Though the late German Lutheran theologian, Wolfhart Pannenberg (1928-2014), is well-known for his rigorous academic style and critically-constructive approaches to doctrines and themes like theological anthropology, Christology, and the doctrine of the Trinity, his many ecumenically-sensitive writings about ecclesiology (within which he is arguably at his most conservative) are often overlooked and neglected. In the current climate of world Christianity where the early creedal confessions of the church are seen more as phenomenologically “imperial” than as theologically “orthodox” (cf. Irvin, Phan, Bantu, etc.), the contention of my paper is that Pannenberg’s insistence upon the ongoing universal relevance of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed provides helpful fodder for my own nuanced argument in favour of the 381 Creed’s continuing universal relevance in response to world Christianity’s general ambivalence not only to this particular Creed but also to Creedal Christianity as a whole. The key to my Pannenberg-inspired proposal is in recognizing the symbolic nature of the Creed in its intent to testify to the distinctiveness of the Christian faith while not confusing the symbol with the distinctiveness itself. This creates room for a sincere valuing of the Creed even while recognizing its historical contingencies unto a charitable encouragement of the Creed’s universal adoption in a way that is freely chosen rather than in a manner that is rigidly imperialist. Along the way, I draw not only from Pannenberg’s engagement with this question through his involvement in the WCC’s Faith and Order dialogues surrounding Baptism, Eucharist, and Ministry (Lima 1982) but also his role in the crafting of Confessing the One Faith: An Ecumenical Explication of the Apostolic Faith as it is Confessed in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (381) (1987, 1999). Pannenberg’s own writings on this topic include not only the third volume of his magnum opus Systematische Theologie (1993, Eng trans. 1998), but also his occasional writings as collected in Ethik und Ekklesiologie (1977), volume three of his Beiträge zur Systematischen Theologie (2000), as well as other sources (e.g., his journal article, “Foundation Documents of the Faith XI. The Place of Creeds in Christianity Today,” The Expository Times 91:11 [1980], 328-32). My argument also takes into account the secondary literature surrounding Pannenberg’s ecumenical ecclesiology and his position on this particular issue (e.g., Apsel, Grenz, Neuhaus, Nüssel, Tanner, Wainwright, Wen, Wenz, Zeuch, etc.).