I’m a big fan of the Nicene Creed (technically the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 for the sticklers), and I have found a great deal of value in reflecting on what it does and doesn’t say. I especially value the creed because it facilitates the intersection of two important parts of my life….
my interest in the development of Christian theology through history. That said, there is something that has been bugging me about the creed lately. When reading it, we essentially get only a list of facts about the Father, Son, and Spirit.
…..I must firmly insist that all that we know about God is firmly entrenched in a narrative, but how well does the creed place God within that narrative?
I don’t like the Creed of 381, finding that it goes too far and instead becomes too much a political compromise. Instead, I prefer the Apostle’s Creed, but Jeremiah’s question is a good one.
When does, for those of you who believe it does, doctrine stop progressing? When do we step back and examine where we are and if we need to move to the left or the right?
What if a new creed is needed? Or a new doctrine, especially in relation to the narrative developed around YHWH and Jesus.