III. Of the going down of Christ into Hell

III. Of the going down of Christ into Hell

As Christ died for us, and was buried; so it is also to be believed, that he went down into Hell.

It's Short, So We're Going to Have Fun

This Article and the doctrine it professes are very important to me and to this blog for one reason: I actually wanted to write a novel three years ago in which the doctrine played a central role. And actually, both my nom de blog and the name of the Prior of the Monastery were characters in it. I won't get into the plot, but one important idea was: What if the universe and Christianity were around thousands of years in the future and played a great role in the life of a great empire. Imagine Late Antiquity Europe in space! Also imagine that the dominant school of theology could be called "Literary," so that they see God as the Great Author of all things and the Christian story as the chief chapter in the great epic of the universe. But after a while, they re-examine the fragmentary records of their past and discover that the Christian story doesn't look so universal anymore. It seems to be filled with the devices of Greco-Roman literature. Thus ancient doctrine becomes challenged. Was this idea due to God or man?

Hence, the first look at Article III will be Katabasis: Christ's Descent to the Dead As Greco-Roman literary device . For our second stab, we'll trace the origin of the doctrine in Tradition and try to put forth an aetiology. For our third stab, we'll look at what aetiology for the doctrine we can find in the Scriptures. Sound like fun?

Facilis Descensus Averno

Talibus orabat dictis arasque tenebat,
cum sic orsa loqui uates: 'sate sanguine diuum,
Tros Anchisiade, facilis descensus Auerno:
noctes atque dies patet atri ianua Ditis;
sed reuocare gradum superasque euadere ad auras,
hoc opus, hic labor est. pauci, quos aequus amauit
Iuppiter aut ardens euexit ad aethera uirtus,
dis geniti potuere...

With such words she prayed and held herself fast to the altar
And thus she arose to speak, "Offspring of divine blood,
Trojan man, Anchises' son, it is an easy descent to Avernus
The door of Dark Dis swings wide open the fullness of the day and night
But to retrace one's steps and depart into the air open to heaven
This is effort, this is work. Few have been able to do so.
And those [who have] moderate Jupiter has loved
Or fiery courage has lifted to the stars...
These were begotten of the gods... (Vergil, Aeneid, VI, 124-130

Was Vergil a prophet? Who knows? I think the tradition about the Second Eclogue is weak, but the prophets often are talking about many things at once. The Cumaean Sibyl, however, was regarded as a prophetess (by Augustine, I think). But I think the merits of her case like the Oracle at Delphi were on historical records not poetry. The Sibylline Books were much imitated but never equalled. One of my favorite parts of City of God could be called, "What they're saying about us (and the Lord)", like a column in one of the Alabama newspapers. Augustine quotes the oracles about Jesus. Some are prophetically inspired. Some are possessed by demons. But all of the Augustine's quoted sources are like the prophets and demons of the New Testament, they're fairly sure Jesus is important. Hence, the doctrine of "The Descent Into Hell" or katabasis , as we shall call it, seems prefigured in the Aeneid . Is there more to this?

Last winter, I attended an intimate talk by Margaret Mitchell of the University of Chicago Divinity School on the genre of the Gospel of Mark. She had some interesting things to say, which I'm sure will figure in a future publication. The tack of the Literary Theologian (LT) would be to see the Gospels as the perfection of all extant and appropriate genres rather than simply as a borrowing from one or more extant genres or an intentional innovation of a completely new genre (two of Mitchell's ideas). One possible way to do this is to see the story of Christ as epic ( Paradise Lost and Paradise Regained make this reading). The Gospels and the Scriptures as a whole become the justification of the Christian way of life.

But I think tragedy is an even more compelling way to look at the Life of Jesus as genre. We have the disguised noble hero, who is revealed slowly as the Incarnate Son of God but is killed as a traitor. His fatal flaw: obedience to God and love of human souls. But yet He becomes his own deus ex machina , rising to new life and transforming something which could evoke fear and pity into a story of joy, hope, and challenge. The best tragedies are more than Aristotle made them out to be. They are also stories of challenge but somehow incomplete. Traditional sympathies are reversed. But the Gospels always seem better executed to me. Thus, the Passion remains a powerful theme for drama, no matter what we think of its presentation. And the broader story remains likewise influential in The Matrix Trilogy , even if the heart of the story seems absent. The Literary Theologian would say that the power and influence of the story, its resonance with stories in other traditions, and its constant mimesis in the secular arts all confirm its divine origin.

And the story of the Harrowing of Hell, though less influential in modern times, must have been a strong draw in the medieval world. It was acted during Holy Week when the emotions of the believers already were strained to the breakingpoint. The Lord, Pie Iesu, was humiliated. Throughout the Christian world, these days were especially feared by the Jews, who often found themselves transformed from fellow human beings to emotional outlets to scapegoats. The Lord be merciful unto our fathers and mothers and heal all of the children of Abraham. The Harrowing of Hell was another form of release. Jesus was not dead but victorious, being witty and authoritative and sometimes literally beating Satan under His feet. And poor Adam and Eve then were restored to their primal innocence.

But an older literary tradition is perfected in that story. The Harrowing is a Katabasis a descent to the dead of an epic hero in search of knowledge about the order of the cosmos and his own destiny. It appears in the Odyssey , the Aeneid , and other less-known works (Plato's Republic etc.). In the Middle Ages, Dante centered an entire epic on the journey through the realm of spiritual death through the realm of purification into the ineffable Presence of God Most High and Triune, "The Love that moved the Sun, the stars." So influential was katabasis in ancient times that Petronius' Satyricon describes the protagonists journeying through the infernal warrens of Trimalchio's house while making allusions to katabases in epics past. But understanding Article III as Katabasis doesn't help us very much. What did Christ need to do among the dead? What of the universe and his destiny did He not know?

Katabasis in the Tradition

The doctrine of Katabasis first seems to appear in the evolving text we know as the Apostles' Creed. It is perhaps too much to say, but I'll say it anyway. The Niceno-Constantipolitan Creed etc. seems to be a product of the Eastern Church (deliberative assembly in the East under imperial auspices that is deeply invested in Hellenistic philosophical discourse), while the Apostles' Creed seems to be a product of the Western Church (starting from Roman baptismal creeds known to Tertullian and Hippolytus). But there seems to be enough cross-pollination of ideas that we simply could be deceived by our sources. What is amazing about this phenomenon is how two creedal statements apparently forged in the crucible of one or the other part of the ancient world were rather gladly adopted in the other. The Eastern Orthodox rightfully complain about the filioque , but do they do so because of the unilateral innovation of the West or because they believe modifications of the Nicene Creed belong to the East. Perhaps, true catholic doctrine lies in that which arises out of the local discourses throughout the Church Universal which each local church offers as a gift to the entire Body. If received as doctrine, it is most surely catholic. And if there is heresy, it arises out of the jealousy of Cain...

But whatever way we pose the Apostle's Creed, some mention of katabasis is found in Arian creeds in the 360s and it then spreads. See a useful footnote . Its presence in Arian creeds may explain why it does not appear in the Ecumenical formulations, for those who might have desired it in the East either were personae non gratae or fearful of being called Arians. But it is known in other Greek creeds later, perhaps due to adoption from the West from more reliable persons.

Schaff has a lot of thoughts on usage. I would take one and run, but it's hard. Some versions emphasize descent to the shades of the dead, inferos in Latin or katotata in Greek. Unfortunately, I know it's rather common and poetic to join the physical abode of the dead with the shades of the dead themselves. Throwing Sheol and its translations as opposed to Gehenna and its translations into the mix further confuses the issue. So let's play another game. The earliest place we find katabasis in Latin creeds is 390 A.D (possibly later) in Aquileia (at the head of the Adriatic in Italy, I didn't remember myself and originally placed it in Gaul), as given by Rufinus in his commentary on the Creed. Considering that Rufinus had the dubious distinction of being Origen's Latin translator, I'm betting he would write very carefully. Hence, it is unlikely he introduced anything to the creed, since he claims it as the baptismal creed of his own church. He also traveled widely in the East, where he was harassed by Arians. He also was an ecclesiastical historian of some importance. Everything suggests to me that the Creed he reports may have been the one he spoke at baptism (he probably would have mentioned a change in his lifetime). Thus, between Hippolytus c. 215 and the baptism of Rufinus c. 374, the doctrine of the descent to the dead was introduced into Italy. We know that it was accepted by the Arians around this time but was not a strongly disputed object in the East.

But where does that leave us? I've played pattyfingers in historical logic, especially as I apply it to the study of late antiquity. I've done so in order to get a date range. The idea of doing so is in order to apply the shopworn trope that Creeds are answers to error. To some extent this is true but we must be careful. It's one thing to say "I believe in God the Father" to contradict the general atheism of "the world" about the Creator, but it's another to say in the Nicene Creed, "begotten, not made..." Some parts of the Creed establish a faith that you could not imagine anyone but a Christian would want to believe. Or they establish a faith that you couldn't imagine someone who called themselves a Christian not believing [Bishop Spong notwithstanding ;) ]. The others argue directly against errors which you could imagine faithful followers of Christ believing until they were catechized otherwise. I think the descent to the dead is specific enough of a doctrine that it falls in the latter category. It speaks to an error rather than framing basic faith.

We know why the Arians went for the katabasis. If Christ were a creature, he, of course, would have followed the fate of all rational creatures. And thus I suspect this formulation entered the Creed because of some ana-Arian heresy in the West that asserted Jesus was a spirit, not human, or had a human body and a divine spirit. Whatever it spoke against, the Creed maintains that Jesus experienced death as fully as any man and entered what Phillip K. Pullman has called (but distorted) "The Prison Camp," the Grief of Asphodel, or the gritty underworld of Gilgamesh. But still we are left to ask: whatever did he do there?

Katabasis in Scripture

Deep controversy at the time of the Reformation concerns the Scriptural basis of the doctrine. The strongest objection is, of course, Jesus' words to the Repentant Thief, "Today, you shall be with me in Paradise" (Luke 12:43). Further support is John 16:16 ff., in which Jesus suggests the Disciples will not see him because, "I am going to the Father." Matthew 22:44, if taken as relevant, would suggest the subjugation of death and Satan happening as Christ sits at the right hand of the Father. It also could be eschatological.

The proof-text of the opposite position is 1 Peter 3:18 ff, "Christ too suffered for our sins once and for all, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, put to death in the body, he was brought to life in the spirit. In the spirit also he went and made his proclamation to the imprisoned spirits, those who had refused to obey in the past, while God waited patiently in the days when Noah was building the ark; in it a few people, eight in all, were brought to safety in the water. This water symbolized baptism, through which you are now brought to safety...and it brings salvation through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who is now at the right hand of God, having entered heaven and received the submission of angels, authorities, and powers."

One can imagine an Italian bishop looking at this treasure attributed to Peter (even if it's not his) and affirming it as pure Petrine doctrine, which was a maxim of Ecumenical Councils and nearly unanswerable in the West. But it's tricky. "Put to death in the body...brought to life in the spirit." Mind-body dualism aargh! But sometimes it's best to credit folks with subtlety. We know Christ was raised in the flesh. Thomas touched his wounds. He ate and drank. He rebuilt, as the expression goes, the temple of his body through the animating power of the breath of God. The Scriptures are insistent through the proclamations of the Apostles that God raised Jesus of Nazareth even before they exactly were confident on the nature of His divinity. Again, Christ the Second Adam is the happy analogy. Christ's raising is a new creation of man through extraordinary means. We are promised remaking by the remaking of the man who is also God. Christ is thus raised in the spirit first so that as the Psalmist says "the body you have broken may rejoice."

Peter then tells us that Christ as a spirit preached to the "imprisoned spirits," the Generation of the Flood. The Mishnah says, "The Generation of the Flood and the Generation of the Wilderness have no portion in the world to come." In the latter case, the text seems to be Psalm 95, "so I vowed in my anger, they shall never enter my rest." But as Hebrews 3:7 ff. quotes it, "Today if you hear his voice, do not grow stubborn as in the rebellion at the time of testing in the desert." Whatever be the anger of God, it is assuaged by Jesus. Those who had passed through the waters of the Flood and the waters of the Red Sea as symbols of baptism (but had died in the waters or in the coincidentally named Wilderness of Sin) now had access to the Gospel for a time in the person of Christ. (The Mormons have made too much of this, perhaps.) They could choose not to be stubborn anymore. Jesus suggests no one who comes from the dead will convince anyone to obey the Law, but what about someone coming to the dead? 1 Peter opens the question. And it opens the question of everybody else who might be imprisoned. The Generation of the Flood, for instance, really had no Covenant with God. It also opens up something important about the abiding-place of righteous Israelites. But it only opens these questions. But it does suggest "whatever going to the Father" was involved with the Triduum either came after the katabasis (it is described after the proposed activities aming the dead) or is somehow simultaneous. One does not obviously exclude the other. The idea is repeated later in the letter, perhaps further boosting the idea of more general preaching, "That was why the gospel was preached even to the dead; in order that, although in the body they were condemned to die as everyone dies, yet in the spirit they might live as God lives." The first fruits of them that sleep likely bore much fruit among the sleepers.

Other passages cited in support of katabasis include God's prophecy concerning enmity between serpents and the descendants of Eve, which often is interpreted Christologically, "They will strike at your head and you will strike at their heel," but exegeting this as referring to katabasis is highly forced. Psalm 139:6-7 says, "Where then can I go from your Spirit or flee from your Presence. I go up to Heaven, you are there. If I go down to hell, you are there as well." I've preached this passage as primarily metaphorical, referring to places and people in which the Psalmist does or does not expect to experience God, but it does make an interesting prophecy of Christ. Job 38:17 suggests God has at least seen the gates of Hell. Psalm 68:18 says, "When you ascended on high, you led captives in your train." Matthew 12:38 ff. is cited as well, but it seems to refer to a body at unity with the "heart of the earth" or the dust (though incorruptible). Seeing what we have elsewhere (and there's more), 1 Peter is the most coherent and obvious Scriptural basis of the doctrine.

But What Does It All Mean?

I think I've said quite a bit about what it all means, but it's worth seeing it as Article III. Article III essentially makes no further exposition beyond that of the Apostle's Creed. It seems apologetic, "it is to be believed." Conscious of maintaining the integrity of the catholic faith, I suspect the English reformers dared not touch it, though it seemed doubtful. Its history in the Protestant churches has been colorful.

But is it worth being apologetic? I would say no. The story of katabasis is a treasure bestowed on us by 1 Peter. It is a story of ultimate kenosis, for Christ did descend to the dead. It is a story of triumph, for Christ was raised to life among the dead. It is a story of love, reconciliation, and redemption, for Christ, it is believed, preached the Kingdom to those who were told they were excluded eternally from its promises. God through Christ put away his anger from the two most evil generations of man. Finally, it is a story of hope, for if even the dead received the Gospel and came as captives in the triumphal train of Christ, death cannot end what faithful word endures in us. And that's why I love The Katabasis of Our Lord, despite its dubiousness.

Until next time, the Holy Brothers pray that the cleansing waters of Baptism working within you shall not just wash away the impurities of the flesh but produce in you the pure and contrite heart which is the great sacrifice to God.