and of a Latin author or authors. 3. That it was made in the eighth or ninth century, in the time of Pepin or of Charles the Great, and probably by some French divine. 4. That the first time it was produced under the name of Athanasius, at least, with any assurance and confidence of it being his, was in the year 1233, when Pope Gregory the Ninth's legates pleaded it at Constantinople in favour of the procession against the Greeks. 5. That it scarce ever obtained in any of the Christian Churches before the year 1000. These were his sentiments when he wrote his treatise de Tribus Symbolis. But in a posthumous piece of his, having then seen what some other learned men had written upon the subject, he was content to say that the Creed could not be set higher than the year 600. How far Vossius was mistaken in his accounts will appear in the sequel. Thus far must be allowed him, that he managed the argument with great learning and judgment, made a good use of such materials as he was possessed of, and though he was not very happy in determining the age of the Creed, or the time of its reception, yet he produced so many and such cogent arguments against the Creed's being originally Greek, or being made by Athanasius, that they could never be answered. 1644. The learned Petavius, who in the year 1622 (when he published Epiphanius) had fallen in with the common opinion of this Creed's being Athanasius's, did yet afterward in his treatise of the Trinity, pub "Neque ante annum fuisse sexcentesimum, fuse ostendimus in libro de tribus Symbolis."-Voss., Harmonia Evangelica, bk. ii. c. 13, in vol. vi. p. 215. lished in the year 1644, speak more doubtfully of it; in the meanwhile positive that it was written in Latin ". 1647. The next considerable man, and who may be justly called a first writer in this argument as well as Vossius, was our learned Usher. He had a good acquaintance with libraries and manuscripts, and was able from those stores to produce new evidences which Vossius knew not of. In the year 1647 he printed his Latin tract de Symbolis, with a prefatory epistle to Vossius. He there appeals to the testimonies of Ratram of Corbey, and Æneas, Bishop of Paris, neither of them at that time made public, as also to Hincmar's of Rheims, (which had been published but had escaped Vossius's observation), to prove that this Creed had been confidently cited under the name of Athanasius almost 400 years before the time of Pope Gregory's legates, the time set by Vossius. And further, by two manuscripts found in the Cotton Library, he thought he might carry up the antiquity of the Creed to the year 703, or even to 600. In short, he scrupled not to set the date of it above the year 447: for he supposes a Council of Spain, held in that year, to have been acquainted with it, and to have borrowed the Filioque from it. Thus far he, without any more particular determination about either the age or the author. b Petavius de Trinitate, bk. vii. c. 8, § 7, in vol. ii. p. 392. • Usser de Symbolis, p. 29 (24). N.B. Usher went upon the supposition that the words, a patre, filioque procedens, were genuine, and not foisted into the Confession of that Council; as they now appear to have been, after a more careful view of the MSS. of best note and greatest antiquity. 1647. About the same time Dr. Jeremy Taylor (afterwards Bishop of Down and Connor) published his "Liberty of Prophesying," wherein he expresses his doubts whether the Creed be justly ascribed to Athanasius. But as he had never seen Usher's Treatise, nor indeed Vossius's, nor was at that time furnished with any proper assistances to enable him to make any accurate enquiries into this matter; it may suffice just to have mentioned him, in regard to the deserved name he has since borne in the learned world. 1653. George Ashwell, B.D., published an English treatise, which was printed at Oxford, entitled Fides Apostolica, asserting the received authors and authority of the Apostles' Creed. At the end of which treatise he has a pretty long Appendix concerning the Athanasian Creed, which is well written, and contains a good summary of what learned men before him had advanced upon the subject. His judgment of it is, that it was written in Latin, and by Athanasius himself, about the year 340. 1659. Hamon L'Estrange, in his "Alliance of Divine Offices," gives his judgment of the Athanasian Creed, that it is not rightly ascribed to Athanasius, but yet ancient and extant about the year 600 after Christ. 1659. Leo Allatius about this year printed his Syntagma de Symbolo S. Athanasii, which no doubt must be a very useful piece, especially in relation to the sentiments of the Greek Churches, and the reception of this Creed amongst them; but I have never seen it; only I learn from Tentzelius (who yet could d Taylor, Liberty of Proph., § 2, 36, in vol. v. p. 407. never get a sight of it) and Fabricius, that such a piece was written by Allatius in modern Greek, in 12mo., published at Rome 1658 or 1659. It appears to be very scarce, since none of the learned who have since written upon this Creed, have either referred to it, or given extracts out of it, so far as I have observed; excepting only something of that kind at Rome, a.d. 1667, by the College de propaganda Fide1. 1663. Cardinal Bona, some years after, in his book de Divina Psalmodia, makes frequent mention of this Creed; touches slightly upon the question about its age and author; takes some cursory notice of what Vossius had said, but nevertheless ascribes it to Athanasius, as being composed by him while in the western parts, Teste Baronio; resting his faith upon Baronius as his voucher g. 1669. Our very learned Bishop Pearson, in his Exposition of the Creed, occasionally delivers his opinion that the Athanasian Creed was written in Latin, and by some member of the Latin Church, and extant about the year 600; though the last particular he builds only upon an epistle attributed to Isidore of Seville, and since judged to be spurious. 1675. Joh. Lud. Ruelius, in his second volume or tome, Conciliorum illustratorum, has a particular dissertation, about thirty pages in quarto, upon this Creed. He follows Vossius's opinion for the most part, repeating the same arguments. f Vid. Tentzel, Judic. &c., p. 147; Fabricius, Biblioth. Græca, vol. v. p. 410. g Bona, de Divina Psalmod., c. 16, § 18, p. 864. h Pearson on the Creed, Art. 8, p. 569, n. (p. 324, ed. 3); Art. 5, p. 400, n. (p. 226.) Ruelius, Concil. Illustrat., vol. ii. pp. 639–670. 1675. Our next man of eminent character is Paschasius Quesnel, a celebrated French divine. In the year 1675, he published his famous edition of Pope Leo's works, with several very valuable dissertations of his own. His fourteenth contains, among other matters, a particular enquiry about the author of this Creed. He ascribes it to Vigilius Tapsensis, the African; and so well defends his position, that he has almost drawn the learned world after him. He is looked upon as the father of that opinion, because he has so learnedly and handsomely supported it; but he is not the first that espoused it, for Labbe, about fifteen years before, had taken notice of some that had ascribed this Creed to Vigilius, at the same time signifying his dissent from them 1. 1676. The year after Quesnel, Sandius, the famous Arian, printed a second edition of his Nucleus, &c., with an Appendix; wherein he corrects his former judgment m of this Creed, taken implicitly from Vossius; and allows, nay, contends and insists upon it, that this Creed was not only known, but known under the name of Athanasius, as high at least as the year 770". He ascribes it, upon conjecture, to one Athanasius, Bishop of Spire in Germany, who died in the year 642. 1678. I ought not to pass over our very learned Cudworth, though he has entered very little into the point before us. He gives his judgment, in passing, Quesnel, Dissert. xiv. p. 729, &c. 1 Labbe, Dissert. de Script. Eccles., vol. ii. p. 477. |