APOSTLES'
630
APOSTLES*
lar speaking of the Creed iis the "Symbol of the Moreover, as soon as we begin to obtain any sort of
Trinity ", and recognizing it as an integral part of detailed description of the ceremonial of baptism,
the rite of baptism (Migne, P. L., Ill, llliS, 1143). we find that, as a preliminary to the actual immer-
It should be added, moreover, that Kattenbusch (II, sion, a profession of faith was exacted of the convert,
p. 80, note) believes that the same use of the words which exhibits from the earliest times a clearly
can be traced as far back as TertuUian. Still, in the divided and separate confession of Father, Son, and
first two centuries after Christ, though we often find Holy Ghost, corresponding to the Divine Persons
mention of the Creed under other designations (e. g. invoked in the formula of baptism. As we do not
regula fidei, doctrina, traditio), the name symbolum find in any earlier document the full form of the
does not occur. Rufinus was therefore wrong when profession of faith, we cannot be sure that it is
he declared that the Apostles themselves had "for identical mth our Creed, but, on the other hand, it
many just reasons selected this very term. This is certain that nothing has yet been discovered which
fact, joined with the intrinsic improbability of the is inconsistent with such a supposition. See, for
story, and the surprising silence of the New Testa-
ment and of the Ante-Nicene fathers, leaves us no
choice but to regard the circumstantial narrative
of Rufinus as unhistorical.
Among recent critics, some have assigned to the
example, the "Canons of Hippolytus" (c. 220) or
the "Didascalia" (c. 250) in Hahn's " Bibliothek
der Symbole" (8, 14, 35); together with the slighter
allusions in Justin Martyr and Cyprian.
(2) Whatever difficulties may be raised regarding
Creed an origin much later than the Apostolic Age. the existence of the Disciplina Arcani in early
Harnack, e. g., asserts that in its present form it times (Kattenbusch, II, 97 sqq.), there can be no
represents only the baptismal confession of the question that in Cyril of Jerusalem, Hilary, Au-
Church of Southern Gaul, dating at earliest from the gustine, Leo, the Gelasian Sacranientary, and many
second half of the fifth century (Das apostolische other sources of the fourth and fifth centuries the
Glaubensbekenntniss, 1892, p. 3). Strictly construed, idea is greatly insisted upon ; that according to ancient
the terms of this statement are accurate enough; tradition the Creed was to be learned by heart, and
though it seems probable that it was not in Gaul, never to be consigned to writing. This undoubtedly
but in Rome, that the Creed really assumed its final provides a plausible explanation of the fact that
shape (see Burn in the "Journal of Theol. Studies ", in the case of no primitive creed is the text preserved
July, 1902). But the stress laid by Harnack on the to us complete or in a continuous form. What we
lateness of our received text (T) is, to say the least, know of these formula; in their earliest state is derived
somewhat misleading. It is certain, as Harnack from what we can piece together from the quota-
allows, that another and older form of the Creed (R) tions, more or less scattered, wWch are found in such
had come into existence, in Rome itself, before the writers, for example, as Irena;us and TertuUian.
middle of the second century. Moreover, as we (3) Though no uniform type of Creed can be surely
shall see, the differences between R and T are not recognized among the earlier Eastern writers before
very important and it is also probable that R, if the Council of Nicoea, an argument which has been
not itself drawn up by the Apostles, is at least based considered by many to disprove the existence of any
upon an outline which dates back to the Apostolic age. Apostolic formula, it is a striking fact that the
Thus, taking the document as a whole, we may say Eastern Churches in the fourth century are found
confidently, in the words of a modern Protestant au- in possession of a Creed which reproduces with
thority, that "in and with our Creed we confess that variations the old Roman type. This fact is fully
which since the days of the Apostles has been the admitted by such Protestant authorities as Harnack
faith of united Christendom " (Zahn, Apostles' Creed, (in Hauck's Realencyclopiidie, I, 747) and Katten-
tr., p. 222). The question of the apostolicity of the busch (I, 380 sq.; II, 194 sq., and 737 sq.). It is
Creed ought not to be dismissed without due atten- obvious that these data would harmonize very well
tion being paid to the following five considerations: — with the theory that a primitive Creed had been
(1) There are very suggestive traces in the New delivered to the Christian community of Rome, either
Testament of the recognition of a certain "form of by Sts. Peter and Paul themselves or by their imme-
doctrine" (tuttos SiSax^s, Rom., vi, 17) which moulded, diate successors, and in the course of time had spread
as it were, the faith of new converts to Christ's law, throughout the world.
and which involved not only the word of faith (4) Furthermore note that towards the end of the
believed in the heart, but "with the mouth confession second century we can e.xtract from the writings
made unto salvation" (Rom., x, 8-10). In close of St. Irenaeus in southern Gaul and of TertuUian
connection with this we must recall the profession in far-off Africa two almost complete Creeds agree-
of faith in Jesus Christ exacted of the eunuch (Acts, ing closely both with the old Roman Creed (R), as
viii, 37) as a preliminary to baptism (Augustine, we know it from Rufinus, and with one another. It
"De Fide et O peri bus ", cap. i.x; Migne, P. L., LVII, will be useful to tran.slate from Bum (Introduction
205) and the formula of baptism it.self in the name to the Creeds, pp. 50, 51) his tabular presentation
of the Three Persons of the Blessed Trinity (Matt., of the evidence in the case of Tertullian. Cf. Mac-
xxviii, 19; and cf. the Didache vii, 2, and ix, 5). Donald in "Ecclesiastical Review", February, 1903. THE OLD ROMAN CREED AS QUOTED BY TERTULLIAN (c. 200). Dc Virg. Vel.. i (P. L., II, 889).
(1) Believing in one God Almighty, maker of the world,
(2) and His Son. Jesus Christ,
(3) born of the Virgin Mary,
Adv. Prax., h {P. L., II, 156).
(1) We believe one only God,
(2) and the son of God Jesus Christ,
(3) born of the Virgin,
(4) Him suffered, dead, and buried,
(4) crucified under Pontius Pilate, ,., , „^ . ,
(5) on the third day brought to life from (5) brought back to life,
the dead,
<6) receive.! in heaven, (6) taken again into heaven
De Pra»scr., xiii and xxxvi (P. L.,
II, 26, 49).
(1) I believe in one God, maker of the world,
(2) the Word, called His Son, Jesus Christ.
(3) by the Spirit and power of God the Father made tiesn m Mary's womb,
and horn of her,
(4) fastened to a cross,
(5) He rose the third day.
(6) was caught
ight
nto heaven,
7) sitting now at the right hand of the (7) sits at the riglit hand of the Father, (7) sat at tiie rigliit hand of the Father,
rather,
(8) will come to judge the living and the (8) will come to judge the living and the (8) will come with glory to take the good dead dead, into life eternal, and condemn the
wicked to perpetual fire, (9) who has sent from the Father the (9) sent the vicarious power of His Holy Holy Ghost. Spirit,
(10) to govern believers [In this passage articles 9 and 10 precede 8. J igh resurrection of the fleah. (12) restoration of the flesh.
U2) thi
