Recognize this, brothers: be glad, brothers, that after the triumph of Christ the prison of the saints has been broken open, and the netherworld no longer exercises any jurisdiction over the saints, since Christ penetrated all the way to the netherworld in order to free the just, not the unjust. Let us realize, brothers, how great a benefit Christ has provided, or rather, how without Christ no one possessed salvation, since, besides the wretched dissolution of their bodies, the souls, too, of the saints were being held in confinement in the underworld. - St. Peter Chrysologus, Sermon 123, par. 7
07 October 2006
Patristic Quote for the Day
Recognize this, brothers: be glad, brothers, that after the triumph of Christ the prison of the saints has been broken open, and the netherworld no longer exercises any jurisdiction over the saints, since Christ penetrated all the way to the netherworld in order to free the just, not the unjust. Let us realize, brothers, how great a benefit Christ has provided, or rather, how without Christ no one possessed salvation, since, besides the wretched dissolution of their bodies, the souls, too, of the saints were being held in confinement in the underworld. - St. Peter Chrysologus, Sermon 123, par. 7
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
May I ask a question Pastor?
In the April edition of 2001 of the Lutheran Witness, there is an article devoted to the debunking of the idea that Christ descended into hell merely to declare his victory and that the "harrowing" of hell, never occured. I think the article claimed that the OT saints were never actually in hell. This is not the first time I've heard this either. Is this typical of Lutherans (even pastors) to deny the harrowing of hell, and if so, is it part and parcel of Lutheranism and/or are these pastors teaching contrary to the Lutheran Tradition?
Thanks.
I'm sorry, that's worded really badly. That should say, the article was, "devoted to the debunking of the idea of Christ harrowing hell".
Sorry. I switched thoughts in the middle of a sentence, and caught my mistake after I posted.
Cheryl,
If you have the new Concordia, you might find the answer on page 671 under Cyril: "The soul, having obtained union with the Word, descended into hell; but using its divine power, *it said to the ones in bondage, "Go forth!"*
Compare this to Luther's Torgau sermon (cited in the Formula):
"our Lord Jesus Christ did descend into hell, battered hell open, overcame the devil, *and delivered those who were held captive by the devil.*" (par. 12)
and
"Christ has crushed hell, opened up heaven, bound and taken captive the devil, *and delivered the prisoners.*" (par. 19)
Which does it sound like Luther and the BOC agree with? I think the answer is NOT the author of those LW articles!
Why is the harrowing of hell never actually mentioned in the Confessions? It's weird how they mention the Torgau, but then never go onto talk about the harrowing of hell itself. Could that be seen as indicative that the rejected the idea?
PS. I don't yet have the new one. It's definately on my reading list.
I suspect it is not explicit because the error that the Formula was countering was the notion that the descent involved suffering. They want it to be clearly understood that his descent was not suffering, but victory and triumph. Saying that it was victory and triumph, of course, does not exlude that he "delivered the prisoners" as Luther said. Interestingly, a number of us pastors wrote a letter to the Lutheran Witness concerning that article. The Witness declined to publish it. I also wrote a letter on my own that they did not publish either. Here it is:
Dear Editors,
I was rather disappointed that both articles in the April 2001 Witness
dismissed out of hand the ancient church's preaching about the Descent
including the liberation of the patriarchs and OT believers - bringing them
from Sheol/Hades into everlasting joy. I do not see how this in anyway
contradicts the teaching of the Formula that Christ descended to hell in
triumph to crush Satan's power.
The liberation of the patriarchs and OT believers has remained a theme in
some of our hymnody - see especially "Now Glad of Heart" published by CPH.
"Who conquered death and harrowed hell and led the souls who loved Him well
all in the light of light to dwell..."
Further, the Bible passages listed as disproving the notion of liberation of
the OT saints do nothing of the sort! The first instance actually cites the
imperfect, the future: "SHALL be saved." The second instance ignores the
ending of Hebrews 12: "And all these, having obtained a good testimony
through faith, *did not receive the promise*, God having provided something
better for us, that they should not be made perfect apart from us." (vs.
38-40).
Dr. Luther's sermon on the Descent into Hell seems to leave open the ancient
notion of deliverance of the patriarchs as well: "Whether we comprehend it
with or without pictures, is an indifferent matter, as long as we don't
become heretics and this article remains intact, that our Lord Jesus Christ
did descend into hell, battered hell open, overcame the devil, and
*delivered those who were held captive by the devil.*" The House Postils,
Vol. 1, p. 480 And again: "Christ has crushed hell, opened up heaven,
bound and taken captive the devil, and delivered the prisoners." The House
Postils, Vol. 1, p. 482.
William Weedon, Pastor
St. Paul Lutheran Church
Hamel, IL
Pr. Weedon,
It might be worth telling "the rest of the story," as Paul Harvey says. The letter you refer to was written by me, and signed by ten other LC-MS pastors--I believe you were one of the ten. It was submitted to doctrinal review by my seminary classmate and then-editor of the Lutheran Witness, David Mahsman.
It was not published, because it failed doctrinal review. In other words, the harrowing of hell is regarded by the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod as false doctrine.
Well, the REST of the story would also include the fact that numerous signatories of the letter were doctrinal reviewers themselves... It left us all scratching our heads, that's for sure, especially since we were all unaware that "letters to the editor" ever had to "pass" doctrinal review!
Should also note that the letter included above is NOT the letter written by Dr. Hogg, but one I had sent off first, I believe. I would welcome it, though, if Dr. Hogg would care to post the letter also that he drafted; if I recall correctly, the substance was the same.
The thing that disturbs me about this, is the fact it is pretty standard teaching. Not only does Scripture teach it, but doctrinally it goes all the way back to Ignatius and Polycarp for goodness gracious. For what reason does any christian have a right to deny such a teaching, except that they have succumbed to the worst form of religious and scriptural individualism imaginable? I mean if a teaching that goes all the way back to Ignatius and Polycarp, and can be demonstrated from Scripture, does not "prove" the validity of a teaching or doctrine, then no doctrine of ours is safe.
I agree with you Pastor, that the Bible verses cited in the article do not disprove anything. Save for one or two, I couldn't even see how they really applied to the topic at hand.
I have been a Lutheran since infancy and have never heard this teaching. Are you saying that the believers of the Old Testament went to hell until Christ descended into hell to free them?
Several weeks ago, waiting for my son at confirmation class, I heard my pastor say that the OT believers went to heaven when they died (son confirmed that I heard correctly). I don't have the writings of Ignatius or Polycarp handy and don't own the BOC (it's been on order almost a year and still waiting... sigh), so could you point me to some scriptures that teach this? I saw the ones you listed that are supposed to refute this teaching, but are there others?
One more question, if I may. How important is it for Christians to know this teaching. In other words, would it be important for me to tell my son? Do I talk to my pastor? or just leave it alone?
crnkxDiana,
I am not surprised at your not having heard it. It's there in Luther and in the Catalog of Testimonies appended to the BOC, but if you didn't know that that was what they were talking about, you'd just overlook it.
The difficulty is with the word "hell" - this doctrine thinks in terms of Sheol as a two chambered "place." Think Lazarus and the Rich Man. Both are in Hades, but one is in torment in Hades and the other is being comforted, but awaiting the "more" that will come with the Resurrection of our Lord.
As to whether the OT saints had gone to "heaven", well, think of our Lord's own words in John 3:13 and ponder its meaning. The teaching of the Church about the rescue of the Old Testament faithful means that Christ has emptied out the "comforted" part of Sheol or Hades and brought those dead to eternal life and thus changed the nature of death for the righteous forever!
Another passage this illumines quite a bit is Matthew 27:52,53. When was the last time you heard THAT text preached on or even mentioned? But the Lutheran dogmatician, Johann Gerhard, says of it: "These saints without a doubt were certain of the patriarchs and prophets who had been buried in the area. They arose together with Christ to show that His resurrection had won resurrection to eternal life for believers. They were also, without a doubt, in the Lord Christ's train as He triumphantly ascended to heaven. This opening of the graves after Christ's death indeed proceeded in some measure from the shaking and ripping apart of the earth; yet it still was a special miracle, whereby was shown that the opening up of our graves and our resurrection to eternal life were obtained by Christ's death. For in the same manner that the graves of these very saints, who in the Old Testament had fallen asleep in true faith in the Messiah, were opened, so that after CHrist's resurrection they came forth from the grave and came into the holy city of Jerusalem, so also shall we, who from the heart believe that Christ, who died for us and rose again (I repeat) we believers shall in the same way some day also experience this." (An Explanation of the History of the Suffering and Death of our Lord Jesus Christ, p. 296)
Now, as to whether this is something to teach to your children, the way I usually approach it is to offer this as a teaching of the Church that is very ancient and seems to explain a number of difficult to understand passages from the Bible. But what the Lutheran Symbols teach of this is the paramount thing: Christ in His descent entered in victory, snatched the keys of hell and death from Satan, and proclaimed His triumph - He did not go to hell to suffer in any way. If your son asks about some of the more difficult passages that this doctrine can help explain, I'd sure explain to him that this is what the ancient and medieval church taught about these matters.
Hope that helps! - Weedon
With respect, Pr. Weedon:
What do you do with the fact that this teaching was rejected as false by the LCMS doctrinal review process? Are you going to revisit that matter? Or doesn't this issue rise to a level of importance? Or doesn't the doctrinal review process matter--i.e. you can ignore it? Or is there some other rationale for not appealing, yet continuing to teach this? It must be a tough knot for you.
Dear Fr. Gregory,
No, not a tough knot at all. The LCMS does not pretend to infallibility in her doctrinal review process and the Lutheran Witness also does not rise to the level of being Church doctrine. The Book of Concord, however, does. And it's reference to Luther's Torgau sermon for the "rest of the story" settles the matter. The fact that many Lutherans do not realize that this is part of the heritage of their Church does not call for abandonment, but for teaching - with the same patience and gentleness with which our Blessed Lord Jesus continues to deal with us.
Wish you, as always, every good thing in Jesus Christ!
Oh, one more point that might or might not be of interest. Where on earth did Weedon ever learn of this teaching? From the Orthodox? No! From the Lutherans. More specificaly at Concordia Bronxville, where one of the profs explained it and where we sang in choir: "Now Glad of Heart" - the CPH published piece (which means it went through doctrinal review!) that included the lines referenced in my letter to CPH:
Now glad of heart be everyone, the fight is fought, the day is won, the Christ is one His throne. Alleluia. Alleluia. Alleluia. Alleluia. Alleluia!
Who on the Rood was crucified and rose again as at this tide in glory to His Father's side. Alleluia...
Who conquered death *and harrowed hell and led the souls that loved Him well all in the light of light to dwell!* Alleluia...
"Now Glad of Heart" used to be (and still may be) a real favorite at Concordia Bronxville, having been composed by one of the music profs at the school - a cousin to the Aufdemberges in my parish. It rips along in 7/8 time, I believe. Great piece for flute, harpsichord and three female voices. We've done it for Easter at St. Paul's before.
Thank you Pasor Weedon. I reread Lazarus and the Rich Man and it made much more sense in light of this information. It almost seems like we are saying there was a purgatory - for lack of a better word- for OT saints.
Always a pleasure reading you blog.
Pr. Weedon, you wrote:
"No, not a tough knot at all. The LCMS does not pretend to infallibility in her doctrinal review process and the Lutheran Witness also does not rise to the level of being Church doctrine. The Book of Concord, however, does. And it's reference to Luther's Torgau sermon for the "rest of the story" settles the matter."
Rx: But the fact that something has been determined as false teaching by the LCMS doctrinal review process may not simply be ignored, may it? When I was a doctrinal reviewer, I rejected the proposed rite of baptism because it didn't have the exorcism. I was overruled, but the project didn't go forward until then.
WW: "The fact that many Lutherans do not realize that this is part of the heritage of their Church does not call for abandonment, but for teaching - with the same patience and gentleness with which our Blessed Lord Jesus continues to deal with us."
Rx: What steps, then, gentle or otherwise, have you taken and are you taking to teach the doctrinal review board of the LC-MS this part of the heritage of their church? Perhaps you could appear with Rev. Wilken on "Issues, etc." or write an article for the Lutheran Witness. It does seem there's widespread denial of this issue in the LCMS--denial that extends to the official board charged with judging doctrine.
Father Gregory,
I will take your counsel under advisement.
Pax!
Dear Diana,
Thanks for the kind comments. Yes, it does help with that story particularly. Not really a purgatory though. A place of waiting and hoping, longing for the fullness of God's promises to be fulfilled. By the way, you might also wish to check this out in light of Paul's words in Ephesians 4:8-10 - "he led a host of captives" when He ascended on high!
Pax!
Cheryl,
In answer to your question of whether it is common for this doctrine to be taught against, I can only give my personal experience.
When I was Lutheran, and went to one of the most Confessional parishes within the LCMS, one of the pastors talked about this doctrine in a bible study. His verdict: False doctrine and old superstition.
That doesn't mean that all Lutheran pastors reject it. There are a few who faithfully hold on to this, and may God keep them. But as a Synod, the LCMS has classified it as false doctrine, and it seems most of the parishes agree.
Grace and peace,
John
Post a Comment