Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

1

0

there follows something in the creed respecting solitarily and peculiarly his soul or spirit ; for the proof whereof, I need not say much in this place, seeing it will be fully confirmed by the whole ensuing part of this chapter. But yet, that I may not affirm any thing without a direct and immediate proof, this will be most evident from the consideration of the use that the orthodox made of this point against that heresy of the Gnostics, by which they

denied the salvation of the body, and that at death their souls ascended above the heaven unto their determinated place, from whence they shall no more return unto their bodies;" for against this notion and opinion they strongly argued, "that it was an overturning the order of the resurrection, a denial of our Lord's descent into hell, and by consequence of all his followers; who, according to the scriptures of truth, must first go thither before they can be admitted to the perfect fruition of the ever blessed God;" unto which convincing argument, these heretics could frame no other reply, than that the body was the hell of soul, and that Christ's being in his body here on earth, was his descent into hell; from the pains where of he was set free, when by death he was delivered from his body:" From whence it is most apparent, that the descent

[ocr errors]

into hell is to be understood alone of our Sa. viour's soul.

For the farther proof whereof, I might cite St. Jerome, who writes, "That it was the soul. of Christ which went into hell;" as also Epiphanius, Ambrose, Origen, Athanasius, with many others, who all apply this action of our Saviour's to his soul alone; employing for this end that text of the apostle, cited by him from the psalmist, on which this article is principally founded, [Acts ii. 27.] "Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see corruption," whereby the soul of Christ, which God would not leave in hell, they understood the rational part of man, that spirit which distinguishes him from a brute, and subsists after its disunion and departure from the body; wherein it is most probable, they were in the right; for although the word soul may by a metonymy be sometimes taken in scripture for the body, yet it cannot be so understood, where it is placed in opposition to, and contradistinction from it, as in this text it is. And, as for the creed itself, the burial of our Lord's body having been already asserted, the bare repetition of the same in other terms, would be an unaċcountable tautology, and contrary to that bre

vity which this short summary of faith intends. But then:

Secondly, the descent into hell respecs not only our Saviour's soul, but relates to something done by it in its separate state, after it was disunited from its body by death; which excludes its having any refference to the miseries and agonies that he suffered in his soul whilst alive. Now this will most evidently appear from the sermon of St. Peter, recorded in the second of the Acts, wherein he applies that text of the psalmist, That God would not leave his soul in hell, unto our Saviour, after that the Jews had by wicked hands crucified and slain him; assuring his auditors therefrom, that although they had crucified and put to death the Lord of life, by means whereof his body was buried in the earth, and his soul gone to hell, yet those two essential parts should return from their respective separated mansions, and be conjoined in the same perfect living man again, according to the prophesy of David, who seeing this before, spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither did his flesh see corruption; where it is manifest, that the being, for descending into hell, related unto the soul of Christ during the interval betwixt his death and resurrection; that, as during that time,

his body was laid in the grave, so his soul went into hell, where each of them remained in their particular habitations, till the re-union of them again by his glorious resurrection, which was the third day after his death and passion.

Now, suitable to this explication of the forementioned texts, were the notions of the pri mitive fathers; Athanasius, in his third tract against Apollinarius, concerning the incarna tion of our Lord, shews in sundry places, "That whilst his body lay buried in the grave, his soul went into hell, to perform in that place those several actions and operations which were necessary for the complete redemption and salvation of mankind; that he performed af. ter his death, different actions by his two essential parts; by his body he lay in the grave and conquered corruption; by his soul he went into hell, and vanquished death."Wherefore he writes in another tract against the said heretic, "That after the death of Christ, his body lay in the grave, and his soul went to hell; neither of which were deserted by his divinity, according to that saying of the psalmist, Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see corruption." And the author of the dialogues concerning the holy trinity, extant amongst the works of the said father, writes, "That

Christ, for our sakes, went down by his soul into hell, whilst his body was laid in the grave." But, what need I multiply quotations to prove a point so universally attested by the ancients in innumerable places of their writings? Let therefore the superaddition of the single testimony of Fulgentius suffice, "That after the death of the son of God, his whole humanity was neither in the grave, nor in hell, but that he lay dead in the grave with his body, whilst he went into hell with his soul." From all which it is most evident, that the descent into hell relates only to the soul of Christ during its separation from the body, or the time that intervened between his death and resurrection; which being premised, I come now to consider the article itself, or what is predicated therein concerning our Lord's separated soul, which is, that he descended into hell; wherein these two things shall be examined: first, the place whither he went, which was hell: secondly, the manner of his going thither, viz. by descending, he descended into hell.

Only before I speak to either of these, I must be forced to premise one thing more, which is, that I do not pretend to affirm, that all the fathers and primitive writers had the same exact notions and conceptions of this ar

« PredošláPokračovať »