This Creed was developed between warring bishops, over a century of strife
to exclude dissenters, cover the points of difference,
it relegated to a single separating comma
the life and teaching of Jesus
fundamental to our faith.

Yet every phrase is somehow suspect
untenable, incredible, or unrealistic
and thus a barrier to faith
as a practical reality.

I believe in God, the Father Almighty, I believe in God, the Father Almighty,

Personal experience and the mythology of every tribe and nation argue for some form of divine existence.
There is another, a spiritual, dimension, which can, and does, interface to mankind
and includes an ideal spirituality that we may call God.
But why call God 'Father', except to proliferate masculine supremacy?
Why 'Almighty' when Her character of Love is manifestly absent from the earth?
Why personify divinity, when Spirituality lies within us all?

Creator of Heaven and earth, Creator of Heaven and earth,

How did creation come about?
The Bible provides a simplistic explanation, disproved by modern science.
If God was creator, it leaves the source of divinity unsolved.
Who or what created God? It solves nothing.
It also leaves extant the untenable concept of a separate heavenly realm
imagined by ancient savants as located above the skies.

and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son,

The ancient concept of divine parenthood for earthly heroes has no reality,
although common to many famed figures of the legendary past
and even to the Emperors of Roman times.

Our Lord, Our Lord,

Can he be 'our Lord' when his teaching is ignored
in this key statement of his church?
These are weasel words!

Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,

The idea of a God impregnated virgin is common to other earlier religions:
.. Buddha was born of a virgin, 550BC
..Horus was born of a virgin, 2000BC
..Indra was virgin born,800BC
..Adonis.. .. Zorastra ... etc.
It was a common concept but is neither original nor tenable.

In this case it seems likely to have concealed a more material conception
either through the action of her fiancee, Joseph,
or the rape by a Roman soldier.

born of the Virgin Mary born of the Virgin Mary

The virginal conception is a doctrine which seems to be a late, and incredible, idea,
perhaps driven by a negative attitude to sex.
St. Paul seems to have been unaware of the virgin birth
which is surely something that he would have mentioned.
The concept must have arisen between his writing and that of the Gospels.
It was perhaps introduced to counter the birth stories of other divines,
whilst capturing the quotation from Isaiah 7:14.

Its lack of credibility does much to undermine orthodox doctrine.

The Creedal Comma The Creedal Comma


Under this 'The Creedal Comma' lies the whole life of Jesus.
It is all that separates his birth and death.
It conceals his radical message under a pall of sacramental doctrine,
generated through a largely legendary account of his execution.

suffered under Pontius Pilate, suffered under Pontius Pilate,

The suffering of Jesus is often viewed as unique,
yet it was routine in those days as a prelude to execution,
a softening up, maybe.
Strangely even the existence of Pontius Pilate is contentious
as no record is found of him outside Christian sources
until a plinth was found bearing his name in 1961.
Was his existence so important in early times
that it needed to be affirmed in the Creed?
If so, why was that?

was crucified, was crucified,

The facts of the Crucifixion are lost in the legends,
trying to explain and justify the fact of failure,
for the mission of Jesus was truly ended;
only his example and message were left to inspire,
care for and guide his bewildered disciples.

died, and was buried. died, and was buried.

There was a view that Jesus never died.
This needed to be denied.
The fact of his burial seem dubious.
Surely his body would not be released to be a focus for disturbance,
even of potential rebellion.
Any sensible ruler would dump it,
leave it exposed, to be eaten by ravens, or even hide it in the local midden.
Like many such stories, the report events have little credibility,
if considered as a historical reality.

He descended into Hell. He descended into Hell.


So where is hell?
Below?
Shown by the mouth of volcanoes?
A gaping flaming void waiting for us to burn away our imperfections,
or sins; make us new, pure for God, maybe.
Why do we still affirm such concepts knowing them to be mere allegories?

On the third day, He rose again from the dead; On the third day, He rose again from the dead;


Physical resurrection bends our credulity beyond its breaking point.
This body that floats through walls with scarred hands and feet has no basis of reality.
We see the Reality of Resurrection only through the resurrection of ideas,
a realisation of truth.

He ascended into Heaven, He ascended into Heaven,

Once again, analogy is twisted and stated as fact;
affirmed despite our realisation that heaven does not lie above us in any physical universe.
The heaven that Jesus spoke of lies around us
in the realisation of God's Kingdom here,
in a higher plane of existence here,
not in some unlikely existence after expiry of our lifespan.
Yet heaven and hell remain as bulwarks of religious orthodoxy.

and sits at the right hand of God, the Father almighty; and sits at the right hand of God, the Father almighty;

The whole model of medieval divinity is that of the royal court.
Jesus ascended as the favourite of God to sit at his side,
dine at His table, share His every thought.
Surely we can discard such physical manifestations of what exists in the spiritual realm.
Surely we can discard stick and carrot theology and rethink the meaning of life,
whilst affirming the reality of spirituality.

from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.

The return of Jesus is a doctrine dearly held. Why?
It is an idea identified in the Gospel of John chapter 14.
It is an idea, a hope, bound to occur to his disciples.
Every generation has seen it as imminent, in vain.
It, and the implied threat of retributive judgement,
remains a powerful tool in priestly hands;
not to be lightly discarded.

Many strange ideas lurk behind this statement:
suspension of the dead awaiting judgement;
the whole package of end-times theory.

Can we not understand that Jesus died?
His life ended and only his spirit lived on,
his inspiration and teaching.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, I believe in the Holy Spirit,


Why separate this entity from divinity,
from the reality that is God,
immaterial and thus spirit?

For God is spirit.

In our weakness we attempt
to define the indefinable,
plumb the Mystery,
re-imagine truth
to fit our needs.

the holy Catholic Church, the holy Catholic Church,


"Holy" meaning separated or dedicated to God
"Catholic" meaning universal or all-embracing
"church" meaning a gathering, or, more often, a building
what is there here to believe?

Should the church be separated
or immersed in society, as Jesus was?
Is the church universal or parochial?
Is the church just a building, as most would see it?
the communion of saints,
the communion of saints,

We state that we see ourselves as members
a group that includes all Christians living or dead.
Yet what do we share with the ancient dead,
or even the persecuted minorities
of Muslim countries?
the forgiveness of sins,
the forgiveness of sins,
Certainly we are called to forgive sin.
This statement lies at the heart of Christianity.
Unfortunately, and perhaps unrealistically,
it is often taken as divine forgiveness
and gets intertwined with concepts
of judgement after death.
the resurrection of the body
the resurrection of the body

About which we might respond with ridicule
or ask which body as we age and decay.

.

and life everlasting.
and life everlasting.

A potent hope permeating most religions,
but realistically unrealistic.

Amen.
.


.