ated no difficulty, as it was in the original Nicene Creed, but it is useless on account of the following 'Deus verus de Deo vero,' and hence was omitted in the Constantinopolitan edition. The Nicene Creed (without these Western additions) is more highly honored in the Greek Church than in any other, and occupies the same position there as the Apostles' Creed in the Latin and Protestant Churches. It is incorporated and expounded in all the orthodox Greek and Russian Catechisms. It is also (with the Filioque) in liturgical use in the Roman (since about the sixth century), and in the Anglican and Lutheran Churches. It was adopted by the Council of Trent as the fundamental Symbol, and embodied in the Profession of the Tridentine Faith by Pius IV. It is therefore more strictly an ecumenical Creed than the Apostles' and the Athanasian, which have never been fully naturalized in the Oriental Churches. ... The faith of the Trinity lies, Men to the Man that is God out of their misery call, Swelled by the rapture of choirs, or borne on the poor man's word, Most like the song that the angels are singing around the throne, The relation of the Nicene Creed to the Apostles' Creed may be seen from the following table: THE APOSTLES' CREED; RECEIVED TEXT. (The clauses in brackets are the later additions.) 1. I believe in GOD THE FATHER Almighty, [Maker of heaven and earth]. 2. And in JESUS CHRIST, his only Son, our Lord; THE NICENE CREED, AS ENLARGED A.D. 381. (The words in brackets are Western changes.) 1. We [I] believe3 in ONE GOD THE FATHER Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, And of all things visible and invisible. 2. And in one Lord JESUS CHRIST, the only-begotten Son of God, Begotten of the Father before all worlds; [God of God], Light of Light, Very God of very God, 1 In the Reformed Churches, except the Episcopal, the Nicene Creed is little used. Calvin, who had a very high opinion of the Apostles' Creed, depreciates the Nicene Creed, as a ‘carmen cantillando magis aptum, quam confessionis formula' (De Reform. Eccles.). * From 'A Legend of the Council of Nice,' by Cecil Frances Alexander, in The Contemporary Review' for February, 1867, pp. 176-179. * The Greek reads the plural (revoμɛv), but the Latin and English versions have substituted for it the singular (credo, I believe), in accordance with the Apostles' Creed and the more subjective character of the Western churches. THE APOSTLES' CREED; RECEived Text. Who was [conceived] by the Holy Ghost, 4. [Suffered] under Pontius Pilate, was crucified [dead], and buried; [He descended into Hades]; 5. The third day he rose again from the dead; 6. He ascended into heaven, And sitteth on the right hand of [God] the Father [Almighty]; 7. From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. 8. And [I believe] in the HOLY GHOST. 9. The holy [catholic] Church; [The communion of saints]; 10. The forgiveness of sins; 11. The resurrection of the flesh [body]; 12. [And the life everlasting]. 5. And the third day he rose again, 6. And ascended into heaven, And sitteth on the right hand of the Father; 7. And he shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; Whose kingdom shall have no end. 8. And [I believe] in the HOLY GHOST, Who proceedeth from the Father Who with the Father and the Son together Who spake by the Prophets. 9. And [I believe] in' one holy catholic and apostolic Church; * * 10. We [I] acknowledge2 one baptism for the remission of sins; 11. And we [] look for the resurrection of the dead; 12. And the life of the world to come. We give also, in parallel columus, the original and the enlarged formulas of the Nicene Creed, italicizing the later additions, and inclosing in brackets the passages which are omitted in the received text: THE NIOENE CREED OF 325.3 We believe in one God, tl FATHER Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. THE CONSTANTINOPOLITAN CREED OF 381.4 We believe in one God, the FATHER Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. 'The Greek reads ɛię μíav . . . ¿kkλŋoíar, but the Latin and English versions, in conformity with the Apostles' Creed, mostly omit in before ecclesiam ; see p. 15. 2 Here and in art. 11 the singular is substituted in Western translations for opoλoyovμev and προςδοκώμεν. The Greek original is given, together with the similar Palestinian confession, by Eusebius in his Epistola ad Cæsareenses, which is preserved by Athanasius at the close of his Epistola de decretis Synodi Nicænæ (Opera, ed. Montfaucon, I. 239); also, with some variations, in the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon (Act. II. in Mansi, Tom. VII.); in Theoderet, H E. I. 12; Socrates, H. E. I. 8; Gelasius, H. Conc. Nic. 1. II. c. 35. See the literature and variations in Walch, 1. c. pp. 75 and 87 sqq.; also in Hahn, 1. c. pp. 105 sqq. The Greek text in the acts of the second œcumenical Council (Mansi, Tom. III. p. 565 ; Hardouin, Vol. I. p. 814), and also in the acts of the fourth ecumenical Council. See Vol. II. p. 35; Hahn, 1. c. p. 111; and my Church Hist. Vol. III. pp. 667 sqq. THE NICENE CREED OF 325. And in one Lord JESUS CHRIST, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance (opoovatov) with the Father; by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; he suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. And in the HOLY GHOST. [But those who say: 'There was a time when he was not;' and 'He was not before he was made;' and 'He was made out of nothing,' or 'He is of another substance' or 'essence,' or 'The Son of God is created,' or 'changeable,' or 'alterable'-they are condemned by the holy catholic and apostolic Church.] THE CONSTANTINOPOLITAN CREED OF 381. And in one Lord JESUS CHRIST, the onlybegotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man; he was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried, and the third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; from thence he shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end. And in the HOLY GHOST, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spake by the prophets. In one holy catholic and apostolic Church; we acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. § 9. THE CREED OF CHALCEDON. Literature. The Acta Concilii in the collections of MANSI, Tom. VII., and of HARDOUIN, Tom. II. FACUNDUS (Bishop of Hermiane, in Africa): Pro defens. trium capitulorum, lib. V. c. 3, 4; lib. VIII. c. 4 (see Gallandi, Bibl. PP. Tom. XI. pp. 713 sqq.). LIBERATUS (Archdeacon of Carthage): Breviarium causæ Nestorianorum et Eutychianorum, c. 13 (Gallandi, Tom. XII. pp. 142 sqq.). BARONIUS: Annal, ad ann. 451, No. 55 sqq. EDM. RICHER: Hist. concil. generalium, Paris, 1680 (Amst. 1686, 3 vols.), lib. I. c. 8. TILLEMONT: Mémoires, etc. Tom. XV. pp. 628 sqq. (in the article ou Leo the Great). NATALIS ALEXANDER: Hist. eccles. sec. V. Tom. V. pp. 64 sqq. and pp. 209 sqq. QUESNEL: Synopsis actorum Conc. Chalcedon., in his Dissertat. de vita, etc., S. Leonis (see the Ballerini edition of the works of Leo the Great, Tom. II. pp. 501 sqq.). HULSEMANN: Exercit. ad Concil. Chalcedon. Lips. 1651. CAVE: Hist. literaria, etc. pp. 311 sqq. ed. Genev. 1705. WALCH: Ketzerhistorie, Vol. VI. p. 329 sq.; and his Historie der Kirchenversammlungen, p. 307 sq. DORNER: History of the Development of the Doctr. of the Person of Christ (2d Germ. ed.), Part II. 99–150. SCHAFF: History of the Christian Church, N.Y. 1867, Vol. III. pp. 740 sqq. Comp. the literature there on pp. 708 sq., 714 sq., 722. The CREED of CHALCEDON was adopted at the fourth and fifth sessions of the fourth ecumenical Council, held at Chalcedon, opposite Constantinople, A.D. 451 (Oct. 22d and 25th). It embraces the NicænoConstantinopolitan Creed, and the christological doctrine set forth in the classical Epistola Dogmatica of Pope Leo the Great to Flavian, the Patriarch of Constantinople and martyr of diophysitic orthodoxy at the so-called Council of Robbers (held at Ephesus in 449).1 While the first Council of Nicæa had established the eternal, pre-existent Godhead of Christ, the Symbol of the fourth œcumenical Council relates to the incarnate Logos, as he walked upon earth and sits on the right hand of the Father. It is directed against the errors of Nestorius and Eutyches, who agreed with the Nicene Creed as opposed to Arianism, but put the Godhead of Christ in a false relation to his humanity. It substantially completes the orthodox Christology of the ancient Church; for the definitions added during the Monophysite and Monothelite controversies are few and comparatively unessential. As the Nicene doctrine of the Trinity stands midway between Tritheism and Sabellianism, so the Chalcedonian formula strikes the true mean between Nestorianism and Eutychianism. The following are the leading ideas of the Chalcedonian Christology as embodied in this symbol:2 1. A true INCARNATION of the Logos, or the second person in the Godhead (ἐνανθρώπησις Θεοῦ, ἐνσάρκωσις τοῦ λόγου, incarnatio Verbi).3 This incarnation is neither a conversion or transmutation of God into man, nor a conversion of man into God, and a consequent absorption of the one, or a confusion (κpãos, σúyxvois) of the two; nor, on the other hand, a mere indwelling (voiкnois, inhabitatio) of the one in the other, nor an outward, transitory connection (ovvápia, conjunctio) of the two factors, but an actual and abiding union of the two in one personal life. Nature or 2. The precise distinction between NATURE and PERSON. substance (essence, ovoía) denotes the totality of powers and qualities which constitute a being; while person (úπóστασiç, πрóσшжоν) is the Ego, the self-conscious, self-asserting and acting subject. The Logos assumed, not a human person (else we would have two persons, a divine and a human), but human nature which is common to us all; and hence he redeemed, not a particular man, but all men as partakers of the same * Abridged, in part, from my Church History, Vol. III. pp. 747 sqq. * The diametrical opposite of the ἐνανθρώπησις Θεοῦ is the heathen ἀποθέωσις ἀνθρώπου. 3. The GOD-MAN as the result of the incarnation. Christ is not a (Nestorian) double being, with two persons, nor a compound (Apollinarian or Monophysite) middle being, a tertium quid, neither divine nor human; but he is one person both divine and human. 4. The DUALITY OF THE NATURES. The orthodox doctrine maintains, against Eutychianism, the distinction of nature even after the act of incarnation, without confusion or conversion (arvyxúτws, inconfuse, and ȧrρéñτwç, immutabiliter), yet, on the other hand, without division or separation (adiapérwe, indivise, and axwpíorws, inseparabiliter), so that the divine will ever remain divine, and the human ever human,' and yet the two have continually one common life, and interpenetrate each other, like the persons of the Trinity.2 5. The UNITY OF THE PERSON (Ένωσις καθ ̓ ὑπόστασιν, ἕνωσις ὑποστατική, unio hypostatica or unio personalis). The union of the divine and human nature in Christ is a permanent state resulting from the incarnation, and is a real, supernatural, personal, and inseparable union—in distinction from an essential absorption or confusion, or from a mere moral union, or from a mystical union such as holds between the believer and Christ. The two natures constitute but one personal life, and yet remain distinct. The same who is true God,' says Leo,' is also true man, and in this unity there is no deceit; for in it the lowliness of man and the majesty of God perfectly pervade one another. . . . Because the two natures make only one person, we read on the one hand: "The Son of Man came down from heaven" (John iii. 13), while yet the Son of God took flesh from the Virgin; and on the other hand: "The 1 1 'Tenet,' says Leo, in his Epist. 28 ad Flavian., 'sine defectu proprietatem suam utraque natura, et sicut formam servi Dei forma non adimit, ita formam Dei servi forma non minuit. ... Agit utraque forma cum alterius communione quod proprium est; Verbo scilicet operante quod Verbi est, et carne exsequente quod carnis est. Unum horum coruscat miraculis, aliud succumbit injuriis. Et sicut Verbum ab æqualitate paternæ gloriæ non recedit, ita caro naturam nostri generis non relinquít.' * Here belongs, in further explanation, the scholastic doctrine of the pixwpnoic, permeatio, circummeatio, circulatio, circumincessio, intercommunio, or reciprocal indwelling and pervasion, which has relation, not merely to the Trinity, but also to Christology. The verb #pixwρtiv is first applied by Gregory of Nyssa (Contra Apollinarium) to the interpenetration and reciprocal pervasion of the two natures in Christ. On this rested also the doctrine of the exchange or communication of attributes, ἀντίδοσις, ἀντιμετάστασις, κοινωνία ίδιωμάτων, communicatio idiomatum. The ἀντιμετάστασις τῶν ὀνομάτων, also ἀντιμεθίστασις, transmutatio proprietatum, transmutation of attributes, is, strictly speaking, not identical with avríðoσıç, but a deduction from it, and the rhetorical expression for it. |