Jesus descended into hell...?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kjack2222
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kjack2222

Guest
CCC 633 - why do we teach that “Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.”? It may sound silly, but what’s the purpose of making a concrete statement about what happened when Jesus descended into hell? Especially given that it’s something we never be able to totally know, soely due to the ultimate unknowability of God, if that makes any sense. Just trying to understand the roots and logic here. Does the above mean that at any guven time there could be those who are or have become “just” in hell?

This line also references rhe Council of Rome 745, but I can’t find original document anywhere and I’m curious to know what it says.
 
Last edited:
It’s not an easy question to answer, as you can see from this earlier thread:
40.png
Council of Rome 745 Apologetics
Hi, On page 164 in the CCC footnote 483 there is a reference to the Council of Rome 745 I tried searching for this but to no avail. I would like to read this because it is a reference as to when Jesus went to the souls/prisoners in Hades, 1 Peter 3:18. We are taught that it was between Jesus death and resurrection. My JW friend says it is after Jesus resurrected as per 1 Peter 3:18. any help would be appreciated. Can some one out there help me? Thanks
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Limbo was believed to be part of the Hell dimension but not Hell propper, it was where everyone since Adam was good enough for Heaven but prior to His death no one could enter. After dieing and reopening the gates of heaven Jesus descends into Limbo part of Hell of fetch everyone.

Bare in mind that is the Sunday School version. I just woke up and can’t advance theology yet.

Goes looking for coffee
 
@Cyril I was taught the same thing. That “limbo” was where just souls went after they died before they were saved by Jesus Christ who came and brought them into his kingdom. I wasn’t told that it was part of hell however and rather that it was a whole separate place which got translated strangely. But at the same time hell is any state completely without God and God wasn’t in limbo either. So maybe it could be considered as a part of hell but for us now, hell is where damned souls go. But anyways @kjack2222, the meaning of that line is that Jesus Christ went to where just souls went before he came and redeemed them, not (atleast that I know of) to what we think of hell. 🙂
 
Last edited:
Yes I would add that this is supported by Philippians 2:9-10: ‘God exalted Him and gave to Him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus, every knee should bend, of those in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth.’
 
Who said that jesus was in hell after his death and till his resurrection?
From the Rev. it would appear that hell will start functioning only after the world ends as satan will take charge of hell as per Rev.20:10 by that time only
 
it was a state of being …disembodied. Jesus’ soul parted His body and joined the state that all departed souls were experiencing. Souls are the place. Souls define the state of being and so to speak the ‘place’ of the damned is called that because that is the state the damned souls experience. Souls unite in a kind of likeness. So righteous souls are united to their likeness Abraham. When Jesus’ soul disembodies and joined the disembodied souls of all history, His soul brought eternal judgement. Souls of faith and righteousness were able to unite with Him. Purgatory is created at that moment by the state of souls in friendship but not pure and hell is defined by those souls at that moment who fled the presence of Christ’s soul.
 
Last edited:
Jesus did not descend into Hell, where the damned are.

“In which also coming he preached to those spirits that were in prison…” I Peter 3:19 DR

I was taught that Jesus descended into what was called Paradise, or Abraham’s Bosom, or is translated as prison in the verse above. I have also seen it translated as Hades or Limbo. It was a place where the spirits of just souls waited until they could be brought into Heaven. Despite dying with faith in God, they could not yet behold the Beatific Vision. It was called Hades because it was a place of the dead, but it was not the same as Hell, the place where the damned souls suffer forever. No damned soul can later repent and turn to God.

After Jesus had redeemed mankind by dying on the Cross, he went to this place (Abraham’s Bosom, Limbo, Hades, etc.) and brought these just souls into Heaven. His sacrifice allows us to enter Heaven after we are purified of all sin.
 
kjack2222 said:
CCC 633 - why do we teach that “Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.”?
Click to expand...
This a very good question and opens up about the real existence of the underworld aka hades, place of the dead, … Jesus talked about this place in Luke 16:19-31. It has two sections, the place of torment, and Abraham’s section where Lazarus was.

After Jesus death, he went down to this place of hell, and released those on Abraham’s side to they can enter into heaven.

In 1 Peter 3:19-22 Jesus also went to the place of the dead to preach to those who died from Noah’s flood.
 
kjack2222 said:
This line also references rhe Council of Rome 745, but I can’t find original document anywhere and I’m curious to know what it says.
Click to expand...
Nobody yet has answered the OP’s question about what conclusion was reached on Jesus’ descent into Hades at the Council (or Synod) of Rome in 745. It’s a question about what happened in history, in a certain place at a certain time. Will we never see this question answered?

Higher up on this thread I gave a link to an earlier thread asking the same question, but I don’t think we managed to answer it there, either.
 
Last edited:
BartholomewB said:
what conclusion was reached on Jesus’ descent into Hades at the Council (or Synod) of Rome in 745[?] … Will we never see this question answered?
Click to expand...
First we have to find the document. I’ve done a bit of digging to find the relevant synod; first I checked Wikipedia, which mentions that a synod of Rome was held in 745 under Pope Zachary. After googling that, I found another wikipedia article about Pope Zachary which briefly mentions that he condemned two heretics, Clement and Adelbert, at a synod in 745. After googling Clement and Adelbert, I found an article in the Dictionary of National Biography about Clement Scotus I. That article gives a few more details about the synod of 745, and has a citation at the end which says, in part, “the Acts of the Roman Synod…[are] in the Monumenta Moguntina…Jaffe’s Bibliotheca Rerum Germanicarum, vol. iii…Berlin, 1866.” Here is that volume, and I’ve linked directly to the page with the text of the “Acta Synodi Romanae” (Acts of the Roman Synod) from 745 A.D.

That synod’s comments on hell appear in two places: once on page 140 and once on page 146. On page 140 the synod condemns Clement the Scot with these words:
“Qui contra fidem santorum patrum contendit, dicens: quod Christus filius Dei, descendens ad inferos, omnes, quos inferni carcer detinuit, inde liberasset, credulos et incredulos, laudatores Dei simul et cultores idulorum.”
Click to expand...
In English:
“Contrary to the teaching of the holy fathers he contends that Christ, descending to the lower world, set free all who were imprisoned there, believers and unbelievers, those who praised God and the worshipers of idols.”
Click to expand...
Page 146 is another condemnation of Clement the Scot, which says:
“…insuper et dominum Iesum Christum, descendentem ad inferos, omnes pios et (name removed by moderator)ios exinde praedicat abstractisse”
Click to expand...
In English:
“…saying also that our Lord Jesus Christ, after he had descended into the lower world, brought everyone [out], righteous and unrighteous.”
Click to expand...
Both translations are from this book.
 
Last edited:
Thank you, @dmar198! It must have been a long, arduous search. Congratulations!

I’ve been looking at a slightly longer passage than the second one you mention, beginning at Similiter autem in the last line on p. 145, and ending at consenserit predicetionibus, the last words before the signatures on p. 146, but I’m not sure how much of it is relevant here. It’s too late tonight to do any translating! Tomorrow.
 
Last edited:
I just looked at the forum thread you linked to earlier, the one called “Council of Rome 745”. A lady in there linked to a complete online translation of the whole document at this page (do a ctrl-f search for the phrase “Acts of The Synod of 25 October 745” without quotation marks). So there you can read the whole thing if you like.

The part that says “similiter autem et Clemens” until the signatures is translated on that page this way:
In the same way let Clement, who in his foolhardiness rejected the decrees of the Fathers, accepted the Old Testament regulations in so far as he allowed a man to marry his brother’s widow, and furthermore affirmed that our Lord Jesus Christ descended into hell to deliver all the godly and the ungodly, let him, we say, be stripped of his episcopal office, excommunicated and condemned by the everlasting judgment of God. This applies also to anyone who agrees with his sacrilegious teaching.
Click to expand...
BTW the other citations from the footnote of CCC 633 are translated here: The Companion to The Catechism of the Catholic Church: A Compendium of Texts ... - St Ignatius - Google Books
 
Last edited:
Thank you! That’s two people who have had their questions answered, I think: @kjack2222, who started this thread, and @Waynec, who started the earlier one back in March.

I want to have a further look at the CCC and the footnote, to compare them with the text you’ve discovered here, but it’s too late tonight. Tomorrow is another day!
 
Last edited:
CCC 633 Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, “hell” - Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek - because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God. Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the Redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into “Abraham’s bosom”: “It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell.” Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.
Click to expand...
.

kjack2222. “Hell” is an Anglicised word. Sometimes “Hades” is translated as “Hell”.

"Hades merely means “abode of the dead”.

.

.
  • “Hell” can be in the context of “the abode of the dead”.
  • “Hell” can ALSO be used in the sense or context of “eternal damnation” too.
.

“Hell” can be in the context of “the abode of the dead”.

That just means that your body has separated from your soul (you are physically dead), the soul goes for judgment.

Then in the Old Covenant days presuming these guys have a Heavenly destiny (I won’t address the unfortunate “bad guys” here who chose eternal separation from God unless you want me to) . . .

The soul could not yet go to Heaven because Jesus had not yet opened the gates to Heaven.

Every son and daughter of Eve had to WAIT to come into Heaven as the Roman Catechism teaches. (Elijah went to “the sky” or “heaven” – same word in Hebrew).

This afterlife for the “good guys” in Old Covenant days before Jesus opened Heaven is often just called “the bosom of Abraham” (based upon Luke 16).

So this “abode of the dead” or “Hades” says NOTHING about if these people went to Heaven or Eternal Damnation.

.

.

“Hell” can ALSO be used in the sense or context of “eternal damnation” too.

.

Jesus did not descend into “eternal damnation”.

Jesus descended into “the abode of the dead” to "preach to the “spirits in prison” awaiting Heaven to open up.

Dr. Brant Pitre goes over this in great detail in his Holy Saturday talk which is free!

Hope this helps.

God bless.

Cathoholic

.

PS Go to this page . . .

https://www.brantpitre.com/interviews

. . . and scroll down to “The Descent Into Hell” to listen to it.

.

More info. here too . . . .

http://www.thesacredpage.com/2008/03/podcast-of-radio-show-with-dr-pitre.html
 
Last edited:
The “Acta” of that synod are a surprisingly good read! We are told that Clement was an Irish bishop and that he was the father of two children born since his ordination, though we are not given the name of his diocese.

My greatest difficulties arose from the opposition of two well-known heretics, blasphemers against God and the Catholic faith. One is called Aldebert, a Gaul by birth, the other an Irishman called Clement.

… "The other heretic, whose name is Clement, is opposed to the Church, denies and refuses to acknowledge the sacred canons and rejects the teaching of the holy Fathers St. Jerome, St. Augustine and St. Gregory. He despises all synodal decrees and declares on his own authority that, even though he has had two children born to him during his episcopate, he can still exercise the functions of a Christian bishop. He accepts the Old Testament ruling that a man can if he wishes, marry his brother’s widow and considers that the same doctrine is applicable to Christians. Contrary to the teaching of the Fathers, he affirms that Christ descended into hell to deliver all those, believers and unbelievers, servants of Christ as well as worshippers of idols, who were confined there.

… In the same way let Clement, who in his foolhardiness rejected the decrees of the Fathers, accepted the Old Testament regulations in so far as he allowed a man to marry his brother’s widow, and furthermore affirmed that our Lord Jesus Christ descended into hell to deliver all the godly and the ungodly, let him, we say, be stripped of his episcopal office, excommunicated and condemned by the everlasting judgment of God. This applies also to anyone who agrees with his sacrilegious teaching."

The passages about Clement evidently found their way into that footnote for the sole purpose of serving as the source of this doctrine, expressed succinctly in just ten words in #633:

Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, …

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1R.HTM
 
Last edited:
[Add to previous]

Sorry, @dmar198, I meant to ask you one last question. Is the DNB entry for Clement available online, or did you read it in print?
 
Either you have privileged access to Google Books, or I’m just not doing the right thing. I can see two rows of title pages, apparently the title page of each volume, but none of the inside pages.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top