of our Apostles' Creed is usually sought in Gaul.
form is found in the writings of Pirminius, a Frank missionary of the eighth
and forms that approximate to it are found in Ps.-Aug., Serm.241,
as in the so-called Missale Gallicanum and Sacramentarium Gallicanum, which
were used in Gaul about that time.
There seemed to be good reason for supposing
that our Textus receptus (T) was a Gallican recension,
widespread use, and was finally adopted in Rome.
But a fatal objection to
this view may be raised in the fact that the phrase creatorem coeli et
terras is not found in any purely Gallican Creed till the twelfth century.
[Moreover, the Gallican Creeds generally repeat credo in
Art.2, and read in in Art.6.].
There is also some new evidence
that the Roman Church, while sanctioning the additional use of the Nicene
Creed (C) at baptism, never really dropped the use of her old Baptismal Creed.
In the following Chapter I shall endeavour to prove that R was transformed
into T in Rome itself, by the gradual absorption of clauses, and that Rome
was the centre from which its use spread.
Some of the new clauses were distinctly of Gallican origin; there is this amount of truth in the old theory.
Salvianus supplies the following fragment; De gub. Dei, vi.6:
Credo, inquis, in Deum Patrem omnipotentem et in lesum Christum Filium eius.
There is a less exact quotation in the profession of Leporius.
Nascitur ... de Spiritu Sancto et Maria semper uirgine, Deus homo lesus Christus Filius Dei ... crucifixus est, mortuus, resurrexit.
Bacchiarius, whose treatise, as we have seen, was probably written in Gaul, quotes a form which may be compared with the Creed of Victricius of Rouen, though the mention of the Blessed Virgin before the Holy Spirit reminds us of Priscillian. He writes:
Natum esse de uirgine et Spiritu Sancto ... passum et sepultum, resurrexisse a mortuis ... ascendisse in coelum, indeuenturum expectamus ad iudicium uiuorum et mortuorum.
Carnem quoque nostrae resurrectionis fatemur integram.
[Ep. ad Fratrem Graecum diaconum, ed. Engelbrecht, p.205.]
A more important witness of the Creed of Gaul in this century is Faustus, Bishop of Riez. In acknowledged writings we find the following:
With these agrees fairly well the creed form embedded in the
two sermons of the Eusebian collection, which have been edited by Caspari,
and are now generally attributed to Faustus.
But the difficulty of deciding what is part of the creed quoted from, and what is explanation, leaves one with a sense of insecurity about any argument based only on these homilies, to which I will refer as H1 H2.
There is a third source of information, but of a more doubtful
kind, in a sermon found by Caspari in a MS. at Albi, Cod. 38.s.ix.,
and published under the title, Tractatus s. Faustini de symbolo (T) [A.
u. N. Quellen, 1879, p.250.].
The in of Faustini has been
erased, and there can be little doubt that the sermon is a compilation from
the works of Faustus.
The title Sanctus points to the beginning of the sixth
century as the date when it was made, before the Synod of Orange (529) condemned
his semi-Pelagian teaching, probably in his own diocese.
Caspari was prepared to accept the evidence of this sermon without reserve, but Engelbrecht does not share this confidence. Here again we are dealing with a somewhat intangible argument, but it seems clear that the creed quoted in this sermon can be relied on as the Creed of the Diocese.
The differences in the Creed of the Homilies lead one to suppose
that Faustus is quoting his personal creed, which was possibly British.
It is remarkable for the omission of unicum, of passus sub Pontio Pilato, though this is not certain, of mortuus and omnipotentis, and for the form abremissio peccatorum, which occurs in the Creed of the Antiphonary of Bangor. But it lacks other marks of relationship to the latter creed.
|I.||1.||Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem;|
|II.||2.||Credo et in Filium eius Dominum nostrum lesum Christum,||om. Dom.
|3.||qui conceptua est de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria uirgine,|
|4.||crucifixus et sepultus,1||passus sub Pontio Pilato, T. + mortuus H2 (a2), T.||
1[Kattenbusch reads (qui ?) sub Pontio Pilato crucifixus est. He quotes for passus, mortuus, the doubtful support of Ps.-Aug., Serm.243, which contains quotations from Faustus.]
|5.||tertia die resurrexit,|
|6.||ascendit in caelum,2||ad caelos, H1 H2.||
2[The singular, preserved by T, is remarkable (cf, Phaebadius, Victricius). The Homilies have ad coelos in their text, but the Second Homily has the singular ad coelum in the exposition.]
|7.||sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris,||+ omnipotentis, H1.|
|8.||inde uenturus iudicare 3 uiuos et mortuos;||
3[Hom.2 (a2) has uenturus iudicaturus de uiuis et mortuis. This variant is found in Priscillian. Aug.Serm.213; Cyprian of Toulon, Venantius Fortunatus, Mozarabic Liturgy have iudicaturus.]
|III.||9.||Credo et in Spiritum Sanctum,||om. et, T.|
|10.||sanctam ecclesiam catholicam, sanctorum communionem,|
|11.||Abremissa 4 peccatorum,||
4[Abremissa is the reading of three MSS. of de Spiritu Sancto, i.1, and must be quoted as neuter plural, cf.ii.4: "In baptismo peccatorum abremissa donantur." In H2 (Cod. Madrit.) it is used as feminine singular, followed by abremissio in the Commentary, which is the reading of Tr.]
|12.||carnis resurrectionem uitam aeternam.|
We turn next to the sermon of Caesarius of Arles (Ps.-Aug., 244), which has already come under our notice as containing quotations of the Quicunque. The first sentence and the latter part, which is hortatory, have been found combined with another sermon in two Paris MSS. (B. N., lat. 3848 B and 2123). Caspari came to the conclusion that the composite expositio fidei thus formed was compiled in Gaul at the end of the sixth or beginning of the seventh century. I have been fortunate enough to find three MSS. of the other sermon, with its proper beginning, Auscultate expositionem, but must reserve discussion of its creed-form for my chapter on "Unsolved Problems." I have also found the first sentence and hortatory part of Ps.-Aug., 244, as a Sermo ad neophytes in a Rouen MS. (A.214).
I will print the whole passage containing the creed from the Benedictine edition, with the variants of Cod. Sangallensis, 150, saec.ix. in (G) and Cod. lat. Monacensis, 14,470, saec.viii., ix. (M.):
|1||Credite ergo,carissimi,in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, credite et in lesum Christum Filium eius unicum Dominum nostrum, credite eum conceptum esse de Spiritu Sancto, natum ex Maria uirgine, quae uirgo ante partum et uirgo||LINE 1. car.] pr. fratres, G. 2. om. et, G. 4. pr. et, B G. om. et u. p. p. M.|
|5||post partum semper fuit, et absque contagione uel macula peccati perdurauit. Credite eum pro nostris peccatis passum sub Pontio Pilato, credite crucifixum, credite mortuum et sepultum, credite eum ad inferna descendisse, diabolum obligasse, et animos sanctorum, quae sub custodia||5. fuit] fidelis, G. 7. cruc.] pr. eum, G. 8. disc., G. 9. diabulum, M. alligasse, G. anima, M; +que, M.|
|10||detinebantur liberasse secumque
ad caelestem patriam perduxisse.
Credite eum tertia die resurrexisse et nobis exemplum resurrectionis ostendisse. Credite eum in caelis cum carne quam de nostro adsumpsit ascendisse.
Credite quod in dextera sedit Patris.
Credite quod uenturus sit
|10. detine-] ne, supra lin. man. 2, M. 10. eumque, M. celestem, GM. tercia, G. pr. a mortuis, BG. 12. celis, G. 13. nostra, G. 14. sed // duo litt. ras. G. sedet, B.|
|15||iudicare uiuos et mortuos. Credite in Spiritum Sanctum, credite sanctam ecclesiam catholicam, credite communionem sanctorum, credite resurrectionem carnis, credite remissionem peccatorum, credite et uitam aeternam.||17. >s. c. B. >c. r. B. 18. om. et, G.|
Closely parallel to this Creed of Caesarius is the following
Creed of Cyprian, Bishop of Toulon, recently recovered from a letter to Maximus [Monumenta
Germ. Hist., Epp.iii., ed. W. Gundlach, from Cod. Colon. 212 (Darmstad.
2326), saec.vii.], Bishop of Geneva, in which he makes a respectful
reference to Osesarius.
The whole passage is as follows:-
|1||Certe symbolum, quod et tenemus et credimus, hoc continet: Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, credo et in lesum Christum, Filium eius unigenitum dominum nostrum - ecce explicitae sunt personae Patris et Filii secundum||line 4. Cod, persone.|
|5||deitatem. Quid uero pro redemptione nostra Filius unigenitus Deus egerit, audi quod sequitur. Qui conceptus de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria uirgine - utique subaudis unigenitus Deus, quia non aliam nominasti personam - passus, inquit, sub Pontio Pilato - qui utique||8. Cod. nomen-. 9. God, inquid sup.|
|10||Filius unigenitus Deus - crucifixus et sepultus - qui nibilominus unigenitus Deus - tertia die resurrexit a mortuis ascendit in caelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris, inde uenturus iudicaturus uiuos ac mortuos - qui utique quem superius es confessus Filius unigenitus est.||13. Cod. uiuis.|
From these passages we may extract the following creeds, and say with confidence that they were used in Southern Gaul at the end of the fifth century:-
CYPRIAN OF TOULON.
|I.||1.||Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem;||
Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem;
|II.||2.||Credo et in lesum Christum, filium eius unicum, Dominum nostrum,||
et in lesum Christum
filium eiua unigenitum,
|3.||Conceptum de Spiritu Sancto, natum ex Maria uirgine,||
qui conceptus de Spiritu Sancto, natus ex Maria uirgine,
|4.||passum sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixum mortuum et sepultum; ad inferna descendit,||
Passus sub Pontio Pilato,
|6.||tertia die resurrexit,||
Tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,
|6.||ascendit in caelis;||
ascendit in coelos,
|7.||sedit in dextera Patris,||
sedet ad dexteram Patria,
|8.||inde uenturus iudicare uiuos et mortuos.||inde uenturus iudicaturus uiuos ac mortuos.|
|9.||Credo in Spiritum Sanctum,|
|10.||Sanctam ecclesiam catholicam, communionem sanctorum,|
|12.||resurrectionam carnis et uitam aeternam.|
Some years ago I attempted to combine the evidence of these
creeds with the Creed of Faustus and others, and so reconstruct the average
Gallican Creed of the fifth century. [Art. in Guardian of 13th March 1885.]
result was a purely artificial form, and was criticised as such by Morin. [Rev.
Ben., 1895, p.199.]
But he admitted that the threefold repetition
of credo was proved to be common Gallican usage.
This adds to the
artistic character of the form and improves the rhythm.
Faustus gives us
a hint that this was considered when he speaks of symboli salutare carmen, or perfectio
[Ed. Engelbrecht, p.102 f.]
My object might just as well be gained by quoting the Creed of Caesarius alone, to prove that nearly the whole of our Textus receptus was current in Gaul at the end of the fifth century.
Our next witness, Gregory of Tours (+594), does not add much to our knowledge in the following sentences, which he incorporates in the prologue to his History:
Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem.
Credo in lesum Christum Filium eius unicum, dominum Deum nostrum. ...
Credo eum die tertia resurrexisse ... ascendisse in coelos, sedere ad dexteram Patris, uenturum ac iudicaturum uiuos et mortuos. Credo Sanctum Spiritum a Patre et Filio processisse.
But the mention of the procession from the Son is interesting, and the participle iudicaturus agrees with the Creed of Cyprian.
Much the same creed was used by Eligius of Noyon (+659) in his de Rectitudine Catholicae Conuersationis Tractatus. I will quote the passage from Cod. lat. Monacensis, 6430, saec.ix., which gives a slightly different and probably purer form of text:-
Promisistis e contra credere uos Deum Patrem omnipotentem et in Ihesum Christum Filium eius unicum Dominum nostrum, conceptum de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria uirgine, passum sub Pontio Pilato, tertia die resurrexisse a mortuis, ascendisse in caelis. Promisistis deinde credere uos et in Spiritum Sanctum sanctam ecclesiam catholicam, remissionem peccatorum, carnis resurrectionem et uitam aeternam.
The form is plainly shortened, not imperfect, since it would be inconceivable that this preacher on the Last Judgment did not confess Christ as Judge in his creed.
Exactly the same form is contained in the sermon following,
which I cannot trace to any author.
It begins (f.59 r.):
Rogo uos et admoneo fratres carissimi ut diem iudicii semper pertimescatis. ...
The Creed of the heretic Pelagius contains the following:-
|I.||1.||Credimus in Deum Patrem, omnipotentem cunctorum uisibilium et inuisibilium conditorem.|
|II.||2.||Credimus et in Dominum nostrum lesum Christum ... (unigenitum et uerum Dei) Filium ...|
|4.||passus est ... mortuus est|
|5.||... resurrexit tertia die,|
|6.||ascendit in coelum,|
|7.||sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris ...|
|8.||uenturus est ... ad iudicium uiuorum mortuorum.|
|9.||Credimus et in Spiritum Sanctum;||
[I have transferred these words from their place following the confession of the Son.]
This form is to be compared with the creed in the Bangor Antiphonary, which preserves the creed of the Irish Church in the seventh century:
|I.||1.||Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, inuisibilem omnium creaturarum uisibilium et inuisibilium conditorem.|
|II.||2.||Credo in lesum Christum, Filium eius unicum Dominum nostrum, Deum omnipotentem,|
|3.||conceptum de Spiritu Sancto, natum de Maria uirgine,|
|4.||passum sub Pontio Pilato,1
qui crucifixus et sepultus descendit ad inferos,
|5.||tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,|
|6.||ascendit in coelis,|
|7.||seditque ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis,|
|8.||exinde uenturus iudicare uiuos ac mortuos.|
|III.||9.||Credo et in Spiritum Sanctum, Deum omnipotentem, unam habentem substantiam cum Patre et Filio;|
|10.||sanctam esse ecclesiam 1 catholicam,||
|11.||abremissa 2 peccatorum,||
|12.||carnis resurrectionem. Credo uitam post mortem et uitam aeternam in gloria Christi.|
The repetition of Deum omnipotentem and the emphatic
assertion of the one substance of the Deity are marks of teaching which was
current in Gaul from the fifth century.
This is shown in a crystallised form
in the Quicunque.
Its influence on the Irish Church is easy to explain,
since S. Patrick had visited Lerins.
The creed seems to be Gallican, omitting creatorem coeli et terras, the place of which is supplied from the Nicene Creed or from Cassian.4 But there are several peculiarities for which it is less easy to account:
de Maria, cf. Victricius, Gall. Miss. A, Gall Sacr. C, etc.; ad inferos, cf. Lambeth, 427, Bratke's Berne MS.
It is most closely related to the sermon, Auscultate expositionem (p.243),
which appears to be Gallican of the fifth century.
I therefore agree with Hahn (p.85, n.222) [Hahn,3 p.84, n.207, compares the so-called Creed of Palmatius found in Martyrium Sancti Calixti Papae et Sociorum eius, but this reference is of very doubtful value.] that it is neither founded on the Textus receptus nor an independent recension of the Old Roman Creed.
But I do not think that it is possible at present to prove anything more.
Before we attempt to discuss the evidence of documents containing our Textus receptus, it will be well to review the history of the creed in Italian Churches, especially in Rome, up to the end of the seventh century.
The Creed of Turin, found in a sermon of Maximus, who was Bishop of Turin in the middle of the fifth century, shows that the Old Roman Creed was preserved unaltered, with the exception of the order lesum Christum and the reading in coelum.
The sermons of Peter Chrysologus, who was Bishop of Ravenna at the same period, show an even closer adherence to the form, though there is some doubt whether uitam aeternam, which appears in the exposition of lxi, and in the other sermons, had not crept (as we have seen happen in other cases) into the text of the creed. [Hahn,3 p.42, n,58. Catholicam is certainly an interpolation.]
The lack of information on the creeds of Milan and Aquileia at this period is at once explained by the fact of their sufferings under barbarian invasion.
Of Rome there is more to say, for the letters of some of the Popes, though they do not prove that the form of creed had yet been altered, show unmistakably that the modifications, which are characteristic of T, were already valued and used. Leo's famous letter to Flavian (449), while it quotes the old type, natus de Spiritu Sancto et Maria Uirgine, contains the explanation, conceptus de Spiritu Sancto. The statement is made (c. 5):
unigenitum Filium Dei crucifixum et sepultum omnes etiam in symbolo confitemur,
but the word "dead" soon follows, and the mention of the Lord's words to the penitent thief in the preceding chapter shows that Leo had also in his mind the descent into hell.
In the following century Pelagius I. wrote a letter to King Childebert I, to prove his loyalty to the old faith of the Church defined at Chalcedon. His language about the crucifixion seems to be influenced by the Nicene Creed, but it shows the same turn of thought towards a fuller expression of the central fact of our redemption:
Quem sub Pontio Pilato sponte pro solute nostra passum esse carne confitemur, crucifixum carne, mortuum carne, resurrexisse tertia die. ...
The Creed of Gregory the Great, printed in the appendix to his letters, is extant in many MSS., [E.g. Rouen, Cod. 516 (0.16), from Jumieges, saec.xi., which I have collated with the Benedictine text given in Hahn,3 p.337. There is no variation.] and there seems to be no reason to doubt its authenticity. It begins with a confession of the Trinity, in terms like those of the Quicunque, and, with some phrases borrowed from the Nicene Creed, proceeds to the following:
Conceptus et natus ex Spiritu Sancto et Maria uirgine; qui naturam nostram suscepit absque peccato, et sub Pontio Pilato crucifixus est et sepultus tertia die resurrexit a mortuis, die autem quadragesimo ascendit in caelum, sedet ad dexteram patris, unde uenturus est iudicare uiuos et mortuos.
Need we hesitate to conclude that R was still in use in the Roman Church, a fact which is confirmed by the discovery of the Old Roman form (with uitam aeternam) side by side with T, in a collection of liturgical documents made in Rome in the ninth century? It appears to have been the form brought to England in the sixth century by Gregory's mission (see p.243 infra), and it survives in several sermons, which cannot be referred to an earlier date than this, nor to any other Church.
There is some evidence to prove that the Nicene Creed had been added to it in the service of baptism. Both the Gelasian Sacramentary and the seventh Ordo Romanus (as printed in Migne, 78,993) quote the Nicene Creed only in this connection. The priest asked in what language the profession of faith for the children should be made. The acolyte answered, in Latin, and sang:
Credo in unum Deum Patrem omnipotentem.
The Gelasian Sacramentary, in its present form, is clearly a compilation, which was introduced into France about the end of the seventh century. [Duchesne, Origines, p.123: "Par sacramentaire gelasien il fant entendre un recueil liturgique romain."] It is based on a Roman liturgical collection, and has been enlarged from Gallican sources. In the service of baptism there are two creeds mentioned at the Traditio symboli, the Nicene (C); at the time of baptism the questions asked manifestly represent a shortened form of R.
|Credis in Deum Patrem omnipotentem?||
|Oredis in lesum Christum, Filium eius unicum, Dominum nostrum, natum et passum?||
|Oredis et in Spiritum Sanctum, sanctam ecclesiam, remissionem peccatorum, carnis resurrectionem?||
Kattenbusch [ii.P.20.] lays stress on the marks of antiquity which distinguish the preface and concluding words that form the setting of the Traditio symboli, and argues that R not C was obviously the original form employed in the service. But the highest antiquity allowed to the preface would not guarantee it against interpolation, and the question is simply this, To what extent was the use of the interpolated creed (C) carried on?
It was too readily assumed that this was the only form used, and the conclusion was drawn that it had been substituted for the old creed, to meet the constant pressure of Gothic Arianism during the reign of Odoacer, 476-493 [Caspari, ii.114.]. Baumer indeed pointed out a discrepancy, in the fact that the creed was said to have been sung dicit symbolum decantando, whereas Leo III. wrote to Charles the Great that the Nicene Creed was not sung in Rome. But he was unable to explain the problem except by suggesting that some enlarged form of the Apostles' Creed, like the Bangor Antiphonary, might have been used. [P.46.]
The mystery has now been cleared up by Morin's publication [Rev. Ben., 1897, p.481.] of another text of the seventh Ordo Romanus from Cod. Sessorianus 52, saec.xi., . This interesting MS. comes from the Abbey of Nonantula, and is now in the Victor Emmanuel library at Rome. The collection in which the Ordo is found comprises fol.104-177v, and includes solemn acclamations for use on festivals characteristic of the Carlovingian epoch, and containing the names of a Pope Nicholas and an Emperor Louis. These must be Nicholas I. (858-867) and Louis II. (855-875). We may therefore assume with some confidence that the collection was made in the ninth century.
Now in this text of the Ordo it is the Textus receptus that
the acolyte sings at the baptism of an infant.
On the other hand, in the
account of the redditio symboli on Thursday in Holy Week it is the
form, Credo in unum deum Patrem omnipotentem, etc., which the priest
recites over the catechumens.
The custom of the recitation of the Nicene
Creed on that day is an evident importation from the East, but we see clearly
that it did not involve the disuse of the Old Roman Creed transformed into
our Apostles' Creed.
We cannot on this evidence alone argue that the completed
form was found in Rome before the ninth century, when the collection was
It remains to pass in review the earliest documents in which T is found. We may begin with the Psalter of Pope Gregory in the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge (N.468). The MS. is of the fifteenth century, and was probably written in England. But there seems no reason to doubt the evidence of the title, Psalterium latinum et Graecum, Papae Gregorii, which implies that the archetype came from Rome. Caspari's judgment on a point of this kind is always weighty, and he decided to refer it to Pope Gregory III. (731-741) [iii. pp.11, 215.]. The text of the creed only varies from T by the omission of est in Art.8 and et in Art.12. This would be an insecure foundation for a theory by itself, but it may be supported by a number of small details.
It is usual to quote Pirminius, a celebrated Benedictine monk
and missionary of the eighth century, as the first writer who quoted the
modern form of the creed.
But no sufficient answer has been given to the
How did it come to him?
He belonged to the kingdom of Neustria,
and came into Southern Germany c. 720, where he founded the Abbey of Reichenau,
and many others.
His creed is found in an interesting treatise called Dicta
Abbatis Pirminii, de singulis libris canonicis scarapsus,
from scarpsus = excarpsus, excerpt, Hahn,3 p.96, n.247.]
edited by Caspari [Anecdota, p.151.].
There is an interesting detail
in it which seems to have escaped notice.
Pirminius speaks of the delivery
of the creed to the catechumens immediately after their renunciation of the
devil and his works.
This was a distinctly Roman custom, whereas in Gallican usage an interval elapsed before the giving of the creed. [Duchesne,2 Origenes du Culte Chretien., p.308, n.3.] This at once establishes a presumption that it was from Rome that he obtained the form of creed. His contemporary Boniface was most enthusiastic in extending the influence of the Apostolic See, and there is every reason to believe that they worked on similar lines, though the references to the creed in the epistles of Boniface [Epp. 6.8.] do not decide the question of the form used.
Before the days of Boniface, the Roman liturgy had begun to exercise influence in Gaul. Duchesne [Op. cit. p.94.] points out how the country had been traversed continually during the seventh century by Roman missionaries on their way to England. The mixture of Roman and Gallican rites and prayers which we find in the Gelasian Sacramentary, Miss. Gallic., Sacr. Gallic., is not surprising.
The so-called Miss. Gallic. (Cod. Vat. Pal. 493,
saec.viii. in.) is not a missal, but a sacramentary, and was written
most probably in France.
It contains, however, a large proportion
of Roman elements.
The ceremonies of the Traditio symboli follow
There are three forms of creed quoted, to which I will refer as A, E, B, since it is possible to distinguish a second creed (E) in the exposition of the first (A).
The Sacr. Gallic., which is really a missal, is in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris (Cod. lat. 13,246, saec.vii.). It presents a peculiar mixture of Gallican and Roman rites so that it is hardly possible to decide from internal evidence where it was compiled. The MS. itself was probably copied at Bobbio, where Mabillon found it, and the archetype may have belonged to Luxeuil, "the monastic metropolis of the Italian convent." [Duchesne, Origines,2 p.151.]
In it there are four forms of creed, which I will call A, E, B, C, distinguishing the creed of the exposition (E) from the first form quoted (A). With these documents should be compared one of the most important of the Ps.-Augustinian Sermons, No.242. It is known to exist in many MSS. [Caspari, iv., xviii.n.1.], and it is a pity that it has not been critically edited. At present there are questions regarding it which cannot be answered with any certainty. It is a compilation drawn chiefly from the sermons of Faustus, in the Eusebian collection, but including quotations from Augustine, Serm.212, and from the exposition of the first sermon in the Sacr. Gallic., the latter passage containing also a reminiscence of Serm.241 [Kattenbusch, i.p.210, n.16.]. It is fully reproduced in the Miss. Gallic.
As printed in the appendix to S. Augustine, it manifestly contains two forms of creed, the first (A) being interpolated. Kattenbusch points out that the preacher at that point only proposes to quote the first words:
lam ad ... symboli professionis sacramentum textumque ueniamus, quod in hunc modum incipit.
The true creed of the preacher, to be extracted from the exposition, agrees with the Creed of Faustus in the threefold repetition of credo, and in omitting unicum, mortuus, a mortuis.
Of the date, it is only possible to say that it was in existence at the date of the formation of the Miss. Gallic., c. 700, and was probably compiled in France. It was found in two MSS. of the Herovall Collection of Canons (Paris, 2123, 3848, B). Perhaps the most practical way of presenting the evidence in these documents will be to draw up a table of their principal variations from the normal type of T, quoting the different creeds in each case as A, B, C, and the expositions as E.
|PS.AUG.||MISS GALLIC.||SACR. GALLIC.|
|242||A E||B||A E||B C|
|1.||+creatorem c. et t., A B||+creatorem c. et t., A E||+creatorem c. et t., B|
|2.||+credo, B||+credo, A E||(in expos. Credo in Filium)||+credo, A; om. Et, A||+credo, B C; om. Et, C|
|3.||om. unicum, B; om. Dom.nost., B; (in expos. Dominus n., B)||Unigenitum sempiternum, A E; om. Dom. Nost., A E; natus + est, A E; de Maria, A E||Ex, B||Unigenitum sempiternum, A; om. Dom. Nost., A; conceptum ... natum, A||Dom.] pr. Deum et, C|
|4.||om. est, A; om. Mortuus, B (in expos. in ueritate mortuus et sepultus); om. desc. ad inf., B||om. est, E; om. desc. ad inf., E||om. est, B; om. desc. ad inf., B||Om. mortuum, B|
|5.||om. A mortuus, B||Uictor ad caelos, B|
|6.||in E||in, B; in, C|
|7.||om. Sed. ad d. P. o., B; (in expos. in Dei Patris, B)||Sedit, A; sedet, E; om. Dei||Sedit, B; om. Dei, B||Sedit, A E; om. Dei, A E|
|9.||Credo + et, B||Spiritu Sancto, B;||+ Credo, C|
|10.||sancta ecclesia cath., B||om. Sanctorum com., E||om. S. c., C|
|11.||om. Rem. Pecc., A E||ac remissionem, B||pr. Per baptismum sanctum, C|
|12.||Huius carnis, A; carnis h., B||uitam habere, post mortem in Gloria Christi resurgere, B||uitam pr. in, C|
The other creed forma from Ps.-Augustinian Sermons, 240, 241, joined with this by Hahn3, p.50, cannot be the work of the same pen. He suggests that they belong to Italy, but does not give any reasons. Having rightly pointed out the objections raised above (p.221), that no pure Gallican Creed contains Creatorem coeli et terrae till the twelfth century, he founds on these sermons a theory that T had its origin in North Italy. It seems to me useless to speculate about their origin till we find some further clue. They deserve to be critically edited from new MSS., paying regard to the sources of the collections in which they are found.
I may add here a short section on the evidence, so far as it goes, of the various lists of apostles' names attached to particular clauses of the creed, whether R or T. It is difficult to arrange it clearly, but the following may suffice:-
I. Sermons founded on R.- I have come across two sermons in which the clauses of R are assigned to apostles, following the order of Matt.x.2-4, Cod. Sangallensis, 40, saec.viii., ix. and Cod. Vat. Pal. 220 [Another MS. is found in Cod. Vat. Pal. 212, saec.ix., x.] I will print all the variations from the pure text of R, given p.200 supra, in a table.
|Saec. VIII., IX.||Saec. IX.,||Saec. XI. .||Saec. X.|
|Cod. Sangallensis, 40||Cod. Vat. Pal. 220||Cod. Sessorian, 52 B||Cod. Vesoul, 73|
|1.||+creatorem c. et., t.|
|2.||om. Filium eius||>I.C.||>I.C.||>I. C.|
|3.||et ex||qui cone. estde S.S.; natus ex|
|4.||om. est||>cruc.et sep.est||Passus sub P.P. cruc. Mortuus|
|5.||>res. t. d. amort.|
|6.||celum||uictor ad caelos||ad celos||uictor ad caelos|
|7.||+Dei; + omnipotentis||+Dei; +omnipotentis|
|8.||Inde; om. est||Inde||Inde; om. est||Inde om. est|
|10.||+ sanct. com.|
|11.||+ uitaiu futuri||+ uit. set.||+ uit. set.|
Another sermon, which is partly dependent on Sangallensis, 40, is found in God. Sessorian (B). Another version of it with many phrases of T is in Cod. Vesoul, 73 [Cf. also Cod. Sangallensis, 732, saec.ix.], but without names of apostles.
II. Sermons founded on T. - Some of the sermons containing T follow the order given in Acts i.13, with two slight variations, i.e., John James for James John, and Matthias for Judas Iscariot. These are Ps.-Aug. 241, the sermon of Pirminius (though this by an obvious error repeats Thomas for Matthias), and the third sermon in Sacr. Gallic (C).
The first sermon in Cod. Sessorian, 52 (A) follows the order of the Roman Canon, the names being added in the margin. In this case it is impossible to say whether they belonged to the original sermon before it was copied into this collection. Two other sermons, Cod. Augiensis, ccxxix. (Karlsruhe) of the year 821, and Ps.-Aug. 240, omit S. Paul's name after S. Peter's, and add Matthias at the end. It is true that the Karlsruhe MS. also omits Simon the Canansean, but a blank space proves that this was an oversight.
|MATT. x. 2.||ACTS i.13.||
|Cod. Sangallensis, 40; Cod. Vat. Pal. 220; Cod. Sessorian, 52 (B)||Ps-Aug. 241; Pirminius; Sacr. Gallic. (C)||
Sessorian, 52 (A);
(1) Paul or (2) (3) Andrew
|James||James [Order in R.V., A.V. James, John.]||
|James of Alphaeus||James of Alphaeus||
|Simon the Cananaean||Judas of James||
Simon (1) the Cananaean
|12||Matthias||Matthias [Pirminius repeats Thomas]||
Thaddeus (2) (3) Matthias
I do not think that these lists lead to any certain conclusion at the present time. But I am confident that future research on these lines will throw light on the origin of the Ps.-Augustinian sermons, which are so puzzling an element in the problem. At least the comparison shows up, so to speak, in a clearer light the important evidence of the two sermons in Cod. Sessorian, 52, in which a text of R survives almost untouched, while the sermon based on T supports the evidence of the order of baptism.
For the present we must fall back on the hypothesis with which we began this chapter, that the Old Roman Creed was revised in Rome itself before 700. All the details which have been brought forward converge upon this conclusion. The Psalter of Gregory in., the witness of Pirminius, as an exponent of Roman customs, the similar witness of the Miss. Gallic, and Sacr. Gallic., the short Creed of the Gelasian Sacramentary - above all, the new evidence of Cod. Sessorian, 52, proving that R had been used consecutively though the Nicene Creed was used. It is impossible to believe that the Church, which in the ninth century refused to insert the Filioque in N to please an emperor, should during that very period have accepted from outside a brand new recension. All analogy points to a process of gradual growth.
Everyone of the additions made had stood the test of time, and was recommended by the usage of teachers held in honour at Rome. The phrases passum, mortuum, catholicam, sanctorum communionem, et uitam aeternam were found combined in the Creeds of Niceta [For my present quotation it does not matter whether Niceta was a Gallican or a Dacian Bishop.] (see p.252) and Caesarius, who visited Rome, and were received with distinction. Niceta's sermon may also be the source from which Creatorem coeli et terras was taken, though it is perhaps more probable that it was taken from the Nicene Creed. Cassarius has both the remaining phrases, conceptus and descendit ad inferna.
Kattenbusch suggests that T is not, as a matter of fact, the
richest or most circumstantial (weitlaufigste) form [i.p.196.].
He quotes "Deum et Dominum, resurrexit uiuus, omnium peccatorum" from the Spanish Creeds, "ascendit uictor" from Miss. Gallic, (and elsewhere), "per baptismum remissionem" from; Sacr. Gallic., the peculiarities of the form in the Bangor Antiphonary, and "huius carnis" from the creed of Aquileia, as specimens of phrases by which T might have been enriched, had it included everything in the way of rhetorical embellishment. But this is a matter of opinion. We may well rest content with the form which has survived, and with the conclusion that the present Baptismal Creed of Western Christendom is not the effect of chance causes combining to thrust an obscure provincial creed into the place once occupied by the venerable archetype of many- varied forms. Our Apostles' Creed is the Old Roman Creed of the second century, sanctified by continuous usage of eighteen hundred years in its Mother Church, like a precious jewel which in the new generation has been recut and polished, that it may reflect new beauties of incommunicable light.
[This text with slight variations of spelling is found in Cod. Sessorian, 52, the Ordo Romanus (0), the first sermon (A); in the Psalter of Gregory III. (C), and Cod. Sangallensis, 27 (G). Art. 4. mortuus] + est, A. ad infernum, A. Art. 8. om. est, A C G. Art. 12. om. et, A C G.]
|Nicene Creed, Niceta (?)||1.||
Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem,
Et in lesum Christum Filium eius unicum dominum nostrum,
|Phoebadius (?), Caesarius;||3.||
qui conceptus est de Spiritu Sancto natus ex Maria uirgine,
|Milan, Phoebadius, Caesarius, Aquileia||4.||
passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus mortuus et sepultus descendit ad inferna,
tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,
ascendit ad caelos,
|Victricius, Faustus, (Priscillian)||7.||
sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis,
inde uenturus est iudicare uiuos et mortuos
Credo in Spiritum Sanctum,
Sanctam ecclesiam catholicam, sanctorum communionem,
carnis resurrectionem et uitarn aeternam.
| << | >> | top |