from St. Augustine, and one from Rufinus's Exposition of the Creed, not, however, ascribed to Rufinus, but to Jerome. This is the last document in the volume. The other contents are, ' Tractatus sancti Augustini episcopi a primo Psalmo usque in finem quinquagesimi,' a Commentary from various sources on the rest of the Psalter, 'Proemium magistri Petri super Psalterium,' the usual Old and New Testament Canticles, the Lord's Prayer and Creed, all with a gloss or comment. This book was given, as we learn from a memorandum at the end, to the Church of St. Vincent at Metz, by Dame Soffia, surnamed Ducelatte, ' pro remedio anime sue,' and of that of her husband and son. From another note on the first page it appears at one time to have belonged to the Jesuits at Paris. 18. The Merton College MS., numbered 208 in Mr. Coxe's Catalogue and assigned by him to the thirteenth century, is a Psalter with gloss or comment, followed by the usual Old Testament Canticles and the Athanasian Creed, all of which have likewise a gloss or comment, but no titles. It is a handsome folio volume. The Psalms with their comment are written in two columns, the Canticles and Creed with their comment in three, the text as usual occupying the centre. The comment on the Psalms is from Augustine and Cassiodorus, in places from Jerome and Ambrose also. The notes, forming the Commentary on the Athanasian Creed, are for the most part either from IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 239 the Stavelot Commentary or the Oratorian, in one case from these two combined, but a few notes are from another source. It is worthy of notice, that while neither the Creed nor its Commentary in this Psalter have any title, the former is distinctly ascribed by the latter to Anastasius, not Athanasius. The first note commences with the words : ' Hie beatus Anastasius liberum arbitrium posuit.' The alteration must have been made designedly. The next MS. we shall mention will indicate what Anastasius was probably meant. The position of the Quicunque, occurring as it does immediately after the Old Testament Canticles, the New Testament Canticles, together with the Benedicite, Te Deum, Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed being omitted, is also noticeable in this volume. It seems to be not uncommon in glossed Psalters of the twelfth and thir teenth centuries, being found, as previously mentioned, in the Bodleian MS. Canonici, Bibl. 30, which contains the Commentary compiled from the Stavelot and Oratorian Commentaries, and in Laud Lat. 17 and Balliol 32, in both of which the Stavelot Commentary appears. This MS. is number 5 in Waterland's list of manuscript copies of Bruno's Commentary. Clearly he was misinformed respecting it. There are some interesting memoranda in the Merton book of former owners. On the flyleaf there occurs: ' Liber Will. Reed Episcopi Cicestriensis quem emit a venerabili patre Thoma Tryllek Episcopo Roffensi. Oretis igitur pro utroque.' By another note it appears to have been presented to the College by the former bishop 'ad usum sociorum ibidem (i.e. in libraria) studentium cathe- nandus.' According to Bishop Stubbs' Registrum, Thomas 240 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Tryllek was consecrated Bishop of Rochester at Avignon in 1364, and died in 1372 ; and William Reed was conse crated at the same place Bishop of Chichester in 1368, and died in 1385. Another person, Master Burbathe, Doctor in Theology, and formerly Fellow of the College, is repre sented as the donor in a note written in a later and different hand on the first leaf The book would appear therefore to have come into the possession of this second donor by some means notwithstanding the chains in which it had been fast bound in the library. 19. Simon Tomacensis, who was a canon of Tournay and a distinguished teacher of theology in the early part of the thirteenth century, composed a Commentary on the Athanasian Creed which has never been printed, but is extant in the Corpus Christi College, Oxford, MS. No. 250, f 24 v., of the thirteenth century, and in the Paris Biblio theque Nationale MS. Latin 18068 of the same century, f. 75 r., also in the Basle MS. B. ix. 6, probably of the fourteenth century. The latter appears from a memo randum at the end to have belonged formerly to the Friars Preachers or Dominicans at Basle. Other manu script copies of it at Paris, Bruges, and Villers in Brabant are mentioned by Oudin ^. It is a long and elaborate Exposition. -The prologue commences : ' Apud Aristo- telem argumentum est ratio faciens fidem, apud Christum argumentum est fides faciens rationem.' The comment proper begins: ' Quicunque, &c., de quacunque gente, qua- cunque conditione, quocunque sexu, non enim Deus ob praerogativam gentis vel conditionis vel sexus istum re- spicit, vel ob vilitatem illorum ilium despicit, sed in omni gente, conditione, sexu, qui timet Deum acceptus est illi.' A very remarkable feature in this document is that it ' De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, tom, iii. pp. 26-33. Lipsiae, 1722. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 241 distinctly and repeatedly ascribes the Creed to Pope Anasta sius, not Athanasius. Thus in the prologue Pope Anastasius is stated to have gathered together, and that in a synod of prelates — ' multitudine praesidum convocata ' — into a com pendious formula described as ' symbolum ' the articles of the Christian religion and the heresies opposed to them. And this Pope Anastasius would seem to have been the first Pope of the name (whose pontificate lasted from 398 to 402), as in his time the heresies of Arius, Sabellius' Pelagius, Entices, and Nestorius had sprung up and spread abroad. And again and again in the course of the Exposition Anastasius, nev£r I think Athanasius, is referred to as the author. For instance, we find ' Una Anastasii intentio est in hoc simbolo simplicitatem fidelium in articulis nostre religionis instruere ad electionem.' The colophon is to the same effect : ' Explicit feliciter expositio super symbolum Beati Anastasii.' Neither in the Oxford MS. nor the Basle has the Commentary any title at the beginning. It may be interesting to mention that in commenting on the Incarnation Simon clearly intimates his belief that the Blessed Virgin was not exempt from the taint of original sin. 20. The Commentary of Alexander Necham, sometimes called 'Alexander de Sancto Albano' because he was a native of St. Alban's, is a work of the same epoch ; it must have been composed either at the close of the twelfth century or the beginning of the thirteenth, as the author died A.D. 1217. It has never been printed: but it is preserved in a British Museum MS. of the thirteenth century — Harl, 3133, f 92, and in two Bodleian MSS. of the same century — Bodl. 284 and Auct. D. 2. 9. The two latter are both Psalters with a gloss or comment. In Bodl. 284 the Athanasian Creed with its gloss or Commentary R 242 Documentary Evidence. [ch. follows the Psalms immediately, as there are no Canticles ; in the other Oxford MS. it follows the Old Testament Canticles, which, like the Psalms and the Creed, are accom panied by a comment. In the first-named Oxford MS. the Commentary on the Quicunque is without title or colophon, in the other it has the title 'Expositio fidei catholice a magistro Alexandro edita,' and in the British Museum MS. it has no title, but the following colophon: 'Explicit fides catholica Atanasii (sic) episcopi exposita a magistro Alexandro de sancto Albano.' The British Museum MS. I may add is not a Psalter : it contains homilies from the Fathers upon the Gospels for Sundays and festivals, and our document comes at the end of the volume, written in a different hand from the preceding contents. This also is a long and elaborate Commentary, written with all the dialectical subtlety and refinement charac teristic of the Schoolmen. The prologue commences, ' Caput aquile visum ab Ezekiele eminentius erat ceteris tribus capitibus,' and it ends, ' In commendacione ergo orthodoxe et catholice fidei hereses extirpare et eradicare intendit Atanasius (sic) in hoc simbolo dicens.' Thus the Creed is distinctly ascribed to Athanasius. The Exposition proper begins, ' Quicunque vult salvus esse, &^c. Hec est enim victoria que vincit mundum fides nostra. Signanter dicit vult et non dicit quicunque salvus erit, quia parvulus baptizatus, si decedat, sic salvatur et non vtilt salvus esse! It is a notable peculiarity of Necham's Commentary that to a large extent it is a comment upon another comment, which is quoted not- fewer than thirty times, I think, the .several quotations being examined, discussed, and explained. In eleven cases the Commentary thus quoted and ex pounded is indicated by its title, viz. ' Notetur glosa scho- lastica que dicit,' &c. It was so called, I presume, from IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 243 being used as a manual of instruction in the schools. In other cases the particular note or comment is simply de scribed as ' glosa,' or ' glosa interlinearis ' or ' marginalis,' according as it was written between the lines of the text or in one of the marginal columns. The term ' glosa mar ginalis volatilis ' or ' glosa volatilis ' also occurs in one or two cases, referring I presume to an additional marginal column besides the two ordinarily found on either side of that containing the text — this fourth column being some times resorted to for convenience when the notes were numerous. This ' glosa scolastica ' was evidently a com pilation drawn from earlier Commentaries and the Fathers. Thus of the thirty passages quoted fifteen are from the Stavelot Commentary, one from the Bouhier, four from that attributed to Fortunatus (but these probably were drawn directly from the Exposition found in the Phillips MS. 1655, in which they all appear), four are from St. Augustine, one apparently from Alcuin : the remaining five I am not able to trace to their sources. Of the four passages drawn from St. Augustine I should say that three are expressly stated to be so ; the fourth is probably taken directly from the Phillips Commentary. These evidences of a Com mentary on the Athanasian Creed, which must have been current in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries and widely used, have hitherto escaped the notice of modern scholars. In the Oxford MS. Bodl. 284, immediately after the Commentary of Alexander Necham, another Exposition of the Athanasian Creed commences. It is imperfect, ending at the seventeenth verse, Quia sicut singillatim ; and this is not owing to any mutilation of the book, which is com plete and in good condition ; evidently it was never finished. Like the Commentary which it follows it has neither title nor colophon, and consequently its authorship R 2 244 Documentary Evidence. [ch. must be uncertain ; but whoever composed it must have had Necham's Commentary before him, which in the com mencement of the prologue it evidently follows ; in fact, the initial words are the same in both. It also resembles Necham's Commentary in ascribing the Quicunque to Athanasius and in quoting the 'glosa scolastica,' which it does four times. Three of these quotations clearly have the Stavelot Commentary for their source, and in two of the three the words introducing the quotation expressly mention the ' glosa scolastica ' as the document quoted — 'in glosa scolastica dicitur'; but in the words introducing the third the document quoted from is described as ' glosa Anselmi.' The Anselm thus clearly accredited with the compilation of the ' glosa scolastica ' must have been the Dean of Laon, who flourished about A.D. iioo and died in 11 1 7. Nothing can be more probable than that he should have compiled this ' glosa ' or Commentary on the Athana sian Creed, inasmuch as he was the author of a similar work on the Old and New Testaments, and another of the same nature on the Psalter has been attributed to him ^ The MS. Bodl. 284 appears to have been written at the abbey of Cirencester, of which Necham was abbot from 1213 to 121 7, for the word Cirencestrie has been written in the same hand as the text of the book at the top of the first page, and is quite legible, though an attempt has been made to erase it ; and the same word written by the original hand is found elsewhere in the book in a similar position, particularly on f 294. This circumstance, con sidered in connexion with the marked resemblance which in some particulars the unfinished Commentary before- ' ' Glossaturam super Psalterium et epistolas Pauli ab Anselmo per glossulas interlineantes marginalesque distinctam,' quoted in Ducange's Glossary under the word ' Glosa ' from Vita Anastasii IV, apud Murat. tom. iii. p. 440. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 245 mentioned bears to that of Necham which it follows points to the conclusion as probable that the former as well as the latter was compiled by him, or at any rate if not by him, by one of the canons of his house. Cirencester Abbey was a house of regular Augustinian canons. Oudin describes Alexander Necham as ' Philosophus eximius, eruditionis profundae Theologus, Rhetor ac Poeta suo tempore insignis,' and then proceeds with an account of his life, which is extremely inaccurate. Having stated that Necham taught publicly in Paris about the year 1 1 80, he adds that after his return to England he was made ' Cicestriensis Canonicus ut constat ex MS. codice Sancti Germani Parisiensis '.' And subsequently he quotes the words of the St. Germain's MS., which are his authority for this assertion : ' Liber magistri Alexandri Canonici Cirecestrensis.' Clearly this represents him not as a canon of Chichester, ' Canonicus Cicestrensis,' but as a canon of Cirencestre. Probably in the MS. there was a mark of contraction over the first e, denoting the omission of the n after it. Evidently Oudin did not know of such a place as Cirencestre or Cirencester ; hence his mistake. Then he continues : ' Unde,' i. e. from Chichester, ' Excestriam se conferens factus in eadem ecclesia Canonicus regularis divi Augustini, anno tandem 12 15 eiusdem ecclesiae Abbas con- stitutus est.' In thus representing Necham as first an Augustinian canon regular and afterwards abbot of Exeter, Oudin appears to have been misled by Bale^- Cave also, strange to say, has fallen into the same mistake, for mistake it obviously is, inasmuch as there never were canons regular nor abbot nor abbey at Exeter. The canons there were secular canons, and at the time were without a dean, the ' Oudin, De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, tom. iii. pp. 4-8. ^ Scriptorum Britanniae centuria tertia. Basiliae, 1559, p. 274. 246 Documentary Evidence. [ch. deanery not having been instituted until 1225. The truth appears to be that Necham first became a canon regular of the Augustinian abbey of Cirencester and was subse quently elected abbot. Tanner dates his appointment to the abbacy in 1215, Dugdale in 1313. According to the latter he died in 1317 ^. 21. The next Commentary calling for attention seems hitherto to have escaped notice altogether. It was written by a contemporary of the last-mentioned commentator, as would appear probable, and one bearing a very similar name. A copy of it is preserved in the Bodleian thirteenth- century MS., Rawlinson C. 67, a book which originally belonged to Hereford Cathedral, and before it passed into the Rawlinson collection must have been for a time in the ownership of Hearne the antiquary, as appears by a memorandum on the flyleaf: ' Suum cuique, Tho. Hearne, Aug. 19, 1 73 1. Bought of Mr. Fletcher of Oxford, Book seller.' The title, on f 86, is ' Expositio simboli Athanasii episcopi secundum Magistrum Alexandrum nequam.' The preface commences : ' Dicit Apostolus, Fides est fundamentum, quod immutari non potest. Fides ista valde necessaria est nobis in conflictu adversus varios hostes, sed illud egregii versificatoris. Prima petit campum dubia sub sorte duelli.' It ends : ' Tres autem sunt simboli vel simbola. Est autem simbolum apostolorum sive laicorum ; et simbolum niceni concilii, quod est simbolum misse ; est et simbolum Atha nasii episcopi quod cantatur in hora prima, et quia plenius et perfectius continetur fides in illo simbolo, ideo de illo primo dicendum.' The first note commences : ' Opus est ut quicunque vult salvus esse ; id est, quicunque desiderat salutem corporis et anime, quia duplex salus hie notatur, ' Monasticon, vol. vi. p. 176. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 247 scilicet salus corporis et anime. Et utraque est duplex. Est enim salus anime temporalis et eternalis. Tempo ralis est virtus ; quia, sicut peccatum est mors anime, ita virtus est salus anime. Salus eternalis est vita eterna. Et utraque est affectanda.' This Commentary being perfectly different from the pre ceding, it is natural to suppose that the two works are by different authors. But owing presumably to the resem blance of their names, and possibly also to their being contemporaries, the authors have been confounded by those whom we rely upon for information respecting them, par ticularly Bale, Cave, Tanner, and Oudin. The confusion appears to have originated at an early period, for Bale pro duces a quotation ' ex catalogo Bostoni Buriensis ^,' in which it will be observed that the writer exercises his ingenuity in accounting for the imaginary fact of the two names having belonged to the same person. It is as follows : ' Alexander nequam . . . simul in sancto Albano mona- chatum petiit atque ad abbatem ita scripsit : Si vis, veniam ; sin autem, tu autem. Respondit Abbas : Si bonus sis, venias ; si nequam, nequaquam. Et ita indignatus, cogno- mine in Neckam mutato, se transtulit Excestriam, ubi multa scripsit.' And we learn from the same source that he died at Worcester ' in quodam itinere,' and was buried there ' in claustro monachorum,' the following epitaph being placed over his grave : — ' Eclipsin patitur sapientia, sol sepelitur, Cui si par unus, minus esset flebile funus. Vir bene discretus, et in omni more facetus, Dictus erat nequam, vitam duxit tamen aequam.' Hence it seems clear that Necham or Neckam and Nequam were different persons, and that the latter died at Worcester ' Scriptorum Britanniae cenluria tertia. Appendix. Boston flourished at the commencement of the fifteenth century. 248 Documentary Evidence. [ch. or in its neighbourhood, and was buried in the cathedral cloister there. By some authorities however, which are quoted by Tanner^, the former is said to have died and been buried at Worcester, the confusion between the names being no doubt the cause of the error. There seems good reason for believing that Nequam was connected with Exeter, and if so he must have been a canon of the cathe dral, unless he was a monk at one of the religious houses of that city, either the Benedictine Priory of St. Nicholas, which was a cell to Battle Abbey, or the Cluniac Priory of St. James, which was a cell to St. Peter's, Cluny ; but his name does not appear in the lists of priors of either house in Dugdale. Tanner mentions several MSS. con taining works by Nequam, and in all probability he was the author of some among the numerous works ascribed by Bale to Necham. If Nequam was a canon of Exeter this might have given occasion to the supposition that Necham became a canon regular there, the two names being confounded. 22. The celebrated schoolman Alexander Hales, who flourished a little later than Simon Tomacensis and Alexander Necham, but in the first half of the thirteenth century, was the author of an important Commentary on the Athanasian Creed. He also composed Commentaries on the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds : and the three Commen taries appear in his Summa Theologiae, which was printed at Cologne in 1632, pars iii. quaestio Ixix. membr. 3. They are also extant in the Bodleian Laud MS. Misc. 493, which is assigned by the Catalogue to the end of the thirteenth century, but is considered by Mr. Macray to belong to the first half of the following century. These documents are not ascribed to any author by the MS. The first is headed, ' Bibliotheca sub nomine Necham. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 249 'Expositio Symboli Apostolorum'; the second, 'Symbolum sanctorum patrum'; the third, 'Hie tractatur de symbolo sancti Anastasii.' The catalogue describes them thus : ' Expositio Symbolorum Apostolorum, SS. Patrum, et S. Athanasii ex Hugone et Ricardo de S. Victore.' On what grounds Mr. Coxe attributed them to these authors it is difficult to understand. Apparently his eye lighted upon the rubric ex Ricardo de sco Victore introducing a quotation towards the beginning of the Exposition of the Apostles' Creed. The Commentary on the Quicunque begins on f 75 v. of the MS. The colophon as well as the rubric at the commencement ascribes the authorship to Anastasius : ' Explicit expositio symboli Anastasii.' It is also called ' Symbolum sancti Anastasii ' in the opening sentence of the Commentary, and ' Symbolum Anastasii ' twice in that upon the Apostles' Creed : once — in the Commentary on the Nicene Creed — it is entitled ' Symbolum Athanasii.' The exposition commences : ' Determinato de symbolo in duabus distinctionibus restat expositio symboli sancti Anastasii. Divisa est in tres partes prohemium tractatum epylogum.' The 'prohemium' includes the two initial verses of the Creed. After commenting upon these the Exposition continues : ' Sequitur tractatus Fides autem catholica haec est, et dividitur in duas partes, i° distribuuntur ea que describenda sunt de deitate, ii° ea que credenda sunt de humanitate.' The last verse is the 'epylogum.' This Commentary does not, like most others, consist of a series of glosses and notes ; the method rather is to state the various points of the subject-matter of the text as they successively present themselves, and discuss them. It is worth noting that two long passages condemning the several heresies respecting the Trinity and the Incarnation are 250 Documentary Evidence. [ch. quoted as the words of St. Augustine, but really they are both from \!n.^ Liber de dogmatibus ecclesiasticis commonly attributed to Gennadius, which in the Middle Ages was believed to be the work of the great Latin Father, and was cited as his. Once the ' glosa ' is quoted. This MS. belonged formerly to the Carthusians at Mayence, as appears from a memorandum at the bottom of the first page, ' Liber Carthusiensium prope Magunciam,' and another at the top of the last page, ' Codex Cartu- siensium Maguncie.' Another Laud MS. — No. 13, Codices Miscellanei, of the fifteenth century — also contains a copy of Hales's Commen taries. They commence on f. 107. The author is expressly mentioned in the introductory words, ' De distinctione et expositione articulorum fidei secundum Alexandrum de Hallis in fine sui tercii,' and again in the colophon after the Athanasian Creed, ' Explicit expositio trium simbolorum fidei catholice secundum magistrum Alexandrum de Hallis in fine sui tercii.' The Quicunque is headed ' De simbolo Athanasii,' and in every instance, I believe, where it is referred to, is ascribed to him, not to Anastasius. 23. Several works in Latin, by Richard Rolle of Ham- pole, were printed at Cologne in 'i^'^6, and among them Commentaries on the Lord's Prayer, Apostles' Creed, and Athanasian Creed ^. The Commentary on the Athanasian Creed, preceded by that on the Apostles' Creed, was reprinted in 1627 in the Bibliotheca Maxima Patrum^. It is entitled ' Symboli Athanasiani expositio clarissima per D. Richardum Pampolitanum eremitam.' Probably it ^ ' D. Richardi Pampolitani Anglo-Saxonis Eremitae . . . in Psalterium Davidicam atque alia quaedam sacrae scripturae monumenta . . . pia enarratio. Coloniae, MDXXXVi.' There is a copy in the British Museum, once the property of Archbishop Cranmer, whose autograph appears on the first page. " Tom. xxvi. p. 624. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 251 formed originally part of a Psalter with a gloss or com ment, for among Hampole's works in Latin in the Cologne book are Commentaries on the Psalms and the Old Testa ment Canticles usually found in Psalters, and these bear internal evidence of genuineness. Richard Rolle was a famous preacher and venerated hermit in Yorkshire during the former part of the fourteenth century. He died at Hampole, near Doncaster, in 1349. Wharton, Tanner, and others say that he was an Augus tinian friar ^. This Commentary is clearly drawn from the Commentary noticed in section 8 of this chapter, which commences with the words ' Haec ratio fidei catholicae,' and of which a copy is preserved in the Bodleian MS., Canonici, Bibl. 30. The former contains nothing I believe which is not to be found in the latter. There are two differences discriminating one from the other. First, the two commencing notes in the latter are transposed in the former, which consequently begins not with the words ' Haec ratio,' &c., but with the words ' Hie beatus Athanasius liberum arbitrium,' &c. And, secondly, all the Oratorian notes on the Creed between the fourth and thirtieth verses exclusive which appear in the latter Commentary are omitted in the former. The Commentary contained in the Canonici MS., it will be recollected, is a compilation of notes from the Stavelot and Oratorian Commentaries. Waterland was somewhat per plexed by the resemblance which he found to exist between the Commentary of Hampole and one in a MS. at Leipsic belonging to the twelfth century: and this led him to doubt the authorship of Hampole^. The Canonici MS., I See introduction to the Rev. H. R. Bramley's edition of Rolle's Psalter. Oxford, 1884. ^ See Waterland's History of the Athanasian Creed, chap. iii. p. 54, note. Oxford edition, 1870. 252 Documentary Evidence. [ch. which was necessarily unknown to that scholar, and which doubtless contains the same Commentary as the Leipsic MS. and the others mentioned by him, solves the difficulty, for it shows that Hampole's Commentary, though not an original work, is still attributable to him, as his recen sion and abridgement of the Commentary preserved in those MSS. A Commentary which appears in a MS. of Magdalen College, Oxford, numbered 115 in Mr. Coxe's Catalogue and assigned by him to the beginning of the fifteenth century, was supposed by Waterland to be none other than Hampole's Commentary i. This, however, is certainly not the case. The two documents have much matter in com mon, which is derived, I believe, immediately from the Commentary in the Canonici MS. as its source. But they are not the same. On the contrary they differ in several particulars. Firstly, they commence differently; the former, ' Hec ratio fidei catholice' ; the latter, ' Hie beatus Athana sius.' Next, the Oratorian notes or glosses between the fourth verse Neque confundentes and the thirtieth aequalis, which are omitted, as before mentioned, in the latter, are found in the former. Thirdly, some of the Stavelot notes which occur in the latter do not occur in the former. Lastly, the former contains a note respecting the Holy Spirit drawn apparently from Alcuin de Trinitate, which does not appear in the latter. With the exception of this note from Alcuin, the former, I may add, seems to me drawn entirely from the Canonici Commentary. The latter is entirely, as previously noticed, from that source. This Commentary in the Magdalen College MS. is not ascribed to any author. It commences on f 170 r. without any title : at the end a note is added stating that it was ' Waterland's History of the Athanasian Creed, chap. iii. pp. 55, 56. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 253 copied from an ancient book, as follows: 'Hec sunt scripta a quodam antiquo libro.' From which we may probably infer that it was of an earlier date than the Commentary of Hampole, who died little more than half a century before the MS. was written. It is erroneously attri buted by the Catalogue to Johannes Januensis or de Balbis. Thus, according to Waterland, the title ascribed to it by the old Catalogue was ' Expositio in Symbolum Athanasianum per lanuensem.' And Mr. Coxe has re peated and endorsed the mistake by his description, to wit, ' Expositio in Symbolum S. Athanasii ex lohannis de Balbis Catholico excerpta.' The occasion of the mistake is not far to seek. Subjoined to the Exposition is an extract from the Catholicon or Dictionary of Johannes de Balbis, or Januensis, respecting the three Creeds ; and the source from which this is derived is indicated in the following words, which are added immediately after : ' Hec lanuensis in suo Catholicon in verbo symbolum.' To any one exam ining the MS. with the slightest care it must be obvious that these words do not refer to the Exposition or Com mentary, but solely to the passage from the Catholicon. 24. In the latter part of the fourteenth century the Wycliffe movement produced, as might be expected, a Commentary in English upon the Athanasian Creed. This Commentary, attributable either to Wyclif or one of his followers, for there seems to be no certain evidence that it was Wyclif s own work, is found together with an English translation or version of the Creed, doubtless by the same hand, in several manuscript Psalters, subjoined among the Canticles to Hampole's translation of the Psalter and Commentary upon it, the Canticles both of the Old and New Testament being also accompanied by a version and Commentary in English. Of these Psalters 254 Documentary Evidence. [ch. there are as many as four in the Bodleian Library — Bodl. 288, 877, and 953, and Laud Misc. 448. The first two of these, in the opinion of the Rev. W. D. Macray of the Bodleian Library, belong to the early part of the fifteenth century — about 141 o; the third is shown to be of the same epoch by the fact of the words ' Liber domini Thome Seignour de Berkeley' appearing in the decorated border of the first page of the Psalms, the inference from which is that the book was written for Thomas fifth Lord of Berkeley, who died in 1416 ; it is also connected with him by the obits of his wife and mother inserted in the Calendar ; and a mitre, the crest of the Berkeley family, is painted at the foot of the same page where his name appears, and again within the large C of Confitebor, the initial word of the first Canticle. It is a well-written and handsome volume. The fourth of these Psalters is assigned to the fifteenth century by Mr. Coxe's Catalogue. Another is in the British Museum, Harl. MS. 1806, written about 1430; another in the Parker Library at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, written about 1420 ; from a memorandum on the second leaf it appears • to have belonged originally to John Colman, Abbot of Lewes. There may be also other manuscript copies of Hampole's Psalter containing the Wycliffite comment on the Athanasian Creed ; these that I mention I have seen. From Waterland's description of a MS. belonging to Trinity College, Cambridge, it would appear to be a book of this class. Its number in the Catalogue, as I judge from the list of the MSS. of Hampole in Forshall and Madden, is 171. As regards the text of these Psalters, the same arrange ment is found in all. Each verse is exhibited in Latin and is immediately followed by its version in English, which is generally underscored by a red line, and then is added the IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 255 postil or comment. And this method is maintained throughout the Canticles, including the Athanasian Creed as well as the Psalms. But the order of the New Testa ment Canticles so-called differs considerably. In Bodl. 288 and 877 they occur thus. Magnificat, Te Deum, Benedictus, Nunc dimittis, Benedicite, Quicunque vult ; in Bodl. 953 and Harl. 1806 thus, Te Deum, Benedicite, Benedictus, Magnificat, Nunc dimittis, Quicunque vult ; in Laud Misc. 448 and Parker E. i. 387 thus, Te Deum, Benedictus, Nunc dimittis, Benedicite, Quicunque vult, Magnificat ; in the last MS. the Magnificat is followed by a Litany. In all the Psalters the Old Testament Canticles appear in their usual, and consequently the same, order. I may add that Ham pole's Prologue to the Psalter in English is found in all, but the apocryphal 151st Psalm is conspicuous by its absence. There is obviously an apparent anomaly in this Wycliffite Exposition and version of the Athanasian Creed being subjoined to the Psalter of Rolle of Hampole, considering that the two documents were the issues of different schools of thought. How is this to be accounted for? In the Bodleian Library is a MS., Laud Misc. 286, which serves as a key for solving the mystery of this seemingly ill- consorted union and sheds a flood of light upon the above- mentioned Psalters. It is a copy of Hampole's glossed English Psalter with the six Old Testament Canticles and the Magnificat annexed but nothing else, and was written in the reign of Henry the Sixth. At the commencement of the book, written by the same hand as the rest of the volume, are a set of verses respecting the Psalter in general and Hampole's Psalter in particular, in which, to quote the Preface of Forshall and Madden to their edition of Wyclif's Bible (vol. i. Preface, p. v), ' the writer states that the work ' (i. e. Hampole's Psalter) ' was undertaken at the request of 256 Documentary Evidence. [ch. dame Margaret Kirkby, a recluse probably at Hampole ; that the autograph copy of the author was still remaining at the nunnery attached by chains to his tomb ; that the writer's was a faithful transcript from the original, and that many copies in ordinary use had been corrupted by the Lollards.' The fines referring to our subject are as follows : — ' Therefore a worthy holy man cald Richard Hampole, Whom the Lord that all thingus can leryd (i. e. taught) lely (truly) on his scole, Closed the Sauter that sues (follows) here in Englyche tong sykerly At a worthy recluse prayer cald Dame Merget Kyrkby. This same Sauter in all degre is the self in sothnes, That lijt at Hampole in surte, at Richards own berynes. That he wrote with his hondes to Dame Merget Kyrkby, And ther it lyjt in cheyn bondes in the same nonery. In Yorkshire this nonery ys, who so desires it to know, Hym thar no way go omys, thes ben the places all on row, Hampole the nonery hyjt (called) betwene Dancastir and Pount-freyt, This is the way to mannys syjt, even streyjth without deseyt.' ' Copyed has this Sauter ben of yvel men of LoUardry, And afturward hit has been sene, ympyed (filled) in with eresy. Thei seyden then to leude foles, that it shuld be al entir, A blessed boke of hur scoles, of Rychard Hampole the Sauter. This lie thei seyd to make theim lene on her scole thoro sotelte.' From these lines it may be inferred that Hampole's Psalter was an incomplete work, containing nothing but the Psalter itself, the six usual Old Testament Canticles, and the Magnificat, with their respective versions and comments in English, these being the contents of Laud 286, which the writer describes as the exact counterpart — ?'« all degre the self in sothnes — of the autograph copy of Hampole, which was at the time in the nunnery at Hampole, the burial- place of the good man, secured by chains in accordance with the custom of the age. For there is no appearance of the Laud codex being imperfect owing to mutilation ; no reason to suppose that it ever contained more than it does at present: on the contrary it does not seem to have IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 257 lost a single leaf; the Magnificat closes in the middle of the second column of the final page — the book being written in two columns — and it is followed by the rubric, ' Explicit Canticum Mar. Matris dni nri ihu cri.sti.' And this conclusion that the Psalter of Hampole was incomplete ending with the Magnificat is confirmed by the fact that the MS. of it belonging to Sidney Sussex College, Cam bridge, which is the earliest MS. extant of the book, being assigned to the close of the fourteenth century, ends also with the Magnificat : it has no other New Testament or Ecclesiastical Canticle, and comprises the same contents as Laud 286. It cannot be supposed that Hampole designedly left his Psalter thus incomplete. No doubt he was pre vented finishing it by some unavoidable cause, possibly failure of health. This incompleteness would naturally create the sense of a need. In proportion as people valued the work of Hampole as enabling them to make an in telligent and profitable use of the Psalms and some of the Canticles sung in the Offices of the Church, they would desire that it should be completed by a supplement, so to speak, containing the Canticles not included in it, viz. the Te Deum, Benedictus, Nunc dimittis, Benedicite, and Qui cunque vult, and constructed upon the same model, each Canticle having its prologue and version and comment in the vernacular. Wyclif or one of his followers, it would appear, resolved to supply the desideratum ; and the result is seen in the composite Psalter, of which we have copies in the above-mentioned MSS., and which, if we may judge from the number of copies — several written in different dialects — even now existing, must have obtained a large circulation throughout the country. Whoever was the compiler, it is clear from the MSS. Laud Lat. 448 and Bodleian 953 that he transferred Hampole's work into his S 258 Documentary Evidence. [ch. book with little alteration, if any : his text, as it appears in Laud 286 and Mr. Bramley's edition, is simply reproduced in them, saving that a word here and there is transposed or altered, one more common and better understood being substituted for another that was rare and perhaps obsolete. ' Copyed has this Sauter ben of yvel men of LoUardry.' But subsequently it was much altered and interpolated in places by revisers and copyists, as may be seen in Bodleian MSS. 288 and 877. To these and the like copies possibly the writer of the lines in Laud 286 refers when he adds : ' And afturward hit was sene ympied in with eresy.' I have been guided in some degree to this account of the glossed Psalter in the above-named MSS. by the Preface of Mr. Arnold to the Canticles with their versions and commentaries edited by him from Bodl. 288 ^. After re ferring to the Laud MS. Lat. 286 as the key to the solution of the question how far the Psalter is attributable to Hampole and how far to Wyclif he adds that the Laud MS. ' containing only seven Canticles,' viz. the six Old Testament Canticles and the Magnificat, ' has not a single word that might not have been written by Ham pole.' Then with regard to Bodl. 288 he continues, that ' containing twelve Canticles ' it ' has in it, especially in the Commentary on the Benedictus, passages which only Wyclif or one of his disciples could have composed.' And the conclusion which he arrives at from these premisses he states to be, ' that in this Commentary on the Canticles ' — that clearly in Bodl. 288 — 'we have down to the end of the seventh Canticle a genuine work of Hampole, retouched in several MSS. by a Lollard hand, but that the five remaining Canticles are a later addition made either by ' Select English Works of John Wyclif, edited by Thomas Arnold, vol. iii. p. 4. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 259 WycHf himself or by his school.' By ' the five remaining Canticles ' Mr. Arnold evidently means the Te Deum, Benedictus, Nunc dimittis, Benedicite, and Quicunque vult, the seventh being no less clearly the Magnificat, which in Bodl. 288, as I have before noticed, immediately follows the six Old Testament Canticles. The obvious conclusion to be drawn from all this with respect to our Commentary is that it is entirely a Wycliffite work, and is in no degree attributable to Richard Rolle of Hampole. Our Commentary with its cognate version of the Atha nasian Creed is found in another Bodleian MS. — Douce 258, of the fifteenth century; and it deserves particular atten tion, as another instance of the apparent anomaly which we noticed in the Psalter just referred to, viz. the sub joining of Wycliffite work to that of Hampole. The MS. is mutilated, some leaves being lost at the end, some probably at the beginning, and some certainly in other places. The first document at present is the 119th Psalm — as numbered in our Prayer Book, but in the Vulgate it is the 1 18th — in the English version of Hampole with his comment. This is followed by Psalms 139 and 22 to 31 inclusive, all also in the version of Hampole with his comment. These are also of course numbered differently in the Vulgate, each being numbered one below its number in the Anglican version : our Psalm 139 is in the Vulgate 138, and so on. I should add that the English version of the 34th Psalm and the comment upon it are omitted from the text ; but the omission is clearly accidental, the Latin initial words ' Domini est terra ' being as usual written in the text, and a note added in the margin stating that this Psalm would be found at the end of the book. It must therefore have been written on one of the leaves at the end, which have been torn away. The version and Exposition S 2 26o Documentary Evidence. [ch. of the 31st Psalm are not finished, ending at the sixth verse. After this on f 39 the Athanasian Creed com mences, each verse in Latin being followed by its Wycliffite version and comment. But at present it is imperfect owing to the mutilation of the volume, the last words on f 45 v. being ' but if crist were wyth the fa,' which occur in the comment on verse 31 beginning ' aequalis Patri.' This is followed on the next page — f 46 r. — by part of the Gospel for Christmas Day in the later Wycliffite version, beginning ' owne thingis and hise resseveden,' and ending ' ful of grace and treuthe'; so that it is plain that one or more leaves have been lost here. The other documents are the Gospels for Easter Day, Ascension Eve, Ascension Day, and Saint Thomas' Day, the Epistles of St. James, the two Epistles of St. Peter, the first and second Epistles of St. John, and part of his third Epistle, ending with the word ' witnessynge ' in the sixth verse. They are all in the last Wychffite version. Of course in its perfect con dition the volume contained also the remainder of the third of St. John and the Epistle of St. Jude, as is evident from a prologue to the seven general Epistles, and also Hampole's version and Exposition of the 24th Psalm omitted in their proper place. It is worthy of notice that all the Psalms in this volume were used in the services of the Church ; and this was no doubt the reason of their selection. Part of the 1 19th Psalm according to the use of Sarum was recited at Prime immediately before the Athanasian Creed, and the rest at the hours of Terce and Sext and Nones ; the 22nd to the 26th inclusive were also said at Prime, the 27th to the 31st inclusive at Matins on Mondays, and the 139th at Vespers on Fridays. Originally in all probability other Psalms were comprised. I have been particular in specifying the contents of this IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 261 MS. in order to show that it is a copy of a book similar in design and method of construction to the Psalter previously noticed. As in the latter the Wycliffites annexed five Canticles (including the Athanasian Creed) with a verna cular version and Commentary of their own to the Psalter of Hampole, so in this book they annexed the Creed together with their own version and Exposition of it, and their own versions of the Gospels for some of the chief festivals and of the general Epistles to his version and Exposition of some of the Psalms used in the daily Office. Both books were clearly designed to meet the want, which must have been urgent at the time, of manuals in the vernacular adapted to assist the people in joining devoutly and intelligently in the Services of the Church. There was nothing therefore exceptional in the Wycliffites supplementing Hampole's Psalter with works of their own. Nor need we suppose, with the writer of the lines in Laud 286, that they did so for the purpose of fathering their tenets upon Hampole. Probably the course they adopted was the necessary result of circumstances. Hampole's Psalter was in possession of the ground ; it was a useful and popular book ; moreover it was not prohibited by the ecclesiastical authorities. They had nothing to substitute for it ; and therefore to utilize and supplement it, as occasion required, was their only alternative. At the same time they must have had sufficient sagacity to perceive that this would be the most likely means of disseminating their own writings and their peculiar tenets. In a British Museum MS. — Addit. 10046, of the fifteenth century — our Commentary and version are sub joined to a Psalter, which is distinctly different from that previously mentioned. The Psalms are in English as well as Latin, the version being the later one of Wyclif but 262 Documentary Evidence. [ch. they are preceded by Hampole's English Prologue. They have no comment. All the Canticles, with the exception of the Quicunque vult, are also without any comment. The Old Testament Canticles, like the Psalms, have the later Wycliffite version, and so too the Benedictus and Nunc dimittis : but it is notable that in the Magnificat Hampole's version is followed generally, with a few readings adopted from Wyclif Lastly, in the Bodleian MS. Laud Misc. 174, of the fifteenth century, is an instance of our Commentary and the version always associated with it appearing in a collec tion of works of practical piety and devotional reading. In this volume it is immediately preceded by the Bene dicite with its Wycliffite version and Exposition. These two documents, it will be remembered, occur in the same order in Bodl. 288 and 877, Laud Misc. 448, Parker E. i. 387, and I may add also Magd. Coll. Oxford 72. Here they are preceded by ' a metrical paraphrase of the seven Peni tential Psalms with prologue by Hampole,' as stated by the Catalogue ; and they are followed by ' the lyf of Oure lady Seynt Marye,' a meditation by Bonaventura on our Lord's Passion and Descent into Hell to be read at different Hours, ' a short rule of lyf for ich man in general and for prestis and lordis in special,' rules for confession of sin, a meditation of St. Anselm, and three documents as signed to Hampole — an exposition of Psalm xxxvi. 20, a meditation or instruction on the Day of Judgement, and ' the myrrour of synners.' Thus our document was circu lated in books for private reading and devotion as well as in those intended to assist persons in the Church Services. This Wycliffite Commentary with the version attaching is edited by Mr. Arnold from Bodl. 288 in the third volume IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 263 of his edition of Wyclif's select works ^, together with the other Canticles and their versions and commentaries. It should be remembered, however, that he does not attribute the versions and expositions of the Old Testament Canticles to Wyclif or his school : indeed they cannot be of Wycliffite authorship, as they are found in Laud Misc. 286, and must therefore be the work of Hampole, but in Bodl. 288 and 877 they have received interpolations, which do not appear in other MSS. I subjoin some characteristic passages of the Com mentary from Addit. 10046, the text of which I believe agrees materially with the texts of the other MSS. Indeed the differences between them appear to be such only as may be accounted for by the variations of dialects and the errors of copyists. The Prologue is remarkable : 'It is seid comunli that ther ben thre credis ; the firste is of apostlis that men knowen comynli ; the tothir ^ is the crede of the chyrche that declareth the formere crede ; this thridde ^ crede is of the trynytie, the which is songen as a salm and was maad in greke speche of oon * that is clepid ^ attanasy, and aftir turnyd to latyn and sundel * amendid and ordeyned to be seid at the firste our ''. This psalme tellith moche of the trinytie, and it is no node here * to knowe it, syth a man may be saved if that he bileveth in god and hope that god wole teche him aftirward that is nedful, and so men seien comunly. Men bileven in two maneris, summe bileven expresly that ther is but o ' god and summe bileven con- fuseli : houever god wole that thei trowe, and if thei lyven on othere side ri3tly as god wole that thei lyven, thei ben ' pp. 71-81. ' i. e. the other or second. ' third. * one. = called. ' partly. ' hour. ' Before 'here' Harl. 1806 inserts ' iche man.' ° Clearly for ooti, or one. 264 Documentary Evidence. [ch. in good wey for to come aftir to blisse, for our crede schulde be medlyd ^ with love and bileve.' The following is the comment on the first verse : ' ffor ther bi is a man saved and it semeth not ynow^ men to seie bi word that thei bileven fully as holy chirche bileveth, for thus sein peynyms ^ and many out of bileve, sith men seien comynle that thei han al siche bileve: and so love and good lyf ben nedful to rijt bileve. And god forbede that men bileven that ech man * schal be savid mut ' trowe expresly ech word that here is seid ; for fewe or noon ^ ben in that staat or grekis or latyns, and 5it to us failith englische to telle that litel that we bileven ; ffor bileve is of truthe that is before our langagis, and, as we seien, god giveth bileve bothe to children and to men, al if ^ thei ben not of power to lerne bileve of ther britheren.' Part of the comment on verse 21,' the Son is of the Father,' is as follows : ' And heere clerkis moten wake her wittis and understonde two birthis, the firste is not makyng of thing but cause ther of with outen ende. And if the sunne were nevere maad as erroure of clerkis hath ofte seid, jit this sunne wolde cause his lijt ethir * with inne ethir ^ with out, so the first persoone bryngith forth the secunde per- sone ; as god, for power to knowe himself knoweth himself fully.' With the above, particularly the words ' god for power to knowe himself,' &c., it may be of interest to compare the following from Wyclif's Trialogus, which, as it was written at the close of his life, may be taken to represent ' mixed. ^ enough. ' Laud 448 and other MSS. read 'paynyms,' i. e. pagans. * After 'man' Harleian 1806 and other MSS. add ' that.' ' Harleian 1806 reads 'mot,' other MSS. ' mote,' i. e. must. " none. ' although. ' Bodl. 877 reads 'either.' ' Bodl. 877 reads ' or.' IV.J Commentaries or Expositions. 265 his mature opinions: 'Cum sit deducibile quod Deus sit actus purus, infinitissime intellectivus, certum est, quod habet potentiam ad se et ad alia cognoscendum, et ilia potentia dicitur Deus Pater. Et, quantum potest se ipsum cognoscere, tantum necessario cognoscit, et ilia notitia dicitur Deus Filius^.' The comment on the last verse is also notable : ' And, aljif this crede acorde unto prestis, netheles the hijer prelatis as popis cardinalis and bischopis schulde more speciali kunne this crede and teche it to men undir hem.' When Wyclif shortly before his death was cited to the court of Rome, in his reply he said, ' I suppose over this that the pope be most oblished to the keping of the gospel among men that liven here. For the pope is highest vicar that Christ has here in erth ^.' 25. At the end of the Commentary of Dionysius Carthu- sianus on the Psalms and Canticles, printed at Cologne in 1534, is subjoined a long Exposition of the Athanasian Creed attributed to the same writer. The editor implies that its genuineness might be disputed, but affirms that it was the work, if not of Dionysius himself, of some person who was a member of the order to which he belonged, and also a diligent student of his writings. Dionysius was a voluminous writer, and was honoured with the designa tion of ' The Exstatic Doctor ' : he is sometimes surnamed Ryckel from his birthplace, which was situated in the Diocese of Liege : he died in 1471. 26. Another Commentary of the fifteenth century — that of Petrus de Osoma, called also Oxamensis or Uxamensis from his birthplace Oxoma, now Osma, in Spain — is noticed by Waterland, who had met with a printed copy of it. ' Wiclif, Trialogus, lib. i. cap. 6. Oxon. 1869. ^ Hardwick's Church History, p. 41 1, note. 266 Documentary Evidence. [ch. A copy of the same book is now in the Bodleian Library. The Exposition is entitled ' Commentaria magistri Petri de Osoma in simbolum Quicunque vult salvus esse! In the prologue Athanasius is stated to have composed the Creed when he was in exile at Treves in the year 350 ; and it is asserted that this is proved by the chronicles of the Emperors and Popes and the legend of St. Athanasius. It is described as having for its design to oppose the impiety of heretics, especially of Arians ; and it is added that it was sung in the choir as a psalm, and on that account was called a psalm. It is here, as in the Com mentary of Alexander Hales, divided into three parts, the ' prohemium ' contained in the first and second verses, the ' tractatus,' and the concluding verse. In the Exposition ' persona ' is defined to be ' quod in natura rationaH dis- tincte subsistit' Frequent reference is made to St. Thomas, viz. Aquinas, and there is frequent mention of St. Athana sius as the author. The colophon is as follows : ' Com mentaria magistri Petri de Osma in simbolum Quicunque vult salvus esse finiunt feliciter : impressaque parisius (sic) per Udalricum cognomento Goring.' This points to the close of the fifteenth century, when Gering carried on the printing business at Paris, as the probable date of the publication of the book. We are furnished by Fabricius^ with some particulars respecting Peter de Osma. He was Professor of Theology and a Canon of Salamanca, and in 1479 wrote a book upon the subject of Confession, which exposed him to the imputation of false doctrine. His case being tried by the Archbishop of Toledo, Alphonsus Camillus, in a Synod held at Alcala, he was anathematized and his book was condemned by the Pope to be burnt. ' Bibliotheca Latina mediae et infimae aetatis. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 267 Upon this he made a formal abjuration of the opinions imputed to him, submitted himself to the judgement of the Archbishop, and declared his acceptance of the faith held by the Pope. He is described by Antonius Nebris- sensis as the facile princeps of his age in every kind of learning. 27. Another Spanish theologian of the fifteenth century is stated by Fabricius and Cave to have composed a Com mentary on the Athanasian Creed. Jacobus Perez de Valentia, an Augustinian, was made in 1468 titular Bishop of Neapolis in Thrace ' sive Christopolitanus,' and suffragan to Roderic Borgia, who was then Cardinal and Bishop of Carthagena and Portus as well as Valentia, and was after wards, in 1492, advanced to the Papal throne under the title of Alexander VI. The latter was a native of Valentia. Perez died in 1492. He wrote a very elaborate and copious Commentary on the Psalms and Canticles, and dedicated it to Borgia, whom he described in the dedicatory address as 'Ecclesiae Valentinae praesul, cuius vices ego, licet immeritus, gero.' This work passed through several editions, for it was first printed at Lyons in 1499, and in the sixteenth century was printed again and again at Paris and Lyons and Venice. Of these the Bodleian Library contains a copy of the Paris edition of 1509 by Johannes Petit and Badius Ascensius ; and the British Museum has three copies, the first belonging to another edition by Petit and Ascensius dated 15 18, the second to an edition published at Paris by Nicolaus de pratis in 1521, and the third to an edition printed by Francis Regnault at Paris in 1533. In all four copies I searched in vain for the Com mentary on the Athanasian Creed, expecting to find it in the usual place subjoined to the Commentary on the Canticles, especially as Fabricius and Cave both mention 268 Documentary Evidence. [ch. it in that connexion ^. As it seems highly improbable that these authorities would have asserted without good reason that Perez was the author of a Commentary on the Quicunque, I presume either that it is printed in other editions of his Psalter which I have not seen, or that it was composed by him as a separate work, distinct from his Commentary on the Psalms and Canticles. In concluding these notices of the Commentaries on the Athanasian Creed, it seems to me desirable to draw attention to some circumstances respecting them. Firstly, their number is considerable, and they range in date from the end of the sixth or the beginning of the seventh century down to the latter part of the fifteenth, em bracing a wide field of study and inquiry which I feel that I have touched only upon the surface. Some of them it has been my lot to be the first to notice, but I am far from supposing that I have produced an exhaustive list which is incapable of being enlarged by future research. Secondly, between several of these Expositions or series of notes — for such many of them were, written in the margin of the text or between the lines — a connexion may be traced, the earlier, in particular that attributed to Venantius Fortunatus and the Oratorian and Stavelot Commentaries, being used as sources from which subsequent compilers in part at least drew their materials. This was the case more especially prior to the thirteenth century; but even in the fourteenth we find Richard Rolle of Hampole constructing his Commentary out of another of a much earlier date, which was nothing but a compilation from two other ' Among the works of Perez, Fabricius in his Bibliotheca mentions ' Com mentarius in Psalmos et Cantica ferialia in Bibliis contenta et in Cantica Evangelica, Te Deum, et in Symbolum S. Athanasii.' Cave, in his Historia Litteraria, also mentions Perezius's Commentary on the Athanasian Creed in connexion with his Commentary on the Psalms and Canticles. IV.] Commentaries or Expositions. 269 Expositions belonging to a yet higher antiquity. Another point calling for notice is our ignorance respecting the authorship of most of these documents. Previous to the thirteenth century there are but two Commentaries the authors or compilers of which are known for certain ; that of Abelard, which was very brief and that of Bruno, which does not seem to have been an original work, but merely a revision of an earlier Commentary supplemented by some passages from the Fortunatus Exposition. Hilde- garde's work I pass over as not properly coming under the category of Commentary. CHAPTER V. VERSIONS. Hitherto we have noticed none but Latin copies of the Athanasian Creed, which claim the first consideration by reason of their greater antiquity as compared with those in other languages in which it is found. But no account of the Creed would be complete which omitted to take notice of the latter as well as the former. I. Of the versions or translations of the Quicunque — as we must assume them to be at present, reserving for later consideration the question in what language it was com posed — those which demand the first notice for importance and interest are clearly the Greek. In Montfaucon's Diatribe de Symbolo Quicunque there are four different Greek versions of our Creed. (a) The first of these had been previously twice edited, by Felckman in his edition of St. Athanasius at the com mencement of the seventeenth century \ and by Eustratius Zialowski in a collection of similar documents subjoined to a brief account of the Greek Church, being copied no doubt by the latter from the former ^. Montfaucon says that it was edited by Felckman ad fidem Palatinorum codicum : but this is incorrect, as the latter expressly states in his ' S. Athanasii Opera ex Otficina Commeliniana, 1601, tom. ii. p 38. ^ Eustratii lohannidis Zialowski Rutheni brevis delineatio Ecclesiae Orientahs Graecae . . . cum nolis evulgata a Wulfgango Gundlingio. Noribergae, 1681. Versions. 271 Appendix of various readings that it was from a MS. described by him as noster codex II anonymus, meaning apparently, as we judge from the preface, that this was the second of the MSS. used by him for his edition of Athanasius and that it belonged to an anonymous owner ^. Unfortunately he gives no further account of the MS. beyond mentioning that the Creed as contained in it is without title or name of author ; but he adds the title — ot;jli/3oXov toC hyiov ' Mavaa-iov — from a Palatine codex, and also several various readings of the text as compared with his own. This Palatine codex may be safely affirmed to be identical with the Greek Palatine codex 364 in the Vatican Library, in which the Quicunque appears with the title and readings noted by Felckman. Such I gather to be the case from collations of the MS. kindly supplied to me by Mr. Bliss of the Record Office. The Palatine collection in the Vatican, it must be recollected, was brought to Rome from Heidelberg (its original home) in 1623, being presented to Pope Gregory XV by MaximiHan, Duke of Bavaria. From the catalogue of that collection recently compiled by Mr. Stevenson under Papal authority, it appears that the MS. to which we are referring was written partly in the fourteenth and partly in the fifteenth century, our document being comprised in the former part ^- It is described as formerly the property of Papa Nathaniel; and we learn from the Prolegomena that it must have been one of fifteen manuscripts sold in the year 1550 by this Nathaniel, a Greek Priest, to Fugger, who in token of gratitude to the Elector Frederick IV bequeathed ' ' Extat hoc symbolum in nostro codice II anonymo, sed absque titulo et nomine authoris ; unde et sic editum ' ; u. s. Appendix, p. 83. ^ Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana codicibus manuscriplis recensita. Codices Palatini Graeci, p. 223. 272 Documentary Evidence. [ch. his manuscripts to the Palatine Library. Montfaucon did not have access to this Palatine codex, but he made use of a Paris MS. — formerly Reg. 2962, in the present Biblio theque Nationale marked Gr. 1286 — likewise containing his first version, but with a different title, viz. tov ev dyt'ots irarpos rjixcav iJieya\ov ' AOavaaiov bjxoXoyia rrjs avrov TriVrecos. This he has followed certainly in one reading, as well as the title. A few years ago the late Rev. S. S. Lewis, the learned Librarian of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, did me the favour to inspect this MS. for me, and he informed me that it appeared both to himself and to the Keeper of MSS. at Paris 'to date from the beginning of the sixteenth century, or at most from the end of the fifteenth century.' This first Greek version of Montfaucon commences, Ei TIS 6e\ei (Twdijvai irpo iravToiv XP'/ avTbe p.ovKb.^ Mrjvl ^oi)bpop.iS>vi. The British Museum and the Bodleian both possess copies of this interesting book, and Dr. Swainson states that the University Library at Cambridge contains another. The late Mr. Brewer was the first, I believe, to call attention to the fact of its containing a Greek version of the Athanasian Creed ^. This Greek Psalter with the Athanasian Creed subjoined was reprinted in 1533 at Antwerp by Joannes Grapheus. The Antwerp reprint has the address of Joannes Leonto- nikes on the verso side of the title-page : instead of the peculiar reading in verse 35 of the Creed — -ets be dvdpunros — which is found in the Strasburg edition, it has ets earl dvOpumos. There is a copy of it in the Bodleian Library. Both these books appear to have been intended for the use of the same class of persons, members of the Latin Church who were enthusiastic admirers and students of the Greek language, so much so that books of devotion in ^ i.e. 1524. ' Brewer, Athanasian Creed vindicated, pp. 60, 61, published in 1871. 286 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Greek possessed in their eyes an enhanced value. It can not be supposed that they were designed for the use of adherents of the Greek Church. They must have obtained a large circulation, especially the Hours, as is shown by the numerous editions through which it passed, and from the fact of its being printed in such a wide variety of localities. My reason for drawing attention to them is that the text of the Quicunque which they contain appears to have influenced in some passages our Prayer Book translation of it. For the same reason I insert a copy of it in Appendix K. One more book remains to be mentioned, which contains our version in the same text, which appears in all these books, ' collectanea aliquot que Sebastianus Lepusculus Basileensis colligebat' subjoined to ' losippus de hello ludaico.' On the title-page of the volume there is no mention of these collectanea, nor of the printer, nor of the date of printing ; but at the commencement is a dedicatory epistle by Lepusculus, addressed ' domino magistro Severino Erizbergio ... in Academia Basileensi Decano,' and con cluding with the colophon : ' Basileae ex museo meo in commemoratione beati Matthiae Apostoli 24 Februarii. Anno 1559.' Lepusculus does not say from what source he derived his text of the Creed ; but evidently this must have been the edition of Wolfius, or else the manuscript copy which Wolfius used. For he reproduces the two remarkable and obviously erroneous readings, to which I have drawn attention as appearing in that edition, and indeed in that alone, viz. ets be dvOpcairos in verse ^5, and eo-Tt in the last. The other variations between the two texts are few and trifling. The title of the Creed is the same in both. A few years later, Waterland says in 1569, Gilbert v.] Versions. 287 Genebrard, who became eventually Archbishop of Aix in Provence, edited our version with a text differing some what, but not substantially, from that of Aldus and the editions previously noticed. He found it in a manuscript book in Greek relating to the Procession of the Holy Spirit which had been presented in the year 1533 to Lazarus Baiffius, the Ambassador of Francis the First at Venice, by Dionysius, the Greek bishop of two of the Cyclades — Zea or Ceos, and Thermia or Kythnos ^. He adds that the book had been decorated in a very elegant manner by Nicolaus Sophrianus^. The title of the Creed in this copy is different from that found in all the printed editions of our version hitherto noticed. It is as follows : "Eic^eo-is bp,okoyias ttjs KaOokiKrjs irto-Tecos tov p,eydkov 'AOavacriov Trarpt- dpxpv ' Ake^avbpeias trpbs 'lovkiov Trdiiav. Genebrard's text thus edited from the MS. of Baiffius was re-edited in Zialowski's book already mentioned. In his preface Genebrard also adverts to two editions of our version, both of which are clearly distinct from any of those to which we have previously drawn attention. The ' ' Hoc Symbolum reperi in libro Graeco manuscripto de Processione Spiritus Sancti, quem Lazaro Baiffio oratori Regis Francisci I apud Venetos obtulit Dionysius Graecus episcopus Zienensis et Firmiensis, an. 1533.' The words occur in Genebrard's Preface to his edition and Exposition of the Creed which are printed at the end of his Commentary on the Psalms published at Lyons in 1607. His Exposition of the Creed is there described as ' Gilberti Genebrardi theologi Parisiensis et Archiepiscopi Aquensis Symboli D. Athanasii Archi- episcopi Alexandriae expositio ex tertio libro eiusdem de S. Trinitate desumpta et eiusdem Psalmorum commentariis adiuncta.' From which it would appear that the Creed with his Exposition of it was first edited by Genebrard in his work on the Trinity. Of this book there is no copy I believe in either the Bodleian or the British Museum ,- but both libraries contain a copy of the Lyons book. Genebrard died in 1599, having been seven years Archbishop of Aix. The word Firmiensis will be observed in the above passage. Possibly Firmium or Firmia was the Latin name for Thermia in the sixteenth century. ^ ' Quem manu sua elegantissime pinxerat Nicolaus Sophrianus Patrum nostrorum aevo vir valde doctus.' Ibid. u. s. 288 Documentary Evidence. [ch. earliest of these was printed by Nicholas Bryling at Basle, but in what year is not known, as Genebrard omits to mention the date; it must, however, be assigned to the middle of the sixteenth century, at which epoch Bryling carried on the printing business. The other was by Henry Stephens in 1565. From Genebrard's description it ap pears that the text of the Creed in these two editions must have been one and the same ; the later must therefore have been a reprint of the earlier ^. This is also evident from the list of seven various readings which he has printed, headed 'in impres. exemplar.,' in the margin of his own text from Baiffius, and which he states to be the result of his collation of their text with his own. Had there been any diversity between Bryling and Stephens, he would have given two lists of variants as the result of his collation. Unfortunately he has supplied no further information in regard to either of these two editions of our version, so that we are not aware of what books they severally formed a part. Dr. Swainson supposed that Henry Stephens's copy was included in the Rudimenta fidei Christianae — Calvin's Catechism in Greek and Latin — which was the only book, so far as we know, printed by him in the year 1565 besides a French Bible and Beza's Greek Testament^. But this was certainly not the case, as the book, of which I have seen a copy in the Bodleian, contains the Apostles' Creed only in Greek, not the Athanasian. Waterland considered Bryling's edition to be the first which was printed of our version ; and Montfaucon was under a similar mistake in regard to that of Henry Stephens. ' ' Cui,' he says in reference to his own copy from BaifSus's codex, ' affine est, quod olim evulgavit Basileae Nicholaus Bryling, deinde iu Gallia, an. 1565. Henricus Stephanus.' ^ See Stephanorum Historia, by Michael Maittaire, 1 709. v.] Versions. 289 This is the more remarkable, as Genebrard, with whose Preface both these divines were acquainted, speaks of several earlier editions being disseminated through the whole of Europe ^. The title of the Creed in Bryling and Henry Stephens is the same as in the Aldus edition and the various editions which I have noticed as following it, and therefore differs from that found in the Baiffius codex. The text, while substantially identical with those of Baiffius and Aldus, is discriminated from both by some variants, and must conse quently have been derived from some independent source unknown to us. Nor do we know from what MS. Aldus copied his text. In regard to the texts of Labbe and Montfaucon, Waterland says : ' I take them to have been patched up from several distinct copies at the pleasure of the editor or editors^.' This estimate would seem to be correct. Labbe does not mention any manuscript authority for his text, and Montfaucon evidently compiled his from the printed editions with which he was acquainted, those of Labbe and Genebrard and Henry Stephens. Besides the Canonici MS. which I have noticed there is, I believe, only one other MS. of our version known as extant at the present day. We are indebted to the late Dr. Swainson for some account of the volume in his book on the Creeds ^ and for a printed copy of the text of the Athanasian Creed which it contains. It is in the Library at Florence, and has the press-mark Plut. XI. cod. 12, and belongs to the fifteenth century. In this, as in the Canonici MS., the Creed is apparently attached to a devo- ' ' Graeca exempla,' i.e. of the Athanasian Creed, 'pridem in totam Europam divulgata sunt Parisiis, Basileae, aliisque ex locis multis, deinde vero cum Latino collata per Georgium Vuicelium.' Genebrard, u. s. ^ History of the Athanasian Creed, p. 217, note, edit. Oxford, 1870. ' p. 472. U 290 Documentary Evidence. [ch. tional book. The title is the same as in that MS. and the Aldus books of Hours, and the text also in substance ; for there are several variations of reading, but they are of trifling importance, such as necessarily result from the errors and slips of copyists, the most important being the omission of the words in the last verse but one, ot be to <^avka els Tb ttvp Tb aldviov, which is obviously due to the occurrence of the last word immediately before. The divergence of this MS. from the text of Aldus is sufficient to prove that it could not have been the copy which he followed, while the substantial agreement with it is such as to confirm most of his readings. There are some notices of this version by Latinizing members of the Greek Church, and by Greeks who had seceded to the Latin Church in the fifteenth and two pre ceding centuries, which are of interest as showing that not only were they conversant with it, but that they also re garded it as the genuine work of St. Athanasius, and more over as showing by consequence that it was the product of a prior epoch. Not long after the Council of Florence, held in 1439, a dialogue respecting the points of difference between the Greeks and Latins and in support of the conclusions of that Synod was composed and issued by Johannes Plusiadenus, described as Archipresbyter, the principal interlocutors being EvkajSrjs or Pius, and 'FaKev- biJT-qs, a term of reproach and contempt applied by Latins to any partisan of the Greek Church, and meaning ragged fellow. Pius is represented as saying : AvriKa 6 p,eyas rrjs eKKkrjaias arvkos 6 Oeios tQ ovti koi tepos 'Adavdcrios ev ry bp,okoyia rrjs eavTov TriaTeoos, fjv e^eOero Ttpbs AijSepwv YlaTrav, 7JS fj dpxfi, "OcTTts hv j3ovkriTai acuOfjvai, Tb Hvevpi,a to dyiov^ (f>r](riv, OTTO toC HaTpos Kal tov TtoC, ov itoi^Tov, ov kticttov, ovbe yevvtiTov, dkk' eKtropevTov. Ti Trpos tovto eyjeis e'meiv ; ovk v.] Versions. 291 eo-rii' 'dyios ovtos koi ttjs eKKkria-ias 6t6ao-Ka\os ^ ; That the version we are at present considering is here quoted does not admit of doubt. The reply of Rhacendytes is remark able : "Aytoi' p,ev Kal bibda-Kakov ex&), tikrjv dp.(f>i^dkk(io p.r} etz/at Trjv prjaiv ra-irqv yvrjaiov avTov ; Pius rejoins : IIus ovk eort yvrja-ia tov bibaa-Kakov fj prjais avrr] ; Combefis supposes that this p^o-ts or phrase was the Creed itself; but from the context it clearly appears to have been the words xat e/c toS vlov. The Greeks did not deny the genuineness of the Creed, but only of these words. It is deserving of notice that the Creed is here said to have been presented to Pope Liberius, though in the copy of Genebrard from Baiffius's codex and in the title to Montfaucon's second version it is described as having been presented to Pope JuHus. Plusiadenus is considered by Leo Allatius, who edited his Dialogue in his Graecia Orthodoxa, as also by Fabricius and Wharton, to be identical with Josephus Methonensis, who was likewise the author of an apology for the Council of Florence, but Cave does not concur with that opinion. Our version was also quoted by Manuel Calecas as follows : Tavviiv yap edv p-r; tis ttkttQs iturTevar), aoidijvai ov hvvarai, a>s b jxe'yas 'AOavdaios ev Trj irpbs 'lovkiov Udirav 'PoS/itTjs rrjs TticTTeoos bfxokoyiq irpotreOriKev ^- That Montfaucon's third version is here quoted is plain, as the first reads mo-ras Te Kal l3el3ai(os -nicrTevarj, and the second Trto-Tois Kat fie^aiuis TTiaTeva-p. The Florence and Canonici MSS. of the third version both read Trto-TiSs irio-Tevaj], as do also the two Aldine Horae, and Weckel and the Strasburg Psalter, and Lepus culus and Bryling, and Stephens and Genebrard. It is ' See Leo Allatius, Graecia Orthodoxa, Roma, 1652, tom. ii. p. 531. ^ The passage occurs in his work De priticipiis Fidei Catholicae, cap. x. 'iTi'CKoyos, edited by Combefis, Bibliothecae Auctarium, Pars altera, Paris, 1672. U 2 292 Documentary Evidence. [ch. true that Labbe has eK Trtorrecos /3e/3a^tos ¦ni(rTevv avTco XP^^'J' Kparrjcrai Tr]v opOobo^ov iriaTiv. Persona is always rendered ^Tro'o-Tao-ts ; immensus ¦navTOKparcap, which is peculiar to this version ; aeternus is atcoz^tos in verses ID and II, as well as 27 and 39 ; omnipotens in verses 13 and 14 is iravTobvvap,os ; in verse 19 piovabiK&s p,iav eKaa-Trjv viToa-Taa-iv for singillatim unamquamque seems to be drawn both from the first and third versions ; the doctrine of the Procession is stated in accordance with the Greek hypo thesis, TO Ttvevp-a TO dyiov dub rov iraTpos ecrnv, ov iT0Lr]T6v, ov KTICTTOV, ov yevvrjTov, dkk' eKiropevrov ; in verse 24 ovSets irp&Tos T] ecrxaros ovbeis p-eyas rj p.iKp6s is very noticeable ; in verse 25 the later order occurs, p.ovdba yovv ev rpidbi Kal rptaSa ev p.ovdbi mas Xpicrriavos evcTefieicrOca ; in verse 26 sentiat is rendered ho^aCirM, another peculiarity of this version ; verse ^•^ is ets be ov Tpaireicra fj crap^ dkk' dvak-qcjjOe'icra ets Oeov ; in verse ^6 the descendit ad inferos of the Latin is entirely passed over, and the Kat racpeis of the Creed of Constanti nople is substituted for it ; in verse 37 we have toC Oeov Kal irarpos, iravTOKparopos being omitted ; and in the last verse, as in the first, rj opOobo^os iricrns is the phrase used, not ^ KaOokiKT] iricTTis. That this version was the work of a Greek theologian is evident not only from the omission of the Kat tot; vlov, but also from the substitution of dpOobo^os for KafloXtK^ and of ra^eis for descendit ad inferos, and from the insertion of several passages from Greek sources. In all probability it is of later date than any of the versions previously noticed. (e) The four versions of Montfaucon are not the only v.] Versions, 295 Greek versions of the Athanasian Creed known to us at present, recent research having brought two more to light. In his work on the History of the Apostles' Creed and the Rule of Faith ^, Professor Caspari of Christiania edited from MSS. two versions, both distinct from those of Mont faucon. The first of the two he derived from Cod. DLXXV of St. Mark's Library at Venice, a MS. of the fifteenth century. The codex also contains works of Nicetas Ste- tatus, an epistle of Johannes Damascenus, and the Com mentary of Zonaras upon the Canons, the Creed being the last document but one. It has for title iria-ns KaOokiKr) tov ayiov 'AOavacriov. The text is imperfect at the end, wanting the two last verses. Another copy of this version is among the contents of No. 21 of the Greek MSS. in the Canonici Collection in the Bodleian Library — f 147 b. The title in this case is different from that in the Venice MS., and is remarkable : Toi3 aytoiT 'AOavacriov tov p,eydXov, o kiyovcriv ot Aarivol crvp.- fiokov. The MS. belongs to the fifteenth century : its other contents according to the Catalogue are ' Anonymi cuius dam auctoris dissertatio per modum dialogi inter Graecum et Latinum habiti super controversiam de Azymis et de S. Spiritus Processione,' ' Expositionis in Fidem Christia- nam fragmentum,' ' Fragmentum tractatus de controversia inter Graecos et Latinos de S. Spiritus Processione,' ' lo hannis Patriarchae Hierosolymitani sermones tres de Azy mis,' ' Simeonis Archiepiscopi Hierosolymitani sermo contra Latinos de Azymis cum notulis marginalibus instructus,' and ' Theodori Edesseni sermo de Azymis ' : the Creed is the last document but one. This copy has hitherto, I believe, escaped notice. ' Quellen zur geschichte des Taufsymbols und der Glaubensregel, v. iii. pp. 263-267. Christiania, 1869. 296 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Another copy, but imperfect, I found in a Greek and Latin manuscript Psalter in the Vatican Library, having for its press-mark Vat. 8i. This has likewise hitherto escaped notice. The MS. is written in two columns, the Latin in one, the Greek in the other. The Latin Psalter belongs to the Galilean version. Both Psalters are followed by the apocryphal 151st Psalm ; and to this succeed the following Canticles in order, all both in Greek and Latin : I. The Song of Moses in Exodus. 2. The Song of Moses in Deuteronomy. 3. The Song of Hannah. 4. The Prayer of Habakkuk. 5. The Song of Isaiah ^ 6. The Prayer of Jonah. 7. The Song of the Three Children — Benedicite. 8. The Magnificat. 9. The Nunc dimittis. 10. The Bene dictus. II. The Song of Hezekiah. These are imme diately followed on f 163 r. by the Quicunque vult, which in the Latin has for title ' fides catholica,' but in the Greek has no title. In both it is imperfect owing to the mutila tion of the book, in the Greek ending with the words — Pia(6p.e0a ovtco Tpeis — of verse 19. The commencement of the Greek version, including part of verse 8, which appears on the recto side of the last leaf of the present volume, is in a distinctly different hand from the codex generally, and the spelling of this is so very singular and curious that I think it worth while to reproduce it in the Appendix ^. Possibly it may serve as a clue to the locality from which this interesting Psalter issued. It would seem to have been written from the dictation probably of an Italian by some unskilled and illiterate person who was called in for a time to take the place of the ordinary copyist. On the verso side of the leaf, necessarily the concluding page of the book at present, the original hand and orthography are resumed. '¦ Isai. xxvi. 9-20 inclusive. 2 gee Appendix L. v.] Versions. 297 It may be observed that the Latin Canticles in this Psalter do not coincide in substance or arrangement with the normal Latin use. They were obviously chosen to correspond with the Greek Canticles. These last are also somewhat abnormal, the seventh Greek Ode or Canticle — the Prayer of the Three Children, EiAoyTjTos et Kvpte 6 ©eo's — being omitted, and the Nunc dimittis introduced between the Magnificat and the Benedictus, and the Song of Hezekiah added. It is also worth notice that the Latin texts of the second Song of Moses, of the Song of Hannah, of the Prayer of Habakkuk, of the Song of Isaiah cap. xxvi, and of the Prayer of Jonah are all from Old Latin versions, not from the Vulgate, which is particularly remarkable, as the Psalter is Galilean. The same is probably the case with the first Song of Moses ; but I cannot assert it to be so, not having copied any portion of that Canticle. I cannot quote any palaeographical authority for the date of this MS. It seemed to me to belong to the thir teenth century or the fourteenth ; but it is with the greatest diffidence that I express an opinion upon a question of palaeography. A fourth manuscript copy of this version I believe may be found in a MS. of the Imperial Library described by Nesselius in his Catalogue as ' CCXLV . . . Codex Theo logicus Graecus Chartaceus antiquus et bonae notae ^.' I think that this is in all probability a copy of our version, for two reasons. First, the contents of the book consist mainly of Greek controversial documents directed against the Latins, some specially relating to the doctrine of the Procession ; and our version was the work of a Greek theologian, as appears from the title given to it in the ' Catalogus Codicum Manuscriptorum Graecorum Bibliothecae Caesareae Vindobonensis; edidit Daniel de Nessel, Vindobonae, 1690, vol. i. p. 344. 298 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Canonici MS. and from the fact of its formulating the Greek doctrine of the Procession. My second reason for so thinking is based upon Nessel's description of the title and initial words of this copy : ' S. Athanasii Archiepiscopi Alexandrini Symbolum Fidei, cuius titulus et principium Tou dy^ou 'AOavacriov tov p,eydkov. "Octtis b' hv jSovkrjrai aooOrjvai, irpb irdvTcav xph Kparelv Tr\v iricrriv! &c. Toi) dyiov 'AOavacriov tov pieydkov are the initial words of the title of our version in the Canonici MS., and "Oo-tis 8' av ^ovkrjTai acoOrjvai, irpb irdvTOdv xph Kpareiv TTJr iriariv are the initial words of its text in the same codex. This description, which thus applies to the version of which we are treating, does not hold true of any other. It will be noticed that Nessel describes the MS. as antiquus, but it cannot have been written before the middle of the fourteenth century, as it contains a work of Maximus Planudes, who died soon after 1353. The Athanasian Creed is the second of the ten contents mentioned in the Catalogue. The initial words of the text in the Canonici MS. have been already mentioned ; in the Venice and Vatican MSS. KaOokiKrjv is inserted before irianv. To note other distinc tive characteristics, immensus is rendered dKaTdXTjwros, as in Montfaucon's third version ; in verse 5 persona is x«/'a'"''?P in all three MSS., but it is irpocrcoirov in verse 4 ; the same word is x^pctKr^p in verse 19 in the Canonici and Venice MSS., but in the Vatican it is i^Tro'o-Tao-ts ; in verse 24, which is wanting in the Vatican, it is x^paKTTjp both in the Canonici and Venice MSS. ; omnipotens is iravrobvvapios in verses 13 and 14, but iravTOKpdrcap in verse 37 ; the verse relating to the Procession, which is wanting in the Vatican MS., is in the Canonici MS. ro irvevpa to dyiov eKiropeverai eK tov irarpos, Kal dvairavopievov ev vlcZ ov iroiriTov ecrnv, ov kticttov, v.] Versions. 299 ov yevvrjTov, dkk' eKiropevrov ; in the Venice MS. it is the same saving the omission of the words Kat dvairav6p.evov ev Dt(3 ; in verse 24 the reading ovbeis 6 irp&ros ij 6 eo-xaTos, &c. is to be noted ; in verse 25 the later form occurs, Kat p.ovds ev Tpidbi Kal Tptas ev piovdbi ripdcrOcx) ; in verse 37 for fideliter credat we have ev iriarei a-TeppS, iricrTeveTca ; in verse 33 for non conversione, &c. there occurs in the Canonici MS. /xtj Tpaireiarjs rfjs OeorriTos els a-dpKa, dkka evcaOeiarjs — in the Venice aXXa kr)cj)Oeia-r]s — ev t(S deio ; in the last verse firmiter fideliterque crediderit is irto-TSs Kat crrepp&s iriaTevcrrj in Canonici ; in the Venice MS. this verse is wanting. This version has several peculiarities, which discriminate it from all others, especially as regards the use of the word XapaKTTjp for persona ; but some passages bear so close a resemblance to the third version of Montfaucon that it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that they were borrowed from it. And if such is the case, this version must necessarily be the later of the two. (_/) Caspari's second Greek version was edited from a MS. in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, which he describes as written in the sixteenth century and having its original home in Calabria. This in general follows the first version of Montfaucon, and appears for the most part to have been drawn from it ; but it is very remarkable that in the verse relating to the Procession it follows rather his third version, as will be obvious from a comparison of the verse as found in these three versions. The first of Montfaucon : — TO irvevp-a to dyiov dirb tov irarpos, ov ireiroir]pi,evov ovre bebrj- yLiovpyr]p,evov ovre yeyevvr\p.evov, dkk! eKiropevrov. The third of Montfaucon : — to iTvevpLa to dyiov dirb tov irarpos Kal tov vlov, ov iroitirov, ov KTICTTOV, ovbe yevvrjTov, dkk eKiropevrov. 300 Documentary Evidence. [ch. The second of Caspari : — TO irvevp.a to dyiov dirb tov irarpos Kal vlov, ov itoirjrbv ovre KTICTTOV, ovre yevvrjTov, dkk' eKiropevrov. Hence it is evident that the compiler was either a Greek- speaking member of the Latin Church or a Latinizing Greek. In a few other instances also he adhered to the third in preference to the first version of Montfaucon. Thus we have dvev biaraypov for irdarfs djJicjjijSokias eKTos, aKardkrjirTOS for ap.€Tpos, iriarcas iricTTeiicTr) for J3ej3aici>s iricTTevcrrj. It is clear that this version must be later than both of those from which it was borrowed. (g) It remains lastly to take some notice of the version which is included with some other documents in an Ap pendix to the Greek Horology printed at Venice in 1868 and other years. An authentic account of this version is supplied by a note, subjoined to it, which states ' that it was resolved that the above Symbol of the great Athanasius, having been compared with the most ancient manuscripts pre served in the Library of Saint Mark, and having been found to be consonant with them, and not only genuine but also in unison with the mind of the Orthodox Church, should be printed : for the copies printed at Paris and elsewhere differ in regard to terminology as well as meaning, but this, being in no respect at variance even with that printed at Moscow, has been here added with a pious intention.' The version is clearly nothing but a compilation from the first and third versions of Montfaucon, but unlike the second of Caspari in the verse relating to the Procession it adopts the language of the first of these, which is in accordance with the Greek hypothesis. The note of which we have given a translation supplies a clue which leads us v.] Versions. 301 to regard it as a comparatively modern compilation. For the copies of the Creed there mentioned as printed at Paris and elsewhere, and described as differing both in termino logy and sense from a copy printed at Moscow with which this version was in exact accordance, could be none other than copies of some of the editions of the third version of Montfaucon, which, as I have shown, were printed at Paris and other places, including Venice itself between the years 1497 and 1 569. Considering the contrast so strongly emphasized in the note between this version and those copies, together with the assertion of the genuineness of the former, it is difficult to avoid the impression that it was drawn up for the purpose of confuting the authority of St. Athanasius in support of the Latin doctrine of the Procession as put forward by those documents, which had been disseminated throughout Western Europe, and alleging it instead in support of the Eastern doctrine. If so, it could not have been compiled before the latter part of the sixteenth century, and might have originated even later. The title of the Creed in this version is ^vp^okov ttjs iricrrecos tov dyiov 'AOavacriov ' Apxi-eiricTKoirov ' Ake^avbpeias. This version of the Athanasian Creed is a recent insertion in the Appendix to the Greek Horology, having been placed there together with some other documents by a former editor of the Horology, Bartholomaeus Hieromonachus Cutlumusianus, in the year 1832. Previously it stood together with them at the commencement of the book, without however forming part of the devotional offices. This is clearly shown by Cutlumusianus's preface, which is reprinted in his edition of 1868, a copy of which I have before me, taken in connexion with a letter addressed by him to the highest authority in the Eastern Church, Con- stantius, Patriarch of Constantinople, and the reply of the 302 Documentary Evidence. [ch. latter, which are both immediately subjoined. In the letter, which is dated December i6, 1831, the editor de scribes himself as 'a true son of the Greek Church of Christ,' states the nature of the work which he had en gaged in, explains his literary difficulties, and ends by expressing the hope that his Holiness will grant him a favourable hearing and return a clear answer with prac tical direction. The Patriarch in his reply, dated March 14, 1832, vouchsafes a favourable reception to the filial judicious letter addressed to him. Therewith he enclosed a list of corrections of the Horology from an ancient trustworthy manuscript preserved at Constantinople : in this Cutlumu sianus would find the answer to his inquiries, and in accord ance with this he is enjoined to emend his proposed edition. Hence at the conclusion of his preface the latter refers to the Patriarch's reply as his ecclesiastical authority for the alterations made by him in the book. Cutlumusianus's edition of the Horology of 1868 was, I believe, the last produced by him. Since his death the Phoenix press at Venice, from which his book issued, has published several revised editions of it, one of which I have seen — that dated 1884. Therein our version of the Atha nasian Creed occupies the same position as in the 1868 and previous editions — in the Appendix, coming after the Gospel for Easter Day, which is the same as our Gospel for Christmas Day, St. John i. 1-14. The new editor in his preface expressly refers to Cutlumusianus's Horology as 'being sanctioned by the great Church of Christ to which we belong,' alleging in proof his letter to the Patriarch and the Patriarch's reply. He had revised it by collation with a copy of the Horology published in Constantinople by the honoured Seitanides in accordance with the judgement of the central administrative Council, v.] . Versions. 303 and ' with the approval and sanction of the great Church of Christ.' The late Dr. Swainson regarded these Horologies pub lished at Venice as ' simply the speculations of different booksellers,' devoid of all ecclesiastical sanction ^. I think I have shown that they possess the highest ecclesiastical authority within the domain of the Eastern Church. Eastern Church books seem always to have been printed at Venice. It has been mentioned that our version of the Athanasian Creed was transferred together with other documents from the commencement of the Greek Horology to an Appendix at the end in 1832. The precise date when it was admitted to the book I am unable to state ; but it would not have been earlier than the latter half of the eighteenth century. I have seen in the Bodleian Library Horologies printed respectively in the years 1535, 1545, 1563, 1601, 1602, 1631, 1623, all at Venice. In none of them is the Athanasian Creed to be found. In these, with one exception, the Hour Offices are preceded by the Gospel for Easter Day, viz. St. John 1-14, and the Passion from St. John's Gospel, or rather the four last chapters of it. These two docu ments are absent from the 1601 book, which seems to be an abridged Horology. Dr. Swainson mentions several Horologies, which he had examined at Venice and in the British Museum, ranging in date from 1533 to 1870 ^ The earliest in which he found the Athanasian Creed was printed in 1787, where it comes, he says, immediately after the Gospel for Easter Day and before the Hour Offices. But it does not follow that it was then introduced as he concludes to the Horology, as an edition was published in ' The Nicene and Apostolic Creeds, p. 476. ° u. s. pp. 477, 478. 304 Documentary Evidence. , [ch. 1777 which he did not see, and possibly others also between 1787 and 1758, the date of the next in priority of time, which he did see. A copy of the 1758 book may be seen in the British Museum. Our document is not there ; but it appears at the commencement of the Horology printed in 1800 — the next Greek Horology in point of date which the Museum possesses — distinct however from the Hour Offices : subjoined to it is the note already mentioned : the Gospel for Easter Day and the closing chapters of St. John's Gospel are relegated to the end of the book. The necessary conclusion is that the Athanasian Creed could not have been inserted in the Greek Horology until after the year 1 758. Probably, I think, it was first admitted to it in the edition of 1777. 3. Next after the Greek versions those in our own lan guage clearly call for notice. It has been already mentioned that in Psalters written in England in the tenth and eleventh centuries an interlinear gloss or version in Anglo-Saxon is found annexed to the Athanasian Creed, as well as to the Psalter itself and Canticles. And the true nature of these glosses was pointed out — that they are not strictly translations, the Anglo- Saxon words being inserted severally above their Latin equivalents, but without their proper inflexional endings, and in accordance with the order of the Latin words, so that they are not formed into sentences ^. The earliest English version of the Creed, extant or known to be extant, is preserved in the Bodleian MS. 435 ^ and was edited by Hickes in his Thesaurus ^. The portion relating to the Incarnation has been recently re-edited from Hickes's text in Mr. Oliphant's work on Old and Middle ' See above, chap. iii. 19. '^ F. 69. v. ' Vol. i. p. 233. v.] Versions. 305 English^. The latter dates the version about A.D. 1340, and describes it as ' most likely written in the Northern most part of Lincolnshire, perhaps not far from Hull.' This version, being composed in metre and rhyme, and variations being necessarily introduced to suit the exigencies of the metre and rhyme, is not a verbal or exact representation of the original. Some idea of it may be formed from its rendering of the last verse : — ' That is the traulh (i. e. Truth or Faith) that heli (i. e. holy) isse, Whilk bot (,i. c. unless) ilkon with miht hisse Trewlic and fastlic trowe he Saufe ne mai he never be.' The next English version in point of time occurs in a British Museum MS. — press-mark Addit. 17376 — con taining a Psalter with Canticles in Latin and English, followed by some poems or metrical pieces in English. The Athanasian Creed with its version, which like that of the Psalter and Canticles is in prose, is found in its usual place at the end of the Canticles. The first of the sub joined poems is ' de septem sacramentis,' and it has the following colophon at the end : ' Oretis pro anima domini Willelmi de Schorham quondam Vicarii de Chart iuxta Ledes, Qui composuit istam compilationem de septem sacramentis.' The second is a rhyming version of some portion of the ritual of the Sacraments, The third is on the ten commandments, ' de decem preceptis,' and the fourth on the seven mortal sins. The latter has the following notable colophon: 'Oretis pro anima domini Willelmi de Schorham quondam Vicarii de Chart iuxta Ledes qui composuit istam compilationem de septem mortal ibus peccatis. Et omnibus dicentibus orationem dominicam cum salutacione angelica xl* dies venie a ' p. 302. X 3o6 Documentary Evidence. [ch. domino Symone Archiepiscopo Cantuarie conceduntur.' The fifth is ' on the joys of the Virgin,' and has the colophon, ' Oretis pro anima Willelmi de Schorham quon dam vicarii de Chart iuxta Ledes.' The sixth is a trans lation of Robert Grosseteyte's hymn to the Blessed Virgin. It commences ' Marye mayde mylde and fre,' and is followed by the colophon, ' Oretis pro anima domini Roberti Grosseteyte quondam episcopi Lincolniensis.' The seventh and last relates to some of the mysteries of the Faith, particularly the Deity, the Creation, and the Fall of man. It has no colophon. All these pieces were edited from this MS. for the Percy Society in 1849 by Mr. Thomas Wright, as the poems of William de Schorham, who was so called probably as a native of Schorham, near Otford, in Kent, and is believed to have been instituted to the vicarage of Chart Sutton immediately after its appro priation to the Augustinian Priory at Ledes in 1320. Mr. Wright infers from the circumstance of some of these poems being attributed by the colophons to William of Schorham that they were all his work, and he assigns their composition to the reign of Edward II. With regard to the English version of the Psalter, including of course that of the Creed — the point which concerns ourselves — it has been hitherto also ascribed to Schorham's authorship, upon the grounds that the whole of the MS. is written in one hand, a hand of the earlier half of the fourteenth century, and that two of the poetical pieces subjoined to the Psalter are expressly attributed to him, also that in places in the book the prayers of the faithful are requested for his soul's welfare^. But the argument is clearly in conclusive. Even if all the pieces which are annexed to ' See The Holy Bible in the earliest English Versions by John Wycliffe, edited by Forshall and Madden, vol. i. Preface, p. iv. v.] Versions. 307 the Psalter were ascribed by their colophons to William de Schorham instead of two only, as we see to be the case, it would not follow that the translation of the Psalter was also due to his authorship. And if the requests in three of the colophons for intercessions for his soul — there are no other like requests on his behalf, I believe, contained in the book — are any proof of his authorship of the trans lation, then for a similar reason it might be attributed to Robert Grosseteyte, for whose soul, it will be observed, the fourth colophon above quoted solicits the prayers of the faithful. But this is not all. A German scholar. Dr. M. Konrath, asserts that the version of the Psalms, including necessarily that of the Canticles and Creed, must needs be wrongly attributed to William of Schorham, inasmuch as it is not Kentish, but belongs to a Midland dialect^. Thus nothing is known respecting the author ship of this version of the Athanasian Creed. Still it is a document of so much interest and importance in reference to the history of the Quicunque in our own Church and country that I have deemed it desirable, especially as it has never yet I believe been printed, to produce it in the Appendix ^- The date of its construction may be inferred approximately from the second colophon quoted above, which makes mention of an indulgence granted by Symon- Mepeham, Archbishop of Canterbury, and that too ap parently as a contemporaneous incident, showing that the MS. could not have been written before the commencement of his archiepiscopate in 1338, and probably was not ' ' Sie,' i. e. the poems of William de Schorham, ' befinden sich in einem bande mit einer Psalmeniibersetzung, die man bisher falselich demselbem verfasser zugescrieben hat ; sie ist jedoch nicht Kentish, sondern gehort einem mittellandischem dialecte an.' Beitrdge zur Erkldrung und Textcritik des William von Schorham, von Dr. M. Konrath. Berlin, 1878. ' Appendix M. X 2 3o8 Documentary Evidence. [ch. written after its termination in 1333. The version there fore may be assigned to quite the commencement of Edward Ill's reign. In the opinion of Dr. Konrath the conjecture of Mr. Wright that Schorham collected his poems and in serted them in this manuscript is erroneous. And certainly it would appear obvious from the colophons soliciting prayers for his soul that he could have had nothing to do with the compilation of the book, as they clearly imply that he was dead at the time. Besides, Dr. Konrath Qoncludes upon internal critical grounds that the scribe by whom it was written was not a Kentish man though a Southerner. Immediately after the Atlianasian Creed, f. 149 v., some memoranda, now almost obliterated, have been inserted in an old hand, but not the same which appears in the rest of the book. Of these the following, which I was able to trace, though with difficulty, would seem to indicate that it was once the property of a Franciscan community : — 'Anno domini M°CC°XX™° viri bartholomei fratres minores primo venerunt in angliam. Anno domini M°CC"°XXIIII fuit regula beati francisci consummata. Anno domini M°CC™oxx''vi° obiit beatus Franciscus.' If the rest were deciphered, possibly they might supply a nearer clue to the original home and even the birth place of this interesting volume. It is a book not unlikely to have emanated from Franciscans. The next old English version in point of date is that previously mentioned ' as the work of Wyclif or one of his followers, produced towards the close of the fourteenth century. It was edited by Mr. Arnold from the Bodleian ' Above, iv. 24. v.] Versions. 309 MS. Bodl. 288 1, also by Dr. Swainson from a Cambridge University Library MS. Ee. i. 10^; the copy which I print in Appendix N is transcribed from the British Museum MS. Addit. 10046, of the fifteenth century. In this, as in other MSS., it should be remembered the version does not appear alone, but in combination with its cognate Com mentary, each verse being followed by its appropriate Exposition. This may account for a certain abruptness, or inaccuracy of translation, or insertion or omission of words, which appear occasionally. It will be very interesting to compare this version with the preceding one attributed to William de Schorham. In particular it may be noticed that while the latter has in verse i ' the catholick faith,' in verse 19 'catholik religion,' and in the last verse 'the bileve catholik,' the former has in verse i ' the comyne bileve,' in verse 3 likewise 'the comune bileve,' in verse 19 ' general religioun,' and in the last verse ' general bileve.' It will be seen by-and-by that in these renderings the Wycliffite version followed earlier French versions, which were used in England. No other English version, so far as we know, appeared until the year 1539, when Bishop Hilsey's Manual of Prayers or Primer was issued, as we may say, under royal authority. Our Creed in English, entitled ' The Symbole or Crede of the great doctour Athanasius dayly red in the Church,' stands at the commencement of this Manual, following immediately the Prologue, and it is followed immediately by the Apostles' Creed, also in English. The title of the book, as stated by Dr. Burton, is ' The Manual of Prayers or the Primer in English set out at length ... set forth by John, late Bishop of Rochester, at the command- I Select English Works of John Wyclif, vol. iii. " Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, p. 488. 3IO Documentary Evidence. [ch. ment of the right honourable Lord Thomas Crumwell, Lord Privy Seal, Vicegerent of the King's Highness '.' It should be mentioned that in 'the King's Primer,' published in 1545 snd reprinted in the following year and sub sequently, the Athanasian Creed is not found — only the Apostles'. Another version was published, probably a few years after that of Bishop Hilsey, at the end of a Psalter in English, ' truly translated out of the Latin,' together with versions of the Benedicite, Magnificat, Benedictus, Nunc dimittis, and Te Deum. This was reprinted recently by Dr. Swainson ^, who dates it about the year 1542, but the precise year when it was issued does not appear to be known for certain. It has evidently a close connexion with Hilsey's version, the title being the same and the text the same with a few variations. In 1549 in the first Prayer Book of Edward the Sixth, where it was printed immediately after the Third Collect for Evensong, appeared the version, which especially claims our attention and commands our interest, inasmuch as, saving the interval of Queen Mary's reign, it has been ever since used in the services of the Church of England, and is so used at the present day with a few variations, only one of which is of any importance. Though we may not be able to trace the author with certainty, we cannot refrain from endeavouring to ascertain the sources from which it was drawn. The results of such an investigation will be found to be curious. I have previously drawn attention to a Greek version of the Creed, which was first edited by Aldus at Venice in ' Three Primers put forth in th; reign of Henry VILL, edited by Dr. Edward Burton, 1834. '^ Nicene and Apostles' Creed, p. 490. v.] Versions. 311 1 497 in a small book of Hours, and afterwards reproduced in not fewer than eight editions of the same book printed at various places — Venice, Tubingen, Hagenau, Florence, and Paris — at dates ranging from 1505 to 1543 inclusive, which was also reproduced at the end of a Greek Psalter printed at Strasburg in 1524, and again at Antwerp in 1533. From the fact of the appearance of the version in these numerous editions of two different books which were published at the close of the fifteenth century and the early part of the sixteenth ending with the year 1543, and which are certified to us by copies now extant in our libraries — other editions of the same books there may have been and it is not unlikely there were — it is obvious that it must have been well known to scholars throughout Western Europe towards the close of the first half of the latter century, probably better known than any other Greek version of the Creed, by some possibly regarded as the most authentic representation of the original text. Could it then have been unknown to the divines, with the Arch bishop of Canterbury at their head, who in the year 1548 were engaged in compiling the first book of Common Prayer of Edward the Sixth ? This would appear a priori very improbable. Literary intercommunion between Eng land and the Continent was not an unknown or rare occurrence at the epoch we are referring to. Foreign scholars visited our country and brought back books with them, and English scholars went abroad in quest of literary treasures. However this be, certain it is that the author of the Prayer-Book version of the Athanasian Creed had before him a copy in some edition or other of Aldus's Greek version, for some phrases and words are evidently translated from it and not from the Latin. In proof of this let me refer to the subjoined table, in which are placed 312 Documentary Evidence. [ CH. for the purpose of comparison several words or phrases of our English version of 1549, and side by side the corresponding words or phrases of the Latin text of the Quicunque, which must have been most familiar to the compiler^ — that namely of the Sarum Breviary — and also of the Greek text of Aldus. The text of the Quicunque I have quoted from is that of Procter and Wordsworth's edition of the Sarum Breviary. The text of Aldus may be seen, as already intimated, in Appendix K reproduced from the Bodleian copy of 1497. Latin of Sarum Breviaty. 'et' omitted in .ill be fore ' Spiritus Sanc tus.' ' immensus.' ' non tres increati nee tres immensi.' ' fideliter credat.' ' est ergo fides recta.' ' Deus est . . . et homo est.' ' perfectus Deus per fectus homo.' ' nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque crediderit.' English version, 1549. (i) ' and the Holy Ghost,' verses 8, 9, 10, 13, 15, and 17. (2) ' incomprehensible,' verses 9 and 12. (3) ' not three incompre- hensibles nor three uncreated,' ver. 12. (4) 'believe rightly,' ver. 29. (5) ' for the right faith is,' ver. 30. (6) ' God . . . and man,' ver. 31. (7) 'perfect God and per feet man,' ver. 32. (8) 'except a man believe faithfully,' ver. 42. In all these eight instances the English clearly follows the Greek and not the Latin, though the fifth and sixth and seventh would be insignificant apart from the other more striking examples. With regard to the second and third some remarks are necessary. There can be little doubt that the word incomprehensible was suggested to the translator by the Greek aKaToATjTTTos, but was understood by him and should be understood by us to mean, not that which is incapable of being grasped by the intellect, but Greek of Aldus. /cat' inserted in all before 'rO -nvevfxa to dyiov.' d/CaTdKTJTTTOS.' ovS^ rpets duardXrjTTTOt ovbi rpiis dtcTtiTTot.' dp9(jus mffTfvar].' iarl yap mans bpOi]' 0€os . . fcal dpOpoj- ¦nos.' TeXeios Oeos Kal reAeio? dvQpojiTos.' idv firi TiS TTiCTTWS TTlff- rtvarf.' V.J Versions. 313 that which cannot be contained within the limits of space. In this sense the word was received and used in the sixteenth century, as for instance by Hooker very distinctly : ' That presence everywhere is the sequel of an infinite and incomprehensible substance, for what can be everywhere but that which can nowhere be comprehended ^ ? ' At the same time, while the word was chosen by the translator as the most literal and exact interpretation of dKardkiiirTos, it would appear probable that it also commended itself to his mind as embracing and representing the various renderings of the Latin in previous English versions — the 'mychel' of that attributed to Schorham, the Wycliffite ' without mesure myche,' the ' immesurate ' of Hilsey, and the 'without mesure' of the version which followed Hilsey's. And no doubt he was right in his interpretation. For that the compiler of the Greek version first printed by Aldus understood dKaTakrjTrTos not to mean that which is incon ceivable to the human mind, but that which cannot be comprehended in space, is proved by this, that in other Greek versions, where some other word is used in the place of this, in every case the word so used has this or an equivalent meaning. Thus the first of Montfaucon has dperpos, immeasurable, his second direipos, infinite, the second of Caspari, while it has dxaTaATjTrros in verse 9, has dopicrros, illimitable, in verse 13, the two being clearly used as con vertible terms, and the fourth of Montfaucon has iravro- Kpdroip, which, as Bishop Pearson^ points out, has been understood ' to signify that God enholdeth, encircleth and containeth all things.' And in the above sense dxaTaArjirTos was used by divines, for instance St. John of Damascus: ' Ecclesiastical Polity, book v. chap. Iv. 4. ^ Exposition of the Creed, Art. I, with note upon the word, and another note in Art. VI. Edition 1832, pp. 70, 429. 314 Documentary Evidence. [ch. "Airetpoz; to Oeiov Kal dKaTdkrjirTov, koi tovto p.6vov avrov KaTakr]irTov f} direipia Kal aKaTakrjyjria ^. The misunder standing of the word incomprehensible in our version, I may remark by the way, has been and is a fertile source of objections and difficulties. With regard to the third instance in the above table — not three incomprehensibles nor three uncreated — the order of the words here, it may be observed, is inconsistent with the rest of the verse, but one uncreated and one incomprehe^isible, and it is peculiar. It is not found in the Latin, nor in any earlier English version, nor in any Greek version, except the third of Montfaucon ; nor yet in every text of that, for it is not in Genebrard's edition of the MS. of Baiffius nor in the Florence MS. as printed by Dr. Swainson. It is found only in Aldus's text and in Bryling and Stephens's copy, which, it must be recollected, is known to us in the present day only from Genebrard's collations of it as compared with his own text. From one of these two therefore the translator must have derived this peculiar reading, in all probability from some edition of Aldus's text. In regard to the fourth and the last instances noted above — their conformity with the Greek of Aldus is the more remark able, as in them, no less than in the last-mentioned instance, earlier English versions clearly followed the Latin. Thus in some passages the translator obviously followed this Greek version in preference to the Latin text of the Quicunque. But we cannot conclude from thence with the late Dr. Swainson ''¦ that he did so throughout. On the contrary, it will be seen in the subjoined instances that the very reverse was the case, the Latin being followed, not the Greek : — ^ De Fide Orthodoxa, lib. i. cap. iv. " Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, p. 495. -] Versions. 315 English version ofi^^q. 'and yet,' verses 11, 14, 16, 18. ' every person by him self,' ver. 19. ' not made, nor created,' ver. 22. ' neither made, nor cre ated, nor begotten, but proceeding,' ver. 23. ' the whole three persons are coeternal together and coequal,' ver. 26. ' so that in all things, as it is aforesaid,' ver. 27. ' the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped,' ver. 27. ' although,' ver. 34. ' so God and man,' ver. 37- ' descended into hell,' ver. 38. Latin of Sarum Breviaiy. ' et tamen.' ' sigillatim unamquam que personam.' ' non factus, nee creatus.' ' non factus, nee creatus, nee genitus, sed pro cedens.' ' totae tres personae co- aeternae sibi sunt et co-aequales.' ' ita ut per omnia, sicut iam supra dictum est.' ' et Unitas in Trinitate et Trinitas in Unitate veneranda sit.' ' licet.' ' ita Deus et homo.' ' descendit ad inferos.' Greek of Aldus. ' TrX-qv' ' tSi'ai/ fxiav €Haffrov vtt6~ OTatTLV.' ' ov TTOITJtSs, ov KTICCTOS.' 'oil noirjTov, ov Kriarov, dAA' kiCTTOpcvTov' ' awai at rpet^ vwoaTdofts Kal avvatSiai iialv eav- rais Kal laai.' ' wffTC Kara ndvra, Ka9ws tiprjTai.' ' Kal r^v fiovdSa iv rpidSi ffi^effdai Set Kal rr,v rpidha iv pLovd^i.' ' €1 icai' ' ovToj Kal 0 9edv9pajnos.' ' KaT^\9€v iv ^5ov.' Two cases occur where the Latin is clearly not followed, but where it is doubtful whether the Greek is followed or some earlier English text or texts. First, in verse 20 the English has ' three Gods or three Lords,' the Latin ' tres Deos aut Dominos,' the Greek of Aldus Tpets Oeovs tj Tpets Kvpiovs. Here the Greek as contrasted with the Latin is apparently followed, but considering that three is found before Lords in all four preceding English versions, it is a fair question whether the translator was not influenced by them" in his insertion of three. Secondly, in verse 39 'the right hand of the Father God Almighty' is very remarkable, the Latin being ' dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis! The Greek has be^iSiv TOV irarpos Kal Oeov iravTuKparopos, which at first sight it might appear that the translator followed. But it will be observed that he has not followed it exactly, for he omitted 3i6 Documentary Evidence. [ch. the copula, and still more, the words in the same order in which they are here used — 'the Father God Almighty' — and in the same connexion are found in two English versions of the Apostles' Creed, one preserved in a MS. of the thirteenth century, and the other in a MS. of the fifteenth, which have respectively ' sit on his Fadir richt honde, God almichti,' and ' sitteth on his Fadre righte side, God alle mygte ^.' The translator therefore may have been — probably was — guided by these English documents. We have seen that in several instances our version of 1549 followed the Greek of Aldus. In one it appears to have been modelled in accordance with another Greek version, viz. in verse 25, where it has ' none is afore nor after other, none is greater nor lesse then other.' This is distinctly different both from the Latin, which has ' nihil prius aut posterus, nihil mains aut minus,' and from the Aldine text, which has similarly ovbev irporepov ^ vcrrepov, ovbev p.el^ov rj ekarrov. It is more like the first version of Caspari, which has ovbeis b irp&Tos ^ 6 ecrxaros, ovbeis 6 p.ei^oiv 7\ 6 ekaTTcav. But here again the translator may possibly have taken a hint from earlier English versions — Hilsey's and that which was published shortly after his — which have ' none before or after another, nothing more nor lesse.' A few other cases may be noted where the translation appears to have been influenced by previous versions. In verse 2 the version of 1549 had not ' whole and undefiled,' but ' holy ' or ' holi and undefiled.' It is impossible to help suspecting that the latter word was derived from the Wycliffite version and that attributed to Wilham de Schorham, which have respectively ' unfilid ' and ' nought defouled.' In regard to holy, it is inconceivable that the translator could have thus rendered ' integram.' The word ' Heurtley, LLarmonia Symbolica, pp. 95 and 99. V.J Versions. 317 which would seem most likely to have suggested itself to his mind as the most fit rendering is that which is now in the Prayer Book, zvhole, i. e. the faith in its integrity, without addition or diminution, or, according to the spelling of the epoch, hole. This was the rendering of the two versions just named, Schorham's so called and the Wycliffite version, the former having ' hole ' and the latter ' hool.' If the translator chose one of the above epithets from these sources, as we see that he probably did, he would probably in like manner choose the other from them. This was also the rendering of z'«^^^rrt;« in the version which was brought out soon after Hilsey's, and but shortly before the first Prayer Book of Edward the Sixth. Thus we might expect that the author of the version of 1549, following previous English versions, would adopt the word hole in verse 2 as the translation of integram, and the change from that to holi or holy by a copyist's or printer's error would be very easy. Again, the translator seems to have been influenced by the Wycliffite and Schorham versions in his rendering of verse 7, ' Such as the Father,' &c. Notably of in verse 21 ' of none,' and in verse 22 ' of the Father,' and in verse 23 ' of the Father and the Son,' appears to be drawn from the same sources. Hilsey's version, and that before mentioned as following his, have of in verse 21, but from in the two others. Furthermore in verse 29 is found in Hilsey alone ; the Wycliffite version has Biside. The concluding words 'he cannot be saved' also, which differ alike from the Latin, ' salvus esse non poterit,' and the Greek of Aldus, a-oiOrjvai ov bwrjaerai, follow Hilsey ; the Wycliffite and Schorham versions have respectively 'he may not here be saaf ' and ' here may not be sauf ' In the word must in verse 28 — 'must thus think of the 3i8 Documentary Evidence. [ch. Trinity' — may be noted a verbal departure, which does not materially affect the meaning, from every preceding version. The obvious conclusion from all this is that the transla tion of i549j which in substance we still use in our Prayer Book, was not drawn uniformly from any one text of the Creed existing at the time, but was probably compiled from several different sources, the two principal ones being the Latin text as then used in the Church service, and the third Greek version of Montfaucon according to the text first printed by Aldus in 1497. In some particulars, among them a few very remarkable ones, Aldus's text is evidently followed ; in others the Latin is adhered to no less dis tinctly ; in others again it seems to have been influenced by previous English versions, in one by the first Greek version of Caspari, and in one the translator chose a word not literally corresponding with his authorities, but ex pressing their meaning. As to the greater portion of the document, which agrees alike with the Aldine text and the Latin, it is impossible to say that one was followed to the exclusion of the other ; but if one only was followed, we should naturally suppose it to have been the Latin, with which the translator must have been most conversant. It is very remarkable that the translator in constructing a version to be authoritatively used in the Church of England should have deferred so much to a Greek version as to accept some of its readings in preference to those of the Latin text of the Creed as recited up to that time in the service of the Church ; and it is still more remarkable that the bishops and divines who compiled the first Prayer Book of Edward should have endorsed these departures from what was then the received text, if we may so de scribe it. The position is not to be accounted for by the V-] Versions. 319 hypothesis that one or both of these parties — if indeed they were distinct parties, it being very possible, we may say probable, that the translator was himself one of the com pilers, indeed the chief of their body. Archbishop Cranmer — regarded the Greek Aldus text as the authentic veritable text of St. Athanasius. If this had been the belief of the translator, he would have adhered more closely than he has done to that text. Had it been the belief of the compilers, it seems strange that they should have dropped the title of the Creed which appears in all editions of Aldus's text, 'S.vp.fiokov TOV dyiov 'AOavacriov, and the corresponding one in the Breviary, ' Symbolum Athanasii,' and described it instead in the rubric of the new book simply as ' this Confession of our Christian fayth ^.' The text of the Prayer Book version has undergone but little alteration. The only alteration of any importance which has taken place is that of holy in verse 3 into whole, made in 1627. Are they in verse 14 was changed ' Two schemes for a new Office drawn up by Cranmer have been edited recently for the first time from the British Museum MS. Reg. 7, B. iv. See Edward VI and the Book of Common Prayer, by Francis Aidan Gasquet and Edmund Bishop, Appendix i, ii, iii. In the first, a scheme for a Breviary, inspired by Quignon's reformed Breviary and assigned to some date between 1543 and Henry the Eighth's death in January 1547, the Athanasian Creed is entitled ' symbolum Athanasii Quicunque vult ' ; in the second, a scheme for Morning and Evening Prayer assigned to an early period in the reign of Edward and consequently, assuming this date to be correct, drawn up very shortly before the first Prayer Book, which could not have been compiled later than the autumn of 1548, inasmuch as the Act of Uniformity, which legalized it, was passed on the 21st of January, r549, Parliament having assembled in the previous November, it is entitled ' symbolum Quicunque vult.' The difference in the title of the Creed in the later Office as compared with that in the earlier may be fairly considered significant and illu-itrative of the title adopted in the first Prayer Book. The dates assigned to these two schemes drawn up by Cranmer are, it should be mentioned, conjectural on the part of the editors, but based upon probable grounds. I must add that the title of the Creed in the 1549 book, though stated by the late Dr. Swainson to be Greek in its origin — Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, p. 493' — is not to be found in any Greek version. 320 Documentary Evidence. [ch. into they are in 1552, and a similar change in verse 16 was made in 1589. In verse 25 ?tor after was changed into or after in 1552, nor lesse into or less in 1589, and other into another in 1552. In verse 27, as it is was changed into as is in 1553. In verse 29, believe rightly in the Incarnation was changed into believe rightly the Incarna tion in 1662. In verse 39, the was inserted before dead in 1552. And in verse 40, of theyr own was changed into for their own in 1552. 3. The German versions, on account of their antiquity, may most fittingly be noticed next. The earliest was first edited by Eccard from a Wolfen- biittel MS., Theol. xxvii. f 153, as part of a manual of religious instruction and devotion entitled Catechesis Theotisca ^. The manuscript appears to have belonged originally to the Benedictine abbey of Weissenburg, from a note upon the first leaf: ' Codex monasterii Petri et Pauli in Wissenburg.' From the character of the handwriting Eccard considers it to have been written about the middle of the ninth century. The style also of the language em ployed would point to that as the epoch which produced the book. Hence he is of opinion that the Catechesis may have been drawn up on occasion of the Second Council of Maintz held A. D. 847. He describes the compiler as ' monachus Weissenburgensis sive Otfridus fuerit sive alius.' It is certainly a book of great interest for the insight it affords into the substance and character of the religious teaching of the German Church in the ninth century. It contains the Lord's Prayer, a list of Peccata criminalia, the Apostles" Creed, the Athanasian, the Gloria in Excelsis, ^ Incerti 7nonachi IViessenburgensis Catechesis Theotisca saeculo ix. con scripta, nunc vero primum edita ... in unum coUegit . . . ac praefatione illustravit ... J. Georgius Eccardus. Hanov. 1713. v.] Versions. 32 c each being accompanied with a translation in the vernacular. The Athanasian Creed is followed by the words ' Explicit Fides Catholica.' This version has been printed recently from the Wolfenbiittel MS. in Massmann's Die deutschen Abschw'orungs-, Glaubens-, Beicht- ttnd Betformeln vom achten bis zum zw'dlften Jahrhundert, pp. 40 and 88. The next in date was by Notker Balbulus, a monk of St. Gall, to whose paraphrase of the Psalms it is subjoined. As he died in 912, it may clearly be assigned to the close of the ninth century or the commencement of the tenth. It has no title. It was first edited by Eccard from the Vienna MS. D. i. 79, f 229 in the Appendix to his work De rebus Franciae Orietttalis et Episcopatus Wircebiirgensis, tom. ii. p. 932. It is also printed by Massmann from the same MS. in the work above mentioned, side by side with the previous version. In some cases Notker adds to his translation a comment or paraphrase. A third version, later than the two just mentioned but not later than the twelfth century, is edited by Massmann from two Munich MSS., germ. 589, f 153, and germ. 588. In the latter appears the title ' Psalmus Quicunque vult salvus esse! German versions are contained also in two German Psalters in the Vienna Imperial Library, the first assigned to the fifteenth century and numbered xxxvill in Denis's Codices manuscripti theologici Bibliothecae Palatinae Vindo bonensis, vol. i. The Creed follows the Canticles, and is imperfect, owing no doubt to the mutilation of the MS., ending with the words of verse 28, ' Daz ist eyn war gloube, daz wir glouben und bekennen daz unse herre sy gotes.' Denis states that the version of the Psalms in this book is much earlier than the fifteenth century, and prob ably this is true also of the version of the Quicunque. The Y 322 Documentary Evidence. [ch. second is numbered XXXIX in the same volume of Denis, and is also assigned to the fifteenth century. The Creed follows the Canticles and Te Deum, and is followed by Litanies. German versions are also found in two Latin and German Psalters in the same library, the first numbered LVII in the second volume of Denis's Catalogue, and as signed to the thirteenth century. The Creed follows the Canticles and the Te Deum, and is followed by Litanies, in which many German saints are invoked. In the second, numbered LVIII in the same volume and assigned likewise to the thirteenth century, our document, with the Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed, follows the Canticles. This MS., before it passed into the Vienna Library, belonged to the Jesuit College at Gratz in Styria, and was probably executed either in that country or Carinthia. These no doubt are but a few among many instances of manuscript German versions of the Athanasian Creed which are even now extant in various libraries. 4. Let us pass to French versions. In reference to these we may fittingly revert to the first of the Capitula of Hincmar delivered to his presbyters, already noticed,^, ' that every presbyter should commit to memory the dis course of Athanasius concerning the Faith, commencing Whosoever ivill be saved, and understand its meaning and be able to enunciate it in common words,' i.e. the verna cular. Clearly the practice thus enjoined upon the clergy of interpreting the Athanasian Creed in the vernacular to their people would necessarily lead to the construction of versions. A priest who had thus interpreted it .would naturally go on for his own convenience as well as the benefit of others to put his translation into writing. Nor is there any reason to consider this Capitulum of Hincmar ^ Above, Part I. chap. ii. 8. v.] Versions. 323 an isolated enactment of its kind : rather it may probably be regarded as a sample of similar directions addressed to the clergy by bishops, at least in France and Germany, during the ninth century. In Regino's collection of Visita tion Articles, so to speak, compiled at the beginning of the tenth century, but, as is expressly stated, from earlier authorities, one of the articles of episcopal inquiry is drawn mutatis mutandis in the words of this Capitulum ^- And the collection in the judgement of Baluze represents in sub stance the code of disciplinary regulations which had been in use from the time of Boniface, or nearly so. This Capitulum then of Hincmar clearly points to the probability that in France, as well as in Germany, versions of the Athanasian Creed originated in the ninth century. The earliest manuscript copy of any French version known of at present — probably there are some earlier copies ex tant, although not yet brought to light — is the first of the two mentioned by Montfaucon and printed in his Diatribe. He dates it about the year 1100 ; and as he found it in a Colbert MS., there can be little or no doubt that it may be found now in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris, to which the Colbert collection passed ^. It has no title. The three verses at the beginning are as follows : ' Kikunques vult salf estre devant totes choses bosoing est qu'il tienget la comune fei. Laquelle si cascun entiere e neant malmise ne guarderat, sanz dotance pardurablement perirat. Iceste est a certes la comune fei, qu'un deu en trinitet e la trinitet en unitet aorums.' It will be noticed that ' Fides Catholica ' is both times rendered ' la commune fei.' Similarly in verse 19 we have 'la comune religiun.' The text is im- ' Above, I. ii. to. ^ ' Ex cod. Colbert. 3133 a 600 annis conscripta est.' Diatribe iti Symbolum Quicunque. Y 2 324 Documentary Evidence. [ch. perfect, ending with the words of verse 29, ' en siecle noz.' Montfaucon's second version is stated by him to be from a MS. 400 years old, written, that is, about the year 1300, which belonged to the Friars Minor, presumably of Paris, but he omits to say to what Franciscan house it belonged. It appears to have been written by the side of the Latin original, and in both cases the title is peculiar and remarkable, that of the original being ' Canticum Bonifacii,' that of the version ' Ce chant fut a Anastaise qui apostoiles de Rome.' The French title is explained by the contemporaneous teaching of Simon Torracensis in his Commentary on the Creed, viz. that it was drawn up by Pope Anastasius in a Council at Rome ^. This version is distinctly different from the former, and the product of a later epoch, the translation being more free, indeed para phrastic, and the language exhibiting a higher stage of growth and formation. But in this also 'Catholica' is always rendered ' comune '; in verses i, 3, and the last we have 'la comune foi,' in verse 19 ' la comune religion.' Another and still later French version, which is worth noticing, occurs in the British Museum MS. Harleian 4337. The book contains a Psalter, followed by the Hours of the Virgin and other documents, and it is plainly a Lorraine book. This is shown by the Preface describing the Psalter as ' dou latin trait et translateit en romans en laingue lorienne.' Then the Calendar is remarkable for the great number of French saints commemorated, including five bishops of Metz. The date is fixed by a colophon to the Psalter stating that it was written and translated in the year 1365. The Psalms, the Canticles both of the Old and New Testament, the Lord's Prayer, Apostles' Creed, and Ave Maria are all ' en romans,' i. e. the Lotharingian ^ Above, I. iv. 18. v.] Versions. 325 French of the period, the initial words only of each docu ment appearing in Latin. Then follows the Athanasian Creed in Latin only, which is remarkable, having for its title ' Canticum Athanasii epischopi ' ; and this concludes what is apparently the first part of the book. The second part is subjoined after the intervention of one blank leaf It comprises the Hours of the Blessed Virgin, the Penitential Psalms, a Litany, the Vigils of the Dead, followed by several prayers and collects, the last being ' Orison comune pour tons les mors,' and finally the Athanasian Creed pre ceded by the rubric ' Quicunque vult salvus esse Lou credo Athenaise.' All these documents are in the vernacular, and that only. The compiler of the book I presume omitted the version of the Quicunque at the end of the Psalter, because he preferred subjoining it to the Hours, the portion of the book especially intended for the laity, though indeed in the Preface the Psalter itself is said to be translated ' pour les gens laye.' The first verse is as follows : ' Qui- conques welt estre sauveiz, il couvient et est besoing et . . . necessaire tenir et croire fermement le foy catholike, que tient et adit saincte eglise.' The last : ' Vez ci le foy catholique, la queille se chescun ne le croit fermement et fiaublement, il ne porrait estre sauveiz.' It will be observed that ' catholica ' is here rendered ' catholike ' or ' catholique,' not ' comune ' as in the former versions. The Hours in this book seemed to me to be written by the same hand as the Psalter, the two forming a complete whole. I cannot leave this part of the subject without drawing attention to the fact, which is of importance in connexion with the history of the Athanasian Creed in England, and must at the same time be a matter of interest to Englishmen, viz. that French versions of our document occur in a series of MSS. — the survivors, no doubt, of 326 Doctimentary Evidence. [ch. numerous others of the same class— which were written in England, and were obviously intended to meet the devotional and religious requirements of the upper classes, who continued as late as the fourteenth century to speak the language of their French or Norman ancestors who had come to our shores with William the Conqueror ^ The first instance of these I shall mention is the Eadwine Psalter deposited at Trinity College, Cambridge, executed at Canterbury in the reign of Stephen, which has been previously noticed in connexion with the Stavelot Com mentary^- In that book two versions of the Athanasian Creed appear in Saxon and French respectively, written between the lines of the text, one above the other, the former clearly being for the Saxon subjugated folk, the latter for the dominant class of Norman descent. The latter commences : ' Ki unques vult salf estre devant tutes choses est busuin que il tient.' Here there is a hiatus owing to the mutilation of the leaf The next two verses continue : ' La quele se chascun entiere e nient malmise ne guarderat, senz dutance perdurablement perirat. Iceste est acertes la comune fei que un deu en ternite e la ternite en unite unurum.' In verse 19, 'Catholica religione' is rendered ' par comune religion.' The last is : ' Ceste est la fei comune, la quele quicunkes fedeilement e fermement ne crerrad, salf estre ne purrad".' There is evidently a close resemblance between this and the first version of Mont faucon. Next may be mentioned, as belonging also to the ' ' The French language was spoken by the superior classes in society in England from the Conquest to the reign of Edward the Third. . , . School-boys were made to construe their Latin into French. . . . The minutes of the Cor poration of London were in French, as well as the proceedings in Parliament and in the Courts of Justice. The use of French was much abandoned in the fourteenth century.' Hallam's Introduction to the Literature of Europe, vol. i. pp. 63, 64, chap. i. § 53. " Above, I. iv. 6. v.] Versions. 327 twelfth century, a British Museum MS., Nero. C. iv, a Psalter also, but without gloss or commentary, written in two columns, the one Latin, the other French. It must have been written in the monastery of St. Swithun, which was attached to the cathedral at Winchester. This is shown by the great number of English or Saxon saints, and more particularly bishops of Winchester or Wessex, mentioned in the Calendar and Litany — Cuthbert, Guthlac, Alfege, Herchenwald, Dunstan, Eadburga, Hedda, Oswald, Aidan, Birinus, Athelwold, Eadmund, and still more con clusively by a prayer to St. Swithun at the end of the Litany, in which he is thus addressed apparently by the writer: 'Sancte Swithune . . . tu es cum Christo in socie tate Sanctorum, et ego miser peccator et fragilis peccavi in atriis tuis in domo tua male vivendo . . . adiuva me una cum ceteris Sanctis quorum corpora in hac iuxta te requiescunt aula vel quorum reliquie in hac ecclesia vel in hac civitate continentur,' &c. The date of the book is assigned to the second half of the twelfth century, but probably it was not executed later than 11 73, the year of Archbishop Becket's canonization, as his festival on December 29 does not appear in the Calendar. The Athanasian Creed occurs in the usual place after the Canticles, following the Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed. The two initiatory verses of the translation are : ' Ki que unkes veolt estre salf devant tutes choses li est mestier que il tienge voire creance. La quele si chascuns entiere et nient malmise ne guarderat, sanz dutance pardurable ment perirat.' Verse 3 has also ' la voire creance,' but in verse 19 we find 'par commune religiun,' and the last is ' Icest est la commune fei, la quele si chascun fedeillement e fermement crerrat (sic), salf estre ne porrat.' There are two other manuscript P.salters in the British Museum 328 Documentary Evidence. [ch. which contain French versions of the Athanasian Creed, though evidently written in England and for the use of English people — Harleian 273 of the early part of the fourteenth century, and Harleian 1770 of the middle of the same century. The first is written in two columns in French, the initial words only of the several Psalms and Canticles being supplied in Latin, but its English origin appears in the number of English saints commemorated in the Kalendar and invoked in the Litany, and the flyleaf contains a memorandum of its possession by an English owner in the fifteenth century : ' Iste liber constat lohn Clerk grocero ap. carlo regis Edwardi quarto post con- questum.' The Quicunque occurs in the usual place in French only and without any title. In verses i and 3 it has 'la comune fei,' in verse 19 'comune religion,' in the last ' la comune foi.' From the absence of the petitions at the end of the Litany, which are usually found in monastic Psalters, it may be concluded that this book was not designed for monastic use. The other Psalter — Harleian 1770 — had its original home in the Priory of Austin Canons at Kirkham in Yorkshire, as we learn from a memorandum on the flyleaf: ' Liber monasterii de Kirkam.' It is written in two columns, the one in Latin, the other in French. The Psalms and Canticles are both without titles. The Athanasian Creed immediately follows the Te Deum, which is preceded by the New Testament Canticles. As in the Winchester Psalter, so here ' Catholica fides ' in verses i and 3 is translated 'voire creance.' In verse 19 ' Catholica religione ' is ' par comune religiun.' But in the last we find 'Catholica fides' rendered in a singular manner by 'la ferme creance '—' Iceste est la ferme creance, la quele chascuns que ne la crerrat fermement, ne purrat estre saufs.' The Lord's Prayer follows the Quicunque, but ends v.] Versions. 329 abruptly with the words ' panem nostrum.' Thus this Psalter is imperfect at the end ; it is also imperfect at the beginning, commencing with the words of the second Psalm ' fringes eos,' so that at present it has neither Calendar nor Litany. For my knowledge of the two last- named MSS. I am indebted to the courtesy of Mr. Scott, the Keeper of the MSS. in the British Museum. It will be noticed that the Metz book is the only one of these MSS. which renders ' Catholica fides ' by ' la catholike ' or 'la catholique foi,' that two have 'voire creance,' but the other four ' comune fei ' with ' comune religion.' This is a matter of some little interest in connexion with the Wycliffite version of the Athanasian Creed, tending to show that the author of that version, which was drawn up at the time when the French language was passing out of use in England and probably with the view of supplying the place of the French versions previously in use, derived from them his expressions, ' the comyne bileve,' ' the comune bileve,' ' general religion,' ' general bileve ^.' I may add that an old French metrical version of our document composed ' ad usum vulgi ' has been edited by M. Francisque Michel from a Paris MS. of the thirteenth century — Bibl. Nat. Suppl. Franc. No. 5145 — together with the corresponding versions of the Psalter and Canticles to which it is subjoined ^. In the same volume is also printed the French version noticed above from the Cotton MS., Nero C. iv, together with variants from an old Corbie Psalter, which at one time belonged to the Colbert Collection^. ' See above, I. v. 2 ; also Appendix N. ^ Libri Psalmorum, versio Gallica antiqua. Edidit Franciscus Michel, p. 361. ^ Ibid., p, 255. 330 Documentary Evidence. [ch. In another volume the same editor has printed the French version of the Quicunque in the Eadwin Psalter, together with the French versions of the Psalms and Canticles found in that book and their Latin texts ^. 5. A Spanish version of our document appears in two early printed Spanish Books of Hours of the Blessed Virgin, of which there are copies in the British Museum. The earliest of them is a curious and interesting little volume, profusely decorated with prints of sacred subjects, as is usually the case with Books of Hours. It contains much besides the actual Office of the Hours, and was evidently intended as a popular book of devotion. The Athanasian Creed occurs towards the end, introduced by the title, ' El psalmo Quicunque vult.' It follows ' Las horas de los finados,' the Hours of the Deceased, and is succeeded by a variety of prayers which close the volume. The book is without title-page or pagination, and is undated, for the colophon, while mentioning the names of the printer and publisher, omits to add, as usual, the date. It is as follows : ' Fenescan las horas de nuestra Senora impressas en Paris por Nicolao Higman por el Symon Voestre librero qui vive en Paris a la calle de nuestra Senora.' The conjectural date therefore assigned by the British Museum Catalogue, viz. 1497, may be safely accepted, as at least approximately correct. For Symon Voestre or Vostre carried on his business of publisher and bookseller at Paris from 1484 to 1520, and Brunet mentions a French Book of Hours printed for him by Nicholas Higman late in the fifteenth century. The other Spanish Book of Hours in the British Museum which contains the Athanasian Creed was printed in Paris ' Le livre des Psaumes ancienne traduction Francaise. Paris, 1876. v.] Versions. 331 for Guillermus Marlin in the year 1546, as we are informed by the colophon. Of this there are two copies in the Museum. It is not a mere reprint of the earlier Horas, but a different book, for it contains some matter not found in that, and omits other matter which is found there ; and the documents which are necessarily common to both are arranged differently. Hence the position of the Athanasian Creed is different, but in both it has the same title and the same text, as it appeared to me. I may mention some renderings that I noticed : the commencement, ' Qualquier que quisiere ser salvo ' ; in verse 9 ' immensus ' is ' sin medida' — 'sin medida es el Padre,' &c. ; but in verse 12 ' tres immensi ' is translated ' tres grandes sin medida ' ; in verse 24, ' nihil prius aut posterius nihil mains aut minus ' is translated literally ' no ay cosa primera ni postrimera, ninguna cosa es maior ni menor,' and 'totae tres personae coaeternae sibi sunt ' is ' todas tres per sonas son en uno siempra durables'; in verse 25 the later reading is followed, ' la unidad en la trinidad y la trinidad en la unidad'; in verse 38, 'resurgere habent' has its exact counterpart in ' han de resuscitar ' ; the last is peculiar in the reading 'cada uno fiel firmemente no creyere.' The title of the book is ' Horas de la Virgen Maria segun el uso Romano con otros officios aiiadidas muchas oraciones.' Thus there are certainly extant at the present day translations of the Athanasian Creed into Greek, English, German, French, and Spanish, which were produced during a period extending from the ninth century to the close of the fifteenth. I do not by any means represent this as an exhaustive list of the versions made and used in the Middle Ages. On the contrary, I have no doubt that others which were then current have since perished, and that others are 332 Documentary Evidence. still in existence of which we cannot produce equally abundant and sufficient evidence. Dr. Swainson mentions an Italian version in a Milan MS. — A. 145 supra — shown him by Dr. Ceriani ; also a Bohemian one ^¦ ' Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, pp. 497, 49S. PART II. CONCL USIONS. Having considered the documentary evidence relating to the history of the Athanasian Creed under the various heads of Testimonies, Canons and Ecclesiastical Injunctions, Manuscripts, Commentaries, Versions, we are now in a position to arrive at some conclusions on the following points : the language in which it was composed, the date when it originated, the author to whom it may be ascribed, the titles attributed to it, its text, its use and reception in the Church. CHAPTER I. THE language. In regard to the language in which the Creed was originally composed, the argument of Waterland is I think conclusive : ' The style and phraseology of the Creed ; its early reception among the Latins, while unknown to the Greeks ; the antiquity and number of the Latin manu scripts and their agreement for the most part with each other, and the disagreement of the Greek copies, all concur to demonstrate that this Creed was a Latin composure rather than a Greek one : and as to any other language besides these two, none is pretended ^! And still further, its distinctly Latin character is emphasized by the fact, which I shall have occasion to advert to more fully by and by, that the terminology both in regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation is largely borrowed from the writings of St. Augustine, whilst several expressions in both parts are also clearly traceable to St, Vincent of Lerins. Of the close relation of its phraseology to that of these two Fathers any one may satisfy himself by comparing the Creed as printed in Waterland's work with the parallel passages from early writers, which he has placed by its side. The fact of the Creed being originally drawn up in Latin cannot indeed be adduced as proving that it was not the ' Waterland, Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, chap. iv. p. 66, Oxford edition. The Language. 335 work of the great opponent of Arianism to whom through out the Middle Ages it was attributed. Some persons, as Serarius^, maintain that it was written by him in Latin. But the remarkable accordance of the phraseology of the Creed with that of St. Augustine, who was not baptized until some years after the death of St. Athanasius, is obviously fatal to a belief in the authorship of the latter. For this accordance can only be accounted for upon one of two hypotheses. Either the Creed in places must have been drawn from or based upon the words of St. Augustine, or else he must have borrowed from the Creed. The latter hypothesis is plainly untenable ; it is impossible to suppose that St. Augustine could have known of the existence of the Creed and been so familiar with it as to adopt its terminology without even once in the course of his volu minous writings mentioning it as a document of authority and the work of Athanasius. Truth then requires us to abandon the belief in the authorship of Athanasius ; and the various legends which have been built upon that belief must be abandoned also, as having no foundation in history — to wit, that he drew up the Creed at the Council of Nice, or at Treves during his exile in that city, or at Rome, where according to Baronius he not only composed it but presented it to Pope Julius. ' De Symbolo Athanasiano disputatio prima. Opusculae, tom. ii. p. 7. Moguntiae, 1611. CHAPTER n. THE DATE. In order to arrive at a conclusion with regard to the epoch which produced the Creed, it is obviously necessary to consider both the external and the internal evidence bearing upon the point, the former being derived from the documents previously noticed, the latter from the text of our document. To deal first with the external evidence, as is clearly most convenient, beginning with the first half of the ninth century, I propose to trace it upwards through each of the preceding centuries as high as it reaches. Not many years have elapsed since various theories respecting the date and origin of the Quicunque were broached by persons eminent by position and reputation, which, though widely differing, indeed conflicting, in other respects, were agreed thus far, that they all represented it to be the production of the ninth century, not earlier. Hence I deem it expedient to commence by particularizing and summarizing the evidences which the first half of that century furnishes of the existence of the Creed at that epoch, and considerably prior to it also. What are these evidences? Firstly, the Creed is quoted or referred to by several writers of this period, and that too as the work of St. Athanasius ; by Agobard, Bishop of Lyons about 820, who quotes verse 3 ^ ; by some Latin ' See Part I. chap. i. 10. The Date. 337 monks at Jerusalem in 809, who refer to it as an authority on the subject of the Procession ^ ; by Theodulf Bishop of Orleans, who in a work on the Procession written in the same year or shortly after, by order of Charlemagne, quotes several verses ^ ; and yet earlier in the century by Alcuin, who in a work upon the same subject also quotes several verses. Next, the use of it was canonically enjoined at this period in episcopal admonitions and charges so to speak: this we learn from a series of capitula drawn up in the dominions and during the reign of the Emperor Lothair ^ ; also from two documents of an earlier date in the ninth century, showing that the clergy were then required to learn it by heart, and that their knowledge of it was one of the sub jects of episcopal examination and inquiry*; also from the capitulare of Hatto, or Ahyto or Hetto, Bishop of Basle, by which the priests of his diocese were required to learn the Creed by heart and recite it at the hour of Prime on Sundays^ ; and lastly from a capitulare of Theodulf Bishop of Orleans, who also admonishes his clergy to learn it by heart ^ Next, we gather from the Epistle of Florus the Deacon to Hyldrad the Abbot, that at this period, together with the Apostles' Creed and Lord's Prayer, it was com monly found in Psalters subjoined to the Old and New Testament Canticles '. And of this fact we have substantial evidence in three manuscript Psalters existing at the present day, all most interesting books : Athelstan's Psalter, as it is called, a British Museum MS., the original part of which, including the Psalms and Canticles, Gloria in ex celsis, Lord's Prayer, Apostles' and Athanasian Creeds, must have been written before 850 A. D., probably in 1 See Part I. chap. i. 9. ' Ibid. I. i. 8. = Ibid. I. ii. 6. * Ibid. I. ii. 4. ' Ibid. I. ii. 5. « Ibid. I. ii. 3. ' Ibid. L i. 12. 338 Conclusions. [en- Germany I ; the famous Utrecht Psalter, which most prob ably belongs to the period we are concerned with at present ^, and the Psalter written in honour of the Emperor Lothair or at his request in 833 or 834 ^ Next it appears in two MSS. assigned to the early part of this period — Paris Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin 145 1 and 3848 B — both containing collections of canons and documents re lating to dogma *. And lastly, a Commentary on the Quicttnque, attributed to Theodulf has recently been edited from the library at Orleans. If rightly so attributed, it must necessarily have been produced not later than 831, the year of Theodulf's death, and if not, as may very possibly be the case, still it may probably be regarded as a work of the first half of the ninth century, inasmuch as the MS. containing it was written in that century according to the high authority of Monsieur Delisle ^. Now what are the conclusions which necessarily follow from the particulars which I have here specified and gathered together ? First, that at the commencement of the ninth century the Athanasian Creed was extant ; and secondly, that it was then extant in its integrity, not in an inchoate, germinal, fragmentary, incomplete condition, but complete as we have it now, the same document which we have in our Prayer Books and say in our churches. For thus com plete and in its entirety it is found in all the MSS. here mentioned. And a third conclusion may be added, that it must have been extant not only at the commencement of the ninth century, but some considerable time before. This is clear on two grounds. First, it was plainly believed at that period to be the work of St. Athanasius, in almost all the documents above mentioned being expressly ascribed ' See Part I. chap. iii. ii. ' Ibid. I. iii. lo. ' Ibid. I. iii. 9. * Ibid. I. iii. 7, 8. = Ibid. I. iv. 7. I-] The Date. 339 to him, cited as his, described by such titles as The Faith of Athanasius. I am not arguing that this belief of the age is any proof that the Creed was the genuine work of Athanasius, but that it proves it to have been even then a work of some antiquity. The divines of the early part of the ninth century had among them men of learning, such men as Theodulf and Alcuin, well versed in the writings of the Fathers, and it is impossible to suppose that they could have regarded the Quicunque as handed down through successive ages from a man who had been dead more than 400 years had it been the production of a recent age, the preceding century or two. They knew at least that the tradition respecting its authorship was not of yesterday. And secondly, we found that in the first half of the ninth century it was the subject of episcopal admonitions and injunctions, presbyters being required to learn it by heart and recite it under pain of incurring canonical censure in case of disobedience ; that it was then also admitted into Psalters and side by side with the Scriptural Canticles which were recited in the service and the Te Deum, and Lord's Prayer, and Apostles' Creed ; that it was then also regarded as a document of weight and authority, appealed to and quoted on matters of faith and doctrine ; and lastly, that in all probability it was then made the subject of a Commentary. And being thus used and received and esteemed in the Church in the early part of the ninth century, we may safely conclude that at that epoch it could not have been a recent production. A new and unknown document would not have been thus used and esteemed. And therefore, even though no other evi dences than those already noticed could be alleged, a pre-existence of some considerable duration might be reasonably claimed for it, in which it would be disseminated z 2 340 Conclusions. [ch. and become widely known, and attract the attention of the learned, and grow into general esteem as a reliable exposi tion of Scriptural truth and Catholic doctrine. But let us advance onwards, and we shall still find further evidences to our point in preceding centuries, though of necessity not equally abundant. The first documentary evidence belonging to the eighth century which meets us is the profession of faith made by Denebert in 798 A.D. at his consecration to the bishopric of the Hwiccii,or Worcester, in which he quotes several verses of the Athanasian Creed for the purpose of declaring his faith in the Holy Trinity^. This is particularly deserving of notice, because he intro duces the quotation with an expression — scriptum est — which clearly implies that in his opinion the document he was quoting from was invested with the characters of authority and antiquity. There are four MSS. of this century in which our document is found either wholly or in part. The first of these to be mentioned — Paris Biblio theque Nationale, Latin 4858 — contains a portion of it only, from the commencement down to the words ' tres aeterni ' of verse 11 ^. This appears at the bottom of the verso side of the last leaf of the volume as it is at present, from which one or more leaves, which no doubt comprised the rest of the Creed, have evidently been torn away. The imperfect condition of the text is the consequence of this mutilation of the MS. This codex belongs to the close of the eighth century. In the three other MSS. we have the Creed in its entirety. Two of these are Psalters, and no mean Psalters, as appears from the care bestowed upon their execution and their ornate character, as well as the connexion of both with Charlemagne. One of them is deposited in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris— Latin ' See Part I. chap. i. 6. 2 ji,;j j ;;; §_ II.] The Date. 341 1 3 159. The Litanies at the end, in one of which Charles is prayed for as ' King of the Franks and Lombards and Patrician of the Romans,' and in the two others simply as King, while Leo is in all three prayed for as Pope, seem clearly to prove that it must have been written between the accession of Leo III to the Pontificate at the close of the year 795 and the coronation of Charlemagne as Emperor at Christmas 800 '. The other Psalter, now in the Imperial Library at Vienna, appears from some dedicatory verses to have been written for Charlemagne when King, and to have been intended by him as a present to Pope Hadrian I. It must therefore have been written some time during the pontificate of the latter, which began in 772 and ended in 795 ^. In the Vienna Psalter the Quicunque is attributed to St. Athanasius by the title ; in the Paris book it has no title. Important and interesting as these two MSS. are, the fourth exceeds them in importance and interest, inas much as it is the earliest manuscript copy of our Creed at present extant, or at least known to be so. It is in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, and has for its press-mark O. 212. It was transferred to its present home from the Irish monastery at Bobio in North Italy at the beginning of the seventeenth century, and is written in an Irish hand. Being clearly, as I have before noticed, not the autograph of the author, but a copy of an older MS., it is not only evidence of the existence of the Quicunque in the eighth century, but also of its being extant yet earlier 3. To some persons it may appear at first thought a matter of surprise that we are only able to point to four MSS. of our Creed as belonging to this century, and to none of a prior date ; but, if the enormous waste and destruction of ancient MSS. which has taken place in former ages, and is still going on • See Part I. chap. iii. 5. ' Ibid. I. iii. 4. = Ibid. I. iii. i. 342 Conclusions. [ch. in some degree, from a variety of causes — unavoidable decay, careless and rough usage, fire, damp, war, fanaticism, ignorance, neglect ; if this is considered, it will become rather a wonder that we should be able to produce so many MSS. of this remote epoch which have survived the wreck. Manuscripts earlier than the ninth century are of course comparatively rare. There is another MS. of this century— Paris Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin 3836, f. 89 r. — which, although not a MS. of our document, requires special notice as affording distinct evidence of its antiquity, more distinct indeed than any MS. copy of it affords. It has been commonly regarded as a MS. of the Creed ; but it is clearly not so, not even of a portion of it. It is a MS. of a fragment — the conclusion of a sermon or discourse on the Apostles' Creed, delivered at the Traditio Symboli to the catechumens or candidates for baptism, in which the preacher adapts and modifies the latter part of the Quicunque respecting the Incarnation. He does not quote or reproduce the text exactly, but passes over one verse almost entirely, and varies the language of all the verses which he deals with more or less, of some very considerably. Some however of the more trifling variations may possibly be due to the copyist, not to the author of the sermon. Now in tracing the evidence supplied by this fragment of the antiquity of the Quicunque, the point first to be noticed is that the copyist tells us in a few words of introduction that he found it at Treveri, presumably Treves. Hence we are pointed in the first place to the MS. at Treves fi-om which the scribe took the transcript which we have now in the Paris MS. of the eighth century, and the former must obviously have been written before the latter ; and it would appear, considerably before, as the scribe of the Paris MS. does not seem to have regarded the document which he II.] The Date. 343 found at Treves as one of recent or contemporaneous execution. Thus a certain interval of time, possibly of considerable duration, must, as it may be reasonably sup posed, have occurred between his finding the Treves MS. and its execution. And this holds equally true, whether the MS. contained nothing but the fragment which he transcribed, or whether it comprised the whole sermon of which it must have formed a part. And again another interval, possibly also of many years, must have elapsed between the writing of the MS. and the composition of the sermon, which it preserved in whole or in part, unless indeed it was the autograph or original copy, which is very improbable. Taking all this into consideration, we can scarcely suppose that the sermon was composed within less than fifty years of the date of the Paris MS., the middle of the eighth century, and the conclusion which I have arrived at, that it was a work of the seventh century at the latest, seems to be a very safe one. I have also stated some reasons for thinking it may be probably assigned to the preceding century '. But at the epoch when this sermon was preached, the Athanasian Creed could not have been a recently composed or unknown document : it had evi dently then attained a certain degree of esteem, perhaps authority, as a manual of instruction, its language was familiar to the preacher, he would seem to have known it by heart. It is but reasonable to suppose that a century or thereabouts must have elapsed between the composition of the Creed and of this sermon. Hence the evidence of the Treves fragment leads to the conclusion that the Creed could not have been drawn up later than the sixth century, but probably originated in the fifth, indeed not after the middle of the fifth century. The text of the Treves frag- ' See Part I. chap. i. 4. 344 Conclusions. [ch- ment is printed in Appendix A. For a fuller account of that document and its relation to the Quicunque, as also for my reasons for assigning the date which I have to the sermon, of which it contained a portion, I must refer to my notice of the fragment in the first Part^. Another evidence of the existence of the Quicunque in the eighth century, and indeed before, is supplied in the notices by Montfaucon and Waterland of a St. Germain's MS. containing it which appears now to be lost ^- In the title Athanasius was described as the author. And yet another is found in the Vatican MS. Palat. 574, though written in the ninth century ; for it comprises a series of documents, the ^21;/- cunque being one of the number, which according to the Ballerini was subjoined to an earlier collection in the eighth century ^. In this instance also our document is attributed by the title to St. Athanasius. Lastly, to the eighth century we^ have seen reason to assign two Commentaries, the Bouhier and the Paris *. And the Oratorian we assigned to the end of the seventh or beginning of the eighth '. For argument's sake we will here assume that it belongs to the beginning of the eighth. The preface to this Com mentary, which is printed in Appendix H, requires especial notice for the remarkable testimony which it supplies to the antiquity of the Quicunque. The author of the ex position therein says that he had always seen it ascribed by the title to Athanasius, even in ancient manuscripts ". And, as these codices which he describes as ancient cannot be supposed to have been less than a hundred years old at the time, at the beginning namely of the eighth century, ' See Part I. chap. i. 4. ''¦ Ibid. I, iii. i. ' Ibid. I. iii. 12. * Ibid. I. iv. 4, 5. = Ibid. I. iv. 3. " ' Traditur enim quod a beatissimo Athanasio Alexandrinae ecclesiae antestite (sic') sit editum : ita namque semper eum vidi praetitulatum etiam in veteribus codicibus.' II.] The Date. 345 it appears that early in the seventh the Quicunque was attributed, and not uncommonly, to Athanasius. We know nothing for certain of the circumstances which gave rise to this belief in the authorship of Athanasius. Whatever they were, whether in the first instance the Creed was ascribed to him as a symbol of the doctrine of which he was the most famous exponent and champion, or whether it was so ascribed at first simply in consequence of its being mixed up in MSS. with other works rightly or wrongly attributed to him, in any case it is not at all likely that this belief sprung into being until some time after the composition of the Creed. Then another period of some duration must be allowed for during which it was spreading wider and gradually growing into the general acceptance which it had attained at the end of the seventh century and the begin ning of the eighth, as we are led to understand by the Oratorian Preface. From these premisses what can we conclude but that the Creed could not have been drawn up later than the fifth century, probably not later than the middle of it? One point remains to be mentioned here, viz. that the work referred to by the author of the Oratorian Commentary in his Preface as ascribed to Athanasius in ancient codices can be none other than our Athanasian Creed, inasmuch as he quotes it from beginning to end verse by verse. I venture to think that I have produced from the eighth century a considerable amount of evidence in support of the antiquity of the Quicunque. Almost all these documents, it will be observed, prove its existence not only at that period but yet earlier, some being Com mentaries, and in others the authorship being attributed to St. Athanasius, whilst the Milan MS. yields internal evi dence to the same effect : and further, two of the number, viz. the Treves fragment and the Preface to the Oratorian 346 Conclusions. [ch. Commentary, point to a definite conclusion as to the ap proximate date of its production, that it may probably be placed not later than the middle of the fifth century. Let us now see whether this conclusion is confirmed by the evidence of the seventh and sixth centuries. Our witnesses of the seventh century are the Autun Canon dated about 670 A. D.^, the Troyes Commentary which emerged, as it appears, during the height of the Monothelete controversy between 649 and 681 ^, the Con fession of Faith of the Fourth Council of Toledo A. D. 633 ^, and the so-called Fortunatus Commentary, belonging, as there is reason to believe, to the early part of the century, possibly to the close of the sixth *. All these, but especially the first, second and fourth, point to the fifth century as the epoch which produced the Quicunque, not later. For if it was attributed to St. Athanasius about 670, as it is in the Canon of Autun, and if it was the subject of Com mentaries in the seventh century, we cannot suppose it to have been a work of the sixth. New and unknown docu ments, as we have before remarked, are not made the subjects of Commentaries, and it has been also noticed that the belief in the authorship of St. Athanasius implies a pre-existence of the Quicunque of some duration. The string of evidence does not cease with the seventh century, but runs on through the sixth and ends apparently with the close of the fifth. Thus the Epistola Canonica proves — if indeed we may rely on the authority of the learned canonists, the Ballerini — that in the sixth century in one locality at least, probably a diocese of Northern Italy, the clergy were required to learn the Athanasian Creed by heart ^. Then there are two documents of the same cate- ' See Part I. chap. ii. 2. '' Ibid. I. iv. i. 3 Ibid. L i. 5. * Ibid I. iv. I. = Ibid. I. ii. i. ii.j The Date. 347 gory as the sermon of which the Treves fragment formed a part, sermons on the Apostles' Creed incorporating some of the language of the Athanasian, but in a much smaller degree. The first of these is printed in the Appendix to the fifth volume of St. Augustine ^, and is attributed by the Benedictine editors to Caesarius, Bishop of Aries from 502 to 543 ^. The second is rather earlier, as appears from the earlier type of the Apostles' Creed which it follows, and may therefore be assigned probably to the beginning of the sixth or the end of the fifth century : it was found by me in two Paris MSS., Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin 3848 B, and 2133 ^. The last particular of evidence I have to allege is from Avitus, Bishop of Vienne in Gaul from 490 to 518, whose writings exhibit two instances of verbal coincidence with the Quicutique, if we may not more fitly call them quotations from it *. This may be evidently considered contemporaneous with the last - mentioned. These four particulars clearly carry us beyond the end of the fifth century for the origin of the Athanasian Creed, and dispose us rather to look for it at the latest in the middle of that century ; and we found that the Treves fragment and the Oratorian Preface bear an accordant testimony. Let us now consider the internal evidence of date. An examination of the terminology of the Creed supplies the means of determining approximately, within well- defined limits, the date of its composition. The phraseology of both parts — that relating to the Trinity and that relating to the Incarnation — bears a marked, obvious resemblance to the language of St. Augus tine. It is not too much to say that for the most part it is ' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xxxix. p. 2194. » See Part I. chap. i. 3. = Ibid. I. i. 2. * Ibid. L i. i. 348 Conclusions. [' CH. distinctly Augustinian in forms of expression and idiom no less than in doctrine. The proof of this is to be found in a comparison of verses 6 to 34, 39, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35 with the passages from the great Latin Father placed side by side with them in Waterland ^. The doctrinal definitions of the Creed are clearly cast in the mould elaborated by that great and acute and sanctified intellect. This resem blance of the phraseology of the Quicunque with that of St. Augustine extends beyond the clauses defining the doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation; it is traceable in the assertion of our Lord's descent ad inferos (the true reading in all probability, for it is found in the Ambrosian and all the earliest MSS.), and still more remarkably in the expression resurgere habent, a distinctly Augustinian mode of expression. I have noted no fewer than fourteen instances of it in the sermons alone of St. Augustine^. And together with this general conformity of doctrinal phraseology with the language of St. Augustine in the two principal divisions of the Creed, instances present them selves in both of striking verbal coincidences with the Commonitorium of St. Vincent of Lerins. Such instances occur in verses 3, 4, 5> 29 and 30. The author then of the Quicunque apparently drew his materials from this work as well as the writings of St. Augustine, unless indeed it was one and the same hand which composed both the Quicunque '¦ The numbering of the Latin text, which is printed in Appendix E, is here followed. ^ The following are among them ; ' Mori veni pro hominibus ? baptizari non habeo pro hominibus?' Tract, in Johan. iv. 14. 'Isti mali praescindi habent in fine.' Ser. v. 8. ' Respondeve tibi habet caro tua ? et confabulatura tecum, diclura tibi in tenebris : Quomodo natus is fuit ? ' Ser. ccxliv. 4. ' Ista caro resurget ista ipsa, quae sepelitur, quae moiitur . . . ipsa habet resurgere.' Ser. cclxiv. 6. ' Modo . . . dicit illud de ore suo . . . episcopus et irridetur. Numquid sic irridcri habet, quando ab ipso iudice potentissimo dicetur ? ' Ser. xviii. 5. "•] The Date. 349 and the Commonitorium. And as no passage in our Creed can be traced to any later source, we are necessarily led to fix upon the year 434 A.D. — the date of the Com monitor itim — as the limit on the one side of the period within which it may have been composed. What limit does internal evi dence point to as the conclusion of that period ? Before this question can be answered, it is necessary to determine whether the Creed was formed by a process of growth spread over a great extent of time, as Dr. Swainson has maintained, based possibly upon two independent documents, which received accretions in the lapse of years ? Or was it the product of one period and one mind, though constructed of materials drawn from a variety of sources? That the latter is the true hypothesis, the Creed itself furnishes sufficient evidence in its construction, its treatment of the subject-matter, and the style of its composition. It is one homogeneous complete whole ; its two divisions have a necessary natural relation, the one being complementary to the other, so that one would be imperfect without the other ; both are introduced and concluded with assertions of the necessity of belief in the dogmas severally expounded ; both are remarkable for that 'antithetic swing' which at tracted the attention of the late Dean Stanley ; and if both are thus remarkable for the terseness and vigour and anti thesis of their language, it is obviously due to the fact of their being largely drawn from St. Augustine, whose style was noted by these characteristics ; and lastly, in both some expressions are found which appear also in the works of St. Vincent of Lerins. We have previously concluded from external evidence that in all probability the Creed was composed not later than the middle of the fifth century. Is this conclusion supported by internal evidence? I think it is. The 35° Conclusions. [ch. Nestorian controversy was not extinct in the year 434, the earliest date, as we have seen, to which the composition of the Creed can be assigned. It continued to be the principal subject which agitated the Church and occupied the atten tion of theologians until or nearly until the year 448, when Eutychianism emerged. If the Quicunque was the product of this period, we might expect that it would distinctly re echo the terminology which was then used by Catholics in reference to the Incarnation — the subject-matter of the Nestorian heresy. To my mind there are distinct traces of this terminology throughout the portion of the Creed re lating to the Incarnation. Let me adduce the following instances in proof. I. It is remarkable that the Creed repeatedly and em phatically asserts the Unity of Christ — not fewer than four times in as many verses, viz. verses 32, 33, 34, 35. The Unity of Christ's Person may be said to be the distinctive tenet constantly affirmed by the CathoHcs in opposition to the Nestorians, whom they charged, and truly, with teaching in effect two Christs, two Sons, a Christ consisting of two personalities, divine and human. That the Creed should affirm this doctrine in such a very marked manner must appear all the more significant if considered side by side with the fact of its entire silence in regard to the co-ordinate doctrine of our Lord's two natures. For though it asserts this latter doctrine in fact by declaring Him to be God and man, perfect God and perfect man, still it is not so explicit on the point as we may presume it would have been, had it been drawn up subsequently to the rise of Eutychianism, and as Confessions and Definitions of the Faith were, which were drawn up subsequently to that epoch. So the Con fession of the Council of Constantinople held A. I). 448 : ' We confess Christ to be of two natures after the Incarna- II.] The Date. 351 tion, in one subsistence and one person ; we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord ^.' So the Definition of Faith of the Council of Chalcedon, A.D. 451, teaches that He is ' One and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten in two natures . . . the difference of the natures having been by ho means destroyed by their union ^.' So the Confession of Pelagius I in the middle of the sixth century professes belief in Him as ' unus atque idem lesus Christus,' at the same time ' ex duabus et in duabus manentibus indivisis et inconfusis naturis.' And the Confession of Vigilius, the immediate predecessor of Pelagius in the papacy, has similar expressions ^. 2. ' Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus,' verse 35. ' For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ.' This verse is evidently drawn from St. Augustine with some transposition of words *. The illus tration of the union of the two natures in the person of our Blessed Lord by the analogous union of the human soul and body occurs repeatedly in the works of that Father. It was adopted by the Catholic opponents of Nestorianism, particularly St. Vincent of Lerins and St. Cyril of Alexandria. By the latter it is employed again and again, twice in his third Epistle to Nestorius, in his Epistles to Eulogius and Successus, three times in his Scholia de Incarnatione, and in his Apologetieus adversus Theodoretum. Supposing the Creed to have been composed during the Nestorian controversy, the comparison in such frequent use at the time would naturally occur to the mind of the author, and he would be led to insert it as expressed ' Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole, p. 139. ' Ibid., pp. 82, 83. ' Ibid., pp. 271, 269, 270. * See Aug. in Joh. Tract. Ixxviii. § 3 ; also Ep. clxxxvii. cap. 3. 352 Conclusions. [ch. in the forcible and appropriate language of St. Augustine, with whose writings he was evidently familiar. After the rise of Eutychianism the use of this illustration was avoided by Catholics or employed with great caution, in consequence of their fear of its misapplication by their opponents ^. 3. ' Unus omnino, non confusione substantiae, sed unitate personae,' verse 34. ' One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.' This verse also is clearly constructed from the language of St. Augustine — ' Idem Deus qui homo et qui Deus idem homo, non confusione naturae, sed unitate personae^' — natitraehelng changed to substantiae, to which I shall advert by-and-by, and Idem Deus qui homo et qui Deus idem homo to unus omnino obviously in order to make the verse dove tail with the preceding one unus autem, probably also as more in accordance with the terminology of the period. The verse accurately represents the Catholic position in contrast to the Nestorian. What St. Cyril contended for — perhaps it was the most critical point of the controversy — was the Unity of our Lord's Person, the evtacris KaO' viro- cTTaa-iv, or Hypostatic union in Him of the two natures. Divine and human ; that He was one altogether, as the Creed states, by unity of person ^. On the other hand, Nestorius ' See Waterland, History of the Athanasian Creed, Oxford edition, 1870, p. 148, with note by Le Quien. '' Ser. clxxvi. cap. i. ' The second Anathematism of Cyril was : Ei tis ovx oiio\oyu ffapxl Ka9' virCffraGiv rjvuja9ai rov iK @€ov irarpos A6yov 'kva re ilvat Xpiardv /X€T(i rijs iSias (TapKos, TOV avrov StjKovltl &tov o^ov ual dv9pojtrov, dvd9i}ia (ffrcv. Similar language is repeatedly used in his second and third Epistles to Nestorius. That the word virbaraais here must be understood in the sense of person is obvious from the fact that in the fourth Anathematism it occurs as a convertible and equivalent term with npoaamov : it tis Trpoadnrois bvalv ^yovv vnoaTaaecn, &c. ; and similarly twice in his third Epistle to Nestorius. The (vcaais Ka9' inroaraaiv of St. Cyril was therefore identical with the unitas personae of St. Augustine reaffirmed by the Creed. II.] The Date. 353 refused to acknowledge more than a conjunction or crvvdcpeia of the two natures in Christ, and that only in dignity, or authority, or power ^ Further, whilst Cyril thus asserted the union in our Lord's Person of the two natures or sub stances, he was careful to repudiate the charge, repeatedly urged against him by Nestorius, that he was guilty of con founding or mingling them^. Christ was one altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of Person. 4. ' Qui, licet Deus sit et homo, non duo tamen, sed unus est Christus,' verse 32 ; ' Who, although He be God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.' Although He be God and man. These words clearly must have been written at a time when it was an acknowledged, admitted principle, acknowledged even by the party whose error the writer was combating, that Christ was both God and man, when the error contended against was not the denial of His twofold nature, but of the Unity of His Person. The force of this argument will be more apparent if we compare with this verse of the Creed the following precisely similar but converse proposition of St. Leo in his celebrated Epistle to Flavian: 'Quamvis in Domino lesu Christo Dei et hominis una persona sit, aliud tamen est unde in utroque contumelia, aliud unde communis est gloria. De nostro enim illi est minor Patre humanitas, de Patre illi est aequalis cum Patre divinitas.' Although there be One Person in the Lord Jesus Christ. When Leo wrote these words, the Unity of Christ's Person was not the point at issue; on the contrary, it was a principle acknowledged and maintained by Eutyches whom he was opposing : the error, the former contended, was not the denial of the Unity of ' See the 2nd Anathematism of Cyril, also Nestorii Sermones, translated by Marius Mercator in Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. xlviii. pp. 757-766. ^ Particularly in his letter to John of Antioch, Aa 354 Conclusions. [ ch. Christ's Person, but of His twofold nature. If this passage is plainly the product of the Eutychian epoch, the verse of the Creed is no less plainly the product of the Nestorian epoch. 5. ' Dominus noster lesus Christus, Dei Filius, Deus pariter et homo~ est : Deus est ex substantia Patris ante saecula genitus, homo ex substantia matris in saeculo natus.' ' Our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God is God and man ; God of the substance of the Father begotten before the worlds, and man of the substance of His mother born in the world ' ; verses 30, 31. The two nativities of our blessed Lord, so frequently asserted by St. Augustine as by the Fathers in general and Confessions of Faith, and here reasserted, were expressly denied by Nestorius and his school ; and this denial was a clear proof that they divided Christ into a twofold personality, divine and human. In his third Sermon he declared that ' God the Word was not born of Mary, but abode in him who was born of her'; and his audacious profanity provoked a serious tumult in the church, one of the congregation, Eusebius, afterwards Bishop of Dory- laeum, but then a layman, shouting out amid general applause that ' God the Word underwent a second nativity.' Afterwards the preacher repudiated in so many words the two nativities ¦'. Theodoret in like manner denied that God the Word was born of the Virgin, and therefore rejected the double nativity ^- ' See Marii Mercatoris Opera in Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. xlviii. pp. 769-771. Nestorius' Sermons are extant only in Marius Mercator's translation. Also Hefele's Councils, vol. iii. p. 14, English translation. St. Cyril Alex, said of Nestorius : eij vlovs 5uo /lep/^et rbv %va Kal '^Tepov fxtv 18ik(vs fivai (prjol viov Kal Uptordv Kal Kvptov tov iK Qeov irarpos ycvvT]94vTa \6yov, tTipov S^ irdKiv dvd /.tipos re Kal ISiKais vlov Kal Xpiardv Kal Kiipiov iK t^j dyias iTap9iVov. Cyrilli Ep. ad Acacium. ' Thus Theodoret : ' Si non est factum caro Deus Verbum, sed carnem vivam II.] The Date. 355 The two nativities being thus denied by the Nestorians, we should expect to find an affirmation of their truth in the Athanasian Creed, if it was drawn up while the controversy respecting the heresy of Nestorius was still raging, though it could not of itself determine the origin of the Creed to that period, similar dogmatic statements being found commonly in the writings of Fathers and Confessions of Faith from the emergence of Apollinarianism downwards. But the verse under our consideration has a more close and critical bearing upon the Nestorian hypothesis. Nestorius argued in the Sermon previously mentioned that God the Word could not have been born of Mary, inasmuch as if it were so the law of nature would be violated, that the child must needs be consubstantial with the mother of whom it is born ^. It was a plausible argument, and the author declared in writing to Pope Celestine that he had found it a very effectual one also^- In his work on the et rationabilem assumpsit, non ipse natura ex Virgine natus est conceptus et fictus et formatus et inde initium, ut esset, accipiens, qui ante saecula est, et Deus, et apud Deum semper, et Patri adhaerens.' S. Cyrilli Apologetieus adversus Theodoretum, Latin translation See Marii Mercatoris 0/«;-a, Migne, Patrol. Lat. vol, xlviii. p, 972. In answer to Theodoret, St. Cyril says of the Nestorians : ' Non patiuntur vel sentire vel dicere ipsum Dei Patris Verbum, quod erat ante saecula Filius, novissimis temporibus inconfuse inconvertibili- terque adunatum esse ex vnlva carni habenti animam rationabilem ac sic fuisse hominem similem nostri.' Ibid. p. 975. ' ' Si non hominis natura, sed Deus Verbum erat, quem ilia pariebat, quae peperit, nequaquam mater eius, qui natus est, invenitur ; quomodo enim aliqua fiet eius mater, qui a natura genitricis est alienus ? Quod si vera mater ab iis appellatur, ergo qui editus est, non Divinitatis natura est, sed homo, si- quidem proprium omnis est matris consubstantivum sibi parere. Ergo non erit mater, quae consubstantivum sibi minime peperit.' Nestorii Sermo iii, as translated by Marius Mercator, Migne, Patrol. Lat. vol. xlviii, pp. 768, 769. ^ 'Aestimo famam praecedentem, quod non frustra certaverimus, sed emendati sint gratia Domini multi ex his qui perversi erant, discentes a nobis quia debet esse parienti oiJLOvaios nalivitas' Epistola I Nestorii ad Caelestinum Papam. This, as his two other Epistles to Celestine, exists only in a Latin translation. A a 2 356 Conclusions. [' CH. Incarnation, which was written at the request of Leo, at the time Archdeacon, afterwards Bishop, of Rome, for the purpose of confuting the errors of Nestorius, Cassian replied to this argument, first by insisting on the birth of our blessed Lord as an event entirely supernatural, and secondly by asserting Him to be of one substance with the mother of whom He was born in time as well as with the Father of whom He was begotten before all ages, with the former in respect of His human nature, with the latter in respect of His Divine nature^. No doubt also the Creed of the Antiochenes, which was drawn up at the Council of Ephesus by John of Antioch and the party of Eastern Bishops who refused to act with St. Cyril, but which in the year 433 became the basis of reunion between the two parties, has the same reference in representing our Lord to be consubstantial with the Father in respect of His Godhead and consubstantial with us in respect of His manhood. The Athanasian Creed in affirming our Lord to be ' God of the substance (ex substantia) of the Father' and at the same time ' man of the substance (ex substantia) of His mother,' while in perfect harmony with Cassian and the Creed of the Antiochenes, goes deeper and strikes at It is printed among the works of Marius Mercatur in Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. xlviii. pp. 174-178. ' ' Magno videlicet peifidiae atque impietatis suae argumento ad negandum ac persequendum Dominum Deum uteris, dicens, homoousios parenti debet esse nativitas. No dum ad plenum dico ac profero in Dei nativitate penitus hoc non esse servandum, quia non parientis fuit nativitas ipsa, sed nati ; et ipse natus est ut voluit, cuius fuit hoc ipsum ut nasceretur. Interim qui homoousion parenti dicis nativitatem esse debere, ego Dominum lesum Christum homo ousion dico fuisse et Patri pariter et matri. . . Secundum divinitatem homo ousios Patri, secundum carnem homoousios matri fuit.' Cassiani de Incarnatione Christi lib. vi. cap. 13. Ti is treatise must have been written in 430. The apostrophe addressed to Nestorius and the exhortation to the faithful at Constantinople at the end show that it was composed before the Council of Ephesus ; the above passage proves it to be subsequent to Nestorius' third Sermon and his first Epistle to Pope Celestine. II.J The Date. 357 the very root of the error of Nestorius in refusing to acknowledge that the Divine Word was born of the blessed Virgin. In his fourth and fifth Sermons, preached in answer to Proclus, Bishop of Cyzicus, the heresiarch dwells more fully upon the doctrine of the Incarnation, and the unreal and illusory character of his hypothesis comes more clearly to light. He speaks of 'God, the Word of the Father, being associated with him who was born of Mary,' ' of the Word of God passing through the blessed Virgin in conjunction with the man to whom she gave birth,' and declares, ' that God passed through the Virgin Christotocos I have been taught by Scripture, that He was born I have not been taught^.' With such teaching as this the assertion of the Creed, which is re-echoed by the words of thankful commemoration put into our lips by the Church upon Christmas Day^, stands in obvious contrast. And the language of the Quicunque may fitly be compared with similar expressions which were elicited by the Nestorian controversy, as that of St. Cyril : ' We assert that the very Word, who was substantially begotten of God the Father, was made like unto us and became incarnate and was made man, that is, took unto Himself a body of the holy Virgin •* and made it His own. For so there shall be truly one Lord Jesus Christ, so we shall worship Him as one, not dividing Him as God and man, but believing Him to ' Nestorii Sermo v, published among the works of Marius Mercator, as translated by him, Migne, Patrol, Lat. tom. xlviii. pp. 786, 787. ^ The Preface for Christmas Day : ' Because Thou didst give Jesus Christ Thine only Son to be born as at this time for us, who by the operation of the Holy Ghost was made very man of the substance of the Virgin Mary His Mother.' It is very remarkable that this Preface, so thoroughly Catholic, so directly subversive of Nestorianism, was inserted in place of the more ancient one in our first Reformed Prayer Book of 1549. Procter, History of the Prayer Book, 5th edition, p. 347. ^ iK TTJs dyias irap9ivov. 358 Conclusions. [ CH. be one and the same Person, partaking of Godhead and manhood, that is at once God and man ^' And again : ' We are assured that He, i.e. the Word, assumed flesh of the holy Virgin ^.' And St. Vincent of Lerins : ' In uno eodem- que Christo duae substantiae sunt ; sed una divina, altera humana, una ex Patre Deo, altera ex matre Virgine.' And Proclus in the Sermon already alluded to, which was preached in the presence of Nestorius with immediate reference to his argument that the Word could not have been born of Mary as not partaking of her substance, and which was answered by Nestorius in the Sermons from which I have quoted : ' It does not pollute Him who cannot be contaminated to proceed from the womb of the Virgin'; 'if the Word had not dwelt in the womb of the Virgin, flesh would never have been seated on the throne'; ' He who is by nature King and God clothed Himself in a body from the Virgin ' ; God, ' while giving the Spirit, received flesh both with the Virgin and from the Virgin : the Spirit indeed overshadowed her, but He Himself was made flesh of her ^' Hence, inasmuch as the doctrine which was symbolized by the term Theotocos as used and insisted on by Catholics is distinctly expressed in this passage of the Creed, the absence from it of that term, or rather of any of its Latin equivalents as Deipara or Dei genitrix, cannot be alleged as proof that it was not the product of the Nestorian epoch. Nor yet would the bare use of the term, if it were found in the Creed, be of itself a proof that it was the product of that age. For the term was no certain test of ' Cont. Nestorium, lib. ii. ^ Ibid., Ep. ad Acacium : tov tov Qeov Aoyov . . cat Trjs dyias irap9ivov Ka^eTv ttjV ffdpKa hia^i^aiovjxeOa. ^ 'Ex ea ' in the Latin. For the Latin translation of this Sermon see Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. xlviii. pp. 775-781. II.] The Date. 359 orthodoxy. Nestorius repeatedly declared his readiness to accept and use it in a certain sense. The different meanings attached to it by the Nestorian party on the one side and the Catholics on the other are contrasted in the following passages from the objections urged by Theodoret, who certainly agreed in the main with Nestorius at the time when the controversy was at its height, to the Anathematisms of Cyril. In the course of his remarks on the first Anathematism Theodoret says : ' God the Word was not Himself naturally born of the Virgin and conceived and framed and formed . . . but He framed for Himself a temple in the Virgin's womb, and associated Himself with him who was framed and born. Wherefore also we call that holy Virgin the mother of God, not as having given birth to God naturally, but as having given birth to a man, united to God, who had framed him ^.' This passage was quoted and censured by the Fifth General Council. In his reply St. Cyril says : ' We denounce with the utmost possible earnestness those who refuse to confess that the holy Virgin is mother of God, because she gave birth to the Word of God according to the flesh': and 'We affirm that the Word from God the Father, having taken upon Him the holy and animated flesh and having been truly united to it, yet without confusion, came forth man from the very womb, but that He still continued to be very God ; and on this account the holy Virgin is mother of God ".' So that what the Creed avers, that the ^ Ovk avrbs, i. e. o ©eiis ti.6yos, (pvffei iK t^s irap9€Vov ycyivvfjTai avWrjtpOeis Kal SiairKaaOels Kal ^op(pa]9ds . . . d\\' lauriS vaov iv ti} irap9€viKy yaOTpl hia- irXdoas (Xvvrjv tw T\atT9ivTi Kal yevvT]9ivTr ov x^P"' '^"^ t^v dyiav iKeivrjv TTap9ivov ScotSkov irpocsayopevofxev, ovx ^^ 9€dv ipvoet yevvrjcraffav, d\K' djs dv9panTOV, tw 5tarr\dffavTt. avruv, TjVQjpiivov @iw. S. Cyrilli Alex, Opera, tom. vi. p. 204, edit. Paris, 1638. ^ TlKeioTTjv 'ocrijv ireiroiTjpieQa r^v KaTaPoijv twv dfio\oyetv ovk dv^xci^^vatv . . . oTi 9€Ot6kos iffrlv rj dyia irap9ivos, on yeyivvrjKe Kara adpKa rbv rov Qeov 360 Conclusions. [' CH. Son or Word, who is God of the substance of the Father, is also man — made so ex substantia matris — of the sub stance of His mother, is the very point which the orthodox contended for as symbolized by the title Theotocos applied to the Virgin Mary. 6. ' Perfectus Deus, perfectus homo ex anima rationali et humana carne subsistens.' ' Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting ' ; verse 30. Considering how largely the phraseology of the Creed is borrowed from St. Augustine, it is notable that the expression ' perfectus Deus, perfectus homo ' is not to be found in the writings of that Father, though no doubt the doctrine which it conveys is implicitly taught by him again and again. He has ' totus Deus et totus homo ^,' but not ' perfectus Deus et perfectus homo,' so far as I am able to discover. Nor is it to be found in Hilary of Poitiers, though he says what is equivalent : ' habens in se et totum verumque quod homo est et totum verumque quod Deus est^.' Nor does St. Leo appear to make use of the expression, though he has repeatedly ' verus Deus, verus homo ' or the like, and in his Epistle to Flavian ' totus in suis, totus in nostris.' But it appears in the Commonitorium of St. Vincent of Lerins, a work which sprung out of the Nestorian controversy " And it is impossible to avoid connecting the term thus occurring in the Creed and the Commonitorium with the very similar one used once, and, Koyov. And, Aia0(l3aioviji(9a tov ck OeoS irarpbs Aoyov, iv irpooXritpei yiyovora Trjs dyias re Kal ifitpvxov aapKSs, ivai9ivTa Te Kar dKr]9iiav davyxvTas, Ik pir)Tpas avTrjs irpoe\9elv dv9paiirov pie/ievrjKevai Si Kal oijToi Qeiv dX.r)9ivov, Tavry Tot Kal 9cot6kos iiTrlv ij dyia irap9ivos. ' Ser. ccxciii. 7. ' De Trinitate, lib. x. cap. 19. ^ Commonitorium. primum. See Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. i. p, 656, n.] The Date. 361 as far as I can ascertain, once only by the great leader of the Catholics in that controversy — perfect God and perfect man^ , and also used in the Union-Creed of the Antiochenes — a document which occupied a conspicuous position in the same controversy and must have- been perfectly well known throughout Christendom, Western as well as Eastern, inasmuch as it was accepted as orthodox by St. Cyril and was made the basis of union, as has been already mentioned, between him and the party who seceded from him at the Council of Ephesus. It was originally drawn up by John Bishop of Antioch and his friends in their conciliabulum held during the sitting of that Council, and sent to the Emperor Theodosius as their Confession of Faith in a Latin translation. The passage referred to is in that translation 'Deum perfectum et hominem perfectum ex anima rationali et corpoi-e ^,' in the original Oeov rkkewv koX dvOpcairov rekeiov eK \//i))(7jj koyiKrjs Kal acap,aTos^- Probably both St. Cyril and the Antiochenes borrowed the expression from St, Athanasius, who makes use of it*j and thus the Creed, though drawn up in Latin, would owe this distinctive and significant term to the illustrious Eastern theologian, to whom it was formerly ascribed. The language of the Creed defining the perfect humanity of our Lord also reproduces the terminology of the Nes torian epoch. ' Perfectus homo ex anima rationali et humana carne subsistens ' ; ' perfect man of a reasonable ^ "Eva Kal Tbv avrov iffixiv tov hid rrjS dyias iTap9evov 9cot6kov Mapias y€vvr]9ivra 9€6v Te\€iov Kal dv9pwiT0v TeKciov, €f.L^vxov, XoyiK6v. S. Cyrilli de Incarnatione Verbi Dei Filii Patris. He expresses the same truth more fully elsewhere, as for instance, woirep iv 9e6T7jTt reKeios ovtoj Kal iv dv9pwnv- TrjTi TiKeios. De Incarnatione Unigeniti, ^ Concilia, Labbe, tom. iii. p. 1091 ; Paris. ^ Hefele's Councils, English translation, vol. iii. pp. 94 and 131, and Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole, p. 137. ' Cont. Apollinarium, i. 16. 362 Conclusions. [^"• soul and human flesh subsisting.' It will be observed that in the words of the Creed of the Antiochenes quoted above, our Lord in respect to His human nature is described as ' perfect man of a reasonable soul and body! And this the Creed appears to fallow with the exception of the word body, instead of which it has adopted the expression human flesh. Why was this change, which is clearly not without meaning ? Some light may be thrown upon the point by reference to the writings of St. Augustine, with which the author of the Creed was evidently familiar. In one passage, speaking in reference to i Cor. xv. 40, that Father dis criminates between corpus and caro : ' Omnis caro corpus est ; non autem omne corpus caro, non solum quia caeleste corpus non dicitur caro,' &c.^ Elsewhere, addressing him self especially to the Manichean denial of the verity of our Lord's human nature, he adopts the more critical term caro humana : 'De ipso homine si quaeris a me, duo iterum dico : Anima humana et caro humana ^.' The word corpus would not of itself unequivocally exclude the heretical notion of a celestial superhuman body belonging to our Lord — a notion inconsistent with the belief that He, the Son of God, was made very man of the substance of the Virgin Mary His mother. Accordingly we find the more critical term cropping up in the Nestorian controversy, and used by Nestorians as well as Catholics. St. Cyril and his friends were frequently charged by their opponents with Apollinarianism ^. And he was not only charged with holding the distinctive tenet of ApoUinaris by denying that ' Ser. ccclxii. cap. xviii. ^ Ser. ccxxxvii. cap. ii. So also ' suscepit animam humanam et carnem humanam.' Collatio cum Maximino, 14. ' See the first Epistle of Nestorius to Pope Celestine, Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. xlviii. p. 176 ; also his seventh Sermon, ibid. pp. 792, 793 ; also remarks of Theodoret on the eleventh Anathematism of Cyril, ibid. p. 998. II.] The Date. 363 our Lord had a human rational soul, but also with holding another tenet ascribed to him in common with Manichaeus and Valentinus, that alluded to shortly before, which was opposed to the verity of His human body or flesh. In his celebrated letter to John Bishop of Antioch, after reciting the Union-Creed which John had sent for his acceptance, and declaring his adhesion to it and giving utterance to his feelings of joy and thankfulness for the restoration of peace and unity thus effected between the Churches of Antioch and Alexandria, he adds that he had been accused of teaching that the holy body of Christ was brought from heaven and not taken from the blessed Virgin^. In conse quence no doubt of these imputations, St. Cyril not only constantly affirms that our Lord had a reasonable souP, but also makes use of the other critical term human flesh ^. Both these terms were recognized and used by the Nesto rians, who would be careful to assert the truths which they charged others with denying. Of this we have a con spicuous example in the Profession of Faith of Theodore of Mopsuestia, which must have been well known to all theologians of the age, inasmuch as it was brought before the Council of Ephesus, and was rendered accessible to Latins by the contemporary translation of Marius Mercator. The passage referred to is in the original, dvOpcovov rekeiov TTJr cpiia-iv eK \j/vxvs re voepds Kai crapKos crvvecrTwra dvOpcoirivris *, ^ 'Cls i^ ovpavov KaTaK0ii.ia9\v Kal ovk iK rrjs dyias irap9evov k^yovTos to ayiov awjxa 'XpitJTov. ^ For instance, "flffircp yap iariv iv 9e6ri]Ti rikeios . . . ovtqj Kal iv dv9pojir6- TTjTl Tikeios KaTa yi tov Trjs dv9 pojiroT-qTOS \6yov, ovk dljjvxov Xa^iijv (jwfxa, f/iifioxuififvov Si fidWov ifivx^ XoyiKfj. De recta fide ad Arcadiam Marinamque. He seems habitually to avoid using the word aSip.a in this connexion without thus guarding it. ^ Thus, KaTair€(ppiKafft yap ovk oTS' oirivs ^vx^Oeiay Tpvxv XoyiKi) T77 dvOpai- irivrf (Tapul Kara (pvGiv rivwa9ai tov Aoyov o^oKoyuv. De Incarnatione U7tigeniii * Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole, p. 231. 364 Conclusions. [ch. in the translation of Marius Mercator, ' hominem natura perfectum, ex anima rationali et humana carne compo situm ^.' A large portion of this Profession, including the above words, is quoted and commented on by St. Cyril, who deals with it apparently as the recognized statement and representation of the Nestorian position, not referring to it as the work of Theodore, but introducing his quotation with the word cpacri^. In the Excerpta ex libro Nestorii, translated by Marius Mercator, it is headed Symbolum Nestorianum. Theodore was the master of Nestorius, and is often regarded as the real author of Nestorianism. In regard to the above passage it must be remembered that the error of these teachers did not consist in the denial of our Lord's perfect humanity, which indeed they both affirmed, but in the denial of the unity of His Person. The two terms to which we are referring — anima rationalis and humana caro — being thus known and used in the Nestorian epoch, it might be expected, if the Creed was drawn up at that period, that the author would have intro duced them for the purpose of defining and emphasizing the humanity of our blessed Lord, more especially as he was a disciple of St. Augustine and could not fail to be acquainted with their occurrence in the works of that Father, which were the main source of his terminology. And a yet further reason for the substitution of the latter of these terms for the word corpus or body used in the same con nexion in the Creed of Antiochenus suggests itself in the fact of its greater exactness and its fitness to meet an error which was rife at the time and was imputed to no less a person than St. Cyril. The Definition of Chalcedon, it is very remarkable, " Mercatoris Opera apud Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. xlviii. p. 877. ^ He quotes it in his treatise. Quod unus est Christus, § 728. II.] The Date. 365 follows the Creed of the Antiochenes in affirming our Lord to be of a reasonable soul and body. The humana carne therefore of the Athanasian Creed, so far from being a proof that it was composed after that Council, is rather evidence of the contrary. If composed after the Council, it would, we should suppose, have adopted its phraseology. Nor does the term, though strictly applicable to Euty chianism, in reference to which it is used by St. Leo, prove it to be a product of the Eutychian controversy: for it has been shown to be of earlier origin — as early as St. Au gustine. But it clearly condemns Eutychianism by antici pation, and was intended no doubt to strike at the doctrine that our blessed Lord had taken to Himself a heavenly body, a doctrine which was actually anathematized by the Fathers of Chalcedon. If Eutychianism was what St. Leo represented it to be, a revival of Manichaeanism and ApoUinarianism, it is clearly to no purpose to point to the language of the Creed originally directed against the errors of ApoUinaris, but necessarily applying equally to the later heresy which reproduced them, and which was actually condemned at Chalcedon, as proving it to have been drawn up subsequently to that Council. Passages in abundance might be quoted from St. Augustine which would appear to have been written for the very purpose of confuting the opposite heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches (so exactly does his language apply to them), but which were really aimed against earlier heresies, of which these were severally the counterparts, perhaps the fruit ; but this does not prove that St. Augustine lived and wrote subsequently to the Councils at which Nestorius and Eutyches were con demned. 7. ' Unus autem, non conversione Divinitatis in carnem, sed adsumptione humanitatis in Deum.' 366 Conclusions. [' CH. ' One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the manhood unto God ' ; verse 34. I have reserved this verse to be noticed last of those referring to the Incarnation on account of the doubt attach ing to the readings in carnem and in Deum. With the exception of two ninth-century MSS., Vat. Palat. 574 and St. Gallon 27, all the early MSS. of the Creed read in carne and in Deo. We are clearly therefore not in a position to base any argument upon the language of this verse in its entirety according to the received text. For that would be to assume the truth of the disputed readings. But apart from these words, and leaving in abeyance for the nonce the question whether or not they are rightly read in the received text, we may safely maintain that this verse also breathes, so to speak, the atmosphere of the Nestorian period. As the Catholics were accused of Apollinarianism by their adversaries, so in particular they were commonly charged with teaching a change of the divine substance in Christ. In repudiating the charge they asserted that He had become flesh not by casting away what He had been and was, but by the assumption of flesh or manhood, still abiding truly God ^ The Nestorian hypothesis involved a twofold personality in Christ, of God who assumed and of the man who was assumed " According to the Catholic ^ OhK dTroP€0\T]KoJs TO ejvat 9€ds Kal Th iK ©eoG ycy€vv^o9ai Harpos, dWd Kal iv irpoaXrjtfjei crapKos pupavriKuis oirep ^v. S. Cyrilli ad Nestorium secunda epistola. Similarly the Third. And, ei S^ 5^ XeyoiTO crapKai9^vai Kal ivav9pw- irrjaai 9eds wv b Abyos, Stcppi(p9Qj irov piaKpdv Tpon^s viro^ia' piiixivr}Ke yap 'oircp ^v . . . 9ibs ydp wv ykyov^v dv9pwiros ov rb eivai ©eos d(piis, iv irpQaKr]\p€i Si fidWov aapKos Kal aipiaTos yeyovws. S. Cyrilli Ep. ad Acacium. ^ ' Divinam naturam corporatum hominem assumpsisse.' Nestorii Ser. xiii. And, 'In assumpto Deus est, ex illo qui assumpsit; qui assumptus est, appella tus est et appellatur Deus.' Ibid., Ser. i. And Theodoret in his objections to the twelfth Anathematism of Cyril says : ' Non Deus passus est, sed homo qui ex nobis a Deo assumptus est.' S. Cyrilli Apologetieus adversus Theodoretum, Marius Mercator's translation, Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. xlviii. p, looo. II.] The Date. 367 faith Christ is one altogether, and He is so not by con version of the Godhead, but by the assumption of the manhood. For God the Word assumed not a man's person, but the nature of man ; not a perfect man, but human nature in its perfection. ' The flesh,' says Hooker ^, ¦ and the conjunction of the flesh with God began both at one instant ; His making and His taking to Himself our flesh was but one act, so that in Christ there is no personal subsistence but one, and that from everlasting. By taking only the nature of man He still continueth one person, and changeth but the manner of His subsisting, which was before in the mere glory of the Son of God, and is now in the habit of our flesh.' The above reasons and considerations, I venture to sub mit, point clearly to the conclusion that the portion of the Quicunqtie relating to the Incarnation was drawn up soon after the Council of Ephesus and before the rise of Euty chianism, between the year 433, when the Creed of the Antiochenes was accepted by St. Cyril of Alexandria, and 448. The terminology is such as might be expected to emanate from an orthodox theologian at that period, who being thoroughly conversant with the writings of St. Au gustine would be led to adopt largely the language of that Father. There is but one verse in this portion of the Creed which I have not noticed at all in the above remarks — verse 31, 'equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.' But this, being literally borrowed from St. Augustine, clearly contains nothing inconsistent with the conclusion we have arrived at in regard to the date of the context in which it appears. We have already stated that there are good reasons for ' Eccles. Polity, v. 52. 3. 368 Conclusions. [' CH. believing the Creed to be the work of one hand and one age. And there is nothing in the other portions of it in any degree irreconcileable with the date which has here been assigned to that relating to the Incarnation. Rather there is much to confirm it. The doctrine of the holy Trinity is in substance formulated as it had been formulated by St. Augustine, who died, it will be remembered, A. D. 430 ; it is stated for the most part in forms of expression and phraseology which may be found in the writings of that Father, as any one may perceive by comparing the quotations from those writings, as printed in Waterland's treatise, Oxford edit, pp. 178-181, with the corresponding verses of the Creed. And there are a few expressions in this, as in the latter part, which seem traceable to St. Vincent's Commonito7'ium as their source. Nor do verses of) to 39 inclusive, which follow the Ex position of the Incarnation, bear any trace of being the product of a later age. As a whole, they are peculiar to the Quicunque. Though they necessarily contain much which is likewise found in the Apostles' Creed, they also contain matter which is not there, and omit some Articles which are there. They cannot be said therefore to be drawn from that formula, nor indeed are they borrowed from any other Latin Confession of Faith. ' Passus est pro salute nostra' is, I apprehend, almost peculiar to the Athanasian Creed, the only other Confession of Faith in which I have been able to find it being that of Pope Pelagius I. Then the omission of any mention of the Crucifixion, Death, and Burial is another peculiarity. ' Descendit ad inferos ' is very rarely found in Confessions of Faith ^. We have ' descendit ad inferna ' in the received ' There can be no doubt that ' ad inferos ' is the right reading. It is found in the Ambrosian MS., the most ancient MS. of the Creed extant; also in II.J The Date. 369 text of the Apostles' Creed, also in a Spanish and a Galilean Creed, and ' descendit in inferna ' in the Aquileian Creed ^ But the only Confessions of Faith besides the Quicunqite which have ' descendit ad inferos ' are an Irish Creed in the Bangor Antiphonary preserved in a seventh or eighth century MS. belonging to the Ambrosian Library at Milan, and the Confession of Faith of the Fourth Council of Toledo, held A. D. 6'},'^, which is remarkable for some other instances of verbal coincidence with the Quicttnque ^ Con sidering how largely the Creed adopts the language of St. Augustine, it seems probable that it has borrowed this expression also from that Father, who frequently makes use of it. Thus he says : • Quis, nisi infidelis, negaverit fuisse apud inferos Christum ? ' Ep. clxiv. 3. The descent of our blessed Lord into hell appears to have been very much dwelt upon at the time of the Nestorian controversy as supplying an argument against Apollinarianism ^, a heresy which occupied a prominent place in the theological discussions of that epoch, being Palat. 574, Paris 13159, and indeed all the early MSS. of the Creed. The only authorities for ' ad inferna ' are the MSS, of the Fortunatus and the Oratorian Commentaries. ' Ad inferna ' is also the reading of the Treves fragment in Paris Latin 3836; but as that document is obviously a portion of a homily or address delivered at the Traditio Symboli, and not of the Quicunque, in corporating some of its language but not adhering to it closely, it cannot be adduced for determining the true text. In these words it probably follows the Apostlei' Creed, as it does expressly in the Article ' Sedet ad dexteram Dei patris.' ^ See Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole, pp. 25, 35, 38, 39, 46. '^ Ibid., pp, 40, 162. ' ''Now the error of ApoUinnrius was,' says Bishop Pearson, Exposition of the Creed, Article V, ' that Christ had no proper intellectual or rational soul, but that the Word was to Him in place of a soul ; and the argument produced by the Fathers for the conviction of this error was, that Christ descended into hell, which the ApoUinarians could not deny ; and that this descent was not made by His Divinity, nor by His body, but by the motion and presence of His soul, and consequently that He had a soul distinct both from His flesh and from the Word.' B b 37° Conclusions. [ch. constantly, as I have already mentioned, imputed by the Nestorians to their adversaries, and the Orthodox no less constantly repudiating the charge ^. Hence the express mention of the descent into hell, side by side with the silence respecting the crucifixion, death and burial of our Lord, which may be said to be a distinctive peculiarity of the Athanasian Creed, as compared with other Confessions of Faith, is a confirmatory evidence of its production in the period when Nestorianism was the chief topic of debate in Christendom. In verse 37, ' ad dexteram Patris,' which is probably the true reading, is an evidence of the Creed's antiquity and is perfectly consistent with the belief that it was a product of the epoch of the Nestorian controversy. Dr. Heurtley'' says, with reference to it : ' We have in this ancient form a significant indication of the antiquity of the document in ' Thus it is particularly mentioned by St. Cyril in his third Epistle to Nestorius, rpirmepos dvt^iw OKvXivaas rbv aSrjv, and in his Epistle to Successus and elsewhere. Caelestine I in his Epistle to Juvenalis and other Eastern bishops uses the words : ' Christi, qui pro nobis natus et passus est, qui reseratis inferis et morte devicta pro nobis die tertio resurrexit.' Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. 1. p. 467. It will be observed that Caelestine, like the Athanasian Creed, passes over in silence the crucifixion and death of our blessed Lord, and mentions only His descent into hell, and resurrection, using the word inferi. Capreolus Bishop of Carthage, in his reply to two Spaniards, Vitalis and Constantius, who had applied to him for a correct exposition of the Catholic Faith respecting two distinctive tenets of Nes torianism, viz. ' hominem purum natum fuisse de Virgine,' and ' hominem purum pependisse in cruce comprehensum,' asserts that at no time, not even in His descent to hell, was the Godhead severed from the manhood in our Lord's Person ; and he insists on this point at some length. ' An dicimus Deum in suscepto homine etiam apud inferos non fuisse ?' and ' Hoc omnino testificans ac demonstrans Deum cuius maiestate plena sunt omnia quodam incomprehen- sibili utique et inexplicabili modo etiam inferis interesse . . . ipse in homine est visitare dignatus inferorum abstrusa.' Epist. ad Vilalem et Constantium ; Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. liii, pp. 851-853. It will be noticed that Capreolus also uses the word inferi : in fact he uses it no less than seven times, infernum or infernus never. ' Pamphlet ou the Athanasian Creed, p. 25. II.] The Date. 371 which it is incorporated, an indication analogous to that which would be furnished by the occurrence of the remains of some extinct animal in a geological formation of disputed age.' This form appears in all ancient Confessions of Faith, in the Apostles' Creed, as found in the works of Rufinus and St. Ambrose and St. Augustine and Fulgentius and Faustus and Facundus, in the Creeds of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and of Constantinople, and of the Nestorians. The form ' ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis ' was not introduced into the Apostles' Creed until the sixth century, according to the scholar just quoted ^. My reasons for considering ' ad dexteram Patris ' to be the true reading in the Quicunque — that which proceeded from the hand of the author — I propose to state in the chapter on the text. In verse 38 the expression ' cum corporibus suis ' calls for careful consideration, as our translation 'with their bodies ' is scarcely an adequate representation of the meaning, which clearly implies not merely the doctrine of the resurrection of the body, but the more particular application of it so much insisted on by Bishop Pearson ^, viz. that each individual will rise again hereafter in the same body wherein he has lived and died here. We might expect that this point would not be passed over by the Creed if it was drawn up at the period to which we have referred it, because the subject had been brought before the attention of theologians very distinctly not many years previously in the controversy between St. Jerome and Rufinus, the former accusing the latter of denying with Origen the identity of the risen body, the ' See Heurtley's Harmonia Symbolica, p. 138; also Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole. ' Exposition of the Creed, Art. XI. B b 2 372 Conclusions. [ch. latter repudiating the charge i. I have already stated that ' resurgere habent ' is thoroughly Augustinian, a mode of expression of which abundant instances may be found in the works of the great Western doctor. Verse 39, ' Et qui,' &c., is obviously constructed from St. John v. 29 and St. Matt. xxv. 41 and 46. It may be objected that to cite, as I have done. Eastern writers, St. Cyril and Theodoret for instance, as supplying internal evidence of the date of an unquestionably Western ' St, Jerome, in his Epistle to Pammachius, says : ' Unde et omnes sic speramus resurgere ex mortuis sicut Ille resurrexit. Non in aliis quibusdam peregrinis et in alienis corporibus quae assumuntur in phantasmate, sed sicut ipse in illo corpore, quod apud nos in sancto sepulcro conditum resurrexit, ita et nos in ipsis corporibus quibus nunc circumdamur et in quibus sepelimur, eadem ratione et visione speramus resurgere.' And again : ' Alia ratione resurrectionem corporum confitemur eorumque quae in sepulcris posita sunt dilapsaque in cineres, Pauli, Pauli, et Petri, Petri, et singula singulorum ; neque enim fas est, ut in aliis corporibus animae peccaverint, in aliis tor- queantur, nee iusti iudicis alia corpora pro Christo sanguinem fundere, et alia coronari.' Rufinus, on the other hand, Commentarius in Symbolum, § 43, also maintains the identity of the risen body : ' Et ita fit, ut unicuique animae non confusum aut extraneum corpus, sed suum quod habuerat reparetur, ut consequenter possit pro agonibus praesentis vitae cum anima sua caro vel pudica coronari vel impudica puniri. Et ideo satis caute fidem Symboli Ecclesia nostra docet quae in eo quod a caeteris traditur, " Camis resurrec tionem," uno addito pronomine tradidit, "huius carnis resurrectionem," huius sine dubio, quam habet is qui profitetur, signaculo criicis fronti imposito ; quo sciat unusquisque fidelium, carnem suam-, si mundam servaverit a peccato, futuram esse vas honoris, utile Domino ad omne opus bonum paratum, si vero contaminatam in peccatis, futuram esse vas irae ad interitum.' Rufini Com- metitarius iti Symbolum. We might suppose that the author of the Athanasian Creed had before him these passages of St. Jerome and Rufinus, especially if the right reading is ' iu corporibus suis,' That this is the reading of the Ambrosian MS., the earliest MS. it will be remembered extant of the Creed, I can affirm from my own knowledge, having collated the MS. myself. Water- land in the assertion, ' resurgere habent cum corporibtis suis et desunt in Cod. Ambros.' (^Critical History of the Aihanasian Creed, p. i8S; Oxford edition, 1870) has been misled by Muratori's inaccurate edition of the Creed from this MS. It reads not ' omnes homines reddituri,' &c. as the text is given by 'M.ViTs.tOTi, Anecdota, vol. ii. p. 225, but 'omnes homines resurgere habent in corporibus suis et reddituri,' &c. All other MSS. however, to the best of my knowledge, read ' cum corporibus suis.' II.J The Date. 373 document, is irrelevant. But in the first place it must be remembered that in the fifth century the border line between Eastern and Western Christendom was not sharply and broadly defined, as it was at a later period ; intercourse between the two was then constant and uninterrupted, the bond of unity unbroken ; and then, although the Nestorian controversy originated in the East and raged with the greatest violence there, and although the leaders on each side were Easterns, still it attracted the attention and awakened the lively interest of the whole of Western Christendom. It was the burning question of the day, and theologians of Italy and Gaul felt that the point at issue between the Bishops of Constantinople and Alexandria was one which touched vitally the common Catholic Faith. There is abundant evidence of this. Several epistles are extant — both of Caelestine I and his successor in the popedom, Xystus III — on the subject addressed to St. Cyril and Nestorius and different Eastern prelates. Early in the controversy a Synod was held at Rome, and Cassian, at the time a monk at Marseilles, upon the request of Leo then Archdeacon of Rome, afterwards its illustrious Bishop, wrote a treatise on the Incarnation in refutation of the nascent heresy. Probably he was selected for this work because he was by birth an Oriental, and had passed his early life in the East and had been a pupil and disciple of St, Chrysostom, by whom he was ordained to the diaconate, so that he must have been thoroughly conversant with Greek theology and the Greek language. The Council of Ephesus was attended by legates from Rome ; and St. Au gustine was summoned to take part in its deliberations, no doubt as the most distinguished doctor of the West, but he died before the assembhng of the Synod. Capreolus, Bishop of Carthage, was also cited to the Council, but was 374 Conclusions. unable to attend. A Western theologian, Marius Mercator, was residing at Constantinople when the controversy was at its height, and took an active part in the discussions, not only writing himself but translating into Latin several of the most important documents which were produced on the great question of the day. St. Vincent of Lerins in his first Commonitorium, which must have been written in 433 A.D. or 434, the second being dated in the latter year, dwells particularly upon the heresy of Nestorius. More over, shortly before the rise of Nestorianism, opinions of a very similar nature were broached by Leporius a monk and priest of Gaul, and attracted much attention both in that country and Africa. He was brought to a conviction of his error by St. Augustine, and upon his restoration to the Church drew up a Confession of Faith, entitled 'Libellus Satisfactionis.' CHAPTER III. AUTHORSHIP. Having arrived at the conclusion that the Athanasian Creed was drawn up at some time during the Nestorian controversy — not indeed when the controversy was at its height, but whilst it was still the chief topic of thought and interest among theologians — we are enabled, if not to determine with certainty the authorship of the document, at any rate to form an opinion of a high degree of proba bility upon the subject. The inquiry is necessarily hemmed in by certain conditions. The Quicunque being of Latin origin, the author must have been a Latin theologian : as it was composed in the Nestorian epoch and reflects the tone of thought then prevalent among the orthodox, he must have been a person who lived at that epoch and was conversant with its theology: as it re-echoes in all its parts the teaching of St. Augustine both in substance and language, he must have been familiar with the writings of that great doctor. And if in any writer who fulfils these conditions we can find any further special traces of identity or similarity in thought or language with the Creed, clearly they will serve as guide-posts in our search. In England the deservedly respected authority of Water- land has caused the Quicunque to be generally regarded as the work of Hilary of Aries. St. Hilary, who was Bishop 376 Conchisions. [ch. of Aries from 429 until his death in 449, was probably conversant with the writings of St. Augustine and the Nestorian controversy, but we have no positive proof of the fact, the only work of his at present extant, with the exception of a very short Epistle to Eucherius, being a sermon on the life of his predecessor in the abbacy of Lerins and the bishopric of Aries, St. Honoratus — a work necessarily of an unpolemical and undogmatic character, and therefore incapable of supplying any such proof Waterland's arguments respecting the authorship are not convincing. The passage quoted by him from Hilary's sermon contains too slight a resemblance of expression with the Creed to be made the basis of his argument^. His only other attempt to produce special proof completely breaks down on examination. Among the works of Hilary mentioned by his biographer is a ' Symboli expositio ambienda,' which Waterland identifies with the Athanasian Creed, his only authority for doing so being that it is described by a similar title — ' Expositio Symboli Aposto lorum,' or rather 'Anastasii Expositio Symboli Apostolo rum ' — in a Bodleian MS. of the fifteenth century^- A MS. of the fifteenth century is adduced to prove the meaning of an expression used in the fifth century. But apart from this, as I have before ventured to point out ^, Waterland was misinformed respecting this Bodleian MS. — ' Laud Misc. 493 ' — which is assigned by Mr. Coxe's Catalogue to the ' St. Hilary thus apostrophizes Honoratus : ' Quotidianus in sincerissimis tractatibus confessionis Patris ac Filii ac Spiritus Sancti testis fuisti : nee facile tam exerte, tam lucide quisquam de Divinitatis Trinitate disseruit, cum eam personis distingueres, et gloriae aeternitate ac maiestate sociares.' S. Hilarii -^relatensis, Sermo de vita S. Honorati, apud Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. i. p. 1272. ^ Waterland, Critical History of the Athanasian Creed, pp. 8i, 90, 164 ; Oxford edition, 1870. " The Early History of the Athanasian Creed, pp. 81-84. Ill ] Authorship. 377 end of the thirteenth century, and is erroneously described as containing a comment on the three Creeds by Hugh and Richard of St. Victor, the comment which it contains being that of Alexander Hales. It belonged originally to the Carthusians at Mayence, as appears by notes on the first and the last pages. In this codex the Quicunque is several times entitled ' Symbolum Anastasii,' once ' Sym bolum Athanasii.' The title ' Expositio Symboli Apos tolorum' is found in it, not as describing the Athanasian Creed, but the comment upon the Apostles'. And the title ' Expositio Symboli Anastasii ' is used in reference to the comment upon the Quicunque. That of ' Anastasii Expositio Symboli Apostolorum ' appears only on the flyleaf in a list of contents written by a modern hand. Hence no doubt Waterland's error. His informant must have been misled by this list of contents, which was obviously drawn up, as too commonly happens, upon a very superficial examination of the MS. My information on the subject is the result of my own inspection of the book. Nor is it possible to acquiesce in Waterland's hypothesis that the 'Expositio Symboli ambienda' of St. Hilary was the Athanasian Creed. What it was is a matter not far to seek. No doubt it was an Exposition or Commentary on the Apostles' Creed, — which was commonly described as ' Symbolum,' — probably addressed to catechumens previous to baptism. Of such Expositions by the Fathers we have abundant examples. Several are to be found among the sermons of St. Augustine. Three other Latin theologians of the Nestorian epoch have been already mentioned, whose writings bear abundant evidence of familiarity with the controversy of their age, for they took an active part in it themselves — Cassian, Marius Mercator, and St. Vincent of Lerins, The second 378 Conclusions. [ch. of these must also have been familiar with the writings of St. Augustine, if he was, as is generally supposed, the same Mercator to whom one of the great doctor's Epistles having reference to the Pelagian controversy was addressed. St. Augustine speaks of him as his son, from which it may be concluded that he was a pupil and disciple of that Father, if not his child in the Faith ^. Probably too Cassian was well acquainted with the writings of St. Augustine. But for any actual evidence of familiarity with those writings in identity or similarity of thought or language we may search in vain in the works both of Cassian and Mercator. But such evidence is found in the Commonitorium of St. Vincent. We see it in the following instances : — St. Vincent of Lerins. ' Ecclesia Catholica ... in Christo . . . duas substantias sed unam credit esse personam ; dnas substantias quia mutabile non est Verbum, ut ipsum verteretur in carnem ; unatn personam, ne duos profitendo filios, qualerni- tatem videatur colere, non Trini tatem' — Commonitorium, i. cap. xiii. ¦ Unus idem'que Christus, unus idemque Filius Dei, et unius eiusdem- que Christi et Filii Dei una persona, sicut in homine aliud caro, et aliud anima, sed unus idemque homo anima et caro! — Ibid. St. Augustine. ' In Christo duae sunt substantiae, Deus et homo, sed una persona, ut Trinitas maneat, non accidente homine quaternitas fiat.' — Ser. cxxx. 3. ' Utrumque unus . . . sed aliud propter Verbum, aliud propter homi nem . . , unus Dei Filius, idemque hominis filius,' — Enchiridion, cap. XXXV. ' Ut quemadmodum est una per sona quilibet homo, anima rationalis et caro, ita sit Christus una persona, Verbum et homo.' — Ibid. cap. xxxvi. * Sicut enim unus est homo anima rationalis et caro, ita unus est Christus Deus et homo.' — In Joh. Tract. Ixxviii. 3. ' S, Aug. Liber de Octo Dulcitii Quaestionihus, Quaest. iii. sec. 2. III.] Authorship. 379 ' Idem Patri et aequalis et minor' — ' Deus est Verbum Mediator Deus Ibid. et homo, Deus aequalis Patri, homo minor Patre. Est ergo et aequalis et minor.' — Ser. cccxli. cap. v. ' Idem ex Patre ante saecula genitas, 'Dominus noster lesus Christus, idem in saectilo ex Matre generatus.' — Deus atite omnia saecula, et homo in Ibid. nostro saeculo, Deus de Patre, homo de Virgine, unus tamen atque idein Dominus et Salvator lesus Christus.' — In Joh. Tract, xiv. i. See also En chiridion, cap. xxxvi. 'Ambas generationes Christi et ex Deo Patre sine tempore et ex homine matre in plenitudine temporis.' — Con. Maximinut/i II, xviii. i. ' Est in Christo Verbum, anima et ' Christus est Verbum, anima et caro; sed hoc totum unus est Christus.' caro.' — .Ser. cccv. 2. —Ibid. ' Unus non corruptibili nescio qua ' Idem Deus qui homo et qui Deus divinitatis et humanitatis confusione, idem homo, non confusione naturae, if(^ Integra et singulari quadam unitate sed unitate personae' — Ser. clxxxvi. personae. ' — Ibid. The comparison of t'ne above sets of quotations, drawn respectively from St. Vincent of Lerins and St. Augustine, leads inevitably to the conclusion that the former was thoroughly acquainted with the doctrinal terminology of the latter, we may say even that he assimilated and adopted it. Thus in St. Vincent the three conditions meet, which we have been led to regard as pre-requisites in any person to whom the authorship of the Athanasian Creed can be assigned with any degree of probability. And he is the only person in whom they can be proved to meet. He lived and flourished at the period of the Nestorian controversy, for he died A.D. 450 ; he was thoroughly conversant with that controversy, as appears plainly from his Commonitorium, and he was familiar with the writings of St. Augustine, a disciple of his school as far as regards the great verities of the Faith. But we are able to advance a step further, and find distinct traces of a connexion 380 Conclusions. [ch. between the Quicunque and the Commonitorium in several remarkable coincidences of doctrinal terminology and idiomatic expression occurring in the two documents. The first verbal coincidence to which I desire to draw attention is in the words perfectus Deus, perfectus homo, which are found in both documents. It is remarkable that the copula should be omitted in both, especially as it is not omitted in the same phrase as used in the Union- Creed of the Antiochenes, and by St. Cyril and St. Athanasius, from whence, and not from any Latin source, it appears to have been derived. Still more remarkable is the coincidence, which occurs in the passages of the two documents, relating to the two Nativities of our blessed Lord : ' idem ex Patre ante saecula genitus, idem in saeculo ex matre generatus' in the Commonitorium, ' Deus ex substantia Patris ante saecula genitus, homo ex substantia matris in saeculo natus ' in the Creed. Similar contrasts between the two Nativities are frequent in Confessions of Faith and the writings of the Fathers, but most rarely do we find the Nativity of our Lord in the flesh described in the manner it is described in both these cases, as taking place in saeculo. I believe I am right in saying that there is but one other instance of this known. Thus the Union-Creed of the Antiochenes has, irpo aldvcuv pev eK rod irarpos yevvTjdevTa Kara Trjf OeoTtyra, eir' ecrxarwv he tQv fip,ep&v tov avTov hi rjpds koI hid ryv 7]peTepav crcorripiav eK Mapias rijs napOevov Kara ttjv dvOpcoiroTriTa : and so also the Definition of Chalcedon. St. Cyril uses a somewhat different phraseology : yevvqOevra pev OeiK&s irpo iravrbs alS>vos Kai Xpovov, ev ecr)(^aTois he rov ai&vos Kaipols tov avrov Kara crdpKa SK yvvaiKos^. To turn to Latin Confessions of Faith con- '¦ Quod unus sit Christus. in.] Authorship. 381 taining some note of date in reference to the Incarnation — the Creed of Damasus has 'ultimo tempore,' that of Bachiarius ' in novissimis diebus,' that of Pelagius ' in fine saeculorum,' that of Leporius known as his ' Libellus Satisfactionis' — drawn up about 426 a.d. — 'novissimo tempore,' that of the fourth Council of Toledo A.D. 633 ' ultimo tempore,' though it uses the same term as the Commonitorium and the Quicunque in reference to the first Nativity — ' ante saecula genitus,' and the Anathe matisms of the Lateran Council A.D. 649 have 'ante omnia saecula natus ' in reference to the first Nativity, but ' in ultimis saeculorum ' in reference to the second. St. Augustine in reference to the two Nativities twice has respectively ' sine tempore ' and ' in tempore,' also ' aeterna ' and ' temporalis ^! Once he approaches very near to the terminology of our documents : ' Deus ante omnia saecula, homo in nostro saeculo ^.' The only instance of in saeculo being used in reference to the second Nativity, so far as I know, occurs in Fulgentius, who was made Bishop of Ruspe in Africa A.D. 507 : ' Unus atque idem Deus, Dei Filius, natus ante saecula et natus in saeculo ^.' These two verbal coincidences are not accidental, nor yet such as might be accounted for by the common use of Catholic phraseology. They exclude, as in the highest degree improbable, if not impossible, the hypothesis that the two documents in which they appear could have been drawn up by different authors independently one of another, the earlier of the two being unknown to the author of the later. It seems to me also improbable, though in a less degree, that two such peculiarities should ' Sermones, cxl. 2 ; also cxc. cap. 11, and ccclxxx. 2. ^ Enchiridion, cap. xxxv. ' De Fide Liber, cap. ii. sec. 1 1 . 382 Conclusions. [ch. have been copied from one document to the other. The only alternative remaining is that both documents were by the same hand, that the author of the Commonitorium was also the author of the Athanasian Creed. But as this conclusion rests only on a probable proof let us see whether it is confirmed by any other identities or resemblances of thought or expression. Let the two subjoined sets of parallelisms be considered : — Athanasian Creed. ' Fides autem Catholica haec est, ut unum Deum in Trinitate et Trini tatem in Unitate veneremur : neque confmidentes personas neque substan tiam separantes ' (verses 3, 4). 'Alia est enim persona Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti : sed Patris et Filii ei Spiritus Sancti una est Divinitas, aequalis gloria, coaeterna maiestas' (verses 5, 6). Commonitorium primum. ' Ecclesia Catholica . . . et unam Divinitatem in Trinitatis plenitu dine et Trinitatis aequalitatem in una atque eadem maiestate veneratur ' (cap. xiii). Also : Unum Deum in Trinitatis plenitudine et item Trinitatis aequali tatem in una Divinitate veneratur ; ut neque singularitas substantiae per- sonarum confundat proprietatem, luque item Trinitatis distinctio Uni tatem separet Deitatis ' (cap, xvi). ' Quia scilicet alia est persona Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti: sed tamen Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sa/icti non alia et alia, sed una eademque natura ' (cap. xiii). I have marked by italics the words occurring in both documents. In the first set of parallelisms both documents present the same cast of sentence, the same thoughts and principles, and some sameness of phraseology. The verbal conformity is more close and obvious in the second. The following may also be considered : — Creed. ' Est ergo fides recta, ut credamus et confiteamur, quia Dominus noster lesus Christus, Dei Filius, Deus pari ter et homo est' (ver. 28). Commonitorium primum. ' Ecclesia Catholica et de Deo et de Salvatore recta sentiens ' (cap. xiii). ' Ecclesia Catholica . . . unum Chris tum lesum, non duos, eundemque Deum pariter atque hominem con fitetur' (cap. xiii). iii.J Authorship. 383 The expression ' Deus pariter et homo ' occurring in both is especially deserving of notice, as being unusual. So far as I can ascertain, it is not used by St. Augustine, though he has several times ' Deus et homo,' nor is it to be found in St. Hilary or St. Leo. There can be little doubt that pariter was in the original text of the Quicunque, though it is omitted generally by later MSS., as also in the texts of the Roman and Sarum Breviaries, and was passed over by the author of our own version. Creed. Commonitorium primum. ' Deus ex substantia Patris ... 'In uno eodemque Christo duae homo ex substantia matris ' (ver. 29). substantiae sunt ; sed una divina, altera humana ; una ex Patre Deo, altera ex matre Virgine ; . . una consuhstantialis Patri, altera consub- stantialis matri ; unus tamen idemque Christus in utraque substantia ' (cap. xiii). Also : ' Perfectus homo ex anima ' Perfectus homo. ... In homine rationali et humana carne subsistens ' plena humanitas. Plena, inquam, (ver. 30). quae animam simul habeat et carnem, sed carnem, veram, nostram, mater- nam, animam vero intellectu prae- ditam, mente ac ratione poUentem ' (cap, xiii). ' Unus idemque Petrus, unus idem que Paulus, ex duplici diversaque subsistens animi corporisque natura' (cap. xiii). The word subsistens in this passage of the Creed, defining our Lord's humanity, is particularly notable, because it was evidently a favourite and common word of St. Vincent's, who uses it three times within a short compass in the Commonitorium. In the passage quoted above he employs it in a similar connexion to that which it has in the Creed ; for he is illustrating the Unity of our Lord's Person by the analogous unity belonging to any human individual notwithstanding his complex constitution 384 Conclusions. [ch. of the diverse elements of body and soul. What makes the use of this word in the Creed more remarkable and seems to identify it more clearly as coming from St. Vincent, is that a different word is found in Marius Mercator's translation of the very similar passage pre viously quoted in the Symbol of Theodore of Mopsuestia, ' hominem natura perfectum, ex anima rationali et humana carne composiiiini! Another person would have copied this literally ; Vincent, we may presume, prefers his own word. It is observable also that the author of the Commoni torium is most explicit and emphatic in his assertion of our Lord's perfect humanity as regards both His soul and body. The man who thus expressed himself would not be unlikely in a doctrinal formulary to adopt the equivalent, but more concise and conventional, terms of St. Augustine, with whose writings, as we have seen, he was well acquainted — the terms which are found in the parallel passage of the Creed. And this probability gains strength when it is considered how largely the terminology of the Quicunque is borrowed from the great Latin doctor. Lastly : — Creed. Commonitorium pHmum. * Unus autem, non conversione ' Unam personam . . . quia muta- Divinitatis in carnem, sed adsump- bile non est Verbum Dei ut ipsum tione humanitatis in Deum ' (ver. verteretur iii carnem ' (cap. xiii). 33). Also : ' Verbum Deus absque uUa sui conversione . . . non confundendo, non imitando factus est homo, sed subsistendo . . . in se perfecli hominis suscipiendo naturam ' (cap. xiv). It is obvious to remark that these parallelisms regarded collectively possess a force and significance which would not belong to them singly and severally. in.] A uthorship. 385 Creed. 'Aequalis Patri secundum Divi nitatem, minor Patre secundum huma nitatem ' (ver. 31). There are other parallelisms, which seem to have arisen from both documents being drawn from a common source — the writings of St. Augustine. These require distinct consideration, as furnishing distinct trace of oneness of authorship. Commonitorium primum. ' In uno eodemque Christo duae substantiae sunt ; sed una divina, altera humana, . . una co-aeterna aequalis Patri, altera ex tempore et minor Palre. . . . Non alter Christus Deus, alter homo, . . . non alter aequalis Patri, alter minor Patre, . sed unus idemque Christus Deus et homo . . idem Patri et aequalis el minor' (cap. xiii). We can scarcely fail to trace the common source of the two documents here in the following passages of St. Augustine : ' Aequalem Patri secundum Divinitatem, minorem autem Patre secundum carnem, hoc est secundum hominem ^.' Also, ' Minor Patre, quia homo : aequalis autem Patri, quia Deus^.' Again : — Creed. CoiHmonitoriuM primum. ' Unus omnino, non confusione sub- ' Unus autem )ton corruptibili nescio stantiae, sed unitate personae' (ver. qua divinitatis et humanitatis con- 34). fusione sed Integra et singulari qua dam unitate personae' ' Altera substantia divinitatis, altera humanitatis' (cap. xiii). In this case even more plainly than in the former the language of St. Augustine is the common source of both : ' Idem Deus qui homo, et qui Deus idem homo, non con fusione naturae, sed unitate personae *.' The man who ' Epist. cxxxvii. cap. iii, ^ Servi. cclxiv. 4. See also Enchiridion, lib. i. cap. xxxv. ^ Serm. clxxxvi. i. C c 386 Conclusions. [ch. averred, as St. Vincent did, that in our Lord are two substantiae— divinitas and humanitas — would clearly not be unlikely to substitute substantiae for the naturae of St. Augustine. And the former word in the Creed is obviously the equivalent of divinitatis and humanitatis in the Commonitorium. Unus in the Creed seems to be drawn from the Commonitorium, and omnino is the summary of St. Augustine's Idem Deus qui homo, et qui Deus idem homo. Thus there are evident traces here of the same hand iri the Creed and Commonitorium. Thirdly :— Creed. Commonitorium primum. ' Nam sicut anima rationalis et ' Altera substantia divinitatis, altera caro unus est homo, ita Deus et homo humanitatis ; sed tamen deltas et unus est Christus ' (ver. 35). kujnat.iitas non alter et alter, sed unus idemque Christus; . . . sicut in homine aliud caro et aliud anima, sed unus idemque homo anima et caro ' (cap. xiii). Here again the common source may be found in St. Augustine, to wit : ' Sicut enim unus est homo anima rationalis et caro ; sic unus est Christus Deus et homo ^.' Clearly the verse in the Creed is nothing but this passage with some transposition of word's. The parallel language of Vincent would also appear to be drawn from it and founded upon it, some expressions being introduced with immediate reference to Nestorianism. Hence it is a probable conclusion that it was by his hand that these words of St, Augustine were transferred to the Quicunque. And further, between the Commonitorium and the Athanasian Creed there exists, not only an accordance of particular thoughts and expressions, but they are pervaded by a unity of fundamental principle. Does ' Tract . in Joh. Evangelium, Ixxviii. 3. III.] Authorship. 387 St. Vincent assert, that ' it is very necessary that the course of prophetic and apostolic interpretation should be guided in accordance with the rule of Ecclesiastical and Catholic doctrine : in the bosom of the Catholic Church also we should be specially careful to hold that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all ' : adding, ' This will be attained if we follow universality, antiquity, consent i ' ? Does he interpret St. Paul's charge to Timothy that he should guard the deposit as meaning — ' Keep the talent of the Catholic Faith undefiled and undiminished : that which has been committed to thee, take heed that it abide with thee, that it be handed on by thee^'? Does he declare the unchangeableness of Christian dogma : ' It is lawful that those ancient dogmas of the heavenly philosophy should in process of time be expounded with greater accuracy, refinement, elegance ; but it is unlawful that they be altered, mangled, mutilated : they may admit of being set forth with greater clearness, lucidity, distinctness, but they must needs retain their fullness, their antiquity, their essence ^ ' ? Does he maintain the necessity of accepting and teaching the Catholic Faith : ' It remains that all understand in like manner, as these moral precepts, so also the admonitions which ' ' Multum necesse est nt propheticae et apostolicae interpretationis linea secundum Ecclesiastici et Catholici sensus normam dirigatur. In ipsa item Catholica Ecclesia magnopere curandum est ut id teneamus quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus creditum est.' . . . ' Hoc ita demum fiet si sequamur universitatem, antiquitatem, consensionem.' S. Vincentii, Commonitorium, i. 2.'^ ' Deposilum inquit,' i. c. S. Paulus, ' custodi, Catholicae fidei talentum in- violatum illibatumque conserva. Quod tibi creditum, hoc penes te maneat, hoc a te tradatur.' Ibid. i. 22. ^ ' Fas est ut prisca ilia caelestis philosophiae dogmata processu temporis excurentur, limentur, poliantur ; sed nefas est ut commutentur, detruncentur, mutilentur. Accipiant licet evidentiam, lucem, distinctionem ; sed retineant necesse plenitudinem, antiquitatem, proprietatem.' Ibid. i. 23. C C 3 388 Conclusiotis. [ch- have been given respecting the Faith, and, as it is permitted to none to provoke or to envy another, so to none is it permitted to receive what is contrary to the gospel taught by the Catholic Church': and— 'To preach to Catholic Christians anything contrary to that which they have received, never has been, never is, and never will be permissible, and to anathematize those who preach anything contrary to that which has been once received never has been, never is, and never will be wrong ' : and — ¦ ' This is the proper duty of Catholics, to keep the deposits of the holy Fathers and the things committed to them, to condemn profane novelties, and as the Apostle said and again said^, If any one preach unto you what is contrary to that which has been received, let him be anathema ^ ' ? The principles thus enunciated underlie the Athanasian Creed, which expresses the great verities of the Catholic Faith, as held and taught by the Fathers, and that for the most part in the very terms which they employed. In particular, it is plain from these utterances of St. Vincent of Lerins that the condemnatory clauses are not alien from his mind and might be attributed to him without any improbability. There is nothing in the early history of the Athana sian Creed inconsistent with the hypothesis that it was ' Gat i. 8, 9. ^ ' Restat ut sicut haec morum mandata, ita etiam ilia quae de fide cauta sunt, omnes pari modo comprehendant, et sicut nemini licet invicem provocare aut invidere invicem, ita nemini liceat praeter id, quod Ecclesia Catholica evangelizat, accipere." Also, ' Annuntiare Christianis Catholicis aliquid praeter id, quod acceperunt, nunquam licuit, nunquam licet, nunquam licebit ; et anathematizare eos, qui annuntiant aliquid praeterquam quod semel acceptum est, nunquam non oportuit, nunquam non oportet, nunquam non oportebit.' S. Vincentii, Commonitorium, i. 9. And, 'Catholicorum hoc pro prium deposita sanctorum patrum et commissa servare, damnare profanas novitates, et sicut dixit atque praedixit Apostolus, si quis annunciaverit praeter quam quod acceptum sit anathema sit.' S. Vincentii, Commonitorium, i. 24. Ill .] Authorship. 389 composed by St. Vincent : on the contrary, there is much which supports this view. That Father was a Gaul and a monk of the celebrated monastery of Lerins, which was situated in an island not far from the coast of Provence, opposite Cannes — the school which reared St. Hilary and St. Caesarius and Virgilius, all three bishops of Aries, and_ Lupus of Troyes. If Lerins was the birthplace of the Creed, we should expect to find that it was first received and used in Gaul and the North of Italy. And this we have every reason to believe was the case. An early and important MS. of the Quicunque — the Vatican MS. Pal. 574 — appears to have issued originally from this monastery, a document relating to an incident in its history being another of the contents of the volume. The earliest extant MS. of our Creed — that in the Ambrosian Library at Milan — is written in an Irish hand, and before it was transferred to its present domicile in the beginning of the seventeenth century it belonged to the monastery of Bobbio in North Italy, which was founded by the Irish Saint Columbanus. The Creed is also found in another Irish MS. — a book of hymns deposited in the Church of the Franciscans on the Merchants' Quay, Dublin, and written, in the judgement of Bishop Reeves, not later than A.D. 1100. These facts appear to indicate that the Quicunque was known to the ancient Irish Church, which in all probability received it from Gaul, where as we have seen it was accepted at an early period : for Ireland was in close communication with Gaul, and, there can be little doubt, derived from that country her Christianity and Episcopate. And according to Mabillon the ancient Irish Church was largely indebted not only to Gaul but to Lerins itself for her ritual ; for he states that the Cursus Ecclesiasticus or the ordinary service as distinct from that 39° Conclusions. [c"- of the Eucharist, which obtained in the monasteries of Marseilles and Lerins, and which he describes as the Alexandrine to discriminate it from the other families of the Cursus, passed into Ireland i- St. Patrick is said to have visited Lerins and spent some time there ^, but the tradition, though possibly true, does not appear to rest upon any reliable evidence. To sum up the grounds upon which the authorship of the Athanasian Creed may be attributed to St. Vincent of Lerins — he flourished at the epoch when from external and internal evidence it appears to have emanated ; there is no other writer of the same epoch to whom it can be ascribed with any degree of probability ; between it and his Commonitorium there exist several coincidences of phrase ology, which seem to indicate that both works were by the same hand ; and the principles avowed by him, particularly as to the necessity of holding the Catholic Faith, are such as we should expect to find in the author of the Quicunque. I do not venture to assert that the evidence I have pro duced is conclusive and demonstrative. It is a case in which we could scarcely look for such evidence. But I think I may without exaggeration describe it as highly probable : and this is no small matter, if Bishop Butler was right in saying that to us probability is the very guide of life. It is not superfluous to add that of all the authors to whom the Creed has been attributed, Vincent of Lerins is the only one to whom it has been attributed with any degree of probability. I have previously alluded to the fact that the evidence alleged by Waterland for the authorship of Hilary of Aries does not bear examination. ' Mabillon, Disquisitio de Cursii Gallicano, 3. See also Warren's Liturgy and Ritual of the Celtic Church, p. 79. * Stokes, Ireland and the Celtic Church, 'p^. 48 and 170. Ill ¦] A uthorship. 391 The same may be said of the hypothesis of Quesnel, which ascribed the Creed to Vigilius Tapsensis^, and of the theory broached about five and twenty years ago by Mr. Ffoulkes, which represented it as compiled by Paulinus Archbishop of Aquileia in or a little before the year 800. ' See Quesnelli, dissertatio II. de variis fidei libellis, § xvi. It was first printed in his edition of Leo's works. It is also printed in Galland's De vetustis Canonum Collectionibus dissertationum Sylloge, tom. i. p. 833 ; and in Migne, Patrol. Latina, toBi. Ivi. p. 1065. He was answered by Antelmi, who ascribed the Quicunque to Vincent of Lerins in his treatise Nova de Symbolo Athanasiano disquisitio, Paris, 1693, and also by the Ballerini, Observationes in dissertationem II. Paschasii QuesnelK, § iii. De auctore Symboli qui cunque, printed in their edition of Leo the Great. See Migne, tom. Ivi. pp. 1071-1075. Also Galland's Sylloge, tom. i. pp. 845, 846. CHAPTER IV. TITLES. In the earliest MS. copy of the Athanasian Creed extant — Ambrosian Library, O. 212, of the eighth century — it has no title. It is the same also in another very early MS. — which is placed about 800 A. D. or a little earlier — the Paris MS. Latin 4858. The same is the case with the very interesting Psalter in the Paris MS. Latin 13159, which certainly belongs to the age of Charlemagne, and in all probability was executed between the years 795 and 800 ; but in this instance the omission of the title is devoid of any significance, as the leaf on which the Creed commences has clearly been inserted in order to supply the place of the original one, which must have been lost (with possibly one or two more) in consequence of some injury done to the book, and it is written in a different hand from that found in the book generally. Hence we cannot be certain whether or not the title was omitted originally^. The earliest title applied to the Creed appears to have been Fides Catholica. We have an instance of its being so entitled as early as the sixth century — in the Epistola Canonica, if the Ballerini are right, as they probably are, in ' See Part I. chap. iii. 5. Titles. 393 thinking that that document refers to our Creed ^- Further, it is so described in the headings of all the oldest Com mentaries. Thus the so-called Fortunatus Commentary in the Oxford Bodleian MS. Junius 25 is headed ' Expositio in Fide Catholica,' and in the Paris Latin MS. ioo8j ' Expositio super Fidem Catholicam,' and in the two Paris Latin MSS. 2826 and 17448 similarly, 'Expositio super Fide Catholica,' where the mark of contraction over the final e and a may have been omitted inadvertently, and in the Milan MS. M. 79 it is headed ' Expositio Fidei Catholice Fortunati,' where no doubt the expositio is referred to as the work of Fortunatus, not the Fides Catholica. Again, the Paris Commentary is headed in the Paris Latin MS. 1012, 'Fides Chatholica cum expositione.' Again, the Troyes Commentary is headed in the Troyes MS. 804, ' Expositio fidei catholicae.' Also the Commentary lately edited by M. Cuissard from an Orleans MS., and believed by him to be the work of Theodulf is headed ' Explanatio fidei catholicae.' The Milan MS. already mentioned as containing a copy of the Fortunatus Commentary contains two other Commentaries on the Quicunque, each having the same title, ' Expositio Fidei Catholice.' This same title is also applied to two more Commentaries — both distinct it must be remembered from any previously mentioned — which are severally found in two Milanese MSS., T. 103 and I. 152, both Milanese Liturgical books, written, as Dr. Ceriani assured me, in Milan ^. It is worth noting that there is a uniformity of title in all the five Commentaries in Milan MSS., the Creed being described in all simply as ' See above. Part I. ii. i. Also the Tractate of the Ballerini, De auctore Symboli Quicunque, among Editorum Observationes in Dissertationem II. Paschasii Quesnelli printed in their edition of St. Leo, and Galland's Disser tationum Sylloge, tom. i. ^ See above. Part I. iv. 9 and 12. 394 Conclusions. [ch. ' Fides Catholica.' And this is continued in the headings of Commentaries as late as the thirteenth century. Thus the Stavelot Commentary is headed in the Paris Latin MS. I2020 of the twelfth century, 'Tractatus de Fide Catho lica,' and Necham's Commentary in the Bodleian, late thirteenth century MS., Auct. D. 2. 9, ' Expositio Fidei Catholice a Magistro Alexandro edita.' And not only in the headings of Commentaries, but in other documents, we have evidence of the early applica tion of the title ' Fides Catholica ' to the Quicunque. It was thus described by Theodulf Bishop of Orleans at the end of the eighth or beginning of the ninth century, both in his Capitula and in his Capitulare addressed to his clergy. So also in the Catachesis Theotisca preserved in a Wolfen biittel MS. of the middle of the ninth century^. So also in the heading of a Prayer to be said after the recital of the Quicunque — ' Oratio post Fidem Catholicam ' — which occurs in the Paris Latin MS. 13388 of the ninth century, a manual of devotion formerly the property of the Abbey of St. Germain des Pres at Paris, where it was no doubt used. And it is so described in the Utrecht Psalter, which, though modern palaeography forbids us to regard it like our ancestors as executed in the time of Gregory the Great, may still be safely assigned to the first half of the ninth century : indeed, it is considered by Sir E. M, Thompson to have been written at the beginning of that century and to be the exact copy of an older codex ^. It is so described also in another Psalter of the ninth century — Parker 272, O. 5^. And this title was never dropped entirely, in proof of which let me adduce three notable ' See above. Part I. v. 3. ^ Handbook of Palaeography, by Sir E. M. Thompson, pp. 64 and 189. ' Above, I. iii. 15. IV, .] Titles. 395 examples of its occurrence at a later date : first, the Vat. MS. Reg. 12, a very beautiful and elaborately-executed Psalter, not previously noticed by me, which must have had, as is shown by several circumstances, the abbey at Bury St. Edmund's for its birthplace in the eleventh century, probably the latter half; secondly, the magnificent Cotton MS., Vesp. A. i, comtaonly called the Augustine Psalter, from St. Augustine's, Canterbury, its former home : the Te Deum and Athanasian Creed in this book, it must be remembered, are by a hand of the eleventh century, dating, as Wanley thought, about the time of the Norman Conquest, and they are accompanied by an interlinear Anglo-Saxon gloss ; but the preceding portion of the book, including the Psalter and Canticles, belongs, in Sir E. M. Thompson's judgement, to the early part of the eighth century 1; and thirdly. Vat. 8i, the only known example, so faf as I am aware, of a Greek and Latin Psalter in which all the Canticles, including the Athanasian Creed, are found in Greek as well as Latin. According to my conjecture, which I only mention in the absence of any authority, the last-mentioned MS. belongs to the thirteenth or fourteenth century ^. The earliest extant instance of the Quicnnque being ascribed to St. Athanasius occurs in the Autun Canon dating in or about the year 670, in which it is entitled, ' Fides sancti Athanasi presolis ' as in the Angers Collec tion, or ' episcopi ' as in the Herovall ''- The preface to the Oratorian Commentary gives us reason to believe that it was ascribed to his authorship even before that — as early probably as the commencement of the seventh century. It ' See Facsimiles of the Palaeographical Society, vol. ii. plate i8. ' For some account of this MS. see above. Part I. v. i, 4 e. ' Above, I. ii. 2. 396 Conclusions. [ch. is so ascribed in the title applied to it in the Vat. MS. Pal. 574 — ' Fides Catholica beati Atanasi episcopi '-^where it appears among certain documents which, according to the Ballerini, were collected together and annexed to the collection of Canons, which they follow, in the eighth century. We find it also so ascribed by the celebrated Vienna Psalter — believed to have been originally the pro perty of Charlemagne — in the title, ' Fides Sancti Athanasii episcopi Alexandrini.' From the commencement of the ninth century downwards MSS. of our document are abun dant, and it is commonly ascribed by the title to Athanasius, but with a great and remarkable variety of form. Thus we meet with ' Fides chatolica sancti Atanasii episcopi Alexandrine ecclesie ' in Paris Latin 1451 of the ninth century,' hides Catholica Sancti Athanasii,' British Museum, Addit. 1 8043 of the tenth century, ' Fides Catholica sancti Athanasii episcopi' in the Bodleian MS., Rawlinson 163 of the eleventh century, and others similar : also with ' Fides sancti Athanasii Alexandrini,' B. M. Cotton, Galba A. xviii of the ninth century, ' Fides sancti Athanasii' in the Psalter of Charles the Bald of the same century, ' Fides sancti Athanasii episcopi ' in Paris Latin 3848 B, also of the same century, and the like : also with ' Sermo Athanasii de fide ' in the Capitula of Hincmar, A.D. 853 ; ' Sermo Athanasii ' in the Profession of Adalbert, A.D. 871; 'Sermo Fidei Catholicae' in the Charge of Riculfus, A. D. 889 ; ' Sermo Athanasii episcopi de Fide Sanctae Trinitatis' in the Articles of Regino at the com mencement of the tenth century, and in the Charge of Ratherius about 960 A.D. ; in aU which cases the form is doubtless derived from the ' admonitio synodalis ' or Episcopal Visitation Articles current in France and Ger many in the ninth century, perhaps earlier: also with IV, .] Titles. 397 ' Hymnus Athanasii de Fide Trinitatis' in the Salisbury MS. 150 and B. M. Bib. Reg. 2. B. v, both of them Psalters written in England in the tenth century : also ' Fides Catholica dicta a sancto Athanasio episcopo ' in Paris Latin MSS. 2076 and 2341 of the tenth century, and ' Fides Catholica edita a beato Athanasio episcopo ' in Vat. 84, assigned by Vezzosi to the tenth century, and ' Fides Catholica quam sanctus Athanasius dictavit ' in Vat. 82, of the same epoch probably. Ratramn, A. D. 868. describes our document as ' Libellus de Fide quem edidit . . . beatus Athanasius Alexandrinus episcopus ^.' The term Symbolum, as far as we know, was first applied to the Qtiicunque in the latter part of the twelfth century. It was thus used by Henry Abbot of Brunswick and John Beleth at that epoch ^. Afterwards it grew into common use, particularly in the title ' Symbolum Athanasii ' and the like, which appears in Breviaries. As it was applied by Beleth in the twelfth century to the Athanasian in common with the other Creeds, so in the thirteenth it was applied by Alexander Hales, Joannes Januensis and Durandus, in the fourteenth by Ludolphus Saxo — but with this differ ence, that Beleth reckoned four Creeds, the Apostles', the Athanasian, the Nicene and the Constantinopolitan ; the others reckoned three only, the Apostles', the Athanasian, and the Constantinopolitan, called by them, as by us, but incorrectly, the Nicene. In the Roman Breviary and the Benedictine the Quicunque is headed ' Symbolum S. Athanasii,' in the Sarum ' Symbolum Athanasii,' in the Ambrosian rite — which is very remarkable — it is simply headed ' Symbolum ^.' ' Contra Graecorum Opposita, lib. ii. cap, 3. ^ Above, Part I. i. 24 and 26. ' Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, vol. ii. p. 1753. 398 Conclusions. [ch. Waterland, following Sirmond, asserts that the Athana sian Creed is called Symbolum' by Hincmar 1. But the document quoted by Hincmar in his work De Praedesti- natione, which he attributes to Athanasius and describes as Symbolum, is clearly not our Creed, but a Profession of Faith, called ' Fides Romanorum ' and ' Fides Romanae Ecclesiae,' which has been very absurdly printed by Chifflet as the ninth book of Vigilius de Trinitate ^. It is possible that Hincmar may have confounded the ' Fides Romanorum ' with the Athanasian Creed ; but this is not probable con sidering that he was thoroughly familiar with the latter, as appears from the frequent quotations from it and applica tions of its language which he has made in his treatise De una et non trina Deitate. The title 'Fides' occurs in the Treves MS. looi, a Psalter of the ninth or tenth century : it is used also by Honorius of Autun. Still more remarkable is the title ' Athanasius ' which is found in a glossed Psalter executed about A.D. 1200, originally the property of St. Peter's, Erfurt, now in the British Museum, Addit. MSS. 10924. Possibly the Qui cunque may have been so called occasionally for the sake of brevity. The title ' Psalmus Quicunque vult ' occurring about the middle of the thirteenth century in the Constitutions of Walter de Cantilupe, Bishop of Hereford, and Walter de ^ Critical History, chap. ii. p. 28, Oxford edition. ^ The passage in Hincmar is as foUows : ' Et Athanasius in Symbolo, dicens se credere in Christum, praemissis aliis, assumptum in caelis, sedere in dextera Patris, inde venturum iudicare et mortuos exspectamus, in huius morte et sanguine remissionem peccatorum consecuturi.' De Praedestinatione, cap. xxxv. It is remarkable that in the ninth century Ratramn, as well as Hincmar, quotes both the Fides Romanorum and the Athanasian Creed as works of Athanasius. IV. .] Titles. 399 Kirkham, Bishop of Durham, is simply attributable to the fact of its being said as a Psalm in the service of the Church. For a considerable period and in various countries our document was ascribed to another person besides Atha nasius ; viz. Anastasius. This ascription appears some times in the titles of the Creed and clearly calls for atten tion. The first instance known of it is mentioned by Waterland as occurring in a MS. of the twelfth century, written for Church use in Augsburg, in which the Creed is described as ' Fides Anastasii episcopi.' But probably it was ascribed to Anastasius prior to the twelfth century, for towards the close of that century Beleth speaks of the belief in his authorship as by no means uncommon, though erroneous i. This belief having once gained a footing, another step necessarily followed. If Anastasius was the author, he must needs be Pope Anastasius. Accordingly in a MS. of the twelfth century the Creed is entitled ' Fides Anastasii Papae,' and the initial note or gloss of the same MS., which is a glossed Psalter, commences ' Hie beatus Anastasius liberum arbitrium posuit,' instead of ' Hie beatus Athanasius, &c.,' as in other MSS. of the same gloss or series of notes — a very clear proof of the belief of the writer in the authorship of Anastasius ^. The thirteenth century added the crowning stone to the edifice. Simon Tomacensis, who flourished early in that century, in his Commentary distinctly as.serts that the Creed was drawn up by Pope Anastasius in a large assembly of ' ' Ab Athanasio Patriarcha Alexandrino contra Arianos hereticos composi tum est, licet plerique eum Anastasium fuisse falso arbitrentur.' Beleth, de divin. Offic. c, 40, quoted in a note in the Oxford edition of Waterland's History. ^ See Waterland's History of the Athanasian Creed, Oxford edition, pp. 54, 55 note : also above, I. iv. 8. 400 Conclusions. [' CH. prelates, and he repeatedly attributes it to the same author ship, never to any other. His Commentary concludes with the colophon : ' Explicit feliciter expositio super symbolum beati Anastasii.' In the Merton College MS. 208 of the same century — a glossed Psalter — the initial note commences with the same words as that in the twelfth century MS. before mentioned, ascribing the Creed to Anastasius ; and in the Laud MS. Misc. 493 of the end of the same century, which contains the Commentaries of Alexander of Hales on the three Creeds, the Quicunque is several times entitled ' Symbolum Anastasii,' once only — and that in the Commentary on the Nicene Creed — ' Symbolum Athanasii.' We have also the ascription to Pope Anastasius in the curious title to a French version of the Quicunque recorded in Montfaucon's Diatribe — ' Ce chant fust S'. Anastaise qui ApostoiUes de Rome.' And this ascription to Anasta sius continued apparently as late as the early part of the sixteenth century, judging from the title ' Fides Catholica sancti Anastasii episcopi ' found in the Harleian MS. 2953, a Psalter of that date originally the property of Charles, the son of Conrad Peutinger of Augsburg. Nor was it in Germany only, as Waterland appears to think, that the Athanasian Creed was thus believed to be the work of Anastasius and expressly attributed to him, but in France and England also : for Beleth and Simon of Tournay were both theologians and doctors of Paris, men of note and influence, and well acquainted with the opinions of the age in which they lived ; and Alexander of Hales, the Irrefra gable Doctor, though he spent much of his life in teaching at Paris, was an Englishman by birth ; and the Merton College MS. seems to have been executed in England. It is not to be supposed that the belief and the ascription we are referring to prevailed universally or even very IV, .] Titles. 401 generally in these countries ; but that they should have spread so widely and continued through so long a period is a very remarkable circumstance. How did it arise? Waterland thinks, and I believe rightly, that the ascription originated in the mistakes of copyists. We are in fact able to trace the change from Athanasius to Anastasius through two stages of error, of which we have extant examples. Thus in the Bodleian MS. of the eleventh century, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, the title of our Creed is ' Fides Anathasii episcopi.' Every one is aware that the transposition of words and letters is a fertile cause of error in MSS. Here the change arises from the transposition of th and n. Next a copyist meeting with this Anathasii inserts the letter s before th : thus in the Cambridge Corpus Christi MS., Parker 411. N. 10, assigned by the late Mr. Bradshaw to the eleventh century, we find the title ' Fides sancti Anasthasii episcopi.' From Anasthasii to the better known ^««j/aj2V the transition by the omission of h is easy and natural. It only remains to mention the titles of the Athanasian Creed in our own English Prayer-Book. In the rubric prefixed to it in the first Prayer-Book of Edward the Sixth, in 1549, it was described as ' this Confession of our Christian faith': and this continued until 1663, when it was changed, as the result of the Savoy Conference, to the form which has been retained ever since — ' this Confession of our Christian faith, commonly called the Creed of Saint Athanasius.' Also in the rubric preceding the Apostles' Creed, as altered by the Savoy Conference and retained ever since, it is described as ' the Creed of Saint Athanasius.' The titles ascribed to the Athanasian Creed at various times form an essential feature in its history. The Balle rini conclude from the facts that in some early MSS. it Dd 402 Conclusions. [ch. has no title and in others is entitled ' Fides Catholica,' that it was not ascribed to Athanasius by the author, but became associated with his name in a subsequent epoch i. With this conclusion we may well rest contented. There is no positive evidence of the ascription to Athanasius being in vogue before the seventh century ; and it is inconceivable that the author of the Creed, whether St. Vincent or any other Latin theologian, should have put it out, as the work of the great Greek Father, especially when he had drawn the terminology largely from St. Augustine. More over this would be impossible, if the earliest title was ' Fides Catholica,' as it was in all probability. Whether or not it was first issued without any title must needs be uncertain, because although the earliest extant MS., that at Milan, and another very early one, Paris 4858, are both without any title and were doubtless copied from still earlier MSS,, we cannot from thence conclude for certainty that those earlier codices were likewise without title, still less that the autograph was so. Probably, however, the author drew up the document in the first instance simply for use in his own community, or at the request of an ecclesiastical superior, and in either case we might expect he would abstain from prefixing a title and still more his own name, especially if he was none other than St. Vincent of Lerins, who describes himself as ' minimus omnium servorum Dei peregrinus ^.' And if it was issued originally without title, it would naturally soon attract to itself the ' ' Athanasii itaque nomen non ab auctore initio adscriptum, sed posteriori tempore inductum fuit ; unde posteriora tantum exemplaria et scriptores septimi, octavi, et noni saeculi illud praeferunt.' Observationes in disserta tionem II. Paschasii Quesnelli, § iii. 3, De auctore Symboli Quicunque. See Gallandii, Dissertationum Sylloge, tom, i. p. 844. Also Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. Ivi. p. 1073. ' Commotiitorum primum, i. IV J Titles. 403 title ' Fides Catholica,' of which it was by its own pro fession an exposition and statement. Then, probably in the latter part of the sixth century, as we should conclude from the fact of its being ascribed in MSS. at the com mencement of the following century to Athanasius, the name of that illustrious Father began to be used in con nexion with it. As to the immediate cause which led to this we know nothing for certain : we can only form con jectures, but it may be probable conjectures. In the judge ment of Waterland it was first spoken of as the Catholic Faith or Faith of St. Athanasius simply as containing in substance his doctrine, not from any belief that it was actually his work ^. This was most likely the case, espe cially considering the circumstances of the latter part of the sixth century. At that time the Catholics in the North of Italy and South of France were brought face to face with Arianism, which was the dominant faith of the Lom bards in the former country and of the Goths in the latter. It was not a critical age, and they did not know, nor did it concern them to inquire, who was the author of the Creed, which they had received as ' the Catholic Faith.' This they were assured of that the truths taught by it were the same for which Athanasius contended in" opposi tion to Arius, which they also must maintain in opposition to his followers. And when it had thus come to be spoken of as the Faith of Athanasius, the exposition of his princi ples, the badge of fidelity to the truths of which he was the most distinguished champion, the next step would follow ere long — the title would be understood to signify that the formula was actually composed by him and be alleged in evidence to that effect. The same process is observable in the history of the Apostles' Creed, which no one now ' Critical History, chap. viii. D d 2 404 Conclusions. [ch. would maintain to have been drawn up by the Apostles themselves. For all that it is no forgery. Neither is the Athanasian Creed a forgery because it is not really the work of the man to whom long ages have ascribed it. There is another way of accounting for the ascription of our document to Athanasius. Possibly it may have been the result of the ignorance or carelessness of copyist.s, which were no doubt a fertile cause of the attribution of works to a wrong authorship in the Middle Ages. Several books or treatises in Latin on dogmatic subjects are extant, which must have been ascribed to Athanasius considerably before the ninth century, being quoted as his by two writers of that age — Theodulf and Hincmar. Their genuineness is however with one exception universally denied by modern scholars. The cause of their being originally thus ascribed to Athanasius, though not written by him, is patent, most of them being cast into the form of a discussion between the great Catholic Doctor and a heretic. Down to the latter half of the seventeenth century these books continued to be considered the genuine productions of Athanasius, and were so edited. In 1664 Chifflet col lected them all and edited them, as the work of Vigilius on the Trinity. But his grounds for so assigning them are clearly insufficient ; and the bulk of them are attributed in preference to Idatius Clarus by Montfaucon and the Ballerini ^. In the Benedictine edition of St. Athanasius one only — the last in order in Chifflet's edition — was re tained among his genuine works, the rest being relegated ' See In libros de Trinitate admonitio in .S. Athanasii Opera, Paris 1698, tom. ii. p. 601 ; also the tractate of the Ballerini, De auctore Symboli Quicun que, V, under the head of Editorum observationes in dissertationem II. P. Quesnelli, printed in the third volume of their edition of St. Leo — Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. Ivi. pp. 1073, 1074 — and in Galland's Dissertationum Sylloge, tom. i. p. 845. IV, J Titles. 405 to the spurious list. What have these books to do with our point ? In his work De Spiritu Sancto written in 809 Theodulf quotes the Athanasian Creed as the work of Athanasius in conjunction with some of these books, which suggests not indeed that it must, but it may have been mixed up in his time with them in the MS. or MSS. which he used^. And if this was the case, it may have led to the connexion of the name of Athanasius with it in the first instance. If a copyist found the Quicunque with the title ' Fides Catholica ' simply or with no title at all following in a MS. of some or one of these books ascribed to Athanasius, he would very possibly assume that that also must belong to his authorship, and would prefix his name accordingly. Such assumptions are not uncommon. The erroneous attribution once introduced would be easily multiplied and propagated by other copyists. These are two alternative possible ways of accounting for the ascription to Athanasius. But nothing certain can be determined upon the point. This is not to be wondered at considering our ignorance of the remote period when the circumstance occurred. Moreover, it is not a matter of any practical importance. For the claims of the Creed to our belief and esteem do not rest upon the fact of its ascription to Athanasius, but chiefly and primarily upon its intrinsic excellence as a faithful exposition of the great scriptural and Catholic verities of the Trinity and Incar nation. This is especially pressed upon English Church men by the statement of the Article that ' the three '. The quotation of the Creed, from Pater a nullo to de Trinitate sentiat, is headed in Migne's edition, Patrol. Latina, tom. cv. p. 247 — Item idem {In Symbolo) quod Spiritus Sanctus procedat a Patre et Filio. This might convey the impression that the Creed was styled Symbolum by Theodulf. Such, how ever, is not the case, in Sirmond's edition, of which Migne's is a reprint, the words In Symbolo being printed in the margin the same as Scripture references. 4o6 Conclusions. Creeds, Nicene Creed, Athanasius's Creed, and that which is commonly called the Apostles' Creed, are most thoroughly to be received and believed : for they may be proved by the most certain warrant of Holy Scripture.' If we are to reject the ' Confession of our Christian Faith commonly called the Creed of St. Athanasius,' because it is not his composition, upon the same principle we must reject also ' that which is commonly called the Apostles' Creed.' And it must fare the same with the Nicene Creed, as we incor rectly call the Creed recited in the Communion Service. P"or it is not identical with the Creed drawn up at the Council of Nice, the former containing much important matter which is not found in the latter and omitting important matter which is found in the latter. CHAPTER V. THE TEXT. Considering the very great number of MSS. of the Athanasian Creed which are still extant, they present a remarkably small diversity of text. There is but one variant of any importance. This remark does not apply to the Treves fragment, which, as I maintain for reasons before stated ^, is a portion of a sermon delivered at the ' Traditio Symboli,' not of our document. There is no evidence to show that the Quicunque existed at one time in a kind of embryo state and attained its present form and dimensions by a process of growth and accretions, like the other two Creeds and the Te Deum. There is no evidence of its having been combined into one from two separate documents, relating severally to the Trinity and the Incarnation. The homogeneous character of the two parts, as I have before pointed out, is a clear indication of the contrary. Nor can it be proved that the condemnatory clauses were subsequent additions to the doctrinal expositions. We have every reason to believe that such as the Creed is now, such it was when it issued from the hands of its author. In Appendix E. I have reproduced the text as printed by Waterland, with collations made by me from early and ' Above, Part I. chap. i. 4. 4o8 Conclusions. [ch. important MSS. ; but there are some particulars which seem to call for special notice. In verses 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 15, and 17 ^^ is read before Spiritus in most early MSS., but it is omitted in later codices, as also in the printed Breviaries, Roman and Sarum. Verses 20, 21, 22, Pater a nullo . . . sed procedens. These verses are the only portion of the Creed respecting which there can be any question whether they belonged to the original text. They are not quoted in the so-called Fortu natus and Troyes Commentaries. On the other hand, they are found in all the MSS. and are quoted in the other early Commentaries, including the Paris, which may be as early as either the Troyes Commentary or the Fortunatus. Possibly' the two last-named documents may have omitted to quote them, because their doctrinal teaching is in sub stance contained in their comments on the fourth verse. The evidence therefore is in favour of the verses belonging to the original text. The mere fact, moreover, of the omission of a Commentary to notice a particular portion of the document which is its subject-matter, is no proof of its absence from the text. It may be added that the quotation by Theodulf in his work De Spiritu Sancto of these im portant verses concerning the relations of the divine persons together with some other verses of the Creed is alone a sufficient proof that they could not have been inserted in the Creed after or during the controversy respecting the Procession which took place at the end of the eighth and the beginning of the ninth century, but must have belonged to it some considerable time before. For Theodulfs treatise was written early in the ninth century before that controversy had ceased. And the internal evidence, as well as the external, excludes the notion of these verses v.] The Text. 409 being subsequent additions. There is nothing as regards doctrine or style to discriminate them from the rest of the Creed, as the work of a later age or different hand. They are perfectly homogeneous with the rest, being cast in the same mould of Augustinian teaching and phraseology. This is particularly true of the doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son, stated in the twenty-second verse, which was repeatedly asserted by St. Augustine : for instance, ' non tantum a Patre sed et a Filio procedere Spiritum Sanctum,' de Trin. iv. 29, and ' Spiritus quoque Sanctus non sicut creatura, ex nihilo est factus ; sed sic a Patre Filioque procedit, ut nee a Filio nee a Patre sit factus,' Ep. clxx. 4. Verse 22. After the words sed procedens the Milan MS. adds Patri et Filio co-aeternus est. As the addition is sup ported by no other MS. it can be of no significance, and I should not deem it worth noticing but for the strange inference drawn from it by Professor Lumby in his History of the three Creeds, a book which has obtained a wide circulation, especially among young theological students. In his judgement the addition ' is of such a character as to stamp this MS. with a date posterior to the great con troversy on the Procession of the Holy Ghost. It is an expansion and affirmation of the preceding portion of the verse which could hardly be expected before that con troversy had excited a considerable degree of attention, that is at the end of the eighth or beginning of the ninth century I.' This is indeed an astonishing argument, espe cially from such a quarter ! How could an assertion of the doctrine of the co-eternity of the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son be an expan.sion and affirmation of the doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the ' Chap. V. p. 2 1 8, 4IO Conclusions. [ch. Father and the Son, seeing that the two doctrines are perfectly distinct the one from the other ? The position is clearly untenable ; and if it falls, the conclusion built upon it must fall too. And further, the insertion of the words in question in this MS. is easily accounted for. Therein the Athanasian Creed is preceded by the ' Liber de dogmatibus ecclesiasticis ' commonly attributed to Gennadius, and by the ' Bachiarii Fides,' and it is followed, though not imme diately, by the ' Damasi Fides ' erroneously headed ' Hiero nymi Fides.' In all these three Confessions of Faith after the respective statements respecting the Procession of the Holy Spirit, there are found the words Patri ct Filio co-aeternus. The scribe being thus made familiar with them very naturally added them in the other Confession, comprised in his book, to the clause relating to the Holy Spirit. It is almost unnecessary to remark that these Confessions were all prior in date to the eighth century, the ' Bachiarii Fides ' and ' Damasi Fides ' considerably so. The co-eternity of the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son was repeatedly affirmed long before that epoch in opposition to the Arian and Macedonian heresies, particu larly by St. Augustine. Its affirmation therefore in this copy of the Quicunque cannot afford the slightest ground for assigning it to a subsequent date. Verse 25. Unitas in Trinitate et Trinitas in unitate. This is the later reading and is found in Breviaries. Earlier MSS. generally have Trinitas in unitate et unitas in Trinitate, as may be seen by reference to the collations in Appendix E. Verse 28. Deus pariter et homo. This is the reading of Milan O. 212, the Paris MSS. 3848 B, 2076 and 2341, British Museum MSS. Bib. Reg. 2. B.V. and Cotton Galba A. xviii, Vat. Palat. 574, Bodleian Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, v.] The Text. 411 Parker 373 O. 5, and Salisbury 150. It was also originally the reading of Paris 13159 and Parker 391, but in both pariter has been erased, and in Palat. 574 there has been an attempt to erase it. The same erasure appears in the Lambeth MS. 437, a Psalter written in England and assigned to the ninth century. The word is found in the quotations of the verse in all the earlier Commentaries, the Fortunatus so-called, the Troyes, the Paris, and the Oratorian. Considering this together with the fact of its being found in almost all the earlier MSS., it appears clearly to have belonged to the original text. It is a word upon which special stress seems to have been laid in con nexion with the doctrine of the Incarnation at the time of the Nestorian controversy, and hence is a confirmatory indication that the Quicunque is the product of that epoch. Thus St. Vincent of Lerins in his first Commonitorium, sec. xiii : ' Ecclesia Catholica et de Deo et de Salvatore nostro recta sentiens . . . unum Christum lesum, non duos, eun demque Deum pariter atque hominem confitetur.' And St. Cyril's Apologetieus pro duodecim- capitibus in the con temporary Latin translation by Marius Mercator represents ' Orthodoxus ' as saying in reference to the Tenth Anathe matism : ' Cur non magis unum eundemque et Deum esse dicunt et hominem, ut omnia sint ipsius et divina pariter et humana -^ ? ' Also St. Cyril's Scholia de Incarnatione Unigeniti according to Marius Mercator's translation, cap. xiii : ' Discernere cupientes quid sit tandem incarnatum esse et hominem factum Dei Verbum, cernimus quod non hoc est hominem assumere tanquam in coniunctione, . . . magis autem fieri iuxta nos hominem (ita tamen ut nulla conversio vel commutatio subsequatur) et sublevare pariter cum sua natura eum, qui in adsumptione fuit carnis et ' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xlviii. 959. 412 Conclusions. [ch. sanguinis dispensative ^.' The ' Deus pariter et homo ' of the Creed precisely corresponds with the expression re peatedly used by St. Cyril, ©eo? dpov koi dvOpooiros, so that the former might be a translation of the latter. It only remains to add that pariter is generally omitted in later MSS. and in Breviaries. Verse 33. Unus autem, non conversione Divinitatis in cai'nem, sed assumptione humanitatis in Deum. By reference to the collations of the text in Appendix E, it will be seen that the early MSS. generally read iit carne and in Deo instead of in carnem and in Deum which are found in the received text. The Vatican MS. however, Palat. 574, likewise an early MS., being of the ninth century, has the latter readings, of course in the usual abbreviated forms in came and in dm ; and that these were the original readings is shown in a very marked manner by the fact of an attempt having been made to change the m in dfii into 0. The evidence of this codex I venture to consider specially valuable on account of its apparent connexion with Lerins ^. These readings are also found in the St. Gallen MS. 27, a Psalter of the ninth century ; they are also the readings of the Oratorian Commentary according to the Vatican MS. from which it is edited by Mai, but the Troyes MS. has in carne and in Deo : the text, however, of that Commentary in the former codex is clearly preferable to that of the latter ^. The Bouhier Commentary has in carnem in Troyes 1979, the earliest of the three MSS. from which I have printed it, itt carne in the two others, Troyes 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24902 ; in all three it has in Deum *. The so-called Fortunatus Commentary has in carne and in Deo I believe in all MSS., and they are the ' Migne, Patrol. Latina, tom. xlviii. p. 1016. * See Part I. iii. 12. ^ See Appendix H. ' See Appendix I, v.] The Text. 413 readings also of the Paris Commentary : they are supported too by the Troyes Commentary, which has ' non con versione Divinitatis in carne neque humanitatis in Divini tate.' Down to the eleventh century the same readings occur in most MSS. But subsequently in carnem and in Deum became usual ; in Breviaries, manuscript and printed, I believe they are always found. The readings in carne and in Deo are clearly an im portant variation, affecting the sense. It is necessary to consider whether or not they should be regarded as the true readings which issued from the hand of the author. They were not so esteemed by Waterland ^, although he was unacquainted with the Vatican MS. Palat. 574. I venture to submit that he was right, that that MS. and the St. Gallen codex have preserved for us the true readings. I think so, firstly, because in carnem and in Deum are in accordance with the doctrinal terminologyof St. Augustine, which is followed generally in the Creed : secondly, because they are also in accordance with the terminology prevalent at the epoch when in all probability it was produced ; and lastly, because they yield incomparably the best and most intelligible meaning. In support of my first reason let me adduce the following passages from the writings of the great Latin Father: 'Verbum caro factum est, a Divinitate carne suscepta, non in carnem Divinitate mutata.' Enchir. cap. xxxiv. 10. '/« unitatem personae Unigeniti assumptus est homo.' Tractatus in loan. Evan. Ixxiv. 3. ' Dei Filius factus est hominis filius, assumptione inferioris, non conver sione potioris, accipiendo quod non erat, non amittendo quod erat.' Ser. clxxxvi. cap. 11. Passages to the same effect may be found in Ser. clxxxvii. cap. iii, Enchir. cap. xxxvi, and Epis. cxlix. 7. Secondly, precisely similar ' See his note in loco. 414 Conclusions. [ ch. to this phraseology was that used by the Catholics in con tending against Nestorius. Thus St. Vincent of Lerins : ' Mutabile non est Verbum Dei ut ipsum verteretur in carnem ' ; and ' Absit ut . . . Deus Verbum . . . personam hominis suscepisse credatur, sed ita potius ut incommu- tabili sua manente substantia, et in se perfecti hominis suscipiendo naturam ipse caro, ipse homo . . . existeret.' Commonitorium, i. 13 and 14. What St. Cyril specially insisted upon was the Unity of Christ's Person — that ' the Logos from God the Father hypostatically,' i. e. in Person, 'united Himself with flesh,' i.e. human nature, ' and with that which has become His own flesh is one Christ, the same Person, as is clear, at once God and man ^.' The oneness of Christ was not the effect of a conversion of the Godhead into flesh : for in vindicating himself from the charge of Apollinarianism brought against him more than once by Nestorius, he repeatedly and emphatically dis claimed the teaching of any such doctrine ^ Rather it rested upon this ground, that the Word ' became partaker of flesh and blood . . . and came forth man from woman, not having cast away the Divine essence and the generation from God the Father, but even in the assumption of flesh continuing to be what He was ^.' Such was the union of the two natures that, although they retained their several distinctive properties, ' in Christ in a wonderful manner ^ 2ap/ci Ka9' viroffraoiv i]Vwa9aL tov iK @€ov Tlarpos, "kva re ^vai Xptffrbv fxerd TTjS iSias aapKos, rbv avrbv SrjXovoTi Qebv bfzov teal dv9pwiTov. The words of his second Anathematism. ^ For instance ; Oiire . . . ttjv odpKa cpafxiv ets 9e6TrjTos rpairrjvai cpvaiv, ovre fj.rjv oapKos ety (pvoiv Trjv diropprjTov Seov A6yov irapavex^Tivai (pvffiv, drpeiTTOS ydp ioTi Kal dvaXXoiuTos. S. Cyrilli ad Nestoriujn tertia Epistola. He denies, it will be observed, the change of the Divine nature aapKos tis 2076, Vat. 82 and 84, B. M. Reg. 2. B. v, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, C.U.L. F. f. I. 23, Parker 272 O. 5, and U. P. all read trinitas in unitate et unitas in trinitate; Palat. 574 has trinitas in unitatem et unitas in trinitatem, but the m both in unitatem and trinitatem seems to be an after-addition. 26. ergo in Palat. 574 is written above the line, no doubt omitted originally. 476 Appendix. 27. Sed necessarium est ad aeternam salutem, ut Incarna tionem quoque Domini nostri lesu Christi fidehter credat. 28. Est ergo fides recta, ut credamus et confiteamur, quia Domi nus noster lesus Christus, Dei Fihus, Deus pariter et homo est. 29. Deus est ex substantia Patris ante saecula genitus, homo ex substantia matris in saeculo natus. 30. Perfectus Deus, perfectus homo ex anima rationali et humana carne subsistens. 31. Aequahs Patri secundum divinitatem, minor Patre se cundum humanitatera. 32. Qui licet Deus sit et homo, non duo tamen sed unus est Christus. 33. Unus autem, non conversione divinitatis in carnem, sed adsumptione humanitatis in Deum. 27. est is omitted in Paris 13159. salutem is repeated in Paris 2076. The same MS. has huamatione, the mark of contraction over e being omitted. quoque was omitted originally in Palat. 574, but has been inserted above. After Christi, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88 adds unusquisque, 28. Paris 1451 and 2076, also S.C.L. 150, insert et before Deus. pariter is omitted in Paris 13159 and 1451, Vat. 82 and 84, C.U.L. F. f. i. 23, Parker 391, B. M. Cotton Galba A. xviii, and U.P., but in Paris 13159 and Parker 391 it has evidently been erased, as appears by the hiatus aiter Deus. In Palat. 574 there has been an attempt to erase it. 29. ante saecula genitus omitted in the text of Milan O. 212, but written in the margin in another hand, et is inserted before Aooto in Paris 13159, 1451, 2076, Vat. 82 and 84, Palat. 574, B. M. Reg. 2. B. v, and Galba A. xviii, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, Parker 272. O. 5, S.C.L. 150, and U.P. est is added after homo in Milan 0. 212, Paris 13159, 1451, 2076, Vat. 82 and 84, Palat. 574, B. M. Reg. 2. B. V, and Cotton Galba A. xviii, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, Parker 272 O. 5, and U.P. In Parker 391 there are evidences of erasure both before and after homo, from which it would appear that et homo est was the original reading, m saeculo: Paris 13159, B. M. 2. B. 1, and C.U.L. F. f. I. 23, in saecula; Palat. 574 in saeculum. 30. rationali: Milan O. 212 rationabili; Paris 13159 and Palat. 574 rationale, humana carne: S.C.L. 150 human^ carn^, Paris 1451 umana. 31. In Palat. 574 the letter j has been added by a later hand to Patri. secundum: Paris 1451 sedum, the error being the result possibly of the omission of the mark of contraction over e. Patre: Paris 13159, 1451, and 3076, B. M. Cotton Galba A. xviii, and V. 'P. patri. 33. conversione: Milan O. 212 evidently had originally conversatione, and this is the reading of S. C. L. 150. In the former MS. the letters at have been erased, leaving a hiatus between s and i ; in the latter a corrector has written the letter i above the s; Palat. 574 reads conversionem, i. e. conversione with Appendix. 477 34. Unus omnino, non confusione substantiae, sed unitate personae. 35. Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus. 36. Qui passus est pro salute nostra, descendit ad inferos, tertia die resurrexit a mortuis. 37. Adscendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris, inde ven turus iudicare vivos et mortuos. 38. Ad cuius adventum omnes homines resurgere habent cum corporibus suis, et reddituri sunt de factis propriis rationem, the mark of contraction over the final e : this may possibly be by the later hand which has clearly made several additions in this MS. ; C.U.L. F. f. i. 23 has confusione. carnem and Deum: Milan O. 212, Paris 13159, 1451, 3848 B, 2076, and 2341, B. M. Reg. 2. B. v, and Cotton Galba A, xviii, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, Parker 272. O. 5, S. C. L. 150, and U. P. all read carne and deo. adsumptione: Paris 131 59 adsuptione, probably owing to the inadvertent omission of the mark of contraction over the letter u ; Palat. 574 read originally adsumptionem, but the final m has been erased. 34. unitate personae: Paris 1451 and 2076 unitatis persone, but unitatis has been partially erased in the latter MS. 35. rationalis: Milan O. 212 rationabilis. 36. salute nostra : Paris 2076 salutem nostram, the mark of contraction being inadvertently added over the final e and a; U. P. has saluta. tertia die : omitted in Milan O. 212, Paris 13159, 1451, and 2076, Palat. 574, B. M. Cotton Galba A. xviii, and Parker 391. In the last MS. the words appear to have been erased, resurrexit: Milan O. 212, Paris 1451 and 2341 surrexit; this also was evidently the original reading in Palat. 574, but re has been added above by a later hand. 37. sedet: Milan O. 212, Paris 13159, 1451, 3848 B, 2076, B. M. Reg. 2. B.V, Parker 391, and U.P. read sedit. ad dexteram : Paris 13159 a dexteram. After ad dexteram, Paris 13159, 1451, 3848 B, and 2076, Vat. 82 and 84, B, M. Reg. 2. B. V, and Cotton Galba A. xviii, B. L., Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, C.U.L. F. f. I. 23, Parker 391 and 272. O. 5, S.C.L. 150, and U.P.addiJe/; the same MSS. after Patris add omnipotentis. In Palat. 574 Dei has been inserted above Patris, but was evidently not part of the original text. In the same MS. the words omnipotentis, Inde venturus iudicare vivos et mortuos are omitted from the text, but they are written, apparently in a different hand, in a note at the foot of the page. Inde venturus iudicare vivos et mortuos were probably omitted through mere inadvertence, but in all probability omni potentis was absent from the text which the copyist followed, as well as Dei. After venturus Vat. 82 and 84, B. M. Reg. i. B. v, and S.C.L. 150 add est. For et mortuos Milan O. 2 1 2 reads ac mortuos. 38. cum: Milan O. 212 in. Waterland asserts that the words resurgere habent cum corporibus suis et are wanting in the Milan Ambrosian MS., but in 478 Appendix. 39. Et qui bona egerunt, ibunt in vitam aeternam; qui vero mala, in ignem aeternum. 40. Haec est Fides Catholica, quam nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque crediderit, salvus esse non poterit. F. Copy of the first Commentary on the Athanasian Creed contained in Troyes 804, and entitled, ' Expositio fidei catholicae! Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat catholi cam fidem. Fides dicitur credulitas sive credentia : Catholica vero universalis vocatur, quod ab universa ecclesia tenere oportet. Ecclesia autem est congregatio fidelium, sive conventus fidelium populi. Fides vera haec est, ut credamus et confiteamur unum et verum Deum in Trinitate et Trinitatem in Unitate ; neque con fundentes personas ut Sabellius hereticus, qui ipsum dixit esse Patrem in persona quem et Filium, ipsum Filium quem et Spiritum Sanctum. Fides autetn catholica est nee personas con- fundere neque Deitatem separare, quoniam tres personae, una vero Divinitas, Deitatis. Est enim gignens, genitus, et procedens : gignens est Pater, qui genuit Filium ; Filius vero est a Patre ; Spiritus autem Sanctus nee genitus, quia non est Fihus, neque ingenitus quoniam non est Pater, sed ex Patre et Filio procedens. Quae tres personae. Pater videlicet et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus, consubstantiales sibi sunt et co-aeternae et co-aequales atque co- operatores, de quibus in Psalmo scriptum est : Verbo Domini this, as in some other particulars, he was obviously misled by Muratori's collation. 39. ibunt: Palat. 574 hibunt. Before qui B. M. Reg. 2. B. v, C.U.L. F. f. 1. 23, and U.P. insert et; in Palat. 574 it has been added above qui. vero is omitted in Milan O. 212, Paris 13159, and U.P. mala: Paris 2076 malum. Mttr aeternam Paris 145 1 adds erunt in resurrectionem vit^; and just before erunt there appear the letters sa with a line drawn through them, as if the scribe had begun to write some word commencing with those letters, as salvi or salvabunlur. 40. Fides in Paris 145 1 is written twice. The same MS. reads chatholica ?L.T^6. firmiterquae. Appendix. 479 caeli firmati sunt, et spiritu oris eius omnes virtus eorum '. In persona quippe Domini Pater intellegitur, in Verbo vero eius Filius accipitur, in spiritu autem oris eius ipse Spiritus Sanctus designatur. Quae tres personae deitatis et singillatim tres sunt et singulariter substantiae ^ unum existant, non essentiae divisg ^, sicut Arrius impie predicare ausus est, qui sicut tres personas in Deum ¦• esse credidit, ita et tres substantias commentatus est ^. Filium Dei minorem esse dixit Patri, non de substantia eius genitum, sed ex nichilo temporaliter creatum ; Spiritum autem Sanctum similiter non creatorem sed creaturam plus quam minorem quam Filium, et Patris et Filii ministrum asserunt"', et ideo non creatorem cum Patre et Filio neque verum Deum eundem Spiritum Sanctum, sed creaturam, ut dictum antea, pre dicare ausus est ; quasi quosdam gradus impietatis suae in Deum, qui unus est, arbitratus, Patrem scilicet, ut aurum, Filium vero, quasi argentum, Spiritum autem Sanctum eramentum '- Nos autem impietatem eius anathematizantes credimus et confitemur aliam esse personam Patris, quem ingenitum ideo appellamus, quia a nullo est genitus, aliam personam Filii, quia Patre solus est genitus, aliam vero personam Spiritus Sancti, qui neque in- ' In the Vulgate, Ps. xxxii. 6. ^ go (he MS. ' e with a cedilla is often written for ae. * Several times in this Commentary the accusative case is used where we should have expected the ablative — ' duas voluntates atque operationes in singularitatem personae ' — ' non duos Christos neque duas personas ... in eum credere oportet' — and elsewhere. This note of barbarous Latinity appears in other writings of the age : in Paris 3836, a MS. of the eighth century, we have 'omnia facta sunt sive quae in caelo sive que in terram ' ; and in Paris 1451, a MS. belonging to the commencement of the ninth century, 'in nicenum con cilium fuerunt damnati arrius et fotinus et sabellius.' * In the corresponding passage in Fortunatus' Commentary we have ' tres substantias esse mentitur.' 'Commentatus est 'gives an equally good sense — invented, devised. ' Asserunt is probably a copyist's error for asseruit. ' 'Opus ex acre confectum' Ducange, Glossarium sub voce aeramentum. The analogy of the three substances of gold, silver, and brass, as representing the Arian doctrine of the Trinity, is found in St. Augustine, de A gone Christiano, lib. i. cap. XV, and in the Synodical Epistle of St. Athanasius and the Council of Alexandria held A. D. 362 : % Siairep Siacfiupovs ovaias, Siaiitp Ictt! xP^"^^ ^ dpyvpos ^ x'^'^^^t ovToj ual airol Xtyojatv. S. Athanasii 7'omus ad Antio- chenos, 5 ; Opera, tom. i. p. 773, edit. 1698. 480 Appendix. genitus, ut Pater, neque genitus, ut Filius, sed ex Patre Filioque procedit. Et in his tribus personis, Patris videlicet et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, una est essentia divinitatis, aequalis gloria, co aeterna maiestas, unita potestas communisque operatio. Qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis et Spiritus Sanctus. Increatus Pater, increatus Filius, increatus et Spiritus Sanctus ; hoc est, a nullo creatus. Inmensus Pater, inmensus Filius, inmensus et Spiritus Sanctus ; quia metiri omnino non possunt. Incircumscriptus Pater, incircumscriptus Fihus, incircumscriptus Spiritus Sanctus ; quia non loco continentur, sed ubique presentes existunt. In visibihs Pater, invisibihs Fihus, invisibihs et Spiritus Sanctus; quia videri a nullo queunt : Aeternus Pater, aeternus Filius, aeternus et Spiritus Sanctus; non tamen tres aeterni, sed unus aeternus, neque initium habens, neque fine concluditur. Omni potens Pater, omnipotens Filius, omnipotens et Spiritus Sanctus ; non tamen tres omnipotentes, sed unus omnipotens, quia omnia que vult potest. Hoc enim non potest, quod non vult, hoc est, quod non expedit. Veritas est, quia falli omnino non potest. Virtus est, quoniam infirmari omnino non potest. Vita est, quia mori nullo modo potest, Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus et Spiritus Sanctus ; non tamen tres dii, sed unus est Deus. Deus enim nomen est potestatis, non proprietatis. Proprium nomen est Patri, quod Pater est ; proprium nomen est Filio, quod Filius est ; et proprium nomen est Spiritus Sancti Spiritus Sanctus. Ita Dominus Pater, Dominus Filius, Dominus et Spiritus Sanctus ; non tamen tres Domini, sed unus est Dominus. Dominus autem ideo appellatur pro eo quod omnera creaturam caeli ac terrg dominetur. Sicut enim singillatim, ut dictum est, utiam quamque personam et Deum et Dominum digne confiteri Christiana veritate compellimur, ita tres Deos vel tres Dominos credere, ut predicare, auctoritate divina et ratione veritatis prohibemur. Si autem quis- libet quempiam ex doctoribus interrogare voluerit, quid sit Pater ; ratione veritatis et auctoritate divina, ut dictum est ; respondere illi necesse est, Deus et Dominus. Similiter si inquirat, quid est Filius ; respondere illi oportet, Deus et Dominus, sicut et Pater. Si autem sciscitetur ab eo, quid sit et Spiritus Sanctus ; similiter ei respondere convenit, Deus et Dominus, quemadmodum Pater et Filius. Sed in his tribus personis non tres Deos neque tres Appendix. 481 Dominos, sed unum Deum et unum Dominum esse confirmet. Unus ergo Pater, qui nunquam fuit sine Filio, non tres Patres. Unus est Filius co-aeternus Patri, non tres Filii. Unus est Spiritus Sanctus ex Patre et Filio procedens, non tres Spiritus Sancti, neque posterior aut inferior vel minor Patri et Filio, a quibus procedit. Et in hac sancta Trinitate deitatis nichil prius nichil posterius nichilque inferius aut inaequale, sed toti tres personae, ut dictum est, co aeterna sibi sunt et quo-aequales et consubstantiales atque insepa- rabiles. Sed quia omnipotens Deus ita invisibihs est ut a mortali creatura, id est, ab homine videri omnino, sicuti est, non possit, idcirco a mundi creatura quantulacunque comparatione ad Deum nobis adtrahere convenit apostolica auctoritate informati \ qua dicit : Invisibilia enim ipsius mundi creatura, que facta sunt intel lectu conspiciuntur, sempiterna quoque eius virtus ''. Solis, qui cum sit unus in natura, tres habere videtur efficientias ; id est, sol, splendor, et calor. Tria quidem vocabula, sed res una est. Splendor quoque illuminat, calor vero exurit. Haec duo ita in sole naturaliter consistunt, ut unum absque alio, et utrumque sine tertio esse non possint ; quia neque splendor sine calore, neque calor sine splendore, neque utrumque, id est, splendor et calor sine splendore ^ fieri possunt *. Quod etiam de natura ignis prudens ' .So the MS. * In this quotation from Rom. i. 20 the copyist has inadvertently omitted the preposition a before mundi and per ea before que. Something too must have been omitted before solis. ' Obviously for ' sole,' — the error being attributable, like the omissions just noticed, to the carelessness of the copyist. * This illustration of the doctrine of the Trinity is found also in the Com mentary attributed to Fortunatus, which has, according to the Milan and Paris copies, ' sol, candor, calor ; tria sunt vocabula, et tria unum.' It is found also in the Rhythms of S. Ephrem Syrus : ' Look at the sun in his height, which is thought to be one ; descend, and look, and behold in his light, a second ; try, and feel, and search his heat, a third. They are like, and yet not like one to another. . . . Light also and the sun are individual subsistences ; there are in them three kinds, mingled in a threefold way, himself, and also the light, and the heat the third, dwelling one in the other, and agieeing without grudging.' Rhythm xi. § i ; Select Works of S. Ephrem, Oxford translation, p. 232. Also in Rhythm Ixxiii. § 1 : ' Lo, there is a similitude between the sun and the Father, the radiance and the Son, the heat, and the Holy Ghost ; and though it be one, a Trinity is beheld in it.' Ibid. p. 339. On the first of these passages the learned translator and editor remarks in a note, ' The use of the I i 482 Appendix. contemplator colligere potest. Ita Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus tres proculdubio extant personae, sed individua maiestate Deitatis et gloria aeternitatis. Fides autem catholica haec est, ut credamus et confiteamur, quia Dominus noster Ihesus Christus Dei Patris est Filius, Deus pariter et homo est ' ; Deus scilicet ex Patre sine initio, homo vero ex matre a certo initio, unus atque idem Filius Dei ; aequalis Patri secundum Divinitatem, minor vero Patri iuxta humanitatem ; co-aeternus Patri in Divinitatem, contemporalis vero matri erga humanitatem, consuhstantialis matri in assumptam humanitatem ; similis Patri per omnia secun dum Divinitatem, dissimilis vero omni creaturae, consimilis autem nobis hominibus in humanitate, excelsior vero omni creaturae caeli ac terrae ; unus atque idem Ihesus Christus Dominus ac redemptor noster. Cuius nominis aetimologia hgc est. Ihesus Ebreo sermone Latine salvator sive salutaris interpretatur. Christus autem Hebraice Messias vocatur, Greca vero lingua Christus dicitur, Latine vero unctus appellatur. Ihesus autem ideo nuncupatur pro eo quod ipse salvum facit populum suum. Christus autem secundum humanitatem ideo vocatur, quia Spiritu Sancto a Patre unctus est, sicut ex ipsius Christi persona Esaias Propheta ait : Spiritus Domini super me, propter quod unxit me'' ; et in Psalmo Propheta ad ipsum Christum Dominum : Sedes tua, Deus, in saeculum saeculi ; virga equitatis virga regni tui ; dilexisti iustitiam et odisti iniquitatem ; propterea unxit te Deus ; Deus tuus, oleo letitiae pre consortibus titis^. Unctus Deus, Filius Dei, a Patre et Spiritu Sancto, non in Divinitatis essentia, sed in humanitate assumpta. Duas quippe in Christo credimus esse naturas, duasque formas, duasque nativitates, duas etiam volun tates atque operationes in singularitatem personae. De prima sun as furnishing by its light a type of the Father generating the Son is very frequent indeed in the Fathers. The use made of it here and R. Ixxiii. § i is much less frequent : indeed, I am not able to furnish any other instance of a passage exactly parallel, as they speak rather of the Holy Spirit, as Light of Light, than as heat of Light.' The illustration being so rare, its appearance in these two Commentaries is one proof among many of the close connexion between them. ' This Commentary, it will be observed, like that of Fortunatus, passes over the twenty-fifth, twenty-sixth, and twenty-seventh verses of the Creed. 2 Isai. Ixi. I. °' In the Vulgate, Ps. xliv. 7, 8. Appendix. 483 quippe nativitate eius, qug secundum Divinitatem ex Patre est, David Propheta ex persona Patris ad Filium ait : Ex utero ante luciferum genui te ^. Ex utero inquit, hoc est, de mea substantia ; ante luciferum, id est, ante omnem creaturam. De secunda vero generatione eius, qug iuxta humanitatem temporalis facta est, beatus Paulus Apostolus sua nos informans auctoritate. At uti venit, inquit, plenitudo temporis, misit Deus Filium suum, factum ex muliere, factum sub lege, ut eos, qui sub lege erant, redimeret, ut adoptionem filiorum reciperemus ^. De prima generatione, qug secundum Deitatem est, Esaias Propheta clamat : Generalionem eius quis enarrabit^ 1 De generatione autem eius, qug secundum carnem est, Mattheus Evangelista scripsit : Liber generationis Ihesu Christi, filii David, filii Abraam*. De duabus vero volun- tatibus in eo ipse sibi Dei Filius testis est, qui tempore passionis suae Patrem efflagitans ait : Pater, si fieri potest, transeat a me cali.x iste ; veriimtamen non sicut ego volo, sed sicut tu ", Pater. Similiter et de duabus operationibus qui nosse cupit, ex evan gelica predicatione plenius scire potest. Idcirco autem Dei Filius, qui verus Deus est ex Patre, verus homo dignatus est fieri ex matre ^, ex anima rationabili et carne consistentibus suis in singularitate person?, ut totum hominem ex anima rationabili et carne mortali subsistente '', qui in Adam peccando perierat, per suam passionem ac mortem de mortis potestate redimeret, et per resurrectionem suam aeternae vitae participem efficeret. Non sicut ApoUinaris hereticus predicare ausus est, qui eundem ' In the Vulgate, Ps. cix. 3. ^ Galat. iv. 4, 5. = Isai. liii. 8. * S. Matt. i. 1. ° S. Matt. xxvi. 39. ^ The terms verus Deus, verus homo are repeatedly used, it may be observed, in this as well as the Fortunatus Commentary, in reference to our blessed Lord. It has been said that this terminology was not introduced till after the Adop tionist controversy, which may be assigned lo the end of the eighth century. The untruth of the assertion might be abundantly proved : but it will be sufficient to quote two passages fiom so early a writer as St. Hilary of Poictiers : ' lesus Christus . . . homo ac Deus . . . habens in se et totum verumque quod homo est, et totum verumque quod Deus est ' [de Trin. x. § 19), and 'Nescit vitam suam, nescit, qui Christum lesum ut verum Deum ita et verum hominem ignorat ' (ibid. ix. § 3). ' The mark of contraction over the final e has been evidently omitted by an oversight : with it the reading would have been ' subsistentem.' I i 3 484 Appendix. F'ilium ' animam non habuisse asseruit ; hoc tamen rationabile ex- istimans, quod Divinitas ei suflSceret pro ratione. Catholica vero fides eundem Dei Filium Dominum ac redemptorem nostrum, sicut verum Deum ex Patre, ut dictum est, ita et verum hominem ex matre animam habere rationabilem et carnem cum sensibus suis credit et confitetur. Qui licet Deus sit et homo, non tamen duos Christos neque duas personas neque duos filios Dei in eum credere oportet, sed unum Christum unumque Dei Filium in duabus, ut dictum est, naturis; singularis vero persona^- Sicut enim quilibet homo, ex anima rationabili et carne mortali subsistens, non duo sed unus est homo, ita et Christus, et Deus et homo in unitatem personae, non duo sed unus est Christus ; unus salvator mundi ac redemptor humani generis : aequalis Patri in forma Dei, minor vero ei in forma servi, creator matris suae et dominus secundum potentiam Divinitatis, creatus vero ex ipsa filius iuxta humani tatem ''. Nam simul ex ea Deus et homo absque ulla corruptione gemina substantia, simplici autem persona, non conversione Divi nitatis in cartie neque humanitatis in Divinitate : id est, neque Divinitas, que immutabilis est, in humanitatem conversa est, neque humanitas in Divinitatem *. Tenent igitur in eo in singu- ' In the MS. a blank space has been left here. The sense seems to require lationabilem. " The passage seems almost borrowed from St. Augustine — 'non duo Christi sunt, nee duo filii Dei, sed una persona, unus Christus Dei filius idemque unus Christus.' S. Aug. Ser. ccxciv. § 9. ' Two remarks suggest themselves here. First, that the Commentator, while clearly following the verse of the Creed commencing aequalis Patri, has substituted for secundum Divinitatem and secundum humanitatem, which we have in the Creed, expressions borrowed from St. Paul, Philip, ii. 6, 7— z« forma Dei and in forma servi. And then the very remarkable antithesis, intro duced here as a comment, is clearly derived from the same source as the verse itself^the writings of St. Augustine. We find, ' Erat ante carnem suam. Ipse creavit matrem suam. Elegit, in qua conciperetur ; creavit, de qua crearetur^ S, Aug. Ser. cxix. 6 ; apud Migne, Patrol. Lat. Also ' Proinde quod ad Verbum adtinet, Creator tit Christus ; omnia enim per ipsum facta sunt. Quod vero ad hominem, creatus est Christus. Factus enim ex semine David secundum carnem^ Ibid, de Praesentia Dei, liber seu Epist. clxxxvii. 8. Again, ' Filius hominis . . . nee sic assumptus ut prius creatus post assumeretur, sed ut ipsa as sumptione crearetur.^ Ibid. Contra sermonem Arianorum liber units, cap. viii. * The MS. certainly has humanitatem here : it is written humanitate with the mark of contraction over the e, which indicates of course the omission of Appendix. 485 laritate personae utrfque naturae absque ulla convertibilitate proprietates suas, Dei scilicet quod Dei est et hominis quod homo est. Sicut enim in essentiam Divinitatis unum sunt ^ cum Patre, ipso dicente : Ego et Pater unum sumus ', ita in natura humanitatis unum est cum Ecclesia; quia idem Christus Dominus cum Ecclesia Catholica, quae est sponsa eius et caput et corpus, unus est Christus, Apostolo hoc affirmante atque dicente : Propter hoc relinquet homo patrem et matrem et adherebit uxori suae, et erunt duo in carne una. Sacramentum hoc magnum est ; ego autem dico in Christo et in Ecclesia '. Hoc autem ideo Dominus fieri voluit, ne in Trinitate, quod absit, quaternitas intromittatur ; quemadmodum Nestorius hereticus impie predicare ausus est, qui dixit beatam Mariam virginem non Deum et hominem genuisse *, in quo homine postea propter meritum sanctitatis Divinitatem Filii Dei habitasse, sicut et in ceteris Sanctis. Ac per hoc, non unam, sed duas in Christo asserunt " esse personas, et introduxit in Trinitatem quaternitatem : cuius impia professio procul absit a cordibus fidelium ". Nos autera credere oportet saepedictum Dei Filium secundum Divinitatem invisibihter in utero virginis Mariae introisse, et veram carnem ex substantia eiusdem virginis Mariae, quam cum Patre et Spiritu Sancto creavit, quasi quoddam vestimentum ' in singularitate personae the final m. This leads us to suppose that the Commentator read carnem in the quotation from the Creed, but that he or the copyist omitted inadvertently the mark of contraction over the e, thus changing the word into carne. This comment may be compared with the following passage of St. Cyril's third Epistle to Nestorius, as translated by Dionysius Exiguus : * Nee carnem dicimus in naturam Deitatis esse conversam, nee in substantiam carnis ineffabilem Dei Verbi essentiam commutatam.' Routh, Scripioi-um Ecclesiaslicorum Opuscula, tom. ii. p. 38. See also S. Aug. de Trin. i. 14. ' So the MS., clearly for ' est.' ' S. Joh. x, 30. ^ Ephes. V. 31, 32. * 'sed hominem' no doubt should have been written. ' Nestorius beatam Mariam virginem non Dei, sed hominis tantummodo credidit genitricem.' S. Leo, ad Leonem Augustina. ^ So the MS. ; probably a clerical error for asseruit. " Fortunatus' Commentary has — ' ne propter adsumptionem humanae carnis dicatur esse quaternitas, quod absit a fidelium cordibus vel sensibus dici aut cogitari.' ' So St. Gregory in Ezekiel, lib. ii. Hom. i. 9 : ' Quid enim vestimentum eius, nisi corpus quod assumsit ex virgine ? ' 486 Appendix. suae ita unisse, ut nee Deus sine homine nee homo absque Deo fieri omnino ' potuisset ; et ita in utraque natura et una persona incorruptibiliter ex ea natum. Et idcirco iam dictara virginem Mariam non hominis tantum, sed Dei et hominis, genitricem credimus et confitemur ; quia Dei Filius, non personam hominis, sed naturam ex ea assumpsit humanitatis ; quia nequaquam con- ceptio carnis in virginis utero Divinitatis praevenit adventu ''¦, sed Divinitas praevenit virginis conceptum ; quam humanam naturam tota Trinitas in utero virginis creavit, sed solus Filius in singularitate person? suae suscepit atque univit. Idcirco autem Dei Filius naturam humani generis, id est, perfectum hominem absque peccato de virgine suscipere dignatus est, ut per eandem naturam, quae in paradiso a diabolo decepta montem incurrerat ; rursum eundem diabolum, non potentia Divinitatis, sed ratione iustitiae vinceret et prostraret, et per indebitam mortem suara debitam mortem nostram evacuaret, et credentibus sibi perpetuam vitam condonaret ; quatinus et diabolus per iustitiam victus cederet, et, quos iniuste retinebat, amitteret, et humanum genus, non merito suo, seu libero arbitrio, sed sola gratia misericordiae salvaretur. Et ideo ob redemptionem humani generis, ut dictum est, Divinitatis suae potentia passus est, in carne mortuus, et sepultus est in eadem carne. Secundum aniraara descendit ad itifernum. Secundum virtutem Divinitatis suae die tertia in eadem carne, in qua mortuus fuerat, vivus resurrexit. Post resurrectionem vero suam per dies xl multis modis discipulis suis se vivum exhibuit, atque ad palpandum prebuit, et ad confirmandam eorum fidem, et hereticorum de- struendam perfidiam, qui eum negant veram carnem in caelo levasse ^, cibum petiit, et coram eis comedit : quadragesimo vero die post resurrectionem suam, videntibus apostolis suis, ascendit ' ' omnino' is written in small letters above the line. ' Thus the MS. The mark of abbreviation over the u has probably been omitted through inadvertence. ^ The Apellitae taught that Christ left His body dissolved in the air, and so ascended into heaven without it: 'Hunc Apellem dicunt quidam etiam de Christo tam falsa sensisse, ut diceret eum non quidem carnem deposnisse de caelo, sed ex elementis mundi accepisse, quam mundo reddidit, cum sine carne resurgens in caelum ascendit.' S. Aug. de Haeresilms, xxiii. See Pearson on the Creed, note on the Article ' He ascended into Heaven.' Appendix. 487 in caelum, et sedet ad dexteram Patris, id est, regnat in gloriam et beatitudinem sempiternam. Quem inde venturum ad faciendum indicium vivorum et mortuorum in ipso mundi termino sustinemus in eadem forma humanitatis et vera carne, in qua ascendit, sed glorificata, non infirma aut despecta, sicut in primo adventu, cum venit occultus, ut iudicaretur, sed, ut dictum est, in gloriam Patris et suam, non ut iudicetur, sed iudicet et reddet ' unicuique secundum opus suum. De cuius adventu secundo in libro apocalypsin scriptum est : Ecce veniet cum nubibus caeli, et videbit eum omnis oculus, et qui ilium pupugerunt'' ; ipse quoque in evangelio de suo adventu ait : Cum venerit filius hominis in maiestate sua, et omnes angeli cum eo ' ,• et iterum ipse : Verum- tamen filius hominis veniet^, putas inveniet fidem in terra ^1 In cuius adventu ad angelicam tubam omnes defuncti a primo homine Adam usque ad ultimum, qui in fine mundi obiturus erit, tam pii, quam impii, tam iusti, quam etiam iniusti secundum apostolicam auctoritatem in ictu oculi in eadem carne, in qua vixerunt, et in qua bona vel mala gesserunt, et in qua mortui sunt, resurgere habent, non naturam aut sexum mutantes, id est, neque vir in sexum femineum, neque mulier in virili forma, sed unusquisque, ut dictum est, in propria forma atque sexu, in qua vixit et mortuus fuit, resurrecturus erit, ut in eadem carne, in qua bona vel mala gesserunt, recipiat unusquisque quod meretur ". ' So the MS. 2 Apoc. i. 7. ' S. Matt. xxv. 31. ' Clearly an error for ' veniens,' the scribe probably being misled by ' in veniet ' immediately after. In the MS. the corrector has inserted ns after ' veniet.' ^ S. Luc. xviii. 8. ' The doctrine here maintained respecting the continuance in the future life of the distinction of the sexes had been clearly asserted by St. Jerome : ' Ego libere dicam et . . . fidem Ecclesiae apertissime confitebor. Resurrectionis Veritas sine carne et ossibus, sine sanguine et membris, intelligi non i:)otest. Ubi caro et ossa et sanguis et membra sunt, ibi necesse est ut sexus diversus sit, Ubi sexus diversus est, ibi loannes, loannes, Maria, Maria. Noli timere eorum nuptias, qui etiam ante mortem in sexu suo sine sexus opere vixerunt.' Again : ' Angelorum nobis similitudo promittitur, id est, beatitudo ilia, in qua sine carne et sexu sunt Angeli, nobis in carne et sexu nostro donabitur.' S, Hieronymi liber con. loannem Hierosolymitanum, cap. xxxi ; Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. xxiii. p. 383. Of the eight errors of Origen against which this book of St. Jerome's was directed, the fifth was ' quod carnis resurrectionem mem- brorumque compagem et sexum, quo viri dividimur a feminis, apertissime neget.' He maintained that the Origenist tenet was inconsistent with the terms of the 488 Appendix. Illud tamen nobis credendum est, quod tam iusti, quam et ' peccatores incorrupta recipiant corpora sua. Hoc est, quod ultra mori non poterunt, apostolo hoc aflfirmante atque dicente : Omnes quidem resurgemus, sed non omnes inmutabimur, in momento, in ictu oculi, in novissima tuba. Canet enim tuba, et mortui resurgent incorrupti, et nos inmutamur"^. Ideo tam electi, quam reprobi, incorrupta recipient corpora, quadnus et iusti in eadem carne, in qua propter Deum in hac vita poenas seu ceteros labores sus- tinuerunt, in ipsa recipiant a Domino aeternam beatitudinem et perpetuam gloriam. In quibus erit aeterna vita una rerauneratio, sed pro diversitate meritorum dissimilis gloria. Similiter et omnes reprobi, impii videlicet et peccatores, in propria corpora sua, in quae" prave seu luxuriose vixerunt, recepturi sunt aeternam dampnationem, in quibus tamen pro qualitate vel quantitate peccatorum dissimilis erit poena, sed una dampnatio sempiterna. Hoc quippe indicium Deus Pater omnipotens per Filium suum in hominem assumptum facturus est, sicut ipse Filius in evangeho de semet ipso testatur dicens : Pater non iudicat quemquam, sed omne iudicium dedit Filio *. Non tamen ita accipiendum est, ut Filius absque Patre et Spiritu Sancto, a quibus omnino dividi non potest, solus iudicet ; sed ideo ita dictum credimus, quia Pater invisibihs est, et a nuUo hominum videri potest. Et ideo solus Filius, ut dictum est, iudicabit, quia ipse solus formam servi accepit, in qua visibiliter vivos et mortuos ludicaturus est. Invisibihter vero tota Trinitas iudicabit : visibiliter autem, ut Creed ' carnis resurrectionem,' heretics admitting a resurrection of the body but not of the flesh. ' In symbolo fidei et spei nostrae, quod ab Apostolis traditum, non scribitur in charta et atramento, sed in tabulis cordis carnalibus; post confessionem Trinitatis et unitatem Ecclesiae omne Christiani dogmatis sacramentum carnis resurrectione concluditur.' Ibid. cap. xxviii. The statement of the Athanasian Creed — ' omnes homines resurgere habent cum corporibus suis ' — is clearly not a mere general enunciation of the doctrine of the Resur rection ; it is a distinct assertion of the identity of the risen body in each individual. In this respect it is very valuable, but the force of the original is lost in our translation—' with their bodies,' instead of ' with their own bodies.' ' The corrector appears to have inserted the letter m with the mark of abbreviation after ' et ' with the intention of altering it into ' etiam.' I Cor. XV. 51, 52. The corrector has made a mark over the a in ' inmuta- mur,' evidently because he thought it an error for 'inmutabimur.' ' So the MS. * S.Joli. Evan. v. 22. Appendix. 489 dictum est, solus Filius in forma servi iuste iudicabit, qui ob redemptionem humani generis solus in carne assumpta iniuste ab impiis iudicatus est. In cuius iudicio electi duabus in partibus discreti erunt, id est, perfectis, quibus dictum est : Sedebitis super duodecim sedes iudicantes XII tribus IsraeP. Quod enim apostolis tunc promissum est, ad omnes perfectos pertinet, qui cum Domino ceteros iudicabunt. Secundus vero ordo erit in illis, qui ad superiorem, hoc est, apostolorum et martyrum se''' perfectorum mensurara pervenire non potuerunt, et tamen per satisfactionem poenitenti?, per elemosynarum largitionem, per compassionem sanctorum, et cetera iustitiae opera vitam consecuturi sunt aeternam. Talibus enim convenit ilia Domini sententia, qua ait : Facile vobis amicos de iniquo mamona, ut, cum defeceritis, recipiant vos in eterna tabernacula " ; et illud : Qui vos recipit, me recipit^. Reprobi vero similiter duabus distincti erunt in partibus, impiis videlicet et peccatoribus. Impii appellantur omnes in- fideles, qui Dominum non noverunt, de quibus psalraista ait : Non resurgunt impio in iudicio '. Resurgent utique, non ut iudicentur, sed ut punientur ° ; quoniam secundum apostolicam auctoritatem quicunque sine lege peccaverunt, sine lege et peribunt'' . De talibus Veritas in evangelio ait : Qui non credit, iam iudicatus est*; hoc est, iam dampnatus est. Peccatores vero vocantur, qui intra Ecclesiam per fidem commorantur, sed prave vivunt. De talibus rursum psalmista ait : Neque peccatores in consilio iustorum'' ; de quibus et Paulus: Confitetur'"' se nosse Deum, factis autem negant, cum sint abbominati, et incredibiles, et ad omne opus bonum reprobi^^ ; quos et Dominus per evangehum increpat dicens : Quid prodest qui dicitis michi, Domine, Domine, et non ' S. Matt. xix. 28. * So the MS. ; but a small « has been inserted by the corrector over ' se.' ^ S. Luc, xvi. 9. * S. Matt. X. 40. There is nothing in this passage inconsistent wilh the hypothesis that the Commentary was the work of the seventh century. It follows SS. Augustine and Ambrose in its interpretation of our Lord's words. See especially S. Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. xxi. § 28, 5. Also St. Ambrose on St. Luke xvi. 9, and the Catena Aurea of Thomas Aquinas on St. Luke, cap. xvi. = So the MS. The Vulgate has non resurgent impii in iudicio, Ps i. " So the MS. ' Rom. ii. 12. " S. Joh. Evan. iii. 18. s Ps. i. c. '» So the MS. " Tit. i. 16. 490 Appendix. facitis quae dico^. Sicut enim fides, quam se mali Christiani habere gloriantur, absque bonis operibus eos salvare non potest, ita bonum opus quodcunque infideles agunt, sine fide nichil iUis prodest, apostolo hoc aflfirmante, qui ait ; Omne, quod non est ex fide, peccatum est"^. Et ideo solos illos credimus posse salvos fieri, qui et fidem rectam absque ullo discrimine retinent, et bonis operibus, in quantum possunt, laborare non desinunt, vitantes scilicet capitalia atque mortifera crimina, sicut ait psalmista : Declina a malo et fac bonum '/ et alibi : Qitiescite ' S. Luc. vi. 46. ^ The last quotation is from Rom. xiv. 23. This classification of 'impii' and 'peccatores' is found in Bruno's Exposition of the Psalms, in a passage borrowed from Cassiodorus : ' Impii sunt, qui sanctam Trinitatem nullatenus confitentur. Resurgunt impii, sed non in iudicio, quia iam iudicati sunt. lustus surgit, ut iudicet ; peccator, ut iudicetur ; impius ut sine iudicio puniatur. Peccatores sunt Christiani, sed peccatis obnoxii, qui ideo non resurgunt in consilio iustorum, id est, in iudicio iustorum, quia iam illis, scilicet iustis, per gratiam confessionis peccata dimissa sunt.' Brunonis Expos. Psalm, i. 6 ; Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. cxlii. p. 51. It appears also in Bede: ' Et congrega- buntur ante eum omnes gentes et reliqua. Duo sunt itaque ordines hominum in iudicio collectorum, qui tamen in quatuor dividuntur. Perfectorum ordines duo sunt : unus, qui cum Domino iudicabit, et non iudicantur, de quibus Dominus ait : Sedebitis et vos super sedes duodecim ; alius, quibus dicetur : Esurivi, et dedistis mihi manducare (S. Matt. xxv. 35), hi iudicabuntur et regnabunt. Item reproborum ordines duo sunt : unus eorum, qui extra Eccle siam inveniendi sunt, hi non iudicabuntur et peribunt, de quibus Psalmista ait : A^on resurgunt itnpii in iudicio. Aliter quoque reproborum est eorum, qui iudicabuntur et peribunt, quibus dicitur : Esurivi, et non dedistis mihi mandu care (S. Matt. xxv. 42).* Bedae Expositio in Matthaei evangelium, cap. xxv ; Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. xcii. p. 109. It will be observed that this passage, like the Commentary, divides the elect, as well as the reprobate, into two classes ; and it was Bede's declared principle to follow the interpretations of the Fathers. St, Ambrose gives a similar description of ' peccatores ' and ' impii ' - ' Ergo impii non resurgunt in iudicio, hoc est, in portionem eorum, qui iudicium siibituri sunt, nee peccatores resurgunt in consilio iustorum. Vides, quia surgunt impii, et non surgent in iudicio iustorum, quia peccatores, etsi non resurgent in consilio iustorum, resurgent tamen in iudicio. Unde videntur, qui bene crediderunt, et fidem suam etiam operibus executi sunt, ipsi non iudicari, sed surgere in consilio iustorum. Peccatores autem, qui non possunt inter iustos surgere, surgent in iudicio. Habes duos ordines. Tertius superest im- piorum, qui quoniam non crediderunt, iam iudicati sunt, et ideo non resurgent in iudicio, sed ad paenam.' S. Ambros. Enarratio in Psalmum I. ^ Ps. xxxiii. 14. Declina, it is worth noticing, is the reading of the Vetus version of the Psalter ; the Roman and Gallican have Diverte. Appendix. 491 agere perverse, discite bene facere '. Quod autem dicimus de Christo Domino : Inde venturus vivos ac mortuos ''', vivos in- tellegimus, quos dies iudicii vivos invenerit, mortuos autem omnes, qui antea obierunt, et tunc resurrecturi erunt ; vel certe, ut quidam volunt, sicut per viventes electi, ita per mortuos reprobi omnes accipiendi sunt ^ Post futurum vero iudicium, et iustorum remunerationem, atque iniquorum dampnationem, quic quid in utrisque divina sententia decreverit, id est, in electis ac reprobis, aeternum et sine fine erit : nee mali ultra gaudia sperabunt, nee boni tristitiam formidabunt. Quoniam, sicut electi perpetua letitia fruentes ad reproborum dampnationem, ut quidam heretici voluerunt, in aeternum reversuri non erunt ; ita et reprobi in perpetua * demersi ad electorum gaudia nequaquam ultra consurgent, ipso iudice teste, qui ait : Et ibunt hi, id est, impii et peccatores, in sitpplicium aeternum, iusti autem in vitam aeternam ^ Haec est fides catholica, quam universalis Ecclesia in electis suis corde credit, ore profitetur, et bonis operibus exequitur. De qua fide quicunque ex his, qui Christiano nomine censentur, quicquam detraxerit aut credere noluerit, proculdubio catholicus non erit, sed intra Ecclesiam positus sub nomine Christianitatis recte catholicus, ut hereticus, deputabitur. ' The words of Isaiah (i. i6, 17) seem to be here attributed to the Psalmist, but possibly it may be a mere clerical error ; the copyist may have omitted after ' alibi ' the words ' scriptum est.' ^ So the MS. originally, but the corrector has written 'iudicare' above 'vivos.' Obviously it had been omitted inadvertently by the original hand. ' These two alternative interpretations of ' vivi ' and ' mortui ' are also given by Fortunatus' Commentary. The correspondence seems to indicate that the writer still had the earlier exposition before him in the latter portion of his Commentary, relating to the Incarnation, although he ceases to follow it closely, as in the former part concerning the Trinity. A similar indication may be found in the allusion to Nestorianism as inconsistent with the doctrine of the Trinity, and introducing a quaternity of Persons. * A word must be here omitted, probably ' tristitia.' ' S. Matt. xxv. 46. 492 Appendix. G. Ccpy of the second Commentary on the Athanasian Creed, contained in Troyes 804, and immediately following the foregoing one. It is preceded by the title ' Item alia expositio! The collations of the copy of this Commentary, edited by Mai ^ from a manuscript in the Vatican, are added in the notes. The title ivhich he applies to tt, ^ Symboli Athanasiani explanatio! is not to be found in the MS. Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem, quatti nisi quisque integram inviolatamque serva verit, absque dubio in aeternum peribit. Quod dicitur in capite horum versuum, hoc repetitur in fine. Nam hoc est in aeternum perire, quod salvum non esse ; et hoc est salvum esse, quod non perire. Sed quid est quod integrara et inviolatam servandam admonet fidem, nisi quia nichil de ilia est auferendum, nichil mutandum, sicut in fine libri apocalipsis terribiliter contestatum est. Demunt namque et violant, id est, minuunt et corrumpunt sacramenta fidei heretici et scismatici ; et idcirco eicit ^ illos foras ecclesiam ^ et excludit a se, ut ipsa sine macula inveniatur et ruga. Sicut enim Deus Veritas' est, ita ea, qu? apostohca ecclesia de Deo docuit, vera sunt. Si aliquid horum depinxeris " aut mutaris, intrat putredo de veneno serpentis, nascitur vermis mendaciorum, et nichil integrum remanebit, quia ubi fuerit corruptio falsitatis, non ibi erit integritatis veritatis ". Oportunum ' Scriptorum veterum nova collectio, tom. ix. p. 396. ^ For ' elicit.' ^ In the corresponding passage of the Bouhier Commentary, Troyes 1979 and 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24902 have ' ecclesia.' ' Mai reads ' veracitas.' ' Mai, ' depresseris.' Troyes 1979 in the corresponding passage has 'de- traxeris.' Probably the right reading is ' dempseris.' " Mai reads ' integiitas.' This sentence, from 'Si aliquid' to 'veritatis,' is found almost word for word in Prosper's Liber sententiarum ex Auguslino, printed in the Appendix to St. Augustine's works — No. 326 of the series. See Migne, Patrol. Lat. xiv. 1888. The Commentator evidently drew directly from Prosper, who flourished in the early half of the fifth century. The original source, from which the latter borrowed the greater portion of the passage, was St. Augustine's Tract, in Joh. Evan. viii. 5. Some of these Appendix. 493 namque michi videtur paucis admonendum, quam ' ilia sit fides qu? salvat^ qug in aeternum perire non si nit : nempe non est ilia, qua demones credunt et contremescunt, non tamen diligunt aut sperant quod credunt, sed ilia potius est, qug per dilectionem operatur, ilia videlicet dilectione '', de qua Dominus ait : Qui diligit me, sermones meos servat*. Quam dilectionem quisquis adeptus fuerit, sentit proculdubio quantum et quale bonum sit Deus. Quod etiam ex hoc ostenditur, quia nulli ab eo recedenti bene est "- A quo enim habet homo ut sit, ab eo habet ut bene sit*. Et hoc est bonum hominis ut summi et incommutabilis boni ' adhaereat naturae ; quod si noluerit, bono se privat, cuius participatione esse ipse poterat. Bonum sit, malum est ei * propter quod etiam per iustitiam Dei cruciatus consequitur. Quid enim tam iniquum quam ut bene sit ei, qui voluntarie deserit suramum bonum .^ Sed hoc malum, quod fit deserendum " summum bonum. Idcirco autem '" plerique non sentiunt, quia inferius amant temporale bonum ; sed divina iustitia est, ut, qui voluntate deserit Deum, cum dolore araittat quod amat preter eum", et ab hoc dolore fides non liberet.eum. Fides namque sentences of Prosper were incorporated in the Canons of the Second Council of Orange, A. D. 529. ' Mai reads ' quae.' ^ Mai omits ' quj salvat.' ' So the MS. The mark of contraction over the final letters of ' ilia ' and ' dilectione ' has probably been omitted through inadvertence. Mai reads ' dilectio.' ' Compare S. Luc. xiv. 23, 24. "' From ' quantum ' to ' bene est ' seems to be drawn directly from Prosper's Sententiae, cclxxxix ; quale bonum sit Deus indirectly from St. Augustine, de Genesi ad Literam, lib. xi. cap. v. ^ Apparently fi om St. Augustine, u. s., lib. xi. cap. viii: 'Qui gloriatur, non- nisi in Domino gloriatur, cum cognoscit non suum, sed illius esse, non solum ut sit, verum etiam ut nonnisi ab illo bene sibi sit, a quo habet ut sit.' ' Mai reads ' summae et incommutabiliter bonae.' ' The passage is evidently corrupt. Mai reads ' poterat bonus, et magnum malum est ei bonum non esse.' Prosper and St. Augustine, in the passages which the Commentator here borrows from, both have ' Quod si noluerit, bono se privat, et hoc ei malum est.' ' Mai, ' deserendo.' "' Mai omits ' autem.' " The whole of this passage, beginning with ' hoc est bonum hominis ' and ending here, is clearly drawn from Prosper's Sententiae, cclxxxvii, De bono humanae naturae ; and it is equally clear that Prosper drew from St. Augustine, de Genesi ad Litteram, lib. viii. cap. xiv. 494 Appendix. alio nomine dicitur credulitas ; nam apud Grecos fides et credu litas uno dicitur noraine. Catholica grecum nomen est; inter pretatur autem latino eloquio universalis, quia toto mundo diffusa ecclesia est^ et toto tempore hanc tenet fidem et tenuit, neque unquam aut tempore mutata est aut locis variata. Nam hereti corum fides non potest dici catolica, quia non est publica, sed privata;- nee ubique tenetur, nee semper fuisse monstratur. Sequitur : Fides autem catholica haec est, ut unum Deum in trinitate et trinitatem in unitate veneremur. Unitas in Deitate, trinitas est^ in personis. Veneremur ergo Unitatem Deitatis in trinitate personarum, veneremur trinitatem personarum in Unitate Deitatis. In qua trinitatem ^ substantiae unitas, ut aequalitatem teneat, pluralitatem non recipiat^, tantura' personarum distinctio, ut unione non permisceatur \ Tres personae unius sunt essenti?, sive natur?, unius virtutis, unius operationis, unius beatitudinis, atque unius potestatis, ut trina sit unitas, et una sit trinitas. Ita ut unusquisque eorum verus perfectusque sit Deus, videhcet ex plenitudine Divinitatis nichil rainus in singuhs, nichil amplius ut " intellegatur in tribus '. Nee huius trinitatis tertia pars est unus, nee maior pars duo quam unus ". Ita tota Deltas sui perfectione aequalis est, ut exceptis vocabulis, qu? proprietatem indicant per sonarum, quicquid de una persona dixeris, de tribus dignissime possit intellegi " ; et non mains sit in tribus quam in singulis, nee minus in singulis quam in tribus "'. Vel " si in tribus hominibus dicas quod sint immortales, ego non intellego plus posse vivere simul tres quara singulos, nee minus singulos quam totos tres, ' Mai omits ' est.' ' Mai reads ' trinitate tanta est.' ' From ' In Trinitate ' to ' recipiat ' is drawn from Prosper's Sententiae ex Auguslino, ccxxvii. ' So the MS., but in the corresponding passage in Troyes 1979 we have ' tanta.' ' Mai, ' permisceantur.' ° Mai omits ' ut.' ' This passage, from ' tres personae ' to ' in tribus,' appears in the Epistle of Pelagius I to King Childebert. See Migne, tom. cv. p. 141. ' From ' nee ' to ' unus ' is from St. Augustine, Con. Maximinum, lib. ii. cap. X. § 2. ° From ' tota Deltas ' to ' intellegi ' appears in the Creed of St. Jerome so called. '" From ' non ' to ' tribus ' is in substance from St. Augustine, Ep. clxx. 5. " Mai reads ' velut.' Appendix. 495 quoniam trium una est immortahtas. Aut si aequaliter sint sapientes, non plus sapiunt simul quam singuli ; sed tanta est in unoquoque sapientia, quanta in tribus '. Si haec ergo in creatura invenitur '¦', ubi non est una anima aut unum cor, nisi ^ per dilectionem et fidem, quanto magis in creatore, in Patre scilicet et Filio et Spiritu Sancto, cui* est aeterna et incommutabilis unitas, qui est indifferens trinitas, unus Deus °, unum lumen, unumque principium ". Sequitur. Neque confundentes personas, neque substantiam separantes. Sicut enim confutantes Arrium unam eandemque dicimus trinitatis esse substantiam, et unum in tribus personis fatemur Deum, ita impietatem Sabellu declinantes tres personas sub proprietatem' distinguimus. Sabehius, qui* intellexit unam esse trinitatis substantiam, ideo confundens personas, ipsum sibi Patrem, ipsum sibi Filium, ipsum ^ Spiritum Sanctum, esse dicebat. Nos tamen non nomina tantura, sed etiam nominum proprietates idem '° confitemur. Nee Pater Filii aut Spiritus Sancti personam aliquando excludit " ; nee rursus Filius aut Spiritus Sanctus Patris nomen personamque recipit : sed Pater semper Pater, Filius semper Fihus, Spiritus Sanctus semper Spiritus Sanctus. Arrius vero, quia cognovit tres personas, idcirco et tres asseruit divinas substantias. Sed nos confitemur, quia Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus substantia unum sunt, personis ac norainibus distinguntur '^ Sequitur : Alia est enim persona Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti : sed Patris et ' These illustrations are from St. Augustine, Ep. clxxxvii. cap. iv. ' Mai reads 'inveniuntur.' = Mai adds ' forte.' ' Mai reads 'qui.' ¦•¦ Mai omits ' Deus.' ^ From ' indifferens ' to ' principium ' is from Prosper's Liber Sententiarum ex Auguslino, cccl, ex Augustini Tract. 39 in Johannem, u. 5. It is in substance from St. Augustine. ' Mai ' proprietate.' * Mai ' quia.' ' ' sibi ' is added by Mai. '" d has been written above m in 'idem' by the corrector, and a line drawn under it. Mai gives the right reading, no doubt, ' proprietates id est personas,' which is found also in the Bouhier Commentary. This is one of the errors which show that the scribe copied from an earlier codex. Probably the text from which he copied omitted ' personas ' and read ' id e ' ; and owing to the omission of ' personas ' he misunderstood the contraction. " Mai reads 'excludit aliquando.' " Nearly the whole of this passage, from ' confutantes Arrium ' to ' dis tinguntur,' appears in the Fides Hieronymi. 496 Appendix. Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est divinitas, aequalis gloria, et co aeterna maiestas. Aequalis gloria, quia non est maior in gloria Pater, quara Filius aut Spiritus Sanctus. Non minorem ^ gloria Spiritus Sancti quam Patris aut Filii. Coaeterna maiestas : quia non est anterior Pater Filio aut Spiritu Sancto, non est posterior Spiritus Sanctus Patre aut Filio. Sciendum tamen est, quia personas dicere necessitas fecit disputationis contra hereticos : nam in scripturis divinis dictum non invenitur. Doctores tamen licenter hoc assumpserunt; non quia scriptura dicit, sed quia scriptura non contradicit ^. Nam cura dixeris, tres sunt, et mox interrogatus fueris, qui ^ sunt tres, nichil omnino respondendum restat, nisi person?. Nam ahud quid respondeas, nichil habebis ; quia non potest dicere, tres dii, aut tres substanti?, aut aliquid huiusmodi, quod absit. Dicta autem persona, quasi per se una, eo quod per se sit. Dicitur etiara substantia *, eo quod per se subsistat, nam quod nos dicimus personas, Greci dicunt ipotasis ", quod interpretatur in Latino subsistentias : et quod apud nos dicitur substantia, apud illos dicitur usia ". Et quidem in Latina lingua quasi unum videtur esse substantia et subsistentia. In Alexandrino tamen concilio, ubi hoc primum tractatum fuit, ita definitum est, ut substantia ipsam rei alicuius naturam rationemque, qua constat, designet, subsistentia autem unius- cuiusque person? hoc ipsura, quod extat et subsistit, ostendat. Alia est enim persona Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti; quia alius est in persona Pater, ahus in persona Filius, alius in persona Spiritus Sanctus ; non est alius in Deitate, non est alius in gloria. Alius est Pater, et alius Filius, quia non est ipse Pater, qui Filius ; non est tamen ahud Pater et aliud Filius, quia hoc est Pater, qui' Filius. Adtendeiidum quoque diligenter, quod ' The final m has been underscored by the corrector. Mai reads ' minor est.' The cause of the error was evidently the same here as in the last instance. The text from which the scribe copied probably had ' minor e.' He understood the mark of contraction to signily the omission of the final m ; but ' e ' is a very common form of abbreviation for ' est.' ° This must have been founded upon St. Augustine, de Trin. lib. vii. cap. iv. § 8, 'Propterea licuit loquendi et disputandi necessitate tres personas dicere, ncni quia Scriptura dicit, sed quia Scriptura non contradicit."* ^ Mai 'quid.' ' Mai ' subsistentia.' * Mai iirordireis. " Mai oiiaia. ' Mai rightly ' quod.' Appendix. 497 dicitur : non est ipse Pater, qui Filius, sed ipsum est Pater, qui ^ Filius ". Pater enim genitor est, non genitus ; Filius genitus est, non genitor ; Spiritus Sanctus non est genitor, quia non est Pater, non est genitus, quia non est Filius, sed procedens est, quia Spiritus. Hoc est tamen Filius, quod Pater, quia Deus, quia creator, quia omnipotens, et cetera nomina, quae substantialia sunt, non personalia, totius trinitatis aequalia sunt. Sciendum quoque sumraopere est, quod Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus inseparabiles sunt etiam in personis, quia sicut ubique est Pater, ita ubique Filius et Spiritus Sanctus; neque alium locum occupat Pater, alium Filius, alium Spiritus Sanctus. Non enim raundura inter se in tres partes diviserunt, quas singulas singuli implerent, quasi non haberent, ubi essent ' Filius aut ^ Spiritus Sanctus in mundo, si totum occupasset Pater. Non ita se habet vera, incorporea, inmutabilisque Divinitas. Non enim corpora sunt, quorum amplius ^ sit in tribus, quara in singulis, magnitudo. Nee loca suis mohbus tenent, ut distantibus spatiis simul esse non possint. Si enim anima in corpore constituta, non solum nuUas angustias sentit, verum etiam quandara latitudinem invenit non corporahum" locorum sed spiritaliura gaudiorum, cura sit quod ait Apostolus ' : nescitis, quoniam corpora vestra templitm iti vobis Spiritus Sancti sunt, quem habetis in Deum * ? nee dici nisi ° stultissime potest non habere locura in nostro corpore Spiritum Sanctum, eo quod totura nostra anima impleverit : quanto stultius dicitur ullis angusdis alicubi imperari '" trinitatem, ut Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus ubique simul esse non possint". Inseparabile est edam opus trinitatis; quia qu?libet persona, ' A dot has been made under the letter i and od written above it by the corrector. " The reference may be to S. Aug. in lohan. Evan. Tract, xxxvi. 9. " In St. Augustine, ' haberet ubi esset ' is the reading. ' Mai reads ' et.' ¦^ Mai reads ' amplior.' So also it is in St. Augustine. ' Mai, 'incorporalium.' ' i Cor. vi. 19. " Mai reads, as do the Vulgate and St. Augustine, ' a Deo.' ° Mai reads ' dicimus si.' '" Mai reads 'impediri.' So also St. Augustine. " The whole "of this passage, from ' Non enim mundum inter se ' to ' esse r.on possint,' is from St. Augustine, de praesentia Dei, Epist. clxxxvii. cap. iv. 15. K k 498 Appendix. sicut sine ahis personis esse non potest, ita sine ahis non operatur, et nichil seorsum agit inseparabilis caritas ' Sequitur : Qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis Spiritus Sanctus. Sciendum est omnino, quod qualitas de Deo proprie non dicitur. Nam de illis decem speciebus categoriarum haec'' sunt, quibus caret Deus, id est, qualitatem, quantitatera, situm, habitum, locum, tempus, et passionem ' ; non tamen caret substantiam aut relationem *, quia et Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus relativa sunt nomina unius substanti?. Itaque absque illis speciebus intelligamus " Deum, quantum possumus, sine qualitate bonum, sine quantitate magnum, sine indigentia creatorem, sine situ presentem, sine habitu omnia continentem, sine loco ubique totum, sine terapore serapiternum, sine ulla sui mutatione mutabilia facientem, nichilque patientera *. Unara autem de his speciebus id est actionem, ideo pretermisi, quia actio creatoris longe dissimilis est ab actu creatur?. Nam creatura sine motu et labore nichil potest agere, actio vero creatoris sine motu et labore sola fit ei voluntate. Hoc tamen quod dicitur : qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis Spiritus Sanctus, propter necessitatem contra hereticos usurpatum est, quia sirailem' Deo Patri Filium asserebant, dissimilemque Spiritum Sanctum. Nos tamen dinoscamus, quid sit in creatura substanti? qualitas, quid in creatore sine qualitate substantia. Proinde si de Deo dicamus, aeternus, immortalis, incorruptibilis, immutabilis, unius", sapiens, et speciosus, iustus, bonus, beatus, spiritus. Horum oraniura quod novissimum posui, id est spiritus, quasi tantum ' This is in substance from St. Augustine, in Johan. Tract, v. i and xx, 3. ' Mai ' hae.' ' Mai ' qualitate, quantitate, situ, habitu, loco, tempore, et passione.' It is to be presumed that he found these readings in his MS., as he says nothing to the contrary. But the Troyes MS. probably is right, the accusative case being frequently used for the ablative in the age which produced this Commentary. I have drawn attention to the occurrence of this barbarism in the previous Commentary. ' Mai reads ' substantia aut relatione.' ' Mai inserts 'nos.' •^ From ' intelligamus Deum ' to ' patientem ' is in St. Augustine, de Trin. lib. V. cap. i. ' Mai ' dissimilem.' ' A dot has been placed under the i by the corrector, signifying that ' unus ' ought to have been written ; ' vivus ' is no doubt the right reading. This appears in Mai, and in St. Augustine iu the passage here borrowed from. Appendix. 499 modo videtur significare substantiam, cetera vero qualitates sub stanti? eius. Sed non ita est in ilia ineffabili simplicique natura ; quicquid enim secundum qualitatem illam ^ dici videtur, secundum substantiam vel essentiam est intellegendum. Absit enim ut spiritus secundum substantiam dicatur Deus, et bonus secundum qualitatem, sed utrumque '^ substantiam ^ sicut secundum sub stantiam sapientia dicitur Deus. Sequitur : Increatus Pater, increatus Filius, increatus* Spiritus Sanctus. Nichil in trinitate creatum, quia tota trinitas unus est creator. Oranis itaque sub stantia, qu? Deus non est, creatura est; et qu? creatura est, non^ Nulla igitur differentia est in Deitate trinitatis ; quoniam, quod de ^ Deo minus est, Deus non est '. Sequitur : Inmensus Pater, inmensus Filius, inmensus ° Spiritus Sanctus. Inmensus est Deus trinitatis ', quia nulla ratione, nulla estimatione metiri valet. Mundo non capitur ; sic replet mundum, ut ipsum " contineat mundum, non ut " contineatur a mundo. Est enim mundo superior, inferior, exterior, et interior : regendo superior, portando inferior, circumdando exterior, replendo interior. Sic est per cuncta diffiisus, ut non sit qualitas mundi, sed substantia creatrix mundi, sine labore regens ^% sine honore " continens, mundum. ' Mai reads ' illic ' ; and so it is in St. Augustine. ' 'secundum' has been written above by the corrector; it appears in Mai's text, as also in St. Augustine. ^ From ' Proinde si ' to ' secundum substantiam ' is from St. Augustine, de Trin. xv. v. 8. ' Mai inserts ' et.' " So the original text; but ' e,' that is 'est,' has been inserted after 'non,' and 'ds e' written in the margin. Mai reads 'creatura non est, Deus est.' The Bouhier Commentary has the same. * Mai omits 'de.' ' This passage, from ' Omnis itaque substantia ' to ' Deus non est,' is word for word the same as Prosper's Liber sententiarum ex Auguslino, Iv. The Benedictine editors have given a marginal reference, ' Ex lib. 14 de civ. Dei et est canon ii. concilii Arausicani.' I have not been able to verify the reference to St. Augustine. Part of the passage — from 'omnis' to 'Deus est' — appears in Alcuin, defide S. Trinitatis, lib. ii. cap. ix, by whom, as well as by Prosper, it must have been originally borrowed from St. Augustine, de Trin. lib. i. cap. vi. § 9. The author of the Commentary drew doubtless directly from Prosper. ' Mai inserts ' et.' '' Mai reads ' trinitas.' '» Mai, ' ipse.' " Mai omits ' ut.' " Mai reads 'regnans.' " Mai, as also St. Augustine, ' onere.' K k a 500 Appendix. Non tamen per spatia locorum, quasi mole diffusus, non ut in diraidia mundi parte sit dimidius, et in alia dimidia dimidius, atque ita per totum totus : non sic dein ' solo c?lo totus, et in sola terra totus, et in parte totus, et per cuncta totus : ita '^ contentus loco, sed in se ipso ubique totus ^- Ita Pater, ita Fihus, ita Spiritus Sanctus : unus Deus trinitas ; sed et * inefifabili modo, cum sit ubique totus per Divinitatis presentiam, non est ubique per habitationis gratiam" Et, cum quosdam peccantes deserit, eisdera tamen ipsis adest per iudicium, quibus decernimus" per adiumentum. Unde non dicimus. Pater noster qui es ubique, cum procul dubio verum sit, sed Pater noster qui es in caehs, in Sanctis videlicet angelis et Sanctis hominibus ', in quibus * esse dicitur non solum per presentiam su? inmensitatis, verura etiam per gratiam suae inhabitationis. Et propterea, cum supra dicerem ubique esse Deum, addendum putavi in se ipso. Est namque ubique, quia nusquam est absens, in se ipso autera, quia non continetur eis, quibus presens est, tanquam sine his esse non possit. Nam spatia locorum tolle corporibus, nusquam erunt ; et, quia nusquam erunt, nee erunt. Iterum tolle ipsa corpora qualitatibus corporum, non erit ubi sint, et ideo necesse est ut non sint ' : Deus autera, qui corporali loco non continetur, in se ipse" est ubique, scihcet per cuncta diffusus: sicut aqua", sicut ' Mai reads ' sed in.' So also St. Augustine. ^ Mai reads ' et nullo.' So also St. Augustine. ' From 'Sic est per cuncta' to 'ubique totus' is from St. Augustine, de praesentia Dei, Epist. clxxxvii. cap. iv. 14. * For ' et ' Mai reads ' miro.' ^ This is also almost word for word from St. Augustine, Epist. clxxxvii. cap. V. 16. ° ' Quibus decernimus ' have been underscored by the corrector, and a mar ginal note has been added, which is partly lost owing to the leaf having been cut away at the edge. Mai reads ' quibus deesse cernitur.' ' This interpretation of the language of the Lord's Prayer must be drawn from the same passage of St. Augustine. It also appears in another passage of that Father — de Sermone Domini in Monte, ii. 17 — a passage which has been incorporated by Alcuin, but without acknowledgement, in his work de fide S. Ti-initatis, lib. ii. cap. v. ° Mai adds ' hominibus.' ' This also, from 'Et propterea,' is almost word for word from St. Augustine, Epist. clxxxvii. cap. vi. ^^ Mai reads 'ipso.' " Something has clearly been omitted before 'sicut aqua.' In the margin Appendix. 501 aer, sicut etiam ipsa lux, qu? in minori loco minora sunt, in maiori maiora '- Deus autem, cuius inmensitas atque magnitudo non est molis sed virtutis, sic est etiam in quolibet uno homine, sicut per cuncta ^ rerum machina ' totus. Sequitur : Aeternus Pater, aeternus Filius, aeternus et Spiritus Sanctus. In Deitate trinitatis quod est esse perpetuum est *, quia natura, initio carens, incremento non indigens, sicut non incipitur, ita nee fine terminatur. Ibi quippe est, ubi nee expectatur quod veniat, neque percurrit quod debeat recordari ; sed unum est " quod semper esse est. Quod si nos et angeli cum initio videre in- cipimus Deum, esse tamen hunc sine initio videmus. Ubi sic semper sine fine esse est, ut nunquam se * animus tendat ad sequentia ', in qua nulla pars suae longitudinis preterit, ut pars alia succedat, in qua omne quod est animus videt, et tardura non esse et longum esse. Et haec quidem " novimus ; qualiter taraen sit ipsa ' aeternitas sine preterite ante saecula, sine futuro post saeculum, sine mora longio ^°, sine prestolatione perpetua, adhuc non videmus. Sequitur : Et tamen, non tres aeterni, sed unus aeternus ; sicut non tres increati, nee tres inmensi, sed unus increatus, et unus inmensus. Ideo non sunt tres aeterni, sed unus; quia sicut unus natus naturae^' est Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus, sicut ^^ una est eorum increatio et inmensitas atque aeternitas. Sequitur : Similiter omnipotens Pater, omni potens Filius, omnipotens et Spiritus Sanctus ; et tamen non tres the corrector has written ' sed non ita diffusus.' That these are the omitted words is shown by the fact of their being found in Mai. Obviously the cause of the error was the repetition of the word ' diffusus.' The corrector must ha\c had another copy of this Commentary before him. ' In this sentence the commentator clearly follows St. Augustine, Epist. cxxxvii. § 4. " Mai reads ' cunctam.' ' Mai ' machinam.' ' This is from St. Leo, Ep. lix. ad Constantinopolitanos. ^ Mai reads ' est unum.' ' Mai reads 'semet,' but he has added a marginal note, 'Cod. set.' Apparently he supposed ' set ' to be a contraction for ' semet.' ' Possibly the mark of contraction for the final m has been omitted over the last letter in ' sequentia.' ' Mai inserts ' per fidem.' ' Mai reads ' haec ipsa.' '" re has been added by the corrector to ' longio,' but Mai reads ' longa.' " Mai ' sicut unius naturae.' " Mai rightly ' sic' 502 Appendix. omnipotentes, sed unus omnipotens. Omnipotens dicitur ', quia omnia potest, sicut scriptum est : Apud Deum autem omnia possibilia sunt^, vel quia omnia qu? sunt, ut sint, potestate illius tenentur, nee" occidant. Solent autem plerique aut quasi adu- lando Deo superflua de oranipotentia eius loqui, aut non necessaria vera docere, cum cimicum aut muscarum vel culicum multitudinem ad curam Dei pertinere aiunt et notitiam ; et propter illud, quod in evangelio dicitur, unum de duobus aut quinque passeribus non cadere in terra* sine Deo ^, dxitfienum agri^ uri', audent predicare, quod non solum genera, sed et numerum verraium noverit Deus, quod* ex corruptione corporum aut viventium aut mortuorum lignorumque aut aquarum corruptionibus vivificantur. Ni qui' dicunt, quia ^^ omnia potest, quippe qui sibi mortem concedere nequit nee mutari possit a bono. Sed, qui ista dicere vel audire delectantur, intellegunt " attentissime Deum simplicis esse natur?, ita ut non sint " in Deo aliud esse et aliud habere, nee esse '* eius aliud velle et aliud posse, sed hoc est velle quod posse. Omnia ergo quae vult potest, et quod potest vult"; nee maior est voluntas, quara potentia, eius, sed neque minor ; sed utraque tanta est, quanta et ille, quia Deus hoc est, quod habet. Aeterni- tatera quippe habet, sed ipsa ^^ est aeternitas sua ; lucera habet, sed lux sua ipse est. Nam in creatura nulla vere simplex sub stantia est, cui non est hoc esse quod nosse. Potest enim esse nee nosse. At ilia divina non potest, quia id ipsum est quod habet. Ac per hoc non sic habet scientiam, ut aliud " illi sit scientia qua scit, aliud essentia qua est ; sed utrumque unum, quaravis non utrumque dicendum sit, quod verissime simplex et unum est " Sequitur : Ita Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus et ' Mai 'dicit.' ^ St. Matt. xix. 26. ' Mai 'ne.' * Mai 'terram.' = St. Matt. x. 29. « St. Matt. vi. 28. ' For ' uri ' Mai reads ' vestire.' ' Mai ' quotquot.' ' ' Aliqui ' is Mai's reading. It is observable how frequently he supplies the right reading. I have before remarked on the numerous errors of the Troyes MS., as proofs that the scribe was copying from an older document. '" Mai adds ' non.' " Mai ' intellegant.' " Mai 'sit.' 13 Mai ,^^; '* After ' vult ' Mai inserts ' quoniam sic potens est, ut dispositionem suam servet, et nullo modo sua statuta convellat.' !¦' Mai 'ipse.' 10 Mai 'alia.' " This passage, from ' in creatura nulla ' to ' et unum est,' is almost word for Appendix. 503 Spiritus Sanctus. Dominus Pater, Dominus Filius, Dominus et Spiritus Sanctus. Et tamen non tres Dii aut tres Domini, sed unus Deus et unus Dominus. De unitate Deitatis et dominatione sanctae trinitatis iam suflficienter dictum est ; sed tamen sciendum est, quod Deus dicatur ad se, Dominus ad creaturas, quibus dominatur ; Deus, quia solus colendus est ', Dominus, quia solus timendus ; Deus religiosorum, Dominus vero servorum. Sequitur : Quia sicut singillatim unamquamque personam Deum ac Dominum confiteri Christiana veritate compellimur, ita tres Deos aut tres Dominos dicere catholica religione prohibemur. Singillatim, hoc est, viritim vel singulariter, quia singulus Pater Deus et Dominus est, singulus Filius Deus et Dominus est, singulus Spiritus Sanctus Deus et Dominus est. Ita nos dicere fides Christiana cogit; quia, nisi ita dixerimus, Christiani esse non possumus, et tamen alium Deum aut Dominum dicere Patrem, alium Deum aut Dominum dicere Filium, alium Deum aut Dominura dicere Spiritum Sanctum prohibet nos catholica religio. Quia, si ita dixerimus, nee catholici nee religiosL esse poterimus. Sed ut Christiani simus atque catholici, dicamus vel potius credamus et Patrem Deum et Filium Deum et Spiritum Sanctum Deum, et simul, non tres Deos, sed unum Deum, qui substantia et natura sit veraciter unus. Sequitur : Pater a nullo est factus, nee creatus, nee genitus : Filius a Patre solo est, non factus, aut creatus, sed genitus : Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus, aut creatus, nee genitus, sed procedens. Quod factus aut creatus nee Pater sit, nee Filius, nee Spiritus Sanctus, iam supra dictum est. Sed et de Patre, quod non sit genitus, quia non est Fihus, sed genitor tantum, quia Pater est, iam premissum est. Nunc vero atten- dendum omnino, quod dicitur, Filius a Patre solo est genitus, Spiritus autem Sanctus ab utroque, id est, a Patre Filioque procedens, spiritus araborura est, Patris scilicet et Filii : Filius autem solius est Patris. Et haec est causa, quae distinguit quid word from St. Augustine, Tract, in lohan. xcix. 4. But it seems to have been taken directly from Prosperi liber Sententiarum ex Auguslino, cccl.xviii, where it appears exactly as it is found in the text. This 'liber sententiarum' is printed, as I have before mentioned, in the Appendix to St. Augustine's works, Benedictine edition, and in Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. xiv. ' Mai omits 'est.' 504 Appendix. differat inter nativitatem Filii et processionem Spiritus Sancfi. Filius sic est de Patre, quomodo natus, non quomodo datus; Spiritus vero Sanctus sic est de Patre, simul et Fiho, quomodo datus, non quomodo natus, hoc est, donum amborum '. Itaque Filius nascendo procedit, Spiritus vero Sanctus procedendo non nascitur, ne sint duo filii. Sequitur : Unus ergo Pater, non tres Patres; unus Filius, non tres Filii; unus Spiritus Sanctus, sed''' non tres Spiritus Sancti. H?c sunt ilia relativa nomina, sed ' * appellativa, in quibus trinitas invenitur. Non enim sic dicitur unus Pater aut unus Filius, sicut dicitur unus inmensus aut unus aeternus aut unus Deus, quia ilia nomina sunt substantiae, hoc est, unitas*; ista". Pater videlicet, Filius, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus, nomina sunt personarum, hoc est, trinitas ". Et ideo relativa sunt nomina, quia Pater ad alium refertur, hoc est, ad Filium ; non enim sibi ipsi est Pater, sed alteri, hoc est, Filio : similiter Filius ad Patrem refertur : sed ' Spiritus Sanctus vel donura, cum dicitur, refertur ad Patrem et Filium, a quibus procedit vel datur. Nam ilia nomina substantialia, hoc est, Deus, Dominus, aeternus, et cetera, de quibus iam satis scriptum est, in quacunque persona dicantur, non referuntur ad aliam sed ad seipsura '. Nam etsi Apostolus dicit Christum Dei virtutem et Dei sapientiara, tamen non ita est relativum in eo virtus et sapientia, sicut est quod dicitur Verbum aut Fihus. Virtus enim et sapientia in Deo substantia est, Verbum autem aut imago aut F'ilius relativum. Quod si Pater, qui genuit sapientiara ', ex ea fit sapiens, neque hoc est ' illi esse quod sapere ; qualitas eius erit Filius, non proles'" eius, et non ibi erit iara summa simplicitas; ' The expression ' quomodo datus, non quomodo natus ' is really from St. Augustine, de Trin. lib. v. cap. xv. The same Father carefully guards against the term ' donum ' as applied to the Holy Spirit being understood in a sense derogatory to His eternal Procession, de Trin. lib. v. cap. xvi. Alcuin, defide S. Trinitatis, lib. ii. cap. xx, does the same, adopting the very language of St. Augustine, but without acknowledgement. ^ Mai omits ' sed.' ' This has been underscored, and 'vel' written above it by the corrector. ' Vel ' is the reading of Mai. •" Mai reads ' unitaris.' 5 Mai adds ' vero.' ' Mai reads ' trinitatis.' ' Mai adds ' et.' " Mai ' alium sed ad seipsam.' » Mai omits 'est.' '° Mai reads 'prolis,' Appendix. 505 sed non ita sit ' Ergo et Pater ipse sapientia est, et ita dicit ^ Filius a ' sapientia Patris, quomodo dicitur lumen Patris, id est, ut quemadmodum lumen de lumine, et utrumque lumen unum, sic intellegatur sapientia de sapientia, et utrumque una sapientia^. Pater igitur et Filius simul una essentia et una magnitudo et una virtus'* et una sapientia. Sed non Pater et Filius simul ambo unum Verbum, quia non simul ambo unus Filius. Verbum enim relative, sapientia essentialiter intelligitur ". Sapientia ergo Filius de sapientia Patre, sicut lumen de lumine, et Deus de Deo, ut et singulus Pater lumen, et singulus Filius lumen, et singulus Pater Deus, et singulus Filius Deus. Ergo et singulus Pater sapientia, et singulus Filius sapientia. Sicut utrumque simul unum lumen et unus Deus, sicut ' utrumque una sapientia ". Spiritus quoque Sanctus sapientia, et siraul non tres sapienti? ' ; sed una sapientia Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus'". Sequitur: Sed in hac trinitate nichil prius aut posterius, nichil maius aut minus. Haec et trinitas unus est Deus ; et, quia unus est, non potest esse diversus ; quia " natura non potest seipsa esse prior aut posterior, maior aut minor. Non est Pater prior Filio neque maior : non est Spiritus Sanctus posterior Patre aut Filio vel minor. Sequitur : ' This is underscored, and in the margin is written ' absit ut ita sit,' which is the reading of Mai and of the passage in St. Augustine, de Trin. lib. vii. cap. i. § 2, from which this sentence, beginning at ' Quod si Pater,' is copied. ' Mai ' dicitur ' ; so also St. Augustine. ' Mai and the printed text of St. Augustine omit 'a.' * This sentence is also from St. Aug. de Trin. lib. vii. cap. i. § 2. Alcuin too, defide S. Trinitatis, lib. ii. cap. 14, has borrowed the passage, but without acknowledgement. ¦' In St. Augustine, for ' virtus ' we have ' Veritas.' ' From 'Pater igitur' to 'intelligitur' is from St. Aug. de Trin. lib. vii. cap. ii. ' In Mai, as also in St. Augustine, it is ' sic' ' This also, from ' Sapientia ergo ' to ' una sapientia,' is word for word from St Aug. de Trin. lib, vii. cap, iii. § 4. Mai and the Bouhier Commentary both add ' sed Filius factus est nobis sapientia a Deo, de qua cum aliquid in scripturis dicitur, Filius nobis insinuatur.' This too is from St. Augustine : from ' sed ' to ' Deo ' comes immediately after the last-mentioned passage ; the rest is compiled from a sentence which follows very shortly after. The words must have been omitted by the scribe of the Troyes MS. through inadvertence. ' Mai 'sapientes.' " This is in substance ftom St. Aug. de Trin. lib. vii. cap. iii. § 6. " Mai inserts ' una.' 5o6 Appendix. Sed totae tres personae quo-aeternae sibi sunt et quo-aequales. Ita ut per omnia, sicut iam supra dictum est, et trinitas in unitate et unitas in trinitate veneranda sit. Qui ergo vult salvus esse, ita de trinitate sentiat^ Sequitur: Sed necessarium est ad aeternam salutem ut incarnationem quoque Dotnini nostri Ihesu Christi fideliter credat. Sicut fideliter credenda est divinitas regnantis, ita fideliter credenda est humanitas salvantis, quia equalis patri- cole'' est de mysterio incarnationis prave sentire, ut divinitatis archana^ raale intellegere. Nihil enim iustius quam ut salvus non sit, qui salutis mysterio derogare non timuerit. Sciendum sane, quod aliam significationem habeat Ihesus, aliam Christus, cum sit unus salvator. Ihesus tamen proprium nomen est illi, sicut propria nomina sunt Elias aut Abraam : Christus autem sacramenti nomen est, quomodo si dicatur propheta aut * patri archa ^ Ihesus quoque nomen ebream, interpretatur in latino salutaris sive salvator : Christus autem grece dicitur, quod trans- fertur in latinum unctus ab unctione, id est, chrisma ^ et hebraice dicitur messias '. Sequitur : Est ergo fides recta, ut credamus et confiteamur quia Dominus noster Ihesus Christus Deus pariter et homo est. Hoc enira est illud sacramentum ab initio ex vulva dispositum, ut semen Abra? raundi conditor apprehenderet, quatinus in se ipso nostrae probaret priraitias naturae, ut Deus homo fieret in " singularitate personae copulans utramque ' Mai adds ' Et haec iam dicta sunt.' ^ So apparently the MS. Mai and the Bouhier Commentary both have ' periculi,' which is doubtless the right reading. The expression must have been borrowed from St. Leo, who in his Epistle to Flavian and also in his fifty-first Sermon uses these words : ' Aequalis periculi erat Dominum lesum Christum aut Deum tantummodo sine homine aut sine Deo solum hominem credidisse.' And the same Father says similarly in another Sermon, xxvii. cap. I : ' Paris periculi malum est, si illi aut naturae nostrae Veritas aut paternae gloriae negatur aequalitas.' St. Leo appears to have followed St. Hilary, de Trin. ix, 3 : ' Eiusdem periculi res est Christum lesum vel Spiritum Deum vel carnem nostri corporis denegare.' ^ Mai ' de divinitatis arcane' ' Mai adds ' dicatur.' ^ From 'aliam significationem' to 'propheta' is clearly derived from St. Augustine, Tractatus iii. in Epistolam loannis, § 6. ° Mai ' chrismate.' ' From ' Ihesus ' to ' messias ' bears an obvious resemblance to the corre sponding passage in the Troyes Commentary. ' For 'in' Mai reads 'ut.' Appendix. 507 naturam, mediator Dei et hominum hominibus appareret ', et his, propter quos venerat rediraendos, ipse unus autem ^ Deus et legifer et rex et magister et redemptor Deus" et redemptio, sacerdos et oblatio, Veritas et vita, sapientia et doctor, id est, qualiter et se* sequentibus exerapla vivendi monstraret; et suo generi, id est, hominibus homo ipse factus per gratiam consuleret, quibus suffragari iustitia nullatenus volebat ^ ; ut, cum ille in homine mortem vinceret, natura in eo humani generis trium- pharet. In illo enim nostra portio, quia nostra caro et sanguis, ut, ubi regnat nostra portio, nos quoque glorificemur. Quaravis igitur peccato ", de hac communicatione ' gratiae non desperes " ; quia, etsi peccata nos prohibent, substantia nos requirit ; si delicta propria exquirunt ", natur? communio non repellit '". ' This evidently follows S. Aug. ad Volusianum, or Epist. cxxxvii. cap. iii. "^ For ' autem ' Mai reads ' esset.' ' Mai omits ' Deus.' ' Mai omits ' se.' ° Mai ' valebat.' ' The corrector has written the letter r above the o in ' peccato.' Mai reads ' peccator.' ' Mai ' communione.' * Mai 'desperet.' " Mai 'excludunt.' " This passage, from ' In illo nostra portio ' to ' repellit,' has an obvious resemblance to the following passage, which appears in the fifteenth chapter of the Liber Meditationum, in the fifth Appendix to the works of St. Augustine : ' Est enim in ipso lesu Christo Domino nostro uniuscuiusque nostrum portio, caro et sanguis. Ubi ergo portio mea regnat, ibi me regnare credo. Ubi caro mea glorificatur, ibi gloriosum me esse cognosco. Ubi sanguis mea dominatur, ibi dominari me sentio. Qnamvis peccator sim, de hac communione gratiae non diffido. Etsi peccata mea prohibent, substantia mea requirit. Etsi delicta mea me excludunt, naturae communio non repellit.' This Liber Meditationum is a collection of prayers and meditations drawn from earlier sources, and the greater part of it, comprising the above passage, is identified with a book compiled by lohannes Fiscamnensis, who died A.D. 1178, and compiled, according to his own account, which appears in the dedication and preface, from Scripture and the works of the Fathers. And so it is described in a manuscript written about the time of the compiler. (See Admoniiio to Liber Meditationum in the Benedictine edition of St. Augustine.) The Liber Meditationum was attributed to St. Augustine, and hence was at first edited among his works. That the author of the Oratorian Commentary should have drawn from lohannes Fiscamnensis, the earlier from the later writer, is of course impossible ; that the converse process did not take place would appear from a comparison of the two passages ; it remains— for there can be no other way of accoimting for the resemblance — that both must have drawn inde pendently from the same source, and that source must have been the work of some Father prior to either of them, of what Father is unknown. 5o8 Appendix. NuHum enim raaius donum prestare posset Deus hominibus, quam ut Verbum suura, per quod condidit omnia, faceret illis caput, et illos ei, tanquam membra, cohabitaret', ut esset fihus Dei et filius hominis, unus '¦' cum Patre, unus homo cum homini bus '. Sequitur : Deus est ex substantia Patris ante saecula genitus, homo est ex substantia matris in saeculo natus : perfectus Deus, perfectus homo et* ex anima rationali et humana carne sub sistens. Ingressus est igitur Filius Dei uterum Virginis, ut iterum nasceretur, ante iam genitus, qui suscepit tantum ^ hominem, qui iam habebat de Patre ° plenissimam Deitatem, non dissimilis Patri cum nascitur eorum' aeterno perpetuus, non dissimihs homini cum ex matre nascitur moriturus * ; consuhstantialis Patri secundum Divinitatem, consubstantiahs matri secundum cognatam nobis infirmitatem " : quia essentialiter natus est de Patre, et essentiahter conceptus natusque de matre, ut esset unus '° natur? cum Virgine". Natus '^ 'idcirco perfectus Deus, quia non'' dis- ^ For 'cohabitaret' Mai reads 'coaptaret.' This reading is found in St. Augustine. The Bouhier Commentary has ' coaptavit.' ^ The Bouhier Commentary adds ' Deus.' So also St. Augustine. ' This from ' nullum ' to ' hominibus ' inclusive is from S. Aug. in Psalmum, Ixxxv. I. * Mai omits ' et.' ^ Mai ' totum.' " Mai ' quia iam de Patre habebat.' ' So the MS. apparently, but for ' eorum ' Mai reads ' ex.' ° This passage, from ' Ingressus ' to ' moriturus,' is found in Vigilius, de Unitate Trinitatis, cap. xiv. Compare St. Augustine, in loh. Eva7i. Tract. xii. 8 : ' Duae nativitates Christi intellignntur, una divina, altera humana, una per quam efficeremur, altera per quam reficeremur, ambae mirabiles, ilia sine matre, ista sine patre.' ' The expression ' cognatam nobis infirmitatem ' appears in St. Augustine, Epist. ad Velusianum, cap. iii. Compare Vincentii Lirinensis, Commonitorium primum, § 13: 'In uno eodemque Christo duae substantiae sunt; sed una divina, altera humana ; una ex Patre Deo, altera ex matre virgine ; una coaeterna et aequalis Patri, altera ex tempore et minor Patre ; una consuhstan tialis Patri, altera consuhstantialis matri ; unus tamen idemque Christus in utraque substantia.' ^° A small i has been written above the n in ' unus ' by the corrector. Mai reads 'unius.' " The words ' unius naturg cum Patre et ' have clearly been omitted in advertently after ' esset,' as appears by the Bouhier Commentary which inserts them. The above passage bears an evident correspondence with the following from the work entitled Liber de Fide ad Petrum : ' Verbum carnem factum ; ipsum quoque esse, qui essentialiter natus est de Patre et essentialiter con- Appendix. 509 simihs Deo Patri, perfectus'' homo, quia simihs omni^ matri, qu? mater ita ilium salva virginitate genuit, sic ut salva virginitate concoepit". Verus enim Deus verus factus est homo, quia omnia nostra suscepit, qu? in nobis ipse creavit, id est, carnem et animam rationalem : propter quod * confitemur perfectum eum° Deum et perfectum hominem. Sequitur: Aequalis^ Patri secundum Divinitatem, minor'' Patre secundum humanitatem. Ideo aequalis et minor, quia Deus et homo, quia serapiternus et temporalis, ut incomprehensibilis comprehendi posset, et iramor- talis haberet, in quo moreretur. Sequitur : Qui licet Deus sit et homo, non duo tamen, sed unus est Christus. Non est alter Christus in Deitate, et alter in humanitate, quia non sunt duae personae, sed una. Deus enim Verbum non accepit personam hominis, sed naturam, et persona Divinitatis accepit substantiam carnis, ut in singularitate personae tota humanitas suscepta unus Christus sit, et unus filius Dei atque hominis '. Nam sicut tres personas sanctae trinitatis credimus in unitate naturae, ita credimus duas Christi naturas in unitate personae. In uno etiam Christo, ceptus est natusque de Virgine ; ipsumque unum esse et unius naturae cum Patre et ujiius naturae cum Virgine.' Liber de Fide ad Petrum, cap. xiii. S. Aug. Opera. See Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. xl. p. 753. This work was formerly attributed to St, Augustine, but by the Benedictine editors it has been placed in the Appendix to his works, and is assigned by them without hesitation to Fulgentius. '' For ' natus ' Mai reads ' et.' '' Mai adds ' est.' ' Mai adds ' quoque.' '' The corrector has written ' no ' above ' omni ' in the belief obviously that ' omnino ' was the right reading ; but Mai has ' homini,' which is found also in the Bouhier Commentary, and is no doubt the right one. The expression is found in St. Augustine, Sermo ccxv. § 4. ' ^ This seems to be borrowed all but word for word from St. Leo : ' Con ceptus est . . . intra uterum virginis matris quae ilium ita salva virginitate edidit, quemadmodum salva virginitate concepit.' Epist. ad Flavianum, § 2. Mai omits the words ' genuit . . . virginitate.' * Mai ' propterea.' ' Mai ' eum perfectum.' ' Mai adds ' est.' ' After ' minor ' an erasure has taken place. Mai adds ' est.' ' Here again we are able to trace an evident correspondence of language with Fulgentius' Liber de Fide ad Petrum. The passage is in the seventeenth chapter of that book : ' Deus Verbum non accepit personam hominis, sed naturam ; et in aeternam personam Divinitatis accepit temporalem substantiam carnis.' 5IO Appendix. sicut duas credimus naturas, ita duas naturales ' operationes indivise, inconvertibiliter, inseparabiliter, inconfuse ; et has duas voluntates, non contrarias, sed sequentem humanam eius volun- tatem et non resistentem vel reluctantem, sed potius subiectam divin? eius atque omnipotente ^ voluntati. Sicut enim eius caro Dei Verbum dicitur et est, ita et naturalis carnis eius voluntas propria Dei Verbi dicitur et est. Queraadraodum enira sanc- tissima atque inmaculata animata ' eius caro deificata est, non est pererapta, sed in ¦* proprio sui statu et ratione permansit, ita et humana eius voluntas deificata^ est*. Nam salvator, sicut humanam naturam propterea suscepit, ut salvaret, ideo et humanam voluntatem vel operationera suscipiendo salvavit. Se quitur : Unus autem tion conversione Divinitatis in carne ' sed assumptione humanitatis in Deo *. Conversio mutatio dicitur. Non enira est conversa", id est, rautata Divinitas in carne'; sed manens, quod erat, suscepit carnem '". Humanitas quoque as sumpta est in Deum, non consumpta ". Sicut enim Deus non rautatur miseratione, ita homo non consumitur dignitate"*. Homo Deo accessit, Deus a se non recessit : adquievit esse, quod non ' After 'naturales' the margin of the MS. supplies the words 'voluntates et duas naturales.' They appear in Mai. ^ The corrector has drawn a line through the final e. Mai reads ' omni potenti.' ¦¦ Mai adds ' que.' ' Mai omits 'in.' * Mai reads ' Dei facta,' but ' deificata ' is no doubt the right reading, being found in the ' Interpretatio vetus.' * The whole of this passage respecting the divine and human wills of our blessed Lord, from the words ' ita duas naturales voluntates ' down to ' voluntas deificata est,' is from an Interpretatio vetus Latina of the Definition of the Sixth General Council. See Routh's Scriptorum Ecclesiasticoriini Opuscula, tom. ii. pp. 241, 242, Oxon. 1840. Routh says of this Vetus Interpretatio: ' In editionibus Conciliorum recentioribus adposita est Definitioni ; in vetus- tioribus ante Graece edita concilia comparet.' ' Mai ' carnem.' ' Mai ' Deum.' ' Mai ' conversa est.' '" See St. Augustine, Enchiridion, cap. xxxiv ; ' Verbum caro factum est, a Divinitate carne suscepta, non in carnem Divinitate mutata.' " Compare St, Augustine : ' Forma servi accessit, non forma Dei recessit : haec est assumpta, non ilia consumta.' Trac. in lohannem, Ixxviii. 1. " This sentence, ' Sicut enim . . . dignitate,' is from Leo's Epistle to Flavian. A previous instance of verbal correspondence with that document has been noticed. Appendix. 51 1 erat ; non desiit esse, quod erat '. Sequitur : Unus omnino, non confusione substantiae, sed unitate personae. Confusio dicitur permixtio : sicut solent duo liquores ita misceri, ut neutrum servet integritatem suam ''. In Christo ergo non sunt permixt? substantiae, quia servat utraque cura alterius coraraunione pro prietatem suam in singularitate personae. Sequitur : Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro units est homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus. Sicut in quolibet homine non est una persona anima ' et alia caro, sed ex anima et carne unus est homo ; ita in Christo non sunt duae personae, sed una divina, quae incarnata est. Nam sicut hominis personam gestat anima, non enim corpus mortuum dicitur persona sicut nee lapis aut lignum, ita Christi personara gestat Divinitas, assumptrix humanitatis : propter quod in utraque substantia dicitur et creditur unicus et unigenitus Filius Dei * Unde et Verbum propter carnem homo est, et caro propter Verbum Deus est ^. Sequitur : Qui passus est pro salute nostra. Passus est; et" in sola assumpta substantia. Licet enim iuxta naturam suam expers passionis extiterit, pro nobis tamen carne passus est ; quia erat in crucifixo proprio corpore impassibiliter ad se referens passiones. Gratia vero Dei pro omnibus gustavit mortem tradens ei proprium corpus, quaravis ' In St. Augustine, Epist. cxxxvii. lo, the very words ' Homo . . . non recessit' occur. Compare also ibid. Ser. cxxi. 5 : 'Accessit ad nos, sed a se non multum recessit ; immo a se, quod Deus est, nunquam recessit ; sed addidit, quod erat, naturae nostrae. Accessit enim ad id, quod non erat ; non amisit, quod erat. Factus est Filius hominis, non cessavit esse Filius Dei.' The commentator must have had these passages before him. ''' This seems to be from St. Augustine, Epist. cxxxvii. cap. iii. ^ Mai ' animae.' * Mai ' Deus.' * This is based apparently upon a passage of Vigilius Tapsensis, con. Eutychetem, lib. iv. § 5 : ' Verbum propter carnem suam homo lesus Christus ; et caro propter Verbum Deus Verbum est ' ; and shortly after, ' Christus . . . idem Deus, idem homo -. unde constat et divinitatem humanitatis et humani tatem divinitatis habere vocabulum ; id est, Verbum dici carnem, et carnem dici Verbum ; non quia in se utrumque mutatum sit, sed quia utrumque una persona, id est nnus Christus sit.' Vigilius flourished towards the close of the fifth century. Alcuin, who is much in the habit of adopting the language of earlier writers, appears also to have had this passage before him. ' Caro Deus est,' he says, ' propter Verbum, et Verbum homo propter carnem.' Adv. Felicem, i. 10. The commentator clearly followed Vigilius, not Alcuin. ' Mai reads 'pro salute nostra passus est, sed.' CI2 Appendix. naturahter ipse' vita sit et resurrectio mortuorum ^ Sequitur: Descendit ad inferna; ut mortem » ineffabili potentia proculcata expoliaret infernum. Tertia die resurrexit a mortuis; ut primo- genitus ex mortuis fieret primitiae dormientium, et faceret viam humanae naturae ad incorruptionis recursum *. Sequitur : Ascendit ad coelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris. Propterea humiliatus est Deus in horaine, ut homo exaltaretur in Deo, et unus Christus, qui inclinatur in assumptis, assumpta glorificaret ^ in propriis, dura " affici non dedignatur iniuriis et ad aequalitatem recurrit Genitoris '. Sedet ad dexteram Patris, id est, regnat in beati- tudine superna. Sedere enim regnare est ; dextera vero Patris beatitudo est sempiterna. Sequitur : Inde venturus iudicare vivos et mortuos. Inde, hoc est, dextera Patris venturus est, quia visionem humanitatis omnibus presentaturus, ut in iudicio sit conspicuus in ea forma, qua iudicatus est, Querendum est autem, quomodo intellegatur quod ipse Dominus ait in evangeho : .£¦^1? non iudicabo, sed verbum, quod locutus sum vobis, iudicabit vos " , cum in alio loco dixerit : Pater non iudicat quemquam sed omne iudicium dedit Filio '. Ita enira '" intellegendum est : Ego non iudicabo ex potestate humana, sed iudicabo ex potestate Verbi ". Quapropter F'ilius hominis ludicaturus est, nee tamen ex humana potestate, sed ex ea, qua Filius Dei est. Et rursus Fihus Dei '^ ludicaturus est, nee tamen in ea forma apparens, in ' Mai 'ipsa.' ^ This, from ' Licet ' to ' mortuorum,' is from the translation of the Synodical Epistle of St. Cyril of Alexandria by Dionysius Exiguus. Routh, Opuscula, tom. ii. p 40, Oxford, 1S40. ^ Mai ' morte.' ' These two notes are also from St. Cyril's Epistle. '¦" Mai 'glorificasset.' " Mai inserts ' et.' ' This passage, from ' unus ' to ' Genitoris,' is apparently founded on the following passage in Vigilius Tapsensis, de Unitate Trinitatis, cap, xvi : ' Unus autem atque insepaiabilis Christus et humiliatur in assumptis et glorifi catur in propriis, cum affici non dedignatur iniuriis et aequalitatem custodit Genitoris.' See Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. Ixii. p. 345. ° In this free quotation from St. John xii. 47, 48, the commentator clearly follows St. Augustine, de Trin. i. 5 27. ' St. John V. 22. 1" Mai omits 'enim.' " This is literally the interpretation of St. Augustine in the passage just referred to—de Trin. i. § 27. There cannot be the least doubt from what source the commentator drew here. " Mai omits 'Dei.' Appendix. 513 qua Deus est, sed in ea, qua Filius hominis est'- Ita quoque dicitur : Pater non iudicat quemquam, ac si diceret ^ : Patrem nemo videbit in iudicio, sed omnes Fihum, quia F'ilius hominis est, ut sit in iudicio conspicuus bonis et mahs I Nam invisibihter tota Trinitas iudicabit. Vivos et tnortuos, id est, eos quos dies iudicii vivos invenerit et eos qui iam antea obierant. Sequitur. Ad cuius adventum otnnes homines resurgere habent cum corporibus suis, et reddituri sunt de factis propriis rationetn. Adveniente Domino resuscitantur mortui cura corporibus suis, ut unusquis que in eo corpore, quod * bona vel mala gessit, reddat rationem gestorum suorum, et in eo corpore, per quod operatus est, recipiat retributionera factorum suorum. Sequitur. Et qui bona egerunt, ibunt in vitam aeternam. Tunc enim humana ° ad conditoris sui simihtudinem sublimabitur, et omnia ei bona, quae naturaliter accepta per peccata corruperat, reparabuntur in melius, id est, intellectus sine errore, memoria sine oblivione, cogitatio sine pervagadone, caritas sine siraulatione, sensus sine offensione, incolumitas sine debihtate, salus sine dolore, vita sine raorte, facultas sine irapedimento, saturitas sine fastidio, et tota sanitas sine morbo. Sequitur. Qui vero mala egerunt, in ignem aeternum. Multi egerunt mala, qui non " ibunt in ignem aeternum, quia ante mortem suam veram penitudinem de peccatis suis gesserunt ; sed haec' de ilhs dicitur, quia* raala egerunt et in malis perse- veraverunt et non emendaverunt. Aeternus vero est ignis, qui eis aeternus " exhibet cruciatus, quia nunquam finietur, nee eos desinet cruciare '"- Sequitur. Haec est fides catholica, quam nisi " fideliter firtniterque crediderit, salvus esse non poterit. Fideliter credamus, ut in fide non erremus ; firmiter credamus, ut de ' From ' Quapropter ' to ' hominis est ' is from St. Aug. de Trin. i. § 28. ' Mai reads ' diceretur.' ° Here too the Commentator is evidently following St. Augustine, de Trin. i. § 29. * Mai reads ' quo.' ° Some word is evidently omitted. ' Substantia ' is written in the margin. It is fou.nd in Mai. « Mai adds 'et.' ' Mai 'hoc' ° Mai reads ' dicitur de illis, qui.' " So the MS., but Mai reads ' quia aeternos.' " Mai ' cruciari.' " Mai adds ' quique.' Ll 514 Appendix. credius non dubitemus, si volumus ad aeternam salutem pervenire, ubi cura angelis Deura laudantes de illius laude vivamus, de illius laude et nos glorieraur, qui vivit et regnat per infinita semper saecula saeculorum '. H. Preface to the Oratorian Commentary , edited by Cardinal Mai, '¦Scriptorum veterum nova collectio! tom. ix. p. 396, from the Vatican MS. 231, Reg. f. 153 v, with the original readings of the MS. where the editor has departed from the text. Iniunxistis mihi illud fidei opusculum, quod passim in ecclesiis recitatur quodque'-" a presbyteris nostris usitatius quara cetera opuscula meditatur, sanctorum patrum sententiis quasi exponendo dilatarem, consulentes parrochiae nostrae presbyteris, qui suffi cienter habere libros nullo modo possunt, sed vix et cum labore sibi psalterium, lectionarium, vel missalem adquirunt, per quos ^ divina sacramenta vel officia agere queant ; et quia cum inopia librorum plerisque neque studium legendi aut discendi sulTra- getur *, idcirco vultis ut saltim hanc fidei expositionem raeditari ' cogantur, ut aliquanto amplius de Deo possint sapere et intel legere. Quia maxima omnium ista pernicies est, quod sacerdotes qui plebes Dei docere debuerant, ipsi Deum ignorare inveniuntur: nam, sicut laico blasphemia, ita " sacerdoti voluntaria Dei igno- ratio in sacrilegium deputatur. Hoc naraque opusculum non quidem est altis sermonibus obscurum nee laciniosis ' sententiis arduum, cum paene ' plebeio conscriptum sit sermone ; sed tamen si adiunguntur ei pro locis necessariis tractatorum ' fidei verba, plurimum iuvat '" ad fidei notitiam. Traditur enim quod a beatissirao Athanasio Alexandrinae ecclesiae antestite sit editum : ita namque semper eum vidi praetitulatum etiam in veteribus codicibus ; et puto quod idcirco tam piano et brevi ' Mai adds ' Amen.' ^ MS. ' quoq.' ' MS. ' pereos.' • MS. ' suffragatur.' ' MS. ' meditare.' « MS. ' ista.' ' MS. ' latiniosis.' « MS. 'pene.' » MS. 'tractorum.' '" MS. 'plurimiiiubat.' Appendix. 515 sermone traditum fuerit, ut omnibus catholicis etiam minus eruditis tutamentum defensionis prestaret adversus illam tempes- tatem, quam ventus contrarius, hoc est diabolus, excitavit per Arrium. Qua tempestate navicula, hoc ' est Christi ecclesia, in medio mari videlicet mundo, diu tantis '¦' fluctibus est " vexata, sed non soluta aut submersa. Quia ille imperavit vento et mari, qui se eidem ecclesie promisit usque ad finem saeculi afifuturum. Quicunque ergo ex * huius maris fluctibus salvari desiderat et in profundum abyssi, aeternam videlicet perditionem, demergi pavescit, teneat integre et inviolabiliter fidei veritatem, Ita enim incipit ^ ipsum opusculum : Quicunque vult, etc. I. The Bouhier Commentary. The text is that of Troyes 1979. Collations are given from Troyes 1532, and British Museum Additional 24,90a, described respectively as Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,903. Incipit expositio Sancti Augustini Fidei Sancti Athanasii Episcopi in veneratione Sanctissime Trinitatis individuaeque Unitatis omnipotentissimi universitatis Dei ^- Traditur quod a beatissimo Athanasio Alexandriae ' ecclesie antistite istud fidei opusculum sit editum, sic " etiam in veteribus codicibus invenitur pretitulatum. Quod idcirco tam brevi et piano ° sermone tunc traditum fuisse cognoscitur, ut oranibus catholicis etiam minus eruditis tutaraentura defensionis '" prestaret adversus illam tempestatem, quara ventus contrarius, hoc est, diabolus excitavit per Arrium. Qua tempestate navicula, hoc ' MS. 'id.' 2 MS. 'tanta.' = MS. 'et.' * MS. ' de.' -¦¦ MS. 'incipitur.' ' In Tr. 1532 the title is 'Incipit expositio fidei catholice Sancti Athanasii Episcopi ' ; in B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' Incipit expositio fidei catholicae.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' Alexandrin?.' * B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' sicut.' " B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' piano et brevi.' ^ Tr. 1532 omits ' defensionis.' L 1 a 5i6 Appendix. est', Christi ecclesia in medio mari, videlicet^ mundo, diu iactata est fluctibus et vexata " sed non soluta aut submersa. Quia iUe imperavit vento et mari, qui se eidem ecclesie promisit usque ad* finem saeculi affuturum. Quicunque ergo de huius maris fluctibus salvari desiderat, et in profundum abyssi, aeternam videhcet per ditionem, demergi pavescit, teneat integre et inviolabiliter fidei veritatem. Ita enim incipit ipsum opusculum : Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat catholicam fidem. Fides, qu? credentem salvat et in aeternum perire non sinit, non est ilia, de qua lacob apostolus " dicit : Et demones credunt et contre mescunt^: et iterum: Fides sine operibus mortua est''. Sed ilia potius est, que iuxta apostolum 'P&tAuxn^ per dilectionem operatur'^; illam videlicet dilecdonem, de qua Dominus ait : Qui diligit me, sermones meos servat'" Ille ergo tenet fideliter" fidem Dei, qui non solum recte credit de Deo, sed etiara digne diligendo et agendo proraereri desiderat Deum. Fides alio noraine dicitur creduhtas : nam apud Grecos fides et creduhtas uno nomine appellatur, id est, pistis '^- Catholica Grecum nomen est '^ ; interpretatur autem Latino eloquio universalis, quia toto mundo diffusa ecclesia et toto tempore. Hanc tenet fidem et tenuit ; neque unquam aut terapore rautata est aut '* variata. Nam hereticorum fides non potest dici catholica, quia non est publica, sed privata, nee ubique tenetur, nee semper fuisse monstratur. Ante omnia ergo surama necessitas est, ut fides vera teneatur. Ipsa enira opera precedit. Nam sine bonorum operum meritis ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' id est.' ^ B. M. Addit. 24,902 'id est,' but ' videlicet ' is written above. ^ Tr. 1532, and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'invexata.' * B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' in' but 'ad' has been written above it. ° B.M. Addit. 24,902 'apostolus Jacob.' ° Ep. S. lac. ii. 19. ' Ibid. ii. 20. ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' Paulum apostolum.' ' Gal. V. 6. 1° S. loh. xiv. 21 and 24. " Tr. 1532, and B.M. Addit. 24,902 'veraciter.' '^ Tr. 1532 ' apellatur TTyctic' A line has been drawn through the last word, and ' pistis ' written above it. B. M. Addit. 24,902 has ' nam fides et credulitas uno nomine TTyctc' 'pistis' has been written above the last word by the corrector. '^ B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' est nomen.' '* Tr. 1532, and B. M. Addit. 24,902, add 'locis.' Appendix. 517 per fidem iustificatur impius, sicut dicit apostolus ' : Credenti in eum, qui iustificat impium, deputatur fides eius ad iustitiam '^. Ut deinde ipsa fides per dilectionem incipiat operari ; ea quippe sola bona opera dicenda sunt, qu? fiunt per dilectionem Dei. H?c autem necesse est ante cedat fides, ut inde ista, non ab isds incipiat ilia ; quoniam nuhus operatur per dilectionem Dei, nisi prius credit in Deum. H?c est fides, de qua dicitur : In Christo enim Ihesu neque circumcisio aliquid valet neque praeputium, sed fides que per dilectionem operatur^. Ergo, ut bona opera sequantur, precedit fides ; nee ulla sunt bona opera, nisi qu? secuntur, pre- cedente fide. Et ideo credendo in Deum prevenit quisque opera sua. Existimo enim, inquit apostolus, iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus *. Non enim ut iustificetur de operibus gloriatur, nee preponit fidei merita sua, sed fide prevenit opera sua. Et quidem temporalis salus communis est et bonis et malis ; immo, communis est hominibus et iumentis, sicut cantatur in psalmo : Homines et iumenta salvos fades, Domine ^. Aeternam vero salutem quam Dominus promittit dicens : Qui crediderit et baptizatus fuerit, salvus erit", et de qua propheta ait: Israel salvatus est in Domino salute eterna ' , nullus proculdubio con- sequi valet, nisi per fidem ; et fidem non quamlibet, num ' quam excogitavit Arrius aut Sabellius vel ceteri heretici, sed catholicam, id est, universalem. Quara divinitus traditara et inspiratara universa semper tenuit et tenebit ecclesia. H?c est enira, de qua Deus per prophetam dicit : lustus autem meus ex fide vivit " ; et apostolus testatur dicens : Sine fide impossibile est placere Deo '". Qu? in tantum omnia bona hominis precedit, ut, nisi ab ipsa et ' B. M. Addit. 24,902, adds ' Paulus.' 2 Rom. iv. 5. ' Gal. v. 6. * Rom. iii. 28. ' Ps. xxxvi. A. V. ; xxxv. Vulg. The quotation is either from the Roman Psalter or the Vetus. '• St. Marc. xvi. 16. ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 • salutem jtemam.' The quotation is fiom Isaiah xiv. 17. » Tr. 1532, and B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' non,' and no doubt rightly. In the latter ' dug partes ' has been written above in another hand. ' See Habac ii. 4, where the passage in the Vulgate '\%— Justus autem in fide sua vivet. But in Heb. x. 38 it is quoted word for word the same as in the text. '" Heb. xi. 6. ri8 Appendix. per ipsam, nihil boni in homine inchoari possit. H?c enim prirao ' homini commendatur et traditur ; et sic ad sacramenta salvus accedit ", videlicet, ut exhorcizetur, catechizetur, baptizetur, mens? dorainicae societur, et sacri chrisraatis ' unctione per donum sancti Spiritus consumetur. Quatinus per h?c ecclesi? incorporatus eruatur de potestate tenebrarum et transferatur in regnum Filii * caritatis ^ Dei, ut deinceps vivere Deo " et cum Deo possit operari. Unde recte de eadem fide subiungitur ' : Quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit, absque dubio in eternum peribit. Integra et inviolata servanda est fides ; quia nihil ' de iUa " est auferendum, nihil mutandum, sicut in fine libri apocalypsis '° terribiliter contestatum est ; ubi legitur : Si quis apposuerit ad h^c, apponet Deus super ilium piagas quae scriptae sunt in libro isto " , et si quis deminuerit, auferet Deus nomen '^ eius de IVjro vitae "- Demunt namque et violant, id est, minuunt et corrumpunt sacramenta fidei heretici et scismatici ; et idcirco elicit illos " foras ecclesia et excludit a se, ut ipsa sine macula inveniatur et ruga. Sicut enim Deus Veritas est, ita ea qu? apostolica ecclesia de Deo docuit, vera sunt. Si aliquid horum detraxeris '^ aut '" mutaveris, intrat putredo de veneno serpentis, nascuntur vermes mendaciorum, et nihil integrum remanebit. Quia ubi fuerit corruptio falsitatis, non ibi erit integritas veritatis. Sequitur ". Fides autem catholica haec est, ut unum Deum in ' Tr. 1532 and B.M. Addit. 24,902 'prima.' ^ Tr. 1532 'accedat.' ^ Tr. 1532 ' crismatis.' * B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits ' Filii.' ' Tr. 1532 ' claritatis,' ^ B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' Deo vivere.' ' This passage from • Ante omnia ergo ' to ' subiungitur' is not found at all in the Oratorian Commentary. ° T. 1532 always reads ' nichil.' ' Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'ea.' " In B. M. Addit. 24,902 the word is given in Greek characters, and ' apocalipsis ' is written above. " Tr. 1532 ' isto libro.' ''' The Vulgate has ' partem.' 1' Apoc. xxii. 18, 19. " B. M. Addit. 24,902 'eos.' '° Tr. 1532 'deinseris' apparently; but B.M. Addit. 24,902 'dempseris,' the right reading doubtless. "¦ B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' vel.' 1' ' Sequitur' is omitted in Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902. Appendix. 519 trinitate et trinitatem in unitate veneremur. Unitas ' est in Deitate, trinitas in personis. Veneremur ergo unitatem Deitatis in trinitate personarum ; veneremur trinitatem personarum in unitate Deitatis. In qua trinitate tanta est substantiae unitas, ut aequahtatem teneat, pluralitatem non recipiat ; tanta personarum distinctio, ut unione non permisceatur '"¦- Tres personae unius sunt essentiae sive naturae, unius virtutis, unius operationis, unius beatitudinis, atque unius potestatis, ut trina sit unitas et una sit trinitas. Ita ut ex plenitudine Divinitatis nihil minus in singuhs, nihil amplius " intelhgatur in tribus. Velut si de tribus hominibus dicamus, quod sint immortales : manifestura est non plus posse vivere simul tres quam singulos, nee minus singulos quos * totos " tres ; quorum trium una est immortahtas. Aut si aequaliter sint sapientes : non * plus sapiunt siraul quam singuh, sed tanta est in unoquoque sapientia, quanta in tribus. Si hoc ergo in creatura invenitur, quanto magis in creatore, in Patre scilicet et Fiho et Spiritu Sancto : cui est aeterna et incommutabilis unitas, qui ' est indifferens trinitas ; unus Deus, unum lumen, unumque prin cipium. Trinitas dicitur quasi tri unitas, id est, trium unitas. Hoc est enim vera trinitas, tres unum esse. Unde lohannes apostolus dicit: Et* tres unum sunt^. Sequitur'". Neque con fundentes personas, neque substantiam " separantes. Sabellius, quia intellexit unum '^ esse trinitatis substantiam, ideo confundens personas, ipsum sibi Patrem, ipsum sibi Fihum, ipsum '" Spiritum Sanctum, esse dicebat. Nos vero non nomina tantum sed etiam nominum '* proprietates, id est, personas confitemur. Nee Pater '^ ' Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'Una,' but in the latter 'unitas' has been written above as a correction. " B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' permisceantur.' ' For ' amplius' Tr. 1532 reads 'plus.' ' For 'quos' B. M. Addit. 24,902 reads 'quam.' ' For ' totos ' Tr. 1532 reads ' omnes.' « ' Non ' is omitted in Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902. ' Tr. 1532 ' que.' ° B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds 'hi.' » I Epist. S. lohan. v. 8. " Tr. 1532 omits ' Sequitur.' " B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' substantia' ; but there is some appearance of erasure above the final a. Probably the mark of contraction has been erased. '^ Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'unam.' " Tr. 1532 adds 'sibi.' " Tr. 1532 adds 'potestates et.' '= Tr. 1532 'Neque Patris,' B. M. Addit. 24,902 'Neque Pater.' In the r2o Appendix. aut Filii aut Spiritus Sancti personara aliquando ' excludit ; nee rursus Filius aut Spiritus Sanctus Patris noraen personamque '' recipit. Sed Pater semper Pater, Fihus semper Fihus, Spiritus Sanctus semper Spiritus Sanctus. E contrario autem ^ Arrius, quia cognovit tres personas, idcirco et tres asseruit divisas substantias. Sed nos detestantes Arrium unam eandemque dicimus trinitatis esse substantiam, et unum in tribus personis fatemur Deum. Im pietatem quoque Sabellu declinaraus', tres personas sub proprietate distinguiraus. Quia Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus substantia unum sunt, personis ac nominibus distinguntur. Substantia est unius cuiusque rei essentia vel natura. Perquam omne, quod '" est, subsistere et esse cognoscitur. Sequitur". Alia est enim persona Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti, sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est Divinitas, aequalis gloria, co-aeterna maiestas. Alius est in persona Pater, alius in persona Filius, alius in persona Spiritus Sanctus. Non est alius in Deitate, non est alius in gloria. Alius est Pater et alius Filius, quia non est ipse Pater, qui Filius. Non est tamen aliud Pater et aliud Filius, quia hoc est Pater quod Fihus. Pater enim genitor est, non genitus. Filius genitus est, non genitor. Spiritus Sanctus non est genitor, quia non est tater; non est genitus, quia non est Filius : sed procedens est, quia Spiritus est. Hoc est tamen Fihus quod Pater, quia Deus, quia creator, quia omnipotens. Aequalis ergo ' gloria trinitatis, quia non est maior in gloria Pater quam Filius aut Spiritus Sanctus, non est rainor ' gloria Spiritus Sancti quam Patris aut Filii. Itera coaeterna maiestas est trinitatis, quia non est anterior Pater Filio aut Spiritu Sancto, non est posterior Spiritus Sanctus Patre aut Filio. Personas dicere in trinitate necessitas fecit disputationis contra hereticos. Nam cum dixeris tres sunt et interrogatus fueris quid sunt tres '', nihil omnino respondendum restat nisi personae. latter the last letters of ' Pater ' appear to have been altered, and ' enim ' has been writtm above ' neque ' by a different hand. ' Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 omit ' aliquando.' ^ Tr. 1532 'personam nomenque.' ^ Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 omit ' autem.' * Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' declinantes.' " Tr. 1532 omits ' quod.' « Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds ' est' » B. M. Addit. 24,902 'minor est.' " B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' tres sunt.' Appendix. 521 Aliud enim ' quid respondeas, nihil habebis, quia non potest dicere tres dii aut tres substantiae aut aliquid huiusmodi, quod absit. Dicta est ^ autem persona, quasi per se una eo quod per se sit. Pater et Fihus et Spiritus Sanctus inseparabiles sunt etiam in personis. Quia, sicut ubique est Pater, ita ' ubique * Filius, ubique et Spiritus Sanctus. Inseparabile est etiam" opus trinitatis; quia qu?libet persona, sicut sine aliis personis esse non potest, ita sine ahis non operatur ; et nihil seorsum agit inseparabilis caritas. Sequitur ". Qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis Spiritus Sanctus. Hoc propter necessitatem contra hereticos usurpatum est, qui dissimilem Deo Patri Filium asserebant, dissimilemque Spiritum Sanctum. Nam qualitas de Deo proprie non dicitur, quem, in quantum possumus, intelligere deberaus sine qualitate bonum, sine quantitate magnum, sine indigentia creatorem, sine situ presentem, sine habitu omnia continentem, sine loco ubique totum, sine tempore serapiternum, sine ulla sui mutatione mutabilia facientem, nihilque pacientera '. In nullo ergo dis simihs Patri Filius, in nuho dissimilis Patri et Filio Spiritus Sanctus : quia in quibus est una Deltas, non est ulla diversitas. Sequitur "- Increatus Pater, increatus Filius, increatus Spiritus Sanctus. Nihil in trinitate creatum, quia tota trinitas unus est creator. Omnis itaque substantia quae Deus non est, creatura est, et quae creatura non est, Deus est. Nulla igitur differentia est in Deitate trinitatis ; quoniam quod Deo minus est, Deus non est. Sequitur ". Immensus Pater, immensus Filius, immensus Spiritus Sanctus. Immensus est Deus trinitatis*, quia nulla ratione nulla estimatione metiri valet. Mundo non capitur : sic replet mundum, ut ipse contineat mundum, non contineatur a mundo, sine labore regens, sine onere continens omnia ; non tamen per spacia ' locorum quasi mole diffusus, sed in solo celo totus et in sola terra totus et in parte totus et per cuncta totus ; ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' nam.' * Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 omit 'est.' ° Tr. 1532 omits 'ita.' * B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits the second 'ubique.' » B. M. Addit 24,902 ' edam est.' ' Tr. 1532 omits ' Sequitur.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 'parientem.' ' Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit 24,902 ' trinitas.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' spatia." 522 Appendix. in ' nuho contentus loco, sed in seipso ubique totus '^. Ita Pater, ita Fihus, ita Spiritus Sanctus; unus Deus trinitas ^ Est namque ubique, quia nusquam est absens ; in seipso autera, quia non continetur eis, quibus presens est, tanquam sine his esse non possit. Qui cum sit ubique totus per Divinitatis presentiam, non est ubique per habitationis gratiam. Unde non dicimus. Pater noster, qui es ubique, cum procul dubio verum sit, sed Pater noster, qui es in cehs : in Sanctis, videlicet, angelis et Sanctis omnibus *, in quibus esse dicitur, non solum per presentiam suae maiestatis, sed etiam per gratiam su? habitationis. Sequitur ^ Aetertius Pater, aeternus Filius, aeternus Spiritus Sanctus : et tamen non tres aeterni, sed unus aeternus ; sicut tion tres increati, tiec tres immensi, sed unus increatus et unus immensus. In Deitate trinitatis quod est esse perpetuum est. Nee Pater unquam fuit sine Filio, quia aeternahter, id est sine initio, genuit Filium, et sicut semper Deus, ita semper extat" Pater : semper quoque Filius cum Patre, quia aeternahter genitus est a Patre : semper etiam Spiritus Sanctus cum Patre et Filio, quia aeternahter ex Patre et F'ilio pro cedit. Non sunt tamen tres aeterni, nee tres increati, nee tres im mensi ; quia totius sanctae trinitatis, sicut una est natura, ita una est increatio, una immensitas, unaque' aeternitas. Sequitur ^ Similiter omnipotens Pater, omnipotens Filius, omnipotens Spiritus Sanctus .- et tamen non tres omnipotens, sed unus otnnipotens. Omnipotens dicitur Deus, quia omnia potest, non patiendo aliquid, quod non vult, sed faciendo quodcunque vult ', sicut scriptum est : Apud Deum autem omnia possibilia sunt^. Oranipotens est, quia omnia quae sunt, illius potestate acceperunt ut sint, illius potestate tenentur '° ' For 'in' B. M. Addit. 24,902 reads 'et' ^ B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' totus ubique.' ^ B M. Addit. 24,902 omits ' unus Deus trinitas.' ' For 'omnibus' Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 read 'hominibus,' and rightly. ^ Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.' " Tr. 1532 and B, M. Addit 24,902 ' existit.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits ' que.' ' This IS not in the Oratorian Commentary; it seems to be taken from St. Augustine, de Civ. Dei, lib. v. cap. 10, ' Dicitur omnipotens faciendo quod vult, non patiendo quod non vult' ' St. Matt xix. 26. " B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' continentur.' Appendix. 523 ne concidant. Hoc Pater, hoc Filius, hoc^ Spiritus Sanctus. Nee tamen tres omnipotentes, sed unus oranipotens, quia totius sanctae trinitatis, sic est una oranipotentia, sicut una essentia '. Ita Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus Spiritus Sanctus : et tamen non tres Dii, sed unus est Deus. Ita Dominus Pater, Dominus Filius, Dominus Spiritus Sanctus : et tamen non tres Domini, sed unus est Dominus. Totius sanctae trinitatis una Deltas et una^ Dorainatio. Sciendum vero quod Deus dicitur 'a se '^j Dominus ad creaturas quibus dominatur ; Deus, quia colendus est ; Dorainus, quia solus timendus est ; Deus religiosorura, Dorainus vero servorum. Sequitur " : Quia sicut singillatim unam quamque personam Deum et Dominum confiteri Christiana veritate compellimur ; ita tres Deos aut tres Dominos ' dicere Catholica religione prohibemur. Unam quamque personam in sancta trinitate singillatim, hoc est singulariter, et Deum et Dominura confiteri oportet. Ita nos dicere fides " Christiana compellit. Quia nisi ita dixerimus, Christiani esse non possumus. Et tamen alium Deum aut Dominum dicere Patrem, ahum Deum aut Dorainum dicere Filium, alium Deum aut Dominum dicere Spiritum Sanctum, prohibet nos Catholica religio. Quia, si ita dixerimus, nee Catholici nee religiosi esse poterimus. Sed ut Christiani siraus atque " Catholici, dicaraus vel pocius '" credaraus et Patrem Deum et Fihum Deura et Spiritum Sanctum Deum, et simul non tres Deos, sed unum Deum, qui substantia et natura sit veraciter unus. Sequitur. Pater a nullo est factus nee creatus nee genitus ; Filius a Patre solo est; non factus nee creatus, sed genitus ; Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus nee creatus nee genitus, sed procedens. Pater a nullo est, quia non habet patrem, de quo sit. Nulla enim omnino " res est qu? seipsam gignit ", ut ' B. M. Addit 24,902 adds ' et' ^ B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds ' Sequitur.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds ' est.' * Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit 24,902 ' dicatur.' = B. M. Addit 24,902 has rightly, as also the Oratorian Commentary, ' ad se.' ° Tr. 1532 omits ' Sequitur.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' Deos ac Dominos. ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' fides dicere.' » Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 add ' religiosi et.' "> B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' potius.' " Tr. 1532 omits ' omnino.' '' B. M. Addit 24,902 'gignat' 524 Appendix. sit. Filius autem de Patre est, ut sit atque ut ilh coaeternus sit '- Cognoscaraus itaque Fihum Dei Filium Dei esse ; cog- noscamus a se ipso non esse, sed genitum esse a Patre, Patrem vero ipsum ingenitura esse, a nullo esse, a nullo vitam accepisse •' Vita est enim ipse Pater*, vita esf* ipse Filius; sed ille de nuOo vita, iste vita de vita ^ Sed talis qualis ilia, tanta quanta ilia, hoc omnino quod ilia ". Filius a Patre solo est genitus ; Spiritus autera Sanctus ab utroque, id est Patre et Filio, pro cedens, Spiritus araborura est. Filius vero solius est Patris. Et h?c ' est causa, quae distinguit inter nativitatem P"ilii et pro cessionem Spiritus Sancti. Filius sic est de Patre, quoraodo natus, non quomodo datus : Spiritus vero Sanctus sic est de Patre siraul et Filio, quoraodo datus, non quomodo natus, hoc est, donura araborura. Itaque Filius nascendo procedit, Spiritus vero Sanctus procedendo non nascitur, ne sint duo filii. Nara cum sit et Pater et * Spiritus, et " Filius et '" spiritus, et Pater sanctus et Filius sanctus, proprie taraen ipse vocatur Spiritus Sanctus, tanquam sanctitas coessentialis et consuhstantialis am borum ". Sequitur ''. Units ergo Pater non tres patres, unus Filius non tres filii, unus Spiritus Sanctus, non tres spiritus sancti. Unus est in sancta trinitate tantummodo Pater, qui genuit Filiura ; unus tanturaraodo Filius, qui genitus est a Patre ; unus tantummodo Spiritus Sanctus, qui ex utroque procedit. Proprium ergo Patris est, quia genuit ; proprium Filii, quia genitus est ; proprium Spiritus Sancti, quia procedit ". Haec sunt relativa ' This is in substance from St. Augustine, in loannis Evan, xlviii. 6. ^ Tr. 1532 ' accipere.' ^ Tr. 1532 ' Pater ipse.' * B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits ' est.' ^ See St. Aug, con. sernionem Arianorum. " From 'Pater a nullo est, quia' to 'ilia' is not in the Oratorian Com mentary. ' Tr. 1532 'hoc.' " Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit 24,902 rightly omit this 'et' ' Tr. 1532 omits this 'et' also. '° B. M. Addit. 24,902 has 'Filius spiritus' no doubt rightly, omitting the 'et' " This passage from 'nam cum sit' to ' amborum' is from St. Augustine, de Civ. Dei, xi. 24. '^ Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.' '¦' Fiom ' Unus est ' to ' procedit ' is not in the Oratorian Commentary. Appendix. 525 nomina, in quibus trinitas dinoscitur : Pater videlicet et ' Filius et Spiritus Sanctus. Qu? ideo relativa dicuntur, quia Pater ad alium refertur, hoc est ad Filium : non enim sibi ipsi est Pater, sed alteri, hoc est Filio. Similiter Filius ad Patrem refertur. Sed et Spiritus Sanctus vel donum, quod ^ dicitur, refertur ad Patrem et Fihum, a quibus procedit vel datur. Alia ergo sunt nomina substantiae, hoc est unitatis, et alia sunt nomina per sonarum, hoc est trinitatis. Substantialia, in quacunque persona dicantur, non referuntur ad aliam ', sed ad seipsam. Relativa vero semper, ut dictum est, ad invicem referuntur. Dicitur Filius ab apostolo Dei virtus et Dei sapientia *. Sed non ita est relativura in eo virtus et sapientia, sicut est quod dicitur Verbum aut Fihus. Virtus enim et sapientia in Deo substantia est. Et ita dicitur Fihus sapientia Patris, quomodo dicitur lumen Patris ; id est, ut, quemadmodum lumen de luraine et utrumque unum lumen, sic intelhgatur sapientia de sapientia et utrumque una sapientia. Pater igitur et Filius simul una ^ essentia et una magnitudo et una virtus et una sapientia. Sed non Pater et Filius simul ambo unum Verbum. Quia non simul ambo unus Filius : sed Filius factus est nobis sapientia a Deo^. De qua cum aliquid in scripturis dicitur, Filius nobis insinuatur. Spiritus quoque Sanctus sapientia. Et simul non tres sapientiae, sed una sapientia. Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus. Sequitur '- Et in hac trinitate nihil prius aut posterius nihil maius aut minus, sed totae tres personae co-aeternae sibi sunt et co-aequales. Ita ut per omnia, sicut iam dictum est, et trinitas in unitate et unitas in trinitate* veneranda sit. Haec trinitas unus est Deus; et quia unus est, non potest' esse diversus. Quia una natura non potest se ipsa esse prior aut posterior, maior aut minor. In hac itaque trinitate nihil est prius aut posterius, quia tot? tres personae co?ternae sibi sunt, id est, simul aeternae. Non est Pater prior Filio, non est Filius posterior Patre, non est Spiritus Sanctus posterior Patre et Filio. Sed ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits ' et' " B. M. Addit. 24,902 for ' quod ' reads ' cum.' ' Tr. 1532 'alium.' ' i Cor. i. 24. ' Tr. 1532 omits 'simul ' and adds ' est ' after ' una.' 6 I Qor. i. 30. ' Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.' " B. M. Addit. 24,902 'unitas in trinitate et trinitas in unitate.' » Tr. 1532 inserts ' se ipsa,' but a mark has been made under it. 526 Appendix. Pater aeternus sine initio Pater; Filius sine initio Patri co aeternus ; Spiritus Sanctus sine initio Patri et Filio co-aeternus. Aeterna quippe est generatio Patris, aeterna nativitas Fihi ex Patre, aeterna processio Spiritus Sancti ex Patre et Filio. Nihil enira ' in hac trinitate raaius aut minus, quia tot? tres personae sibi sunt co-aequales, id est, simul aequales. Non ibi est Filius minor ^ Patre, nee Spiritus Sanctus minor Patre et Filio. Sed quantus Pater, tantus Filius, tantus Spiritus Sanctus. Filius per omnia aequalis Patri, Spiritus Sanctus per omnia * Patri et Filio co-aequalis. Quapropter qui unam Divinitatem Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti confitemur, diversum in hac trinitate ordinem non recipimus. Quia increata et inaestimabilis trinitas, quae unius ¦* est aeternitatis et glorie " nee tempus nee gradum vel posterioris recipit vel prioris. Nescit hie ordinem fides, nescit discretum Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti honorem, nee aliquem in Deo invenit gradura. Nusquam secundum, nusquam tertiura Deura legimus. Primum legimus, primum ac solum audivimus. Nam et Filius, quamvis ex Patre sit, tamen primum ac prin cipium esse se dicit. Omnimodis ergo et trinitas in unitate et unitas in trinitate veneranda est. Quia trinitas " est in unitate persona et una est in trinitate substantia. Quoniam unus est Deus, sed taraen trinitas. Nee confuse accipiendum est ', quod ait Apostolus : Ex quo omnia, per quem omnia, in quo omnia * ,- nee deis multis, sed ipsi gloria in saecula saeculorum. Amen ". Sequitur '". Qui vult ergo salvus esse, ita de trinitate sentiat. Sed necessarium est ad aeternam salutem, ut incarnationem quoque Domini nostri Ihesu Christi" fideliter credat. Sicut fideliter credenda est Divinitas regnantis, ita fideliter credenda est humanitas salvantis. Quia aequalis periculi est de mysterio ' Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 for 'enim' read 'etiam.' ° Tr. 1532 ' maior.' ^ B. M. Addit. 24,902 'per omnia Spiritus Sanctus.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 'unus.' ^ Tr. 1532 'aeternitatis et gloriae est' " Tr. 1532 and B, M. Addit, 24,902 'trina.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 omits 'est' ' Rom. xi. 36. " ' Amen ' is in a different hand. This passage from ' Sed Pater aeternus ' to ' saeculorum ' is peculiar to this Commentary. It is not in the Oratorian. " Tr. 1532 omits ' Sequitur.' " Tr. 1532 adds ' unus-quis-que.' Appendix. 527 incarnationis prave ' sentire et ' de Divinitatis archano male '' intelligere. Nihil enim iustius, quam ut salvus non sit, qui salutis mysterio derogare non timuerit. Ihesus noraen est heb- reum ; interpretatur autem in latino salutaris sive salvator. Christus grece dicitur, quod transfertur in ' unctus ab unctione, id est, chrismate ; hebraice vero dicitur Messias. Sequitur " Est ergo fides recta ut credamus et confiteamur, quia Dominus noster Ihesus Christus, Dei Filius, Deus et homo est. Filius Dei Deus homo factus est, ut in singularitate personae copulans utramque naturam mediator Dei et hominum hominibus appa reret, verus Deus, verus horao, unus Christus. Utraque ergo" natura in eo est credenda et confitenda, videlicet divina et humana, qui factus est nobis redemptor et redemptio, sacerdos et oblatio. In iho enim nostra portio, quia nostra caro et sanguis, ut, ubi regnat nostra portio, nos quoque glorificemur. Nuhum maius donum prestare potuit ' Deus hominibus, quara quod Verbura suura, per quod condidit omnia, fuit illis caput et illis ' ei tanquam membra coaptavit, ut esset Filius Dei et ' Filius hominis, unus Deus cum Patre, unus homo cum hominibus. Sequitur". Deus'" ex substantia Patris ante saecula, homo" e.v substantia matris in saeculo natus : perfectus Deus, perfectus homo'"'' ex anima rationali et humana carne subsistens. Essentialiter natus est de Patre, et essentialiter conceptus natusque de raatre, ut esset unius natur? cum Patre et unius natur? cum virgine ; consubstantiahs Patri secundum Divinitatem, consuhstantialis matri secundum humanara infirmitatem ; de substantia Patris ante saecula genitus, de substantia matris in saeculo natus ; perfectus Deus, quia indissimilis '* Deo Patri, perfectus quoque homo, quia similis homini matri. Quae mater ita ilium salva virginitate genuit, sicut salva virginitate concepit. Verus enim Deus verus factus est homo ; quia omnia nostra suscepit, quae in nobis ipse creavit, id ' Tr. 1532 'male.' ^ B. M. Addit. 24,902 'ut.' ' Tr. 1532 'prave.' * Tr. 1532 adds 'latinum.' = Tr. 1 532 omits ' Sequitur.' " Tr. 1532 for ' ergo ' has ' vero.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' potuit prestare.' ' Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit 24,902 ' illos.' » B. m'. Addit. 24,902 omits 'et' '" B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds ^' est.' " B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' et homo est' '^ Tr. 1532 adds 'est' " Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'non dissimilis.' 528 Appendix. est carnem et animam rationalem. Propter quod perfectum eum Deura et perfectum hominem confitemur'. Aequalis Patri .^ecundutn Divinitatem, minor Patre secundum hutnanitatem. Ideo aequahs et rainor, quia Deus et homo ¦^, aequalis Patri in forma Dei, sicut Apostolus dicit : Qui cum in forma Dei esset, non rapinatn arbitratus est esse se aequalem Deo *. Minor Patre in forma servi, de qua idem Apostolus continue subiungit : Sed semet ipsum exinanivit, formam servi accipiens *. Unde et ipse Dominus in evangelio aequalem se Patri in Divinitate esse ostendens ait: Ego et Pater unum sumus ^. Et iterum rainorera se Patre in humanitate esse confirmans dicit, quia Pater maior me est". Qui, licet Deus sit et homo, non duo tamen, sed unus est Christus. Non est alter Christus in Deitate et alter in buraani- tate, quia non sunt duae personae, sed una. Deus enim Verbum non accepit personam hominum' sed naturam*, ut in singularitate personae tota humanitas suscepta unus Christus sit, et unus Filius Dei atque hominis. In quo sicut duas credimus naturas, ita duas naturales voluntates et duas naturales operationes '' in separabiliter, inconfuse, et has duas voluntates, non contrarias, sed pocius humanam eius voluntatem subiectam divinae eius atque omnipotenti voluntati. Nara salvator sicut humanam naturara propterea suscepit, ut salvaret, ita et humanara volun tatem suscipiendo salvavit. Sequitur '"- Unus autem non con versione Divinitatis in carnem " sed adsumptione humanitatis in Deum. Conversio mutatio dicitur. Non ergo est "* conversa, id ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 inserts ' Sequitur.' - Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit 24,902 add ' est' " Phil. ii. 6. •• Ibid. ii. 7. ^ St. John X. 30. Tr. 1532 instead of 'Ego . . . sumus ' has 'Ego in Patre et Pater in me est.' * St, John xiv. 28. From ' Ideo aequalis ' to ' maior me est ' is peculiar to this Commentary. It is not in the Oratorian. In substance it is from St Augustine. B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds ' Sequitur.' ' Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 'hominis.' * Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit 24,902 add, as the Oratorian Commentary, ' et persona Divinitatis accepit substantiam carnis.' " Tr. 1532 instead of 'voluntates et duas naturales operationes' has ' potentias.' '" Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.' " Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit 24,902 ' came.' " B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' est ergo.' Appendix. 529 est, mutata Divinitas in carnem ; sed manens quod erat suscepit carnem. Humanitas quoque assumpta est in Deum, non con sumpta. Homo Deo accessit, Deus a se non recessit. Adqui evit esse quod non erat, non desiit esse quod erat. Sequitur'. Unus omnino, non confusione substantiae, sed unitate personae. Confusio dicitur permixtio, sicut solent duo liquores immisceri ^, ut neutrum servet integritatem suam. In Christo ergo non sunt permixte substantiae, quia servat utraque cum alterius com munione proprietatem suam in singularitate personae. Sequitur '. Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus. Ut * in quolibet homine non est una persona anima, et anima * caro, sed ex anima et carne unus est homo, ita in Christo non sunt duae personae, sed una divina, quae incarnata est. Nam sicut hominis personam gestat anima, quia utique corpus mortuum non dicitur persona sicut nee lapis aut ° lignum, ita Christi personam gestat Divinitas, assumptrix humanitatis ", propter quod utraque substantia dicitur et creditur unicus et unigenitus Filius Dei. Unde et Verbum propter carnem homo est, et caro propter Verbum Deus est. Sequitur '. Qui passus est pro salute nostra, descendit ad inferos, surrexit a mortuis, ascendit ad caelos, sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omni potentis, inde venturus iudicare vivos et mortuos. Passus est, sed in sola assumpta substantia. Gratia enim ' pro omnibus * gustavit mortem, tradens ei proprium corpus ", quaravis naturaliter ipse vita sit et resurrectio mortuorum. Descendit ad inferos, ut morte ineffabili potentia proculcata spoliaret infernum, et antiquorum iustorum animas, qui, quamlibet in loco tranquillitatis, ibi tamen detinebantur, ad paradisi amoena reduceret. Tertia die resur rexit'" a mortuis in eadem carne, qua passus fuerat, ut esset ' Tr. 1532 omits ' Sequitur.' ^ B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' ita misceri.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 'Sicut.' * Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 give the right reading ' alia.' ° B. M. Addit 24,902 ' nee' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 'Divinitatis,' but it has been underscored, and ' humanitatis ' written above it by the corrector. ' Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit 24,902 add ' Dei. ' Tr. 1532 'hominibus.' ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' corpus proprium.' '" Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' surrexit' M m 530 Appendix. primogenitus a' raortuis et primitiae dormientium, et faceret viam humanae naturae ad immortalitatis recursum. Ascendit ad coelos, quia ideo humiliatus est Deus in homine, ut homo exaltaretur in Deo. Sedet vero ad dexteram Patris, id est, regnat in beatitudine superna ^- Sedere enim regnare est. Dextera vero Patris beatitudo est sempiterna. Inde venturus est * iudicare vivos et mortuos; quia visionem humanitatis omnibus presenta^ turns est, ut in iudicio appareat conspicuus in ea forma, qua iudicatus est. Vivos autem et mortuos, qui iudicandi sunt, eos intelligere debemus, quos dies iudicii vivos invenerit, et eos, qui iam ante obierunt. Sequitur '. Ad cuius adventum omnes homines resurgere habent cum corporibus suis, et reddituri sunt de factis propriis rationem. Adveniente Domino, resuscitantur mortui cum corporibus suis, ut unusquisque in eo corpore, quo bona vel mala gessit, reddat ° rationem gestorum suorum, et in eo corpore. per quod operatus est, recipiat " retributionera factorum suorum '. Sequitur *. Et, qui bona egerunt, ibunt in vitam aeternam, qui vero mala, in ignem aeternutn. Tunc enim " iusti non solum in aniraabus beatificati, sed etiam in corporibus glorificati, posside- bunt vitam aeternam, absque ullo metu mortis cum iucunditate * et gaudio immortalitatis. Tunc etiam hi, qua'" mala egerunt, illo extreme iudicio raittentur in ignem aeternum : qui ignis ideo dicitur aeternus, quia eis aeternos exhibet cruciatus " et nunquam finietur, nee eos cruciare cessabit. Multi egerunt mala, qui '^ non ibunt in ignem aeternum, quia ante mortem suam veram peni tudinem de peccatis suis gesserunt; sed hie de illis dicitur, qui mala egerunt, et sine eraendatione in malis perseveraverunt. Sequitur. Haec est fides catholica, quatti nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque crediderit, salvus esse non poterit. Fideliter credamus, ut in fide non erremus, firmiter'* credamus ut de creditis non ' B. M. Addit 24,902 'ex.' ^ Tr. 1532 ' sempiterna.' = B. M. Addit 24,902 omits ' est' ¦• Tr. 1532 omits 'Sequitur.' = Tr. 1532 adds 'uni Deo.' ^ B. M. Addit. 24,902 ' retribuat.' ' From ' et in ' to ' suorum' is omitted from the text of Tr. 1532, but is inserted in the margin. " Tr. 1532 for 'enim' reads 'vero.' " B. M. Addit 24,902 ' iocundidate.' '" Tr. 1532 and B. M, Addit 24,902 'qui.' " Tr. 1532 'eos cruciet eterno cruciatu.' " Tr. 1532 adds ' et' '* Tr. 1532 and B. M. Addit. 24,902 for 'firmiter' read 'fideliter.* Appendix. 531 dubitemus, si ad aeternam salutem volumus pervenire, ubi cum angelis Deum laudantes de illius laude vivamus, de ihius laude et nos gloriamur. Amen '. J- Commentary on the Athanasian Creed in MS. loia, Latin, Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris. It commences on f. 59 and ends onf. 66. Incipit Fides chatolica cum exposicione Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat chatolicam fidem. Chatolica dicitur universalis: et quid universalis, nisi quod universa ecclesia debet tenere . Fides dicitur ab eo quod fies in dies *. Quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit. Id * est, unus quisque singuhs ° per se. Integram inviolatamque servaverit, hoc est, incorruptam : quod nihil inde rainuas, nihil addas. Absque dubio, hoc est, sine dubio in aeternatn " peribit. Fides autem chatolica haec est aequalis, ut unum Deum in trinitate et trinitatem in unitate veneremur. Quid est hoc nisi ut unura Deum credaraus in tres personas, Patrem et Filium et Spiritum Sanctum ' ? Pro quid diciiut persona ? Qui * per se sonat. Quando dicis Patrem, ' B. M. Addit. 24,902 adds ' Explicit Expositio.' ' This note upon ' chatolica ' appears also in the Commentary attributed to Fortunatus and in that of Bruno. ' Fides is derived from fieri by St. Augustine also. Sen. Ixxxii. 22 : 'Ipsa fides in Latino sermone dicitur appellala, quia fit quod dicitur.' Similarly in Sermon No. 264 in the Appendix to his works, attributed by the Benedictine editors on the authority of several manuscripts and by Baluze to Caesarius of Aries ; ' Fides a fit, id est ab eo quod fiat, nomen accepit' ' H. appears to have been written just before ' Id ' and afterwards erased. Clearly the scribe at first intended to write ' Hoc' » So the MS. * So the MS. ' Perditionem ' may be omitted. ' The accusative where we should have expected the ablative. So we have afterwards : ' in carnem animam rationabilem abuisse,' ' in eam carnem, que prius fuerat, resurrexit,' and 'tres personas in unitatem,' and repeatedly ' pro quid.' There are several instances of the same peculiarity, as I have noticed, in the first Commentary on the Athanasian Creed in Troyes, 804. " Probably for ' quia.' The last letter of a word is frequently omitted in this MS. M m a 532 Appendix. personam dicis: quando dicis Fihum, personam dicis: quando dicis Spiritum Sanctum, personam dicis, quia unus quisque per se sonat. Et istas tres personas in unitatem veneremur, hoc est, adoremus. Sequitur. Neque confundentes personas. Qui dicit, ipse est Pater, ipse Filius, ipse et Spiritus Sanctus, confundat ' personas, qui de tres '¦' unam facit. Alia est enim persona Patris, alia Filii, alia et Spiritus Sancti. Quia superius dixi, et Pater per se, et Filius per se, et Spiritus Sanctus per se, secundum personas dico. Sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est divinitas, aequalis gloria, quo-aeterna tnaiestas. Nullus maior, nullus minor, sed tote tres persone quo-aeterne sibi sunt et quo- aequales. Qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis et Spiritus Sanctus. Id est, secundum divinitatem aequales sibi sunt. Increatus Pater, increatus Filius, increatus et Spiritus Sanctus. Dicuntur increati, quia nunquam fuerunt creati, quia nee initium habent nee finem. Sed tamen angeli creati sunt, et ominis * anima creatura est, et homo creatura est, et omnem rem quamcunque vides, creatura est, et tamen abent * inicium, sed non abent finem. Inmensus Pater, inmensus Filius, inmensus Spiritus Sanctus. Quid hoc ? Inmensus dicitur, quia nulla ilium potest mensura ', quia de ipso scriptum est : Ego celum et terram implebo " ; et alibi : Celum palmum ' mitigens * et tram " pugillo concludens '" ; et rursum ' So the MS. ^ Obviously ' personas ' is understood. We have afterwards ' de tres personas nnam faciamus ' and ' una de istas tres personas.' ' It will be observed that h is frequently omitted in this MS. at the com mencement of a word. This is particularly the case with habere. * For ' habent." » So the MS. The British Museum MS. Reg. 2. B. v., which reproduces several of these notes, has — ' Quia ipsum nullus mensurare potest' ° The quotation is evidently from Jer. xxiii. 24 in the old Latin or Italic version : ' Nonne caelum et terram ego impleo,' in the Vulgate 'Numquid non caelum et terram ego impleo ? ' — Sabatier, Bibliorum Sacrorum Latinae ver- siones, &c., tom. ii. p. 686, edit. Paris, 1751. Lmpleo is generally found in quotations of this text by the Fathers : implebo seems to be unexampled. ' So the MS. ' So the MS. Metiens was probably the original reading. These cor ruptions and errors show plainly that this is not the autograph copy of the Commentary, and that the scribe was copying from an earlier MS. ' For terram, the mark of contraction being omitted. •° Isaiah xl. 1 2 is doubtless quoted. This text in the old Italic is ' Quis mensns est manu aquam et caelum palmo et omnem terram pugillo ? ' in the Appendix. 533 scriptum est : Caelum mihi sedis ' est, terra autem scabellum pedum eorum ". Quem tamen non caelum, non terram *, non mare ilium potest capere, quia nisi ille ibi est, et nullum * modo constare potuissent. Sequitur. Aeternus Pater, aeternus Filius, aeternus et Spiritus Sanctus. Aeternus dicit, quia semper in aeternitate est ante omnia secula et in finem seculorum. E * tamen non tres aeterni, sed unus aeternus, sicut non tres increati, nee tres inmensi, sed unus increatus et unus inmensus. Ut hoc cognoscas, quia secundum illas personas hoc dictum est. Similiter omnipotens Pater, omnipotens Filius, omnipotens et Spiritus Sanctus. Quid est omnipotens, nisi quia semper per omnia potens est ? Et qui potest diabolum vincere, nisi ille solus, quia •' adligavit fortem, id est, diabolo vasa eius diripuit^, quos de potestatem ' eius eripuit ? Sicut apostolus Paulus dicit : Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos " ? Et tamen non tres omnipotentes, sed unus omnipotens. Quare dicit : non tres omnipotentes, sed unus omnipotens, nisi quia non potest unus plus quam alius, sed tote tres una voluntate ? Que non vult Pater, ne ' Filius ; que non vult Filius, ne Pater nee Spiritus Sanctus : sed una est voluntas illorum. Ob hanc causa '" dicitur : non tres omnipotentis", sed Vulgate, ' Quis mensus est pugillo aquas et caelos palmo ponderavit ? Quis appendit tribus digitis molem terrae?' in St. Augustine, Epist. cxx. 14, ' Qui caelum mensus est palmo et terram pugillo ' : and other Fathers in quoting it agree very nearly with him. See Sabatier, u. j., p. j8o. The ante-Hieronymian version would seem to have been followed here. ' For ' sedes.' ' For ' meorum,' the initial m being omitted inadvertently. The passage quoted is Isaiah Ixvi. i in the old Italic version, ' Caelum mihi thronus et terra suppedaneum pedum meorum ' ; in the Vulgate, ' Caelum sedes mea, terra autem scabellum pedum meorum'; in St Augustine, Epist. cxx. 14, ' Caelum mihi sedes est, terra autem scabellum pedum meorum.' * So the MS. * Apparently e for 'et' ° So the MS. The scribe has written quia for qui, being misled evidently by the following word commencing with the letter a. * See St. Matt. xii. 29. ' The mark of contraction over the final e in ' potestate ' indicative of the omission of m is perfectly clear. It has been already noticed that the MS. contains several instances of the same solecism. * Rom, viii. 31. ' For 'nee' '" Clearly for ' causam,' the mark of contraction being omitted probably through inadvertence. " For ' omnipotentes.' 534 Appendix. unus omnipotens. Sequitur. Ita Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus et Spiritus Sanctus. Ergo tres Deos colis? Absit. Quare ergo dicitur ; tres Dei, nisi quia secundum illas personas hoc dictum est ? Quia Pater Deus, Filius Deus, et Spiritus Sanctus Deus. Et tamen non tres Dii, sed unus est Deus. Quare ? Quia una est illorum Divinitas, aequalis gloria, quo-aeterna maiestas. Ita Dominus Pater, Dominus Filius, Dominus et Spiritus Sanctus. Et tamen non tres Domini, sed unus est Dominus. Sicut superius dixi, ita et istud sic est. Sed tamen querendum est nobis, pro ' quid Deus dicitur, vel pro quid Dominus, nisi quia aperte datur intelligi quia Deus dicitur secundum Divinitatem, et Dominus secundum humanitatem. Aliter adhuc intellegi potest ; quia Deus dicitur^ ad providendum, et Dominus nominatur ad domi- nandum*. Sed, sicut in aevangeho legimus de illo dissipulo Thomas, quando iterum veniens Dominus apparuit, et non credente discipulo raanus et latus ostendit, et ille exclamavit, Dominus meus et Deus meus * ; quid aliud nisi quod Deum con- fessus est ante secula et hominem factum in finem seculorum. Sequitur. Quia sicut singilatim, id est singulariter, unamquamque personam et Deum et Dominum confiteri Christiana veritate com pellimur, hoc est admonemur sive cogiraur, ita tres Deos aut tres Dominos dicere chatolica relegione proibetnur. Quid aliut nisi que detestamur aut vitamur ". Pater a nullo est factus nee creatus nee genitus. Hie aetiam queri potest, quid abet Pater qui * no ' abet Filius, aut quid habet Filius quod * non abet Pater, aut quid abet Spiritus Sanctus que nee Pater abit " nee Filius ? Sic dictum est : Filius a Patre solo est, non factus, nee creatus, sed genitus : Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus, nee creatus, nee genitus, sed procedens : quo-aeternae sibi et quo-aequales. Sed tamen querendum nobis est, quid est quod Filius a Patre genitus dicitur, nisi quod Filius Verbura Patris vocatur; sicut lohannis aevangelista dicit : In principio erat Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum '" 1 In principio erat Verbum, dicit, ' So the MS. " Here there is an erasure in the MS. ° The initial letter in 'dominandum' appears to have been added by a corrector. ' St John XX. 28. 5 So the MS. ; probably for ' vetamnr.' " So the MS. ; clearly an error for ' quod.' ' So the MS. ° The MS. gives an abbreviation — q. 9 For ' habet.' '" St. John i. I. Appendix. 535 hoc est Filius; et Verbum erat apud Deum, -vides quomodo declarat ; et Deus erat Verbum, quia quando dixit, faciamus hominem ad himaginem et sitnilitudinem nostram ', non dixit, quia facio ad similitudinem meam, sed faciamus, id est ad J'ilium et Spiritum Sanctum hoc dictum est ^. Unus ergo Pater, non tres Patres ; unus Filius, non tres Filii ; unus Spiritus Sanctus, non tres Spiritus Sancti. Absit, ut a nobis hoc esse credatur, ut de tres personas unam faciamus. Et in a " trinitate nihil prius aut posterius nihil maius au * minus, sed tote tres persone quo-aeterne sibi sunt et quo-aequales, id est in istas tres personas nullus est minor ^ nullus est minor, sed tote tres persone quo-aeterne sibi sunt, ita ut per omnia, sicut iam supra dictum est, et trinitas in unitate et unitas in trinitate veneranda sit. Qui vult ergo salvus esse, ita de trinitate senciat. Sed necessarium est, qui vult ad aeternam salutem pervenirCs ut Dominum nostrum Ihesum Christum verum hominem esse fateatur''. Quia sunt nonnulli, qui eum fuisse credunt purum hominem in carnem ; sed alii dicunt, quia fantassiina ; alia ' dicunt, qui ' patrem carnalera abuisset. Sed non est nobis hoc si * credendum. Credamus eum purum hominem non fuisse, et in carnem animam rationabilem abuisse. Et sitivit et esurivit et lassavit et iuxta carnis infirmitatem veros dolores sustinuit. Est ergo fides recta, ut credamus et confiteamur, quia Dominus noster Ihesus Christus, Dei Filius, et Deus pariter et homo est. Quomodo hoc potest esse? Ipse insinuat, cum subiugit '. Audi quid dicit. Deus est ex substantia Patris ante secula genitus, et homo est ex substancia matris natus in seculo : perfectus Deus, perfectus homo ex anima racionabile '" et humana ' Gen. i. 26. '' On the passage in the first chapter of Genesis St Augustine says : ' Ad insinuandam scilicet, ut ita dicam, pluralitatem personarum propter Patrem Filium et Spiritum Sanctum.' De Genesi ad litteram, cap. xix. = Clearly for ' hac.' * So the MS. = So the MS. . a remarkable instance of carelessness on the part of the copyist. « Probably the words 'verum Deum et' have been omitted inadvertentiy after ' ChristnUi.' So it would appear from what follows. ' Clearly for ' quia,' the final letter being omitted, as is often the case in this MS. » Clearly for ' sic' ' So apparently the MS. for ' subiungit '" For ' racionabili.' 536 Appendix. came subsistens. Quid aliut nisi ut eum verum hominem credas secundum umanitatera * ? Sequitur. Et qualis ' Patri secundum Divinitatem, minor Patri secundum humanitatem. Hoc et etiam querendum est, qur * Filius iunior esse Patri credatur ? Superius dictum est, quia Filius aequalis est Patri, id est, secundum suam Divinitatem. Unde est minor Patri tantum solum ex illam carnem' quam adsupsit^ Quia enim caeh rex terram nostram carnis adsumpsit, infirmitatem nostram ilia iam angelica celsitudo non dispicit. Hinc est, quod ante redemtoris adventum angeli ab omnibus adorantur et tacent. lohannes vero in apochalipsin angelum adorare volunt "- Sed tamen hisdem angelus, ne se debeto adorare, compescit dicens : Vide ne feceris, conservus tuus sum et fratum * tuorum '. Quia enim naturam nostram quod * caeli rex adsumpsit super se elevata * conspiciunt, adorare sibi et pertimescunt °. Sicut lament '" superius dictum est, nihil credas ' The British Museum MS, Reg. 2. B. v. has this for one of its notes, adding, no doubt rightly, • et esse verum Deum secundum divinitatem.' ^ So the MS. ; clearly by an error of the copyist for ' Aequalis.' » So the MS. ' So clearly the MS., which has ' ilia came ' with the mark of contraction over the last letter of each word indicative of the omission of the concluding m. I have already noticed the occurrence in this MS. of a similar barbarism — the accusative case after the preposition de. ^ Clearly for ' adsumpsit ' ; the mark of contraction over the letter « being omitted probably through inadvertence. It is inserted in the same word shortly after. ' So the MS. The printed text of St. Gregory has ' voluit' ' Rev. xix. 10. ' Clearly for ' elevatam,' the mark of contraction over the final u being inadvertently omitted. ' From ' Sed ' to ' pertimescunt ' is extremely difficult to read in the MS., the writing having become very faint, and some words all but obliterated. The whole passage bears an obvious resemblance to the following in St. Gregory the Great, In Evan. Hom. viii : ' Quid enim caeli rex terram nostrae carnis adsumpsit, infirmitatem nostram ilia iam angelica celsitudo non despicit . . . Hinc est enim quod Loth et losue angelos adorant, nee tamen adorare pro- hibentur, lohannes vero in Apocalypsi sua adorare Angelum voluit, sed tamen idem hunc Angelus, ne se debeat adorare, compescuit dicens : Vide ne feceris, conservus enim tuus sum et fratrum tuorum. Quid est quod ante Redemptoris adventum angeli ab hominibus adorantur et tacent, postmodum vero adorari refugiunt, nisi quod naturam nostram, quam prius despexerant, postquam super se assumptam conspiciunt, prostratara sibi videre perti mescunt ? ' '"So the MS., probably for ' tamen ut' Appendix. 537 Filio minorem esse Patri, nisi solum secundum umanitatem : quia nee Pater adsumpsit carnem, nee Spiritus Sanctus, nisi tantum Filius. Ob hanc causa ' est minor Patri. Qui, licet Deus sit et homo, non duo tamen sed unus est Christus. Nondut ^ hoc credas, quae * illic humanitas non sit cura divinitate, sicut ' ilia divinitas et ilia humanitas in unum sibi sint. Audi qui ^ dicit ¦: Nam, sicut anima racionabilis et caro unus est homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus. Nam, sicut homo unus, qui tamen ex duabus substanciis consta *, ex corpore videlicet et anima, sed tamen unus homo est, similiter et Christus ex duabus substanciis constat, deitatem et umanitatem '. Non oc " credendum est, que ilia divinitas non adiungit " ad ilia '" humanitatem, quae ilia divinitas sit per se, et ilia humanitas per se ; non sic, sed ulla ''" divinitas et ulla umanitas in unum sunt. Sequitur. Unus autem non conversione divinitatis in carne, sed adsumpsione utnanitatis in Deo. Una de istas personas, idem vero Christus. Non ideo conversus est in carnem, ut suam divinitatem perderet in celura " ! sed adsumpsit carnem, ut Deus esset secundum divinitatem et Dominus secundum humanitatem. Unus omnino non confusione substanciae, sed unitatem '"^ persone. Id est, non est confusa substancia Christi, quae '" abebat cum Patre et Spiritu Sancto, sed equaliter sibi sunt. Natn sicut anima racionabilis et caro unus est homo, ita Deus et homo unus est Christus. Qualis Christus, qui passus est pro salute nostra, descendit ad infernum, resurrexit ' So the MS., the mark of contraction being omitted. ' So the MS., apparently for ' non duo ut," the two first words being repeated from the verse of the Creed quoted just before. This passage of the Com mentary forms one of the notes in the British Museum MS. Reg. 2. B. v. ' So the MS., probably for 'quia,' the reading of the note in Reg. 2. B. v. * Reg. 2. B. V. reads ' sed ut ' — probably the right reading. ' Probably for ' quid,' as before. <¦ So the MS., clearly for ' constat' ' So the MS., the mark of contraction over the final letter in both words being clear. ' For ' hoc' ^ Apparently for ' adiungitur,' the mark being omitted. '" So the MS. " This word may be ' celum' or ' colum,' but it is so difficult to read that it is impossible to say for certain what it is. " So the MS., the mark of contraction over the last letter being quite distinct. 538 Appendix. a mortuis. Nam querendum est, quum ad ilium latronem, qui crucem ' suspensus est, dixit : Amen dico tibi, odie mecum eris in paradiso " ; et rursum dicunt aevangelia : Inclinato capite tradidit spiritum " ; et hie dicit : Statyra descendit ad inferos ; quomodo hoc potuit facere ? Num quod divisa fuit anima Christi ? Quid aliut intellegit' debet, nisi de illius divinitate, que inseparabilis est Patri et Spiritu Sancto, hie dictum est : Amen dico tibi, hodie mecum erit' in paradiso 1 Et ilia anima simplex descendit ad inferos, ad alias animas liberandas. Et postquam eas inde liberavit, stim " rediit ad corpus suum ; et in eam carnem, que prius fuerat, resurexit ' ; et in aevangelio legimus, quod multa corpora sanctorum, qui dormierant, resurrexerunt, et venierunt in sanctam civitatem, et aparuerunt multis ". Quid hoc voluit Christus facere, quod tunc corpora sanctorum resurexerunt Cum illo pariter, nisi quia ut perfeccius crederetur, quae et ipse resurexit in eam carnem, que prius fuerat, qui et alias sicut ' resurgere facit ? Et, post apparuerunt, redierunt in eorum sepulcra. Ascendit ad cells '; sedet ad dextera ' Patris. Inde ven turus iudicare vivos et mortuos. Vivos dicit qui in carne inveniendi sunt, et mortuos dicit, quorum iam ossa per. eorum sepulcra con sistunt. Sicut ilia tuba magna fuerit cantura, et vox de celo audita fuerit dicens : Surgite, surgite ; tam omnes mortui et vivi corpora sua incorruptibiles accipiunt et resurgunt. Sed tamen illi vivi, qui tunc inventi fuerint, non moriunt'"; sed in eorum locum, ubi unus quisque stat, carnem illam corruptibilem, que abent, mutata incorruptibilem ", sed tamen animam suam non '¦ So the MS. ^ St. Luke xxiii. 43. This agrees with the Vulgate, also with the text as quoted by SS. Hilary and Augustine. The old Italic 'rastTfi quod htioxt hodie. ^ St. John xix. 30. This agrees both with the old Italic and the Vulgate. ' So the MS., clearly for ' intelligi.' ° Evidently for ' statim.' * St. Matt xxvii. 52, 53. ' Possibly ' se ipsum' is omitted. ' There are instances of this barbarism in the rubrics of the Utrecht Psalter — ' Canticum Moysi ad filiis Israhel' — ' Hymnum ad matutinis.' " The mark of contraction over the last letter has doubtless been omitted inadvertently. '" No doubt the mark of contraction for the termination ur has been omitted inadvertently. " Probably the mark of contraction over the final a in ' mutata ' and the Appendix. 539 exiendo corpus suum. Unde scriptum est : Tam iustorum, quam iniustorum, caro incorruptibiliter resurgit uut' penam possit suffer rere "^ pro peccatis vel pro '' in aeterna gloria manere pro meritis *. Ad cuius adventum omnes hominis resurgere abent cum corporibus suis, et reddituri sunt de factis propriis racionem. Et, qui bona aegerunt, ibunt in vitam aeternam, et qui male, in ignum ^ aeternum. Unde nos Dominus pro sua pietate eripere dignetur. Haec est fides catholica, id est universalis. Nam nisi quisque fideliter et^ firmiterque crediderit, salvus esse non poterit". preposition in before ' incorruptibilem ' have been omitted inadvertently, so that the text should be ' mutatam in incorruptibilem.' ' So apparently the MS. ; obviously for ' ut' ' So apparently the MS. ; clearly for ' sufferre.' ' The copyist evidently intended at first to write ' pro meritis,' but finding himself in error did not add the latter word ; and afterwards neglected to erase the former word which he had written by mistake. * The commentator is evidently quoting the following passage in the Liber de dogmaticis Ecclesiasticis commonly, but upon uncertain grounds, attributed to Gennadius : ' Eadem caro corruptibilis, quae cadit, tam iustorum quam in iustorum incorruptibilis resurgit, quae vel poenam sufferre possit pro peccatis aut in gloria aeterna manere pro meritis.' So the passage is printed in the Appendix to St. Augustine, Migne, Patrologia Latina, tom. xlii. p. 12 15; but a MS. in the British Museum Addit. 12,725, which contains a copy of that exposition of doctrine, gives some variety of reading : — ' caro ' is inserted after ' iniustorum,' ' nt ' is read for ' quae, ' ' penas ' for ' penam,' ' sufficere ' for ' sufferre,' ' ant ' for ' vel.' It will be observed that some of these readings are followed by the Commentary. In the B. M. MS. the above-mentioned document is entitled Doctrina Ecclesiastica, and is not assigned to any author. It is remarkable that it does not maintain the view, in support of which it appears to be here alleged, but rather favours the opinion broached by St. Augustine, but only as a conjecture, that the quick at Christ's coming shall undergo a momentary death. St. Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. xx. cap. 20. It asserts however that either opinion may be held without heresy. The passage quoted, it is obvious, merely maintains the, identity of the risen body ; the quotation therefore is inapposite. = So the MS. " The last three words have been rendered illegible by a note written over them, A.l). 1219. 540 Appendix. K. Copy of a Greek Version of the Athanasian Creed from ^ilpai rrji aeiTtapdevov Mapias Kar edos rfjs 'PooixaiKrjs avArjs. 'Eura yftaXpLol rfjs p-iravoias, k.t.X. Printed by Aldus at Venice A.D. 1497. Su/itjSoXoy rov ayiov 'Adavaaiov. "Ocrris PovXrjrai ircodrjvai, irpo iravrtov xph i^pareiv rrjv KadoXiKijv nicrriv, 'Hv 61 ur) (Is CKaa-TOS craau Kai diiaprjrov rripfiar], avev Stcrraypnv (Is rbv atava unoXfirai. Hiotis Se 17 KadoXiKTi avrr/ icrriv, iva eva 6(6v ev rpidSc Koi rpidda ev povd^i cre^a>peBa. Miyrc arvyxeovres ras vTrourdcreis prjre rrjv ovuiav pepi^ovres. "AXXt; ydp icrrlv rj virorrracris rov Trarpos, dWrj rov vlov, aWt] rod dyiov nvevparos. AXXa irarpos Kal vlov Kal dyiov irvev- paros pia (trrlv r] deorrjs, "(Tt/ 17 So'^a, avvatbws rj peyciKetorrjs. Oios 6 narrjp, rocovros 6 vlos, roiovrov Koi to dyiov Trvevpa. ' Akticttos 6 TrarTjp, aKTiaros 6 vlos, aKrurrov Kal to Tcvevpa rb dyiov. 'AKardXijnrof 6 narfip, dKardXrjTrros b vlos, aKaTaKrjTTTOv kcI to nvevpa rb dyiov. Alcovios b 7raTr)p, alavios b vlos, alwviov Kal rb irvevpa rb dyiov. IIX^v ov rpeis alatvioi, aXX' fis aioii'iof. 'Sicrnep ovBe rpets dKardXrjTTToi ovBe rpe'is aKricrroi, dXX' els aKTiaros koi eis dicaTdXjjnTOf. 'Opoias vavrohivapos 0 narrjp, iravrohi- vapos 0 vlos, iravTohvvapov Kal to nvevpa to dyiov. JlXfjV ov rpe'is TroKTo- Svvapoi, dXX eig iravrodvvapos. Ovra 6ebs b Trarrjp, debs b vlos, 6ebs Kal rb TTvevpa rb ayiov. UXtjv ov rpeis 6eoi, dXX* els Oeos. 'Opoicos Kvpios b irarrip, Kvpios b vlos, Kvpiov ' Kal to nvevpa ro dyiov. IlXiji' ov rpe'is Kvpwi, dXX' ets e'(Trt Kvptos. "Ort mf IBiav piav exacTTov ' vnocrracriv 6ebv Kal Kvpiov bpoXcryeiv rtj xpioTiaviKrj dXrjdeia ^la^opeOa, ovtq) rpe'is deovs rj rpels Kvpiovs \eyeiv rfj KadoXiKij evirefieia KcoXvopeda. 'O narfip air' oiibevbs earl Tcoirjrbs ovre prjV kthttos ovde yevvrjros. 'O vlos dirb rov Trarpos povov ecrnv, ov Troirjrbs ov ktkttos d\Xa yevvrjTos. To TTvevpa rb ayiov aTTo rov narpbs Kal rov vioij, ov ttoitjtov ov KTiarbv dXX' eKiropevrov, Ets ovv TTaTTjp, ov rpels Trarepes, (is vlos ov rpets vloi, ev rrvevpa dyiov ov rpia TTvevpara ayia. Kav ravrrj rjj rpiddi oitdev Ttporepov rj vcrrepov, oiibev pe'i^ov i] eXarrov, dWd craai ai rpe'is VTCoaracrets Kal irvvaiSiai elirlv eavrais Kal is TTurrevaji, ' Sic. Appendix. 541 ^EoTt ydp TTitrns dpBri iva TTicrTevuipev Kai opoXoyapev on 6 Kvpios ripSiV 'lijCToCs Xpto-Tos o vlos TOU 6eov debs Kal dvdpamos ecrn. Qebs eK T^s oiicrlas rov irarpbs irpb aici>vciiv yevvrjBels Kca dvdpwiros eK rrjs ovo'ias rrjs pijTpbs ev Tcp alavi re-)(6eis. Te'Xeios 6ebs Kcu reXeios avBpcoTros eK ^i'v\TJs XoyiKrjs Kal dv6pamivr]s crapKbs vcpurrdpevos. "icros ra irarpl Kara rr/v BeoTryra, eXdrrcav rov irarpbs Kara rrjv dvBpayTroTrjra. Os, et Kal Bebs Kal dvBpamos ecrnv, oii Bvo opas dXX* ets eort Xpio-rds. Ets de, ov rpoirfi rrjs BebrriTos els irdpKa, dXXd irpoaXrj'^ei, ttjs dvBpwTrortjros els Beov. Ets TrdvTttis, ov (Tvy)^virei rrjs ovcrtas, dXX evorrjrt rrjs VTrocrrdcrecos. Kat ydp, o)S ^vxr) XuyiKrj Kal f] (rap^ eis ecrlv dvBpiairos, ovno Ka\ b BedvBpajTTOS eis e'o-Ti XpicTTOS. Os erraBe 8id rr/v cr three times for a, i; three times for t, twice for v, r) once for ei, h once for ei, aa> oncc for ev and once for e, ot once for vy and once for fi, P once for k, a> once for o and once for v, and k once for x- I do not give this as an exhaustive list of the anomalies and pecu liarities in this excerpt. It must not be supposed that we have here a sample from which an estmiate may be formed of the codex generally ; on the contrary, with this exception it appeared to me to be well and correctly written. M. Copy of the earliest English version of the Athanasian Creed contained in British Museum MS. Addit. iT,2,T6,f I47 ^~ 149 v. Whoso wyll be sauf, nede it is to hym to fore alle thinges ' that he holde the catholick faithe. The which bot ¦^iP ich on * kepe hole and nou3t defouled, wyth outen drede he shal peris wyth outen ende. The faithe for sothe of holy chirche is this, that we houen o ' god in trinite and the trinite in onhede, noujt confoundand persons ne departand substaunce. On for sothe is persone of the fader, another of the sone, another of the holy gost ; bot of the father and of the sone and of the holy gost is o godhede, even glorie, majeste to gidres everlastand. Swich as the fader, swich is the sone, swich is the holi gost. Unfourraed is the fader, unfourraed is the sone, unfourraed is the holi gost. Mychel his the fader, mychel his the sone, mychel his the holi gost. The fader hys everlastend, the son is everlastend, the holy gost is everlastend. And never the lefse ther ne be nou3t thre everlastend, at ther is on everlastend. As hii^ ne ben noujt thre unfourraed, ne thre grete, at on unfourraed, and on grete. Also his the fader alrai3ti, the sone almi3ti, the holi gost almi5ti. ' In the MS. p always stands for 111. ° 3 signifies _j/ at the beginning of a word BnAgti elsewhere. ^ i.e. each one. ' i.e. one. ° The pronoun meaning they. Appendix. 543 And never the les ther ne ben non thre almi3ti, bot on is almi3ti. So is god fader, god is sone, god ys the holy gost. And na for than ther ne ben nou5t thre goddes, bot ther is o god. So is the fader lord, the sone lord, the holy gost lord. And na for than ther ne ben nou3t thre lordes, at on is lord. Ffor as we ben constreint thur3 ' cristen sothenes '^ to knowelich on lich god and lord ich a persone, so we be defended thur3 catholik religion to seien thre goddes and thre lordes. The fader his made of no wi3t, ne fourmed ne bi3eten. The sone is one hche of the fader, nou3t made, no3t formed, at bi3eten. The holy gost is of the fader and of the sone, nou3t made, nou5t formed, no3t bi3eten, bot forthgoand. Ffor thi o fader is and nou3t thre fadres, o sone and nou3t thre sones, on holy gost 'and nou5t thre holy gost* Bot in this trinite n03t is to fore ne nou3t by hinde, nou3t raore ne lafse, at alle thre persons ben to gadres everlastand and even. So that by alle thinges, as it is soue said aboue, and on hede in thre hede and thre hede in on hede be to houd. Ffor thy he that wil be saved fele he so of threhede. Bot nedeful thinge is to the everlastand helthe that he trowe lich bileve the incar- naeioun of our lord ihesu crist. Ffor thy the ri3t bileve is that we bileve and knowelich that our lord ihesu crist, goddes sone, is god and raan. He his god of the substaunce of the fader bi3eten to fore the worldes and raan of the substaunce of the moder boren in the world. He is perfit god and perfit raan, beand of reasonable soule and mannes flesshe. He is even to the fader efter the godehede, lafse than the fader efter the manhede. The which, tho3 he bi god and man, na for than hh ben nou3t two bot 0 crist. He is for sothe on no3t thur3 taking of manhede in to god*. He is on in alle, nou3t thur3 confusion of substaunce, but thur3 onhede of persone. Ffor, as resonable soule and flesshe is o man, so is god and man o crist. The which suffred for our helthe, went to belle, and aros the thridde dale frora deth to lyf. He ste3e up to the hevens, sitteth at the ri3t hand of god fader almi3ti. From thennes he is to cum to jugen the quike and the ' i.e. through. ^ i.e. truth. ' So the MS. ' Clearly some words have been omitted after tkur). The Latin in this MS. is 'non confusione {sic) divinitaris in carne, sed assumptione humanitatis in deum.' 544 Appendix. ded. At whowos cumyng al men han to rise wyth her bodis and ben to 3elden rekening of her propre dedes. And hii that deden wele shal gou to the lif everlastand, and hii that han don ivel shul gou into fir everlastend. This ys the bileve catholik, the which bot if ich man have bileved trowlich and fastelich, hene may nou3t be sauf N. Copy of the Wycliffe version of the A thanasian Creed from the British Museum MS. Addit. 10,049. Who evere wole be saaf, it is nedeful bifore alle thingis that he holde the comyne bileve. This comune feith is of this kynde ', that, but if ^ ech man kepe it hool and unfilid, withouten doute he schal perische withouten ende. This is the comune bileve, that we worschipe o " god in trynite of persones the which god is trynyte of oonhede of godhede : neth medlynge ' these thre persones, ne departinge the substaunce. There is othir persone of the fadir and othir of the sone and othir of the hooly goost. But of these thre persones is 00 godhed and evene glorie and comyne magiste withouten ende. Which is the fadir, siche is the sone, and siche is the holy goost. Unmaad is the fadir, unmaad is the sone, unmaad is the holy goost. The fadir is withoute mesure myche " and eek " the sone with the holy goost. The fadir is withouten bigynnynge and also withouten endynge and so ben the other two persones. And netheles if god be such that ther ben not thre goddis suche : for there is but o god of what kynde manere that he be, and so there ben not thre unmaad ne thre thus grete ne thre withouten ende, but alle these thre persones ben o god that is siche. Also almy3ty is the fadir, almy3ty is the sone, almy3ti is the holi goost. And netheless not ' The words ' This comune feith is of this kynde ' are not underscored in the MS. with a red line as the words of the version are in general, but they are clearly necessary to the sense. ^ i.e. except. ' i.e. one. ' i.e. mingling or confounding. " The preceding version has mychel, that in Bodleian MS. 425 mikel. ' i.e. also. Appendix. 545 thre goddis ben almy3ty, but o god is almy5ty. So the fadir is god, the sone is god, and the holy goost is the same god. And netheles ther ben not thre goddis, but o god is alle these thre. And so the fadir is lord, the sone is lord, and the holy goost is lord. And 3it ther ben not thre lordis, but o lord is ech of these. And to this witt speketh the crede ', that we ben nedid ^ to graunte that ech of these thre persones is ful god and ful lord, and 3it we ben forfendid * of god to seie that ther ben thre goddis or that these thre persones ben thre lordis bi general religioun. But the fadir is maad of noon ne maad of nou5t ne bigeten. The sone is of the oo fadir, not maad ne maad of nou3t but boren. The holy goost cometh bothe of the fadir and of the sone, not maad ne maad of nou3t* but comyng forth. And herfore we moten nede confefse " that there is oo fadir not thre fadris, oo sone not thre sones, oo holi goost not three holi goostis. And in this trynite is nou3t tofore ne aftir raore ne lefse, but alle these thre persones ben evene withoute bigynnyng and ende and evene in power and in godhed. And so we gaderen here, as it is before seid, that bothe oonhed in godhed and trynite in persones and trynite in this oonhed " to be wor- schipid over other thingis. And who evere wolde be saaf, thus fele he of the trynyte. Biside the godhede of these thre persones it is nedeful to knowe the manhede of this secunde persone and so trowe it treuli. Therfore it is ri3t bileve that we bileve and knoweleche that oure lord ihesu crist, goddes sone, is bothe god and man. He is god of his fadris substaunce born spirituah before the world, and he is man of his modris substaunce born and maad man in the world. And so he is perfit god as he was tofore the world, and he is perfit man maad of a resonable soule and is of mannes fleisch. And so evene to the fader bi his godhede and lefse than the fadir bi his manhede. But if crist be god and man and so two kyndis' and bothe of him*, netheles crist is not two persones but oo. Crist is oo persone, not bi turnyng ' The words ' And to this witt speketh the crede ' are not underscored. = After ' nedid ' Harieian MS. 1806 and Laud 448 read by ' christen trouthe.' * i.e. forbidden. * Bodleian 288 adds ' ne bigeten.' • The words ' And herfore . . . confesse ' are not underscored. « ' be ' is added in Bodleian 288. ' i-e- natures. * Bodleian 288 also reads ' him,' but Laud 448 ' hem.' N n 546 Appendix. of god in to fleisch, but bi takynge of manhede into godhede. And thus crist is algatis ' 00, not bi confusioun of his substaunce, but by oonhed of his persone'' For with* a resonable soule and fleisch is bothe o man, so in crist bothe god and man is o persone in crist. That crist suffride for oure helthe, wente doun into helle, and thridde ' day roos from deth. And thus crist ste3e " to hevenes, sittith on the ri3tside of the fadir almy3ty, and fro thennis he is to come to deme the quike and the dede. Hereso * this comynge at the laste day shal al manere of men rise and shal give resoun to crist of her owne dedis. And these men that hav do goode dedis schulen go to luf withouten ende, and these men that hav do yvelis schulen go to fier withouten ende. This is general bileve, the which but * ech man trowe truli and stedfastli, he may not here ' be saaf. 'i.e. wholly. ^ This and the preceding verse are not underscored with red in the MS. as the version is in general. The omission was no doubt through inadvertence. ^ Bodleian 288 and Laud 448 both have ' for whi as.' ' Laud 448 reads ' on the thridde.' ^ i. e. ascended. * So apparently this MS. ; others read ' to.' ' So apparently ; other MSS. have ' lyf ' and ' lif.' * Bodleian 2S8 adds 'if.' " Other MSS. add ' with.' GENERAL INDEX. Abbo of Fleury, 28 ; his evidence of the use of the Quicunque in Eng land, ibid. Abelard, quotes Quicunque, 36 ; his commentary on, 236 ; dependence on earlier expositions, 237; letter to Bernard of Clairvaux respecting Cistercian Breviary, 453. Adalbertus, Bp. of Morinum, his pro fession of faith, 26. Admonitio Synodalis, 80, 81, 193, 194, 426. Adoptionist controversy, its bear ing on the date of the Fortunatus Commentary, 170, 171 ; of the Quicunque, 208-213. Adrian, Pope, 113. 2Elfric, Abp. of Canterbury, 31 ff. ; Abp. of York, ibid. ; the monk, ibid. jEneas, Bp. of Paris, quotes Quicunque as Athanasian, 26. iEthelstan, Psalter of, 125 ff., 337, 449- Agobard, Bp. of Lyons, quotes Qui cunque as Athanasian, 19. Aix-la-Chapelle, Convention of, 67. Alcuin's Libellus de Processione Spiritus, 1 6 ; quotes Quicunque as Athanasian, 1 7 ; authenticity and date, ibid. ; his Defide S. Trinitatis and Monotheletism, 186, 189. Aldus press editions of the Horae, 281-283, 311. Alexander de Hales, 40 ; his reasons for liturgical use of creeds, ibid. ; N commentary on Quicunque, 248 ; ascribes it to Anastasius, 249 ; method of, ibid. ; passages wrongly ascribed to St. Augustine, 250 ; MSS. containing it, ibid. Amalarius, work of, on the Offices of the Church, 444, 454. Ambrosian rite, peculiarities of, 446 ; its Canticles, 149, 151 ; daily use of Quicunque, 428. Anastasius, Pope, Quicunque ascribed to, 239, 249, 399 ff. Angers collection of Canons, 53ff. Anglo-Saxon Church, its use of Qui cunque, 29, 140 ff., 450. Anglo-Saxon Homilies of jElfric, 29 ; quotations from Quicunque, 29, 30 ; their authoi'ship, 31-33. Anglo-Saxon glosses in Psalters, 141 ff., 304. Anselm, Dean of Laon, compiler of ' glosa scolastica,' 244. Antioch, John of, 356, 361. Antiphonary of Bangor, 14. ApoUinarian controversy, 362, 365, 366. Apostles' Creed, sermons ou, 3-12. Aquinas, Thomas, his defence of the use of Creeds, 41 ; his explanation of the Ephesine Canon krepa mffris, 42 ; attributes Quicunque to Atha nasius, ibid. Arian hypothesis of the Trinity illus trated by metals, 226 ; derived from St. Augustine, 215. n a 548 General Index. Armenian Church receives Quicunque, 458. Arnold, Abbot of Lubeck, 37. Athanasius not the author of the Quicunque, 335 ; earliest ascription to him, 395 ; how accounted for, 402 ff. Atto, Bp. of Vercellae, his Capitulare and the Epistola Canonica, 48. Augustine, Bp. of Hippo, his chrono logy, 172; connexion with Oratorian Commentary, 1S9; language com pared with Treves fragment, 6-8 ; with Quicunque, 347 ; with the Commonitorium of Vincent of Lerins, 378, 385. Autun, Canon of, 52 ; its evidence of use of Quicunque as Athanasian in seventh cent., 53, 346 ; enlarged knowledge of it by publication of Angers and Herovall collections, 53, 54; their date, 55 ; contents of the Angers collection, 55-58 ; of the Herovall collection, 58-60; their evidence of genuineness and anti quity of the Canon, 60-62 ; history of MS. 1603, Paris, Lat, 62, 63 ; meaning of Fides S. Athanasii in Autun Canon, 63-65 ; date of Leo degar's Synod, 65, 66. Aiitus, Bp. of Vienne, defends doctrine of Double Procession by quoting language of Quicunque, 2. Bamberg Psalter, 138-140. Beleth, John, rector of the Theological School of Paris, 38 ; reckons four Creeds, ibid. Benedictine use of Quicunque in monastic offices, 20, 21, 432. Bessarion, Bp. of Tusculum, advocates Western doctrine of the Procession at Council of Florence, 277. Bohemian version of Quicunque, 332. Bouhier Commentary on Quicunque, 195 ; relation to Oratorian Com mentary, ibid. ; list of MSS. con taining it, 197. Bremen, Church of, and Vienna Psalter, 104 ff. Breviary, oldest extant MS. of, 164 ; inclusion of Quicunque, 423 ; modem Cluniac omits Quicunque, 433 ; when inserted in Roman, 452. Bruno, Bp. of Warzburg, his Psalter, 226; compared with Stavelot Com mentary, 205-208 ; MSS. copies of, 227-230; Waterland's mistakes respecting it, 229, 239; printed editions, 231. Caesarius of Aries, sermon of, refer ring to Quicunque, 4, 347. Calecas, Manuel, quotes Greek ver sion of Quicunque, 291. Calendar, English, and chronological rules in tenth cent, 127-129, 158. Caspari's Greek versions olQuicunque, 295-3°°- Cassian, his treatise on the Incarna tion, 356, 373 ; introduces Prime m the West, 425. Catholica Fides, earliest title of the Quicunque, 2, 3, 392. Chalcedon, definition of, its bearing on date of Quicunque, 364. Charlemagne, treatise of Alcuin dedi cated to, 17 ; his convention at Aix-la-Chapelle, 67 ; Psalters of his time, 72, 98, 107, 448; date of his reign, 115 ; his patronage of literature, 193. Charles the Bald, capitula of, 76 ; his relations with Pope Hadrian, 102 ff. Chiliasts, 174. Christendom, relation of Eastern and Western, in fifth cent., 373. Chronology, of Eusebius, 115, 172 ; of Fortunatus's Commentary, 171 ; of Augustine, 173. Church estates, alienation of, by clergy forbidden, 48, 49. General Index. 549 Cirencester, Abbey of, 244. Cluniac monks, rule of daily recitation of Quicunque, 2 7 ; modern Breviary omits Quicunque, 433. Colbertine MS. oi Quicunque, wrongly so described, 8. Commonitorium of Vincent of Lerins, coincidences with Quicunque, 348, 358, 360. 374. 378 ff.; and with writings of Augustine, 378, 385. Dagulfus the scribe, dedicatory verses of, 104. Damasi symbolum, 15. Date of the Quicunque, 336 ff. ; sum mary of external evidence, 336- 347 ; internal evidence, 347-374. Denebert, Bp. of Worcester, his use oi Quicunque, 15, 16. Descent into hell, when first found in Apostles' Creed, 11 ; variations of terminology, 13, 14, 222, 368 ; its use against Apollinarianism, 369. Destruction of ancient MSS., 341. Dionysius Carthusianus of Ryckel, Commentary of, 265. Discipline, ecclesiastical, 80, 84, 86. Double procession of the Holy Spirit, 2, 147, 170, 188, 209, 409; its treatment in Greek versions of Qtii cunque, 271, 274, 275, 277, 278, 287, 290, 291, 294, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301. Durandus, Bp. of Mende, Rationale 0,45- Eastern Church, atritude of, to Qui cunque, 457. Edward VI, first Prayer Book of, 310 ; its version of the Quicunque, ibid. ; sources of the version, 311 ff.; rubrics relating to Quicunque, 430. — second Prayer Book of, why it en joined increased recital of Quicun que, 430. English Psalters of tenth cent, con taining Quicunque, 140; of eleventh cent, 153 ff. English Synodalia referring to Qui cunque, 89 ff. ; Constitutions of WaUer de Cantilupe, Bp. of Wor cester, 89 ; of Walter de Kirkham, Bp.of Durham, 90; of Peter Quivil, Bp. of Exeter, 91. — versionsofQ2«'« ": 133, 342 iii. mss. containing commentaries on the Athanasian Creed. (Where a commentary is not named the sources cannot be traced.) ENGLAND. Bodl. Lib. L. Jun. 25 Laud, Codd. Miscel. 234 ¦ „ Lat. 17 . Canonici Bibl. 30 ) MS. Laud, Misc. 40 ) ,, Codd. Lat. 105 Rawlinson B.N. 163 Laud, Lat. 96 284 . Auct. D. 2. 9 . MS. Rawlinson C. 67 MS. Laud, Misc. 493 . „ 12 Codd. Misc. 288 . . .\ 877 . . . 95 • • ¦[ Laud, Misc. 448 . ' Douce 258 Laud, Misc. 174 Erit. Museum MS. Addit 10046 Reg. 8 B. xiv . Fortunatus . . . 176 , 178 Stavelot 202 (from Stavelot and Oratorian) 218, 219 Bruno Necham „ Nequam Hales Wycliffite 223-4, 234 . 227 . 227 24i> 3, 4 . 241 . 246 . 24S . 250 254,258 (partly from Stavelot) • 259 . 262 261, 263 • 234 556 MSS. Index. Brit. Museum Hari. MS. 1806 „ 3133 MS. Addit. 1S043 „ 10924 „ 24902 Trin. Coll. Cam. Lib. R. 17. i 171 . C. C. Coll Camb. Parker Lib. E. 1-387 Wycliffite Necham Stavelot Bouhier Stavelot Wycliffite J, Stavelot PAGE 254, 258 • 241 201, 207, 230 . 219 . 198202 254, 258 255, 258 Ball. Coll. Oxon. Lib. No. 32 . . Stavelot . ... 204 St John's CoU. Oxon. Lib. No. loi . ,, 204 C. C. Coll. Oxon. Lib. No. 250 . . Simon of Tournay . . . 240 Magd. Coll. Oxon. Lib. No. 115 (mainly from Stavelot and Oratorian) 253 Merton Coll, Oxon. Lib. MS. 208 . „ „ . 238 Phillipps or Middlehill Collection, 1655 (mainly from P'ortunatus) . . 237 York Cath. Lib. xvi. 7. 4 . . Stavelot 205 Durham Cath. Lib. . . ,, . ... 205 FRANCE. Paris B. N. Lat. 2826 ¦ 17448 10081012 13020 18068 S. Gall. 27 and 241 Troyes MS. 804 1979 1532' S. Omer Lib., no press mark Orleans Lib. MS. 94 . Boulogne Lib. MS. 20 Fortunatus ParisStavelot . Simon of Tournay Fortunatus Troyes Oratorian Bouhier Orleans (from Stavelot and other sources) 179179179 199 201 240 181 184188196 197197211 225 Vat. Lib. Lat. Reg. 231 Milan Lib. M. 79 T. 103 . ¦ I- 152 Florence Lib., no press mark Turin Lib. No. 66 Bamberg Lib. A. 11. 16 Ed. or B. II. 16 Munich Lib. Cod. Lat. 19417 ITALY. . Oratorian . . . . .190 . Fortunatus, &c. . .181, 232 221, 233, 234,236 235 . Fortunatus . . . .182 . (from Stavelot and Oratorian) . 2 20 GERMANY. . Fortunatus 181181181 MSS. Index. 557 PAGE Munich Lib. Cod. Lat. 3729 . . Fortunatus .... 181 14508 . . „ .... 181 14501 . . ,, .... 181 Metz Pub. Lib. No. 14 . . . (from StIVelot and Oratorian) . 220 AUSTRIA. Vienna Imp. Lib. 269 (Denis) . . Fortunatus 133, 1} SWITZERLAND. Basle MS. B. ix. 6 . . . . Simon of Tournay 240 BELGIUM. Brussels Lib. No. 9191 . . . (from Stavelot and Oratorian) . 220 iv. mss. containing versions of the athanasian Creed. Bodl. Lib. Canonici Gr. 116 21 f. 147 b Bodl. Lib. MS. 425 F. 69. v MS. 288 Brit. M. Addit 17376 1 0046 Brit. M. Harleian 4327 373 1770 Camb. Univ. Lib. Ee. i. 10 ENGLAND. Greek English French English 280 295 304309 305 309324328 328 309 FRANCE. Paris B. N. Gr. 12S6 (formeriy Reg. Greek 272 2962) Paris B. N. Suppl. Franc. 5145 . . French 329 Paris Royal Lib. 1327 (formerly 2502) Greek 275 ITALY. Vat. MS. Gr. Palat. 364 . . • Greek 271 , 81 . . . . „ 296 Florence Lib. Plut. XI. cod. 12 . . „ ^89 S. Mk. Lib. Venice Cod. dlxxv . „ 295 558 MSS. Index. AUSTRIA. PACE Vienna Imp. Lib. (Nessel) Codex CXC. Greek 277 Gr. MSS. . CCXLV. „ 297 D. I. 79, f. 229 . German 321 Denis No. xxxviii . ,, 321 „ xxxix . „ 322 GERMANY. Munich MSS. Germ. 588 . . . German 321 589 f. 153 . . „ 321 WolfenbiittelMS.Theol. XXVII. f. 153 „ 321 V. MSS. CONTAINING CaNONS AND ECCLESIASTICAL Injunctions referring to the use of the Athanasian Creed. ENGLAND. Brit. Mus. MS. Addit. 19725 . . Cap. Lothair 73 ITALY. Vat. 1342 . . Ep. Canonica . 50 — 1343 • >; ... 50 — 1353 ¦ - 5845 • — 4332 . Vallicellan A 5 Barberini 2888 ,, ... . Cap. Atto . Ep. Canonica . 6°5085 505° Vercelli 175 Ivrea MS. - Coll. Canons (Herovall) , 64 54 FRANCE. Paris B. N. Lat. 1603 . . . Coll. Canons (Angers) 3848 B . . . Coll. Canons (Herovall) . 2123 ... „ . . 4281 ... „ . . 2400 ... „ . . Sangerm. 1363 . . „ . . 53 54 54 54 54 ¦ 54 BELGIUM. Brussels Burgund. Lib. loi 27-10144 . Coll. Canons (Angers) 54 Darmstadt 2179 Munich G iii Einsiedeln 205 . San Gall 675 Vienna 2 171 MSS. Index. GERMANY. . Coll. Canons (Angers) . Cap. examinationis . SWITZERLAND. . Coll. Canons (Angers) . Coll. Canons (Angers) AUSTRIA. . Coll. Canons (Angers) 559 PAGE 53 68 54 54 54 THE END. SELECT LIST Stanbarb theological Morks PRINTED AT The Clarendon Press. Oxford. THE HOLY SCRIPTUEES, ETC. FATHEES OP THE CHURCH, ETC. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, ETC. . ENGLISH THEOLOGY LITUR6I0L0GY .... page I ., 4 .. 5 „ 6 THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, ETC. HEBREW, etc. Notes on the Text of the Book of Genesis. By G. J. Spurrell, M.A. Second Edition. Crown 8to. i2s. 6d. Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel. By S. R. Driver, D.D. 8vo. 14s. Treatise on the use of the Tenses in Hebrew. By S. R. Driver, D.D. Third Edition. Crovm 8vo. 7s. 6d. The Psalms in Hebrew without points. Stiff covers, 2s. A Commentary on the Book of Proverbs. Attributed to Abra ham Ibn Ezra. Edited from a MS. in the Bodleian Library by S. E. Driver, D.D. Crown 8vo, paper covers, 3s. 6d. The Book of Tobit. A Chaldee Text, from a unique MS. in the Bodleian Library ; with other Kabbinical Texts, English Transla tions, and the Itala. Edited by Ad. Neubauer, M.A. Crovm 8yo. 6s. A Hebreto and English I/exicm, of the Old Testament, with an Appendix containing the Biblical Aramaic, based on the Thesaunas and Lexicon of Gesenius, by Francis Brown, D.D., S. R. Driver, D.D., and C. A. Briggs, D.D. Parts I— V. Small 4to. 2s. 6d. each. Part VI, In the Press. HEBREW, etc.— HebreiU Ac centuation of Psalms, Proverbs, and Job. By William Wickes, D.D. 8vo. 5s. Hebrew Prose Accentu ation. By the same Author. 8vo. I OS. 6d. The Book of Hebrew Roots, by Abu '1-Walid Marwan ibn Janah, otherwise called Eabbi Yonah. Now first edited, with an appendix, by Ad. Neubauer. 4to. 2l. 7s. 6d. ETHIOPIC. The Book of Enoch. Translated from Dillmann's Ethiopic Text (emended and re vised), and edited by E. H. Charles, M.A. 8vo. 16s. GREEK. Old Testament. Vetus Testamentum ex Versione Septua- ginta Interpretum secundum exemplar Vaticanum Romae editum. Accedit potior varietas Codicis Alexandrini. Tomi III. i8mo. i8s. Oxford: Clarendon Press, London: Henky Pbo^vde, Amen Corner, E.C. HOLY SCRIPTURES. GREEK. A Concordance to the Septuagint and the other Greek Ver sions of the Old Testament, including the Apocryphal Books, By the late Edwin Hatch, M.A., and H. A. Eedpath, M.A. Parts I— V, A-nPOnTAON, 4to, 2 IS. each. Part VI, In the Press. Essays in Biblical Greek. By Edwin Hatch, M.A., D.D. 8vo. IDS. 6d. Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt; sive, Veterum Interpre tum Graecorum in totum, Vetus Testa mentum Fragmenta. Edidit Fridericus Field, A.M. 2 vols. 4to. 5!. 5s. New Testament. Novum Testamentum Graece. Anticiulssimo- rum Codicum Textus in ordine parallelo dispositi. Accedit collatio Codicis Sinaitioi. Edidit E. H. Han- sell, S.T.B. Tomi IIL 8vo. 24s. Novum Testamentum Graece. Accedunt parallela S. Scrip turae loca, etc. Edidit Carolus Lloyd, S.T.P.E. iSmo. 3s. On writing paper, with wide margin, 7s. 6d. Appendices ad Novum Testamentum StepJtanicMm, jam inde a Millii temporibus Oxoniensium manibus tritum ; curante Gulmo. Sanday, A.M., S.T.P., LL.D. I. Col latio textusWestcottio-Hortiani(jure permisso) cum textu Stephanieo anni MDL. II. Delectus lectionum notatu dignissimarum. III. Leetiones quaedam ex codicibus versionum Memphitioae Armeniacae Aethio- picae fusius illustratae. Extra feap. 8vo, cloth. 3«. 6d. ¦ Novum Testamentum G^'aece juxta Exemplar Millianmn. i8mo. 2s. 6d. On writing paper, with wide margin, 7s. 6d. GREEK. The Greek Testament, with the Headings adopted by the Eevisers of the Authorised Ver sion : — (i) Pica type, with Marginal Re ferences. Demy 8vo. los. 6d. (2) Long Primer type. Fcap. 8vo. 4s. 6d. (3) The same, on writing paper, with wide margin, 15s. The Parallel New Testa ment, Greek and English; being the Authorised Version, 1611 ; the Re vised Version, 1881 ; and the Greek Text followed in the Revised Ver sion. 8vo. I2S. 6d. Outlines ofTextualGriti- cism applied to the New Testament. By C. E. Hammond, M.A. Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. A Greek Testament Pri- mer. An Easy Grammar and Eead ing Book for the use of Students beginning Greek. By E. Miller, M.A. Extra fcap. 8vo. 3s. (>d. LATIN. Libri Psalmorum Versio antiqua Latina, cum Paraphrasi Anglo-Saxonica. Edidit B. Thorpe, F.A.S. 8vo. los. 6d. Old-Latin Biblical Texts : No. I. The Gospel according to St. Matthew, from the St. Ger main MS. (gi). Edited with Intro duction and Appendices by John Wordsworth, D.D. Small 4to, stiff covers, 6s. Old-Latin Biblical Texts : No. II. Portions of the Gospels according to St. Mark and St. Matthew, from the Bobbio MS. (k), etc. Edited by John Wordsworth, D.D., W. Sand.ay, M.A., D.D., and H. J. White, M.A. Small 4to, stiff covers, 21s. Oxford: Clarendon Press. HOLY SCRIPTURES. LATIN. Old-Latin Biblical Texts : No. III. The Four Gospels, from the Munich MS. (q), now num bered Lat. 62 24 in the Eoyal Library at Munich. With a Fragment from St. John in the Hof-Bibliothek at Vienna (Cod. Lat. 502). Edited, with the aid of Tischendorfs tran script (under the direction of the Bishop of Salisbui'y),by H. J.White, M.A. Small 4to, stiff covers, 1 2s. 6(2. Nouum Testamentum Domini ETostri lesu Christi Latine, se cundum Editionem S. Hieronymi. Ad Codicum Manuscriptorum fidem recensuit lohannes Wordsworth, S.T.P., Episcopus Sariaburiensis. In operis societatem adsumto Henrico luliano White, A.M. 4to. Ease. I. Euangelium secundum Maitheum. 12s. 6d. Pasc. II. Euangelium secundum Marcum. 7s. 6d. Ease. III. Euangelium secundum Lucam. 12 s. 6d. Ease. IV. Euangelium secwiidum Johannem. los. 6d. OLD-FRENCH. Libri Psal morum Versio antiqua Gallica e Cod. ms. in Bibl. Bodleiana adservato, una cum Versione Metrica aliisque Monumentts pervetustis. Nunc primum descripsit et edidit Franciscus Michel, Phil. Doc. 8vo. los. 6d. ENGLISH. The Holy Bible in the Earliest English Versions, made from the Latin Vulgate by John Wycliffe and his followers : edited by Forshall and Madden. 4 vols. Eoyal 4to. 3!. 3s. Also reprinted from the above, with Introduction and Glossary by W. W. Skeat, Litt. D. The Books of Job, Psalms, Promrbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. 33. 6d. The New Testament. 6s. ENGLISH. The Holy Bible, Revised Version*. Cheap Editions for School Use. Revised Bible. Pearl i6mo, cloth boards, is. 6d. Revised New Testament. Non pareil 32mo, 6d. ; Brevier l6mo, IS. ; Long Primer 8vo, is. 6d. * The Revised Version Is the joint property of the ' Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. The Oxford Bible for Teachers, containing the Holy Scrip tures, togetlierwith a new, enlarged, and illustrated edition of the Oxford Helps to the Study of the Bible, com prising Introductions to the several Books, the History and Antiquities of the Jews, the results of Modern Discoveries, and the NaturalHistory of Palestine, with copious Tables, Concordance and Indices, and a series of Maps. Prices in various sizes and bindings from 7s. 6d. to 2I. 2S. Helps to the Study of the Bible, taken from the Oxford Bible for Teachers. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. The Psalter, or Psalms of David, and certain Canticles, with a Translation and Exposition in Eng lish, by Eichard Eolle of Hampole. Edited by H. E. Bramley, M.A. With an Introduction and Glos sary. Demy Svo. it. is. Studio, Biblica et Eccle siastica. Essays in Biblical and Patristic Criticism, and kindred subjects. By Members of the Uni versity of Oxford. Vol. I. Svo. los. 6d. Vol. II. Svo. 1 2s. 6d. Vol. III. Svo. i6s. Vol. IV. Svo. I2S. 6d. London : Henry Frowdb, Amen Corner, E.C. FATHERS OF THE CHURCH. ENGLISH. The Book of 'Wisdom : the Greek Text, the Latin Vulgate, andthe Authorised English Version ; with an Introduction, Critical Apparatus, and a Com mentary. By W. J. Deane, M.A. 4to. I2S. 6(i. GOTHIC. The Gospel of St. Mark in Gothic, according to the translation made by Wulfila in the Fourth Century. Edited, with a Grammatical Introduction and Glossarial Index, by W. W. Skeat, Litt. D. Extra fcap. Svo. 4s. 2, FATHERS OP THE CHURCH, ETC. St. Athanasius : Orations against the Arians. With an account of his Life by William Bright, D.D. Crown Svo. gs. Historical Writings, ac cording to the Benedictine Text. With an Introduction by W. Bright, D.D. Crown Svo. los. 6d. St. Augustine : Select Anti- Pelacjian Treatises, and the Acts of the Second Council of Orange. With an Introduction by William Bright, D.D. Crown Svo. 9s. St. Basil: The Book of St. Basil on the Holy Spirit. A Eevised Text, with Notes and Introduction by C. F. H. Johnston, M.A. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. Canons of the First Four General Councils of Nicaea, Co^istanii- nople, Ephesus, and Clialceclon. With Notes by W. Bright, D.D. Second Edition. Crown Svo. 7s. dd. Catenae Graecoruvi Patrum in Novum Testamentum. Edidit J. A. Cramer, S.T.P. Tomi VIII. Svo. 2l. 4s. Clementis Alexandrini Opera, ex recensione Guil. Sindorfli. Tomi IV. Svo. 3?. Cyrilli Archiepiscopi Alexan drini in .XII Prophetas. Edidit P. E. Pusey, A.M. Tomi II. Svo. 2I. 2s. in D. Joannis Evan gelium. Accedunt Fragmenta Varia necnon Tractatus ad Tiberium Dia- conum Duo. Edidit post Aubertum P. E. Pusey, A.M. Tomi III. Svo. 2l. 5s. Commentarii in Lucae Evangelium quae supersunt Synace. E mss. apud Mus. Britan. edidit E. Payne Smith, A.M. 4to. il. 2s. The same, translated by E. Payne Smith, M.A. 2 vols. Svo. 14s. Ephraomi Syri, Rabulae Epi scopi Edesseni, Balaei, aliorumque Opera Selecta. E Codd. Syriaeis mss. in Museo Britannico et Bibliotheca Bodleiana asservatis primus edidit J. J. Overbeek. Svo. il. is. Eusebii Pamphili Evangelicae Praeparationis Libri XV. Ad Codd. mss. recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi IV. Svo. It. los. Evangelicae Bemonstra- iionis Libri X. Recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. TomilL Svo. 15s. contra, Hieroclem et Marcellum Libri. Recensuit T. Gais ford, S.T.P. Svo. 7s. Oxford : Clarendon Press. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Eusebius' Ecclesiastical His tory, according to the text of Burton, with an Introduction by W. Bright, D.D. Crown Svo. 8s. 6d. Evagrii Historia Ecclesiastica, ex recensione H. Valesii. Svo. 4s. Irenaeus : The Third Book of St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, against Heresies. With short Notes and a Glossary by H. Deane, B.D. Crown Svo. 5s. 6d. Patrum Apostolicorum, S. de mentis Romani, S. Ignatii, 8. Polycarpi, quae supersunt. Edidit Guil. Jacobson, S.T.P.E. Tomi II. Svo. il. is. PMlo. About the Contem plative Life ; or, the Fourth Book of the Treatise concerning Virtues. Critically edited, with a defence of its genuine ness. By Fred. C. Conyheare, M. A. Svo. 14s. ReUquiae Sacrae secundi ter- tiique saeculi. Eecensuit M. J. Routh, S.T.P. Tomi V. 8vo. il. 5s. Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorwn Opuscula. Eecensuit M. J. Eouth, S.T.P. Tomi II. Svo. los. Socrates' Ecclesiastical His tory, according to the Text of Hussey, with an Introduction by William Bright, D.D. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. Sozomeni Historia Ecclesi astica. Edidit E. Hussey, S.T.B. Tomi III. Svo. 15s. TertuUiani Apologetieus ad versus Gentes pro Christianis. Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by T. Herbert Bindley, B.D. Crown Svo. 6s. . de Praescriptione Haereticorum : ad Uartyras : ad Scapu- lam. Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by T. Herbert Bindley, B.D. Crown Svo. 6s. Theodoreti Ecclesiasticae His toriae Libri V. Eecensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. Svo. 7s. 6d. 3. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, ETC. Adamnani Vita S. Columbae Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and Glossary, by J. T. Fowler, M. A., D.C.L. Crown Svo, half-bound, Ss. 6d. net. Baedae Historia, Ecclesiastica. A New Edition. Edited, with Intro duction, English Notes, &c., by C. Plummer, M.A. 2 vols. Crown Svo. 2 IS. net. Bigg. TheChristianPlatonists qf Alexandria. By Charles Bigg, D.D. Svo. los. 6d. Bingham's Antiquities of the Christian Church, and other Works. 10 vols. Svo. 3L 3s. Bright. Chapters of Early English Church History. By W. Bright, D.D. Second Edition. Svo. 12s. Burnet's History of the Refor mation of the amrch of England. A new Edition, by N. Pocook, M.A. 7 vols. Svo. ll. lOS. Cardwell's Documentary An nals of the Reformed Church of England ; being a Collection of Injunctions, Declarations, Orders, Articles of Inquiry, &c. from 1546 to 17 16. 2 vols. Svo. 1 8s. Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents relating to Great Britain and Ireland. Edited, after Spelman and Wilkins, by A. W. Haddan, B.D., and W. Stubbs, D.D. Vols. I and III. Medium Svo, each il. is. Vol. II, Part I. Medium Svo, I OS. dd. Vol. II, Part II. amrch of Ireland ; Memorials of St. Patrick. Stiff covers, 3s. 6d. London: Henry Feowde, Amen Corner, E.C. ENGLISH THEOLOGY. Fuller's Church History of Britain. Edited by J. S. Brewer, M.A. 6 vols. Svo. II. 19s. Gibson's Synodus Anglicana. Edited by E. Cardwell, D.D. Svo. 6s. Hamilton's {Archbishop John) Catechism, 1552. Edited, with In troduction and Glossary, by Thomas Graves Law, Librarian of the Signet Library, Edinburgh. With a Pre face by the Eight Hon. W. E. Glad stone. Demy Svo. 12s. dd. Hussey. Rise of the Papal Power, traced in three Lectures. By Robert Hussey, B.D. Second Edition. Fcap. Svo. 4s. dd. John, Bishojy of Ephesus. The Tliird Part of his Ecdesiastiad Hisioi-y. [In Syiiac] Now first edited by William Cui-eton, M.A. 4to. il. 12s. The same, translated by E. Payne Smith, M.A. Svo. los. Le Neve's Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae. Corrected and continued from 1715 to 1853 by T. Duffus Hardy. 3 vols. Svo. il. is. Noelli (A.) Ccdechismus sive prima institutio dlsciplinaque Pietatis Christianae Latine explicata. Editio novacuraGuil. Jacobson, A. M. Svo. 5s. dd. Records of the Reformation. Tlie Divorce, 1527-1533. Mostly now for the first time printed from MSS. in the British Museum and other Libraries. Collected and arranged by N. Pocock, M.A. 2 vols. Svo. II. ids. Reformatio Legum Ecclesias- ticarum. The Eeformation of Eccle siastical Laws, as attempted in the reigns of Henry VIII, Edward VI, and Elizabeth. Edited by E. Card- well, D.D. Svo. 6s. dd. Shirley. Some Account of th e Church in the Apostolic Age. By W. W. Shirley, D.D. Second Edition. Fcap. Svo. 3s. dd. Stillingfleet's Origines Bri- tannicae, with Lloyd's Historical Account of Church Government. Edited by T. P. Pantin, M.A. 2 vols. Svo. los. Stubbs. Registrum, Sacrum Anglicanum. An attempt to exhibit the course of Episcopal Succession in England. By W. Stubbs, D.D. Small 4to. 8s. dd. 4. ENGLISH THEOLOGY. Bradley. Lectures on the Book of Job. By George Granville Bradley, D.p., Dean of Westmin ster. Crown Svo. 7s. dd. Lectures on Ecclesiastes. 'Bj the same. Crown Svo. 4s. dd. Bull's Works, with Nelson's Life. Edited by E. Burton, D.D. 8 vols. Svo. 2I. 9s. Burnet's Exposition of the XXXIX Articles. Svo. 7s. Butler's Wo7'ks. Divided into Sections ; with Sectional Headings ; an Index to each volume ; and some occasional Notes ; also Prefatory Matter. Edited by the Eight Hon. W. E. Gladstone. 2 vols. Medium Svo. II. Ss. 2 vols. 8vo. IIS. Oxford : Clarendon l^re; ENGLISH THEOLOGY. Comber's Companion to the Temple; or a Help to Devotion in the use of the Common Prayer. 7 vols. Svo. II. us. dd. Cranmer's Works. Collected and arranged by H. Jenkyns, M.A., Fellow of Oriel CoUege. 4 vols. Svo. \l. I OS. Enchiridion Theologieum Anti-Romanum. Vol. I. Jeremy Taylor's Dissua sive from Popery, and Treatise on the Real Presence. Svo. Ss. Vol. II. Barrow on the Suprem acy of the Pope, with his Dis course on the Unity of the Church. Svo. 7s. dd. VoL III. Tracts selected from Wake, Patrick, Stillingfleet, Clagett, and others. Svo. us. Greswell's Harmonia Evan gelica. Fifth Edition. Svo. 9s. dd. Hall's Works. Edited by P. Wynter, D.D. 10 vols. Svo. ^l. 3s. Heurtley. Harmonia Sym bolica : Creeds of the TVestern Cliurch. By C. Heurtley, D.D. Svo. 6s. dd. Homilies appointed to be read in Churches. Edited by J. Griffiths, M.A. Svo. 7s. dd. Hooker's Works, with his Life by Walton, arranged by John Keble, M.A. Seventh Edition. Revised by E. W. Church, M.A., Dean of St. Paul's, and F. Paget, D.D. 3 vols. medium Svo. il. ids. the Text as arranged by J. Keble, M.A. 2 vols. Svo. us. Jackson's (Dr. Thomas) Works. 12 vols. Svo. 3Z. 6s. Jewel's Works. Edited by R. W. Jelf, D.D. 8 vols. Svo. I7. los. Martineau. A Study of Re ligion: its Sources and Contents. By James Martineau, D.D. Second Edi tion. 2 vols. Crown Svo. 15s. Patrick's Theological Works. 9 vols. Svo. II. IS. Pearson's Exposition of the Creed. Eevised and corrected by E. Burton, D.D. Sixth Edition. Svo. 10s. dd. Minor Theological Works. Edited vrith a Memoir, by Edward Churton, M.A. 2 vols. Svo. los. Sanderson's Works. Edited by W. Jacobson, D.D. 6 vols. Svo. ll. IDS. Stillingfleet's Origines Sacrae. 2 vols. Svo. 9s. Rational Account of the Grounds of Protestant Religion ; being a vindication of Archbishop Laud's Eelation of a Conference, &c. 2 vols. Svo. IDS. Wall's History of Infant Bap tism. Edited by H. Cotton, D.C.L. 2 vols. Svo. Ii!. IS. Waterland's Works, with Life, by Bp. Van Mildert. A new Edition, with copious Indexes. 6 vols. Svo. 2l. lis. Revieiu of the Doctrine of the Eucharist, vrith a Preface by the late Bishop of London. Crown Svo. 6s. dd. London : Henby Frowde, Amen Corner, E.C. LITURGIOLOGY. Wheatly's Illustration of the Book of Common Prayer. Svo. 6s. Wyclif. A Ccdalogue of the Original 'Works of John Wyclif. By W. W. Shirley, D.D. Svo. 3s. dd. Wyclif. Select English Works. By T. Arnold, M.A. 3 vols. Svo. ll. IS. Trialogus. With the Supplement now first edited. By Gotthard Lechler. Svo. 7s, 5. LITURGIOLOGY, Cardwell's Tivo Books of Com mon Prayer, set forth by authority in the Eeign of King Edward VI, compared with each other. Third Edition. Svo. 7s. History of Conferences cm the Book of Common Prayer from 155 1 to 1690. Svo. 7s. dd. The Gelasian Sacramentary. Liber Sacramentorum Romanae Ec clesiae. Edited, with Introduction, Critical Notes, and Appendix, by H. A. Wilson, M.A. Medium Svo. 1 8s. Liturgies, Eastern and "Western. Edited, with Introduc tions and Appendices, by F. E. Brightirian, M.A., on the Basis of the former Work by C. E. Ham mond, M.A. Vol. I. Eastern Liturgies. Demy Svo. ll. IS. Helps to the Study of the Book of Common Prayer. By the Very Eev. W. E. Stephens, B.D. Being a Companion to Church Worship. Crown Svo. 3s. dd. LeoMe Missal, The, as used in the Cathedral of Exeter during the Episcopate of its first Bishop, A.D. 1050-1072 ; together with some Account of the Eed Book of Derby, the Missal of Eobert of Jumifeges, &c. Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by F.E. Warren, B.D., F.S.A. 4to, half-morocco, il. 15s. Maskell. Ancient Liturgy of the Church of England, according to the uses of Sarum, York, Hereford, and Bangor, and the Eoman Liturgy arranged in parallel columns, with preface and notes. By W. Maskell, M.A. Third Edition. Svo. 15s. Monumenta Ritualia Ecclesiae Anglicanae. The occasional Offices of the Church of England according to the old use of Salisbury, the Prymer in English, and other prayers and forms, vrith disserta tions and notes. Second Edition. 3 vols. Svo. 2l. 10s. Warren. The Liturgy and Ritual of the Celtic Church. By F. E. Warren, B.D. Svo. 14s. Oxford AT THE CLARENDON PRESS LONDON: HENRY FROWDE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, AMEN CORNER, E.C, 8755 N%l/ !•¥ ?^ v!k ''^S-.-' .^^ >^y gs^j' i i^ fi^