Me and Creeds

I dislike creeds. I often have a smirk when I say the Nicene Creed, because saying it is a little bit of a stretch. I realize that many, perhaps most, Episcopalians interpret the Nicene Creed figuratively, but some part of me is not used to doing that. I imagine a line of priests at their ordination, reciting the Creed, all with their fingers crossed behind their backs.

And then, I came across this article by a Baptist pastor:
http://theparson.net/creed.html

The Baptists don't do creeds either, it seems. They believe in "soul freedom" - an individual is primarily responsible to God. If there is one Baptist creed, it is belief in Jesus. Bishop John Spong, retired bishop of New Jersey (and very controversial theologian), noted that with time, the required Christian creed got longer and more complex, and it also stifled discussion, since subjects that could have used some wiggle room were now clearly defined. Constantine, who helped convene the Council of Nicaea, intended the creed to be a basic framework for the Christian faith that still allowed some diversity of opinion. The thing is, the world is very complex, there are no easy answers, and we can short-change ourselves by insisting that there are. Spong suggests that we go back to "Jesus is Messiah." "Jesus" and "is" admittedly lack wiggle room, but everyone from a fundamentalist to a closet Unitarian could go along with "Messiah". That proclamation gets rid of all the claptrap and focuses us on the one thing that matters to Christians of all stripes: Jesus.