Descending into Hell

I received an interesting couple of questions from one of my church members today.  Since I took some time to answer them, and since the questions were good ones, I thought you all might be interested, also.  

The Questions

I’ve noticed that the Apostles Creed contains the text “he descended into hell” while the Nicene Creed does not. In my ventures into the web to look for some information, I’ve become bogged down and rather lost.

Could you either point me in a good direction OR explain (briefly) my queries:

1. Why is this phrase not in both? Especially since we use both in our church.
2. What is the Scriptural grounds for this statement?

My Answer

The Nicene and Apostles' Creed arose in an interesting way.  The earliest version of the Apostles' Creed is commonly called "the Roman Symbol."  It came into being as a statement to be used with baptism in the 2nd century A.D.  The purpose of it was this: when you are baptized into the name of the "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit," we should say a bit more about that God.  What do we mean when we use those words?  What "Father, Son, and Spirit" are we talking about, specifically?  So, the Roman Symbol clarified the God honored in baptism, and the faith into which the person was baptized.  It was used, as far as we can tell, exclusively by the churches in and around Italy.  

Here is a text of the Roman Symbol:

I believe in God the Father almighty;

and in Christ Jesus His only Son, our Lord,

Who was born from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary,

Who under Pontius Pilate was crucified and buried,

on the third day rose again from the dead,

ascended to heaven,

sits at the right hand of the Father,

whence He will come to judge the living and the dead;

and in the Holy Spirit,

the holy Church,

the remission of sins,

the resurrection of the flesh

(the life everlasting).

When the Nicene Creed was written, and later revised by the Council of Constantinople, the form of it was based in part on the Roman Symbol.  However, this Creed has an entirely different purpose.  It is used to define the God worshiped in the Church generally, and especially in the Eucharist.  Also, it was a Creed for all parts of the Christian world, not just Italy .  The Nicene Creed further focuses on the person and work of Christ and his relationship with the Father.  That was the major subject of the Council of Nicaea, whence comes the Creed. 

The Apostles' Creed was a 5th century revision of the Roman Symbol.  Once again, it was used primarily at baptism for the same purpose.  Also, it has only been used in the Latin speaking church.  It was influenced both by the Roman Symbol and by the Nicene Creed. 

The decent into hell was added in the 5th century, and is usually considered a very minor point of doctrine by the universal Church.  It is not in Nicene Creed, I suppose, because no one thought it was important enough to put in there, or maybe it didn't even come up in conversation.  It certainly wasn't being argued about.

However, in baptism it does have a part to play.  It comes from 1 Peter 3:19 in which Christ is said to have died and then proclaimed the Gospel to the spirits in prison.  Peter then goes on to link this proclamation to "baptism which now saves you" (1 Peter 3:21, but please look at all the verses around this to see the context).  So this part of Christ's story is linked directly to baptism in the Bible, and then therefore to the creed said at baptism. 

In more modern translations of the Apostles' Creed, we say "descended to the dead."  The original text can be read as "place of the dead" as easily as it can be read "hell," and hell is a more doubtful interpretation of Peter's "spirits in prison," but that is a whole other topic.

Today, Anglicans use the Apostles' Creed at Baptism and as part of the Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer liturgies.  The Nicene Creed is used at Eucharist, unless we are also baptizing on Sunday morning.  If we baptize, we use the Apostles' Creed as part of that portion of the liturgy and leave out the Nicene Creed for that day.  

One Minute Review: Surrogates

The One Minute Review of Bruce Willis' film "Surrogates" is now available.  You can watch it below, or on YouTube or Vimeo. 


One Minute Review: Surrogates from Thomas McKenzie on Vimeo.


http://www.vimeo.com/6800776

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL3zR_4boPQ

Silence and Betrayal

At our church, we are engaged in something called "The Jesus Story Year" (www.JesusStoryYear.com)  Yesterday, the story of Christ was based in the tale of Joseph and his brothers from the last several chapters of the Book of Genesis. 

I focused on the idea of betrayal.  Judah betrays his brother Joseph, Judas and Peter betray Christ, inevitably I betray Christ.  Not a happy topic, and also one that I was having a hard time with as far as figuring out how to communicate it.  How could I talk about the reality of betrayal, but also the truth of Christ's amazing love even to his betrayers?

Then on Saturday night (when all the parts of my sermon, which I have been playing with all week, usually come together) I was in my office praying when suddenly I thought of Silence.  Silence is a novel by Shusaku Endo, and one of my favorite works of fiction.  I have not read it in many years, but I will never forget the climatic scene.

I'm sitting at my desk and I think "I wonder if I could refer to Silence in this sermon?"  Then I wonder where my copy is.  I stand up, and without hesitation I walk to one of my six book cases and my hand goes directly to the book.  I felt that God was guiding me to this particular story.

I read from the book during the sermon, and you can listen to the sermon for yourself if you want to judge the effectiveness of it.  In any case, I do want to recommend this fantastic book.  Yes, I spoil the climax in my sermon.  But I think the book is well worth reading, and I don't feel that many readers will be surprised by the ending in any case. 

So, check out Shusaku Endo's Silence, preferably at your local bookstore, but also at Amazon.com. 

Liturgy Podcast One

Last night I started a new Wednesday night program. It's called "Behind the Curtain, why we worship this way." A lot more people showed up than I expected. So that was cool. 

I came into this session with a desire to just go with the flow and see what people were interested in. That's what we did. However, I didn't feel all that great about how it went.  See what you think.

Here is a link to the church teaching podcast, where you can listen to it. The episode is called Behind the Curtain ONE. If you use iTunes, I recommend subscribing to both of our church podcasts, the sermon one and the teaching one. Just search "redeemercast" in the iTunes store.

Thanks.


Subscribe Free
Add to my Page

North or be Eaten, the Review

Andrew Peterson, friend of the blog, has just put out his newest book "North or be Eaten." To order one, go here.

Here on iHajj, aka ThomasMcKenzie.com, we asked the toughest critic we know to give us her thoughts. Friend of mine or not, we knew this would be a hard hitting review. Here it is, unedited and uncut.


Review: North Or Be Eaten from Thomas McKenzie on Vimeo.
If you are reading this on facebook, that's cool. But you aren't getting the entire iHajj experience. Go to www.thomasmckenzie.com for the whole blog, or view the video alone at www.vimeo.com/6713260

Here is some more actual information about Andrew and his new book.

About the book:

Janner, Tink, and Leeli Igiby thought they were normal children with normal lives and a normal past. But now they know they’re really the Lost Jewels of Anniera, heirs to a legendary kingdom across the sea, and suddenly everyone wants to kill them.

Their escape brings readers to the very brink of Fingap Falls, over the Stony Mountains, and across the Ice Prairies, while villains galore try to stop the Igibys permanently. Fearsome toothy cows and horned hounds return, along with new dangers: a mad man running a fork factory, a den of rockroaches, and majestic talking sea dragons.

Andrew Peterson’s lovable characters create what FantasyBookCritic.com says made Book One “one of the best fantasy novels in a very long time,” and Book Two contains even more thrills, exploring “themes universal in nature, ranging from the classic good versus evil, to the importance of family, and burdens of responsibility.”

About Andrew:

Andrew Peterson is the author of On the Edge of the Dark Sea of Darkness, Book One in the Wingfeather Saga, and The Ballad of Matthew’s Begats. He’s also the critically-acclaimed singer-songwriter and recording artist of ten albums, including Resurrection Letters II. He and his wife, Jamie, live with their two sons and one daughter in a little house they call The Warren near Nashville , Tennessee . Visit his websites: www.andrew-peterson.com and www.rabbitroom.com

Technorati Tags North or be Eaten Review

Behind the Curtain

I’m standing in the our sanctuary after worship.  I’m still wearing my white robes and and my giant silk poncho.  I’ve been greeting people as they leave, and those who are left in the room are bunched in little groups.  As I walk up the aisle, I come to a young married couple.  This is their third visit.  



The man looks at me and says “so, do you do this every Sunday?”  His wife seems embarrassed, but I don’t know why.  “Do what?” I ask him.  “You know, all this?”  He waves a hand around the room.  His other hand is in the tight grip of his wife.  She says to him in that strained, sort-of-whispering voice “I told you that they do.”

I smile and say, “well, things change with the seasons of the church year, but, yes, basically we do this every Sunday.”  

This thing that he was speaking of, this thing we do every Sunday, is something we call “liturgy,” or “liturgical worship.”

Of course, every church has liturgy.  That is, every church basically does the same thing every Sunday.  There is a pattern, a particular space, a certain way of incorporating music, a way of handling preaching or praying or taking the offering.  Even when there are variations, liturgy tends to triumph.

At Redeemer our liturgy is important to us.  We are conscious of it, perhaps more so than many other churches in our part of the country.  This comes from our Anglican way of being Christian.



Over the years, many people have asked me to sit them down and explain all that we do.  They want to know why we do this thing with our hands, or why this object is moved at this moment, or why the service has this particular element.  I try to answer their questions in a succinct way, and if they keep asking I might refer them to a book.



There is part of me that doesn’t want to answer their questions.  I feel a bit like the salesman towards the end of the “Wizard of Oz.”  He’s pulling the gears that make the mighty apparition speak while the fire and smoke billow forth.  When the veil covering him is pulled back, the great and powerful Oz says “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.”

I’m a bit like the man behind the curtain.  There is a certain amount of mystery to liturgy, and I think that this mystery adds to the experience of the sacred.  However, unlike Oz our God is real.  We do not need to pretend that he is present with us, nor do we need to manipulate those who would come to worship him.

In that spirit, I am leading a series of conversations beginning this Wednesday night.  I call this “Behind the Curtain: why we worship the way we do.”  I’m going to talk about the structure and purpose of our liturgy.  I’m also going to literally (and I always use the word “literally” literally) walk folks step by step through the liturgy, commenting on every aspect that is of interest to those present.  I see this as an interactive learning opportunity.  I hope it satisfies the curious, but more importantly I hope that it adds to the depth and meaning of our worship.

Everyone is invited on Wednesdays.

We will have Evening Prayer in the chapel beginning at 6:30, followed by Behind the Curtain from 7:00 until 8:00 p.m.  We will do this series for as many weeks as it is interesting and helpful.  I will do my best to make an audio recording for our teaching podcast, but this is the sort of thing that will be much better appreceiated by those in actual attendance.  Childcare is available, though this may be something that older children might enjoy as well.  



Church of the Redeemer is located at 920 Caldwell Lane, Nashville, 37204.   The website is www.RedeemerNashville.net, and join us on facebook at www.facebook.com/redeemernashville 

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs

I went with my girls to see "Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs." They have been dying to see it since they first saw the trailer.

First off, this film has nothing to do with the book. So put those expectations away. That said, I enjoyed this movie a good deal, laughing out loud many times. For the kids, it is upbeat, funny, and has a positive message. For the adults, there are lots of gags and references to other movies. I would compare it to Kung Fu Panda in that way. This is no Up or Wall-E, but I can't imagine you won't have a good time if you see it.

I saw it in 3-D, which was added a layer of fun and excitement to the whole thing. There are parts that may be scary for little ones, but my children, and all those around me, seemed to love it. The 10 year old boys who were with us said they didn't like it, and would have preferred more violence. To each his own.

Though I liked the film, I have nothing positive to say about the way the Green Hills Cinema handled us today. But, that will make for its own letter to the manager.

One Minute Review: The Informant!

My review of Soderberg's newest film, starring his buddy Matt Damon. Check it out below, or at Vimeo or via audio only on my podcast.



Technorati Tags The Informant! review

One Minute Review: 9

The One Minute Review of 9 is now available through YouTube and (shortly) Vimeo. Watch it below, or check it out at YouTube.com/fisher4x



Technorati Tags 9 review

Church Is No Place For A Child (?)

 

I saw this photo, and this accompanying story, on the Tennessean's website today.  It is a sign at the entrance to a local church sanctuary which reads "no children under 2 years of age allowed in the sanctuary."

I have not the slightest interest in talking about this specific church.  I could imagine this sign in any number of large, evangelical churches.  Instead, to me this highlights (through contrast) the way that my Christian tradition understands the place of children.

The pastor of this Evangelical church said, "there is nothing in adult service for the 1-year-old or the 2 years.  It is not an age-appropriate ministry. And obviously little children distract a parent from paying attention in a service."

At our church, we have a children's program during part of the service. That program ends in time for children to come in for communion (a weekly occurrence). We also have nursery/young child care available for kids 3 and under.  If parents wish to have their infants in our nursery, that is totally fine.  We also have some parents who keep their little ones with them in the service.

I understand placing your little ones in the capable hands of our nursery workers.  It allows you to focus on worship without having to manage a baby.  Also, babies can annoy those around you.  This is especially true if they are crying and the parents don't take them out of the service to calm them.  A few cries or yelps, however, don't seem to bother most people.

I go to the movies quite a bit.  The idea of preventing children under the age of 2 from going into a movie theater appeals to me for practical reasons.  Little ones, in my opinion, shouldn't be exposed to that sort of media (for many reasons).  Also, crying babies bother the heck out of me in movies.  Personally, I think that movie theaters should have child care available and force parents to use it for certain films.  It makes me sick to see 4 year olds in rated R movies.

But a movie theater is not a sanctuary, and the Church shouldn't do things simply for "practical" reasons.  A movie theater is designed to entertain.  One hopes that a church service has little or nothing to do with entertainment.  Rather, we gather to worship the Living God.

When the pastor says that there is "nothing in the adult service" for these little ones, he is leaving out many things.  The largest of these is the Holy Spirit himself.  Yes, God is present everywhere all the time.  But God's presence is especially known when his people gather to worship him.

This may be theological difference between us Anglicans and American Evangelicals.  Perhaps someone out there will weigh in on that.  But it seems to me that being part of the Body of Christ in worship, even if you have no understanding of what is happening, is a good thing.  It is good for the baby's soul, it is good for the bond in the family, it is good for the rest of the church to be with them.  It is good for adults to sometimes be bothered, to sometimes not get their way (both the parents and those around them).  It is good for other members to see the family together, to know them as a family, and to love them as a unit and not simply as individuals.

In most Anglican churches, baptism is the entrance to full membership in the Church.  Given that we baptize babies, why would we exclude full members from our worship services?  The baptism of infants, and the inclusion of them in worship, is an image of God's grace to all of us.  Why would we want to avoid seeing that in real life?

In our tradition, we believe that worship centers on Word and Sacrament.  If the Bible is the Word of God, it seems to me that hearing God's Word read aloud is good for the soul; even if you don't understand what is being said.  How many adults don't understand everything that is being said on Sundays?  Most of us!  But God still uses his word to penetrate our hearts.  Are we so sure that he doesn't do this with little children?

In our service, we offer the Sacrament of Communion to all baptized Christians.  The smallest of our children may receive the Sacrament.  I would not deny the Body and Blood to a Christian simply on the basis of their age.

Finally, I don't believe in the exclusion of small children from worship because of the example and command of Christ himself.  When his disciples wanted to get rid of those pesky kids, Christ responded "Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these." (Matthew 19:14)  

Those who display the Kingdom of Heaven to us should not be excluded from the gathering of the Body in worship.  That just seems to me to be simple, biblical truth. 

Mike's Gay Friend

Mike (not his real name) sent me an e-mail recently. Mike is a young guy who is a strong Christian. A fellow Christian friend of his just told Mike that he is gay. Mike wrote me for help. He wants to tell his friend that he is outside of God's will, and at the same time he wants to love him. His friend has been trying to make his feelings go away, but now has accepted that this is just how God made him. I took some time composing a letter to send Mike, and thought it would be beneficial to post here.

Dear Mike,

You find yourself in a difficult place. You have a friend whom you want to love, but with whom you have a disagreement about a very personal and sensitive issue.

In my opinion, the Church makes three mistakes in dealing with a self-identified homosexual person. The first is to reject that person completely, to condemn them and drive them out. I have never seen this done in my lifetime, but I have certainly heard of it.

The second mistake is to accept and celebrate their lifestyle. This is a mistake because homosexual behavior is utterly condemned by scripture, with no exceptions or wiggle room. This is not a debatable point. Christian theologians who accept homosexual behavior have to, when push comes to shove, either admit that this is true or flat-out lie about what scripture says. As I have heard said, and have repeated myself, "Christian homosexuality is a reality in search of a theology." There just isn't an orthodox Christian theology that supports this behavior.

The third mistake is to tell people to change the way they feel. It is a mistake to tell people that they can be, or should be, free of their homosexual feelings. The reality is that people who have homosexual desires are probably never going to feel otherwise. Is it possible that God would deliver them? Absolutely, "with God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:26) He might do a special act of grace. However, as anyone who has ever been around alcoholism (for instance) can tell you, for every one person that God miraculously delivers from the desire to drink there are tens of thousands of recovering alcoholics for whom the desire to drink is a daily struggle.  For every one person whom God truly, miraculously delivers from same-sex attraction there are many, many more for whom this is an on-going struggle.  

The likelihood is that your friend will always be sexually attracted to people of his own gender. However, this does not mean he has to act on those feelings. I, and you, and most Christians, have strong desires and feelings that we do not act on because we love the Lord and want to walk in his ways. Overcoming his feelings is unlikely. Acting in a Christian manner with his sex life is, by God's grace, up to him. The fact that he has homosexual feelings in no way indicates that those feelings are godly or good, any more than anyone's feelings are necessarily good for them.

Not that you asked, but let's talk about his faith for a moment. Living in unrepentant sin is bad for the spiritual life. Teaching others to live in unrepentant sin (as some leaders in other denominations are now doing) is very dark. That said, it is my belief that "if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." (Romans 10:9) I was once involved in a conversation, on a street corner unfortunately, with a gay activist. He told me that I believed he was going to burn in hell because he was gay. I responded, "I don't believe that you are going to burn in hell because you are gay. I believe that you are in danger of hell if you reject Christ." (John 12:44-50)

My advice is to love your friend as you love yourself, to be a compassionate friend to him. Remember that sexuality is an important part of the human person, and it is a very personal thing to talk with someone about. If God gives you an opportunity to talk about your views, then do so. Make your thoughts clear, but remember that you are speaking to someone for whom Christ died. You are not the judge, but you still may be called upon to give a warning (Ezekiel 3:17ff seems apt to me).

May the Lord be with you as you walk out the Gospel.

Thomas+

14 Years

14 Years ago I married the greatest woman in the world.

Happy Anniversary, honey. I love you.

--Thomas

An Invitation to say "Thank You"

My friend Mark Smeby has a great website on which he gives folks the chance to say "thank you." It's called www.howdoyousaythankyou.com There are some examples of folks on the site saying "thank you" through short videos, and an invitation for you to post your own thanksgivings.

Mark asked me to participate several months back, and I was happy to do so. The video he and Chris made of me can be found here or embedded below.

I'm thankful to these guys for making this opportunity available for me, and others. Check it out.

Glee: Check it out

OK, I just watched the pilot episode of Glee on Hulu.com. If this episode is any indication, this is the show to watch this season. Set your TiVo now.

One Minute Review: Extract

I saw Mike Judge's latest creation, "Extract." Here is my review. You can also see it at youtube.com/fisher4x

One Minute Review: Extract from Thomas McKenzie on Vimeo.