e
character, his services to education, we should not be offended, even
if we were not fully aware of all that he had done for humanity. We
should not say that there was any minimum of praise, nor any maximum of
offence. It would not be an act chargeable with these faults, unless
we did it in the midst of those who disputed his eminence.

{116}

The House of God is a place where we ought to assume that the
revelation of God is the foundation of worship. Hence a Creed which
recites the substance of that revelation should fairly be assumed to
express the convictions of all present.

The two Creeds, known to us as _The Apostles' Creed_ and _The Nicene
Creed_, are evidently free from the charge of offence or lack of
worship. They take so little account of matters of opinion,--they deal
so entirely with the facts of Revelation, that it is hard to conceive
any other kind of words so free from the kind of charge which the
Professor brought against Creeds in Worship.

But it will be necessary to examine more at length the position of the
Creed which is called Athanasian, and to enquire what defence may
fairly be made, if it is the form against which the Professor really
brought this charge. For it must be acknowledged that many thoughtful
men do stumble at this Creed. To them it is an offence, because it is
often assumed that it is the expression of opinion about those who do
not accept the doctrines which it contains.

1. Now in reciting the Athanasian Creed, a congregation is not
attempting to deliver its opinion: we are reciting the assertions which
are implied in the Bible, concerning the Being of God, and the
Incarnation of Jesus Christ.

Let us emphasize this point. The Athanasian Creed has a different form
from the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds. You could not fairly describe it
as "a loving outburst of a loyal heart," as Bp Harvey Goodwin described
the Apostles' Creed. _Gloria {117} Patri_ is indeed added at the
close, thereby marking it as a Psalm or Hymn in its use in Church[1].

We think that in its form, fairly considered, it is the reflective
utterance of a Christian, who is meditating on the Being and Personal
Nature of the Godhead. As I read or say it, I am, as it were,
balancing the statements which limit my conception of the truth. On
this side I may go so far, and no further; on that side I am limited to
that expression. Between these two--including these truths--the fact
of Godhead is to be