Gibson on Article III: Of the going down of Christ into Hell

In the Confession of Augsburg there was merely a single clause on the descent into hell in the article, De Filio Dei, ” Item, descendit ad inferos.” Our own article, as it now stands, is considerably shorter than the corresponding one in the series of 1553. As originally drawn up by Cranmer it went more fully into the explanation of what was meant by the descent into hell, and contained these words: “Nam corpus usque ad resurrectionem in sepulchro jacuit, spiritus ab illo emissus, cum spiritibus qui in carcere sive in inferno detinebantur, fuit, illisque praedicavit, quemadmodem testatur Petri locus. At suo ad inferos descensu nullos a carceribus aut tormentis liberavit Christus Dominus.” In this form the article was signed by the six royal chaplains, but prior to publication the last clause (At suo … Dominus) was omitted, and the article, as published in 1553, stands in the English copy as follows: —

” As Christ died, and was buried for us : so also it is to be believed that He went down into hell. For the body lay in the sepulchre until the resurrection : but His ghost departing from Him was with the ghosts that were in prison or in hell, and did preach to the same, as the place of St. Peter doth testify.”

Wii|«i

At the revision in Elizabeth’s reign the bishops in Convocation struck out the last clause which refers to St. Peter’s language,^ and the article was thus brought into its present form, in which it simply states the fad of the descent, but attempts no explanation of it, and brings forward no scriptural proof of it. The reason for the alteration is probably to be sought for in the controversies which were agitating the country at the time. The subject is one which has always had a special attraction for many minds, and in the sixteenth century there were many and various theories held concernins it ; and the violent controversies which had been raised in some parts of the country are quite sufiBcient to account for the excision of the allusion to S. Peter’s language. The following extract from a paper of Bishop Alley of Exeter, drawn up in preparation for the Convocation of 1553, admirably illustrates the wisdom of the Elizabethan divines in their treatment of this article :

” First, for matters of Scripture, namely, for this place which is written in the Epistle of S. Peter, that Christ in Spirit went doivn to Hell, and preached to the souls that were in Prison. There have been in my diocese great invectives between the preachers, one against the other, and also partakers with them ; some holding that the going down of Christ, His soul to Hell, was nothing else but the virtue and strength of Christ, His death, to be made manifest and known to them that were dead before. Others say that Desandit ad inferna is nothing else but that Christ did sustain upon the

^ The clause was untouched by Parker in his preliminary revision, and is therefore found in the MS. which the archbishop submitted to the bishops (now in the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge). It is, however, marked in this for excision, a line being drawn through it with the archbishop’s red i^encil.

cross the infernal pains of hell, when He called Pater, quare me dereliquisti, i.e. Father, why hast Thou forsaken nu? Finally, others preach that this article is not contained in other symbols, neither in the symbol of Cyprian, or rather Bufine. And all these sayings they grouDd upon Erasmus and the Germans, and especially upon the authority of Mr. Calvin and Mr. Bullinger, The contrary side bring for them the universal consent, and all the Fathers of both churches, both of the Greeks and the Latines. For of the Latine Fathers, they bring in S. Aitstin, S. Ambrose, S. Jerom, Gregory the Great, Cassiodore, Sedulius, Virgilius, Primasius, Leo, with others, as it may appear in the places by them alledged. Of the Greek Fathers, they alledge Chrysostom, Eusebius, Emissenus, Damascen, Basil the Great, Gregory Nyssen, Epiphanius, Athanasius, with others. Which all, both Latines and Grecians, do plainly affirm, Quod anima Christi fuit vere per se in inferno, i.e, that the soul of Christ was truly of itself in hell ; which they all with one universal consent have assertively written from time to time, by the space of 1100 years, not one of them varying from another.

” Thus, my Right Honourable good Lords, your wisdoms may perceive what tragedies and dissensions may arise for consenting to, or dissenting from this article. Wherefore, your grave, wise, and godly learning might do well and charitably, to set some certainty concerning this doctrine; and chiefly because all dissensions, contentions, and strifes may be removed from the godly affected preachers.” ^

» Strype’s Annals, vol. i. p. 348. At an earlier date the subject was causmg trouble, for in May 1550 Micronius writes to BuUinger, and tells him that “they are disputing about the descent of Christ into hell” {Original Letters, vol. ii. p. 561). It is also worth noticing that among Parker’s books there exists a volume with the following title, A Treatise concerning the immediate Going to Heaven of the souls of the faithful II

! \1

We shall probably not be far wrong if we attribute to this appeal from the Bishop of Exeter the alteration introduced into the article.^

Three subjects require to be considered in connection with this article.

1. The meaning of the word Hell.

fathers lefore Christ; and that Christ did not descend irUo Hell, by Christopher Carlile. Appended to this is a memorandum : “This book exhibited and delivered the 20th day of August 1563, to the most Reverend Father in God, the Lord Matthu, Archbishop of Cant., by nie, Thomas Tailor, etc. … the doctrine whereof I neither allow nor approve.” See Hook’s Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury ,

vol. ix. p. 510.

Was the dispute, referred to by Micronius, caused by Bishop Hooper’s Brief and Clear Confession of the Christian Faith, which was published in the year 1550 ? The following extraordinary passage may well have «iven rise to any amount of discussion : — ” I believe also that while He was upon the said cross dying, and giving up His spirit unto God His Father, He descended into hell ; that is to say, He did verily taste and feel the great distress and heaviness of death, and likewise the pains and torments of hell, that is to say, the great wrath and severe judgment of God upon Him, even as if God had utterly forsaken Him, yea, as though God had been His extreme enemy ; so that He was constrained with loud voice to cry, ’ My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me ? ’ This is simply my understanding of Christ, His descending into hell. And besides, I know well that this article hath not from the beginning been in the creed, and that many others have otherwise both understanded and interpreted it ; which esteem that Christ verily and indeed descended into hell, to the place of the damned, alleging the text of S. Peter ; the which I confess is yet covered and hid from me. The Lord vouchsafe to open the gate unto us, and to give us an entrance into such mysteries.” — Later Writings of Bishop Hooper (P.S.), p. 30.

^ Even so the article remained a subject of bitter controversy in some quarters. See Strype’s Parker , bk. iii. ch. xviii. , where there is a notice of a controversy which arose at Cambridge in 1567, “what the tnie sense of Christ’s descent into hell was ; whether it were a local descent, as it was then commonly taken, or to be understood in some other meaning. This dispute was managed \nth so much heat, that it came to the secretary, who was that universities’ Chancellor. And he sent unto the archbishop for his advice in this matter ; who gave him his thoughts for the better stilling, and composing this difference. But what that was, I find not.”

2. The scriptural grounds for the doctrine, and the object of the descent.

3. The history of the doctrine in the Church and of the clause in the creed referring to it.

I. The Meaning of the word Hell. The word used in the Latin of the article is In/en, which is also used in the Athanasian Creed, and in most’ of the later copies of the Apostles’ Greed. The older ones usually have Inferm a few the singular Infemwm The difference in meaning is but slight. If the distinction of genders is to be pressed, we should have to say that while the neuter referred only to the place, the masculine was suggestive of the persons to whom He descended • and we actually find that in an Anglo-Saxon Psalter the clause 18 rendered, ” He nither astah to hel-warum ” — i.e. to the inhabitants of hell. But it is not clear that any such distinction is intended to be drawn, for the words In/eri, In/emvs, and In/enia are apparently used mdiscrimmately in the Vulgate, as the equivalents of the Hebrew Sheol (At(f) and the Greek Hades ftS,,?) while they are never used to represent Gehenna or the place of torment. In order, therefore, to see the meaning of the word Hell in this article it is neceary to examine the belief of the Hebrews concerning the invisible world. Sheol occurs more than sixty times in the Old Testament, being in almost every instance rendered in the LXX. by “AiBv. The word Itself IS a ” neutral ” word.” meaning the under-world or state of the departed in general— the ” meeting-place for

•So the Creed of Aquileia as given by Eufinus. There is some evince that this was also the original reading in the AthlniiTn

I […] Venantius Fortunatos. ’ Lambeth Library, No. 427, of the ninth century

The word V is softened from W, a root meaning to be hollow

all living (Job xxx. 23), where were the souls of the righteous, Jacob (Gen. xxxviL 35), Samuel (1 Sam. xxviii. 15), David (2 Sam. xii. 23), as well as tyrants such as the King of Babylon (Isa. xiii. 9). In course of time, as Jewish belief developed, and the hope of a future life became clearer, it was recognised that there was a difference in the condition of the souls of the departed in the under-world, though there are but the faintest traces of this in the canonical books of the Old Testament. Our ” main pre-Christian authority ” for the belief of the Jews, shortly before the days of our Lord’s ministry, is the Book of Enoch, dating from the first and second centuries, b.c. In this we read of a vision shown to Enoch by an angel, who showed him ” beautiful places intended for this, that upon these may be assembled the spirits, the souls of the dead.” These are the resting-places of the souls of the just, and elsewhere we read of a Garden of Righteousness and Garden of Life,’ which ” appears to be the prototype of what was afterwards known as the Garden of Eden, or Paradise,” though its ” relation to the abodes just described is not distinctly indicated.” * Enoch is also shown other places not far from the abodes of the righteous, where the souls of the wicked are separated in great affliction until the great day of judgment. While later on he is granted a vision of a ” cursed valley ” which ” is for those who will be cursed to eternity,” namely, the valley of Hinnom, better known in this connection in the Graecised form of the word, Gehenna ( = Dan X3).7

^ hSHV is not actually mentioned in this passage, but Josephus definitely speaks of At^iys as the place from which the soul of Samuel was evoked. —ArUiq. VI. xiv. § 2.

2 Book of Enoch, ch. xxii. ’ Ch. xxxii. Ix. Ixi. IxxviL

’ Ch. xxii. ” Ch. xxvii.

■^ oVan’i is used frequently in the Targums and the Talmud, e.g. Pirqc

Sheol, then, according to the belief of the Jews, is the place where the souls of the departed await their final judgment, and is divided into two parts, in one of which are the souls of the faithful in peace and rest, in the other the souls of sinners, already in torment, though apparently not yet in Gehenna. And this is the belief which seems to have the direct sanction of the New Testament. Thus our Lord promises to the penitent thief that he shall be with Him ” to-day in Paradise ” ( = the garden of Eden, S. Luke xxiii. 43) ; and in the parable of Dives and Lazarus, Lazarus is carried by the angels to ” Abraham’s bosom,” seemingly another name for Paradise,^ while Dives is described as being “in Hades,” and “in torments” (S. Luke xvi. 22, 23). To Sheol or Hades, then, the English word Hell ^ in this article corresponds, and like the Hebrew word it is a “neutral” term, in itself conveying no notion of the condition of the spirits detained in it, whether it be one of blessedness or the reverse. Both the Greek and Latin terms. Hades and Inferi, are entirely free from the associations which have unfortunately grown up round our English word Hell, owing to the unfortunate accident that it has been adopted as the translation for Gehenna ^

Aboth V. 29, where jiy || also occurs. See Schurer, Jewish People in tlie Time 0/ Christ, div. ii. vol. ii. p. 183.

^ See Lightfoot, Horoi Hebraiccs, on S. Luke xvi., where instances are quoted of the use of this term by Jewish writers.

^ Hell is in the Authorised Version used as the translation of yicvva in S. Matt. V. 22, 29, 30, x. 28, xviii. 9, xxiii. 15, 33, S. Mark ix. 43, 45, 47 ; S. Luke xii. 5 ; S. James iii. 6. It represents “Aid-n^ in S. Matt, xi. 23, xvi. 18 ; S. Luke x. 15, xvi. 23 ; Acts ii. 27, 31 ; 1 Cor. xv. 55 ; Rev. i. 18, iii. 7, vi. 8, xx. 13, 14.

as well as Hades, and thus denotes definitely the place of torments, as well as the intermediate state.

II. The Scriptural Grounds for the Doctrine and the Object

of the Descent,

The passages of Scripture which require to be considered in connection with the subject of our Lord’s descent into hell are four in number: (a) St. Luke xxiii. 43 ; {h) Acts ii. 24-31, including the quotation of Ps. xvi. 10 ; (c) Eph. iv. 9 ; and (d) 1 Pet. iii. 18, iv. 6.

(a) St. Luke xxiii. 43. This verse gives us our Lord’s promise to the penitent thief, ” Verily, I say unto thee. To-day shalt thou be with Me in paradise.” The words assume and sanction the current belief that Paradise, or the Garden of Eden, was the part of that unseen region to which the name of Sheol was given, in which the souls of the faithful departed were preserved. And thus the passage appeals to us with the weight of a direct statement from our Lord Himself that after His death He would pass into the region of departed souls, i.e. would “descend into hell.”

It would seem, then, that on scriptural grounds, and apart from all historical considerations, we are justified in referring to these words in connection with the descent into hell. But it does not appear that they were ever appealed to by the Fathers as proof or illustration of the fact of the descent, and those who first inserted the article into the creed can hardly be supposed to have had in view the promise to the penitent thief. Although it would seem that Jewish belief inclined to the inclusion of Paradise in Sheol, or Hades, yet some of the Christian Fathers, as Tertullian,^ expressly distinguish between the

^ Tertullian {Dt Anima, 55) mentions a treatise that lie had written, De Paradisoy in which he says that he had proved “omnem aniuiani apud inferos sequestrari in diem Domini.” He carefully distinguishes between

two ; and the general opinion among them, to which the article in the creed must have been intended to give expression, most certainly was that Christ descended into some region which they never speak of as Paradise, where were the souls of the faithful who had died under the Old Covenant, that He announced to them the accomplishment of His work of redemption, and then transferred them to Paradise. Something more will have to be said on this subject later on. For the present we pass on to the consideration of the next passage of Scripture alleged as proof of the doctrine.

(h) Acts ii. 24—31. In these verses S. Peter quotes and applies the language of David in Psalm xvi. : ” I beheld the Lord always before my face, for He is on my right hand, that I should not be moved : Therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced ; moreover my flesh also shall dwell in hope : because Thou wilt not

Paradise and Inferi, holding that the martyrs, and they alone, go direct to Paradise. All others, including the souls of the faithful generally, arc apud inferos. But this region is divided into two jiarts, ** Sinus Abrahic” (which is thus distinguished from Paradise), and the place assigned to the wicked. The patriarchs and prophets were apiid in/eroSf and to them Christ descended to make them coinpotes sui, Cf. Adv. Mareion. iv. 34. In Apol. 47, Paradise is the place of heavenly bliss, appointed to receive the spirits of the saints, apparently after the last judgment. IrenjEus (V. xxxi.) has much about the “place where the souls of the dead were,” the “invisible place allotted by God,” where souls ’* remain till the resurrection,” but nowhere identifies it mth Paradise. According to Origen there is an upper and a lower Paradise. To the lower one ( = Abraham’s bosom) go the souls of the righteous, and thither Christ transferred the souls of the patriarchs and prophets. See horn, in Num. xxvi. 4, and horn. ii. in 1 Reg. In Augustine, Dc Gcncsi ad Literam, bk. xii. ch. xxxiii, the reader will find a very interesting discussion of the meaning of the terms Inferi, Sinus Abrahse, and Paradise. Augustine admits that the place where the souls of the just are is sometimes called Inferi, but points out that Lazarus is not said to be apicd inferos, whereas Dives is. Cf. also Ep. ad Dardanum^ clxxxvii., where Augustine admits that the explanation of our Lord’s saying to the penitent thief, which refers it to the descent into hell, is a possible one, though, as he thinks, involving considerable difficulties.

jl

as well as Hades, and thus denotes definitely the place of torments, as well as the intermediate state.

II. The Scriptural Grounds for the Doctrine and the Object

of the Descent.

The passages of Scripture which require to be considered in connection with the subject of our Lord’s descent into hell are four in number: (a) St. Luke xxiii. 43 ; (h) Acts vl 24-31, including the quotation of Ps. xvi. 10 ; (c) Eph. iv. 9 ; and {d) 1 Pet. iii. 18, iv. 6.

(a) St. Luke xxiii. 43. This verse gives us our Lord’s promise to the penitent thief, ” Verily, I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with Me in paradise.” The words assume and sanction the current belief that Paradise, or the Garden of Eden, was the part of that unseen region to which the name of Sheol was given, in which the souls of the faithful departed were preserved. And thus the passage appeals to us with the weight of a direct statement from our Lord Himself that after His death He would pass into the region of departed souls, i.e. would ” descend into hell.”

It would seem, then, that on scriptural grounds, and apart from all historical considerations, we are justified in referring to these words in connection with the descent into hell. But it does not appear that they were ever appealed to by the Fathers as proof or illustration of the fact of the descent, and those who first inserted the article into the creed can hardly be supposed to have had in view the promise to the penitent thief. Although it would seem that Jewish belief inclined to the inclusion of Paradise in Sheol, or Hades, yet some of the Christian Fathers, as Tertullian,^ expressly distinguish between the

^ Tertullian (J9e Animay 55) mentions a treatise that he had written, De Paradiso, in which he says that he had proved ” oiuneni animam apud inferos sequestrari in diem Domini.” He carefully distinguishes l^etwecn

two ; and the general opinion among them, to which the article in the creed must have been intended to give expression, most certainly was that Christ descended into some region which they never speak of as Paradise, where were the souls of the faithful who had died under the Old Covenant, that He announced to them the accomplishment of His work of redemption, and then transferred them to Paradise. Something more will have to be said on this subject later on. For the present we pass on to the consideration of the next passage of Scripture alleged as proof of the doctrine.

(6) Acts ii. 24-31. In these verses S. Peter quotes and applies the language of David in Psalm xvi. : ” I beheld the Lord always before my face, for He is on my right hand, that I should not be moved : Therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced ; moreover my flesh also shall dwell in hope : because Thou wilt not

Paradise and Inferi, holding that the martyrs, and they alone, go direct to Paradise. All others, including the souls of the faithful generally, are aptid inferos. But this region is divided into two parts, “Sinus Abrahic” (which is thus distinguished from Paradise), and the place assigned to the wicked. The patriarchs and prophets were apud inferos^ and to them Christ descended to make them competes sui. Cf. Adv. Marcion. iv. 34. In Apol. 47, Paradise is the place of heavenly bliss, appointed to receive the spirits of the saints, apparently after the last judgment. Irenoeus (V. xxxi.) has much about the “place where the souls of the dead were,” the “invisible place allotted by God,” where souls ** remain till the resurrection,” but nowhere identifies it vnth Paradise. According to Origen there is an upper and a lower Paradise. To the lower one ( = Abraham’s bosom) go the souls of the righteous, and thither Christ transferred the souls of the patriai-chs and prophets. See horn, in Num. xxvi. 4, and horn. ii. in 1 Reg. In Augustine, Dc Gencsi ad Litcram, bk. xii. ch. xxxiii, the reader will find a very interesting discussion of the meaning of the terms Inferi, Sinus Abrahje, and Paradise. Augustine admits that the place where the souls of the just are is sometimes called Inferi, but points out that Lazarus is not said to be apud inferos, whereas Dives is. Cf. also Ep. ad Dardanum, clxxxvii., where Augustine admits that the explanation of our Lord’s saying to the penitent thief, which refers it to the descent into hell, is a possible one, though, as he thinks, involving considerable difficulties.

leave my soul in Hades (ek aSijv\ neither wilt Thou give Thy Holy One to see corruption. Thou madest known unto me the ways of life ; Thou shalt make me full of gladness with Thy countenance.” These words, the apostle proceeds to show, received no adequate fulfilment in the person of David. They could not, therefore, find their ultimate realisation in his experience. ” He both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us unto this day.” They look forward beyond the life and death of the patriarch, and find their complete realisation in the person of the Messiah. David, ” being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins He would set one upon his throne, he foreseeing this spake of the resurrection of the Christ, that neither was He left in Hades (eh aSrjv) nor did His flesh see corruption.” The witness of this passage to the fact of the descent is equally clear with that of the one previously cited, though it says nothing of the object of the descent, or of the nature of the region visited.

(c) Eph. iv. 9 : ” Now that He ascended, what is it but that He also descended into the lower parts of the earth (e/9 to, KardiTepa fiiprj t^? 7^9, Vulg. in in/eriores partes terrce) ? He that descended is the same also that ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.”

This passage cannot be appealed to without some hesitation, for the interpretation of it is not absolutely certain. Two different views have been taken of its meaning. First, that which takes it of the descent into hell; a view which finds large support among both ancient and modern commentators, and which can claim in its favour the use of the term ra xaTcorara rfj^ 7^9 in the LXX. rendering of Psalm Lxii. (Ixiii) 10, and of the kindred phrase iv roif; KaTtorara) (/caTODTaroA?, k art) t^9

7^9 in cxxxviii. (cxxxix.) 15. Indeed, as Bishop Pearson says, ” This exposition must be confessed so probable, that there can be no argument to disprove it.” But though it is the most probable, yet it is not the only possible interpretation of the apostle’s words ; for, secondly y they may be taken as contrasting the earth beneath with the heaven above, and thus allude not to the descensus in inferna, but simply to the fact of the Incarnation, when Christ “came down” or “descended into” the earth beneath.^

{d) The last passage to be considered brings us face to face with the whole question of the object of the descent. Were it not for the language of S. Peter in his First Epistle (1 Pet. iii. 18-iv. 6) there would be no grounds for looking for any further object of the descent into hell than this : that Christ might fulfil the conditions of death as really and truly as of life. If Hell or Hades merely means the unseen world of departed spirits, then death in the case of every human being, consisting as it does of the separation of the soul and body, ipso facto involves a ” descent into hell ” on the part of everyone who is subject to it. If, then, our Lord really died upon the cross, it was a necessity that His human soul should pass into the world of spirits, and ” descend into hell.” ” Christ in dying shared to the full our lot. His body was laid in the tomb. • His soul passed into that state on which we conceive that our souls shall enter. He has won for God, and hallowed every condition of human existence. We cannot be where He has not been. He bore our nature as living : he bore our nature as dead.” ^ This, then, namely, to fulfil the conditions of death, may

’ For a full discussion of this passage see the Commentaries of Meyer and Ellicott, in loc. Both these writers decide in favour of its reference to the descent into hell.

••» Westcott’s Historic Faith, p. 76.

unhesitatingly be set down as one object of the descent It remains to consider whether the language of S. Peter compels us to maintain that there was a yet further object of it, namely, the preaching of the gospel to them who were sometime disobedient.

[…]

It has been already mentioned that the direct reference to this passage was struck out of the article in its passage through Convocation in 1563, owing to the controversies which were then agitating the country. But although there was manifested an unwillingness to bind a particular interpretation of what is confessedly a very difficult passage upon the consciences of tlie clergy, yet the judgment of the English Church as to the meaning of S. Peter’s woids is not obscurely indicated by the retention of the passage as the epistle for Easter Eve, an occasion for which it is obviously appropriate only if it be taken as referring to the descent into hell.

In the early Church it would appear that there was no doubt whatever concerning the reference of the apostle’s words. The first writer who directly connects the passage with the descent is believed to be Clement of

Alexandria. In this he is followed by Origen. Nor is there a trace of any other interpretation till the days of Augustine. He, however, in a letter to Evodius, Bishop of Uzala, enters fully into the exegesis of the words, and concludes his discussion by deciding that they have nothing whatever to do with the descent into hell, but refer to the teaching of Christ — in the spirit not in the flesh — to the unbelieving in the days of Noah. Augustine’s authority was naturally of great weight in the Western Church. His view on this subject is adopted by Bede, by S. Thomas Aquinas, and, as might be expected, found favour with many of the Eeformers ; and it must be admitted that “the dominant exegesis of 1 Pet. iii. 19, among the English theologians of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, has been that which disconnects it altogether from the descent into Hades.

In spite, however, of this, there is little doubt that Augustine and those who followed his lead in this matter are wrong. They have often failed to see clearly the distinction between Hades and Gehenna, and have sometimes been misled by the erroneous reading, rw Trvevfiari, as, for instance, was Bishop Pearson, who interprets the clause not of the human soul of Christ, but of the power of His Divinity ; an explanation which can hardly be maintained when the definite article is deleted, for the phrase OavaroiBeU fiev aapxl, ^cooTroirjOeU Be irvevfiarc can point

’ Clement of Alexandria, StroinaUis, VI. vi. ; Origcn, In Matt. 132.

2 The whole letter (No. clxiv. ) is worth careful study. ’* The spirits in prison” are explained by Augustine as “souls which were at the time still in the bodies of men, and which being shut up in the darkness of ignorance were, so to speak, *iu prison’— a prison such as that from which the Psalmist sought deliverance in the prayer, * Bring my soul out of prison that I may praise Thy name.’”

^ Summa, 3a Q. 52, 2, 3m,

to nothing but the contrast between flesh and spirit,^ or (as the terms are popularly used) body and soul. Taking the words of the apostle, then, as they stand, it would appear that they speak directly of what happened after the death of Christ. ” Being put to death in the flesh, but quickened (i.e, endowed with a new power of life) in the spirit ” He ” went and preached to the spirits in prison.” The spirits to whom the announcement was made are further described as those ” which aforetime were disobedient, when the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing.” If the interpretation here given be correct, these words definitely teach us that the or at any rate an object of the descent was the proclamation of the gospel to that generation which had been cut off by the flood. Two questions immediately present themselves: (1) What was the effect of the preaching, i.e. did it bring about any alteration in the condition of those to whom it was made ? and (2) Was it confined to the generation actually specified by S. Peter, or were its benefits (if any) extended to others also ?

1. With regard to the first of these questions, it has been pointed out that the word used by the apostle is iK7]pv^€^ proclaimed as a herald. Hence it has been inferred that the preaching was ” a mere proclamation of blessedness to men who had already repented when on earth, and had no need of repentance after death, when it never comes, and could not avail even if it did come.” * This view is unsatisfactory for two reasons — first, the words of Scripture cannot be said to imply that the recipients of the preaching had ” already repented when on earth.” S. Peter speaks of them as having been ” aforetime disobedient,” but says not one word of any

^ Cf. Rom. i. 4 ; 1 Tim. iii. 16.

• Bishop Browne on The Articles, p. 96.

subsequent repentance ; secondly, 1 Pet. iii 1 9 does not stand alone. It cannot be fairly isolated or considered apart from ch. iv. 6, which speaks of the gospel being preached — using the word evayyeXl^eiv nx)t /crjpvaaeLv — to the dead (vcKpoU), and states further the object of the preaching : ” that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.^ These words are admittedly difficult, but they certainly seem to imply that the preaching was attended with some beneficial result. On the whole, the best interpretation of them appears to be that which takes the first clause immediately following Lva (that they might be judged, etc.) as a subordinate one, of the state which the €vrjyy€\L<T07) left remaining, and thus makes the last words ” that they might live, etc.,” as the true result and end of the preaching.^ But whatever be the details of interpretation, the passage as a whole is surely a sufficient warrant for holding (a) that there was a second object of the descent into hell, namely, to preach to the spirits in prison ; and (b) that this preaching of the gospel to the dead was in some way instrumental in changing their condition for the better.

If this view be correct it follows that the descent into hell should be regarded not only as the last step in the humiliation of Christ, but also as the first step in His triumph. It witnessed the initial fulfilment of that acknowledgment of Him, of which S. Paul speaks in Phil, ii 10, ” that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth (fcaTaxOovLcov), and that every tongue

’ Cf. Alford, in loc. ; the construction may be illustrated by Rom. vi. 17, Yiii. 10.

should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father,” where it should be noticed that the word used for ” things under the earth ” is rendered in the Vulgate, Inferna, which, as we have already seen, is one of the terms most frequently employed to describe the place to which Christ ” descended ” after His death.

2. The second question. Was the preaching confined to the generation specified by S. Peter, or were its benefits extended to others as well, is one to which it is perhaps impossible to return a definite and certain answer. One generation, and one generation alone, is specified by the apostle; and that just the generation of which it might be said that it received exceptional treatment on earth. It may, therefore, have been the subject of a special extension of mercy in the unseen world of Hades. But, as will be shown immediately, there is an extraordinarily strong tradition among the Fathers that Christ descended to the patriarchs and prophets of the Old Dispensation, and preached to them, and bettered their condition. There is no other passage of Holy Scripture from which such a tradition can have originated; and it would therefore seem that the Fathers took it that those mentioned by S. Peter were but specimens, so to speak, of a class — of those, that is, who had lived and died under the Old Covenant. It may be so. But this is all that can be said. Where Scripture is silent, such an inference must be more or less precarious, and though the opinion may appear a probable one, it can only be held (if at all) as a ” pious opinion,” which cannot be pressed upon any as a part of the faith. In any case, it would be rash in the extreme to infer from this passage the possibility of an extension of the day of grace, or an opportunity of repentance beyond the grave, for Christians, whose case is wholly different. It cannot be said that the apostle’s words afibrd the slightest grounds for

expecting a second offer of salvation to any of those who have slighted or misused God’s revelation made ” in His Son.”

III. The History of the Doctrine in the Church, and of the clause in the Creed referring to it.

Although the clause ” He descended into hell,” has never formed part of the creed of the Eastern Church, and only made its way into that of the West in comparatively late times, it is remarkable how prominent a position the fact of the descent occupied in the belief of the early Christians, and how very general was the belief that it was instrumental in changing for the better the condition of the faithful who had died before the coming of Christ. It meets us from the very first. Ignatius (A.D. 115), in his Epistle to tlie Magnesians, speaks of it: ” Even the prophets, being His disciples, were expecting Him as their teacher, through the Spirit. And for this cause He, whom they rightly awaited, when He came, raised them from the dead.”^ Justin Martyr (140) and Irenseus (180) both quote the following passage as from Jeremiah or Isaiah, and apply it to the descent into hell : ” The Lord God remembered His dead people of Israel who lay in the graves ; and descended to preach to them His own salvation.” 2 Irenaeus also quotes a certain presbyter ” who had heard it from those who had seen the apostles and from those who had been their disciples,

• Ignatius, Ad Magn. ch. ix.

2 Justin Martyr’s Died. wUh Trypho, ch. Ixxii. Justin Martyr here (probably without sufficient justification) accuses the Jews of having cut out the passage from the sayings of Jeremiah. There is no trace of any such words in existing copies of the LXX. IrenjEus says nothing of any such charge against the Jews, but cites the passage several times ; in III. xxii. as from Isaiah, in IV. xxxvi. as from Jeremiah, and in IV. Iv., without giving the name of the author.

• -X’~

should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father,” where it should be noticed that the word used for ” things under the earth ” is rendered in the Vulgate, Inferna, which, as we have already seen, is one of the terms most frequently employed to describe the place to which Christ ” descended ” after His death.

2. The second question, Was the preaching confined to the generation specified by S. Peter, or were its benefits extended to others as well, is one to which it is perhaps impossible to return a definite and certain answer. One generation, and one generation alone, is specified by the apostle; and that just the generation of which it might be said that it received exceptional treatment on earth. It may, therefore, have been the subject of a special extension of mercy in the unseen world of Hades. But, as will be shown immediately, there is an extraordinarily strong tradition among the Fathers that Christ descended to the patriarchs and prophets of the Old Dispensation, and preached to them, and bettered their condition. There is no other passage of Holy Scripture from which such a tradition can have originated; and it would therefore seem that the Fathers took it that those mentioned by S. Peter were but specimens, so to speak, of a class — of those, that is, who had lived and died under the Old Covenant. It may be so. But this is all that can be said. Where Scripture is silent, such an inference must be more or less precarious, and though the opinion may appear a probable one, it can only be held (if at all) as a ” pious opinion,” which cannot be pressed upon any as a part of the faith. In any case, it would be rash in the extreme to infer from this passage the possibility of an extension of the day of grace, or an opportunity of repentance beyond the grave, for Christians, whose case is wholly different. It cannot be said that the apostle’s words afibrd the slightest grounds for

expecting a second offer of salvation to any of those who have slighted or misused God’s revelation made ” in His Son.”

III. The History of the Doctrine in the Church, and of the clause in the Creed referring to it.

Although the clause ” He descended into hell,” has never formed part of the creed of the Eastern Church, and only made its way into that of the West in comparatively late times, it is remarkable how prominent a position the fact of the descent occupied in the belief of the early Christians, and how very general was the belief that it was instrumental in changing for the better the condition of the faithful who had died before the coming of Christ. It meets us from the very first. Ignatius (A.D. 115), in his Epistle to the Magnedans, speaks of it: ” Even the prophets, being His disciples, were expecting Him as their teacher, through the Spirit. And for this cause He, whom they rightly awaited, when He came, raised them from the dead.”^ Justin Martyr (140) and Irenaeus (180) both quote the following passage as from Jeremiah or Isaiah, and apply it to the descent into hell : ” The Lord God remembered His dead people of Israel who lay in the graves ; and descended to preach to them His own salvation.” 2 Irenaeus also quotes a certain presbyter ” who had heard it from those who had seen the apostles and from those who had been their disciples,”

• Ignatius, Ad Magn. ch. ix.

2 Justin Martyr’s Dial, vnth Trypho, ch. Ixxii. Justin Martyr here (probably without sufficient justification) accuses the Jews of having cut out the passage from the sayings of Jeremiah. There is no trace of any such words in existing copies of the LXX. Irenaeus says nothing of any such charge against the Jews, but cites the passage several times ; in III. xxii. as from Isaiah, in IV. xxxvi. as from Jeremiah, and in IV. Iv., without giving the name of the author.

as having said that the Lord ” descended in m qum sunt mh Urra, preaching His advent there also, and declaring remission of sins received by those who believe in Him. But all those believed in Him, whose hope was set on Him — that is, who foretold His advent and submitted to His dispensations, just men and prophets and patriarchs, etc.”i Similarly, Tertullian (200) says that Christ “in Hades apud inferos) underwent the law of human death, nor did He ascend to the heights of heaven, imtil He descended to the lower parts of the earth in inferiora terrarum) that there He might make patriarchs and prophets sharers of His life (competes sui)” To a still earlier date, perhaps, belongs the recently discovered fragment of the apocryphal Gospel of Peter, which refers to the descent into hell in the following words : — ** They see three men coming forth from the tomb, two of them supporting the other, and a cross following them ; and the head of the two reached to heaven ; but that of Him who was led by them overpassed the heavens. And they heard a voice from the heavens, saying, Thou didst preach (iKrjpva) to them that sleep; and a response was heard from the cross, yea.” It would be easy to multiply quotations from later Fathers. References to some of them are appended in a note.* But those just

• Irenaus, IV. xlii. ’ De Anima, ch. 65.

• The descent into hell is a prominent feature in the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus, which perhaps dates from the second century (ch. xxxi.- xviv.). The doctrine was accepted by the heretic Marcion (see Irenaeus, I. XXV.). It also appears in the apocryphal correspondence between Abgar of Edessar and our Lord, preserved by Eusebius, ff. E. I. xiii. Of the third century the following Christian Fathers among others refer to it :— Hippolytus, De AiUichristo, 45 ; Clement of Alexandria, StromaUis, vi. 6 ; Origen, Contra Cel^um, ii. 43 ; cf. in Lucam, Horn. iv. ; in Joann. ii. 30 ; Cyprian, Testim. adv. Jud, ii. ch. xxiv. In the fourth century reference may be made to Cyril of Jerusalem, Cat. iv. 11 ; xiv. 18, 19. Athanasius, Orat, caiUr. Arian. iii. 23, 29 ; ^nst. ad Epict. 6 ; Hilary of

cited from writers of the second century are sufficient to establish the early and widespread belief of the Church in the fact of the descent into hell. They also give evidence of the belief that the descent brought with it some benefit to those of the Old Covenant to whom Christ preached.

Turning now to the creeds of the Church it is to be noticed that the clause, ” He descended into hell,” is not found in a single Eastern one. It is therefore wanting in the Nicene Creed. Nor is it to be found in the earlier creeds of the West. The first creed of any kind to contain the clause is that which was apparently drawn up at Sirmium and accepted at Ariminum in 359. This creed, although a Latin one, is only known to us through the Greek translation of it preserved by Socrates in his Ecclesiastiml History (bk. ii. ch. xxxvii.). In it we find the words : ” Was crucified and died and descended into hell {ek ra KaraxOovia KareXOovTo), and disposed matters there ; at the sight of whom the door-keepers of Hades (wvXcopol aBov) trembled.” 1 It has been suggested with some probability that the clause may have been thus prominently placed in this creed ” the more eflfectually to blind the eyes of the orthodox.” 2 The fact of the descent was important in connection with the views which were afterwards developed into the ApoUinarian heresy. If admitted, it was a direct proof of the existence of the human soul in Christ, for this alone could have been the subject of the descent. It may be, therefore, that the

of Poictiers, Tract, in Ps. cxxxviii. 22 ; Basil, In Ps. xlWii. 9 ; Ambrose, De Exc. Fratris. ii. 103. At the close of the fourth, and beginning of the fifth century there are allusions in Jerome, In Dan. ch. iii. ; In Esai. bk. vi. ch. xiv.. In Ezec. bk. iii. ch. xii.. In Osee, bk. iii. ch. xiii.; Augustine, De Qenesi ad liUram, xii. 53, Epist. ad Evod. ; and, later, see Cyril of Alexandria, Horn. Pasch. xx.

[…]

Arians hoped that by this ostentatious profession of a belief, which by implication overthrew their own heretical denial of the human soul in Christ, they might draw off attention from their inadequate statements on the real point at issue between them and the orthodox party, and thus secure the acceptance of their creed. However this may be, the occurrence of the article in this creed of theirs is to be noticed as being historically its first appearance in any formal creed of any sort. Some forty years later we meet with it for the first time in a Baptismal creed, namely, in that of the Church of Aquileia, in which it occurs in the form, descendit in infema. Our knowledge of this is due to Rufinus (a.d. 400), who expressly informs us that at that time the clause was not in the creed of the Church of Rome. We come across it next in the creed given by Venantius Fortunatus (570), which is clearly based on the Aquileian Creed of Rufinus. Here it is given in the form, descendit ad infemum” The plural infema) is found in the form given in the Gallican service books. In Spain it is met with in the creed given by Ildefonsus of Toledo, and Etherius and Beatus in the seventh and eighth centuries descendit ad infemay although it is wanting in the creed given in the printed Mozarabic Missal. In Ireland it is found in the creed contained in the Bangor Antiphonary, which dat< from the seventh century (680-691).’ Here it occurs

• Expos, xi.

[…]

« The Antiphomry of Bangor, fol. 19 (H. BraJt>haw Soc.)

perhaps for the first time in the form descendit ad inferos ; and after this it is generally met with in one or other of its forms.

Note. — It has not been thought necessary in considering this article to say anything of the various interpretations which have sometimes been put upon the words, but which really evacuate them of their plain meaning, e.g. that of Durandus, which explains them of a ” virtual motion and efficacious presence,” or that of Calvin, that the descent into hell consisted in suffering the torments of Gehenna. A refutation of these and some other strange and fanciful interpretations may be found in Pearson’s work 07i the Creed. But at the same time it may be well to warn the readers that in his section on this article of the creed Pearson has written ” less lucidly than is his wont.” (1) He begins with an erroneous statement concerning the Creed of Aquileia, in which he asserts (contrary to fact) that the word scpultus was wanting. Rufinus clearly shows that it contained both sejptdtns and descendit in inferna. (2) He mistakes the meaning of Rufinus, from whose language he infers that ” the fii*st intention of putting these words in the creed was only to express the burial of our Saviour,” whereas all that Rufinus intends to say is that the clause scpultus in the Roman and Oriental Creeds includes the notion of the descent of the soul into Hades, as well as the committal of the body to the grave. (3) He is misled by the erroneous reading, tc3 irvevfiariy in 1 Pet. iii. 18, and gives what can only be called a forced and non-natural interpretation of the whole passage, denying its reference to the descent into hell at all. (4) He nowhere distinguishes clearly between Hades and Gehenna, and ends by confusing the two, and directly asserting that Christ descended into Gehenna. ” By the descent into hell, all

those which believe in Him are secured from descending thither. He went into those regions of darkness that our souls might never come into those torments which are there.” An excellent study of the whole subject of this article may be found in Dean Plumptre’s Spirits in Prison, No. iii.

Notes

• Driver’s Sermons on the Old Testament, p. 79.
• Hell comes from the Anglo-Saxon ffelan (German, Hullen), to cover. It is, therefore, the unseen and covered place. ” It is properly used both in the Old and New Testament to render the Hebrew word in the one and the Greek word in the other, which describe the invisible mansions of the disembodied souls, without any reference to sufferings. “—Bishop Horslcy’s Works, vol. ii. Serm. 20.
• Plumptre’s Spirits in Prison, p. 97.
• It is remarkable that neither Horsley in his celebrated sermon on 1 Pet iii. 19 {Works, vol. ii. Serm. 20) nor Bishop Browne {On the Thirty-Nine Articles) makes the slightest allusion to this text.
• *’ About A.D. 165.” See Swete, Oospel of Peter, p. xliv. The passage quoted in the text occurs in ch. ix.
• Cf. Heurtley’s ffarmonia Sijmbolica, p. 134. 12
• Rufinus, In Symh. 18. Dr. Swete thinks that the clause cannot have been of recent introduction in the days of Rufinus, and is inclined to assign it to the end of the second century or the beginning of the third, as a protest against the Docetic heresy. See his work on The Apostles* Creed, p. 61.
• See Hahn, Bibl. dcr Symbole, p. 35.
• Migne, vol. Ixxxv., p. 395.