I wonder how a translation distorted the Apostles’ Creed, which is one of the oldest prayers of the Church and still recited as a powerful summary of what we believe.
The Apostles’ Creed is one of the oldest prayers of the Church. Every Sunday, Christians stand together and recite it as a powerful summary of what we believe. But not many know that the Creed we use today is not exactly the same as the one used by the early Christians. In fact, one line—“He descended into hell”—was added later, and has become a source of confusion for many.
The earliest form of the Creed, used by Christians in Rome around the year 200, did not contain the word “hell.” It simply said that Jesus was crucified, buried, rose again on the third day, and ascended into heaven. For the first three centuries, that was enough for the faithful.
Around the late 300s, some local churches in Italy and France added the phrase “He descended to the lower regions” (Latin: descendit ad inferos). The purpose was to stress that Jesus really died like all human beings and did not only “appear” to die, as some false teachers claimed. By about the year 750, this extra phrase had spread everywhere in Western Europe and eventually entered the Creed we recite today.
In Latin, inferos simply meant “the place of the dead.” But when the Creed was translated into old English, the word hell was used, which back then also meant “the underworld” or “grave.” As English evolved, “hell” came to mean only one thing: the place of eternal punishment. So what was meant to affirm that “Jesus really died” began to sound like “Jesus went to the place of the damned”—something the Church never taught.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains that Jesus did not go to the hell of punishment but to the realm of the dead, to bring life and hope to those who had died before Him. Many Christian traditions now prefer the phrase “He descended to the dead” because it expresses the truth without confusion.
The Creed is supposed to be a clear profession of faith. But when words change their meaning over time, they can end up creating more confusion than clarity. If people in our pews believe that Jesus entered the place of the damned, then the Creed is no longer serving its purpose. History shows that the line was added later and was never part of the original faith statement. The Church has the authority to develop expressions of belief, but such developments must not distort the meaning of what we believe.
The truth is simple: Jesus really died, just as every human dies. But He rose again, breaking the power of death forever. That is what the Creed meant to express.
To say ‘He descended to the dead’ stays true to the original faith, but to say ‘He descended into hell’ does not. History shows that the disputed line was not part of the original Creed. While the Church can refine how it expresses faith, no evolution or expansion can be accepted if it changes the very meaning and purpose of what we believe. The Creed should be a beacon of clarity, not a cause of confusion.
Mathew Rongmei
Dimapur