Explanation of the Creed

The essay “Explanation of the Creed” refers to the public conversations of St. Ambrose of Milan (about 391, 9 chapters). The treatise is a transcript of an oral sermon and describes the ritual of “transferring the Symbol” a week before Easter. In that era, the main baptized people were adults; Of the heretics, only the Sabellians and Arians are mentioned. The saint explains to those preparing to receive Baptism the basic Christian dogmas. From the content of the conversation it becomes clear that Christian teaching remained disciplina arcana, secret to the outside world; the text of the Creed was not written down, but was learned by heart when the bishop “transmitted the Symbol.” The stenographer is limited to recording only the first and last word of each member of the Symbol. First the bishop talks about the name and origin of the Creed. Then follows the call to make the sign of the cross and the first reading of the Symbol occurs. The reading is followed by a brief explanation of the doctrinal truths. After the second reading, the Symbol is explained in more detail, clause by clause. Then the Symbol is divided into three parts of four parts and the results of the teaching are briefly summarized. At the end, the bishop calls on the catechumens to learn the Symbol by heart and warns that it should not be written down and communicated to the unbaptized and heretics. *The title of the essay in Latin is Explanatio symboli ad initiandos. Contents Preface by the translator Explanation of the Creed Translator's Preface 1 Three works of St. Ambrose of Milan “Explanation of the Creed” (Explanatio Symboli), “On the Sacraments” (De sacramentis) and “On the Mysteries” (De mysteriis) are catechetical teachings that explain the main provisions of the Christian faith and reveal the meaning of the sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation and the Eucharist. If the authenticity of the treatise is myst. never raised serious doubts, then the essays expl. symb. and sacr., on the contrary, were not recognized as authentic for a long time. When comparing texts sacr. and myst. many questions arose, but what struck the eye first was their, so to speak, “dissimilar resemblance.” In fact, despite the commonality of the topic, between sacr. and myst. There are both significant similarities and many differences. On the one hand, both works are addressed to the newly baptized and contain an explanation of the sacred rites of the sacraments; they describe and imply essentially the same rituals, and explain them in more or less similar terms. On the other hand, there are differences between essays in genre, content and style. Text sacr. is a series of sermons, while myst. - an integral literary treatise that retains only the appearance of a sermon (the author addresses the readers as if they were listeners). Moreover, the scope of the treatise clearly goes beyond the scope of a sermon. Sacr. contains prayers and formulas for the rites of the sacraments, extensive excerpts from the Eucharistic canon, as well as an interpretation of the Lord's Prayer. We find none of this in myst. But most importantly, sacr. clearly inferior in literary style and finishing to myst. and other works undoubtedly belonging to St. Ambrose. Style sacr. gets lost behind numerous repetitions and constant questions that may seem naive and unnecessary. Authenticity sacr. was not questioned until the Reformation. The work entered the handwritten tradition under the name of St. Ambrose, and in the 9th century. it is referred to as the original text by Paschasius Radbertus and Ratramnus of Corby. But in the 16th century. Critics of the authenticity of this text appear: first Protestant and then Catholic scholars put forward a number of arguments: sacr. very different in style from other works of St. Ambrose; It is doubtful that St. Ambrose wrote a work copying his own work myst.; in other works of St. Ambrose nowhere criticizes the inhabitants of Mediolan for rare communion; a critical attitude towards the Roman Church is not characteristic of St. Ambrose; the reproach against the Greeks for receiving communion once a year could only arise after the time of St. John Chrysostom (d. 407). Only at the beginning of the 20th century. Research is emerging that proves the authenticity of sacr. Already G. Morin (1929) writes about the belonging of sacr. and expl. symb. St. Ambrose 2, O. Faller (1955 3), G. Lazzati (1955) and others in their studies come to the conclusion that the authorship of sacr. cannot belong to anyone other than St. Ambrose. An undoubted fact is the antiquity of the text: in sacr. of the heretics, only Arians are mentioned, there are no hints of Christological disputes and discussions about grace, the sermon assumes a large number of baptized adults; the liturgical formulas of renunciation and the sacraments of Baptism mentioned in sacr. are not found in other Western rites, so the place where the sermon was delivered could only be Milan; quotations from Holy Scripture contained in sacr. coincide with quotations in other works of St. Ambrose. The peculiarity of the style is due to the fact that sacr. - This is the only surviving transcript of the oral public sermon of St. Ambrose: text sacr. was written from the ear by a scribe-stenographer, moreover, De Sacramentis is a conventional title given on the basis of the first two words of the work, which confirms its initially oral nature. St. Ambrose could have used sacr. for his annual teachings as a note, he later wrote myst. Based on sacr., the text of which consists entirely of the thoughts and expressions of St. Ambrose, found in almost all of his works. The teachings are addressed primarily to the newly baptized, whom St. Ambrose calls for communion as often as possible. The source of knowledge about the practice of communion in the East for St. Ambrose was guided by books and rumors (he himself had never been to the East). Most likely in sacr. We are talking about a trend that arose in the ascetic practice of Eastern monks 4. According to the testimony of Rev. John Cassian, in the East some monks received communion only once a year due to extreme reverence for the Eucharist 5. St. Ambrose does not criticize the rite of the Roman Church, but defends the rite of his Church. He explains local liturgical practices rather than polemicizing against Roman ones. In thought and style sacr. cannot belong to any of the writers whom criticism put forward as possible authors of the work. The situation is similar with the authenticity of another cataclysmic teaching - expl. symb. This small work has survived only in two manuscripts without indicating the author. Its authenticity depended on sacr., since expl. symb. was perceived as the first book of sacr. We see that Christian teaching remained disciplina arcana, secret to the outside world; the text of the Creed was not written down, but was learned by heart when the bishop “transmitted the Symbol.” At St. Ambrose in a letter to his sister Marcellina we find the following words: Sequenti die, erat autem Dominica, post lectiones atque tractatum, dimissis catechumenis, symbolum aliquibus competentibus in baptisteriis tradebam basilicae 6 (“The next day was Sunday, after reading the Holy Scriptures and preaching, I dismissed the catechumens and conveyed the Creed to several petitioners in Baptistery of the Basilica"). Like sacr., expl. symb. is a transcript of an oral sermon and describes the rite of “transmission of the Symbol” in an era when the main baptized were adults; Of the heretics, only the Sabellians and Arians are mentioned. In expl. symb. reflects the ancient church tradition that existed until the end of the 6th century, prohibiting the recording of the Creed; the stenographer is limited to recording only the first and last words of each member of the Creed. St. Ambrose usually uses the words mysterium (mystery) and sacramentum (sacrament) as synonyms, which is also typical for the Latin translation of Holy Scripture. However, he is already planning a division of these concepts. Thus, he calls the sacred rites of the sacraments of Christian initiation (Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist) sacramenta, and the hidden, mysterious meaning of the sacred rites – mysteria (see, for example: expl. symb. 5; sacr. 1. 1. 2; myst. 2, etc.). “Mysteries of trials” (mysteria scrutaminum) or simply “test, research, inquiry” (scrutamen, scrutinium, scrutatio) in Western rites were called rites that were performed on the so-called “askers” (competentes - asking [for Baptism]) or “elected”, announced, who expressed a desire to receive Baptism in next Holy Saturday. In Mediolan, the recording of the names of candidates for Baptism, the so-called “submission of the name” (nomendatio), took place in the period from Epiphany to the beginning of Pentecost (exp. Luc. 4.76; sacr. 3.12). With the onset of Lent, the catechumens entered a period of preparation for the sacrament of Baptism, which, in addition to fasting, included both a ritual and a didactic part. Starting from the third week of Lent, they began to pray for the “elect” and their successors during the liturgy. The main part of the “tests” consisted of exorcisms, or spells (in Slavic - prohibitions), designed to sanctify the soul and body of the catechumen, freeing them from the power of the unclean spirit. The ritual side of the “tests” included making the sign of the cross, blowing, kneeling, and laying on of hands 7 . The prayer of prohibition was followed by the rite of renunciation of the devil 8. John the Deacon speaks of examining the hearts of the catechumens on the subject of faith: do they retain the sacred words after renouncing the devil, do they understand the need to accept the grace of the Redeemer, do they believe in God the Father Almighty 9 . The structure and content of these essays are as follows. Expl. symb. is a fragment of a teaching that the bishop delivered to the catechumens during the so-called rite of “transfer of the Symbol” (traditio Symboli) a week before Easter. First the bishop talks about the name and origin of the Creed. After the call to make the sign of the cross, the first reading of the Symbol occurs. The reading is followed by a brief explanation of the doctrinal truths. After the second reading, the Symbol is explained in more detail, clause by clause. Finally, after the next overshadowing with the sign of the cross, the Symbol is divided into three parts of four members each and the results of the teaching are briefly summed up. At the end, the bishop calls on the catechumens to learn the Symbol by heart and under no circumstances write it down or communicate it to the unbaptized and heretics. In sacr. and myst. the author now addresses the newly baptized and explains to them the sacraments that they accepted. If myst. represents one book, then sacr. - these are six discourses-teachings, corresponding to the number of days of Bright Week in which they were pronounced. Sacr. and myst. begin the same way: the bishop sets out the purpose of his conversation and explains the reason why he could not talk about the sacraments before. What follows is a consistent presentation and explanation of the rites of the sacraments. St. Ambrose speaks of performing the rite of “opening” the lips and ears (apertio), pre-baptismal anointing and renunciation of the devil. This is followed by the blessing of water, confession of faith and Baptism. After reading the Gospel of John (John 13), the bishop washes the feet of the newly baptized. After washing, one should put on white clothes and perform the sacrament of Confirmation. At the end, the newly enlightened Christians begin the sacrament of the Eucharist. To explain the sacraments of St. Ambrose turns to the Holy Scriptures, using all known methods of interpretation, especially typology. The purpose of the explanations is to reveal the truths of the Christian faith and to teach moral edification. The doctrine of the Eucharist occupies an important place in the treatises. The announcement ends with instructions in prayer and a detailed explanation of the petitions of the Lord's Prayer. Researchers date the texts to 390–391. 1. Until now, the mysteries of trials have been carried out 10. A study was conducted to ensure that no impurity remained in anyone's body. In the prayer of prohibition 11 we asked for and received sanctification not only of the body, but also of the soul. Now the time has come and day 12 has arrived for us to pass on Symbol 13. This Symbol is a spiritual seal 14, the reflection of our heart, it is like an ever-present guard 15. Truly the Symbol is the treasure of our soul. 2. So, first we must understand the meaning of the name itself. The Greek word "symbol" means "gathering" 16 . Mostly merchants are in the habit of using the word symbola when they collect their money. Being made up of everyone's contributions, it is kept intact and intact, so that no one attempts to deceive either the collection or the trading enterprise. Finally, merchants have a custom that if someone commits fraud, they expel him as a fraudster. Therefore, when the holy apostles gathered together, they compiled a brief statement of faith, so that we would quickly comprehend all its truths 17. Brevity is necessary so that what is stated is constantly and vividly retained in memory 18 . I know that especially in the eastern regions 19 to what was originally handed down from our ancestors 20 - some through deceit, and others out of jealousy (through deceit - heretics, out of jealousy - catholics) - they added what should not be, some trying to sneak in by deception, and others, trying to prevent deception and, apparently, guided by something like piety mixed with frivolity, crossed the limits [set] by their ancestors 21 . 3. So, the holy apostles, when they gathered together, composed a short Symbol. Cross yourself! (After this is done and the Symbol is read) 22. In this Symbol the Divinity of the Eternal Trinity is expressed in the clearest way: the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, that is, the venerable Trinity, has one action 23. And therefore our faith is such that we believe equally in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. For where there is no difference in greatness 24 there should be no difference in faith. Then, I have said many times that only our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, took on this flesh together with a rational and perfect human soul 25 and that He took on the form of a body 26 . Having a true body, He became like a man (Phil. 2:7). However, He has exclusive superiority in His birth. After all, He was not born from the seed of a man, but came, as it is said: from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary. Do you recognize the superiority of the Heavenly Creator? Truly He became like a man in order to take our infirmities into His Flesh, but He came with the excellence that comes from eternal greatness. So, let's read the Symbol! (And when he read it, he continued). This is contained in Divine Scripture. Should we, with a daring mind, transgress the limits set by the apostles? Are we more prudent than the apostles? 4. But you tell me: “Then heresies arose! After all, the apostle says: There must be heresies in order to test the good 27.” - So what? Look at the simplicity! Look at the cleanliness! When the Patripassians 28 appeared, the Catholics decided that in this part [of the Symbol] the “invisible” and “impassive” [Father] 29 should also be added, as if the Son of God were visible and subject to suffering! If He was visible in the flesh, then it was His flesh that was visible, not the Divinity, and it was the flesh that suffered, and not the Divinity. Listen, finally, to what He says: God, My God, listen to Me, why have You forsaken Me? (Ps.22:2; Matt.27:46; Mark 15:34). Our Lord Jesus Christ says this while suffering. He said this as a man, speaking according to the flesh, as if the flesh were saying to the Divine: “Why have You forsaken Me?” Now let's imagine that our ancestors were doctors and wanted to cure a disease with medicine. If medicine was not needed at the time when some souls were seriously ill with heresy, then there is no need for it now. Even if you should have looked for him then, you don’t need to look for him now. For what reason? The Sabellians were opposed by the uncorrupted faith, [and] they were expelled, especially from the western regions. From this remedy [against the Sabellians] the Arians invented a reason for slander. Since we profess the Symbol of the Roman Church, they considered the Father Almighty invisible and impassive and said: “Do you see that this is what the Symbol says?” in order to present the Son as visible and subject to suffering! So what? Where faith is not distorted, the teaching of the apostles is sufficient, and additional explanations 30, even from clergy, are not needed at all. Why? Because the tares are mixed with the wheat. 5. The symbol begins like this: I BELIEVE IN... THE ONLY OUR LORD 31 . Say this: HIS ONLY SON! Not “the only Lord”; there is one God, and one Lord 32. But so that they do not slander and say that we claim that the Son is one Person 33 [with the Father, we say]: And in... the only one, our Lord. Since I have spoken about the Godhead of the Father and the Son, it is time to speak about His incarnation: WHO WAS BORN... AND BURIED. You know about His suffering and burial. ON THE THIRD DAY... FROM THE DEAD. You also know about His resurrection. HAS ASCEN... SEATS at the right hand of the FATHER. So, you see that the flesh was not able to diminish the Divinity in any way; moreover, the incarnation served to the great glorification of Christ 34. And on what basis does He, having risen from death, “sit at the right hand of the Father”? As the One who brought the Father the fruit of good will 35. You know two truths: “He rose from death” and “he sits at the right hand of the Father.” The flesh could not in any way diminish the glory of the Divine. You have two [explanations]: Our Lord Jesus Christ “sits at the right hand of the Father,” [after] “rising from death” either by the exclusive right of Divinity and His hypostatic birth 36, or, at least, as the eternal Victor, Who “acquired the good kingdom for God the Father” 37 and gained for Himself the exclusive right by His victory 38. SITCHED AT THE RIGHT HAND OF THE FATHER... AND OF THE DEAD. Listen, man! For your part, you must quickly believe. Let faith itself be born out of love. He who loves does not humiliate. A friend who loves a friend does not humiliate him in any way. Those who love the Lord should not belittle Him all the more 39 . Why do I say, “He is seated”? And the lover has something to fear: Where... and the dead. He will judge us 40. Beware of belittling the One who will be your Judge! What is this secret for? Do not the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit have one judgment? Isn't there one will, one greatness? Why are you told that the Son will judge, if not so that you understand that you should not belittle the Son in anything? 41 So, look, you believe in the Father, you believe also in the Son. And what thirdly? AND INTO THE HOLY SPIRIT. All the sacraments that you will receive, you will receive in the [Name] of this Trinity. Let no one deceive you! So, you see that the venerable Trinity has one action, one sanctification, one greatness. 6. Understand well how we believe in the Creator, so that you might not say: “But [the Symbol] also speaks [about faith] in the Church, and in the remission of sins, and in the resurrection!” - So what? The reason is the same: just as we believe in Christ, as we believe in the Father, in the same way we believe in the “Church”, and in the “forgiveness of sins”, and in the “resurrection of the flesh”. On what basis? Because he who believes in the Creator also believes in the work of the Creator. However, so that you do not consider this our invention, listen to the testimony: If you do not believe Me, at least believe [My] works! 42 Now, you know it. Now your faith will shine even brighter if you recognize that true and undistorted faith in the work of your Creator must extend to both the “Holy Church” and the “absolution of sins.” Believe that all sins are forgiven you by faith! That is why you read the words of the Lord in the Gospel: Your faith has saved you (Mark 10:52; Luke 17:19) 43. LEFTING... RESURRECTION. Believe that the flesh will also be resurrected! Why was it necessary for Christ to take on flesh? Why was it necessary for Christ to ascend to the cross? Why was it necessary for Christ to taste death 44, undergo burial and rise again, if not for the sake of your resurrection? All this is the mystery of your resurrection. If Christ is not risen, our faith is in vain 45. But He rose again, and therefore our faith is firm 46 . 7. So, I said that the Apostles compiled the Symbol. If merchants of goods and depositors of money have such a law that if someone robs a collection of money, they consider him dishonest and unworthy of trust, then we should be all the more careful that nothing is stolen from the Symbol of the Ancestors, as you will find in the Revelation of John - this book is recognized as canonical and is extremely useful for [laying] the foundations of faith, because in it John directly called our Lord Jesus Christ Almighty 47, although this is also in other places 48 - so, in this book it is said: “If anyone adds or takes away [anything], he incurs judgment and punishment” 49. If nothing can be added or subtracted from the Writings of one apostle, then how can we distort the Symbol, which we accepted as composed and transmitted by the apostles? We must neither take away nor add anything! After all, this is the Symbol that is preserved by the Roman Church 50, where Peter, the first among the apostles, sat, and where he brought their common teaching 51. 8. So, just as there are twelve apostles, so there are twelve members [of the Symbol]. Cross yourself! (After it's done) I BELIEVE...VIRGOS. You know about the Divinity of the Father, about the Divinity of the Son, you know about the incarnation of the Son, as I said. AT... BURIED. You know about suffering, death and burial. These four members! ON THE THIRD DAY...AND THE DEAD. These are the other four members, that is, there are already eight members. Let's look at four more terms: AND IN THE HOLY SPIRIT... RESURRECTION. It was according to the number of the twelve apostles that the twelve members were made up 52. 9. I want to strictly warn you that the Symbol should not be written down, since you will have to return it 53. However, let no one write it down! For what reason? We have accepted that it should not be recorded. But what to do? Remember. However, you say to me: “How can it be remembered if it is not written down?” – The easier it can be remembered if it is not written down. "Why?". Listen! After all, you will not reflect on what you write down every day, being reassured by the opportunity to re-read it again. And what you don’t write down, you will begin to remember every day for fear of forgetting. On the other hand, the Symbol is a reliable protection. Whether there is confusion in the soul and body, the temptation of a never-sleeping enemy, some tremors in the body, a stomach illness - remember Symbol 54 and immerse yourself in thought! Most importantly, say it to yourself! Why? So that you, having become accustomed to pronounce it loudly in the presence of the faithful, do not begin to pronounce it among the catechumens or heretics 55 . The preface is written based on: Ambroise de Milan. Des Sacraments. Des mysteres. Explication du Symbole / Texte établi, trad. et annoté par dom B. Botte. P, 1949; 1961 2. P. 7–45. (SC; 25bis); Sładyszewski L. Św. Ambroży z Mediolanu. Wyjaśnienie Symbolu. About tajemnicach. About sakramentach. Wstęp // Źródła Myśli Teologicznej. Kraków, 2004. S. 5–44. See: Banterle G. Introduzione. Milano; Roma. 1982. P. 11, n. 8. Sancti Ambrosii Opera. P. 7: Explanatio symboli, De sacramentis, De mysteriis, De paenitentia / Rec. O. Faller. Vindobonae, 1955 (CSEL; 73). However, also in paenit. 2. 9. 89 St. Ambrose speaks disapprovingly of such penitents “who think that repentance consists in abstaining from heavenly sacraments.” John Cassian the Roman. Interviews of Egyptian ascetics // John Cassian the Roman. Scriptures. Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra, 1993 P. 605. Along with the practice of rare communion, there were monasteries in which communion was given daily (see: History of Egyptian monks. M., 2002. P. 41). – Approx. ed. Epist. 20. 4. PL 16:995. This letter is from 386, and further tells of the court's attempts to seize one of the basilicas. – Approx. ed. For more information see: The Gelasian Sacramentary. Lib. 1, cap. 26–35. P. 36–53. Ferrandi diaconi. Epist. XI ad Fulgentium. PL 65:378b. Ioan. Diac. Epist. ad Senar. IV. PL 59:402. Obviously, the “tests” included, in addition to exorcisms, an examination of the conscious acceptance of the truths of faith. Candidates for Baptism also listened to the reading of fragments of the Old Testament books, followed by a sermon (myst. 1). Apparently, the “trials” were carried out three times during the period of Lent, but then their number increased to seven. The last “test” took place on Holy Saturday (see: Amalarii Fortunati Treuirensis episcopi. Responsio de scrutinio. PL 99:894, 897). Subsequently, the “tests” disappeared from the practice of the Western Church, leaving a trace in the pre-baptismal rite, which was recorded in the Roman ritual (Ordo Baptismi adultorum // Rituale Romanum. Lutetiae Parisiorum, 1623. P. 32–55). After the Second Vatican Council, “trials” again entered the practice of the Roman Catholic Church (see: Ordo initiationis Christianae. Praenotanda I. C. De structura initiationis adultorum. 25. De tempore purificationis et illuminationis). Perhaps here at St. Ambrose, we have the earliest evidence of the performance of the rite of “test” - scrutamen. Lit. "through exorcism." On the ritual side of exorcism, see: Almazov. pp. 152–189. In Mediolan, the “transmission of the Symbol” (traditio Symboli) took place on Vai Week in the baptistery adjacent to the basilica between the Liturgy of the Word, at which catechumens could be present, and the Liturgy of the Faithful (see epist. 20, 4. 6. PL 16:995; cf. Isid. Hisp. eccl. offic. 1. 24. 2. PL 83:763). It is generally accepted that the word “symbol” in the meaning of confession of faith was first mentioned in the Epistle of the Council of Milan (c. 389), chaired by St. Ambrose, to St. Sirius I, Pope of Rome (epist. 42, 5. PL 16:1125). Perhaps in expl. symb. 1 we have earlier evidence of this tradition. St. Maximus of Turin speaks of the “seal of the Symbol” (signaculum symboli), which separates the faithful from the wicked (Max. Taurin. trad. symb. PL 83:433). Many interpreters of the Symbol use military terminology. St. Ambrose compares the Symbol with a military oath - sacramentum militiae (uirgb. 3. 4. 20). Quodvultdeus of Carthage, whose writings have long been attributed to Bl. Augustine, says that a Christian must rush at the devil “with the sacrament of the Symbol and the banner of the Cross” (cum Symboli sacramento et crucis uexillo), and with this weapon he will win (Quoduultdeus Carth. symb. I. 2. PL 20:637). Greek σύμβολον – from συμβάλλω – “to collect, to connect.” St. Ambrose gives his interpretation of the word “symbol”. Rufinus of Aquileia says that the apostles themselves chose the word “symbol” for the name of the rule of faith they compiled, hence the name - the Apostolic Symbol. According to Rufinus, a “symbol” is a “gathering” (collatio) - that which several people collect “into one.” This is what the twelve apostles did, collecting the doctrinal sayings of each of them “into one”; “sign, omen, sign” (indicium), “military password” (signum), by which one can distinguish an enemy from an ally, true preachers of the apostolic teaching from false ones (Ruf. Aquil. exp. symb. 2. PL 21:338). Later, a tradition appeared according to which each member of the Creed was assimilated to one of the apostles. Two versions of this legend, different from each other, are contained in sermons attributed to Bl. Augustine (Aug. Hipp. serm. 240–241. PL 39:2188–2191). St. Isidore of Seville says that the Symbol contains in a few words all the sacraments of the faith collected by the apostles from Holy Scripture. Brevity is necessary so that believers will contain in their hearts knowledge sufficient for their salvation. This short word of faith was predicted by the prophet: As the word shortened will the Lord create on the earth (Is. 10:23; Rom. 9:28) (Isid. Hisp. eccl. offic. 2. 23. 5. PL 83:816–817). Obviously, we are talking about the diocese of Aquileia, located east of Milan, and not about the eastern part of the empire. St. Ambrose condemns the changes made to the Apostolic Creed, which was distributed only in the Western, but not in the Eastern Churches. Rufinus of Aquileia says that in some places, because of heretics, additions are made to the Symbol, noting that the Symbol of the Roman Church remains unchanged (Ruf. Aquil. exp. symb. 3. PL 21:339). For various religious formulas in the East, see Athanas. Alex. synod. PG 26:681–794, rus. transl.: St. Athanasius the Great. Epistle about the councils that took place in Arimina in Italy and in Seleucia in Isauria // St. Athanasius the Great. Creations. T. 3. M., 1994 r. pp. 92–165. "Ancestors" of St. Ambrose names both the Old Testament righteous (myst. 1) and previous generations of Christians (expi. symb. 4), thereby showing the continuity of the New Testament Church from the Old Testament. Here and below, the words of the scribe-stenographer are enclosed in parentheses. Some works retain the scribe's notes, e.g. let's go 5. 12. 36. However, with all the shortcomings of shorthand recording, this treatise provides a unique opportunity to hear the living speech of the great saint. Wed: fid. 2. 6. 50: Cum autem filius, quos uelit, uiuificet, et operatio una sit, uides quia non solus filius uoluntatem patris, sed etiam pater filii faciat uoluntatem; 2. 7. 52: Una ergo uoluntas, ubi una operatio. – The conclusion from the unity of action to the unity of essence is the usual patristic argument in favor of the consubstantiality of the Persons of the Trinity. – Approx. ed. Wed: fid. 3. 13. 103: Superest, ut unius quoque maiestatis patrem filiumque doceamus. Cp.: incarn. 65: Nihil enim in Christo imperfectum. Suscepit itaque carnem, ut resuscitaret; assumpsit animam, sed animam perfectam, rationabilem, humanam assumpsit atque suscepit; 67: Assumpsit, inquam, animam, ut incarnationis suae benediceret sacramento; suscepit affectum meum, ut emendaret. The word forma - image, form - from St. Ambrose has the meaning of perfection and completeness of nature. Wed: fid. 5. 108–109: Qui cum in forma Dei esset, exinaniuit se, et formam serui accepit. Quid est in Dei forma, nisi in diuinitatis plenitudine? Disce igitur quid sit: Formam serui accepit, id est, plenitudinem perfectionis humanae, plenitudinem obedientiae. “Patripassians” are modalist heretics who considered the Father and the Son to be one and the same person, and therefore taught that God the Father Himself suffered on the cross. One of the patripassians was Praxeus, against whom at the beginning of the 3rd century. wrote Tertullian. – Approx. ed. According to Rufinus, in the Aquileian Church these words were added to the Apostolic Creed because of the heresy of the Sabellians (Ruf. Aquil. exp. symb. 5. PL 21:344). In Mediolanus, this insertion into the Symbol was used by the predecessor of St. Amrosius at the department of Auxentius. In Roman law, cautio is a written document that was drawn up at the conclusion of an oral agreement (stipulatio) in addition, to prove the fact of the agreement (see: Pokrovsky I.A. History of Roman Law. St. Petersburg, 1998. pp. 400–401, 411). Wed: sacr. 1. 5. 8. 11; myst. 28. The stenographer indicates only the first and last words of the Symbol, thus observing the ancient tradition of the Church, which forbade the writing of the Symbol (see expl. symb. 9; Quoduultdeus Carth. symb. 1. 1; Petr. Chrys. symb. apost. 61–62. PL 52:354–375). Cp.: spirit. s. 3. 15. 104: Non sunt enim duo domini, ubi dominatus unus est, quia pater in filio, filius in patre et ideo dominus unus. Wed: incarn. 77: Nam utique filium eiusdem cum patre substantiae confitentes in tractatu consilii Nicaeni non unam personam, sed unam diuinitatem in patre et filio crediderunt; exam. 6. 7. 41: Sic et in euangelio, ubi dicit ego et pater, utique non una persona est. Cp.: fid. 2. 8. 64: Neque enim deus sui pati potuit detrimentum, cum id, quod adsumpsit ex uirgine, nec accessio diuinae nec diminutio potestatis sit; 5. 15. 183: “Euacuatio potestatum” et “uictoria de morte quaesita” triumphatoris utique non minuit potestatem. See: Luke 2:14. Cp. fid. 2. 6. 50: Passio autem Christi uoluntas est patris. Cp. Ps.109:1, 3; incarn. 53: in eo salua generationis dominicae praerogatiua. Wed: 1Kop.15:24; fid. 2. 12. 104: Haecine tibi uidetur esse subiectio, in qua regnum patri paratur? Cp.: fid. 5. 13. 166: Numquid secundum carnem ad dexteram patris sedere praeripuit et inuito patre sibi praerogatiuam paterni solii uindicauit? Cp.: fid. 4. 2. 26: Quis igitur odit Christum, nisi qui derogat? 4, 8, 80: Filio igitur qui derogat, patri derogat. Wed: fid. 2. 12.102: Aut si te ratio non monet, species saltem iudicii ipsa commoueat. Adtolle oculos ad iudicem tuos, intuere qui sedeat, cum quo sedeat, ubi sedeat. Cp.: fid. 2. 12. 100: Sed pater non iudicat quemquam; omne enim iudicium dedit filio. Dedit utique generando, non largiendo. Vide quam te noluerit suo filio derogare, ut tibi ipsum iudicem daret! On this topic St. Ambrose addresses several times in his treatise fid., citing the Gospel of John, for example. 2. 4. 38 – John 16:15; 2. 6. 47 – John 3:8; 2. 6. 50 – John 5:21; 2. 6. 51 – John 16:15. Wed: epist. 42, 4: Credatur symbolo apostolorum, quod ecclesia Romana intemeratum semper custodit et seruat. St. Ambrose uses the expression sententia communis—common opinion, common teaching—which later became a technical term in Latin theology. Reading the Symbol three times with a detailed explanation of each member, making the sign of the cross, breaking the Symbol into three parts of four members each, linking the number of members to the number of apostles, justifying the ban on writing the Symbol and the call to remember the Symbol in exceptional situations (expl. symb. 9) - all served to memorize the text of the prayer. “Return of the Symbol” (redditio Symboli) - the reading of the Symbol by heart by the catechumens, this happened solemnly, in the presence of all the faithful (see: Aug. Hipp. confes. 7. 2.4–5). The “Return of the Symbol” was not one of the pre-baptismal rites. In Rome, the “return” took place on Holy Saturday morning (see: The Gelasian Sacramentary. Lib. 1, cap. 42. P. 78), and in Carthage a few days before Easter (see: Ferrandi diaconi. Op. cit. PL 65:379; Fulg. Rusp. epist. XII. 14. PL 65:386). It is unknown when the “return of the Symbol” took place in Mediolan. Wed: uirgb. 3. 4. 20: Symbolum quoque specialiter debemus tanquam nostril signaculum cordis antelucanis horis cottidie recensere: quo etiam cum horremus aliquid, animo recurrendum est. Cp.: Cain et A. 1. 9. 37: Caue ne incaute symboli uel dominicae orationis diuulges mysteria.