this exposition in such express terms as are not capable of any other interpretation; but also because it was generally used as an argument against the Apollinarian heresy: than which nothing can shew more the general opinion of the catholics and the heretics, and that not only of the present, but of the precedent ages. For it had been little less than ridiculous to have produced that for an argument to prove a point in controversy, which had not been clearer than that which was controverted, and had not been some way acknowledged as a truth by both. Now the error of Apollinarius was, That Christ had no proper intellectual or rational soul, but that the Word was to him in the place of a soul: and the argument produced by the fathers for the conviction of this error was, That Christ descended into hell,* which the Apolcarni suæ defuit, cum animam suam out of his book De Incarnatione in inferno dolere non sineret ; nec Christi, written particularly against animam suam in inferno deseruit, Apollinarius: Πείσθητε οὖν, ὅτι ὁ ἔσωcum in sepulcro carnem suam 2 θεν ἡμῶν ἄνθρωπος ἐστιν ἡ ψυχή· τοῦτο corruptione servaret. Fulgent. ad καὶ τῆς πρώτης πλάσεως δεικνυούσης, Thrasimund. l. iii. c. 31. · καὶ τῆς δευτέρας διαλύσεως δηλούσης, οὐ μόνον ἐφ' ἡμῖν τούτων δεικνυμένων, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ θανάτῳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐδείκνυτο· τὸ μέντοι μέχρι τάφου φθάσαν, ἡ δὲ μέχρι ᾅδου διαβᾶσα διαιρετῶν δὲ ὄντων τῶν τόπων πολλῷ μέτρῳ καὶ τοῦ μὲν τάφου σωματικὴν ἐπιδεχομένου τὴν ἐπίβασιν, ἐκεῖσε παρῆν τὸ σῶμα, τοῦ δὲ ᾅδου ἀσώματον· πῶς ἐκεῖ παρὼν ὁ Κύριος ἀσωμάτως, ὡς ἄνθρωπος ἐνομίσθη ὑπὸ τοῦ θανατοῦ; ἵνα ψυχαῖς ταῖς ἐν δεσμοῖς κατεχομέναις, μορφὴν ἰδίας ψυχῆς ἀνεπιδεκτὸν ὡς δεκτικὴν τῶν δεσμῶν τοῦ θανά του παραστήσας, παροῦσαν παρούσαις, διαῤῥήξῃ τὰ δεσμὰ ψυχῶν τῶν ἐν ᾅδου και τεχομένων. 1. i. §. 13. Thus Euthymius, in his commentary upon the words of the Psalmist, “Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell:” Τίθησι καὶ τῆς ἐλπίδος τὴν αἰτίαν. Καὶ γὰρ οὐκ ἐγκαταλείψεις, φησὶ, τὴν ψυχήν μου εἰς ᾅδην, ὅπου τῶν τετελευτηκότων αἱ ψυχαὶ κατέχονται τόσ πος γὰρ ὁ ᾅδης ὑπὸ γῆν ἀποκεκληρωμέ νος ταῖς τῶν ἀποθνησκόντων ψυχαῖς· ποῦ τοίνυν ὁ λῆρος Απολλινάριος, ὁ τὴν προσληφθεῖσαν σάρκα δογματίζων ἄψυ χον καὶ ἄνουν ; ὡς ἀνόητος. And from hence we may understand the words of Theodoret, who at the end of his exposition of this Psalm thus concludes : Οὗτος ὁ ψαλμὸς καὶ τὴν ̓Αρείου καὶ τὴν Εὐνομίου καὶ ̓Απολλιναρίου φρενοβλά βειαν ἐλέγχει. Which is in reference to those words, “ Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell.” In the same manner, Leporius Presbyter (' quod male senserat de Incarnatione Christi, corrigens,' as Gennadius observeth, Illust. Vir. cat. 60. and particularly dis * What the Apollinarian heresy was, is certainly known: they denied that Christ had a human soul, affirming the Word was to him in the place of a soul. Apollinaristas Apollinarius instituit, qui de anima Christi a catholicis dissenserunt, dicentes, sicut Ariani, Deum Christum carnem sine anima suscepisse. In qua quæstione testimoniis evangelicis victi, mentem, qua rationalis est anima hominis, non fuisse in anima Christi, sed pro hac ipsum Verbum in ea fuisse, dixerunt. S. August. de Hares. 55. Against this heresy the catholics argued from the descent into hell, as that which was acknowledged by them all, even by the Arians (with whom the Apolo linarians in this agreed), as we have shewn before by three several creeds of theirs in which they expressed this descent. This is the argument of Athanasius in his fourth dialogue De Trinitate, which is particularly with an Apollinarian: Ὥσπερ οὐκ ἠδύνατο ὁ Θεὸς ἐν μνήματι καὶ ἐν ταφῇ γενέσθαι, εἰ μὴ εἶχεν τὸ τιθέμενον σῶμα· οὕτως οὐκ ἂν ἐλέχθη κατακεχωρίσθαι τοῦ σώματος, πανταχοῦ ὢν καὶ τὰ πάντα περιέχων, εἰ μὴ εἶχε τὴν χωριζομένην ψυχὴν, μεθ' ἧς καὶ τοῖς ἐν ᾅδου εὐηγγελίσατο· διὰ γὰρ αὐτὴν ἀναχωρεῖν τοῦ σώματος λέγεται καὶ ἐν ᾅδου γεγενῆσθαι· καὶ τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἐν ᾅδου γενέσθαι διὰ τὴν ψυχὴν καὶ ἐν μνήματι τιθῆναι διὰ τὸ σῶμα. §. 7. But because these dialogues may be questioned as not genuine, the same argument may be produced 6 linarians could not deny; and that this descent was not made by his Divinity, nor by his body, but by the motion and presence of his soul, and consequently, that he had a soul distinct both from his flesh and from the Word. Whereas if it could have then been answered by the heretics, as now it is by many, that his descent into hell had no relation to his soul, but to his body only, which descended to the grave; or that it was not a real, but only virtual, descent, by which his death extended to the destruction of the powers of hell; or that his soul was not his intellectual spirit, or immortal soul, but his living soul, which descended into hell, that is, continued in the state of death: I say, if any of these senses could have been affixed to this Article, the Apollinarians' answer might have been sound, and the catholics' argument of no validity. But being those heretics did all acknowledge this Article; being the catholic fathers did urge the same to prove the real distinction of the soul of Christ both from his Divinity and from his body, because his body was really in the grave when his soul was really present with the souls below; it followeth that it was the general doctrine of the Church, that Christ did descend into hell by a local motion of his soul, separated from his body, to the places below where the souls of men departed were. Nor can it be reasonably objected, that the argument of avowing that of the Arians and Apollinarians, Deum hominemque commixtum, et tali confusione carnis et verbi quasi aliquod corpus effectum') does thus express the reality and distinction of the soul and body of the same Christ: 'Tam Christus filius Dei tunc mortuus jacuit in sepulcro, quam idem Christus filius Dei ad inferna descendit; sicut beatus apostolus dicit, Quod autem ascendit, quid est nisi quod descendit primum in inferiores partes terræ? Ipse utique Dominus et Deus noster Jesus Christus nnicus Dei, qui cum anima ad inferna descendit, ipse cum anima et corpore ascendit ad Coelum.' Libel. Emendationis, p. 23. And Capreolus, bishop of Carthage, writing against the Nestorian heresy, proveth that the soul of Christ was united to his Divinity when it descended into hell, and follows that argument, urging it at large; in which discourse among the rest he hath this passage: Tantum abest, Deum Dei filium, incommutabilem atque incomprehensibilem, ab inferis potuisse concludi; ut nec ipsam adsumptionis animam, aut exitiabiliter susceptam aut tenaciter derelictam: sed nec carnem ejus credimus contagione alicujus corruptionis infectam, Ipsius namque vox est in Psalmo, sicut Petrus interpretatur apostolus, Non derelinques animam meam apud inferos, neque dabis sanctum tuum videre corruptionem.' Epist. ad Hispan. p. 50. Lastly, The true doctrine of the incarnation against all the enemies thereof, Apollinarians, Nestorians, Eutychians, and the like, was generally expressed by declaring the verity of the soul of Christ really present in hell, and the verity of his body at the same time really present in the grave; as it is excellently delivered by Fulgentius: 'Humanitas vera Filii Dei nec tota in sepulcro fuit, nec tota in inferno; sed in sepulcro secundum veram carnem Christus mortuus jacuit, et secundum animam ad infernum Christus descendit; et secundum eandem animam ab inferno ad carnem, quam in sepulcro reliquerat, rediit, secundum divinitatem vero suam, quæ nec loco tenetur nec fine concluditur, totus fuit in sepulcro cum carne, totus in inferno cum anima: ac pro hoc plenus fuit ubique Christus; quia non est Deus ab humanitate quam susceperat separatus, qui et in anima sua fuit, ut solutis inferni doloribus ab inferno victrix rediret, et in carpe sua fuit, ut celeri resurrectione corrumpi non posset.' AdThrasimund. l. iii. c. 34. the fathers was of equal force against these heretics, if it be understood of the animal soul, as it would be if it were understood of the rational; as if those heretics had equally deprived Christ of the rational and animal soul. For it is most certain that they did not equally deprive Christ of both; but most of the Apollinarians denied a human soul to Christ only in respect of the intellectual part, granting that the animal soul of Christ was of the same nature with the animal soul of other men.* If therefore the fathers had proved only that the animal soul of Christ had descended into hell, they had brought no argument at all to prove that Christ had a human intellectual soul. It is therefore certain that the catholic fathers in their opposition to the Apollinarian heretics did declare, that the intellectual and immortal soul of Christ descended into hell. The only question which admitted any variety of discrepance among the ancients was, Who were the persons to whose souls the soul of Christ descended? and that which dependeth on that question, What were the end and use of his descent? In this indeed they differed much, according to their several apprehensions of the condition of the dead, and the nature of the place into which the souls before our Saviour's death were gathered; some looking on that name which we translate now hell, hades, or infernus, as the common receptacle of the souls of all men,† both the just and * At first indeed the Apollinarians ani vero carnis tantummodo.' Facundid so speak, as if they denied the hu- dus, I. ix. c. 3. man soul in both acceptations; but + Some of the ancient fathers did afterwards they clearly affirmed the believe that the word gons in the Vuxn, and denied the vous alone. So Scriptures had the same signification Socrates testifies of them: IIpórepov which it hath among the Greeks, as μὲν ἔλεγον ἀναληφθῆναι τὸν ἄνθρωπον comprehending all the souls both of ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγου ἐν τῇ οἰκονομίᾳ τῆς the wicked and the just; and so they ἐνανθρωπήσεως ψυχῆς ἄνευ· εἶτα ὡς ἐκ took infernus in the same latitude. μετανοίας ἐπιδιορθούμενοι, προσέθηκαν As therefore the ancient Greeks did ψυχὴν μὲν ἀνειληφέναι, νοῦν δὲ οὐκ assign one ᾅδης for all which died, ἔχειν αὐτὴν, ἀλλ ̓ εἶναι τὸν Θεὸν Λόγον Πάντας ὁμῶς θνητοὺς ἀΐδης δέχεται ἀντὶ νοῦ εἰς τὸν ἀναληφθέντα ἄνθρωπον. and κοινὸν ᾅδην πάντες ἥξουσιν βροτοί· Hist. l. ii. c. 46. Nam et aliqui eo- as they made within that one done rum fuisse in Christo animam negare two several receptacles, one for the non potuerunt. Videte absurditatem good and virtuous, the other for the et insaniam non ferendam. Animam wicked and unjust (according to that irrationalem eum habere voluerunt, of Diphilus, ap. Clem. Alex. Strom. rationalem negaverunt; dederunt ei v. c. 14. p. 721. animam pecoris, subtraxerunt animam hominis.' S. August. Tract. 47. in Ioan. §. 8. This was so properly indeed the Apollinarian heresy, that it was thereby distinguished from the Arian. Nam Apollinaristæ quidem carnis et animæ naturam sine mente adsumpsisse Dominum credunt, Ari Καὶ γὰρ καθ' ᾅδην δύο τρίβους νομίζομεν, Hic locus est, partes ubi se via findit in ambas: unjust, thought the soul of Christ descended unto those which departed in the true faith and fear of God, the souls of the patriarchs and the prophets, and the people of God. Hac iter Elysium nobis: at læva malorum as they did send the best of men to happiness, (Touto dè övoμA KIKλŃOKOμEV gons, there to be happy, and taught кóλπov'Aßpaàμu) and the unjust on the rewards to be received there as well left to a place of misery. Ouros & #epi as punishments: (Λέγεται δὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ ᾅδου λόγος, ἐν ᾧ ψυχαὶ πάντων κατέμελικοῦ Πινδάρου ταυτὶ περὶ τῶν εὐσε- χονται ἄχρι καιροῦ ὃν ὁ Θεὸς ὤρισεν. p. βέων ἐν ᾅδου, 923. Tertullian wrote a tract, De Paradiso, now not extant, in which he expressed thus much: Habes etiam de Paradiso a nobis libellum, quo constituimus omuem animam apud Inferos sequestrari in diem Domini.' De Anima, c. 55. St. Jerome on the third chapter of Ecclesiastes : 'Ante adventum Christi omnia ad inferos pariter ducebantur: unde et Jacob ad inferos pariter descensurum se dicit; et Job pios et impios in inferno queritur retentari: ct Evangelium, chaos magnum interpositum apud inferos; et Abraham cum Lazaro, et divitem in suppliciis, esse testatur.' ad fin. And in his 25th, al. 22nd, Epistle: Perfacilis ad ista responsio est; Luxisse Jacob flium, quem putabat occisum, ad quem et ipse erat ad inferos descensurus, dicens, Descendam ad filium meum lugens in infernum: quia necdum Paradisi januam Christus effregerat, necdum flammeam illam romphæam et vertiginem præsidentium Cherubin sanguis ejus exstinxerat. Unde et Abraham, licet in loco refrigerii, tamen apud inferos cum Lazaro fuisse scribitur.' col. 57. And again: 'Nequeo satis Scripturæ laudare mysteria, et divinum sensum in verbis licet simplicibus admirari: quod, Moyses plangitur: et Jesus Nave, vir sanctus, sepultus fertur, et tamen fletus nou esse scribitur. Nempe illud, quod in Moyse, id est, in lege veteri, sub peccato Adam omnes tenebantur elogio, et ad inferos descendentes consequenterlacrymæ prosequebanturIn Jesu vero, id est, in Evangelio, per quem Paradisus est apertus, mortem gaudia prosequuntur.' Ibid. Tò πρότερον ὁ θάνατος εἰς τὸν ᾅδην κατῆγε νυνὶ δὲ ὁ θάνατος πρὸς τὸν Χριστὸν тараπéμπe. S. Chrysost. Panegyr. ad Sanctas Mart. Bern. et Prosdoc. &c. t. v.orat. 65. And in his Tractate proving that Christ is God, he makes this exposition of Isaiah, xlv. 2. Húλas xad · Τοῖσι λάμπει μένος ἀελίου Τὰν ἐνθάδε νύκτα κάτω, Φοινικορόδιαί τε λειμῶνές Εἰσι προάστειον αὐτῶν. Plut. de Consolat. ad Apollon. Ο τρισόλβιοι Κεῖνοι βροτῶν, οἳ ταῦτα δερχθέντες τέλη Μόλωσ ̓ ἐς ᾅδου· τοῖσδε γὰρ μόνοις ἐκεῖ Ζῆν ἐστὶ, τοῖς δ ̓ ἄλλοισι πάντ' ἐκεῖ κακά. Sophocl. ap. Plutarch. de Aud. Poet. c. 4.) so did the Jews also before and after our Saviour's time. For Josephus says, the soul of Samuel was brought up dov, and delivers the opinion of the Pharisees after this manner, Ant. Jud. 1. xviii. c. 2. 'Alávatóv Tε ioxov πίστις αὐτοῖς, εἶναι καὶ ὑπὸ χθόνος δικαιώσείς τε καὶ τιμὰς οἷς ἀρετῆς ἢ κακίας ÉTITýdevois év Tų ßių yέyovɛ' aud of the Sadducees after this manner: Yuxñs · τε τὴν διαμονὴν, καὶ τὰς καθ ̓ ᾅδου τιμωρίας καὶ τιμὰς ἀναιροῦσι. Therefore the Jews which thought the souls immortal did believe that the just were rewarded, as well as the unjust punished, vπò xlovòs, or kad dov. And so did also most of the ancient fathers of the Church. There was an ancient book written De Universi Natura, which some attributed to Justin Martyr, some to Irenæus, others to Origen, or to Caius a presbyter of the Roman Church in the time of Victor and Zephyrinus, a fragment of which is set forth by David Hoeschelius in his Annotations upon Photius, delivering the state of ons at large. Περὶ δὲ ᾅδου, ἐν ᾧ συνέχονται ψυχαὶ δικαίων τε καὶ ἀδίκων, ἀναγκαῖον EITEV. Here then were the just and unjust in hades, but not in the same place. Οἱ δὲ δίκαιοι ἐν τῷ ᾅδῃ νῦν μὲν συνέχονται, ἀλλ' οὐ τῷ αὐτῷ τόπῳ ᾧ καὶ oi adikoi. Mía yàp εis touto Tò xwρiov κálodos, &c. There was but one passage into the hades, saith he; but when that gate was passed, the just went on the right hand to a place of But others there were who thought hades or infernus was - never taken in the Scriptures for any place of happiness; and therefore they did not conceive the souls of the patriarchs or the prophets did pass into any such infernal place; and consequently, that the descent into hell was not his going to the prophets or the patriarchs, which were not there. For as, if it had been only said that Christ had gone unto the bosom of Abraham, or to paradise, no man would ever have believed that he had descended into hell; so that, being it is only written, "Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell," it seems incongruous to think that he went then unto the patriarchs who were not there. Now this being the diversity of opinions anciently in respect of the persons unto whose souls the soul of Christ descended at his death, the difference of the end or efficacy of that descent is next to be observed. Of those who did believe the name of Hades to belong unto that general place which comprehended all the souls of men (as well those who died in the favour of God, as those who departed in their sins), some of them thought that Christ descended to that place of Hades, where the souls of all the faithful, from the death of the righteous Abel to the death of Christ, were detained;† and κᾶς συνθλάσω, καὶ μοχλοὺς σιδηροῦς συντρίψω, καὶ ἀνοίξω θησαυροὺς σκοτεινούς, ἀποκρύφους, ἀοράτους ἀναδείξω σοι τὸν ᾅδην οὕτω καλῶν. Εἰ γὰρ καὶ ᾅδης ἦν, ἀλλὰ ψυχὰς ἐκράτει ἁγίας, καὶ σκεύη τίμια, τὸν ̓Αβραὰμ, τὸν Ἰσαὰκ, τὸν Ἰακώβ· διὸ καὶ θησαυροὺς ἐκάλεσε. This doctrine was maintained by all those who believed that the soul of Samuel was raised by the witch of Endor: for though he were so great a prophet, yet they thought that he was in bades; and not only so, but under the power of Satan. Thus Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho, p. 333. Paiveται δὲ καὶ ὅτι πᾶσαι αἱ ψυχαὶ τῶν οὕτως δικαίων καὶ προφητῶν ὑπὸ ἐξουσίαν ἔπιπτον τῶν τοιούτων δυνάμεων, ὁποῖα δὲ καὶ ἐν ἐγγαστριμύθῳ ἐκείνῃ ἐξ αὐτῶν πραγμάτων ὁμολογεῖται. Who was followed in this by Origen, Anastasius, Antiochenus, and others. mihi occurrit inferos alicubi in bono posuisse Scripturam, dumtaxat Canonicam. Ibid. Non facile alicubi Scripturarum inferorum nomen positum invenitur in bono. Epist. 57. al. 187. §. 6. Præsertim quia ne ipsos quidem inferos uspiam Scripturarum in bono appellatos potui reperire. Quod si nusquam in divinis auctoritatibus legitur, non utique sinus ille Abrahæ, id est, secreta cujusɗam quietis habitatio, aflqua pars inferorum fuisse credenda est. Quanquam in his ipsis tanti Magistri verbis, ubi ait dixisse Abraham, Inter vos et nos chaos magnum firmatum est, satis, ut opinor, appareat, non esse quandam partem quasi membrum inferorum tantæ illius felicitatis sinum. Epist. 99. al. 164. §. 7. + This is the opinion generally received in the Schools, and delivered as the sense of the Church of God in all ages: but though it were not so general as the schoolmen would persuade us, yet it is certain that many of the fathers did so understand it. ̔Ο μὲν ἐπὶ σωτηρίᾳ τῶν ἐν ᾅδου ψυχῶν παρῄει, ἐκ μακρῶν αἰώνων τὴν ἄφιξιν αὐτ тOU πεрμεvovσwv. Euseb. de Demonstrat. 1. x. c. 8. Karñ\dev eis tà kaταχθόνια, ἵνα κᾀκεῖθεν λυτρώσηται τοὺς dukalovç. Cyril. Catech. iv. §. 8. "Hμɛɛ γὰρ ἡ Θεότης τελειοῦν τὰ πάντα τὰ κατὰ |