(3) A third proposal is that the rubric before the Creed should be removed, as has been done by the Church of Ireland, so that the Creed while remaining in the Prayer Book should be no longer used in public worship.

This suggestion does not raise so important a question of principle as the previous one. It cannot be denied that it is within the competence of the Church so to act. Changes have been made on previous occasions as to the rules governing the use of the Creed, and if necessary they may be made again. It is a question of wisdom and advisability rather than of principle. But the public recitation of this Creed acts as a solemn reminder of the responsibility of the intellect in matters of faith, with which we can ill afford to dispense; and, looking at the importance of maintaining a firm faith in the doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation, and having regard to the immense value of the Creed as expounding these doctrines, it would, in the belief of the present writer, be an incalculable loss, and one which would render the Church's task immeasurably greater than it is at present, if the Creed was to be no longer publicly recited in our churches. The Dean of Westminster was surely right when, in words that have been already cited, he said, 'If it still stood in the Prayer Book, but with no rubric for its use, it would soon be as unfamiliar to most of us as the

"1

prayers for use at sea." That is a contingency which

1 See above, p. 242.

in days when indefiniteness of belief is only too common, the Church cannot lightly contemplate.

(4 and 5) There remain the suggestions of a synodical declaration, or rubrical note, and of a new translation.

It is widely said at present that neither of these would be sufficient to satisfy the objectors; and possibly neither of them would by itself. But it is believed that in combination they might go far to do so. It has been already shown how much less harsh the original Latin is than the English, and that there is need of a change of rendering in several of the clauses. And if a new translation were accompanied by an explanatory note introduced with it into the text of the Prayer Book, such as those which stand after the order of the Holy Communion, and the Public Baptism of Infants, it is very possible that in a short time the common misunderstanding of the meaning of the Creed would disappear, and that we should hear less of the objections now raised to its recitation. It must be remembered that this course has never yet been tried. Twice over the Lambeth Conference has asked for a new translation. Its request has never been granted. Twice over Convocation has made a synodical declaration on the meaning of the Creed, but it has remained buried in the records of that body, and its existence is not known to one in a thousand among churchmen. All that is wanted is that the request of the Lambeth Conferences of 1888 and 1897 should be granted, and that the Synodical Declaration of 1873 and 1879 should be somehow

R

introduced together with the new translation into the text of the Prayer Book, or (if it be found ultimately that there are insuperable difficulties in the way of this being done) that they should be together printed at the end of the book as a kind of appendix to it. If this were done constant reference could be made to them by preachers, and congregations could be properly instructed in the meaning of the Creed. If more pains were taken by clergy in expounding it, and more study devoted to its language and meaning by congregations, the result might in many cases be the removal of objections which have been somewhat hastily taken up, and have been thought to be serious because an immediate answer did not seem to be forthcoming. The experience of the great Duke of Wellington is worth recording, and may serve to conclude this defence of the use of the Creed. On one occasion at a party at which the Duke was present, a person was expressing his dislike for and objection to the Athanasian Creed. The Duke declined to discuss the subject at dinner, but said he would speak to him about it afterwards. When dinner was ended he took the man aside, and said: 'After the war was over, I thought it my duty to inquire why I was a member of the Church of England, and I examined the Prayer Book, the Articles, and especially the Athanasian Creed, and after doing this, and reading that famous treatise of Waterland's, I came to the conclusion that every word of it is borne out by Holy Scripture.'1

1 Quoted in a speech by the late Sir George Prevost in the Lower House of Convocation. See Chronicle of Convocation, Sessions April and May 1872, p. 447.

NOTE F

EARLY AUTHORITIES FOR THE ATHANASIAN CREED

In the following note are given as briefly as possible specimens of the detailed evidence for the early date of the Athanasian Creed, arranged under the various headings given in the text.

(1) Writers of the Ninth Century who cite the Creed

as the work of Athanasius.

(a) Hincmar of Rheims (c. 857).--De una et non trina Deitate. 'Sic crede et confitere sicut credit confitetur et prædicat sancta Catholica et Apostolica ecclesia, dicens; Fides Catholica hæc est ut unum Deum in Trinitate personarum et Trinitatem personarum in Unitate Deitatis veneremur, neque confundentes personas sicut Sabellius ut tres non sint, neque ut Arius substantiam separantes ut trina sint. Quia alia non aliud est persona Patris, alia non aliud est persona Filii, alia non aliud est persona Spiritus Sancti. Sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est Divinitas, æqualis gloria, coæterna majestas. Et in hac Sancta et inseparabili Trinitate nihil est prius aut posterius, nihil majus vel minus, sed totæ tres personæ Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus coæternæ sibi sunt et æquales. Ita ut per omnia, sicut jam supradictum est, et Trinitas personarum in unitate Deitatis, et Unitas Deitatis in Trinitate personarum veneranda sit.'-Migne, cxxv. p. 616. In this passage Hincmar directly refers to verses 3, 4, 5, 6, 24 and 25. Elsewhere he clearly refers to other verses; and in his Explanatio in ferculum Salomonis he appears to refer to the portion of the Creed which deals with the Incarnation, while in the second of his treatises on Predestination he directly quotes verse 38:-'Ad cujus

adventum secundum fidem Catholicam omnes homines resurgere habent cum corporibus suis.'-De Prædest., Epil. c. 6.-Migne, cxxv. 464. For his references to the Creed as the work of Athanasius see De una et non trina Deitate (Migne, cxxv. p. 531), and cf. below under (2)a.

(b) Agobard of Lyons (c. 820).—Adversus Felicem.-' Beatus Athanasius ait Fidem Catholicam nisi quis integram inviolatamque servaverit, absque dubio in æternum peribit.'—Migne, civ. p. 35.

(c) Theodulf of Orleans (794-821).-De Processione Sancti Spiritus. Pater a nullo est factus, nec creatus, nec genitus. Filius a Patre solo est, non factus, nec creatus, sed genitus. Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus, nec creatus, nec genitus, sed procedens. Unus ergo Pater, non tres Patres; unus Filius, non tres Filii; unus Spiritus Sanctus, non tres Spiritus Sancti. Et in hac Trinitate nihil prius aut posterius, nihil majus aut minus, sed totæ tres personæ coæternæ sibi sunt et coæquales. Ita ut per omnia, sicut jam supradictum est, et Trinitas in Unitate et Unitas in Trinitate veneranda sit. Qui vult ergo salvus esse, ita de Trinitate sentiat.'—Migne, cv. 247.

6

It is also said of Theodulf in a very early Life of him that he wrote a Commentary on this Creed. Explanationem edidit symboli Sancti Athanasii, quod a monachis post tres regulares psalmos ad primam cotidie canitur.'-See Ommanney, Critical Dissertation, etc., p. 19.

(d) Alcuin (804).--Libellus de Processione Sancti Spiritus.— 'Beatus igitur Athanasius reverendissimus Alexandriæ urbis Episcopus, qui summo ejusdem urbis pontifici Alexandro, suo etiam præceptori devotus adjutor in Nicæno fuit concilio, in Expositione Catholicæ fidei, quam ipse egregius doctor conscripsit, et quam universalis confitetur ecclesia, processionem Spiritus Sancti a Patre et Filio declarat, ita dicens: Pater a nullo est factus, nec creatus, nec genitus; Filius a Patre solo est, non factus, nec creatus, sed genitus; Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio, non factus, nec creatus, nec genitus, sed procedens.'-Migne, ci. 73.