Hell, Hades, and Christ's Descent (Part 2)

Theological Letters

In part 1 of this post, I mentioned that a famous TV star asked me about Hell, Hades, and Christ’s descent thereto. In the first part of this correspondence, I discussed the conceptual development in biblical and non-biblical Jewish literature, followed by the developments within Eastern Christianity. In this followup, I look briefly at the Western understanding of Hell, and the differences between East and West on the topic. I invite you to please subscribe to support my work.

Dear “Royal,”

You’re correct that the Western understanding of Christ’s descent, or the “Harrowing of Hell,” appears different. The Western view does carry significant differences. You can see this in how the doctrine develops over time.

First, as noted in my previous letter, the Latin writers do not distinguish Hell and Hades. Hence the Latin doctrine develops as a Harrowing of Hell. Early aspects of the Western doctrine in Hilary, Jerome, and Ambrose mirror aspects of the doctrine in the East. Christ smashes the gates of bronze, liberates those within, and brings life to many. Jerome even echoes the “fish hook” theme from Gregory of Nyssa. 

However, a change occurs with Augustine of Hippo. Augustine finds it unacceptable to think that, prior to the advent of Christ, angels would carry the patriarchs into “Hell,” as stated in Christ’s parable about the Rich Man and Lazarus — here reading Hades as Hell. Hence, Augustine distinguishes “Abraham’s bosom” from “Hell,” suggesting that the former was really a lesser paradise. Abraham and Lazarus are in this lesser paradise, while the Rich Man is in Hell. This, of course, raises the question for Augustine of whether Christ descends into both Hell and Abraham’s Bosom, a question previous authors did not ask because these were not seen as two different “places.” (I here place “places” in quotes, since the Eastern fathers, like Alexandrian Jews, took a less literal approach to the location, seeing it as an allegorical picture of the condition of the soul — as explained in my previous letter. But the West generally, and Augustine specifically, tend in a more literal direction, more akin to what we read in Josephus.) Augustine affirms that Christ certainly descended to Abraham’s bosom, but he hesitates to say that he descended into Hell. Augustine ultimately entertains the idea that Christ also descends to Hell in order to liberate some who, by God’s “mysterious justice” (by which he means predestination), he chose to liberate. But unlike the Eastern Church fathers, who suggest that Christ liberates all, Augustine rejects such a view as absurd. Those that did not believe on earth cannot find faith in Hell, says Augustine. As for the Eastern view that Christ’s descent is a cosmic event for all peoples of all times, we see a stark contrast in Augustine. He sees Christ’s descent as a one-time event that is relevant to only those in Abraham’s bosom and those in Hell at the time of this descent; it has no significance beyond this single moment in time. According to Augustine, the memory of Christ’s descent was in fact obliterated after his departure. Hence, it has no lasting effect for those who remained in Hell nor for those who descend there after Christ’s ascent in the Resurrection. 

Augustine’s views took on further weight when echoed by Gregory the Great. Like Augustine, Gregory takes the declaration that Christ conquered Hell as hyperbolic, rejecting the idea that he liberated all. Echoing Augustine, Gregory insists that one cannot find faith in Hell if one has not believed when upon earth. As for who Christ liberated, Gregory’s answer is the same as Augustine. He brought life to the righteous in Abraham’s bosom, and if he liberated any from Hell, he did so only in keeping with his mysterious election. 

The doctrines of Augustine and Gregory were further codified in the West by the council of Toledo in 625 AD. In the years to follow, conflict emerged between Pope Boniface and an Irish missionary, Clement, over these Western revisions to the doctrine. Clement insisted, in keeping with the East, that Christ did indeed liberate all of humanity, regardless of whether these souls were believers or unbelievers when upon the earth. Boniface convened a synod in Rome to condemn this view and reiterate the view of Toledo — the same view held by Augustine and Gregory — that Christ liberated only the Old Testament righteous. 

In the medieval period, the Western doctrine continued to develop in idiosyncratic ways. Augustine’s distinction between Abraham’s bosom and Hell had already introduced the notion of three spiritual regions: Heaven, Hell, and the lesser Heaven of Abraham’s bosom. The medievals came to refer to Abraham’s bosom as a limbo, or middle place, between Heaven and Hell. Hence it became known as the “limbo of the fathers” (limbus patrum). But there emerged a second limbo in Western medieval thought. Later medievals were less inclined than Augustine to grant the damnation of unbaptized infants. Hence, there emerged the doctrine of a “limbo of infants” (limbus infantium). The rationale for differentiating this limbo from the limbo of the fathers was that the fathers believed and attained righteousness, while unbaptized infants simply lack personal sins that merit the damnation of the wicked. While unbaptized infants are rightly kept from the lowest Hell, so the rationale went, they should not be elevated to the limbo of the fathers. 

In addition, the medievals took further steps in developing the doctrine of Purgatory than previous writers. While earlier fathers spoke of post-mortem purgation of souls, the medieval doctrine of Purgatory developed the doctrine into a formal “place” and thus a further region of Hell. In Purgatory, believers who fall short of beatitude undergo penal suffering in order to purge the soul and deliver them to Paradise.

As a brief aside, the Eastern fathers often presume that further purification of the soul may be needed post-mortem, before the soul can rest in God (e.g., Basil, Hom. Ps. 7.2). But such a view should not be confused with the Western doctrine of Purgatory. Rather, it is merely a presumption that restoration of the human person — body and soul — that Christ came into the world to affect is a lifelong process, and it is not complete until the resurrection from the dead, when the body and the soul are both restored and partake of divine immortality (see my essay “On Whether the Soul is Immortal,” section 4). The point is especially evident because the Western councils of Florence and the Second Council of Lyons both intentionally avoided talk of place and of fire when discussing Purgatory, knowing that the Eastern Churches would disapprove — proof that the West held the more literal view and recognized that the East rejected it. Moreover, the Eastern opposition to this Western doctrine is pervasive in the anti-Western polemics of Mark of Ephesus.

Returning to the Western development, by the time of Thomas Aquinas, we find a doctrine of not only Paradise and Hell, but of four regions of Hell. The lowest region is that of the damned. Above this we find the other Hells. There is the Hell of infant limbo, where the souls of unbaptized infants can never attain beatitude because they cannot attain baptism post-mortem. Yet, their pangs are less than those of the lowest Hell. In addition, there is the Hell of the patriarchs (i.e., Abraham’s bosom), where the OT righteous awaited liberation. There is also the Hell of purgatory, where believers who have received baptism but still fall short of beatitude, due to personal sins, undergo suffering in preparation for glory. Looking at Christ’s descent in light of these developments, Aquinas suggests that Christ descended to either all the Hells or into only the part where the righteous were imprisoned. If the former is true, Christ’s descent to the lowest Hell would not be to liberate the wicked, but to bring shame to them for their unbelief. As for the limbo of infants, this too would not liberate, since only baptism can cleanse original sin. Liberation can only be offered to the righteous who are already prepared for everlasting glory. 

Such doctrines continued to inform the Roman Catholic teachings on Christ’s descent for centuries to come. Such doctrines inform the romantic portrayals of the afterlife in Dante’s Divine Comedy, for example. Admittedly, many Roman Catholics today seek to allegorize these doctrines in ways that move them closer to an Eastern view. For example, some Catholics seek to interpret the doctrine of Purgatory as a desirable and pleasant purging in the presence of God, a revision that is closer to what we read in the Eastern fathers and amongst the Orthodox generally. But there’s no getting around the fact that this is a re-interpretation of the doctrine that moves contrary to its historical development in the West.

As should be clear from the foregoing, combined with what I wrote to you previously, the differences between the East and the West on the doctrines of Hell and Hades are considerable. The East distinguishes Hell and Hades, while the West does not. The East teaches that Christ descended into Hades, not Hell, while the West teaches that Christ’s descent is into Hell. The East teaches that Christ’s descent was a cosmic event for all peoples of all times. The West teaches that Christ’s descent was a one-time event. The East teaches that Christ's descent destroyed the power of Hades and liberated all of humanity from death — regardless of whether all or only some choose to embrace this life. The West teaches that there are numerous regions of Hell, and Christ liberated only those in one of these, while he left bound those in the lower Hells of damnation and infant limbo. The East teaches that Hades is forever transformed and defeated by this descent, the way back to God being forever reopened. The West teaches that the memory of this one-time event was erased from those left, as it had no bearing on their fate. The East sees in the various pictures of Hades and Hell allegorical pictures of spiritual realities; the West sees a literal depiction of various regions to which souls are bound post-mortem. Perhaps most important, the East sees in Christ’s descent a critical feature of the gospel of his liberation of humanity from death, while the West sees a one-time event that has no significance beyond the Saturday on which it occurred.

Again, I hope that helps.

Sincerely,

Dr. Jacobs

—

Nathan A. Jacobs, PhD

Scholar in Residence of Philosophy and Religion in the Religion in the Arts in Contemporary Culture Program (RACC)
Vanderbilt University, Divinity School
http://nathanajacobs.com
https://vanderbilt.academia.edu/NathanAJacobs