with the vncircumcised to the nether parts of the earth c. with them that go downe to the pit c. Now although we denie not but that these places may be expounded of hell as Hierom doth yet the circumstances of the place will rather leade vs to take it for the graue First because there are two words added which are properly so taken as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bhor which signifieth a pit and is translated by the 70 sometime 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometime 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to descend into the pit or caue and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cheuer also which properly signifieth a graue is ioyned with the rest whose graues are made in the side of the pit Ezech. 31. 23. Secondly the phrase of speech also giueth this sense Ezech. 31. 18. Thou shalt sleepe in the middest of the circumcised with those that are slaine by the sword and Ezech. 31. 27. They are gone downe to the graue with their weapons of warre Now in hell men sleepe not neither is that a place for the slaine for the soule dieth not neither doe men carrie their weapons thither Thirdly Iunius in these places interpreteth sheol sepulchrum the graue 2. Though we admit that in these places it may be taken for hell yet it is not so alwaies taken as Psal. 63. 9 They that seeke my soule to destroy it shall goe downe into the lowest parts of the earth then it followeth vers 10. They shall be a portion for foxes but they that goe downe to hell are no pray for foxes so likewise the Prophet Dauid saith Psal. 139. 15. Thou hast fashioned me in the lower parts of the earth I trust they will not say hee was borne in hell It is euident therefore that the Answerer more boldly than truly saith that by these words the lowest parts of the earth Hell the place of the damned is alwaies signified for vnlesse hee be able to proue that he doth but trifle Obiect 2. The more vile and loathsome the dungeon is the greater the loue of the Prince who to set at libertie his captiues there inthralled disdaineth not to enter into it in his owne person c. Ans. p. 52. Ans. 1. You haue well reasoned for Limbus Patrum you would dissemble your fansie that waies but you cannot I pray you what captiues were enthralled in hell that Christ by going thither set at libertie Let the indifferent Reader iudge whether these words do not smatter of Limbus Patrum 2. It is denied that Christs descension in soule to hell doth more set foorth his loue and fauour than his crosse and passion Saint Paul noteth this as the lowest point of Christs humiliation He humbled himselfe and became obedient vnto the death euen the death of the crosse Philip. 2. 8. And herein the Scripture doth chiefly set foorth the loue of Christ in dying for vs who loued me and gaue himselfe for me saith S. Paul Galath 2. 20. And in this consisteth the fauour of our Prince because hee hath visited from an high and redeemed his people Luk. 1. 68. What greater fauour can we expect than that our Prince should come from heauen down to earth and vouchsafe to dwell among sinfull men to die the death and goe into the graue for them Bernard telleth vs as much There are degrees in ascending and descending the first degree in descending is to the flesh the second to the crosse the third to death behold how farre he descended could he doe any more might not our King say what ought I doe more which I did not Bernard goeth not beyond Christs death nor findeth any further degree of descension needfull after that Obiect 3. As ascending and descending are opposed one to the other so there must be a manifest antithesis betweene the places to the which the motions tended which cannot bee of heauen and earth as directly opposite one to the other but of heauen and hell which are often found in the Scripture set opposite one against the other as Psal. 139. 8. If I ascend into heauen c. if I lie downe in hell c. Ans. p. 53. Ans. 1. In the place alledged there is neither the opposition betweene ascending and descending neither doe some of the best Interpreters reade hell but the graue for the true reading of the place is and make my bed in the graue not in hell so is it taken Iob. 17. 13 the graue sheol shall bee my house I shall make my bed in the darke 2. The heauen and earth are as often opposed one to the other in Scripture as heauen and hell which are set one against the other not so much in respect of the distance of place as different qualitie Psal. 103. 11. the Prophet saith As high as the heauen is from the earth so great is his mercie toward them that feare him Here the Prophet had occasion to alledge the places of greatest distance to set foorth the greatnes of Gods mercie by way of comparison but he opposeth not hell but the earth against heauen Obiect 4. Christ before his ascension led captiuitie captiue as it is in the Psalme but his conquest ouer his enemies was not obtained by his comming downè from heauen but by his passion on the crosse and his descending to hell therefore that is the descending here spoken of Ans. p. 54. Ans. I will helpe you a little to gather your argument into forme that descending is here vnderstood whereby Christ obtained conquest ouer his enemies but this was done by his descension into hell not by his comming downe from heauen Ergo. 1. The proposition is graunted the assumption is not proued for it doth not follow Christ did not get this victorie by his descending from heauen Ergo by descending to hell for hee obtained it by his death Coloss. 2. 14. He put out the hand-writing of ordinances which was against vs and fastened it to the crosse and hath spoiled principalities and powers c. Which words Origen expoundeth thus Sicut bona quaeque scripta dicuntur non atramēto sed spiritu viui Dei ita mala quaeque scribuntur atramento calamo diaboli propter quod Dominus deleuit chirographum peccatorum nostrorū Hom. 2. in Psal. 38. As all good things are said to bee written not with inke but by the spirit of the liuing God so euill things are written by the inke and penne of the diuell therefore the Lord rased out the hand-writing of our sinnes If the diuel were conquered when the hand-writing of our sinnes was blotted out then hee was subdued vpon the crosse to the which this hand-writing was fastened But yet the Apostle more euidently saith That he might destroy through death him that hath power ouer death that is the diuell Heb. 2. 14. The diuel was then destroyed and perfectly conquered by Christs death the conquest being once obtained hee needed not againe to be conquered Obiect 5. The
signifie the place of torment for the wicked And whereas he would prooue that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifieth hel because the Apostle calleth it death Act. 2. 24 he hath made a good argument against himselfe for if hee make death and hell all one then hee will fasten vpon Christ the death of hell which is the second death Neither will it helpe him that the Syrian translator retaineth the same Hebrue word sheol for wee must follow the authentike origin all which is the Greeke and yet the Syrian Interpreter readeth in the same place sepulchrum which I thinke vnderstood the Syrian tongue somewhat better than this our new Rabbin Is not this also a proper argument S. Luke in another place Luk. 8. 31 taketh the word abyssus for hell Ergo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place signifieth hell He that findeth such fault with the priuate writer for loose conclusions should haue remembred himselfe to haue made better arguments Obiect 4. In this place the soule is opposed to the flesh therefore two distinct parts must be vnderstood Bellarm. ibid. To the same purpose the answerer when the Scripture diuideth the kinds as the soule and the body it alwaies notifieth vnto vs two distinct things But here by the holie one the flesh of Christ is vnderstood as S. Peter expoundeth Act. 2. 31. and the Syrian doth expresly call it bodie pag. 14. Ans. 1. Here wee haue another schollerlike argument he would prooue idem per idem the same thing by it selfe the Scripture here diuideth the kindes of soule and bodie Ergo it speaketh of two distinct things of the soule and the bodie 2. Indeede as you translate the soule and the flesh must needes signifie the soule and the flesh but the word nephesh doth not alwaies signifie the soule but the life when it is named with the flesh as Genes 9. 5. the flesh with the nephesh the life thereof shall ye not eate Leuit. 17. 14. the nephesh the life of the flesh is the bloud and so is soule to be taken in this place for the life 3. The Syrian translator readeth thus vers 31. hee saw before and spake of the resurrection of Christ that he was not left in the graue nor his bodie saw corruption If ye will stand to your owne text you are gone for here no mention is made neither of his soule nor of hel The Latin text also readeth for his soule he was not left in graue wherefore these Interpreters by soule vnderstand himselfe his person 4. As the holy one being the whole consisting of bodie and soule is yet taken for a part that is the flesh so by the same figure why may not the soule being but a part be taken for his whole person Obiect 5. Now that they are two distinct seuerall clauses is prooued by the two negatiue disiunctiue particles not and neither carefully retained as may appeare Psal. 16. 5. and 44. 19. c. Ans. p. 13. Ans. 1. His argument is weake these words not and neither in some places doe signifie two distinct things therefore in all In the 89. Psalme vers 22. the Prophet saith the enemie shall not oppresse him nor the wicked hurt him here these two negatiues lo lo are vsed and yet there is no great difference in these two clauses So likewise Psal. 31. 1. Mine heart is not exalted nor mine eyes lifted vp These negatiues iterated shew no great diuersitie of matter 2. But be it admitted that these particles doe inferre a distinction in the sentences doth it follow These are two diuers clauses Ergo one must be referred to the soule the other to the bodie 3. Neither doe wee say that these words containe a superfluous repetition of the same thing for the latter sentence expoundeth the former that although the life of Christ seemed to be raked vp in the graue yet his life should not so leaue him but that his bodie being preserued from corruption should presently be raised vp againe the second clause therefore sheweth how and in what manner Christs life and person was not forsaken in that his bodie by the power of God was defended from corruption And such are the obiections as wee haue heard against the exposition of the first place our arguments follow for the confirmation thereof REASONS APPROVING THE FORmer exposition that this place serueth not to proue the descension of Christ in soule to Limbus Patrum GENERALL REASONS CONCERning the question it selfe ARgum. 1. First I vrge that saying of Augustine In ijs quae apertè in scripturis posita sunt inueniuntur ea omnia quae continent fidem moresque viuendi All those things which containe faith and good manners are found in those places which are plainly set foorth in Scripture But this article that Christ descended in soule to deliuer the Patriarks is not found set foorth in any plaine and euident place of scripture but such as are obscure and doubtfully expounded both of Protestants and Papists Ergo it is no article of faith so to beleeue Argum. 2. S. Luke and so likewise the other Euangelists did write of all things that Christ both did and taught till his ascension Act. 1. 1 But they write nothing of Christs descension in soule to hell to set at libertie the soules of the godly Ergo it may be doubted whether it were any of Christs works And therefore as Master Beza well noteth I say that the Euangelists would not haue passed ouer this historie of the descent of Christs soule into hel Then as Augustine saith in another matter I haue told you that wee haue not read it in the Gospell but let vs seeke it there for if we finde it not there where shall we finde it I may imagine vnto you but then I shall not be a sure dispenser but a foolish fabler In like sort whence should we receiue an histore of any of Christs acts but from the Euangelists that writ the storie of Christs life and death Argum. 3. The rule of faith out of the word of God is certaine Prou. 30. 6. Put nothing to his words least hee reprooue thee and thou be found a liar Thus was it concluded by the Fathers in the Councell of Ferraria sess 10. It is euident that it is not lawfull by any meanes to depart a iot from the symbole of the Apostles But this article of Christs descension was not of ancient time in the Apostles Creede Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that neither Irenaeus nor Origen or Tertullian in the exposition of the Creede make mention of Christs descension but onely of his sepulture Ruffinus saith that neither in the Romane symbole nor in the East Churches it is not added He descended into hell The Nicen Creed hath it not nor the Constantinopolitane the Sirmian nor that of Carthage as elsewhere is shewed that it is omitted in tenne seuerall ancient Creedes Therefore although we doe with reuerence receiue and acknowledge this
greater that if the theeues soule went presentlie to Paradise much more Christs For whereas our Sauiour saith Where I am there shall my seruant be Ioh. 12. 26. it must follow that either the soule of the theefe must be in hell with Christs or that Christs soule was in paradise with the theeues for it were a dishonour for the seruant to preuent the Master The seruant is not greater than his Master Ioh. 13. 16. but now should the seruant haue the preeminence if his soule should goe to paradize and his Masters to hell 5. But we are told that these words Ioh. 17. 24. Father I will that they which thou hast giuen me be with me where I am which words with me where I am cannot otherwise be vnderstood than of his Godhead doe fully applicate Christs saying to the theefe Answ. p. 20. Ans. 1. If this venturous expositor had considered what went before and after these words with me where I am he would not haue vented foorth such an vncertaine glosse for first our Sauiour saith I will that they which thou hast giuen me be with me were they giuen vnto him as God I thinke not for who can giue vnto God then they were giuen vnto him as the Messiah he therefore prayeth they may be with him as the Messiah 2. It followeth immediatly that they may behold my glorie which thou hast giuen mee doth hee not speake here also of that glorie which was giuen him as the Messiah for the which he prayeth vers 5. and now glorifie me c I trust as he is God he praieth not for glorie to bee giuen him for hee that prayeth is inferiour in that hee prayeth But Christ as hee is God is not inferiour to his Father Doth hee then pray as God that they may bee with him take heede of Arianisme if you be too rash in this point he prayeth then as the Messiah 3. If Christ saying where I am speake of his Godhead his request was euen then fulfilled for his Apostles were with him then present as God for his Godhead filleth heauen and earth But his request was not then but in his kingdome of glorie fulfilled therefore he speaketh not of his Godhead 4. Though our Sauiour speake in the present tence where I am that is so spoken in respect of the assurance and certaintie of his kingdome purchased for his which was as sure as if alreadie he were in it and so doth our Sauiour with like certaintie pronounce of those which beleeue in him that they haue euerlasting life and are passed from death to life Ioh. 5. 24. 5. Thus Origen expoundeth this place of the glorie due vnto our Lord as the Christ and Messiah which he imparteth to his faithfull seruants Like as notable warriers doe not with other ordinarie souldiers diuide the spoile but they haue the best part so Christ to those that haue laboured more abundantly decreeth the chiefest honors and like to his owne such as hee conferred vpon his Disciples Father I will that where I am they be with me These honours like vnto Christs are not the honours due to his Godhead which no creature is capable of but such which hee receiued as Messiah 6. But wee are further certified that Augustine epistol 57. thus expoundeth these words of our Sauiour spoken to the theefe of his Godhead Ans. p. 20. Ans. 1. I will set Augustine against Augustine whose iudgement in his writings against the aduersaries of the faith is to be preferred before his priuate epistles sent to his friends for these were indited vpon the sudden the other vpon more mature deliberation these were directed to friends that would take euerie thing in the better part those intended against enemies that were readie to catch any aduantage But Augustine in his booke written against Felicianus the Arrian cited before expoundeth Christs words vttred to the theefe vpon the crosse of the soule 2. And why may wee not as well expound Christs descending into hell with Ambrose of the presence of his diuine power as with Augustine his ascending vp to heauen Ambrose saith Abyssum opinione si penetres illic quoque videbis Iesum operari If you in thought will search into the deepe you shall see Iesus also worke there But hee hath yet a more euident testimonie writing vpon these words Psal. 139. 15. Substantia mea in inferioribus terrae My substance was in the lower parts of the earth Christ to deliuer the soules of the dead to hell c. and that the diuine substance is here vnderstood the words following declare Thine eyes saw mine vnwrought substance that is the vnmade and vncreated word 3. Ambrose thinketh also that Christ was present with the theefe in soule the same day Abyssus ergo dixit non est in me sed coelum non dixerat non est in me quem receperat resurgentem paradisus non dixit non est in me quem regnare in se absoluto quoque latrone cognouerat sicut ipse Dominus dixit Hodie mecum eris in paradiso The deepe said not hee is in mee but heauen said not he is not in me whom it receiued rising againe Paradise said not he is not in me whom it knew to raigne there the theefe being also deliuered as the Lord said This day shalt thou be with me in paradise As hell said Christ was not there so Paradise said not hee was not there that is in soule and as Paradise knew Christ that day to raigne so Christ was there but it knew him then first to raigne there as the Messiah for as hee was God he was knowne to the heauenly powers alwaies to raigne in heauen Therefore Christ in his soule was the same day with the theefe in Paradise And thus much of the generall reasons PARTICVLAR REASONS TAKEN out of the place of Scripture it selfe Act. 2. 29. ARgum. 1. That which is called hell vers 27. the Apostle expresseth by the name of death ver 24. God hath loosed the sorrowes of death This cannot be the second death for these sorrowes had no hold of Christ and therefore they needed not be loosed for him And the Syrian Interpreter translateth sorrowes of the graue Christ then was onely now being dead vnder the sorrowes of the first death that is in the graue for so vsually death and the graue are put together in the Psalmes Psal. 6. 5. In death there is no remembrance of thee in the graue who shall praise thee Psal. 88. 10. Shal the dead praise thee or shall thy louing kindnes be shewed in the graue Argum. 2. Christ was vnder the sorrowes of that hell whither he descended as the Apostle saith ver 24. Whom God hath raised vp and loosed the sorrowes of death because it was impossible that he should be holden of it But Christ suffered not the sorrowes of the lower hell the place of torment for al his sorrowes and trauaile was ended vpon the crosse when hee cried
consummatum est it is finished Ioh. 19. 30. To the proposition Bellarmine answereth 1. That the sorrowes of hell as the Latin text readeth and the Answerer approoueth pag. 12 were loosed and dissolued non quibus teneretur not wherewith he was held sed ne teneretur but least he should be held of them Contra. 1. These sorrowes of death had fastened of Christ though they could not still hold him because they remained to the resurrection for this followeth as a reason of Christs raising vp whom God raised vp loosing the sorrowes of death if the sorrowes of the death and graue had not kept Christ a while hee should presently haue been raised vp 2. Againe Christ could not be held or detained of death death then had fastened vpon him but could not hold him One cannot be said to let go their hold or not to be able to hold vnlesse first they lay on hold but hell sorrowes did not so much as assay or assaile Christ after his death 2. He saith that Christ loosed the sorrowes of hell not for himselfe but for others Our answerer also hath the like saying S. Peter mentioneth sorrowes which were loosed at Christs resurrection which could not be in the sepulcher where his body lay dead and senselesse Ans. pag. 9. Contra. 1. The Apostle speaketh directly of Christ the sorrowes were loosed for him that was raised vp but Christ onely was raised vp The sorrowes of death were loosed onely for him that could not be held of them but Christ onely could not be held of them Ergo the sorrowes of death here spoken of were onely loosed for the resurrection of Christ. 2. As for our answerers position it doth manifestlie bewray him to bee a Limbist for if Christ loosed forrowes and not for his bodie which was senselesse then hee must either graunt that the sorrowes of hell were vpon Christ himselfe of the which hee was loosed at his resurrection or that hee loosed them for others and so hee is detected to be also an hell-harrower for the soules of the Fathers deliuered thence 3. What then though Christs bodie were without sense in the graue We say not it felt sorrowes but was vnder the sorrowes or bonds of death for it was a time and state of sorrow while Christs bodie lay in the graue till it was raised vp againe Argum. 3. S. Peter saith vers 31. he spake of the resurrection of Christ that his soule should not be left in hell or the graue c. The Prophet in these words speaketh of Christs resurrection but the descending of Christs soule to hell belongeth no waies to his resurrection but the not leauing of his life in the graue implieth the resurrection Ergo the Prophet meaneth no such being or going of Christs soule to hell Argum. 4. That which Dauid prophecieth of Christ was wholly and fully performed in Christ and not in Dauid But the not being or leauing of the soule in hell was as well performed in Dauid as in Christ for his soule was not at all in hell Ergo Dauid prophesieth not of the not leauing of Christs soule in hell First for the proposition the Answerer telleth vs that the true Antithesis between Christ and Dauid is only in his incorruption resurrection and ascension and not in any thing els pag. 17. Contra. The whole prophecie of Christ Thou shalt not leaue my soule nor suffer thy holy one to see corruption is by the Apostle applied to Christ vers 31 and denied to Dauid ver 29. for the whole is a peculiar prophecie of Christ he spake of the resurrection of Christ vers 31 in this whole sentence not partly of Christ partly of them both This prophesie then was historically onely true of Christ though typically and in some similitude also it agreeth to Dauid who hoped in Christ to rise againe and not for euer to dwell in corruption but literally the whole prophesie is referred to Christ as S. Peter expoundeth THE SECOND PLACE EXAMINED 1. Pet. 3. 18. which was put to death in the flesh but quickened in the spirit in the which spirit he went and preached to the spirits in prison which were in time passed disobedient when once the long suffring of God abode in the daies of Noe. The obiections answered WHereas the most approoued interpretation of these words is this that Christ hauing suffered in his humane nature yet was sustained and raised vp by his diuine spirit in and by the which he preached by y e ministery of Noe to the disobedient of the old world which now are damned spirits in the prison of hell this exposition shall be afterward warranted by the Scriptures hauing also the testimonie of some ancient writers But first a suruey shal be taken of the contrary obiections Obiect 1. If the meaning be that Christ dying in the flesh was raised to liue by his diuine spirit it ascribeth a foule error to the Apostle as placing Christs resurrection befare his descension whereas Peter speaketh not at all here of the resurrection c. Ans. p. 22. Ans. First here is no mention of Christs descension at all thus he beggeth the thing in question and buildeth vpon that which is most doubted of Secondly if the Apostle had treated of Christs descension before his resurrection is this such a foule error in the narration of things not to obserue the order of time Doth not S. Paul as much that first speaketh of Christs ascension Ephe. 4. v. 8. and afterward of his descension vers 10 Thirdly how can he say that in this place hee speaketh not all of the resurrection of Christs bodie when he maketh direct mention thereof vers 21. by the resurrection of Iesus Christ c Obiect 2. Here is no opposition betweene the humanitie and diuinitie of Christ because he speaketh of the death and passion of Christ which touched his humanitie onely Ans. p. 24. Ans. First is not here now a good argument the Apostle speaketh of that which concerneth Christs humanitie onely Ergo he toucheth not his diuinitie To make it a good argument hee should haue said he speaketh onely of the death and passion c. Secondly but then had hee said vntruly for the Apostle maketh expresse mention of his quickning in the spirit which is no part of his death or passion Obiect 3. The two parts of Christs humanitie are here directly set one against the other that is the soule against the bodie Ans. p. 24. Ans. 1. Thus hee still committeth the same fault which is called petitio principij the begging of the question for this is the point controuerted whether by the flesh and spirit Christs bodie and soule are vnderstood 2. Though the Syrian Interpreter reade bodie yet so doth not the originall which we are to follow 3. And though by flesh Christs bodie be vnderstood yet it followeth not that the spirit signifieth the soule for the like opposition is vsed by the Apostle Rom. 1. 3 betweene the flesh
cannot be shewed againe in all the scriptures 2. Because this example was most fit for the Apostles purpose who before vers 14. 15. exhorted that we should be content to suffer for righteousnesse and not to be ashamed of the profession of our faith then he strengtheneth his exhortation by certaine reasons as from the effects the confusion of those that speake euill of our conuersation in Christ 16 from the efficient cause the will of God vers 17 then hee doth illustrate his doctrine by two examples first of Christ who suffered as a iust man and was sustained in his suffrings and quickened againe secondly of Noah whom the Lord vpheld in his preaching and profession against all the professors of the old world condemning them and sauing him 3. Because this example of Noahs deliuerance by the Arke did minister iust occasion to the Apostle to speake of Baptisme where of the other was a figure of the which he intended to speake Thus our exposition is found euery way sutable to the Apostles purpose so is not the other and this might serue for another reason of this sense and interpretation giuen of this place Argum. 6. The dead to whom S. Peter saith the Gospell was preached chap. 4. 6 were not then dead but liuing when the Gospel was preached for the Apostle addeth that they might be condemned according to men in the flesh And Augustine inferreth well Quo modo iudicantur in carne quam non habent si apud inferos sunt How shall they be iudged in the flesh which they haue not if they be in hell But the spirits here preached to in prison are the same there called the dead and this Bellarmine confesseth that this place is expounded by the other Ergo the spirits here preached vnto were not then dead Bellarmine answereth thus to the reason of the proposition thus expounding the words that they might be condemned according to men in the flesh that is seeme to bee damned in mens iudgement because their bodies were killed in the water yet their spirits may liue that is may be saued before God Contra. First if the soules of them which died in the flood were saued then they which die in infidelitie and wickednesse may be saued for S. Peter saith that God brought the flood vpon the vngodly 2. Pet. 2. 5. Secondly this condemning in the flesh and liuing in the spirit followeth as an effect and sequel of the preaching going before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this cause was the Gospel preached c but according to his sense the effect must goe before the condemning of the flesh and the preaching followed aboue two thousand yeere after when Christ descended to hell Thirdly the Apostle by being condemned in the flesh and liuing in the spirit vnderstandeth the two parts of regeneration mortification in putting off the old man and renouation in putting on the new as S. Paul speaketh 1. Cor. 5. 5 Let him be deliueuered to Sathan for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saued in the day of the Lord. This was not meant of the death of his bodie for the partie liued after and was reconciled to the Church 2. Cor. 2. Wherefore this mortifying of the flesh and viuification of the spirit must be performed in this life as Augustine well expoundeth That they may be iudged according to men in the flesh that is in diuers tribulations and in the death of the flesh c. but may liue according to God in the spirit because they were mortified and dead therein while they were held in the death of infidelitie and impietie Here Augustine by being condemned in the flesh and liuing in the spirit vnderstandeth the dying vnto infidelitie and impietie Argum. 7. This place serueth not at all to prooue the deliuerance of the fathers out of Limbus by Christs descension thither 1. Those to whom Christ preached are said to bee incredulous persons or disobedient such were not the Fathers Ergo whereas Bellarmine saith that some of them might repent before their death and so their soules might bee saued he speaketh without booke For although I think not that al which perished in the waters were damned as infants and such as heard not of Noe his preaching if any such were so were not disobedient yet such as beleeued not and were disobedient were condemned to hell The Apostle maketh no distinction of them but calleth them disobedient and the world of the wicked how then dare hee say some of them repented before their death and so were not disobedient nor wicked 2. The hell that Christ descended vnto he loosed sorrowes in for so the Latin text readeth Act. 2. 24. hauing loosed the sorrowes of hell and the Answerer approoueth this reading pag. 12. But the Fathers were not in the sorrowes of hell but in Abrahams bosome a place of rest as Augustine calleth it Memorabilis quietis faelicitatis sinus A famous place of rest and felicitie And he further saith How Abraham into whose bosome the poore man was receiued can be vnderstood to haue bin in these sorrowes I cannot see The conclusion is this that the beleeuing Fathers were not deliuered out of hell neither yet were vnbeleeuers for Si omnes inde soluit exinaniuit inferna For if he deliuered all from thence then hell was emptied August It followeth then that if Christ descended in soule to hell to loose the sorrowes thereof and yet they were neither loosed for beleeuing Fathers that were in no sorrowes for Abrahams bosome was a place of comfort Luk. 16. 25 nor yet for vnbeleeuers that cannot come out of hell ibid. 26. They cannot come from thence to vs Then it remaineth that he descended not at all in soule to hell for any such end 3. The Patriarks were not in hell at all therefore were not deliuered thence they were in Abrahams bosome which is no part of hell Augustine prooueth it by three reasons First Ne ipsos quidem inferos vspiam scripturarum locis in bono appellatos reperire potui I can not finde in any place of scripture hell to be taken in any good sense or the better part But Abrahams bosome is taken in the better part Ergo. Secondly Sinus ille Abrahae secretae quietis habitatio pars aliqua inferorum credenda non est A place of rest and comfort can be no part of hell but so is the bosome of Abraham a place of rest Ergo. Thirdly betweene Abrahams bosome and hell is a great gulfe and distance Luk. 16. 26. wherupon he concludeth Apparet non esse quandam partem membrum inferorum tantae faelicitatis sinum It appeareth that a hauen of so great happines can be no part or member of hell Argum. 8. The preaching of Christ to the spirits in prison sometime disobedient in the daies of Noe is a forme and figure of the state of the Church vnder the Gospell for so S. Peter
Apostle speaketh of that descension which was next before his ascension but that was not his descending into the world being so many yeeres before Ergo he meaneth not that descensiō Ans. p. 54. Ans. 1. Doth it follow he meaneth not Christs first descending to the earth Ergo he speaketh of his descension to hell what loose conclusions are these 2. Why may not the Apostle ioyne that first descension and his ascension together as our Sauiour doth Ioh. 3. 13. No man ascended vp to heauen but he that descended from heauen the sonne of man which is in heauen 3. But there came another descension betweene which went immediatly before his descending to death and the graue Obiect Then yee will make many descensions as some of you expound his descension of his base and meane estate in a earth as to bee borne in a stable c. liuing in poore estate c. Some b of his humiliation to the last and lowest point that is to say to death and the graue some of his descending into the wombe of the Virgin but as his ascending was but one exaltation so his descending was but one humiliation Ans. p. 55. Contra. 1. Concerning the descending of Christ into the Virgins wombe I know none that doth now much vrge it Reuerent Beza doth demurre vpon it saying I leaue it to the Reader to consider 2. The other two expositions may well agree and stand together and he that affirmeth the one denieth not the other Further in making but one degree of Christs humiliation you crosse S. Paul who maketh two degrees as wee doe his taking vpon him the forme of a seruant and obedience to the death of the crosse Phil. 2. 7. 8. Bernard also maketh the same degrees of Christs descension which we doe as he is cited a little before his descending to the flesh to the crosse to the graue 3. As erroneous is your other assertion to make but one degree of Christs exaltation for he was exalted first by his resurrection out of the graue then exalted by his ascension into heauen 4. You and your cosine germanes doe make many descents of Christ first into the graue secondly into Limbus in the brimme of hell thirdly then into hell in the lower parts of the earth Obiect Christ was not interred properly in any part of the earth but in a tombe of stone and the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 added here to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth particularize and distinguish the parts of the earth in generall from those notorious infernall parts Ans. p. 55. Ans. 1. It is an absurd and preposterous speech to vse his owne words and a ridiculous cauill to say that Christ was not properly buried in the earth but in a rock as though rocks are not to bee counted part of the earth Our Sauiour saith he should be three daies and three nights in the hart of the earth Matth. 12. 40. then surely he was properly in the earth for it was his bodie not his soule that was so long in the earth his soule I hope they will not shut vp in hell three daies and three nights seeing the Scripture saith in their sense his soule should not be left there and to say that Christs soule did not enioy his fathers presence in heauen all the while it was absent from the bodie is contrarie to the Scripture Thou wilt shew mee the waies of life and shalt make me full of ioy with thy countenance Act. 2. 28. Origen maketh Christs soule but one day in hell vpon these words Hee shall raise vs after two daies prima dies c. the first day to vs is the passion of our Sauiour secunda qua descendit c. the second wherein he descended to hell the third of the resurrection Hom. 5. in Exod. 2. Further the graue that Christ was laid in was wide and deepe for at once three women went down into it and two Angels were seene at once in it with what sense then can yee exclude it from being part of the earth 3. Your article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will not helpe you a rush for both Psal. 63. 9 and Psal. 139. 15 the article is added and yet neither of these places are vnderstood of hell as is shewed before Ans. to obiect 1. The parts then of the earth are not compared with it selfe but considered as parts of the world in respect whereof they may be called lower or lowest parts Obiect 6. Bellarmine to prooue this place to be vnderstood of the descension of Christs soule into hell vrgeth these words that follow that hee might fill all things vers 10. and so visite all parts of his kingdome in earth hell and heauen Contra. 1. If you will haue Christ to fill all places with his locall presence what differeth this opinion from the Vbiquitaries that make an omnipresence of Christs flesh 2. Christ filleth all places with his gifts and benefits as the Apostle sheweth afterward Hee hath giuen some to be Apostles c. 3. Augustine sheweth how Christ not by any locall presence but by his diuine power filleth all things Nec tamen Dei localem fingimus praesentiam non mundum dimittens ad coelos ascendit nec coelum deserens ad terram venit sed vno eodemque tempore totus totum impleuit Act. cum Felic c. 17. Neither doe we imagine a locall presence of God hee left not the world to ascend to heauen neither for sooke heauen and came to the earth but at one and the same time filled all in all And such are their obiections REASONS CONFIRMING THE right exposition of this text ARgum. 1. First our Sauiour saith Ioh. 3. 13. No man ascendeth to heauen but hee that descended from heauen the sonne of man which is in heauen and S. Paul saith in that he ascended what is it but that he had descended first into the lower parts of the earth Ephes. 4. 9 one of these places expoundeth the other to descend then into the lower parts of the earth is to descend from heauen to the earth for our Sauiour and Paul speake of the same descension not of diuers Argum. 2. Where Christ visited thither he descended but he did not visit hell therefore he descended not thither The proposition cannot be doubted of the assumption is thus proued Where Christ visited he visited to redeeme Luke 1. 68. Blessed be the Lord God of Israel because he hath visited and redeemed his people he visited them to the end to redeeme them but hee redeemed none in hell Ergo he visited not hell therefore the Apostle speaketh of no descension thether Argum. 3. The lowest poynt of Christs humiliation was the lowest poynt of his descension this is confessed His ascension being but one exaltation proueth that his descending likewise was but one humiliation Ans. p. 55. So long then as he descended he was in his humiliation if Christ should be exalted in his descension it
were as much to say hee ascended in descending But this were absurd as Origen noteth If wee diligently consider we shall finde that neuer any is said to descend into an holie place or ascend to an vnnoble place Christ then did not begin to be exalted while he was descending But the death and passion of Christ and suffring vpon the crosse and so consequently his graue was the lowest point of his humiliation Philip. 2. 8. He humbled himselfe and became obedient vnto the death euen the death of the crosse Ergo Christ descended no further then to the crosse and his graue Argum. 4. Christ ascended from that place whether he descended but he ascended not in soule from hell Ergo he thither descended not The proposition is grounded vpon the Apostles words now in that he ascended what is it but he descended first vers 9. The assumption is thus proued Of the natiuitie life death resurrection ascension and all other actions performed by our Sauiour the Apostles were witnesses Act. 4. 20. We cannot but speake the things which we haue seene and heard 1. Iohn 1. 1. That which we haue heard seene with our eyes and our hands haue handled of the word of life declare wee vnto you But the Apostles neither sawe nor heard of Christ ascending out of hell but onely from the earth Acts 1. 9. while they beheld he was taken vp Ergo c. Argum. 5. To descend into the deepe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to descend into the lower parts of the earth with S. Paul speaking of Christ are all one this is graunted Ans. p. 12. out of Luke 8. 31. But to descend into the deepe is nothing else but to be among the dead which are in the graue and not in hell Rom. 10. 7. Who shall descend into the deepe that is to fetch Christ againe from the dead Thus Origene expoundeth this place If any man in minde and thought descend into the deepe thinking Christ there onely to be conteined as though it were all one and a like to call him from the dead c He saith that it is a like phrase to descend into the deep and to fetch Christ frō the dead Ergo Christs locall descension was but to the graue Argum. 6. How 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lower parts of the earth and in what sense it is to bee taken that place sheweth Psalme 139. 13. Thou hast fashioned mee in the lowest parts of the earth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Septuagint reade in the superlatiue but here the Apostle in the comparatiue if the lowest parts of the earth doe not signifie hell the lower shall much lesse Obiect To vse the comparatiue for the superlatiue is a phrase and forme of speech very vsuall among the Grecians so that here it may very well be taken for the superlatiue to signifie the lowest parts Ans. p. 51. Ans. 1. We doe not much stand vpon this point for the Syrian and Latin translator doe reade here ad inferiora to the lower or inferiour parts Beza ad infimas partes to the lowest parts for whether wee reade lower or lowest the sense is the same for the earth compared with other parts of the world may be said to be the lower or lowest part 2. Yet who can be ignorant but that where the necessitie of the sense vrgeth not to expound the superlatiue by the comparatiue as it doth in all these places by the Answerer alledged Matth. 11. 11. and 23. 11. Mark 4. 31. 32. and in the rest yet where the sense so vrgeth not as in this place it doth not and especially where the common dialect is vsed as in Scripture most an end the comparatiue degree is to be translated properly by it self And whereas the Answerer findeth not fault with the Latin translator for expounding the superlatiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek Psal. 139. 13. by the Latin comparatiue inferiora lower how much fitter is it to translate the comparatiue by the comparatiue as the Latin text doth here Argum. 7. I will now lastly adioyne the exposition of some of the Fathers Origen saith Paulus quoniam descensionis Christi mysterium praedicat profundum nominauit quasi de superioribus ad inferiora venientis Homil 2. in Genes Paul because he preacheth the mysterie of Christs descension into hell he named the deepe as of one comming from the higher to the lower parts And againe the same Origen thus writeth Descendere Deus dicitur quando curam humanae fragilitatis habere dignatur quod specialiùs de Domino saeluatore nostro sentiendum est descendit ergo neque enim alius ascendit quà m qui descendit descendit ergo Dominus non solum curare sed portare quae nostra sunt Hom. 4. in Genes God is said to descend when he vouchsaseth to take care of humane frailtie which more specially is to be thought of our Lord and Sauiour he descended therefore for none other ascended but hee that descended the Lord therefore descended not only to care for but to carrie our nature Augustine also thus witnesseth Est quaedam coelestis habitatio Angelorum illae pars rerum superna est haec terrena vita vbi caro sanguis si illi comparatur inferna est cum enim his sunt mortui ne mireris si infernum dicitur In Psalm 85. There is a certaine heauenlie habitation of Angels that is the higher part of things this earthly life where flesh and bloud is if it bee compared to that is the lower part for seeing there are dead here marueile not if it bee called hell Although Augustine in the words following seeme to incline to the opinion of Christs descension to deliuer the Patriarkes thinking notwithstanding that Abraham was not in hell yet in this sentence he sheweth this to be no strange sense to expound the earth in respect of heauen to be the lower parts Theodoret vpon this text thus writeth His descending doth not signifie any passing from place to place but teacheth the greatnes of his dispensation that when hee was most high he abased himselfe so much and endured so great abasement He interpreteth as we doe of Christs humiliation and abasement here in earth Bernards opinion we haue seene before that he maketh three degrees of Christs descension ad carnem ad crucem ad mortem to the flesh to the crosse to death and the graus Now whereas diuers fathers are produced as Irenaeus Athanasius Ciprianus Epiphanius Hierom Augustine Ambrose Chrysostome with others as witnesses of Christs descension in soule to hell p. 56 First all these are alledged by Bellarmine with twētie more to proue that Christ descended into hell in soule to deliuer the Patriarks from thence wherefore vnlesse hee therein concurre with them they are no fit witnesses to speake in his cause Secondly neither did all the Fathers agree in iudgment that Christ descended into hell to redeeme the soules of the Fathers Origen