Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 6.djvu/594

Rh C K E E D 8 simplicity of structure and of thought the Apostles may, indeed, be called the oldest of the creeds. It takes us back to the most primitive stratum of Christian belief. But as a matter of fact and chronology, what is now known as the &quot;Apostles Creed&quot; is not found in anything like its present form, till four centuries after the faith of the Eastern Church was definitely settled in the Nicene Symbol. It is to this latter creed, therefore, that we must first turn our attention in historical order. II. The circumstances in which the Council of Nicaea was assembled have already been briefly sketched in the articles ARIUS and ATHANASIUS. The opinions of Arius promulgated in the commencement of the 4th century made such commotion in tl church as to call forth not only the admonition of bishops, but the intervention of the imperial government in the hands of Constantine, who had professed himself a Christian, and become the patron of the peace and prosperity of the church. The distractions of the Donatist schism on the one hand, and of the Arian heresy on the other, were subjects of grave anxiety to a prince, one of whose motives in joining the rapidly increasing influence of the Christian church, as he himself professes in a letter addressed to Alexander (bishop of Alex andria) and Arius jointly, was the establishment through out his dominions &quot; of some ono definite and complete form of religious worship.&quot; In the same letter he gave some very good advice on the subject of the prevailing religious contentions. &quot; My advice,&quot; he says, &quot; is neither to ask nor answer questions which, instead of being scriptural, are the mere sport of idleness or an exercise of ability ; at best keep them to yourselves and do not publish them. You agree in fundamentals (irepl TOV Kopv&amp;lt;f&amp;gt;aiov).&quot; (Euseb., Vit. Const, iii. 66). The epistolary efforts of Constantine, however, had no effect in allaying the theological dis sensions of the Church of Alexandria, which, on the contrary, with the banishment of Arius, spread widely throughout all the Eastern Churches. The conclusion was accordingly formed of convoking a general council of bishops in which the Catholic doctrine should be formally declared. This the first oecumenical council met at Nicsea in Bithynia in the summer of the year 325. It contained about 300 bishops. The traditionary number is 318 ; but there is no clear evidence of the actual number, which has been variously estimated from 218 to 320. Besides prelates there was a large number of pres byters and attendants. Hosius, bishop of Cordova, the chief counsellor of Constantine in the Western Church, who had been the bearer of his letter to Arius and Alexander, is supposed to have acted as president, although others probably shared this office. Eusebius, in speaking of the presidency, uses the plural number. Among the most renowned of the assembled bishops may be mentioned Alexander of Alexandria (attended by his more celebrated deacon, and subsequently his successor in the Alexandrian bishopric, Athanasius), Eustathius of Antioch, Eusebius of Csesarea in Palestine, his namesake, and some suppose his brother, of Nicomedia, Macarius of Jerusalem, Leontius of Csesarea in Cappadocia. Csecilian of Carthage, Marcellus of Ancyra, Spyridion of Cyprus, and other known although less distinguished names. There is no detailed record of the proceedings of the council. Eusebius of Cajsarea and Athanasiua both wrote about it ; but it is impossible to trace out in any continuous form the actual proceedings of the council, from anything that they say. &quot;We know not,&quot; Dean Stanley says, &quot; whether it lasted weeks or days &quot; (Eastern Church, p. 1 29). So far as can be gathered, however, there was much discussion untrammelled by the exercise of any external authority. Arius himself, being only a presbyter, had no seat in the conclave, but he appears to have been frequently called upon or allowed to express his opinions, his chief opponent in argument being Athanasius. At first the Arian party seem to have made a bold defence of their opinions, and to have found considerable support in the council ; but ultimately they formed but a small mino rity. After an unsuccessful effort on their part to submit the draft of a creed, which, only called forth violent disapprobation, and was in fact torn in pieces by the excited assemblage, Eusebius of Csesarea produced a con fession of faith which he had been taught in his youth as the confession of the Church of Palestine. It was favoured by the emperor, and would have been accepted by the Arians. But the very fact that the Arians were disposed to accept the creed introduced by Eusebius, indisposed the orthodox party to its adoption. An expression, used by his namesake of Nieomedia with the view of characterizing unfavourably the extreme orthodox position the expres sion Homoousion ( O/zootViov) at length became the battle-ground betwixt the parties. The Arians violently condemned it ; the Eusebians or semi-Arians also at first strongly disapproved of it ; but to the majority it became the very term they were in search of, in order to dis criminate their view of the relation of the Father and Son from Arianism; and accordingly it was adopted. The assent of the emperor was gained ; Hosius of Cordova announced the creed of the church at length settled ; and even the two Eusebii after a time gave in their adhesion to the expression, although reluctantly, and in the case of Eusebius of Nicomedia apparently with an amount of reserve which led to future difficulties. The following are the terms of the creed as issued by the council : &quot;We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things, both visible and invisible ; and in oue Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only begotten, that is to say of the substance of the Father, God of God and Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father (b^oovawv ri$ irarpi), by whom all things were made, both things in heaven and things on earth ; who, for us men and for our salvation, came down and was made flesh, made man, suffered and rose again on the third day, went up into the heavens, and is to come again to judge the quick and the dead ; and in the Holy Ghost.&quot; Then followed the clauses anathematizing the several assertions of the Arians, that &quot; there was a time when He (Jesus Christ) waa not &quot; before He was begotten He was not,&quot; &quot; He came into existence from what was not,&quot; and that He is of a different &quot; person &quot; or substance &quot; This the original form of the Nicene Creed, it will be observed, differs considerably from what is popularly known as the Nicene Creed. Afterwards certain clauses (which we have marked in italics) were omitted, and others of more importance added, especially the present conclusion of the creed, following the simple statement in the original of belief in the Holy Ghost. &quot; I believe in the Holy Ghost [the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeded from the Father (and the Sou), who with the Father and the Son are worshipped and glorified, who spake by the prophets. And I believe one Catholic and Apostolic Church. 1 acknow ledge one baptism for the remission of sins. And I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come].&quot; The history of the addition of these clauses is involved in some obscurity. They have been often attributed to the Council of Constantinople which, in 381, followed that of Niccea, and the existing creed has been consequently called by the special title of the Nicseno-Constautinopolitan Creed. But, on the one hand, the enlarged creed is fouud in a work written by Epiphanius seven years before the date of this council (Migne, xliii. col. 232), and on the other hand there is nothing said in the canons of the Con- btantinopolitan Council respecting the enlargement of tlis