The Rev. J. II. Todd on an Ancient Irish Missal. 25 



rhe fact that the Creed forms a part of the Office of the Mass in the Stowe 

 Missal is no argument against the high antiquity I have assigned to that MS. 

 For, although the Constantinopolitan Creed was not publicly sung at Rome 

 until the time of Leo III.,* and did not become fully established in the Mass 

 until the eleventh century, it is admitted by all that it was used in other 

 Churches. The third Council of Toledo, A. D. 589, enjoined: — "Ut per 

 omnes ecclesias Hispania3, vel Gallaicia), secundum formam orientalium eccle- 

 siarum Concilii Constantinopolitani, hoc est cl episcoporum, symbolum fidei 

 recitetur ; ut priusquam Dominica dicatur oratio, voce clara a populo decan- 



the Synod of Agde, in Languedoc, held A. D. 506, Can. 13: — "Symbolum etiam placuit ab omni- 

 bus eoclesiis una die, i. e. ante octo dies Dominica; resurrectionis, publice in ecclesia competentibus 

 tradi." The coiiqietentcs were the catechumens wlio were deemed admissible to baptism, and 

 therefore, the Creed used was of course the Baptismal Creed. 



* This is not the place to discuss the question of the introduction of the Constantinopolitan 

 Creed into the Roman Liturgy. But it is evident from the words of Berno, Abbot of Eeichenau, 

 that the custom had not fully established itself in his time, i. e. about A. D. 1014; for he tells us that 

 he himself was present when the Koman presbyters, being asked why they did not ohaunt the Creed, 

 answered, that the Roman Church, having never been infected with heresy, had not the same need 

 to chaunt the Creed frequently as other Churches: "AtDominus Imperator" (he adds, i.e. Henry 

 II.) "non ante desiit, quam omnium consensu id Domino Benedicto Apostolico" [i. e. Benedict 

 VIII.] " persuasit, ut ad publicam Missam illud [sc. symbolum] decantarent; sed utrum hanc 

 consuetudinem servent adbuc, afErmare non possumus, quia certum non tenemus." — De rebus ad 

 Missam pertinetitibus, cap. 2. {Biblioth. Patr. Lugd. tom. xviii., p. 58 A.) Maetene explains this by 

 saying that Berno is only speaking of the Creed being chaunted, and that it does not follow that it 

 was not said or read before that time {De S. Eccl. Bitibus, lib. i. c. 4, art. 5, n. 11); and he refers to the 

 conference between Leo III. and the messengers of Charlemagne, relative to the introduction of 

 JSioque into the Creed, A. D. 809, by which it appears that the same question was at that time agi- 

 tated, and the same distinction between reading and chauuting alluded to ; the custom of the Roman 

 Church being to read, and not to chaunt the Creed. For, the messengers having asked whether the 

 Pope had not himself given leave to have the Creed chaunted at Rome, and so adopted the usage of 

 other Churches, Leo answers: — "Ego licentiam dedi cantandi; non autem cantando quidpiam 

 addendi, minuendi seumutandi;" and shortly afterwards, "quod veroasseritis, ideovosita cantare, 

 quoniam alios in istis partibus vobis priores audistis cantasse, quid ad nos ? Nos enim id ipsum non 

 cantamus sed legimus: et legendo docere, nee tamen legendo aut docendo addere quidpiam eidem 

 symbolo inserendo praisumimus." — Collalio liomce Itabila, ap. Hardouin, Concil., tom. iv., col. 973. 

 But if the question was merely between reading and chaunting, the answer of the Roman Presby- 

 ters, reported by Berko, that the Roman Church was never infected with heresy, loses its point. 

 VOL. xxm. d 



